Agenda item

A report from the Director of Regeneration and Environment and Director of Finance, Resources and Customer Services will be circulated as soon as possible. This seeks approval of the revised Inter Authority Agreement. (Key decision – reference number 4032)

(Report No.155)

(8.45 – 8.50 pm)

TO FOLLOW

Councillor Daniel Anderson (Cabinet Member for Environment) introduced the report of the Director of Regeneration and Environment and Director of Finance, Resources and Customer Services (No.155) seeking approval of the revised Inter Authority Agreement.

NOTED

1.               That the Inter Authority Agreement (IAA) was the legal document that governed the interface between the North London Waste Authority (NLWA) and the seven constituent Waste Collection Authorities (WCAs) (of which Enfield Council was one) for waste disposal.

2.               That the Menu Pricing Mechanism (MPM) within the IAA was the proposed process by which NLWA would recover its waste disposal and operating costs from WCAs. The current system was a levy based approach whereby costs were apportioned between WCAs in proportion to the tonnage of household waste delivered. The proposed MPM apportioned costs across actual delivered tonnages relating to waste streams and services. If approved by all WCAs the new process would begin from 1 April 2016.

3.               The rationale for a menu pricing arrangement as set out in section 3.10 of the report.

4.               The detailed amendments to the IAA as set out in full in section 3 of the report.

5.               The benefits to Enfield as set out in section 5.4 of the report, which included the mitigation of financial pressures and, that the proposed plant at Edmonton would utilise air cooling technology rather than water cooling meaning there would be no visible plume from the facility and this would benefit Enfield residents.

6.               Councillor Stafford expressed his appreciation to Councillor Anderson (Cabinet Member for Environment) and Ian Davis (Director – Regeneration and Environment) for successfully securing the benefits detailed in the report for the benefit of Enfield residents.

Alternative Options Considered: NOTED the alternative options which had been considered as detailed below and in section 4 of the report:

1.               Not to sign the revised IAA and Menu Pricing Mechanism (MPM). This would result in the Levy not changing in 2016. This might have a negative impact on recycling rates across North London as there would be reduced financial incentive for Boroughs to increase recycling and might also result in difficulties delivering partnership projects going forward. NLWA was the statutory Waste Disposal Authority for the North London area which meant the Council was legally obligated to dispose of their municipal waste through the NLWA arrangements.

2.               The original proposal included transitional arrangements before 2016 for phasing in menu pricing early. This was intended to provide financial incentives for Boroughs to increase recycling as early as possible. LBE felt that this was not an options as the proposal gave rise to significant financial pressure for the Borough and that the basis for the MPM costs should be revisited.

3.               The option to base the levy on a per capita charge had also been explored however this approach would not be financially viable for the Borough and would not encourage sustainable waste management approaches and so had been discounted.

DECISION: The Cabinet agreed to

1.               Approve in principle the change from the current levy process for payment of waste disposal and associated costs, to the Menu Pricing process included at Appendix 1 of the report.

2.               Approve the revised Inter Authority Agreement (IAA) document attached at Appendix 1 of the report of which the amendments were detailed at section 3.11 to 3.41 of the report, subject to decision 3 below.

3.               Delegate authority to the Cabinet Member for Environment and Director of Regeneration and Environment to approve, subject to any minor changes, the version of the revised IAA document attached to the report and following the approval, to enter into the IAA.

Reason: The Council had been working with the NLWA and the other 6 Waste Collection Authorities (WCA) since 2004. NLWA was legally obligated to provide disposal services for the WCAs within its area and had the power both to raise levies from the WCAs for this and to direct WCAs to deliver waste to NLWA contractors. The proposed IAA and Menu Pricing Mechanism provided a transparent and equitable method for apportioning costs across all WCAs. The IAA was intended to promote and enable collaborative working and therefore benefit all partners to the agreement in the longer term (section 5.3 of the report referred). It was recommended that LBE enter into the revised IAA and MPM as under the agreement a number of benefits would be secured, as set out in paragraph 5.4 of the report.

(Key decision – reference number 4032)