Agenda item

5.1

Public Question in respect of Confidential Information

Mr Nigel Slack referred to his question to Full Council on 5 February 2014 regarding the exemption of material from the public domain. He stated that he was told that this would be considered and an answer provided in due course. However, he believed that judging by the exemptions in items 13 and 14 on the agenda for the meeting the status quo continued. He therefore asked whether the Council could comment on whether the matter was still under consideration or had the negative decision been made but simply not communicated?

Councillor Julie Dore commented that on all occasions the Council released information that was in the public interest. However, what was in the public interest was subjective. In the case of items 13 and 14 although it may appear to be in the publics’ interest it breached the confidentiality expected of the private party to the agreement.

5.2

Public Question in respect of the Streets Ahead Contract

Mr Nigel Slack asked, in relation to the Streets Ahead Contract, was it a change of arrangements about who borrowed the money for the project to save money for both AMEY and the Council? He also asked whether it was a change of rules, because the delivery of the service was a shambles, to avoid AMEY becoming liable for penalty clauses or was it that special vehicles finances were weak and needed to be strengthened with Council guarantees?

Councillor Jack Scott, Cabinet Member for Environment, Recycling and Streetscene informed Mr Slack that it was in the nature of questions concerning a confidential paper that the answers will be slightly more circumspect than otherwise. However, he stated that he was very happy to reiterate the previous statements he had made on this subject, that the paper dealt with financial issues and subsequent legal matters – effectively the first point.

Concerning the second point, it was absolutely not the case that the project was a shambles. The Council published online externally validated and verified performance information about the project which showed this and Mr Slack had been provided with a hardcopy.

Performance data for January 2014 showed that, in respect of immediate responses, Grounds Maintenance, Highways, Structures, Traffic Signals and Street Cleaning had a 100% achievement within contractual timescales with Street Lighting 96.49%. Regarding non-immediate response, Grounds Maintenance and Highways had a 100% achievement within contractual timescales, Street Lighting 99.94%, Structures 50%, Traffic Signals 99.3% and Street Cleaning 99.92%.

Concerning the third point, Councillor Scott had already stated that the decision did not require any situation in which the Council would give the provider more money than previously.

In conclusion, Councillor Scott hoped that this provided some reassurances concerning the issues raised and stated that he was not sure there was much further he could safely say on the matter.