Apologies for absence were received from Councillors J McManus, T Pilgrim and J Walsh.

Members are asked to consider whether they have any disclosable pecuniary interests and/or any other relevant interest in connection with any item(s) on this agenda and, if so, to declare them and state the nature of the interest.

Members are reminded that they should also declare whether they are subject to a party whip in connection with any item(s) to be considered and, if so, to declare it and state the nature of the whipping arrangement.

Members were reminded of their responsibility to declare any disclosable pecuniary interest and/or any other relevant interest in any item of business on the agenda, no later than when the item was reached.

Members were reminded that they should also declare whether they were subject to a party whip in connection with any item(s) to be considered at this meeting and, if so, to declare it and state the nature of the whipping arrangement.

No such declarations were made.

Attached to the agenda are:

·  Call-in procedure

·  Call-in forms

·  Cabinet Report of 27 June, 2016

·  Cabinet minute 19

Chair’s Introduction

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and outlined the procedure to be adopted in respect of the two call-ins that had been received. Each lead signatory would have five minutes to provide an explanation of the call-in and then the Cabinet Member – Environment would have five minutes to explain the decision that the Cabinet had taken. On this occasion no witnesses had been called by those calling in the decision but the decision taker had called the following witnesses:

·  Mark Smith – Head of Regulation and Environment

·  Andy McCartan – Contracts Manager Environment and Regulation Waste and Recycling, Regeneration and Environment

·  Kevin MacCallum

They each would be given five minutes to read out any statements they may have prepared. The Committee would be invited to ask questions at the end of each of the stages outlined. This would be followed by summing up by the Lead Signatories and the Cabinet Member, a debate and finally the Committee would make its decision.

The Committee then considered the detail of two call-ins of the Cabinet’s decisions made at its meeting on 27 June 2016 on the Domestic Refuse Collection Outline Business Case (Cabinet Minute No. 9 refers.) which was:

  ‘That

(1)  the Outline Business Case set out in the report be approved and officers be requested to carry out further detailed work on the two short-listed options in order to prepare a Full Business Case and recommendations for future domestic refuse collections, to be reported to a future meeting; and

(2)  the proposed approach to public consultation on the shortlisted options as set out in section 9 of the report be approved.’

Councillor I Lewis along with Councillors A Brighouse, C Carubia, P Gilchrist, S Kelly and D Mitchell had called the Cabinet’s decision in as they considered

  ‘that the Cabinet is wrong to consult on changes to the collection of waste in Wirral based upon only presenting two options to improve recycling to the public, including the possibility of moving to a three weekly collection of residual waste.  This decision effectively limits the feedback that the Council could receive from residents on the best ways of achieving 50% or more recycling rates within their communities.  This call in requests that Cabinet engage in a more open and wide ranging consultation on waste management with the people of Wirral over a longer three month period in order to gauge public opinion of the Cabinet’s 3 weekly option and to consider alternatives.’

Councillors L Rennie, T Anderson, B Berry, C Blakeley, E Boult, D Burgess-Joyce, W Clements, D Elderton, G Ellis, J Green, J Hale, P Hayes, A Hodson, K Hodson, I Lewis, T Pilgrim, C Povall, L Rowlands, A Sykes, G Watt and S Williams had also called in the same decision for the following reasons:

‘Whist agreeing with the premise of increasing recycling rates in Wirral the signatories to this call-in are concerned that the limited two options being offered to the public for consultation equate to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.