§ 10. Mr. Greenwayasked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many local authorities have now privatised refuse collection; and what information he has as to the approximate savings or additional expenditure involved as a result.
§ Mr. KingFourteen authorities have made arrangements that will save about £29 million in total over the contract periods involved. A considerable number of others are reassessing the ways in which their services are provided, to ensure that efficiency and economy are achieved.
§ Mr. GreenwayHave not privately run schemes served as a catalyst for the great improvement in refuse collection in both the public and private sectors, as well as saving ratepayers the enormous sums of money that my right hon. Friend has outlined? Is that not desirable and is it not also true that these are highly efficient schemes?
§ Mr. KingIn all services that are provided by public bodies, whether central or local government, there is a requirement and a duty on all concerned to ensure that the services that are needed are provided in the most efficient way. It is clear that, in many cases, going out to tender for refuse collection has saved substantial sums of money for ratepayers.
§ Mr. DubsIs the Secretary of State aware that the Conservative-controlled Wandsworth council has privatised both refuse collection and street cleaning, since when the Members of Parliament for Wandsworth have been inundated with complaints about dirty streets in the borough? Is he further aware that anyone who goes from Lambeth to Wandsworth knows when he reaches the borough boundary, because he can see the dirt on the streets?
§ Mr. KingI note that the services will now be provided at a saving of some £7.5 million, over the contract period, to the ratepayers of Wandsworth. I know that there are some attempts to spread propaganda about inadequacies of the service. However, I know that there were a substantial number of complaints about the service beforehand. Many people have told me that the service has improved substantially.
§ Sir Anthony MeyerWill my right hon. Friend take steps to ensure that the enormous savings that can be made in this way are brought to the notice not only of local councils in England and Wales but to the electors of those councils before the forthcoming elections?
§ Mr. KingAt the next local council elections the Conservative council in Birmingham, for example, will be offering a rate reduction of 12.5 per cent. That has been brought about partly by the workmen that it employs, who have demonstrated that they can save £3.5 million a year when refuse collection is put out to competition. That saving is being transmitted direct to the ratepayers.
§ Mr. CanavanGarbage.
§ Mr. GrahamAlthough I acknowledge that the public versus private contractor argument is of great concern and interest, will the Secretary of State bear in mind that some private contracts have been terminated because of a failure to meet promises about services? Will the Secretary of State monitor that aspect of the issue and especially bear in mind the public interest when councils will have got rid of equipment and, therefore, be at the mercy of private contractors?
§ Mr. KingThat is a most interesting question. I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman favours putting services out to tender. I hope that he does. There can be no justification for not assessing whether services are being provided in the most efficient way. The quality of the service and the need to provide it at a proper standard is an important ingredient in a contract.