Serco bin contract needs examination

Your report ‘Bin cash plan branded ‘immoral’’ [Gazette, February 1] leaves me and I am sure most of your readers somewhat bemused.

I have downloaded the document that Canterbury City Council released on November 21, 2017 with the name ‘Waste Collection Recycling and Street Cleansing Contract.pdf’. This was provided in response to a Freedom of Information request that read “I would like to see your contract with Serco for collection of all types of waste in the district, including provisions for fining the company for failing to fulfil the contract and details of the period covered by it.”

It is clearly not a copy of the final contract – it does not include the name of the service provider and there are no signatures. However, if it is a close approximation to what was signed, Sections 3 (Commencement and duration of contract) and 5 (Warranties and general obligations of the parties) do raise questions over the decision to pay Serco more than was provided for in the original contract.

We need a brisk inquiry to establish the facts and a short report. This need not be either expensive or time consuming – indeed any attempt to inflate costs through obfuscation and delay should lead to a crisp interim report naming the guilty parties. It should not be difficult to obtain the contract documentation and determine whether Serco is being paid to provide services over and above those originally contracted or whether the contract is being altered to give Serco more for doing what it originally undertook to do. As a local resident with over 30 years’ experience as a management consultant, I would be happy (if given full access to documents) to write such a report without charge. Joe Egerton, Palace Street, Canterbury