Issue - meetings

Background:

This report updated Members on the project for Mercury Abatement and Improvements to Medway Crematorium. Since the award of the second contract design work had progressed on this Design and Build project, but, on 23 May 2012, the contractor responsible for supplying and fitting the cremators advised that the aforementioned delays in securing a principal contractor had meant slippage in their programme and that they would not be able to supply all of the equipment by 31 December 2012 as originally timetabled.

A revised programme had been provided that allowed for the installation of 1 abated cremator by 31 December 2012, which meant that the crematorium would still be able to comply with the target of 50% abatement by the end of December.  The remaining cremators would then be installed with completion expected in March 2013.

The Cabinet agreed that the decisions set out below were urgent and should therefore not be subject to call-in. In line with rule 16.11 of Chapter 4, Part 5 of the Constitution, call-in could be waived where any delay likely to be caused by the call-in process would seriously prejudice the Council’s or the Public’s interests.This report was being presented as an urgent item because of the requirement to install cremators capable of removing mercury by 31 December and the two (previously) selected contractors must be in receipt of a contract, agreed by the Council, before they could start placing orders with their suppliers.  This agreement to extend was time critical and any further delay would mean that this target date was not achieved.

The Chairman of the Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee had agreed that the decisions proposed were reasonable in all the circumstances and to them being treated as a matter of urgency and to waive call-in.

Additionally, and in line with Rule 16 (Special Urgency) of the Access to Information Rules (Part 2 of Chapter 4 in the Constitution), it was noted that the Chairman of the Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee had agreed that the taking of these decisions could not be reasonably deferred.

Reasons:

The extension is the most appropriate and cost effective option.