Cllr Mark Flewitt, talking rubbish

mark flewitt

The blog of Southend Tory councillor Mark Flewitt (St Laurence ward) is something of a dark fascination. Like a pile-up on the other side of the motorway, you know it’s going to be a grisly grammatical mess but you can’t help but peek a glance.

The latest instalment of the Flewitt Saga sees the good councillor taking umbrage at the tendering process for the council’s waste collection contracts. Apparently, the current contract holders, Cory Environmental, have lost out on the new contract.

Mark is obviously outraged (you can tell by the number of exclamation marks), but it’s not immediately apparent why

Before we attempt to unpick Mark’s objections, let’s look at what has actually happened.

Cory Environmental are the current providers of waste collection services to Southend Borough Council, meaning they take care of the regular household rubbish collections (rather than waste disposal). This contract is for a set length of time, and at the end of that period of time it comes up for re-tender. So Cory put in a new bid, along with any other parties interested in providing the service. These bids are then whittled down to four or so “preferred options” through a process by council officers, before the decision is made as to who gets the council.

What has happened here is that Cory’s bid is not amongst the four preferred bids.

Now as I said, it isn’t readily apparent what has gotten Cllr Flewitt so upset. I am, as regular readers will know, not always a fan of privitisation. But here I have to say, it seems to be working as intended. If Cory’s bid failed to get through the process, it will be for good reason; namely that other potential providers made better offers; better value in some way. It will not be simply that some council officer has decided that they don’t like Cory; that is not how it works.

Waste collection accounts for £4.7m of the council’s budget for the 2014/2015. For contrast, the council spends £2.7m on street cleaning. This is at a time when central government (run by Mark’s own party) is inflicting punitive cuts, measured in the tens of millions of pounds, on Southend. Any savings which can be made in the waste collection expenditure for next year will, of course, be leapt upon.

Here’s part of what Mark’s blog says on the matter:

The Council Director and Portfolio Holder are asked a series of questions but the answers are thin and vague. Nothing addresses when the process was started and by who.”

Well, the contract will have had an expiry date written into it (Mark works for a law firm; is he really this ignorant of how contracts work?) so it won’t have been some great secret when abouts a re-tendering process would take place. Additionally, the joint administration have been in place for some nine weeks. The request for tender would have gone out long before — under the previous, er, Tory administration. Under former councillor Tony Cox, in fact (I look forward to what he has to say on the matter).

So Mark is upset that this has been handled by council officers — whose job it is to do so — under rules which would have been established before the start of the process, and that the current service providers have been beaten by better offers. Still following? Because I’m completely lost. Would he rather the council tossed taxpayer money away unnecessarily?

This feeds into a theme of opposition from the Conservatives in Southend. It seems that, having enjoyed power for so long, they still can’t believe that they would be rooted out by the electors. At the last full council meeting, Tory James Courtenay launched a bizarre attack on Anne Jones (executive member for Children & Learning) over the closure of St Hilda’s — a private school outside of the council’s remit.

Southend ditches Cory…” Mark says, “elected members don’t know why….. If he thought about it for a second rather than focusing on petty attacks, he might be able to figure it out. It isn’t hard. But no, he and his fellow Tories would rather jostle with each other for their own personal positions.

Mark and his colleagues might want to think on whether this sort of mentality had anything to do with resident’s near-wholesale rejection of their party at the ballot box.



  1. My own view is, that before any tendering is announced, there should be a full consultation conducted among the residents who will be using the service asking for there view on how to improve the service.

    Why are we the residents who are paying for the service still not being consulted with regard to what we require from the service?

    Alan Grubb


      1. I do not recall a consultation document in connection with the above. One thing might be worth considering is to give advance notice of any future consultation document in the forth coming Outlook Magazine.


        1. I think that’s an excellent idea Alan, and it would have my full support. The trouble is that, sadly, waste collection isn’t the sexiest of subjects, so you’re always going to be up against it to get people to participate; including people whose input might be most valuable.


          1. We who pay council tax should be given the chance to have an input into the services which we pay fore, hence the consultation document, but under the present scheme although the consultation might be advertised at various locations, the response is poor, therefore the ideas are limited.

            As we have a council magazine delivered to every household several times per year, the council could inform the reader about any forth coming consultation document.


  2. The council hasnt actually received any financial submissions – just the PQQ… They have to review each PQQ and select 4 bidders to tender. The natue of all these things are subjective when there is no price involced – maybe the Council just didnt want Cory anymore…


    1. Well, not having seen an example of a PQQ I cannot say for certain, but presumably it must have some indication of cost and services, else how is the decision made? On who uses the prettiest font?

      One thing which does occur to me, is that I have no idea what the results of the consultation were. It may well be that Cory received a profoundly negative response, which impacted their bid negatively.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s