‘We will take this opportunity to review the formulae for the cost of rural services’

1. ‘We will take this opportunity to review the formulae for the cost of rural services’ Proving the Rural Penalty Additional Costs associated with providing refuse collection in West Devon

2. West Devon Borough CouncilRefuse Round Number 4 • Same driver and two loaders • Driving the same refuse truck • Five different rounds (Mon to Fri) • Wednesday round is predominantly Okehampton, a market town with a population of about 5,000 • Other four days are surrounding villages and hamlets

3. West Devon Borough CouncilRefuse Round Number 4

4. Both routes use the same vehicle and crew • Both routes take roughly the same time (full working day) Friday Wednesday

5. Friday • 473 properties • 79.14 square kms • 220 km Wednesday • Average 466m between properties • 1,499 properties • 8.16 square kms • 168 km • Average 112m between properties • Both routes use the same vehicle and crew • Both routes take roughly the same time (full working day)

6. Both rounds are required to start and finish from the Depot and Transfer Station in Tavistock (15 miles away). The blue round has to return twice

7. Wednesday and Friday compared

8. West Devon Borough Council20 refuse rounds

9. West Devon Borough CouncilRefuse Collection Rural Penalty • Using multiple linear regression on 20 refuse rounds provides results which show: • That, on average, village properties in West Devon are 1.64 times more costly to collect than town properties (urban) • That, on average, properties in hamlets and isolated rural dwellings are 2.78 times more costly to collect than town properties (urban) • Waste management cost: West Devon 2011/12 is £1.66m

10. West Devon Borough CouncilRefuse Collection Rural Penalty • Using multiple linear regression on 20 refuse rounds provides results which show: • If all the properties in West Devon were urban and town/fringe and there were no village or hamlet/isolated properties to collect then the £1.66m cost would be £1.07m • This means that the rural penalty (ie the additional cost of collecting from villages and hamlets) equates to £590k

11. Camden Westminster Kensington & C Hammersmith & F

12. Baseline Working Group One of 3 DCLG funding formula working groups RSN invited to their 27 February meetingto consider Cost of Rural Services ‘Impartial’ experts (most from urban authorities) not entirely convinced by cost of rural services argument !!! DCLG Officers recognise need to look into cost of rural services … … but have no research budget Suggested we look at waste costs in Northumberland

13. Rural Penalty:Waste Collection in Northumberland

14. NorthumberlandArea Map Authority divided into three service areas and waste collected out of six depots shown as rings on the map.

15. NorthumberlandNorth Area Map Population 88,447 in 37,263 households covering an area of 2,455 square kilometres. 36 people per square kilometre compared with 951 per square kilometre in South East service area. Waste collection service for area operates out of 3 depots in Castle Morpeth (orange circle), Alnwick (purple circle) and Berwick (light blue circle)

16. NorthumberlandWest Area Map Population 74,652 in 30,619 households covering an area of 2,468 square kilometres. 30 people per square kilometre compared with 951 per square kilometre in South East service area. Waste collection service for area operates out of a depot in Hexham (circled green on the map).

17. NorthumberlandSouth East Area Map Population 147,520 in 62,898 households covering an area of 155square kilometres. 951 people per square kilometre compared with 30 per square kilometre in West service area and 36 in North service area. Waste collection service for area operates out of out of Stakeford depot (circled in blue) and Cowley Road (circled in red)

18. Three contrasting service areas

19. Three contrasting service areas

21. Refuse Collection Penalty Work • Calculated for every round the number of properties in each of the following rural/urban definitions: • Urban > 10k • Town and Fringe • Villages • Hamlets and Isolated Dwellings

22. Refuse Collection Penalty Work • Correlated Northumberland refuse round summaries to numbers of properties in each rural / urban classification • Using simple linear regression an average time to empty a bin in each rural / urban classification was calculated

23. Bins emptied per productive man hour

24. Bins emptied per productive man hour +8.7% +41.1% +63.8%

25. Calculating overall rural penalty • Using simple linear regression it was established that in urban areas 67.23 bins can be collected each man hour. • The fact that fewer bins can be collected in less urban areas makes it more expensive in terms of manpower by 8.7% in town and fringe areas, by 41.1% in villages and by 63.8% in hamlets

26. Calculating overall rural penalty • Taking these figures together, it is 15.1% more costly in productive man hours to empty bins across Northumberland than it would be if the whole are was urban and 67.23 bins per productive man hour were collected across the whole County. • When unproductive time is factored in the additional cost penalty rises slightly to 15.3%

27. Calculating overall rural penalty • If the 15.3% was applied to Northumberland’s current budget for waste management (which includes recycling) of £23.463m then the additional cost of serving rural areas is estimated as £3.11m

28. Calculating overall rural penalty • Rural Penalty Waste Management (one service) = £3.11m • DCLG calculation of value of sparsity to Northumberland: • Pre damping £5.820m • Post damping £1.254m

29. Calculating overall rural penalty • Rural Penalty Waste Management (one service) = £3.11m • Other services – Central Education Functions, Social Services, Highways and Transportation, District functions all have rural penalties associated with serving large rural areas • DCLG calculation of value of sparsity to Northumberland: • Pre damping £5.820m • Post damping £1.254m

30. What Happens Next? • Further semi-secret discussions • Bill passing through House • Further consultation over summer • Full scheme details in late-autumn • April 2013 start

31. Proving the Rural PenaltyNext Steps • Why are we here? • More predominantly rural authorities responded to initial consultation than urban authorities with the same message

32. Proving the Rural PenaltyNext Steps • Why are we here? • BUT opponents of argument were unaware that the argument was coming forward • BUT the rural cost of services argument is out there now to be supported / attacked • Important that predominantly rural (SPARSE) authorities respond to the summer consultation in even greater numbers

33. Proving the Rural PenaltyNext Steps • Remember what we are pushing for

34. Proving the Rural PenaltyNext Steps • Remember what we are pushing for

35. Proving the Rural PenaltyNext Steps: How far have we got? DCLG Exemplifications for Cost of Rural Services: Redistribution of Funding (£m)

36. Proving the Rural PenaltyNext Steps: How far have we got? DCLG Exemplifications for Cost of Rural Services: Redistribution of Funding (£m)

37. Proving the Rural PenaltyNext Steps • What will RSN do? • Briefing note when summer consultation comes out • Individual Authority comparative analysis of any exemplifications issued • Write out to all rural MPs with our commentary on the analysis • Template response to consultation • Template analysis for local MP • Template Council Motion

38. Public Health Transfer of Responsibilities • Public Health expenditure by Local Government area The Department of Health has recently issued a paper detailing spending estimates for the new NHS and Public Health Commissioning Architecture. The estimated £2.2 billion of expenditure on public health that will, in future, be commissioned by local government is analysed by rural and urban category in the table below.