Capa superior
2.4 Evolución de terminales móviles
3.1
Consultation Process
Consultation is a key tool in identifying the costs and benefits that may accrue to different stakeholders within and outside of the Sunshine Coast region as a result of implementing the business models under consideration. The consultation program also provides a forum for stakeholders to express concerns regarding any aspect of the reform process and/or the future strategy of the business.
A targeted consultation approach was adopted as part of this PBA to ensure that key stakeholders had appropriate opportunity to provide input into the process.
Table 3.1: PBA Consultation Process
Stage Action
Information Preparation
• A Stakeholder Information Paper was prepared for distribution to key stakeholders, setting out the key features of competition policy and competitive neutrality, as well as the potential implications of each business model
Public
Announcement
• The PBA process was announced in the ‘Sunshine Coast Daily’ on Saturday 19th December 2009, with Council’s internet site also featuring a public notice announcing the PBA
• Interested parties were provided with the Stakeholder Information Paper and invited to submit comments on the implications of each business model by 19th February 2010
• Following the public announcement, a number of external stakeholders requested further information, and two meetings were held with these stakeholders to discuss the PBA and associated issues
• Formal responses were received by two stakeholders
• All comments and submissions were considered as part of the PBA assessment process Identification of
Interested External Parties
• Specific stakeholders that could be affected by any changes to Council’s waste management activities were identified, sent a copy of the Stakeholder Information Paper directly and asked to provide comments on the implications of each business model under consideration
• The stakeholder groups targeted included: o Local and Regional Business Representatives; o Major Suppliers and Contractors;
o Environmental Bodies;
o Regulators (i.e. State Government); and o Unions
Internal Consultation
• Stakeholders within Council and WRM were consulted and comments sought regarding the PBA process and potential outcomes
• The following consultation methods were adopted: o Targeted discussions with Council management o Targeted discussions with WRM management
o Information handouts/information sessions for WRM staff Feedback on
Draft Report
• The draft PBA was made available for comment to all stakeholders upon completion (and downloadable from Council’s website)
• A public advertisement and media release announced the availability of the draft report for review and comment
• No formal submissions were received during the public notice period, although informally positive comments were received by members of the community regarding the recommended business model to be applied to the business
Source: AEC Group
Public Benefit Assessment of Reform Options for Waste Management Activities Final Report
3.2
Responses from Stakeholders
The following table provides a summary of the responses received from stakeholders. Table 3.2: Responses from Stakeholders
Stakeholder Process Undertaken and Response Received
EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS
Unions The following unions were provided Stakeholder Information Papers for comment:
• Transport Workers Union
• Australian Workers Union
• Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union
• Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers Australia
• Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
No responses were received by the closing date. In other PBA submissions relating to local government utilities, unions have generally expressed a desire for corporatisation to not be adopted given the potential change in employment conditions that may occur in the move to the Federal industrial relations system. Unions have also highlighted the need for Council’s to retain active control of their business activities such as water, sewerage and waste
management. Recently, union preference appears to have been for the FCP business model. Regional Business
Representatives
The following key local and regional business organisations were provided Stakeholder Information Papers for comment:
• Buderim Chamber of Commerce
• Caloundra Chamber of Commerce
• Cooroy Chamber of Commerce
• Eumundi Chamber of Commerce
• Kawana Chamber of Commerce
• Kenilworth Chamber of Commerce
• Maleny Chamber of Commerce
• Maroochydore Chamber of Commerce
• Nambour Chamber of Commerce
• Noosa Chamber of Commerce
• Yandina Chamber of Commerce
No responses were received by the closing date. Major Suppliers /
Contractors
A selection of major suppliers to WRM were contacted regarding the PBA process, with Stakeholder Information Papers sent to:
• Cadet
• Transpacific Cleanaway
• JJ Richards and Sons
• Mann Waste Management
• Rossow Recycling
• Suttons
• Thiess Services
• Visy Recycling
No responses were received by the closing date from the suppliers targeted. However, a meeting was convened with a waste and recycling industry body representing 50 waste contractors and recyclers across Queensland where concerns were raised regarding Council’s monopoly in the collection of commercial and industrial waste and recyclables. It was suggested that such a policy contravenes NCP objectives, and that it will also impede Council in achieving its objective under the waste minimisation strategy to maximise diversion from landfill of commercial and industrial waste given that private operators are able to offer a more sophisticated suite of recycling services. Further, it was indicated that such a monopoly does not exist anywhere else in Australia.
Public Benefit Assessment of Reform Options for Waste Management Activities Final Report
Stakeholder Process Undertaken and Response Received
Customers Stakeholder Information Papers were also sent to the following major customers:
• Sunshine Plaza
• Kawana Shopping World
• Nambour Hospital
• Noosa Hospital
• Hyatt Coolum
• Caloundra Hospital
• Noosa Civic Shopping Centre
• Stockland Caloundra Shopping Centre
One submission was received from a major customer who agreed with the concept of full cost recovery and user pays principles (provided collection contractors were engaged at
commercially competitive rates). Other comments related to providing subsidised recycling services for businesses to encourage full utilisation of recycling services, and greater transparency surrounding price formulation (and provision of monthly data to commercial customers particularly shopping centres who frequently on charge services to tenants). The submission stated that they had no preference regarding the reform option chosen provided service, costs and environmental focus is not impacted.
General Community
Following the public announcement of the PBA process, meetings were held with
representatives of a number of community stakeholder groups to discuss the link between the PBA process and the recently adopted waste management strategy.
Two submissions were received from members of the community / community groups by the closing date. A number of regional community groups provided a combined submission regarding their preferred business model for WRM. The key focus of comments received from a community perspective related to the need for an appropriate business structure to ensure the success of the new waste management strategy, along with additional business
transparency in the form of regular public reporting and review of performance. It was stated that the FCP business model was the preferred option as:
• It would allow Council to continue to control and manage waste in the region (with service delivery and waste minimisation the focus rather than business profit maximisation);
• It would allow easier integration and communication with other Council departments such as town planning and environment;
• It would allow more flexibility and ability to respond to changing circumstances; and
• It would provide greater flexibility for the business to form community alliances and provide effective public education programs.
Environment The following identified local and regional environmental organisations were provided Stakeholder Information Papers for comment:
• Sunshine Coast Environment Council
• Community Recycling Inc
• Envirocom
• Noosa Biosphere Ltd
The Sunshine Coast Environment Council contacted AEC and information was subsequently provided regarding the PBA process (although no formal submission was made).
Regulators The following regulators were provided Stakeholder Information Papers for comment:
• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
• Queensland Competition Authority (QCA)
The QCA advised in its letter dated 21st January 2010 that it may have a conflict of interest in providing a submission, given that it could potentially be asked to critically review the findings of PBAs undertaken for Queensland Councils. No response was received from the EPA. INTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS
Councillors Councillors were informed of the PBA process on 23rd
April 2009, and also again on the 10th December 2009 (prior to the public announcement of the PBA). A briefing was also held with Cr Jones on 11th
February 2010 regarding the different business models under assessment and implications for the adopted waste management strategy.
From comments received - it is evident that Council wishes to continue to be actively involved in decisions regarding waste management in the region including oversight of the delivery of the objectives of the waste minimisation strategy.
WRM Employees Information papers were provided to WRM employees outlining the PBA process and addressing potential concerns that may exist.
No responses were received by the closing date, although it was made clear in information provided to staff that whilst Council was required to consider the LGOC business model as part of the assessment process, it was unlikely that such reforms would be recommended in WRM’s instance.
Public Benefit Assessment of Reform Options for Waste Management Activities Final Report
Stakeholder Process Undertaken and Response Received
Council Senior Management and WRM Management
The implications of each business model under assessment were discussed with Council senior management and also WRM management.
There was a general consensus that the most appropriate business model for WRM moving forward would involve Council continuing to retain direct control of waste activities, particularly in relation to the importance of effective waste management in Council’s overall vision of being Australia’s most sustainable region.
Source: AEC Group
3.3
Consultation Outcomes Summary
A number of responses were received from external stakeholders in response to the distribution of the Stakeholder Information Paper, community announcements and direct stakeholder contact. From these responses, it was clear that the preferred outcome was for Council to adopt the FCP business model for WRM as it would allow Council to continue to actively control waste management in the region and ensure the effective implementation of the recently adopted waste minimisation strategy. This was consistent with the outcomes from consultation with internal stakeholders.
Other areas of concern/interest raised during the consultation program included:
• Council’s monopoly over the collection of commercial and industrial waste streams keeping private operators out of the market, when such a monopoly does not exist anywhere else in Australia (industry representative organisation);
• Desire for enhanced public reporting on WRM’s financial and non-financial performance moving forward (community groups); and
• Desire for additional information on how charges are formulated for multi-tenant properties to ensure that usage can be on-charged effectively (shopping centre).
Public Benefit Assessment of Reform Options for Waste Management Activities Final Report