Ealing Council has rejected a call from the Liberal Democrats to review the decision to approve a contract extension for the council-owned waste collection company.

Greener Ealing (GEL) is a company owned by Ealing Council but operated as a separate entity – responsible for street cleaning and waste collection. The Labour Cabinet decided on October 7 to award a five-year contract extension to Greener Ealing, bringing the whole contractual relationship to 15 years.

The opposition has the constitutional power to "call-in" an executive decision before bringing it to the committee to discuss whether Cabinet should or should not reconsider a decision. Presenting on behalf of 18 requisitioning councillors across political groups, argued that bypassing an open competitive market tender for a £150 million contract extension was disproportionate and lacked sufficient transparency.

Speaking at the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on Thursday, October 22, the Liberal Democrat Spokesperson for Finance argued that the decision lacked a competitive tendering process and cited ongoing concerns about service quality. The call-in submission asserted that Cabinet relied far too heavily on the conclusions of the independent Ealing Shadow Bid and Value Assessment (prepared in June 2026), which evaluated historical performance and reduced complaint volumes as primary evidence of strong delivery.

He said: "The administration is proposing to extend Greener Ealing's contract until 2035. It is highly unusual for an extension of this size, circa £350 million (whole-life value), to be non-competitive, and this alone warrants further scrutiny."

Addressing the reliance on complaint reductions as the sole indicator of quality, Cllr Oxley pointed to performance inconsistencies across the borough and ongoing failures regarding vulnerable residents. He said: "The target for missed assisted collections for disabled and elderly residents is zero, yet GEL has persistently missed that target since 2020, disproportionately impacting vulnerable residents. None of us should be content with this."

He added: "This is not an ideological debate… we don't object in principle to services being delivered by a local authority-owned company like GEL, provided it performs well and it offers value for money. Unfortunately, GEL's performance is distinctly average, and that is simply not good enough for our borough."

Cllr Dominic Moffit, the Cabinet Member for Climate Action, pushed back against the assertions made by the opposition. He told the committee that it was not an "uncompetitive process", claiming a full tendering process would have cost £120,000 – not £12,000.

advertisement

He added: "As a local authority-owned company, a decision to extend the contract by the council does not need to go through any kind of procurement process. The financial advice from the independent adjudicator was that we had taken the most appropriate course of action…

"In the last couple of years, there have been between eight and 10 missed assisted collections. There are 3,000 in the borough every week, every fortnight – that's 0.3 per cent of those collections that are being missed.

"While the target is zero because we absolutely want to make sure we get all of those done, I don't think we should think that this represents some enormous egregious failure of service delivery to some of our most vulnerable residents, who are actually well looked after by GEL across the borough."

After hearing all arguments, the committee – which has a Labour majority – voted to reject the call in, ultimately upholding the original cabinet decision.