FOI request (FOIR-741638848)

Software used by municipal waste collection operations

Requested Mon 18 August 2025
Responded Thu 28 August 2025

Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I kindly request the following information in the context of domestic waste bin/sack collection services, as opposed to trade/commercial collections or waste disposal.

1. Do you currently operate waste services (collections) directly, or through a waste contractor such as Biffa, Suez or Veolia? If through a contractor, please name them.

2. Which of the IT systems below do you use for the management of day to day municipal bin collections:

a. Yotta/Causeway

b. Bartec Collective

c. AMCS Clear

d. Whitespace/Powersuite

e. Contender

f. Selected Interventions/Echo

g. Core (Suez)

h. Webaspx/Routeware

i. RouteSmart

j. MS Office

k. No IT system

l. Other (please name)

3. Which IT system do you use for each of the following in your refuse collection vehicle fleet and associated staff:

a. Fleet management system.

b. HR system.

c. RCV on-board camera system.

d. Telematics/vehicle tracking provider.

4. What IT system(s) do you use to manage the following service areas:

a. Grounds/Parks maintenance.

b. Street cleansing.

5. How many Electric Vehicles do you have in your waste collections fleet?

---

Response

1. Biffa4a. Refused - please see below

2. Refused - please see below

3. Information not held

4a. Refused - please see below

4b. Refused - please see below

5. Information not held

NOTICE OF REFUSAL

The information you have requested in relation to (2) and (4) is commercially sensitive and falls under Section 43 of the Freedom of Information Act – Commercially Sensitive Information - Information prejudicing commercial interests – commercial interest relating to an organisations commercial activity and may include trading activity procurement and relationships with third parties.

The exemption afforded by Section 43 is subject to what is known as the ‘public interest test’. When applying the test in a particular case a public authority is deciding whether the public interest is better served by non-disclosure than by disclosure.

Although the Freedom of Information Act does not define ‘in the public interest’, there is a presumption under Freedom of Information that openness is in the public interest. In applying the public interest test a public authority will take into account the distinction that has been often made by courts between things that are in the public interest, and things that merely interest the public. Where applicants have not identified public interest considerations succinctly or accurately, the public authority has a responsibility under the Act to make their own assessment of the public interest considerations in the particular case.

We have identified the following public interest factors that may be seen as encouraging the disclosure of information:

a) accountability of public spending.

We consider these factors to be of limited relevance in relation to the information in question.

Public interest factors seen as encouraging non-disclosure are, generally, the exemptions themselves. In consideration of this matter we came to the following conclusions:

a) ensuring that companies are able to compete for business fairly.

b) damage to reputation and/or financial interests.

In weighing the factors for and against disclosure we have concluded that the likely benefit to the applicant and the wider public of disclosure is outweighed by the likely prejudice caused by such disclosure and that therefore the public interest is better served by non-disclosure.