To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors PA Andrews, KG Grumbley and TM James and from Councillor R.J. Phillips.

To receive any declarations of interest by Members in respect of items on this agenda.

Councillors PJ Edwards and RH Smith declared a personal interest in agenda item 9: Work programme Update, as Council appointees to the Joint Member Waste Forum.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 16th July, 2007.

RESOLVED: that the Minutes of the meeting held on 16th July, 2007 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To consider suggestions from members of the public on issues the Committee could scrutinise in the future.

The following two suggestions were received from Members of the public:

Suggestion 1

A member of the public referred to the call-in by the Environment Scrutiny Committee of Cabinet’s decision on 6th September on the subject of Rotherwas Archaeology: options for completion of the Ribbon and completion of the Rotherwas Access Road.

He referred to his correspondence with the Chairman of the Committee and suggested that given the Committee’s overarching role in managing the operation of the Scrutiny Committees the Strategic Monitoring Committee should review any decision made and the procedure followed.  He made a number of remarks in support of his view that a rigorous enquiry was needed to look at how the matter had been handled.

The Chairman summarised the request as a wish for the Committee to review the process.  Consideration would be given to whether this issue should form part of the work programme.

A Member sought clarification on whether the Environment Scrutiny Committee had to consider the call-in of the Cabinet decision and determine its response within 10 working days. 

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services said that in general the timeframe of 10 working days in which to consider a call-in and determine a response was appropriate, unless there was a specific reason for not doing so, for example if a key expert was unavailable to attend.  In that case the Committee may formally decide to adjourn but this could not be an open ended adjournment. 

The matter had been called in by the Environment Scrutiny Committee and it was proper that that Committee dealt with the matter.  This did not prevent the Strategic Monitoring Committee looking at the matter and reviewing it.

Suggestion 2

It was suggested that there appeared to be a lack of consistency in the Council’s definition of senior citizens in its policy documents.  As an example a bus pass was available to people aged 60 whereas to be eligible for the concessionary parking scheme people had to be aged 65. It was requested that this issue should be investigated.

To report performance to the end of July 2007 against the Annual Operating Plan 2007-08, national performance indicators used externally to measure the performance of the council, together with performance against revenue and capital budgets and corporate risks, and remedial action to address areas of under-performance. 

The Committee considered the Integrated Performance Report (IPR) on performance to the end of July 2007 against the Annual Operating Plan 2007-08, national performance indicators used externally to measure the performance of the council, together with performance against revenue and capital budgets and corporate risks, and remedial action to address areas of under-performance. 

Performance Against Performance Indicators

The Head of Policy and Performance presented the section of the report on performance indicators.  He explained the revised format and the intention to seek to make further improvements to the way the performance information was presented.

Referring to the opening paragraphs of the IPR he noted the performance highlights as set out in the report.  He drew attention to the upturn in performance of the benefits service and favourable feedback from the Government Office West Midlands on the end of year review of the Local Area Agreement. 

He noted that 13 of the 16 indicators marked as red (not on target) were under the Council priority: maximising the health, safety, economic well being, achievement and contribution of every child.  Of these 8 targets involved the Primary Care Trust.  A meeting scheduled with the Trust on 7 September to give final consideration to the Teenage Lifestyle Survey and agree the indicators for measurement in the coming year had not taken place.  The Trust had, however, indicated that they would meet and resolve matters at a more recent meeting of the Herefordshire Partnership performance management group.

In the course of discussion the following principal points were made (page references are to pages of the IPR circulated as a separate document):

·         (p16/17) a question was asked about a number of indicators with a baseline, no target but still with a direction of travel.  The Head of Policy and Performance commented that the reasons for the lack of a target were being followed up.  The relevant directorates had supplied the information on the direction of travel.  There was no reason why targets should not be provided in all appropriate cases.  In fact targets should have been set by April.

·         (p17 - 89b) It was noted that performance on the number on the child protection register per 10,000 population under 18 was currently below target.  In reply the Committee was informed that if the Council had a lower number of children on the register than might on average be expected this could imply that not all potential cases were being identified and children were potentially at risk.  However, if too many were being recorded this could imply an unsatisfactory regulatory framework.

·         Attention was drawn to the absence of performance templates for a number of indicators.  The Head of Policy and Performance replied that it was expected that these would have been completed by the time the next IPR was produced.

·         (p3) Progress against the target for the average length of stay in B&B accommodation for homeless households was questioned.  In reply it was noted that whilst the Government target of zero would not be achieved  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

To consider the results of the Employee Opinion Survey 2007.

The Committee considered the results of the Employee Opinion Survey 2007.

The Head of Human Resources presented the report.  He highlighted the improved response rate which at 53% was well in excess of the 43% average response rate for local government surveys.  The responses in general also showed marked improvements in the perception of employees over the areas covered by the survey questions.  Trends showing key differences in opinions from the 2006 and 2005 surveys were set out in appendix 1.  Appendix 2 set out a comparison with local government benchmark data.

He concluded by emphasising the importance of taking action in response to the survey’s findings.  Directorates would receive detailed reports to enable them to respond.

In the course of discussion the following principal points made:

·         Asked about comparative information, in particular with the private sector, he said that there was a vast amount of information available but the Council relied on the local government benchmark data provided by the Opinion Research Corporation.

·         The views expressed about senior management were discussed.  The Head of Human Resources clarified that 51% now felt valued by senior management, 36% disagreed and 13% were unable to agree or disagree.

·         Whilst 77% agreed that they had adequate training for their job this meant a proportion was not satisfied.  It was important to avoid complacency.  In reply the Head of Human Resources said that year on year improvements in responses showed that there had not been complacency.  The forthcoming work to secure  Investors in People accreditation would ensure the engagement of the workforce.

·         Regarding bullying the Head of Human Resources said that the detailed directorate reports would identify where the difficulty lay.

·         Asked about the finding that 36% disagreed that action would be taken as a result of the survey the Head of Human Resources identified communication as a key issue.  He reiterated that action had been taken as a result of previous surveys.  There was a need to remind employees of this and demonstrate what had been achieved.

·         It was noted that the Council did not have a staff suggestion scheme policy.  The view was that a focus on teams rather than individuals was perhaps embraced more by staff.  There were opportunities for staff to express views through one to one meetings, the staff review and development process.  This was also a feature of Investors in People.

The Chairman thanked Mr Johnson, Head of Human Resources, and congratulated him on his new appointment with the West Midlands Fire and Rescue Authority.

The Cabinet Member (Corporate and Customer Services and Human Resources) also formally thanked Mr Johnson and praised his achievements. 

The Committee endorsed these remarks.

RESOLVED:  that the report be noted.

To note the Ombudsman Annual Letter 2006/07 and the figures for complaints and compliments recorded including complaints determined by the Local Government Ombudsman and the Complaints Panel for the year ended 31st March, 2007.

The Committee was asked to note the Ombudsman Annual Letter 2006/07 and the figures for complaints and compliments recorded, including complaints determined by the Local Government Ombudsman and the Complaints Panel for the year ended 31st March, 2007.

The report to Cabinet on 6th September was appended to the report.

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services presented the report.  He highlighted several aspects where the Ombudsman had commented favourably on the Council’s complaints handling arrangements, as set out in the report.  No reports of maladministration had been issued.  The Council was also well placed to move from the second quartile to the top quartile of authorities in terms of responding to enquiries from the Ombudsman’s office within 28 days.

It was noted that the majority of complaints continued to relate to planning and building control issues.

RESOLVED:  that the report be noted.

To report progress on implementing the Executive's action plan.

The Committee considered progress in implementing the Executive’s action plan.

The Acting Head of Service (ICT and Customer Services) presented the report.  This provided an update on progress made since the executive’s response had been presented to the Committee on 30th March, 2007.  The Acting Head of Service commented on progress against each recommendation as set out in the report.

In the course of discussion the following principal points were made:

·         Questioned about procurement of ICT equipment outside the approved arrangements through ICT Services the Acting Head of Service said that he was not aware of this now being an issue.  Schools had the freedom to procure as they wished, but this did not provide them with the four year warranty and security of support afforded to them by procuring through ICT Services.

·         The Cabinet Member (Corporate and Customer Services and Human Resources) reminded the Committee of previous discussions about the role of Members in enforcing disciplinary procedures in respect of procurement.  The Director of Corporate and Customer Services reported that in consultation with Human Resources a number of related policies had been refreshed, for example internet usage.

·         It was asked whether the relationship with schools had improved.  The Director of Corporate and Customer Services replied that quarterly meetings were being held and she considered that the relationship was improving.  She outlined progress in developing remote access for schools whilst noting that complex issues remained to be resolved.  Progress was reviewed at the quarterly meetings.  Service Level Agreements with schools had been issued on time, following consultation.

·         Asked about ICT staffing the Acting Head of Service confirmed that the need for all permanent posts had been reviewed.  The current structure was now considered adequate to deliver the service.

·         A question was asked about three reviews to which the report appeared to refer:  the work to a standard framework used by Red Island (the specialist agency) in relation to information security accreditation, a physical audit of ICT hardware across the authority, and work on desktop standardisation; and whether there was an inventory of all equipment.  The Acting Head of Service replied that following the introduction of a procurement process in 2005 there was a good record of equipment.  There was no record prior to that other than that which had been compiled in preparation for the millennium.  The Director of Corporate and Customer Services added that the reviews referred to were not three separate reviews but interrelated pieces of work designed to establish clearly what equipment was held and move towards standardisation.

·         Asked about the ICT Services budget the Acting Head of Service replied that work was ongoing to achieve a balanced budget by the year end.  The Director of Corporate and Customer Services added that Service Level Agreements had been rolled out across all directorates.  A zero based budgeting exercise had also been completed.  Standardisation of desktops was an important element of reducing costs.  Directorates would be charged for the number of desktops supported.

·         The interlinkage of accommodation plans with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

To consider the Committee’s work programme.

(Councillors PJ Edwards and RH Smith declared personal interests in respect of the waste disposal issue on the programme)

The Committee considered its work programme.

The following principal points were made:

·         That the Scrutiny function would expect to be involved both proactively in consideration of the review of the waste disposal strategy and in reviewing the outcome.  It was proposed that the Environment Scrutiny Committee would lead on this issue.

·         That the Committee required a report in October on quality of performance of the arms-length services recently purchased by Amey PLC to clarify performance baselines.

·         A report on the Council’s Smallholdings policy should be brought to its November meeting.

·         Referring to the complaints about Planning and Building Control services noted in the Ombudsman’s annual letter it was suggested the Committee should look at the reasons for the complaints and the way the services interacted with individuals which seemed to be one cause of concern.  It was noted that the Head of Planning Services had reported to the Committee on this issue in January 2007 and an update was requested.

·         The suggestions made by the members of the public at the start of the meeting in relation to the scrutiny process and age limits and eligibility for services were also noted for possible future consideration.

RESOLVED: That the work programme be amended to reflect the points above.