To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors WLS Bowen, SPA Daniels, TM James and RH Smith.  Councillor RJ Phillips, Leader of the Council, also sent his apologies.

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

Councillor PJ Edwards declared a personal interest in agenda item 8: the Council’s Policy for the Management of the Smallholdings Estate because a relative farmed one of the smallholdings.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 25th October, 2007

RESOLVED:  That the Minutes of the meeting held on 25th October, 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.

There were no suggestions from members of the public.

To provide the Strategic Monitoring Committee with a further update on the status of the Herefordshire Strategic Service Delivery Partnership between the Council, Amey Wye Valley Limited and Owen Williams Limited. 

Further to its meeting on 25th October, the Committee received a further update on the status of the Herefordshire Strategic Service Delivery Partnership between the Council, Amey Wye Valley Limited (AWV) and Owen Williams Limited.

In accordance with the Committee’s decision of 25th October the report set out the transitional arrangements relating to the purchase of the major part of Herefordshire Jarvis Services (HLS) by Amey plc; the continuity of service delivery – stating that there had been full service continuity with no interruption to services of any kind; Amey’s assessment of the programme of works for the reminder of 2007/08 and a baseline on the standards of service provision against which future performance could be assessed.

The Chairman welcomed Mr N Sharman (Head of Local Government Services, Amey plc); Mr S Gyford General Manager Amey Wye Valley Limited and Mr R Garbutt (Manager Owen Williams Ltd, Hereford Office who had been invited to make a presentation and answer questions.

Mr Sharman introduced the presentation.  This outlined the background to the standing of Amey plc and the resources available to the Company.  It explained Amey’s aim, specialisms and understanding of the requirements of its customers; listed successful local government partnerships it was already involved in, and noted similarities in particular with Hertfordshire County Council which also served dispersed communities.  It described Amey’s values, which were considered to align with the Council’s.   It emphasised in terms of performance that the aim was to make profit through smarter and better working, sharing the benefits with the Council. The services provided by Owen Williams and AWV contracting under the contracts with the Council were described.  It also noted the new vehicles, new plant and new personal protective equipment provided since AWV had taken over the contract with the Council; and outlined steps taken during the integration period.

Mr Gyford identified the following differences in approach: suppliers paid on time; Amey’s understanding of the needs of its Local Government customers; AWV felt valued by its colleagues (not just a source of cash); tangible support was received from the Group in all areas of the business; monthly contract reviews were supportive as well as challenging; plant and equipment were new; and there were real opportunities for growth.

He reported that the “Bellwin” flood remedial works could be delivered by the deadline of 22 December 2007.  He added that 75% of the programmed highway works 2007/08 had been completed which meant that progress was on track.

The presentation also commented on whether there was a potential conflict of interest created by the fact that Owen Williams as consultants and AWW as contractor were both owned by Amey PLC.  It was asserted that it was now commonplace for Councils to procure their consultancy support and contracting delivery as an integrated service from a single supplier.  To abuse the position would be contrary to Owen Williams’s values.  Apart from any question of morality, the reputational risks to Amey of any bad practice would be immense, not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

To receive a presentation from the Cabinet Member on key issues.

The Committee received a presentation from the Cabinet Member (Corporate and Customer Services and Human Resources)

A report from the Cabinet Member on the Corporate and Customer Services part of her portfolio had been previously circulated, the section on Human Resources having been omitted by administrative error.  A revised, complete report was circulated at the meeting.

The Cabinet Member referred to her report but advised that she wanted to highlight significant issues facing the Council.  She highlighted the following matters:

·         She noted the fact that several reports for the Committee’s agenda had had to be circulated separately, having been unavailable when the agenda was despatched.  She said that it was an example of the need for the Council’s procedures to be followed by all staff.  The inconsistency of approach to team briefings was a further example.  Staff needed to follow procedures or be held to account if they did not.

·         It was important for the Council to draw on best practice to achieve efficiencies, freeing resources for investment in frontline services.

·         Performance needed to be challenged, noting use being made of the peer support available to Members and Officers from the West Midlands Centre for Excellence.

·         Implementation of the action plan in the Investors in People Assessment, noting amongst other things the feedback from the assessors that when people were promoted it was important they were provided with the support to deliver in their new job.

·         The need for development programmes for Members as recommended by the Crookall report on The Council’s ICT financial and contractual governance arrangements.

·         That whilst the processes for reporting bullying were considered good it was important that staff were given confidence to raise issues.

·         The Business Transformation Programme needed to be progressed.  Other Authorities had derived benefits from these programmes.  It was important that the potential savings were generated.  Issues of peripatetic working and office accommodation were interlinked with this process.

·         The process of combining back office services needed to proceed in line with Government thinking.  Discussions were taking place with the Primary Care Trust and the Hospitals Trust had also expressed interest.  A more seamless service could be delivered.  This would involve changes for staff.

·         Job Evaluation and Single Status was still on the national agenda, with Councils, for example Birmingham City Council, experiencing difficulties in implementing it.  Herefordshire Council had done well to have implemented Single Status.

·         The Comprehensive Area Assessment would be challenging and it was important to ensure that the Council’s priorities were reflected in the Agreement.

·         It continued to be difficult to recruit to posts in IT and social care and there were also difficulties in Human Resources.  The Council needed to develop its own staff.

In the ensuing discussion the following principal points were made:

·         The Chairman stressed the importance of the Committee having material presented to it in a timely and orderly manner if it was to be able to conduct its business efficiently and effectively.  This was an issue relevant to meetings across the Council.  He referred  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

To consider a progress report on Herefordshire Connects.

The Committee considered a progress report on the Herefordshire Connects project.

Members expressed a number of concerns about the content of the report and its late publication.  It was requested that a further report be prepared setting out the development of the Herefordshire Connects project in a clear sequential order with a clear explanation of the financial position, noting that the predicted savings had significantly reduced, and clarifying any interlinkages with the Council’s other major IT projects.

The Chief Executive commented on the development of the Herefordshire Connects project.  He noted that the Executive would shortly be taking decisions on the project as part of the budget process and, in calling for a further report, the Committee needed to be mindful of the timing of its input into that process.

RESOLVED: that a further report be prepared for the Committee’s consideration setting out the development of the Herefordshire Connects project in a clear sequential order with a clear explanation of the financial position, and clarifying any interlinkages with the Council’s other major IT projects.

To advise the Strategic Monitoring Committee of the Council's policy for the management of the smallholdings estate. 

(Councillor PJ Edwards declared a personal interest in this item.)

The Committee considered a report on the Council’s policy for the management of the smallholdings estate.

The Head of Asset Management and Property Services presented the report.

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

·         It was requested that a map be made available to Members of the Committee showing the Council’s holdings. In reply it was noted that a series of maps would be needed but work currently underway on the Council’s holdings as a whole should enable this information to be produced in due course.

·         The policy of disposing of land when prices were rising was questioned.  It was replied that the policy as set out in the Asset Management Plan was to generate £10 million in capital receipts over a ten year period.  This should be achieved.  The policy was to rationalise the smallholdings estate by disposing of unsuitable or high maintenance property.

·         It was noted that some of the documentation quoted as background papers and described as policy did not indicate when it had been produced but appeared to be out of date.  It was stated that the Property Strategy as reported to Cabinet on 19 May 2005 was the Council’s policy and the documents being referred to were supporting working documents.

·         It was proposed that a full review of the management of the smallholdings estate be carried out and properly documented in one report, with particular reference to value for money for the whole of Herefordshire. 

·         It was suggested that provided that the Committee was assured that the criteria for rationalisation of the estate were in place the Committee should focus on other issues.

·         It was suggested that in some instances the rental for holdings compared favourably with that for a property on the Belmont housing estate.  It was asked whether sub-letting was also taking place.

In reply the Estates Manager said that the previous Cabinet Member had instructed that there should be no sub-letting and under the Agricultural Holdings Act (AHA) this was not permitted.  However, there were ways in which this could be subverted.  He had discussed this with fellow land agents but there appeared to be no counter.  In contrast, under the new Farm Business Tenancies (FBT) control could be exercised and permission required to sub-let.  The Council could exercise its discretion under an FBT to permit sub-letting but if it did do so it could charge extra rent.  Forty of the Sixty–one holdings were currently held under the AHA.

In response to detailed questions the following points were made:

·         That increased prices for grain would be reflected in rent reviews.

·         That one notice to quit had been issued and although the arrears had now been paid that tenant would leave the smallholding in February 2009.

·         Expenditure on a road at a smallholding at Burghill was clarified. 

·         The reasons why a particular holding at Burghill had not been let were clarified explaining the various tenancy agreement options and their  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

To report performance for the first half of 2007-08 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 performance for the first half of 2007-08 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 report. 

In the ensuing discussion the following principal points were made (page references are to pages of the Integrated Performance and Finance Report (IPR) circulated as a separate document):

·         (p39) An explanation was sought of progress on performance indicators relating to lifestyle: 22a-g, which were marked as red (not on target).  The IPR stated that a meeting had been arranged with the Primary Care Trust in November that should result in an agreed set of defined indicators and targets.  The Improvement Manager replied that lead officers for each target had been agreed by the Children’s Trust Board earlier in the month.  Whilst considerable activity was taking place to address these lifestyle issues it was proving difficult to agree indicators that measured progress. 

It was requested that a progress report be made to the Committee’s next meeting.

·         It was acknowledged that the clarity of the presentation of the performance information had been improved in response to comments made by the Committee, assisting the more efficient conduct of business.

·         (p40) In relation to indicator 35b HCS (No of half day sessions missed by looked after children as % of total number of sessions in primary schools) it was noted that the latest figures when available at the end of October would show high levels of absenteeism.  The Head of Safeguarding and Assessment said that this was an important issue particularly given the Council’s responsibility to looked after Children as their Corporate Parent.  Personal Education Plans set out educational and pastoral measures to address non-attendance.  The service was working closely with social workers to target improvement.

·         (p51) It was noted that 5 of the 9 targets marked as amber (some progress/data not yet available so not possible to determine trend) under the priority: maximising the health, safety, economic well-being, achievements and contribution of every child related to non-attendance at school. The Head of Safeguarding and Assessment commented that although the Education Welfare Service was the lead service there was a need to work with partners to address the issues and improve performance in this area. An attendance strategy was currently being discussed with schools.

·         (p39/40) Performance against target 89b (completion rate of initial assessments of children in need within 7 working days of referral) was questioned.  The Head of Safeguarding and Assessment said that this was a critical indicator.  The principal reason why the target was not being met was difficulty in recruiting and retaining social workers.  This was a national problem.  However, he considered that action that had been taken locally such as strengthening links with local colleges was proving beneficial.  Staff numbers were starting to increase but as these were newly qualified  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.