To consider the draft Corporate Plan 2008 -2011.

The Committee was invited to comment to Cabinet on a draft of the Council’s Corporate Plan 2008-11.

An updated version of the Plan had been circulated to the Committee on14 March 2008.  Page numbers quoted below relate to this revised document.

The Head of Policy and Performance (HPP) presented the report.  He reported that the Plan, which was a rolling 3 year Plan, would set the key direction for the Council.  He highlighted how the Council’s themes and top priorities related to the Herefordshire Sustainable Community Strategy and the Local Area Agreement, as set out on p6 of the Plan and the Planning Framework as set out on p7.  He noted that because of the way the Plan was now drafted there was no longer a need to produce an Annual Operating Plan as a separate document. 

In the ensuing discussion the following principal points were made:

·         One Council Priority read: “Affordable housing to meet the needs of local people”.  It was suggested that, reflecting the approach at national level, the priority should read to provide “decent” affordable housing.

·         That in addition to the Plan referring to closer working with the Primary Care Trust the importance of the Police delivering its targets in partnership with the Council needed to be highlighted.

·         Noting the priority of achieving value for money concern was expressed about the Extra Care Housing Scheme at Rose Gardens Hereford.  It was suggested that the amount of public money, from various sources, expended on the Scheme did not represent value for money when compared with what might have been provided by the private sector for the same level of investment.  It was proposed that the Committee should receive a report on the Scheme and review its value for money and whether there were any lessons to be learned for future schemes.

·         That sections of the report that looked back rather than forward (for example p23-27, 32-34 and 38-56) and appeared rather to be seeking to promote and publicise achievements in the previous year sat uneasily within the Plan.  Noting the HPP’s comment that the Plan had to report back on what had been achieved as well as looking forward it was suggested that backward looking sections might be set out as an appendix to the Plan.

·         That there were a number of places where the Plan was unclear.  Examples given were the diagram on p 7, the box on the left hand corner of p29, and the presentation of p40 (appendix D) where the fact that further data was awaited in a number of cases made the information unusable. 

·         That no reference was made to the Schools Review at pages 9, 24 and 58 where it seemed appropriate to do so.

·         That the document paid insufficient attention to the role of Parish and Town Councils (p6, 12 and 16 were cited.)

·         That appendix c (how satisfied are our residents with what we do and what we provide) overall showed a significant decline in satisfaction and this needed to be commented on and addressed.

·         It was questioned why one of the key actions alongside the key commitment in 2008/09 and 2009-11: “the number of adults killed or seriously injured in road accidents to be reduced” referred to working in partnership with the Highways Agency to take action on trunk roads, but made no reference to work on B roads.

·         It was suggested that indicator NI 21 which read “dealing with local concerns about anti-social behaviour and crime by the local council and police” needed to be rephrased.

·         That it would present a truer picture  if appendix b to the Plan, the Council budget, set out the total spend available to the Council, rather than the net revenue budget and the capital programme. 

·         That it was essential that the key commitments listed for 2008/09, p8-21 of the Plan, were deliverable.  Confirmation was sought that Directors had approved the relevant commitments.  The HPP said that the Corporate Management Board had approved the commitments after consultation with individual Cabinet Members.  Some work remained to be done to reflect the final draft of the Local Area Agreement.  Members proposed that further work should be undertaken to make certain that the commitments were achievable.

·         It was asked whether it was appropriate on p8 of the Plan to portray key Stage 4 results in 2007/08 as an achievement, given that the target had not been met.  The HPP said that whilst the Council had not met the ambitious target set by the Government performance against local measures was good and had improved.

·         It was suggested that pages of the Plan listing key performance indicators for each of the Corporate Plan Themes might be removed to make the document more succinct.  The HPP acknowledged that there would be some duplication with the Local Area Agreement (LAA) which would be removed when the LAA position was clear.

·         That there was insufficient reference in the Plan to the urgent need to address the issue of waste collection and disposal.

·         The validity of the reference on p8 of the Plan that 31% of young people felt that Herefordshire Council gives them the opportunity to influence decision making was questioned.  The HPP said that this finding was from a statutory survey, was statistically valid and had been produced by young people themselves.

·         The HPP acknowledged that some of the actions in the Plan were not the Council’s direct responsibility but reflected the Council’s wider community leadership role and the importance of strong relationships with its partners.

·         That under each of the Corporate Themes consideration should be given to providing some analysis, explanation and context.

·         It was suggested there were gaps in the Plan, citing the absence of any reference on p14 in the theme relating to economic development and enterprise, to the new livestock Market, and need for a new river crossing and outer relief road.  The HPP replied that the Plan was consistent with the Medium Term Financial Strategy.  Some items were therefore not included because they were not currently affordable within the current financial plans.

In conclusion the HPP said that the length and depth of the debate had demonstrated Members’ interest in effective scrutiny and constructive input into the Council’s future actions.  All of these points would be considered as the Plan was finalised, noting that Cabinet was to consider the Plan on 27 March before Council considered it in May.  Even then allowance would have to be made for the final decisions on the Local Area Agreement.

RESOLVED:

That (a) Cabinet be advised that further work should be undertaken with Directorates to ensure that the commitments in respect of the seven key themes are appropriate and achievable;

(b)   Cabinet be advised that there appear to be a number of significant omissions in the current draft of the Corporate Plan which the Committee believes should be addressed before the Plan is submitted to Council for approval;

(c)   a report be submitted on the Rose Bank Garden Scheme reviewing its value for money and whether there were any lessons to be learned for future schemes.