To consider the recommendations of the review of the Service Delivery Partnership with Amey and approve a preferred approach to future service delivery to enable formal negotiations to commence.

Cabinet considered a report which outlined recommendations of the Service Delivery Review of the Council’s Service Delivery Partnership with Amey, and their approval was sought to commence formal negotiations regarding a preferred model of future service delivery.  The Director of Environment and Culture informed the Cabinet that a Herefordshire Model of service delivery was the preferred model, and subject to successful negotiations, Amey would incorporate the relevant Council staff responsible for the relevant service areas under TUPE arrangements.  Members of the Council had been invited to comment on the draft report and their views were outlined in Appendix 2 of the report.

The Chairman of the Strategic Monitoring Committee advised Cabinet of the outcomes of the discussion held at SMC on 10 September, which agreed the following; that

(a)     the SMC broadly supports the recommendations being made to Cabinet on the Service Delivery Review of the Council’s Service Delivery Partnership with Amey;

(b)     the SMC noted that detailed negotiations will give rise to a further opportunity to scrutinise the methods being proposed to measure both quality and value for money of both individual projects as well as the contract as a whole;

(c)     further reassurance be sought on the employment matters and financial implications once firm proposals have been agreed by both parties;

(d)     the SMC be reconsulted once the asset management and property review is completed at the latest by March 2009;

(e)     regard be had by Cabinet to the Committee’s other principal observations as set out above.

The Chairman of the SMC informed the Cabinet of the principal points which were made during the course of discussion, which are attached as Appendix 1 to these minutes.

The Leader stated that whilst the cost of renegotiating the contract was estimated to be £200,000 (which would include consultancy fees for external legal and contract renegotiation advice), this cost should be considered in the context of the whole life of the contract.

Members praised both Council employees and Amey contractors for their joint working for the benefit of the people of Herefordshire in dealing with the serious damage inflicted on the County during the recent flooding.   The Cabinet Member  Highways and Transportation informed Members that word of thanks had been sent to staff by him and the Head of Service recognising the work undertaken during the recent floods.  The work of the rescue services was also acknowledged.

The Cabinet Member Corporate, Customer Services and Human Resources informed Cabinet that appropriate senior support would be provided by the Human Resources team and that the process would be closely monitored.  It was recognised that any change in the service delivery model would impact on staff and that it was important that advice and guidance was available. 

In discussion it was emphasised that an alternative model of service delivery would require a very strong client side responsible for ensuring agreed specification, value for money etc.  Assurance would be sought on the effectiveness of the partnership (client/contractor) and the mechanisms by which non compliance would be dealt with.

The Cabinet Member Highways and Transportation informed Members that he had visited Bedfordshire County Council, an authority which had developed a managing agent model in partnership with Amey, and that he had been impressed by the arrangements that had been put in place.  The Cabinet Member emphasised that the contract needed to clearly define aspects of compliance and should there be a failure to deliver compliance on any part of the contract then action would need to be taken.  With relation to the ‘watchman scheme’ the Cabinet Member hoped that certain aspect of devolution were written into the contract to ensure the ability to take account of future requirements.  The Cabinet Member thanked the Director and staff for keeping him informed of developments during the review process.

A Member in attendance commended the resolutions from SMC to the Cabinet and emphasised that recommendation (b) was of vital importance as whilst there was anecdotal evidence of improvements in work undertaken, value for money could not be demonstrated.  Additionally it was commended that recommendation (d) was of equal, if not greater importance.

In responding to a question raised regarding how the authority, as a client, was managing progress and improvement, the Director of Environment and Culture stated that clear measurements were integral to negotiations.  He advised Members that Bedfordshire maintained a client side of eight officers who had the ability to investigate and scrutinise any aspect of the contract.  The Director emphasised the importance of having the ability to consider all aspects of the contract as well as keeping a watching brief on the quality and value for money delivered in other authorities.

RESOLVED that:

(a)   the final report of the Service Deliver Review by noted

(b)   Officers be authorised to commence formal negotiations with Amey to secure changes to the partnership to reflect a preferred model of service delivery whilst also addressing, where possible, anomalies and weaknesses in the current contractual arrangements;

(c)   The Herefordshire Model of service delivery, as outlined in the report, be pursued as the preferred model and used as the basis for negotiations.  Under this model, subject to successful negotiations, Amey would taken n the relevant Council staff responsible for these areas under TUPE arrangements;

(d)   Asset Management and Property Services be excluded from the negotiation whilst a wider review of the property estate and its management is carried out and that this is completed by the end of March 2009;

(e)   A report be submitted to Cabinet on conclusion of the negotiations and the negotiations of the preferred model in (c) above does note restrict the recommendations of a different model if it is clear that this would be in the Council’s best interests.

The Cabinet additionally agreed to the recommendations as outlined by the Strategic Monitoring Committee:

(i)      the SMC broadly supports the recommendations being made to Cabinet on the Service Delivery Review of the Council’s Service Delivery Partnership with Amey;

(ii)                            the SMC noted that detailed negotiations will give rise to a further opportunity to scrutinise the methods being proposed to measure both quality and value for money of both individual projects as well as the contract as a whole;

(iii)                          further reassurance be sought on the employment matters and financial implications once firm proposals have been agreed by both parties;

(iv)                          the SMC be reconsulted once the asset management and property review is completed at the latest by March 2009;

(v)                           regard be had by Cabinet to the Committee’s other principal observations as set out above.