BOROUGH OF POOLE

COUNCIL EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

12 NOVEMBER 2009

The Meeting commenced at 7:00 p.m. and concluded at 8:57 p.m.

Present:

Councillor Mrs Haines (Chairman)

Councillor Gregory (Vice-Chairman)

Councillors Allen, Brown, Clements (substitute for Councillor Martin), Rampton.

Also attending Councillor Sorton as the Portfolio Holder for Council Efficiency and Effectiveness, Councillors Brooke, Gillard, Collier, Trent, Eades and Leverett.

Members of the public present: 1

CEE26.09APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Martin.

CEE27.09DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillors Rampton, Mrs Haines and Sorton declared personal interests in the motion at Item 5 on the Agenda as they were in receipt of Special Responsibility Allowances.

CEE28.09MINUTES

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the last Meeting of the Committee held on the 23 September 2009, having been previously circulated were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman subject to the following amendments:

The addition of Councillor Sorton in attendance as the Portfolio Holder for Efficiency and Effectiveness, the addition of Councillors Brooke, Mrs Deas, Gillard, Leverett, Mrs Stribley also attending.

A Member commented that he did not feel that the comments of all those contributing to the debate of the Motion were recorded as was normal practice.

CEE29.09URGENT BUSINESS

The Chairman asked the Head of Legal and Democratic Services to make a statement with regard to the closure of Merley Youth Club.

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services advised that he had informed the Councillor who had requested this matter be considered as an urgent item on the Agenda that it was not within this Committee’s remit. He had agreed that an item, as this matter related to the Provision of Youth Services and the Youth Club, was to be placed on the Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee Agenda for the 24 November 2009.

He then informed Members that should other issues flow from that discussion in relation to Property Services then these matters would be the subject of further scrutiny. The Head of Legal and Democratic Services explained that it would not be possible to undertake an in depth scrutiny on the 24 November 2009, but that it was proposed that the Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee establish a small Working Group to report back to that Committee. Any other issues relating to Property Services would be considered by this Committee at a future Meeting.

The Member concerned explained that he had requested that this item should be placed on the Agenda this evening and he disagreed with the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and felt that there were issues that needed to be reviewed by this Committee with regard to the Corporate Asset Management Plan and an item should have been on the Agenda. He felt that residents in Merley were entitled to an urgent response to their concerns and he found it most regrettable that there was not an item on the Agenda this evening.

Some Members commented that they were not kept informed of significant and important issues nor were Press Releases forwarded to all Councillors.

CEE30.09MOTION REFERRED FROM COUNCIL: MEMBERS ALLOWANCES: PROPOSED REDUCTION IN SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY ALLOWANCES (SRA’s) AND PROPOSED REDUCTION IN PRESS AND PUBLICITY BUDGET

The following Motion had been referred from Council on the 20 October 2009 to the Overview and Scrutiny Board and then this Committee:

“In the spirit of previous requests, and in view of the National Conservative Party's proposal to cut Ministers pay by 5%, freeze it for 5 years, and cut departmental budgets within Whitehall, we propose that this Council:-

Reduce the amounts awarded in all Special Responsibility Allowances by 5% and freeze them for 5 years to be implemented from April 2010; and cut the Borough of Poole budget for press and publicity by one third, in line with proposals for Whitehall Departments.”

Signed: Councillors Gillard, Brooke, Mrs Deas, Trent and Allen.

  • The main signatory to the Motion thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to address the Meeting and made the following points: there had been a substantial increase in Special Responsibility Allowances from 25% to, in some cases, 100% increase which he felt could not be substantiated based on the presumption that once the Overview and Scrutiny functions were combined the work of the Chairmen of these Committees would increase substantially. He likened the increase to Council Employees’ salary and their concern over Job Evaluation and Unison’s request for a 2% to 2.5% salary increase, which had been refused.
  • He implored Members, in these difficult times and referring to the fact that the majority of Members in receipt of Special Responsibility Allowances were Conservative Members, to agree to a 5% cut in response to National Conservative Policy Proposal which he felt would relieve the pressure on Council Services.

The Seconder of the Motion made the following points:

  • He agreed with the sentiments of the Proposer.
  • He had been advised when he was first elected that Council had to accept the findings of the Independent Remuneration Panel and he had now learnt that this was not true.
  • With regard to the current situation on Members’ allowances, he felt the Council was not demonstrating good leadership as the people who were in receipt of the Allowance were benefitting from a Review of the Panel’s first decision.
  • With regard to the reduction in the present Publicity Budget, he queried whether the Council needed to fund six copies of ‘Poole News’ each year.
  • He explained that the present Publicity Service was part of the Resources Portfolio and that Service Unit had gained ten extra Staff whilst other Units had reduced Staff.

A signatory to the Motion addressed the Meeting explaining that the Leader had advised Area Committees that the Council may receive 1.5% increase in funding from the Government and that the best one could hope for was a ‘stand still’ Budget.

  • He felt that, in view of the Proposal for a pay freeze in Local Government salaries, Councillors should take their share of the burden and Allowances should be cut for 5% and frozen for five years feeling that this was a good background for pay negotiations with Staff.

He agreed that six copies of ‘Poole News’ per year was more than necessary.

  • He felt that a cut in one-third of present Publicity Budget would be prudent.

A number of Members of the Committee responded, raising the following issues both in support and against the Motion.

  • It was queried how, when one was creating a new post, such as that of Overview and Scrutiny Chair could produce a pay rise, as previously these roles had not existed? This Council’s Special Responsibility Allowances were at the lower end of comparator Authorities.
  • The payments were for Allowances not salaries and Allowances were paid to allow Members to undertake their roles without being out of pocket and should not be compared with salaried employment.
  • The Meeting was advised by a Member who had attended the Conservative Party Conference that the proposal for any reduction in budgets related to Civil Servants and Central Government, not Local Government.
  • There was an opportunity for the Council to demonstrate to the Public some leadership if Members in receipt of a Special Responsibility Allowance were to undertake a 5% cut, a Member stated he would be prepared to offer the same reduction in his allowance.
  • There was more worthwhile use for the funding that would arise from saving in reducing Special Responsibility Allowances.
  • It was stated that it was a personal decision for Members and that anyone could ask for payments not be made or to be given to Charity but it was felt that it was not the real issue and that the real issue was that the Council was the fourth worst funded Authority in the Country.
  • A Member agreed that in these difficult times when a number of Residents in the Borough on fixed incomes all Members were in the position to make the gesture in reducing allowances and it should not only be left to those in receipt of Special Responsibility Allowances.

The Head of Customer Services and Communications was invited to address the Meeting. He explained that this was a frontline Service and that its role was to improve resident’s access and experience of access to Services. The Unit supported the website and managed internal communications and currently its budget was half the spend, and Press and Publicity was half of that undertaken by Bournemouth Borough Council.

The Head of Customer Services and Communications then referred to ‘Poole News’ explaining that in the 2009 Poole Opinion Survey 87% of residents who read every copy felt well informed, 22% of those who read some copies felt well informed and of those who never read the publication only 2% felt well informed about the Council. He felt this was a key publication for the Council.

Of the work of the rest of the Unit it was and explained that it responded to 1,200 media queries during the last year issued two hundred press releases. The Head of Customer Services and Communications informed the Meeting that the next publication of the A to Z Guide was to be deferred to next summer in order to make budgetary savings.

A Member commented explaining that he recognised the importance of Communications Staff and the need to consult with residents. He felt that the Communications Budget was being used to put a positive spin on the Administration’s Policies and explained that of with regard to the Merley Youth Club closure this did not go out on News Direct and he had received only one of the Press Releases issued.

He stated that the budget had increased by 16% for this Service Area and that the increase in this budget was more than any other and he felt that this was the wrong priority for the Council.

In response the Head of Customer Services and Communications explained that there had been a net increase in the budget, which also contained £45,000 for the web improvements, which was being reallocated as this was to be undertaken at a later date.

A Member spoke in favour of the reductions in Press and Publicity Budget referring Members to the statement by Councillor Leverett when he was in Opposition explaining that he would reduce the Press and Publicity Budget and employ one person.

The Head of Customer Services and Communications explained that there were increases in ten staff across the Resources Portfolio Area of which 0.8 was a net increase for his Service Unit he explained that the Service was undertaking more for the same budget and costs were increasing and he was working on a ‘level’ budget next year.

A Member commented that Press Statements should go to all Members and that there was an issue with when items were received when ‘News Direct’ Service. The Head of Customer Services and Communications agreed to review this.

It was proposed and seconded that:

“Cabinet be requested to review savings in Members Allowances when considering the Council’s budget as a whole in the light of current economic circumstances.”

On being put to the vote the original Motion was “LOST”.

It was unanimously RECOMMENDED to Cabinet that:

“Cabinet be requested to review savings in Members Allowances when considering the Council’s budget as a whole in the light of current economic circumstances.”

POST MEETING NOTE

The Head of Customer Services and Communications notified the Chair following the Meeting that unfortunately he had given wrong information in relation to the growth figure for the Communications Team. The correction was 1.12 not 0.8 as quoted.

CEE31.09FORWARD PLAN

The Committee considered the Forward Plan and it was noted that multi-area agreements were being considered by a special Meeting of the Economy Overview and Scrutiny Committee on the 3 December 2009 to which District Council Leaders and Deputies and the Leader of the County Council, had been invited. It was proposing to progress this Item through a Select Committee style process.

In response to a query from a Member as to how the effectiveness of Council partnership arrangements, excluding multi-area agreements were to be scrutinised it was agreed that the Overview and Scrutiny Board should be asked to review how partnerships worked across the rest of the Authority.

Any need to add an item on the Merley Youth Club would be reconsidered following the scrutiny by Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

The issue of complaint handling and the quality was also to be addressed at a future Meeting of this Committee once the appropriate scrutiny topic form had been completed.

RESOLVED that the Report on the Forward Plan be noted.

CEE32.09LOCAL GOVERNMENT OMBUDSMAN ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR END 31ST MARCH 2009: REPORT OF THE HEAD OF LEGAL AND DEMOCRATIC SERVICES

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services introduced his Report outlining a summary of the complaints received by the Local Government Ombudsman against the Council and the conclusions.

He outlined the background to the Report together with the detail of local settlements for maladministration which had been undertaken by the Council noting that the Council had paid a total of £2,350 in compensation to the year ending 31st March 2009 all of which related to planning issues.

With regard to response times, unfortunately there had been a slight increase in the time taken to respond to the Ombudsman by Service Units. The Committee was keen that the Council should respond to the Local Government Ombudsman in the specified time and agreed that this should be a requirement.

The Committee thanked the Head of Legal and Democratic Services for his Report.

It was recommended that:

(i)the Report and actions proposed by the Local Government Ombudsman be noted ; and

(ii)Service Units failing to respond to Local Government Ombudsman’s complaints within the specified time be monitored and reviewed by this Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

CEE33.09USE OF CONSULTANTS

The Chairman reported that a Meeting of the Working Party tasked with reviewing the use of consultants was to take place next week.

A Member commented that the significance of the Overview and Scrutiny role of Members did not appear to be understood by Units and although some have responded to the Questionnaire concerning the use of the consultants, responses had been less than adequate in some areas.

CEE34.09REVIEW OF COUNCIL’S GRANTS PROCESS

Peter Pawlowski, Strategic Director reported that an Officer Working Party had been established of which he was Chair. Each of the main Units concerned with Grants together with Legal and Financial Services Representatives were Members of the Working Party and it was proposed to report back to this Committee by March 2010.

CHAIRMAN

1