Agenda item

Report of the Cabinet Member Corporate Services

The Cabinet Member Corporate Services introduced the report and reminded Members that in October 2015 Council approved the creation of  the 2020 Partnership Joint Committee, the delegation of GO Shared Service and ICT from the date of its creation and, following Cabinet decisions on 9 February, the subsequent delegation to the joint committee, of revenues, benefits and customer services. In October 2015 Council also delegated to the joint committee employment matters for all partner council staff including HR policies and procedures, pay and grading policy and total reward policy. Along with other partner councils CBC requested a further report during 2016 on the business case for a local authority company. A company structure and governance proposals was approved by the joint committee on 30 September 2016 which included proposals for CBC to become a member of a support services company from which it would receive GOSS and ICT.

Cabinet had reviewed the position regarding the inclusion of revenues, benefits and customer services and had determined to withdraw those services and to return them to the direct management of CBC rather than commit them to the company.

The Cabinet Member stated that Cheltenham Borough Council had positive experience with shared services. It was now a question of tailoring an all embracing project in its initial concept to something what would be appropriate for Cheltenham. Transferring the existing partly shared services to a company would provide resilience and the Cabinet Member gave the example of the positive experience with UBICO.

The following comments were made by Members :

• Austerity had driven the council to pursue shared services. However it was important to protect those front line services which Cheltenham were providing uniquely.
• There was a fear among some Members that as the partnership model moved towards a company model openness and transparency could be compromised. Decision-making would move further away from each authority and therefore individual Members. It was essential for Members to be able to scrutinise decisions of the company and that they had all the necessary and relevant information available to them in order that they could uphold their duty to residents.
• The decision to keep customer services and revenues and benefits in house should be kept under strict review but it provided CBC with the opportunity to shape these front facing services with a different view in conjunction with other partners. There was a strong belief among some Members that keeping these services in house was in the very best interests of the council and its residents.
• A Member made particular reference to the £159k savings target identified in the Medium Term Financial strategy from including customer services and revenues and benefits in the proposals. He highlighted that CBC’s current collection rate was 98 % compared to the national average of 97% and questioned whether this rate could be maintained within a company model. Based on £45 million received by the council a year, a 1% decrease represented £450k which in his view illustrated the scale of the risk of potential loss. He strongly believed that it was in the best interests of Cheltenham to keep those services in house as it provided the council with more flexibility compared to other potential joint arrangements. It also protected the unique provision of service in Cheltenham compared to other rural authorities within the joint partnership.

The Leader emphasised that the driver for pursuing joint arrangements was to ensure that services in Cheltenham were not cut which was particularly challenging faced with the dramatic reduction in Government funding over recent years. He highlighted CBC’s conscious ability to provide discretionary services and gave the example of the new advice contract which Cabinet had approved earlier on the agenda. It was vital that the company was transparent and accessible to all members on a cross party basis. Scrutiny of the company was important and how the company was operating should be kept under constant review.

The Cabinet Member Corporate Services reiterated that the rationale behind withdrawing revenues and benefits and customer services from the company model was in order to have “local services locally managed”. He recognised the role of scrutiny which had been built into the model.

RESOLVED THAT

1. the updated 2020 Partnership Business Case at Appendix 2 be approved in so far as it relates to Cheltenham Borough Council for the delivery of GOSS and ICT functions.

2. the transfer of GOSS and ICT functions as outlined in Schedule 2 of the Inter Authority Agreement dated 11 February 2016 to a local authority support services company owned by Cheltenham Borough Council, Cotswold District Council, Forest of Dean District Council and West Oxfordshire District Council be approved.

3. it be agreed that this authority’s revenues (including council tax), benefits and customer services be withdrawn from the 2020 Partnership Joint Committee with effect from 14 November 2016.

4. the Head of Paid Service be authorised, in consultation with the Leader, Cabinet Member for Corporate Services, the s151 Officer and the Borough Solicitor to work with the Partnership MD to finalise and complete the Articles of Association, Members Agreement, Contract for Services and  documents and to take all necessary steps to enable the support  service local authority company formation.

5.  the Democratic Services Manager, in consultation with the Borough Solicitor, be authorised to make such changes to the Constitution as are necessary to reflect and facilitate the implementation of the recommendations in this report.