Agenda item

Report of the Chief Executive

The meeting adjourned for tea between 4.10 and 4.45 pm. Following this adjournment the Mayor had to leave the meeting so the chair was taken by the Deputy Chair, Councillor Barbara Driver.

The Chief Executive introduced his report which had been circulated with the agenda. He emphasised that in producing the report he had consulted widely and for the purposes of brevity he had not circulated the consultants report to the meeting although it was available to all members.

He acknowledged that at this stage the role of members was not as clearly defined as some members would like.  However he emphasised that this section 4 report was concerned with the proposed officer structure. The members working group had been set up to help define member involvement going forward.

He emphasised the huge implications arising from the government financial settlement and the Localism Bill. He considered that the recommendations for the officer structure were fit for purpose in the context of the new Coalition government’s agenda which it would be unwise to ignore. Indeed he felt there was no realistic alternative as maintaining the status quo was not an option.

He acknowledged that some members thought that commissioning was just good management and officers should just get on and do it. In his view the important difference was to start with a much clearer idea of the desired outcomes for citizens and the community. Commissioning did not assume there would be no in-house delivery in the future but decisions would be made on the basis of the most effective business case. It opened up opportunities for the voluntary and community sector and it was not a case of all services being transferred to the private sector. He had circulated an outline plan to councillors which provided an indicative timetable for when services would be reviewed.

From his consultation with members, he concluded that members were supportive of the need to reduce the number of Assistant Directors. He emphasised the importance of the role of the Strategic Directors in their management to date of key change projects such as GO and Civic Pride so it was logical for them to take on the commissioning role in the new structure.

Finally he stressed that the project was very much frontloaded and therefore the “one-off’ resource of £80,000 funded from virement as recommended by Cabinet would be very welcome to manage the transition period.

The Leader indicated that his party would be supporting the recommendations. He emphasised that member involvement and public involvement would be key when the future of each service was being considered. He also encouraged members of overview and scrutiny to come forward with their own ideas on how they wish to be involved in the monitoring of the services in the future.

A member expressed concerns that the officer structure had been mapped out but there are was still a big gap in the definition of how members and residents would be involved.  He had raised these concerns back in June and he now wanted to see firm proposals.  He wanted to know what the organisation would look like in six months time and he considered that defining the member framework should be a priority.   It also concerned him greatly that he did not know the reasons for moving forward with commissioning.

Other members concurred that there were concerns about members roles and it was particularly important that backbenchers were able to feel more accountable to their electorate going forward. They acknowledged the need to give their feedback to their Chief Executive when requested and to get involved.

Another member supported the direction of travel but struggled with the rationale for the section 4 report. It seemed premature to be recommending an officer structure and officers must take councillors with them. There was also a risk of overview and scrutiny being excluded and a protocol was needed to set out how scrutiny would be monitoring contracts in the future. There was also a gap in defining who residents would go to if they were not satisfied with the service being provided.

Without a proper business case, it did not seem the right time to cut back on resources and put in place a structure which was appropriate for the endgame but not necessarily appropriate for the transition period. 

A member suggested that members must be able to have trust and belief in the management team in taking strategic commissioning forward and it was important for members to ensure the right management team was in place.  

Other members supported the need to improve services and that there was no time to waste given the current financial challenges.

In response the Chief Executive stressed that all members had been invited to give their views. He did not feel it was for him as Chief Executive to bring forward proposals for members’ involvement. His role was to facilitate it by bringing members together so that they could come up with the definitions. There was a need to define a business case and public engagement but that was not an issue for the section 4 report. He was confident that the officer structure would support the transition period and emphasised the additional funding to address any initial shortfalls.

Upon a vote the recommendations were CARRIED.

Voting For: 29 with 2 absentions

Resolved that:

1. The Chief Executive’s proposals for a Strategic Commissioning Council be approved and the new Council structure as set out in this report and in Appendices A and B be agreed
   
   
2. A ‘one-off’ resource of £80,000 be set aside, funded from virement as recommended by Cabinet, as outlined in section 4 of the report.
   
   
3. It be noted that formal consultation (stage 3 as set out in Appendix C) on the proposed new structure will be undertaken with affected employees
   
   
4. The newly constituted Appointments Committee (or appropriate sub-committee) be requested to conduct and complete any necessary recruitment or redundancy processes at Assistant Director level (including the AD Resources/s151 Officer) and to agree such terms and conditions of appointment or dismissal as may be necessary in order to facilitate the new structure