Agenda and minutes

East Kent (Joint Arrangements) Committee
Wednesday, 3rd December, 2008 10.00 am

Venue: The Guildhall, Westgate, Canterbury

Contact: Lyn McDaid  01227 862 006

Items
No. Item

1.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

TO RECEIVE apologies for absence

 

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Paul Carter, Councillor John Gilbey and Councillor Roger Latchford.

 

2.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

TO RECEIVE declaration of interests

 

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest made.

 

3.

SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS

The Chairman to report any notifications received prior to this meeting regarding the attendance of substitutes for the named Members of this Committee. 

 

Minutes:

There were no substitute Members.

 

4.

MINUTES pdf icon PDF 66 KB

To confirm as a true record the minutes of the meeting of the East Kent (Joint Arrangements) Committee held on 25 June 2008.

 

Minutes:

The Minutes of the meeting of the 25 June 2008 were agreed as a true record.

 

5.

MATTERS ARISING

Matters arising from the last meeting of this Committee

 

Minutes:

There were no matters arising.

 

6.

MATTERS REFERRED FROM THE EAST KENT (JOINT SCRUTINY) COMMITTEE

TO RECEIVE any items referred from the last meeting of the committee

 

(None this time)

 

Minutes:

There were no matters referred to the East Kent (Joint Arrangements) Committee from the East Kent (Joint Scrutiny) Committee.

 

7.

ALLOCATION OF £50,000 FUNDING TO EAST KENT CLUSTER BY KENT & MEDWAY IMPROVEMENT PARTNERSHIP pdf icon PDF 78 KB

TO CONSIDER a report from the Head of Policy and Improvement, Canterbury City Council

 

Minutes:

The Chief Executive of Canterbury City Council briefly outlined the report. He explained that £50,000 had been allocated from the Kent and Medway Improvement Partnership to the East Kent Cluster in order to help fund a number of the ongoing projects. The report provided for the management of future funds.

 

RESOLVED – The East Kent (Joint Arrangements) Committee resolve to recommend that:

 

a)    any four of the Chief Executive’s of the parties or their nominated representatives acting together have delegated authority to allocate funding to relevant projects within the agreed shared services programme, with East Kent (Joint Arrangements) committee acting as the monitoring body

b)    the principle of a holding fund be recommended to the parties, subject to funding being made available in future years, to enable the East Kent (Joint Arrangements) committee to agree the funding of projects without the need for a referral back to the constituent authorities

c)     any funds allocated by the Chief Executives as above or voted by the parties or otherwise in respect of specific projects be allocated to the project champion as designated officer, such funds to be managed and expended in furtherance of the project

d)    the designated officer may appoint or retain external agents or contracts or any officer of any of the parties for any purpose.

 

8.

JOINT HOUSING LANDLORD SERVICES pdf icon PDF 128 KB

TO CONSIDER a report from the Head of Community Services, Thanet District Council

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

At the commencement of this item point one of the resolutions was agreed prior to discussion on this item to allow the Ashford Borough Council representative to participate in the debate.

 

The Chief Executive of Thanet District Council outlined the report on Joint Housing Landlord Services. He explained that it was the aim to establish a shared service vehicle for Housing by April 2010.

 

The initial reports on the proposals had been to the Executives of each of the five participants and each had agreed to move to the next stage.

 

The reasons for recommending the shared service vehicle approach included Service Improvements, Efficiencies and Cost Reductions, Resilience and Improving capacity.

 

The shared service vehicle involve the transfer of approximately 270 FTE posts and would be responsible for the management of 21,000 houses across  the five authorities.  Each Council would retain ownership of its housing stock and housing strategy.   All proposals were subject to tenant consultation and Secretary of State approval.

 

The committee was informed that the Chief Executive of Thanet District Council would be leading the project board, supported by a Project Manager, Project Director, nominees from each of the parties and tenant representatives.

 

The Shared Service Vehicle would be a not for profit organisation and could potentially seek charitable status. The broad composition of the Board of the Shared Service Vehicle would consist of five Councillors, five Tenants and five Independent Members.  There would also be an area structure underneath the board to provide local delivery of services and enhance local involvement.

 

The shared service vehicle would be responsible for direct housing management and maintenance functions for the five Councils.  Support services such as HR, ICT and Legal would be purchased under terms to be agreed.

 

A new report would be brought before the East Kent (Joint Arrangements) Committee at its meeting in March.

 

In response to questions from a Member, the Chief Executive of Thanet District Council confirmed that there would be a Chairman of the Shared Service vehicle in addition to the 15 Members of the Board. It was also hoped that the five Independent Members of the Board would bring a variety of different complementary skills from professional backgrounds.

 

The Council’s would retain the management of housing strategy, waiting lists and homelessness issues; a debate was needed in the future to decide if these services should be combined or transferred.

 

The tenants in the five districts had met with the individual districts and there had been little complaint about the proposals. More detailed consultation would form part of the process.

 

In response to a question from a Member the Executive of Thanet District Council there was a lot of detailed work to be completed before a final business case could be presented. At this point in time Members were only being asked to agree the principles.

 

The Chief Executive of Thanet District Council confirmed to the Committee in response to a question from a Member, that the report was only a series of proposals  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

SHARED HR/PAYROLL BUSINESS CASE pdf icon PDF 109 KB

TO CONSIDER a report of the Corporate Director, Shepway District Council –

 

 

Minutes:

The Corporate Director of Shepway District Council outlined the report on the shared HR/payroll business case. She confirmed to the Committee that there would potentially be significant savings in the region of £500,000 arising from a joint arrangement.  In addition it was noted that there would also be non-financial benefits, which included increased resilience, procurement budget and skills base to draw from.

 

She said the proposal to release money to purchase a joint payroll system would not be finalised until each Executive or Cabinet had agreed the proposal.  She confirmed that the project could still be viable with fewer than four partners.

 

The Leaders of the parties were advised that the decisions that were anticipated to be taken in March/April 2009 should be included in their Forward Plans.

 

RESOLVED – That the East Kent (Joint Arrangements) Committee recommend:

a)     To the Executive of each participating Council that it -

i)                   Delegates to East Kent (Joint Arrangements) committee the responsibility to develop business models for a shared HR and Payroll Service between some or all of the parties and to make recommendations to them.

ii)                 Contributes £10,000 to develop the project.

iii)               Agrees to Kent County Council commencing an appropriate procurement process for the acquisition of a suitable HR/Payroll software system provided that the system shall not be acquired until the participating Districts have approved the business model.

b)     Upon the first two parties approving the above recommendation, the East Kent (Joint Arrangements) committee delegates to the Project Lead (Wendy Head, Corporate Director, Organisational Performance, Shepway District Council) the power to develop the business models for a shared HR and Payroll Service between some or all of the parties.

c)      The decisions on the use of funding secured to develop the project be delegated to the Project Lead referred to in (b) above, in consultation with the Chief Executives of the parties.