Agenda and minutes

Mr J N Wedgbury declared an interest in various items as a Member of the Fire Brigades Union and an active trade unionist. 

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 11 July 2012 are correctly recorded and that they be signed by the Chairman as a correct record. 

(1)       Mr Sweetland introduced a report which set out the proposed changes in the management, operation and company structure of Commercial Services following an independent review and consideration by the Governing Board for Commercial Services.  He introduced Mr McPherson, Managing Director of Commercial Services who gave details of the proposals.

(2)       Mr Sweetland and Mr McPherson answered questions and noted comments from Members which included the following:

• Mr McPherson confirmed that Commercial Services generated £8k net profit per member of staff at no cost to the County Council or Council tax payers.

• A Member emphasised the importance of some of the Directors on the Board being from the private sector.  Officers undertook to supply a copy of the company structure and details of the Directors to members of the Committee.
• In relation to a question on profitability, Mr McPherson stated that LAZER made 1.5%, with reduced overall profitability, the other areas turned over 5% which was acceptable.
• In response to a question on how the to ensure that there was no perceived advantage to Commercial Services in its dealings with the County Council, Mr McPherson stated that it was essential that the procurement process with KCC was seen to be fair and that there was no preferential procurement.  It was important that Value for Money (VFM) was demonstrated and that contracts were only awarded to Commercial Services Companies if they could demonstrate VFM.
• The importance of making sure that Kent business knew that Commercial Services were competing with them on a level playing field was emphasised.
• In relation to the purchase of green energy, Mr McPherson stated that it was not possible to buy green energy in Kent. 
• Regarding the premises for Commercial Services, Mr McPherson stated that it was important that Commercial Services were located in premises that were separate from the County Council, negotiations were underway regarding premises with the aim of being as cost effective as possible.
• The importance of there being more information about Commercial Services within the Budget Book was emphasised.

(3)       RESOLVED that:

(a)       the comments made by Members and the actions being taken to change and improve the management, governance and operations of Commercial Services be noted;

(b)       the Cabinet Committee endorse the decisions to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste, the     Cabinet Member for Business Strategy, Performance and Health Reform and the Corporate Director, Environment, Highways andWaste in relation to the formation of new companies; the transfer of existing KCC employees to such companies; and the entering into of all necessary leasehold and other agreements to give effect to these arrangements,  subject to the terms of the KCC Constitution and the Articles of Association of the Company, and

(c)        an update report on the Commercial Services Companies be submitted to the Committee in 6 months time.

(Post meeting note: it was agreed that a more appropriate time for the update report to be submitted to the Committee would be after Commercial Services End of Year  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

(1)       Mr Gough introduced a report which outlined the progress on the programme of work being undertaken to ensure the successful establishment of Local Healthwatch (LHW) in Kent by April 2013. The report set out the strategic approach to developing the model and outlined the key stages in ensuring successful delivery of the new requirements including the move towards procurement.

(2) Mr Gough, Ms Van Ruyckevelt and Ms Gailey answered questions and noted comments from Members which included the following.

• In response to a question on the amount of time that the interim Shadow Local Healthwatch Board would stay in place, Mr Gough explained that there was a need for flexibility as it was unlikely that the new Board would be in place by 1 April 2013, which was also the case for most other local authorities.   Things would be clearer once the procurement exercise had been carried out and the Local Healthwatch organisation had been appointed.
• Regarding the Membership of the Shadow Board, Mr Gough stated that members had been selected by an open invitation for expressions of interest as part of an open and transparent appointment process.
• In response to a question on the complex relationships between Local Healthwatch and the County Council, Mr Gough stated that there was an inbuilt tension within the legislation.  The County Council commissioned and paid for services but at the same time would be involved in scrutinising social care via the Health and Wellbeing Board.
• Mr Gough confirmed that the voluntary sector were keen to be involved with Local Healthwatch and this was being nurtured, especially as the Local Healthwatch had to be a social enterprise.
• A question was asked about what the reputational and financial risks were to the County Council, Officers undertook to circulate details of the risk analysis to all Members of the Committee.
• Ms Van Ruyckevelt stated that all of the views expressed from organisations regarding the commissioning would be placed on the County Councils website in order to be transparent.
• Ms Van Ruyckevelt confirmed that officers had worked closely with all parties especially Kent and Medway Networks who were the host organisation. They were also working closely with the Shadow Health and Wellbeing board to ensure that there was an integrated way forward.
• Ms Gailey referred to the work being carried out to ensure that the LINk legacy of information and experienced people were utilised under the new organisation.

(3)       RESOLVED that the Cabinet Committee endorse the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member to move to procurement following the steps set out in the report. 

(1)       The Chairman referred to the need to look at a more efficient process for involving Members in the decision making process for this type of property decision.  He stated that work was being carried out by the Director of Governance and officers to revise the property protocol which would have an impact on this process not just for decisions relating to Kings Hill but to other property decisions as well.  Members would be kept informed of progress.

(2)       Mr Abrahams and Mr Hyland introduced a report which outlined the rationale for the sale of three small development plots at Kings Hill as part of the adopted strategic land disposal programme at Kings Hill.  Officers undertook to supply Members of the Committee with a copy of the programme.

(3)       RESOLVED that the Cabinet Committee endorse the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member to authorise the sale of the three parcels of land (areas 01, 03 &05, Kings Hill, Village 2).

(1)       Mr Hyland submitted a report which outlined the rationale for the sale of a large development plot at Kings Hill as part of the adopted strategic land disposal programme at Kings Hill.

(2)       RESOLVED that the Cabinet Committee endorse the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member to authorise the sale of the land (areas 57 Kings Hill, Village 2).

(1)       Mr Hyland submitted a report which outlined the rationale for the sale of a large development plot at Kings Hill as part of the adopted strategic land disposal programme at Kings Hill.

(2)       RESOLVED that the Cabinet Committee endorse the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member to authorise the sale of the land (areas 62 Kings Hill, Village 2).

(1)       Mr Gough and Ms Beer introduced a report on the Council’s proposed approach to the introduction of auto enrolment of employees into an Occupational Pension Scheme.  

(2)       Ms Beer and Mr Miller answered questions and noted comments from Member which included the following:

• Ms Beer confirmed that the requirement to notify all staff every three years of their right to opt in or out of the pension scheme would be an administrative burden.
• Mr Miller stated that this legislation was really aimed at the private sector where pension scheme membership was low rather than the public sector which traditionally had a high take up of pension scheme membership.  Ms Beer explained that currently all staff were auto enrolled into the pension scheme when they joined the authority. The new legislation required the authority to write to all staff every three years to inform them of their right to be part of the pension scheme, which generated the risk that in difficult financial times some people may take the opportunity to opt out of the scheme which might not be in their best long term interests.  This was one of the reasons for suggesting that implementation of the requirement should be delayed.
• Mr Miller explained that the Local Government Pension Scheme had a significant number of members and that staff opting in and out had tended to have a smoothing effect.  The fund was reviewed every three years.
• Mr Miller confirmed that as part of the new proposals the options for staff to make half contributions has been preserved.

(3)       RESOLVED that the Cabinet Committee endorse the following decision to be taken by the Leader of the Council:

·        KCC to fulfil the statutory requirements of Auto Enrolment by assessing and informing employees of their enrolment rights in accordance with Auto Enrolment Regulations.  This is to comply with the initial staging date on 1 March 2013.

·        KCC informs the Pensions Regulator of its wish to exercise the right to defer, using the transitional arrangements, the full implementation of Auto Enrolment until October 2017 for staff that have already opted out of the Local Government Pension Scheme or the Teachers Pension    Scheme.

(1)       Mr Gough introduced The Business Strategy and  Support performance dashboard provided Members with progress against targets set in the current financial year’s business plans for key performance and activity indicators.

(2)       Mr Gough, Mr Cockburn, Mr Hallett and Mr Fitzgerald answered questions and noted comments from Members which included the following:

• The Chairman referred to the informal meeting that had been held with Members to discuss improvements to the way that the Performance Dashboard information was displayed, the suggestions made by Members had been incorporated into the report.
• Mr Cockburn confirmed that the Performance Dashboards were reviewed at Management Team meetings and were a key source of information. He emphasised the importance of the information being provided in a meaningful format which helped officers to identify and address issues.  It was important that this information related to the disbursement of resources.
• In relation to Freedom of Information, Mr Gough stated that there had been a huge movement in the right direction and he agreed that publicity should be given to this improvement. He referred to the steady work with officers to achieve improvements in the system of processing Freedom of Information request and the importance of ensuring as much key information was available on the website as possible.  He stated that improvements had been achieved in spite of an increasing number of Freedom of Information requests.
• A Member expressed the view that the report should also bring out the cost effective way that this Directorate provided support to services for the people of Kent.
• Members were asked to put forward any suggestions for amendments to the Performance Dashboard via the Democratic Services Officer.
• In relation to a question on the Performance Indicator for responding to the Ombudsman, Mr Fitzgerald explained that there had been a change in the way that this indicator had been presented, to reflect the way that the Ombudsman assessed the County Council.
• A Member pointed out that the Performance information that Officers needed to effectively run their business was not necessarily the same as that which Members wanted to see.
• Mr Fitzgerald referred to the business planning process that was about to begin.  Members would have an opportunity to input into the business planning process which would assist Members in deciding the data they required. 
• Mr Gough stated that it was important that when issues of interest or concern to Members occurred the Performance Dashboard data was supplied. What was important was having the right level of meaningful information to assist Members.

(3)       RESOLVED that the comments made by Members on the Business Strategy and Support performance dashboard, including the appropriateness and relevance of the indicators currently included in the dashboard, be noted

(1)       Ms Hansen introduced the first quarter’s full budget monitoring report for 2012/13 which had been reported to Cabinet on 17 September 2012. 

(2)       Mr Simmonds, Mr Gough, Ms Hansen and Mr Wood answered questions and noted comments from Members which included the following:

• In response to a question on the impact of the Finance restructure, Mr Wood stated that it had been difficult, 110 finance posts had been taken out of the structure, there had been a culture change for the organisation with budget management being moved to managers.  The previous structure/way of working had been in place for 23 years up until April 2012. There were pockets of resistance to the change from individual managers but these had been quickly resolved. Generally there had been support for the change throughout the organisation. He stated that the journey would take about 2 years. The Chairman stated that it was important that the Committee were kept informed of the progress being made to move to the new way of working and that they could be kept up to date though the Financial Monitoring reports.
• Mr Gough responded to a question on “total place” and the management of public sector assets within an area.  He stated that this work was part of the means to achieve the £10m saving through property rationalisation.  He reminded Members that there was an exempt report on New Work Spaces later in the meeting.
• Mr Wood explained that the reference in Appendix 3 of the report to “interim” solutions, related to the situations where things had not gone to plan and it would take some time to find an alternative solution so a quick fix was put in place. He was aware of the importance of making sure that there was a proper long term solution to the issues and the interim solution removed as soon as possible before it became embedded.  This gave the opportunity to learn from any problems.   It was agreed that details of the lessons learned from overcoming these issues would be included in a future report to the Committee.
• Mr Simmonds stated that it was important to remember that in taking 30% of people out of finance made the unit very dependant on IT, it was therefore essential that the IT worked.   He emphasised that taking over £3m out of the Finance budget was an enormous undertaking and that just because it had been done did not mean that it had not been extremely difficult.
• Mr Simmonds referred to the indicator for paying invoices within 20 days which had slipped, he confirmed that there was no backlog in Finance, down to the difficulties being experienced in Directorates as they take on their new responsibilities from the reorganisation.   Often they had to deal with invoices with no reference number or inadequate information. 

(3)       RESOLVED that the revenue and capital forecast variances from budget for 2012/13 for the Finance and Business Support, Business Strategy Performance and Health Reform, Democracy and Partnerships and Environment,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

(1)       Mr Simmonds introduced an update on the 2013/14 budget consultation launched on 6^th September

(2)       Mr Simmonds answered questions and noted comments from Members which included the following:

• Regarding making sure that all sectors of the community were encouraged to respond to the consultation, Mr Simmonds stated that Members had a role to play in their community to raise awareness of the opportunity of responding to the proposals. Parish Councils were a good way of doing this.  He stated that there had been 100 responses to date.
• A Member stated that Mr Simmonds had attended a meeting of his Locality Board and given a clear presentation on the Budget. Ms Carey stated that she and Mr Simmonds had volunteered to attend local meetings such as Local Engagement Forums etc. 
• The importance of analysing the consultation feedback and in particular who had responded, or not, in order to learn from this exercise for next years consultation, was emphasised.
• It was noted that the second meeting of the IMG on the Budget would be held on 23 October at 3.30pm.

(3)       RESOLVED that the launch of consultation be noted and that feedback be provided to the November round of Cabinet Committee meetings.

(1)       Mr Charman and Ms Agyepong introduced a report which set out the new Equality Statement and Policy Objectives for Kent County Council following the implementation of the Equality Act 2010.  Following consultation the Equality Objectives had been further developed since they were presented to the Policy and Resources Cabinet Committee meeting on 11 July 2012.

(2)       Ms Agyepong answered questions and noted comments from Members which included the following:

• Ms Agyepong confirmed that over the past few months officers had been looking at the equalities systems that needed to be in place within the authority.  It was intended that these would be embedded within the business planning process and was not to be an additional burden or a tick box exercise but would be part of the Authorities core process.
• As this Committee was going to monitor the County Council’s Equalities Policy, a Member expressed concern about the amount of time that this Committee would be able to devote to this with the amount of other business that it had.   The Chairman stated that this would be kept under review and that if necessary consideration could be given to establishing an Informal Member Group to carry out this important monitoring role.
• It would be useful for a future report to the Committee to include a full set of the targets to be achieved.
• Ms Agyepong stated that in terms of complaints these were dealt with by the complaints team who should be able to understand the nature of the complaint and to be able to identify those that were able equalities issues.  She would then work with the business to address the issue at the point of service, when necessary the Equalities officer would provide additional support to the business.
• In relation to setting objectives and monitoring them it was important that relevant objectives were identified for specific parts of the business, for example Highways may not need to record information on gender but it would be helpful to have information on disability.
• Ms Agyepong explained that the approach to the equalities objectives was heavily influenced by the County Council’s priorities and would reflect the situation of negative budgets which meant that the County Council was not able to respond to all need but needed to prioritise in order to respond to the greatest need.

(3)       RESOLVED that

(a)       it be noted that the proposed equality policy statement and objectives for KCC  will run from October 2012 to September 2016 and that the actions to achieve the objectives will be determined     through annual business plans and priorities.

(b)       the equality performance will be part of the Performance Management Framework and quarterly core monitoring received by this committee to enable the Committee to review compliance against the objectives and the Equality Act 2010 on a regular basis.

(c)     the Committee receive the statutory Annual Equality Report  on all equality outcomes.

(1)       Mr Gough introduced a report which outlined the approach taken to seek employee views about the various elements within their employment package.  A countywide staff survey was currently being conducted and was taking place in advance of the requirement to make savings of £500k from terms and conditions from April 2013.   The results of the survey would enable the Council to make informed choices about future short and long term changes to terms and conditions and the wider employment package.

(2)       Ms Beer and Mr Miller answered questions and noted comments from Members which included the following:

• Mr Miller explained that the length of the survey reflected the breath of the employment package that the County Council offered.  It also provided an opportunity to inform employees of what was currently available.  He confirmed that the survey had been tested before it went live and it should take between 15 and 20 minutes to complete.
• Mr Gough confirmed that the outcome of the survey would be reported to Personnel Committee in November 2012.  This report had been brought to this Committee meeting as part of the budget process.

(3)       RESOLVED that the comments made by Members on the approach and the consultation be noted and that a further report be submitted to the Committee on the outcome of the consultation.

(1)       Mr Gough and Ms Beer introduced a report which set out the  proposals for the restructure of the Learning and Development function in the Human Resources Division and gave the opportunity for the Committee to consider the changes made to the rest of the Division and its service delivery as a result of its restructure in July 2011.

(2)       Mr Gough and Ms Beer answered questions and noted comments from Members which included the following:

• Ms Beer explained that the key change in the revised structure for the Learning and Development function was the flatter management structure, account had been taken of feedback and directorates had been reassured that they would continue to receive the required level of support as would key partner organisations.
• Regarding dedicated training for Contact Centre employees, Ms Beer explained that the Contact Centre had a high level of training required as it was the voice of Kent and therefore provision of specific in house trainers was justified.  The reason why Contract Centre trainers were on a lower grade than trainers for Mental Health issues, for example, was that the complexity of statutory provision in this area of social care was higher and the Mental Health team also provided training to partner organisations.

(3)       RESOLVED that the comments made by Members on the proposals for the new learning and development team and note the impact of the broader Human Resources restructure be noted.

(1)       Mr Gough and Mr Whittle submitted a report which detailed changes made to the business planning process for 2012/13, as well as highlighting the proposed changes to the process planned for 2013/14.  2013/14 was the first planning year in which Cabinet Committees would be part of the planning process. KCC’s business planning process was now co-ordinated by the Policy & Strategic Relationships team within Business Strategy who would make sure that cross cutting priorities were embedded across the Authority.  Business Planning would be carried out a divisional level.  Cabinet Committees had a pre-consultation role and would have the opportunity to consider and comment on the draft business plans before they were approved by the Cabinet in March 2013.

(2)       Mr Cockburn emphasised the link between business planning and the democratic process supported by usable performance data across the Authority.

(3)       RESOLVED that the changes to the business planning process for 2013/14 as set out in the report be noted.

(1)       Mr Gough introduced a report on the £43 million project which Kent County Council was leading to transform Kent and Medway’s Broadband infrastructure. This project, which was being delivered in partnership with the Government’s Broadband Agency, BDUK, would ensure that at least 90% of properties could access superfast broadband by 2015 and that the remaining 10% had access of at least 2Mbits/s. Kent County Council had managed to secure an early slot on the Government’s procurement pipeline and considerable preparatory work had been undertaken to ensure that the project was ready to procure at end of next month.

(2)       Mr Gough, Ms Cooper, Mr Gurr and Mr Lamacraft answered questions and noted comments from Members which included the following:

• A Member questioned the adequacy of 10% of Kent properties having access of at least 2MB when the UK average was 8MB and asked whether it was possible to improve on this.  Mr Gough accepted the point made but stated that 90% of Kent would be able to access superfast broadband and that 2MB for the remaining 10% was a minimum and was not the end of the story. Mr Gurr set out the disproportionate cost of providing superfast broadband for the remaining 10%.  It was anticipated that beyond 2015 there would be more funding available from various sources to make improvements.
•  Mr Gough explained that the roll out of superfast broadband had to be market driven.  The preferred supplier will define the programme for the roll out. KCC had applied for funding from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which would be useful in terms of tackling issues in rural areas. Mr Lamacraft confirmed that the suppliers would be required to provide the most economic and commercially viable roll out that they could in order to achieve the most efficient use of the money.

(3)       RESOLVED that the report and comments made by Members be noted.

(1)       Mr Gough, Ms Spore and Mr Micklewright introduced a report which explained that as part of the Medium Term Financial Plan £10 million of savings had been identified against Property and Infrastructure Support. Part of the strategy to deliver the saving was the implementation of the corporate landlord model and the central management of properties. One work stream being progressed was a review of Facilities Management (FM) delivery. Current delivery across the KCC estate was fragmented, with no clear strategy in place to ensure each location was provided with consistent, satisfactory and value for money FM services.

(2)       The report was an update on the present position following the receipt of the FM Consultant’s strategy options and recommendations.  Phase 1 of the project was now close to completion, and further baseline costs were being sought from KCC Finance to ensure KCC’s data was as accurate as possible before proceeding to procurement within Phase 2 (implementation). Following a review of the FM Consultant’s options by the steering group, at the procurement board it was recommended that the most appropriate strategy for Phase 2 (implementation) was to implement a total facilities management, with the county split into three geographical areas.  A 5 year contract with a 2 year option to extend for each region with a start date of April 2013. Mobilisation of the three contracts was expected to take 6 months from this date.

(3)       Mr Gough, Ms Spore and Mr Micklewright answered questions and noted comments from Member which included the following:

• Members sought an assurance that the new contracts would not exclude Small Medium Enterprises (SME’s) and that one size would not fit all.   Ms Spore assured Members that the contacts would be drafted in such as way as to ensure that smaller sub-contractors would be able to deliver some of the services and not to preclude the local supply chain.
• It was pointed out that some smaller companies would not be able to meet the pre-qualification limit.  Ms Spore explained that KCC would pre qualify the main contractor and the localised supply chain.  She confirmed that the concerns of Members in relation to insuring that SME’s were not disadvantaged would be addressed in the procurement.
• Ms Spore explained that the proposed Total Facilities Management for Sessions House would still enable one contractor to have a number of supply chain members who would provide facilities. 
• Mr Gough confirmed that the aim was to have a balance between achieving economies and being sensitive to local interests, which was why it was proposed to have three contracts for the County.  He thanked Members for their input and welcomed Members oversight of the new contracts. He undertook to ensure that local interests were taken into account.

(4)       RESOLVED that the Committee support a decision by the Cabinet Member for Business Strategy, Performance and Health Reform to progress to Phase 2 (implementation) for the delivery of Facilities Management.

RESOLVED that under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the meeting for the following business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of Exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1 and 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

(1)       Ms Millar introduced a report which gave the background to the contract to allow progression of Goat Lees Primary School, Ashford to meet the anticipated completion date of August 2013. 

(2)       RESOLVED that the Cabinet Committee endorse the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for the progression of the procurement for Goat Lees Primary School and that the Director of Law and Governance can enter into the necessary contracts with the successful tenderer.

(1)       Ms Millar introduced a report on the design and build contract to deliver the playing field, parking and new vehicular access for St Mary’s Platt School, Sevenoaks with completion by end of 2012 .

(2)       RESOLVED that the Cabinet Committee endorse the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member on the proposals to enter into a design and build contract to deliver the playing field, parking and new vehicular access for  St Mary’s Platt School.  

(1)       Ms Spore submitted a report which set out the need for a new Framework for the appointment of external property consultants to be procured and gave information as to progress made to date and anticipated timescales.

(2)       RESOLVED that the current position be noted and that following the outcome of the procurement the Committee note that that the Director of Property and Infrastructure Support is authorised to establish the new framework for Property Consultancy Services.

(1)       Mr Gough introduced a paper which updated the Committee on progress in respect of the Total Place savings and the New Work Spaces Programme.

(2)       RESOLVED that the Committee support the establishment of the Programme Board.

(1)       Ms Millar introduced a report on the submission of the feasibility study for the Christchurch Academy Dover to the Department for Education for approval and following this approval a Future Schools Notice would be issued to the contractor.

 (2)      RESOLVED that the current progress in relation to the Dover Christchurch Academy be noted.