Minutes:
1. Ms Spore introduced the update report, which had been requested at the committee’s previous meeting, and summarised key points. Ms Spore, Mr Oakford and Mr Watts responded to comments and questions of detail from the committee, including the following:-
a) asked about the impact and relevance of the Local Government White Paper and Local Democracy Initiative to the decision the County Council needed to make about its estate, Ms Spore and Mr Oakford advised that the timetable and recommendations arising from the White Paper were not yet known and would take time to be implemented. Investigative work on the future of the Council’s estates could not be delayed to wait for it. It was emphasised, though, that the Council had not yet committed to any specific course of action or expenditure while investigative work was ongoing, and no design work or marketing was progressing. An update report would be made to the committee’s January meeting;
b) concern was expressed that investigative work currently going on would need to be repeated once the outcome of the White Paper was known, and some Members expressed discomfort with the direction and speed of current work. Although reviews of use of premises had been regularly undertaken, for example, New Ways of Working phases 1 and 2, such a project had not previously been undertaken in such difficult financial times;
c) asked about current expenditure and the amount spent on engaging consultants, Ms Spore clarified the figures and advised that the planned spend set out in the previous report had not yet been committed and that design and feasibility work done was at no cost to the Council. Once requirements were understood, the SOC and funding model would be updated. She undertook to supply Members confidentially outside the meeting with details of the spend on consultants since January 2020;
d) asked about the cost of making Sessions House covid-secure for the Coroner’s inquest currently going on, Ms Spore advised that areas of the building sufficient to accommodate the inquest had been made secure and she undertook to supply details confidentially outside the meeting;
e) asked what would happen if the Government did not renew its consent to hold virtual meeting and SHQ was not available for staff to move back in to, Mr Watts advised that he would report to the Selection and Member Services Committee later in November on how future meetings could be held. Planning was always ongoing for the next three months ahead. He undertook to seek confirmation from the Government, and if no confirmation about remote meetings had been forthcoming by February 2021, the Council would need to plan some way of achieving face-to-face meetings which were covid-compliant;
f) asked about the work of the Kent Estates Partnership (KEP), Ms Spore advised that this included the NHS, police and other partners and covered all local authority property. There was renewed appetite in the County Council, district councils and all partners to review how accommodation was used. Asked about how the County Council and other partners, for example, the police, liaised about use of their respective estates, Ms Spore undertook to give Members further information about this outside the meeting. Mr Oakford reminded the committee that the Council had a duty to deliver services to Kent residents in the most efficient way; it was not just a question of the buildings used;
g) asked about work to action the committee’s resolution at its previous meeting, Mr Oakford advised that a working party had met and that he had written to the committee to update them on action to address the points raised.
2. It was RESOLVED that:-
a) the report be noted, and Members’ comments, set out above, be taken into account;
b) the following requested information be supplied to Members before the committee’s January meeting:
i) information about how the County Council liaises with partners, for example, the police, about accommodation issues;
ii) a letter to Members to cover finance issues, including all costs of consultants and of making part of Sessions House secure for the Coroner’s inquest;
c) reports be submitted to the committee’s January meeting as follows:
i) a full update on the outcomes of SHQ survey work, costs and next steps; and
ii) information about the Kent Estates Partnership in a separate report.
Supporting documents: