Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Etheridge, Khan, Andy Stamp, Wildey and Williams.

(During this period, the Conservative and Labour and Co-operative political groups had informally agreed, due the Coronavirus pandemic, to run meetings with reduced number of participants. This was to reduce risk, comply with Government guidance and enable more efficient meetings. Therefore the apologies given reflected that informal agreement of reduced participants.)

To approve the record of the meeting held on 22 October 2020.

The record of the meeting of the Committee held on 22 October 2020 was agreed and signed by the Chairman as correct.

The Chairman advised that the report on the Monuments and Place Names Working Group was circulated separately to the main agenda and he had agreed to accept it as a matter of urgency to enable the Committee to consider this matter before it is considered by Cabinet on 15 December. The report was not available in time for despatch with the main agenda due the final meeting of the working group being held on 17 November.

Members are invited to disclose any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Other Significant Interests in accordance with the Member Code of Conduct.  Guidance on this is set out in agenda item 4.

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other significant interests (OSIs)

There were none.

Other interests

In relation to item 5 (Attendance of the Portfolio Holder for Resources), Councillor Murray declared that in her professional capacity she participated in the Medway Social Work Teaching Partnership student placements scheme.

In relation to item 5, (Attendance of the Portfolio Holder for Resources), Councillor Maple declared that he was a member of the Health and Charitable Foundation and Medway Credit Union, both of which were tenants of the Pentagon Centre.

In relation to item 8 (Council Plan Monitoring and Risk Register Review Quarter 2 2020/21), the following declarations were made:

Councillor Johnson declared that his employer, the Citizen’s Advice Bureau (CAB), was mentioned in the report, as was the kickstart scheme which CAB participated in.

Councillor Hackwell declared that his wife was a part-time assessor and tutor with Adult Education.    

In relation to item 11 (Draft Capital and Revenue Budget 2021/22), Councillor Opara declared that her company had benefitted from the discretionary business grant.

Whipping

Confirmation was provided that there was none.

This report provides an overview of activities and progress made on work areas within the Resources Portfolio, which fall within the remit of this Committee. This information is provided in relation to the Portfolio Holder for Resources being held to account.

Discussion:

Members received an overview of activities and progress made on work areas within the Resources Portfolio, which fell within the remit of the Committee. These were as follows:

•         Transformation and Digital Services

•         Council Plan and Service Improvement

•         Business and Administration Support Service

•         Complaints Policy and Management

•         HR

•         ICT

•         Legal

•         Property

•         Category Management/Procurement

•         Travellers

Councillor Gulvin, Portfolio Holder for resources attended the meeting and responded to Members’ questions and comments as follows:

•     Business Change Team national recognition and the steps being taken to ensure that Medway continues to adapt to new digital ways of working.

The Portfolio Holder agreed that the Business Change Team had worked particularly well over the past few months and referenced the development of user friendly online chat bots as an example of how cutting edge technology was making digitally enabled services accessible to a wider range of people. Another example of the successful use of computer bots was a recent data transfer exercise which had enabled the exercise to be carried out in-house at a vastly reduced cost.

Asked how residents were included in the transformation process, the Portfolio Holder highlighted the importance of being responsive to customer feedback in the further development of digital services. An example was the household waste booking system that was introduced as a result of the pandemic and which had been subsequently been refined following customer feedback to enable bookings to be cancelled.

•     Learning from incidents elsewhere to ensure that contingencies were in place to protect against cyber-attacks.

The Portfolio Holder responded that the Council’s complex IT system was managed by a highly regarded team in whom he had a lot of confidence. The team were very well aware of the potential for a cyber-attack and systems such as filters were in place to prevent such an event and to aid a quick recovery should any incident occur.

•     Liaison with other public bodies on partnership working as part of the One Public Estate (OPE) programme.

The Portfolio Holder advised that, with the assistance of Government funding, the Council had worked on OPE schemes with partners such as the Clinical Commissioning Group and the Fire Service. One example was work on the proposed new Healthy Living Centres for Chatham Town Centre, Strood and Hoo.

In response to a question on the future of Gun Wharf, the Portfolio Holder expressed his desire for the Council to relocate given the high cost of maintaining the building which he considered to be no longer fit for purpose. The situation was compounded by the grade 2 listing of the building. However, such considerations were on hold, particularly in view of the pandemic. More immediate proposals were to relocate staff from office accommodation that was being leased, such as within Broadside and Kingsley House, to Gun Wharf.  

•     Timescale for a review of the new Front Line Services reorganisation to assess if it was working effectively, particularly with regard to Community Wardens.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 434.

This report accompanies a short presentation on the results of a survey on the working arrangements experienced by colleagues whilst we have been responding to the pandemic.  The survey aims to capture feedback on the current experience and thoughts from the workforce on how we take good practice forward into our new ways of working, and how we can eliminate any concerns colleagues are facing.

Discussion:

The Committee received a report and presentation on the results of a survey on the working arrangements experienced by Council staff during the pandemic. The survey had aimed to test how the Council responded to the needs of the workforce during the pandemic and to explore the opportunity for a different way of working going forward.

The survey had focused on work life balance, wellbeing, mental health, productivity, flexibility, support and equipment for people working at home. Over 1000 people had responded to the survey which revealed high satisfaction rates with the flexible working arrangements being made by the Council. Eight dedicated workstreams had been created to build on the achievements so far, using the data from the survey.

During the discussion, Members raised a number of issues and the officer response was as follows:

·            Difficulties in taking annual leave:  The Council managed, measured, and encouraged the taking of annual leave to aid wellbeing. Managers were prompted to address issues where compliance systems identified that leave was not being taken. Staff redeployment had been used to reduce the pressure on areas of high business demand to enable people to take their leave entitlement. Annual leave could be taken in hours as well as whole or half days.

·            Ongoing training for apprentices during the pandemic:

Apprentices continued to receive the support they needed. The Council’s apprenticeship academy brought together all apprentices to ensure that there was a cohort of learning across the peer group. There was an expectation that all apprentices, and anyone new to their role, would still need to come into the office to have formal recognition into the role and to find out about the organisation. The induction process had been reviewed to take the distant workforce into account. As Gun Wharf was a Covid secure building, it allowed up to 25% of the workforce in the office where their attendance was required. 

·            Cyber Security risk issues associated with working from home: The Council had a duty of care to staff working from home. Checks would be made to ensure cyber security was listed within the risks and priorities of the eight workstreams. Cyber security was captured within the Council Plan.

·            Measuring productivity and helping people to be more productive: The way in which productivity was measured was changing. Given the current increased on-line activity rather than face to face discussions between colleagues, HR and ICT were working on the use of Microsoft Analytics to identify the different forms of interaction. This would help identify how people were spending their time and their productivity.

Officers agreed to consider what more can be done to help people to be more productive. There was a lot of pressure on the workforce and people needed to feel valued to help them to be more productive. 

·            Flexibility to improve a work/life balance for the 25% who are currently not satisfied: The Council recognised that workloads had been an issue throughout the pandemic as people had to adapt quickly to working differently.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 435.

The purpose of this report is to update the Committee on the progress made against the 2016-2021 Procurement Strategy and the establishment of a 2021-2025 Procurement Strategy.

Discussion:

The report provided an update on progress made against the 2016-2021 Procurement Strategy and the establishment of a 2021-2025 Procurement Strategy. The comments of the Committee were as follows:

Impact of the end of the Brexit Transition period for current Council procurement activity – it was noted that the EU legal framework for procurement had been transposed into UK law (with an abridged version) effective from 1 January 2021. The main change related to the requirement for providing notices of contracts from use of the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) into a Finder Tender service which will be a UK bulletin board. The Head of Category Management advised that there had never been interest in any Medway contracts from countries in the EU, EEA or Switzerland.

Improved working with the voluntary sector – the Committee was advised of the material contribution made by the voluntary sector in supporting the Council’s response to the COVID pandemic some of which had involved varying contracts to create that capacity.

Capacity to achieve the aspirations in the Procurement Strategy – the Head of Category Management provided an assurance that while the targets in the Strategy were ambitious he was confident that a score of 3 could be attained against all objectives as detailed within Appendix 3 of the report

Building on the understanding of the Procurement process by elected Members – the Committee expressed support for a recommendation that training for all elected Members on procurement should take place and for further discussion to take place on the format and delivery of the training to encourage interest and take-up.

Social value in procurement – Members expressed interest in how the Council could maximise the achievement of social value through procurement activity including training of young people, encouraging diversity, the creation of good quality jobs and safeguarding the environment. The Head of Category Management explained that there was a framework of over 100 social value themes, outcomes and measures (TOMS) to assist the Council to determine social value priorities and then to evaluate impact.

Developing talent – the Committee was advised Category Management were a team of six, three of whom had achieved membership of the Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply and three of whom were studying towards full membership.

Council engagement with Medway SMEs – the Head of Category Management provided an assurance to the Committee that activity to regularly engage with SMEs in Medway was ongoing and that project -specific dialogue with local bidders had been found to be more effective than the previous annual Meet the Buyer event run by the Council. Barriers to successful bidding by SMEs had been addressed. For example, procurement documentation had been streamlined and upfront information was provided about generic standards and certification required for each project with careful scrutiny to ensure that project-specific requirements from bidders were appropriate.

In conclusion the Committee noted the achievements of the 2016-2021 Procurement Strategy as outlined in the objectives in Appendix 1 to the report.

The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 436.

This report summarises performance in Quarter 2 (Q2) 2020/21 on the delivery of the programmes and measures which fall within the remit of this Committee.

Discussion:

The Committee considered a report that summarised the Council’s performance in Quarter 2 of 2020/21 on the delivery of programmes and measures which fell within the remit of the Committee. The report also presented the Q2 2020/21 review of strategic risks.

The Committee discussed the following:

•     Medway Development Company (MDC) off siting of affordable housing: The Committee was advised that the Council commissioned MDC to deliver sites and such decisions were made by its Board. It was noted that the Whiffens Avenue development would include a number of shared ownership affordable housing units aimed at key workers. This was also the intention for Mountbatten House, the proposals for which were currently out for consultation. However, the use of off-site provision was allowing sites to be developed that would not otherwise come forward.

•     The opportunity for the extended bank holidays during 2022 to trigger a bid for city status: The Chief Legal Officer agreed to refer this issue to the Director of Place and Deputy Chief Executive.

•     Implications of moving into tier 3 on the rough sleeping initiative: The Committee was advised that all the measures that had been taken during the first lockdown were still being taken. In addition, the winter initiatives had been brought forward and outreach teams were regularly making offers of accommodation to rough sleepers.

•     The disparity between the levels of rent in the private housing rented sector and the maximum payable thought the benefits system: Members were advised of the various types of engagement that the Housing team had with private landlords. These included incentives for them to take Council applicants, for example a rent guarantee scheme which had been piloted and would be rolled out.

The Committee was advised that the level of local housing allowance was set by Government to cover the bottom 30% of the market.

•     Clarification on why the homelessness risk (SR35) was considered to have high likelihood but marginal impact: The Head of Housing Strategy clarified that this referred to a residual risk after management action had been taken.

•     Insufficient routes for academic qualifications for adults to improve their work skills: The Head of Housing Strategy agreed to raise this with the adult education co-ordinators.

•     Clarification on how the target for improved street cleanliness was calculated: The Head of Housing Strategy agreed to review the source data and respond outside the meeting.

Decision:

Members of the Committee considered the Q2 2020/21 performance against the measures used to monitor progress against the Council’s priorities, and noted the amended strategic risk register as set out in Appendix 4. 

(In accordance with Council Rule 12.6, Councillors Johnson, Maple and Murray asked that their votes in favour be recorded.)

This report presents the results of the second round of the Council’s capital budget monitoring process for 2020/21.

Discussion:

The Committee considered a report on the second round of the Council’s capital budget monitoring process for 2020/21.

Members were advised that the capital programme was currently forecast to come in on budget.

Members raised a number of issues which were responded to as follows:

•   It was anticipated that bulge classes would be delivered on time, despite Covid related pressures. Asked whether provision had been made for risks of delays in the programme, the Chief Finance Officer agreed that it was unfair that, due to delays by the Department of Education, the Council had been required to fund bulge classes and representations continued to be made.

•   The Chief Finance Officer agreed to relay back to Front Line Services concerns that the work on the Horsted gyratory system remained outstanding.

•   Concerns regarding the rolling out of pay and display parking machines which required the user to touch them were acknowledged and the Committee noted that the piloting of innovative cashless parking machines was under consideration by the Transformation Board. The current replacement of old machines was necessary to ensure income could continue to be collected.

•   The Chief Finance Officer advised that the use of the Members’ priority fund should not be encouraged at present. 

•   Clarification was sought on the £800,000 for miscellaneous schemes within the Children’s improvement programme. The Committee was advised that this was revenue expenditure funded by capital receipts and that the various projects were referenced in the Council report of 8 October.

Decision:

The Committee noted the results of the second round of capital budget monitoring for 2020/21.

(In accordance with Council Rule 12.6, Councillors Johnson, Maple and Murray asked that their votes in favour be recorded.)

This report presents the results of the second round of the Council’s revenue budget monitoring process for 2020/21. Section 3 sets out the overall position, while Sections 4-7 and appendices 1-3 provide full details.

Discussion:

The Committee considered a report on the second round of the Council’s revenue budget monitoring process for 2020/21.

Members were advised that, since February, the Council had received £65m of Covid related grant, much of which was for passing on to businesses. This grant, and management action to contain expenditure, had reduced the pressure on the budget from £24m to £2.5m.

Members raised a number of issues which were responded to as follows:

• Concern was raised regarding the worsening position in Adult Social Care due to the pandemic and the Chief Finance Officer agreed that the raising of the precept would be beneficial. Asked about the rising cost of nursing care, he agreed that this was not sustainable and negotiations with providers to reduce this cost were ongoing.

• Negotiations with the CCG on funding placements as a result of early hospital discharges were continuing. Members were advised that such funding had to be claimed back from the Department of Health and NHS England via the CCG and clear records were being kept to ensure that claims were made.

• In response to a question on social work agency fees paid to the Medway Commercial Group, the Chief Finance Officer advised that, whilst a premium would still be paid, a new Memorandum of Understanding had been agreed and this would enable MCG to support the Council in reducing the number of agency workers in social care through joint working on programmes such as ‘temp to perm’. 

• With reference to the £500,000 spend on legal counsel, the Chief Legal Officer confirmed that two senior advocates had been recruited who could represent the Council in the High Court and above. Counsel was used for more complex matters which required attendance at court for longer periods and would prevent the Council’s lawyers from undertaking their other work. He reported that the spend on using Counsel had been brought down from £700,000 in 2016/17 to £183,000 in 2019/20. The current spend was unusual and was a result of Covid.  

• Asked for more information on the Members priority fund, the Chief Finance Officer agreed to consult the Leader on whether he wanted to make commitments against it in the current situation and if so, what the process should be.

• A Member noted that all sections of the budget under the Committee’s remit were underspent and that previous Q2 figures had sometimes been much higher. He acknowledged the good job that the Chief Finance Officer had done in previous years in ensuring that the figures that were presented to the Committee at the end of the financial year reflected the figures presented throughout the year.

• With reference to the financial difficulties that had been reported at other Councils, the Chief Finance Officer reported that the Council’s debt exposure was much lower. Officers were currently assessing the measures announced in the recent Government spending review to assist Councils, such as continued support for responding to Covid.

Decision:

The Committee noted the results of the second round of revenue  ...  view the full minutes text for item 439.

This report presents the Council’s draft capital and revenue budgets for 2021/2022. In accordance with the Constitution, Cabinet is required to develop ‘initial budget proposals’ approximately three months before finalising the budget and setting council tax levels at the end of February 2021. The draft budget is based on the principles contained in the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2021-2023 considered by the Cabinet on 17 November.

Discussion:

Members considered a report which presented the Council’s draft capital and revenue budgets for 2021/22 which was based on the principles contained in the Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2021-2023 considered by Cabinet on 17 November.

During the discussion the following comments and responses were made:

•   It was noted that Kent County Council consulted residents on budget priorities. Officers confirmed that Medway would follow the same budget setting process as previous years which did not include public consultation.

•   Officers noted a request that, where any future budget proposals might lead to potential redundancies, this should be made explicitly clear in the reports to Cabinet and Council.

•   Members were advised that a 2% uplift assumption had been made in respect of most of the Council’s fees and charges, although Directorates had discretion to propose a variation. Members were further advised that it was assumed the direct impact of Covid-19 would continue to mostly be funded by Government.

•   Officers confirmed that the Council had discretion over the level of staff pay award.

•   Regarding the number of large premises that had closed in the last two years, officers agreed to provide further information on the risks to the Council’s business rates tax base.

•   Concern was raised regarding the sustainability of the Special Educational Needs (SEN) budget on which there was growing pressure. Officers responded that authorities had been required to implement the 2014 Department of Education (DfE) SEN reforms without adequate increase in the Dedicated Schools Grant. The Council had a SEN deficit plan which included measures such as investment into local SEN provision rather than expensive out of area provision and keeping SEN children in mainstream education where appropriate.

•   On the issue of the accessibility of financial support for those required to self-isolate following testing, officers advised that grant applications had surpassed expectations which indicated that the publicity campaign had been good. There was little left in the discretionary fund and it would be replaced by a new scheme which would be available shortly.

•   In response to a question on income opportunities, the Committee was advised that Medway Commercial Group was seeking to widen its customer base for its recruitment agency beyond the Council, to the NHS and external care providers for example.

Decision:

The Committee:

a)   noted that Cabinet had instructed officers to continue to work with Portfolio Holders in formulating robust proposals to balance the budget for 2021/22 and beyond; and

b)   commented on the proposals outlined in the draft capital and revenue budgets and forwarded the proposals to the individual overview and scrutiny committees.

(In accordance with Council Rule 12.6, Councillors Johnson, Maple and Murray asked that their votes in favour be recorded).

Report to follow.

Discussion:

With specific reference to Stalin Avenue the Committee discussed the scope to review street names at a later stage as a request for this to be included within the terms of reference of the Working Group had not been supported. It was recognised that the Council has a statutory role in relation to street naming and numbering and that there are wider implications including a degree of inconvenience for residents when street names are changed.

Decision:

The Committee agreed to notify the Cabinet of its support for the recommendation of the Monuments and Place Names Working Group that Sir John Hawkins Car Park should be renamed as St John’s car park.

(In accordance with Council Rule 12.6, Councillors Johnson, Maple and Murray asked that their votes in favour be recorded.)

This report provides Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee Members with the opportunity to scrutinise the latest steps taken by the Council to assist Medway to in the second Response phase of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Discussion:

The Committee considered a report on the latest steps taken by the Council to assist Medway in the second Response phase of the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Committee discussed the implications of Medway moving into tier 3; discouraging people from travelling to lower tier areas; assistance from the military in track and trace; the offer of lateral flow testing for schools; testing arrangements for care homes and University students; the arrangements for moving patients discharged from hospital into care homes; and the provision of emergency places in local hotels and guest houses for rough sleepers.

The Chief Legal Officer agreed to provide an update on track and trace with Committee members and information on infection rates among Council staff.

Members were advised that, following the first tranche Government funding, this had been extended to the end of the financial year. 

Decision:

The Committee scrutinised and noted the Council’s role in the second response phase of the Covid-19 pandemic.

(In accordance with Council Rule 12.6, Councillors Johnson, Maple and Murray asked that their votes in favour be recorded.)

Discussion:

The Committee considered a report regarding the Committee’s current work programme.

In addition to the changes proposed in the report, it was proposed that the Committee receive a presentation on the establishment of a Medway Community Lottery. The Chairman advised that the next meeting, on 28 January 2021, would commence at 6.00pm with this being the first item of business.

The Committee was supportive of the proposal to dedicate two meetings during the 2021/22 Municipal Year to the attendance of Portfolio Holders, with two Portfolio Holders being held to account at each meeting.

Decision:

The Committee:

a)   agreed the proposed changes to the Committee’s work programme (Appendix 1 to the report) as set out in paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3 of the report and the addition of an item on the establishment of a Medway Community Lottery to the business of the meeting scheduled on 28 January 2021; and  

b)   noted the work programmes of the other overview and scrutiny committees (Appendix 2 to the report).

(In accordance with Council Rule 12.6, Councillors Johnson, Maple and Murray asked that their votes in favour be recorded.)