Agenda item

The Portfolio Holder for Community Safety and Customer Contact will attend the meeting in order to be held to account for matters within the remit of this Committee. 

Discussion:

Members received an overview of progress made within the Portfolio for Community Safety and Customer Contact falling within the remit of the Committee over the last year which included the following subjects:

·                      Community Contact

·                      ICT

·                      Legal

The Portfolio Holder for Community Safety and Customer Contact, Councillor Hicks, responded to Members’ questions and comments as follows:

·                    Customer Contact Team – The pressures on the Customer Contact Team were highlighted. The Better for Less (BfL) initiative had increased pressure by reducing the numbers of staff whilst customer numbers were increasing making Riverside One very busy. Portfolio Holder agreed that Riverside One was not able to provide services to the standard the Council aspired to and therefore a new location was being sought. He further advised that in the next year or so Chatham would have a proper customer contact centre. However, under BfL most complaints were received via telephone and the call centre received 50,000 calls a month. The public was also directed to the Community Hubs in Rochester and Gillingham. In response to questions about the number of contact centre staff, the 92% positive response rate and the breakdown of call monitoring data (i.e. how many calls were used to provide the data) and the Portfolio Holder agreed to provide the Committee with this information in the form of a report.

·                    ICT – The Council’s systems were not always considered adequate and the Portfolio Holder’s current view on IT accessibility for Council staff was requested. In addition, concern was expressed about the  “digital by default” requirement for the public to be online to be connected to Council services. The Committee was advised of the “agile working” initiative which would allow officers to record their work whilst out of the office, for example, social workers and planning officers. He also referred to “Thin Client” technology that was more efficient to run and used less power than a personal computer. The Portfolio Holder was a member of a cross party working group that was considering these matters and he undertook to provide the Committee with details. The Group had also recognised the hard work of the staff and the quantum and complexity of the work. However, concern was expressed that the staff were working incredibly hard and their goodwill and capacity was not limitless.

·                    Legal Strategic Advice – A concern was raised about potential liability to the Council if the Government ruled that the Council should not have decided to transfer a surplus on the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) to its general fund. In the past, legal challenges had caused the Council to become risk averse and it was asked where the Council stood in comparison to other local authorities. The Portfolio Holder reported that the Council had gained detailed legal opinion and it was for the Portfolio Holder for Finance to respond to this question. The Council would always obtain robust legal advice whenever necessary before taking action such as this.

Decision:

The Committee thanked the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety and Customer Contact for his attendance and the answers he had provided to the Committee and it was noted that a report on contact centre staff numbers and shift patterns and data regarding call monitoring would be submitted to a future meeting of the Committee.