Finance Committee - Thursday 4 April 2024, 7:30pm - Wandsworth Council Webcasting
Finance Committee
Thursday, 4th April 2024 at 7:30pm
Speaking:
An agenda has not been published for this meeting.
Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.
have you emerging?
OK.
OK, welcome.
welcome to this meeting, my name is Councillor Pritchard, and I am the Chair of the Finance Committee.
I am members of the Committee, I would like you to introduce yourself, starting on my left, please good evening, Chairman Chair sorry, Johnny Belgium, Councillor for Battersea Park, ward in Battersea Bournemouth.
good evening, everyone, Councillor Jeremy, Amber from West Putney, ward.
evening, Clare Fraser, South Ballón, Ward.
Norman Marshall
Steve Waugh has Shakespeare and Queen Sandwood.
good evening, everyone added Richard Jones for Northcote ward in Battersea.
Matt Corner from Nine Elms ward in Battersea.
Peter Graham oxygen speak for finance and Councillor for Wandsworth company, okay, and thank you, we've received apologies from Councillor Hedges, Councillor Osborne and I think Councillor Jeffreys as well.
yeah, OK, thank you, and we have a number of officers present who will introduce themselves when they address the Committee.
OK, this is a special Finance Committee, and before commencing this evening's meeting, I would like to state for any members of the public viewing the meeting, and it was him a reminder to the members of this. In this meeting, the meeting was called at the request of the minority party members, in order to apply further discussion on the item stated. These items were presented to the Committee on the 27th of February. I would like to remind committee members that the recommendations on these papers were agreed on the 27th of February. We will therefore not be voting on these papers. However, I acknowledge that the change programme and the digital strategy were both taken after the guillotine, so there was no discussion on these
the officers have come for an extra meeting at the minority party's request, and I would like this session to be useful to them and the officers to gain useful feedback on the papers, with this in mind, I expect us all to deal with the papers in a constructive manner aiming to add value to the process that is already underway, the meeting needs to be tight and well focused and I hope we will be able to achieve this hopefully within about an hour or just split over. Thank you.
OK right.
the next item was the
right the minutes from the 27th February, as this is a special meeting of the minutes of this committee, the minutes 4 from the 27th of February are not available for inspection, however, the exempt minutes for the 24th of January are available and we will need to go into closed session at the end of this meeting to agree these.
Everyone understand we, we don't necessarily need to go into closure, or we can just sit you recount as we're happy with them. As I meant, I was slightly surprised to see the amendments laid out on the page, because we could just have this idealised version, but we're happy to vote it through in this form. You are happy with it great OK, then we don't need to do that. Thank you very much. OK, item 3, the declarations of interest are there? Any declarations made a pecuniary other no other registrable or non registrable interests, for members to declare
no declarations, brilliant.
OK, the next item on the agenda was to be, and evidence was the request was for an evidence session with the Leader, unfortunately the Leader is unable to attend, so I suggest we move on to the next item, Councillor Grahame, I think we we do need an explanation of why, given there was a four week window for scheduling this meeting in which I assume on one evening after those four weeks he would have been available. The meeting had been scheduled
at this stage on an evening that he could not attend.
to Councillor Grahame, what I would say to you is this is obviously it is the linguist choice as to whether or not he attends a meeting of any meeting of the Committee, I think that is correct, he can obviously you've asked for him to attend.
but he has declined that offer, so I are you suggesting that there was no doubt in the last four weeks that he was willing to attend, is that what you're saying, Councillor Graham, I do not hold the leader's diary okay, but the constitutionally it fell to you to determine the date. Did you not seek to consult with the Leader on dates that he could attend Councillor Grahame? My first position is always to make sure I have a date where I can get the majority of the committee members to attend and, as you say it is was my choice about that and the officers OK, but that's not an answer to my question, which was, did you consult with the Leader of the Council as to whether there was a date that he could attend with the leader of the council? Knew what dates were available and obviously, and perhaps Mr. Choudhry would like to clarify what I've said about attendance from the Leader
yes, of course chair so.
or
our procedures for LAC meetings does have provision for.
a member of the Executive to attend that have been nominated to attend a USC meetings normally to to been honoured to attend that happens on most occasions now, as this is a special meeting for reasons that you have already given Leader was not available, he has nominated anyone to attend in this place and therefore isn't here that compulsion,
that sorry that provision in the
I must say, procedure rules.
relates to meetings that occur in the normal schedule, if there is a requirement by this committee for the Leader to specifically attend, then it is open to this committee to pass a resolution to require the Leader to attend per cent to.
rule 14 be.
there are two issues with that, and the first is that other authorities, and indeed the law as drafted in terms of requiring a Member's Executive to attend, does not require the NLC to exercise a resolution before the exercise of that power. It is deemed to be exercised by virtue of placing an item on the agenda. Now I have asked repeatedly why you feel that is not the case. You said it rests upon an understanding that the Chair in those other authorities would be able to consult with the members of the Executive on their availability. That was the case here, so I still don't understand why you think it does not apply. That is the first part, and I have the second part
would you like to put your second point I'll address in birth?
but the different different issues, so let's not confuse the two, I'll come back on the second ones, if you can answer that one short, so I'm not in a position to comment or comment on the provisions that apply or are used by other authorities, but the legal position is that the local government act,
2000, section 9 F A makes specific provision for the committee rather than specific members of a committee to require a member of the Executive, including the Leader to attend, that is a legal position.
that position is translated into our our Council procedure rules for a see committed in paragraph 14 B, and that legislation is required to be interpreted by the Council in line with the statutory guidance, is it not, and the statutory guidance which replies to this and other councils which provides for this is to have a work programme that is actually a requirement of statutory guidance does this committee have a work programme?
that is not the practice in this this Council or the work programme approach taken in other authorities, the overview and scrutiny committees functioning, an entirely different manner whereby they scrutinise once decisions have been taken or develop policies, the arrangements in this Council is for all decisions to be taken by the Executive to be pre, subject to pre-decision scrutiny so the arrangements are quite different here.
different, but there is still a requirement in the statutory guidance on this committee to have a work programme and that is the envisaged way to resolve this issue, and that is why other committees take an agenda item to be an exercise of a statutory right they have to require a member of the Executive to attend now we don't have.
what we should have on what I think you are now saying is a breach of the statutory guidance in terms of having a work programme, why, therefore, is it not the case that the agenda item of itself is an exercise of that statutory right, and where does it say otherwise?
Councillor Graham, I refer to my previous comment on this, the statutory provision is very clear that it is the right of the Committee not.
the write off in a one or a group of members of a committee to require the attendance of the members of the Executive with regards to whether or not the the guidance has apply with regards specifically to a her work programme by these committees, the arrangements are different here and it is guidance and the arrangements are applied slightly differently and or in all authorities the arrangements as they apply here.
give members of this Committee and the overview and scrutiny committees far greater input into the work of the Executive and the decisions taken by the Executive than any other authority.
that I'm aware right years ago I went down to the second issue in that case, I agree, we're not gonna get any further on that point. The second issue which is separate entirely that legislation is what is stated in paragraph 49 of our own USC procedure rules. They set out that there should be designated executive members for each of the LCCs. In the case of this committee. They have two designated members are Councillor Ireland and Councillor Akinola. They are required normally to attend each meeting in the eventuality that neither of them can attend. That paragraph says the Leader shall make arrangements for another member of Executive and not those two to attend any meeting the designated members cannot attend so they cannot attend tonight. This is a meeting of the Committee and therefore the Leader should have, under our own esa C procedure rules made arrangements for another member of Executive to attend. Should he not
no Councillor Graham, I've.
correspondence with you on this by e-mail during the course of the week or the week, and in that correspondence I've made clear that I disagree with your interpretation with paragraph 14, A, the interpretation that you have placed on paragraph 14. A is that the obligation to require attendance should be for every meeting. That is not an interpretation that I agree with. The inclusion of the word normal suggests that that is a normal provision. It is not this, or a special meeting is a nor not a normal provision and had the intent of the you may you come back in a moment, no doubt Councillor Graham, but I am, I'll give me a moment to give you the advice I or I will give on this
had the intent been that there was a
or a requirement on every occasion for a Member of the Executive to attend these meetings, there would be no need for paragraph 14 be, which is the specific provision that allows Ma individual Scrutiny Committees to require attendance.
so I'm Councillor Graham, please explain in that case, because we Councillor Graham Councillor Graham percent Councillor Gruen, I would just like to say, Look, I appreciate that you obviously are disappointed. What I am going to say is this which may help, is that if and when I think it would be useful for the Leader to attend a Finance Committee or meet with finance committee team, I will of course discuss directly with him and arrange for him to attend at a time that works for him and us does that give you some comfort in terms of future possible future attendance at this committee form the Leader
that that does, but it doesn't overcome the problem we have here, which is that we have no member of the Executive present at a meeting when, as procedure, rules state that there must be a member present and that can be the only interpretation that can be placed upon the words member of the Executive to attend any meeting. This is a meeting it falls under any metre. Councillor Graham, whether designated members cannot attend, the Leader must appoint another member to attend. Furthermore, Councillor C Richard, you said that the reason that the Leader's availability had been insufficiently canvassed was to enable the regular people that attended this meeting to attend. In which case did you make no effort to ensure that one of Councillor and or Councillor McKenna look at attend? Sorry
Councillor Graham
please don't make interpretations about what I said now, I'm asking him, said to you what I did done was I've worked out what dates were appropriate. I'm afraid you don't know which dates were offered et cetera, now what I'm going to say to you again is obviously if we want to see the leader I've said, I will, if I think it's useful, I can ask him for a future date. I would also say to you that we have now got
5 8 9 committee members plus the officers here plus items on the agenda which you obviously wish to discuss, that this meeting is going to be is broadcast, it will be monitored and the officers here to answer questions and what I have said right at the beginning is that this is a time to ask questions and I think we should now move on to being able to use the officers' time well, given that they have come to the meeting
sorry, I've got a requirement, so our response to them spirit that was offered, I am grateful for your stating it in that fashion, obviously.
intention for calling this meeting, as was released at the last meeting, and was indeed relayed before it was simply that we were concerned that there was no opportunity. There would be no opportunity, given the number of items on the agenda for the last meeting, to adequately discuss them, which proved to be the case. That is the reason why we scheduled this meeting. However, in order that we didn't just come back, discussed three papers and then go home, but to add value and in the light of the democracy review report, which I think we've all now saying copies of which said
and I quote, the Leader is not regularly exposed to scrutiny at an Area C, as opposed to simply ask difficult questions in full Council, open accountability is difficult to identify, in other words, the CFDs is identified as a problem with once our system that we are not holding the Leader Scrutiny at these meetings the last time we did say was in July 2022 and getting on for two years ago.
he has not been back since we felt it would make this this evening more valuable and also allow him to be scrutinised without eating into the time for the administration's papers, which will be the case at a regular meeting to do so tonight, given that there was four weeks in which to make sure that could happen, we felt that that was a perfectly reasonable request. It was, in fact, easier to accommodate him in terms of that than it would be at a regular special meeting of the Finance Committee when there is no flexibility on the date and no ability to consult with him on his availability. So we are disappointed that he is not here. I take what you said, and I hope that he won't run away from that open accountability
we obviously retain the right to call further special meetings and put it on the agenda and hope that he turns up again, but we prefer not to be in that position. However, I do have to sound a note and I appreciate we are not going to resolve this at this meeting, and indeed not every Member may be following the ins and outs of the of the details can said I, I have severe concerns about the way in which the rights of this committee and the procedure rules, which are supposed to ensure that there is a member to the Executive here which is relevant to the other papers as well. When we ask for the opinions of the Executive on the other papers in front of us, there will be no one here to respond
and that is unacceptable, so thank you, OK, are we all okay in that case, and thank you for your comments and let's move on to the first item, which is the change programme and
Mr Jackson, would you just like to say a couple of words about it and what you would hope we can particularly focus on this time?
yeah, thank you Chair, so this is the the second progress report on the change programme to this committee, I think, is worth emphasising that the programme is still significantly in its mobilisation phase and most of the allocated funding referred to in the report hasn't yet been drawn down, the report sets out, in particular, a proposed benefits framework and that is one area chair where we would welcome any feedback that members want to offer about how we go about measuring the success and impact of the programme.
that benefits framework is broad, which reflects that the objectives of the change programme abroad.
and linked to how we are looking to change the way the Council works in order to be effective in delivering council priorities. So it's not just about financial savings. I think it's worth emphasising. However, the report does include an estimate of potential savings and these are, as you can see in the report, only estimated ranging are estimated ranges at this stage. I think the other thing worth highlighting is that the report does include an update on senior management changes. The report references, in particular the appointment of Samuelson, who starts as our executive director change and innovation later this month, and also since the original report was published
the Council has now appointed Ian Robinson as our chief digital and information officer, and we've also appointed Nacer Porter as our new head of organisational development, so all three of the senior posts agreed by the joint staffing committee back in October have now been filled, and all three of those colleagues join us later this month, which is good news brilliant, thank you very much OK.
can I have questions, please on this, OK right, let me just hand Councillor Corner.
first of all, Councillor Anne, Bash Councillor.
right.
OK, Councillor corners to start with, please, thank you Chair, I really welcome this further information on the change programme and the opportunity to provide thoughts, could I just start by just asking what the purpose of this this programme is and the reason I start with that is because I think it's it's broad and ambitious but in my own experience in in my professional life,
programmes can stand or fall and succeed or fail based on how tightly defined they are at the beginning, so I won, I wondered, if the Chief Executive answer that that that first broad question and also comment on how he intends to control the delivery of the programme given its broad its broad scope.
yeah, thank you for the question, so it is, it is a broadly drawn change programme and the purpose is abroad, indeed, the very short summary to the report highlights what those are, so the programme is about enabling the delivery of the priorities of the Council and Members may remember that a key input to the change programme was the recommendations that we had from the corporate.
and peer review which identified areas in which the Council needed to change the way it worked. If it wanted to be the council that it had identified, it wanted to be as part of its own corporate priorities. So that's the first area of the programme. Secondly, attracting and retaining the right workforce, which is critically important for any successful organisation, and then this is a particular challenge for local government and the whole sector, not just this Council, so the great employer work stream is or is a critical part of the overall change programme. And, thirdly, securing a
ongoing financial sustainability. So it is it is broadly drawn, and I accept the
the question that promised behind the question, which is that we need to make sure that in in having a broadly drawn change programme, we nevertheless make sure we do deliver things that we want to deliver through it, which I think is why you know being clear about the benefits framework and what it is we're looking to achieve through the programme is an important part of this.
establishment phase and, as I've said at the start, yeah would welcome any feedback Members want to offer on what the report identifies as and what we see as the benefits and the way that we intend to measure measure the programme, thank you.
clinical volunteers, a short supplementary, so you, you've outline that there are three elements to the purpose of a programme, so delivering change initiatives attracting the right people and securing ongoing financial sustainability, for me the first one is clearly or a sensible objective for a change programme.
the other two seem to be like ongoing business as usual, they're not something that would stop at the end of the change programme, so if that is right to say that this change programme is actually an ongoing piece of work that will just continue into business as usual or does it have a clear clearly defined end date,
or is that simply when the money runs out?
so at the moment we don't have a clearly defined end date and I think that's something we will need to work out once we've got a firmer programme to be honest, and that's one of the things I know.
Samuelson will want to look at on her arrival, I've talked to Sam about that in advance.
and I think getting.
a greater sense of timescale, for each of the individual work streams and when we might be looking to expect them to reach conclusion is a piece of work that we need to focus more on.
and I think it's fair to say also that
as with any change programme, there comes a point at which the things that you're working on should transition to business as usual. So to take your example of recruitment and retention of talent, that is always a challenge for an organisation, as something you should always focus on. I think what we're saying is we sense that there's a need to invest significantly in changing how we currently do that, to get us to the point where we then, hopefully, we've got something that looks more like a steady state. The reality is, this is not an area that's been looked at and refreshed for some time on any strategic scale for this organisation. That's the piece of work that we're embarking on, and I would hope that we got we, we will get it to a point where it does then feel more like something that's business as usual, but you're right at the moment we haven't prif precisely defined, you know what will be the milestone points at which we think we've done that and we can start to transition to business as usual and those are things that we need to give more attention to.
thank you, Councillor Anne Bash I've got two questions. The first is a rather specific one about the voluntary sector and in my role as chair of the grant sub-committee, I've been pleased to see us working with both the NHS and the voluntary sector to develop the voluntary sector strategy, and it's good to see us work with the voluntary sector and them being treated as more equal partners than they have done previously and they are responding very positively to this. So congratulations to Ms Mr. Evans and Councillor Akinola. Could we be updated on this work in terms of the voluntary sector strategy and let us know how the plans to agree the strategy are progressing
and how this might might be put into action over the next six months to a year.
check. Can I suggest that, as John he's with us and is actually leading that work stream within the change programme, John Evans, Monaghan, if that sounds great but Councillor I'm Bashir, I just wanted to clarify what the link was between the voluntary sector strategy and the change programme. I hadn't didn't quite pick that up from the question out of the stream of work in terms of better partnerships, and thank you more partnership working as I understand it, had been beforehand over to John Evans that the that that is correct and and in essence O'Connor links back to Councillor Corner's question. This is a broadly drawn change programme, so it is. It is about the way the Council works on one of the ways that the Council is looking to change is to more fundamentally tie in of voluntary and community sector partners into how we operate as an organisation, and that is the partnership and community work. Stream is one of the strands of the change programme and John happens to be leading on that so it would be useful if Mr Evans give answer
thank you Chair, thank you, Councillor and above so, as the Tuesday says that the or our journey with strengthening our relationship with the voluntary sector has been a really important part of our our work over the past, a new two years now and a key part of the
the change programme as well and, as this Committee will remember, we brought a paper here and I think towards the end of last year or early this year, where we set out the next steps of where we go with our relationship with the voluntary sector, so that was to create a,
a civic strategy co-produce with the voluntary sector, and also for us to look at how we can better support the infrastructure needs of the voluntary sector as well.
so those those two key work streams are move forward we had a.
a very well attended voluntary sector event in the civil suit.
it was, I think, end of February early March, I think it was.
where we were at about 100 representatives from the voluntary sector and we were discussing with them the key themes that they want to see in any von set strategy and the infrastructure needs, so we were in the process of evaluating that information at the moment and hopefully to come forward to this committee or in in the coming months really without setting out where we want ahead and with that strategy.
we, which I think is a real key, are a key milestone, I think, in our in our relationship with the wider sector, so really pleased that that work is is is underway.
thank you.
yeah or by other question, and give other Members a chance, OK, Councillor Graham, thank you, sir, I mean it comes partly into this broad-based development.
designation that the change programme is as to how its impact is actually measured or disentangle from other things. The Council is doing so, for example, on page 7. There's a table there, we've been as good as Councillor Gruen, could you give us the paragraph number as well? It's also paragraph 76, page 7 paragraphs right. I'm afraid I'm of pricing from the I I from the previous one, I shall give you I shall give birth in for the rest of the meeting. That's fine, so page 7, paragraph 7, that there are a number so resident satisfactory, for example, is going to be apparently measured by the resident survey and trust in the Council, but residents answer to a question on, I am satisfied with the way the Council runs. Things is not going to reflect their
their response to change programme, which is largely intact, I know it will reflect whether there have been has been collected or whether the street is clean or the regular operational things those are standard questions as we do we are discussing support for those had standard questions that have appeared in the residents survey going back a long time they move about no movement on those questions is going to be able to be isolated to change programme. Likewise, the better staff engagement is apparently going to be measured. On the question I would recommend the organisation is in a good place to work. That's an existing question. It moved 10 points in the last year before we change programme exists, so how on earth can I I mean I'm not saying those are bad questions to ask they're good ones, but they're not going to be answers, aren't going to tell you anything about the change programme either?
so I agree, you're not going to be able to isolate the impact of the change programme necessarily on those indicators, particularly the resident satisfaction one. On the other hand, if we had a change programme that paid no regard to ultimately the ability of the Council to improve services and outcomes for residents, there really wouldn't be much point to it and, as the summary in the report identifies at the heart of the change programme, is enabling the organisation to be more effective at delivering the priorities of the Council, which includes all those things you mentioned, Councillor Graham, so I completely agree. It's gonna be very difficult to isolate the impact. On the other hand, if we weren't to include some broad indicators of that kind, it seems to me we'd be missing the ultimate point of the change programme, which is to improve the effectiveness of the count of the organisation in delivering the Council's priorities and and just to pick up on your comment
about the impact of the staff survey. The part of the change programme that actually has been underway for some time is the great employer work stream, and I do think that has directly impacted very much so on that. 10% increase in staff advocacy around wanting to work for the organisation. But I am just pointing out that could go both ways because it could be that the change programme is a huge internal success and yet these metrics go down for operational reasons that are nothing to do with the change programme. And I just I, I'm not sure how they're helpful to him and I'm not saying don't measure them, but I'm not sure why they're helpful to mix up with this given they can't be disaggregated. I mean the other aspect of this is
page 24, which is just before Appendix 2, is its, or is it part of the same thing, because it is to say it is the same, it's the same issue about.
separating out what the Council is doing anyway from from what the outcome of the change programme is, so the only one of these maps, which which so benefits and actually show quantifiable benefits, is the one on page 24, just before Appendix 2, the last patient report Appendix 2,
so people and place benefits map right, and so that actually has a column that says quantifiable benefits, as opposed to just benefits, and the other places now all, but one of those are out are supposed to be products of existing work. The Council is undertaking, none of them seemed to me to be reflective of the change programme and the one that does stand out as something that isn't already part of what the Council is doing is securing ward based programmes, and I'll I'll come back to that because I have I have
severe concerns about that direction, but I the broad point.
is that those are not quantifiable benefits of the change programme, more social rent homes available will be a product of planning policy and the thousand homes programme, for example on the administration's current policies. There's nothing in the change programme that makes that a quantifiable benefit of a change programme, so I I think that it's sort of herring in the wrong direction in trying to find these things to quantify it.
so I would make the same point I made before there clearly isn't a one-to-one relationship between the two, but the purpose of the change programme is to improve the overall effectiveness of the organisation in delivering Council priorities, clearly a key Council priority is delivery of more social and affordable homes, so it's not unreasonable to seek to find ways in which the change programme can assist that delivery of Council priorities so.
I, so I recognise.
the risks in adopting those kind of measures, which is why the overall benefits framework will include does include some things that are more directly related to. You know narrower impacts of the change programme, but it doesn't seem unreasonable to works, given that what we've said is that the change programme is enabling the delivering delivery of excellent services and council priorities, not to then include measures that attempt to measure whether we're whether we're doing that when it would be odd not to include them, but I mean, I understand that the the difficulty of then tracking exactly how far the change programme is the contributor behind those things, but as I say, it would be odd not to include them, because we, we want the change programme to be seen as something that's supporting the overall effectiveness of the council.
pointed. This is to look at the actions that the change programme is undertaking and then seek to quantify those which can be done, and which won't be seen in these broader things, which are very amorphous and hard to define and are just, if I can, because it is on the wall base point before we go off at people play some benefits map. I have always been
severely opposed to ward based programmes or things like ward based budgets, ward budgets which have come up at various times in connection with various authorities and which always lend themselves to playing into electoral calculations that have nothing to do with the services the council should actually be providing wards are not there to represent identifiable areas of need or even the most relevant geographical features of the Borough they are there to provide units of a roughly equal size whether they're two or three members.
and they they tried to be as natural as possible, I've drawn some of them, I think Councillor Belton, murderers and monitor the others in terms of the ones we have right now, so I'm very aware of how they came about because I put lines on a piece of paper.
they shouldn't be the basis for Council programmes that are identified in that way unless we wish to divert money into electronically thank references that should not happen, I have I'll be having a response on that yeah actually I don't think that's never seen Ward base come up anywhere in terms of programmes of suggestion before I think that might and to say suddenly and should be taken back which we are suddenly here to going back to the Executive.
for an answer, Councillor Warrell, could you make a note factories, thank you Chair, my question is, in relation to on page 9 paragraph A paragraph 18.
or in relation to the soft survey, a note in here that you refer to a low indicator on mental health and wellbeing incompetence in the future. I was just wondering what work has currently been doing and what is proposed to be done under the programme to actually tackle this particular issue. As we know, mental health is a major issue in the community at the moment and ma am amongst our staff change brings fear, check change brings concern and people. So I suppose part of my questioning is what progress? What are we doing to to make sure that we are countering that those feelings of fear and
around that our staff might encounter and also just as a as as an aside but are linked to this is that the
the Health Committee passed on one of the previous papers mental health champions programme, so I'm just wondering how thick these other programmes link into this area of work and how they are in fact joined up.
check if a micro VAT is with this evening and Mike's closer to some of that work, and I am so perhaps Mr Carney back to respond to fine yeah, I noticed he came to the tables and thank you for the question you know, I know you right to highlight it as it is a key staffing concern, so we have a range of different initiatives in place.
and, of course, we're not alone in the public sector or indeed the private sector, in seeing a significant increase in mental health related sickness absence and and issues at work, so we've had a in the last nine months I think we had a senior management conference at the top of senior 130 odd managers attending a full morning's conference focused on mental health where we discussed,
their responsibilities, and there were various actions arising from that we have a well established staff intranet, that has a whole range of different support mechanisms for staff, including an employee assistance programme where staff can access free of charge up to 6 hours, confidential counselling or anything work-related or personal related,
and it's also a regular subject to joint staffing committees, so you know it is an ongoing challenge, but I I think we are doing wow what others in the sector are doing, and it's a constant focus for it.
OK, Councillor, we're all is.
OK, Councillor Fraser.
yeah, thank you and no kind of discussion on joint and joint staffing, how are the so obviously this will be Richmond as well, how how is this kind of communicated as a similar paper being sent to to Richmond or on one kind of similar discussions happening now regarding the change programme?
yes, so yeah, so, or as a similar paper to this one, went to the February finance and resources committee in Richmond
yeah, so it's been addressed by members in Richmond in a similarly.
Councillor Richard Jones,
thank you Chair, I've got a question on returning to page 7, paragraph 7 these are the the the the measurements of success of the change programme, the first to our resident satisfaction and trust in Council, and I noticed that the two questions that are reproduced in the column on the right hand side,
are the questions from the resident survey and states resident survey, I think the last time we did conduct a full resident survey was in 2019.
and we thereafter we broke with the tradition of running it every two years because of Covid and COVID meant you couldn't replicate the methodology properly, so you couldn't get a like-for-like comparison.
when COVID restrictions were, thankfully, in the rear view mirror, we did ask when the resident survey was going to be started again and we were told that there were no plans to restart it, can I take it from paragraph 7 that actually there are there are plans imminently to run another resident survey.
I think we've got.
Mr. Evans, to answer.
thank you Chair, so a residence to conduct a residents survey was one of the actions from the LGA corporate peer challenge as well, so the residents survey has been conducted, a fieldwork has been conducted.
and is being done on the same basis as previous resident surveys as well, so the results are being compiled and analyzed as we speak.
thank you.
yeah, but that's great, I've got two more questions, that's all right.
but are they about the same thing, no can, as we'd got a lot of questions, and hopefully the officers were OK with this, I like to pick up Councillor Belton and then go for a second round, OK because Councillor Belton hasn't spoken to yet.
thank you Chair, actually this may be frustrating, but I was rather picking up on Councillor Graham has pointed out its interest in me on that he referred to page 24 and TW discussion about wards as opposed to perhaps enumeration districts.
and I just wonder whether he is that as a misinterpretation, if he hasn't, then I would like to join him in a voice of concern, presumably most of our plans maps looking down this list here, there is mention of one particular ward, there are two wards, perhaps but others are just areas.
representing as I do a ward which must be at the towards the top end of having extremes in the ward of extreme wealth. Extreme wealth of many, many millions of pound penthouses at 1.00 end and quite a lot of poverty. At the other end, I am concerned that we're not looking at things as crudely as on a ward basis and that we're looking so perhaps I now missed Evans. Historically, I don't know whether this is right now historically spent a lot of time analyzing that kind of data. We're not actually doing it on quite the crude basis. It was suggested that we were not going to consider Battersea Park as one area. In any of these forms it would be
segmented much more narrowly, presumably so, Councillor Belton, I think the Chief Executive would like to yeah, so I was going to respond to Councillor Graham, but the the the debate moved on, I am pretty confident that has been used as shorthand for small area kind of strategy development. I will double-check that with Paul Moore who is leading on this piece of work at the moment, but
I I certainly agree with the comments that have been made about ward boundaries not being very often a sensible basis for that kind of work. I think it's just been you're used as shorthand, but I'll confirm that with OK, Massimo, might we be down to Super output areas and that sort of thing, I think sometimes it will be bigger areas. I, I think you have to tackle the area that makes economic sense in terms of tackling the issue that you're looking to tackle and I think it will vary depending on the needs of the area. Thank you very much, Mr. Evans, did you have anything to add or you
brilliant, thank you.
right, obviously we.
got more more questions, so Councillor Graham Councillor Anne Bash Councillor corner any one else, Councillor Richard Jones.
OK, and I think I might draw to close after that, if you go Councillor Graham, while I have a couple of things, I hope it is not drawn to a close to swiftly, one of them which hasn't quite been picked up on here, even though it was raised previously an Indian raised when in the background and what we discussed in November, is why electoral services under the proposed reorganisation,
we're reporting to the change roles and indeed was supposed to report into a temporary change role. I I, I'm I'm I think there are aspects of this and indeed I was on the recruitment panel for members all since I am looking forward to arrive and I think that will definitely have benefits for the Council. I'm not opposed all of this, but I I I do have concerns about Electoral Services, which is something that should be fairly stable and has a very important role in terms of ensuring the propriety and and fair and balanced and and well-run nature of our elections will be reporting into an area which is all about shaking things up
Mr checks, so I hope I can give Councillor Graham immediate assurance on that so.
that that temporary post is about to be undertaken by micro VAT. Who is with us this evening? As you'll know, Councillor Graham micro VAT is the current Assistant Director for Electoral Services, so it has remained with Mike entirely for continuity reasons and I suspect at some point in the future you know it will find a more appropriate, longer-term home, but it was in order to avoid any discontinuity that it's remained with Mike. That's entirely the reason why that is a a reassuring answer and I am satisfied with that. Can I turn to another point or do you want to move on
I'm trying to be fair and it depends how quickly you can do it, Councillor Graham, if you can be very quick and have a quick answer, yes, after that next person, for what it was actually, it was in relation to the the question that Councillor Fraser asked because of course there are a number of papers that this committee receives that are received in near identical form in Richmond or indeed you could say the other way round.
yet under on page 29 of the practices in the appendices under governance neutral, it talks about the democracy review and the ability of the review to deliver savings, and in particular, so it says a leader and cabinet model could be run at a lower organisational cost than current arrangements now our current model is a leader and cabinet model.
it has overlaid, as indeed the cf GSS report says this, this pre-scrutiny pre-decision scrutiny of Desai of papers that go to the Executive under what CSG es has said so far, they appear to be recommending that we would have far fewer papers and indeed that papers like this one we might not receive might not receive for 18 months even.
is this the identified saving because if you're preparing a paper for Richmond anyway, what you're actually will be getting as a saving is not giving us the information that Richmond councillors receive likewise in Richmond's version of this paper, there is no suggestion that they should junk the committee system in order to find savings and yet that is more expensive, so why is it not there in the equivalent page of the Richmond paper?
so Mr. Evans again again may want to comment, please. He's actually leading this work stream, but I think it's a misreading of the paper. There are no substantive governance proposals in Richmond because none arose from their peer review. In the case of Wandsworth, there were significant recommendations around the need to review governance in Wandsworth. So in a sense, it then is in play, if you like, as an issue that needs consideration. I think the words that you're highlighting there are just as a statement of fact, that it would be possible to run the Leader and Cabinet model more cheaply, is not to say that that's what we're proposing. I think it's just
or an attempt to highlight in a section that is meant to be about the potential for financial savings, that potentially there is a way of running such a system at lower costs, or Mr Evans, I don't know if you want to add anything but I think that was the intention.
of thank you, and I absolutely it's more about saying what the potential is, really, we know that once it runs a, it runs a leader and cabinet model, but we know from our own standing and what the CSG has said, and that's a very easy run in a very unusual,
Wayne there are multiple different ways of running that
and and some of them, I think, do have the potential to be a bit more streamlined and inefficient.
but there's no, no decisions are being made about any of that at the moment, we're still in that review phase, so it really is down as a sort of potential art of the possible, I suppose.
struggling to see what that lower organisational cost on page 29 is today, because what it cannot be apart from not giving us the papers conversion get Councillor Graham if I can perhaps offer way through this Mike, my assumption is that we will hear more about the proposals for the democracy review at a later date, possibly through,
the general purposes committee, would that be a reasonable assumption, and when that happens I think we've also said there will be at that point, presumably we will understand whether or not a potential.
benefit can be realised, yes.
I, I think that's true and any proposals that relate to will need constitutional change to deliver them will need to go through general purposes at that point so.
I just pick up on Councillor Gruen's point, the about papers Richmond I, I think the quantum of papers are the same for two councils, are very small in number, actually very small OK, thank you very much, Mr. Evans didn't quite answer the question you put him and the reason I pick up on it is because when I previously suggested
outside this committee that general purposes would be receiving the results of the CSG s review for discussion. I'm working out what we do next. I was told that was not necessarily the case, or Mr. Evans has just said that any changes to the Constitution will come to general purposes. He's not saying that the CFDs worked and consider it well, and I think you make a good point, but we should have that that moment of reflection, particularly as we set up a subcommittee that has never met to discuss this work. So I hope I hope that we can. We can take it that, but we both agreed that it should come back to general purposes and that we will get that discussion in due course. I will find out what's happened to it. Thank you very much, Councillor Anne Bash
I really want to follow up. Councillor Matt Corner was saying initially about the complexity of the programme, it's a really far-reaching programme covering the whole Council and 9 work streams, some of which I understand overlap, so it's very complex and it's very far reaching from the council, and it also involves a step change that we're trying to deliver in terms of performance and in culture too, and I know we haven't really responded to the chief executive saying How will HMA we measure some of these benefits, particularly the social and economic benefits, and I think it's quite hard for us as Members to engage in the overall discussion, but I think it's really important that we do, because we are back this cross-party, we've back this financially
and so I wonder whether we need some time, particularly with the new change manager outside the committee system, to discuss some of the complexities and interrelationships, but the question I've got for the Chief Executive, which is how particularly does he think that councillors can support such a massive change programme now and over the next year because I think it is crucial we do support it if you can get give us any clues that would be really helpful.
thank you, Councillor, Anne Bash, so I think Samuelson would really welcome the chance in inappropriate for him to get a bit under the bonnet of this with members, if that's something of interest to members, I fully intend to give.
Ms Olson on her arrival the chance to run the rule over this, and I suspect the change programme once Sam's been here, a few months will look quite different to how it looks now. I think we would recognise that we've got going with it and we made some good progress in some areas and in other areas we've we've been awaiting the kind of dedicated capacity that we'll have once Sam is here and is able to pull a team around her, and I think she'd welcome the chance to get further input from members into that. So I'll encourage her to engage with members and see how you most might like to do that. It is the kind of conversation that actually is best conducted, not in a formal committee, so if Members are willing to join some kind of reference arrangement with Sam, I'm sure she should welcome that, but I think I think that sounds like that will be something that members of this committee, and presumably other Members, would also welcome and might be a good way of doing more working together, as you say, not in a a sort of in a formal committee sense, yeah, so that would be great if we could think about that Cat's Corner,
thank you, Chair, I wanted to.
go back to how we measure the benefits, so I think everyone appreciates, but that's really important.
both in terms of measuring the success of the programme but also in making sure that it is scoped and scoped and shaped correctly, I think the point about the volatility in the survey results is, it is a really good one actually and to Councillor Wolves point as well, some people don't like change and you might actually end up getting the survey results going down in the short to medium term even though the programme is a success in delivering its objectives.
and the one, so so I thought that a better way of additionally off of measuring the programme and maybe something that could be added to the mix of measurements is benchmarking with other councils, I see no mention of that within the paper, so I would like to ask if it could be added because I'm sure that data can be collected relatively easily.
I think in principle, the idea of benchmarking is a good suggestion and I'm more than happy that we steer Sam Ulsan towards looking for appropriate benchmarks, so I agree in principle, actually it's not as easy as you might think and the amount of entirely consistent data that councils collect is now quite minimal because the government doesn't prescribe that in the way that it did a few years ago but in principle if we can find appropriate benchmarks I think that's a good idea.
the very quick follow up by absolutely a helmet you'll know better than I do OBR about how easy it is to get this this data, but one would hope that the LGA or something through the the peer review if they can do that and they might be able to help with the benchmarking data be interesting to see what what can be found, but I'm other point very quickly as on page 11 we talk about our rough place costings. The paragraph is paragraph 23 which goes over into page 11
I really like the Council's approach to using data to inform policy and decision making, so that we've got one cost item, which is 27,000 pounds for a data scientist that for me it seems astonishingly low salary for it and its variants data scientists, and it seems odd that across the programme we've spoken about how
costs and benefits need to be further defined, but this is a very precise number, could you just shed some light on how that has been arrived at and whether we could revisit the amount where investing in that, because it is a high-skill jobs that typically demands a high salary?
this, I believe that's one of the benefits of working with the other borough. So what you've got? There is the Wandsworth share of the salary cost. However, I fully accept the point where we probably do want to invest further in this area, and I suspect that will be looking to invest more as we go forward and identify the further potential of data, because I completely agree with you is so hugely productive area to some extent. We've held back a little bit over the last few months because our new chief digital information officer, Ian Robertson, starts with us in April, along with Ms Olson. So we were keen to give salmon
and Ian, the chance to set out their stall and decide what the most effective investment is, but I think I'm right in saying that salaries, because it's it shared with the other borough.
I think that's the case here, even if it was 52,000 pound or 54,000 pound across.
the two boroughs that would still be slightly on the low side. Compared to what was specifically on this, we normally apply a three-fifths rule of thumb. I appreciate it varies, but three fifths, and when you account for the other, costs of an employee would suggest that actual salary would start with the three, and yet we're spending 162,000 pounds on HR and internal calm Councillors I just would commit my note on the side was this was this a full-time equivalent, so obviously surely we'll go away, and perhaps we can hear a little bit more about how that's costed up, and perhaps we could get that
information set out what we will do that chair, but can I just say I welcome Members' enthusiasm for investing more in our data capability. OK, thank you very much, OK, Councillor Richard Jones, and then actually I'm going to stop after that I'm sorry, Councillor Graham Councillor Richard Jones,
thanks to her, slight question is on the rise from page 29.
which is the paragraph please
if you turn up page 29, you'll see if there was any paragraph members.
it's just been running of the old.
paragraph, the old version doesn't have paragraph numbers either states that it's the first and first sub bullet point, but that's helpful, so this is about governance, and it notes that the cost savings from governance under the change programme are probably going to be neutral.
but there is one, I think, premise that I would like to challenge in the paper as it's written, so it states that there is some potential for financial efficiency via swifter decision-making, resulting reducing lead-in timescales and therefore reduced associated costs.
I would challenge the assumption that swifter decision-making does make for financial efficiency and financial savings, often being able to make a decision on a dime and in haste, actually increased costs, because they often have to be revisited and corrected with all the attendant cost of that but also I think there is, I think members perhaps more long serving members of the majority party would probably agree with me on this.
is that there is a link between the fact that Wandsworth historically is one of the most financially well managed councils and could deliver such sustained below council tax with the quite disciplined and drawn out decision-making process, the pre-scrutiny model at Wandsworth, there's literally knocked hundreds of millions of pounds of contracts through very detailed, laborious examination of proposals that have come to it and even before proposals come to committee.
because officers know they're going to be pored over by experienced members, a lot of discipline and work goes into those proposals beforehand.
before they get to Committee, they go through the Leader's Group, they go through the Directors Board, so I just wanted to press that point that you know sometimes if you slowed down and you get the decision right, actually that's the source of financial savings and,
making a dash to swifter decision-making, I think we could learn we could live to regret that.
sorry, Chief Exec yet, so I think Councillor Richard Jones makes a good point and I think what we want to explore is getting a proportionate approach on the right issues. So I think the approach that you've described is absolutely right for big decisions that has significant implications, whether they be financial or or otherwise, but I think sometimes we are guilty of applying the same approach to decisions that actually don't really necessarily require that same level of lead-in time and run up because they they, they don't have that same level of implication or risk associated with them. So I think what we're interested in exploring with Members is whether we can take a more proportionate approach to some decisions as opposed to putting everything through the same level of scrutiny and run-in time to decision making, but that that's something we'll explore with members through the governance review yeah quick follow-up, I guess that's very quick follow up
in the spirit of that answer, which I think is fair enough so far as it goes on.
do you think there were some decisions, then, that actually, some decisions of each perhaps should spend so much time on to the decisions that we should actually spend more time on than we do now, because under the current model, the biggest financial decisions are only given by the minority party seven days Scrutiny because we only get the papers seven days in advance, and that's the same lead in time, as you say, for a decision to dispose of a very small and unstrategic piece of land. While there are some decisions that you think actually, the process should be lengthened for
with papers published more than seven days in advance.
I wouldn't necessarily say the answer is to lengthen the availability of particular papers, but making sure we spend more time on those things that are most significant in terms of the impact on our residents has got to be the right thing, and I do think we do not necessarily do that in the time that we spend.
in this committee and in other parts of the Council's decision-making, I wouldn't want to be drawn on whether it's specifically about the earlier publication of.
data, but in the spirit of this exchange, I think we want to explore with members how we put the right attention on the right issues at the right time, right thank you very much, thank you very much, Members and no Councillor Graham I did say.
first of all I, the one thing I would like to do is there's a couple of things I'd like to add, if I may, and particularly looking at the residents that the trust in the Council and resident satisfaction I have been, as I've been listened to the debate I've been thinking about this I think maybe there's something around satisfaction.
about?
once with councillors I can very nebulous thing is whether it's more specific on how we operate with the services, with the staff who you deal with, maybe the question should be slightly more focused about how we're doing things, because presumably the difference that.
some of them, particularly the work stream the and workforce work will deliver, is the way that the stock, the staff and the teams are working with our risk.
no, so, just if I can facilitate moving forward.
as some Members will be aware, the residents survey includes a whole host of questions, including some service specific ones, so I am happy that we go away and consider what other.
questions within the residents survey we might use in line with your question Chair.
right okay, let's try that one okay, and then I just wanted to check when the next update will be coming to this committee.
the next formal update update, so we agree twice yearly, so September would be the next one September, the next one where I hope and I'd obviously hopefully something with Samuelson where I was gonna say and I'm sure Sam would be keen if members are up for it to engage in a different form to help develop whatever turns up in September, OK, thank you very much officers, thank you very much members and I hope that has actually been
constructive, OK.
well now.
excuse me, 1 minute yeah.
OK now, we'll move on to Item 6, which is the digital strategy, and Mr Gravett is here and would you do you want to say a couple of words or go straight for questions?
thank you Chair, I'll just say a couple of words very quickly, sorry, it's it's very obvious that we, along with the rest of the world, are entering a period of accelerated technology change.
the advent of AI in process automation, and we've spoken about data already tonight, undoubtedly you're going to have a significant impact on way we deliver services and
indeed, on some of our staff and their job content, so this strategy really lays the framework for that work over the next period, it's based around six key themes which draw on.
a standard template from the London office of technology and innovation and, as has been referred a number of times already this evening, the new chief digital information officer starts in a couple of weeks and he will take this work forward and I think as well as data in the in the area of digital as well it will be an area with further one-off investments are needed in order to realise the benefits moving forward. Thank you.
thank you very much for scrub VAT okay, questions, starting with Councillor Warrell Councillor Graham minor topical question per se, it's a suggestion and recognising the lateness of the hour already and how long we spoke to the other paper this paper is useful but is actually quite difficult to work through if you're an outsider.
and if you remember the public reading this paper as a suggestion, when this, when there is another paper coming to us around this or some feedback around the progress, it would be useful if you could come up with five or six points in each work stream as to what residents would see as a change in their everyday life. So some practical outcomes, as I said this is stretchy, is great for those people into stretchy but for the everyday person reading this, actually it's it, it could become meaningless, but they'd need something to hang on, to see what change we would be in their lives. So rather than debate the issue, just as as a suggestion to move forward
yeah, thank you for that suggestion, I'll I'll take that away and will reflect that in further reports that come to Committee.
we have noted that yeah Councillor Graham, OK, I actually agree with what Councillor Warren said, and I think it is because of the level of abstraction in which it's all couched. Even even the descriptions of particular programmes and items are put in some very abstract language which doesn't mean that it's meaning this as such because I'm sure that if you know what the detailed plans are surrounding it, it does make sense, but it does make it meaningless for anybody who doesn't have access to that detail and in a document of this length, that would be hoped that some of that detail could be there to give it a bit of colour. That isn't a particular criticism of this document because unfortunately this is a fashion
across organisations and across the public sector and the private sector to to produce things that are very abstract, but let's have a question, yes, so my question was the one parts of this that aren't abstract are the forward from the leader of the council, which is on page 41 of the pack, page 3 of the actual strategy document which talks all about this as the strategy is all about Wandsworth connecting Wandsworth things specific to Wandsworth, there's a page on the local context which again talks about things that are very specific to Wandsworth which implies that it's all been designed around Wandsworth needs how much of what comes next is different to the identical strategy in Richmond.
sorry, Mr Garth, yes, thank you, well, there are differences, not least in in the case studies.
and there will be differences moving forward, but it's not, I don't think it's surprising that two London boroughs have got quite similar approaches to how they use technology both historically and in the future, so you're right to suggest that the two strategies for both councils are quite similar.
and I think that's actually something of a virtue, because it does allow for economies of scale for the very significant investments that will be required in some of the technology you say they're quite similar, are I mean the the the the only noticeable difference once you get past page 6, apart from the occasional case study is that whereas we have innovation and collaboration as one of our aims,
Richmond has agile and innovative, however, Richmond then defines using exactly the same sentence, agile and intuitive to mean a culture of innovation collaboration, enabling us to be an agile Council able to adapt quickly and changing to the needs of the communities we serve as opposed to in our version. It says we service slightly ironic given our Council's motto is we serve and that's also grammatically correct so, but that is the only difference and then you go through the strategy approaches identical.
the the the bullets on the left are actually reorder, but the text is identical on the right, there's a whole thing, so page 47, all of those strategies are linked, plan strategies and the descriptions and the status and expected time of arrival are all the same, apart from the fact that Richmond also has achieving for children digital strategy which we seem not to have.
he goes through the goals and priorities on every single one of the subsequent pages are the same and from about halfway through all of the appendices and all the priorities are word for word are integrated and they said it's not that this they're somewhat identical or somewhat similar, they are pretty much identical in which case why are their preferences forwards from leaves of Council saying it's all about Wandsworth and it clearly isn't,
are you expecting any of the officers to answer I am, because why is it presented as being once more specific when it clearly is not Councillor Graham, I think that question is probably not one that the officers can answer. Obviously, the Leader would choose to put a preface in about the strategy. If what the question is is what are the differences, and why is it very similar to what Richmond has got? Then presumably asked a question in a different way, who made the decision to have two different documents branded up for the two different identities to two different councils, rather than having one to present identical texts,
I cannot comment on that, so the development of both strategies were done in consultation with two Lead Members for each Council. They're both aware of the similarities in approach and were both content with the final approach it was taken. OK, thank you very much. Councillor Fraser was follow up because we've been looking at cost savings and indeed we've told that we might not get papers at all to try and save money. Surely it costs more money to produce two different documents. I mean, it wasn't surely right to the vanity of the two leaders wanting their own photograph at the front was Councillor Graham, I'm just gonna say to you, is one of the things I asked was that we try and keep this fairly tight. I think this is drifting. Councillor Fraser has a question
for comment I do, thank you Chair, it's it's a question and it's just thinking about and leading on through Councillor Warrenpoint actually I'm kind of making this kind of accessible to two members of of public in ones with I'm also thinking about those you know we've got quite a high proportion of residents for whom English is a second language and just how we're gonna take that into account in any work we do in this strategy in this area.
Mr Garath, yes, you're happy to take that one well as as before yeah, we will, of course, when specific actions and and impacts on service delivery arise, we will describe those in as plain or English as possible I think everyone can appreciate some of this is quite technical and difficult for people who don't work in in the field to understand, but it's a point obviously well made that we should, wherever we can describe a particularly impacts on on our residents in as plainer English as we possibly can.
sorry.
I managed to lose track, I think Councillor Colin, you did have your hand up and then I was OK, Councillor Corner.
off you go.
yeah sorry, thank you, Chair. I'm similar to my point on the how the change programme has been scoped in and shaped and of course this does feed into the training programme, but looking at the three core principles that underpin the strategy on page 44, sadly buried in a paragraph number, but there it is in big, bold text. It does say that the three principles are putting people first, innovation and collaboration and efficient and effective. They're not really mutually exclusive though, and whilst I would agree that that's that doesn't have to be the case, and that's all of those things can feed through the very detailed and, as has been mentioned, quite abstract roadmaps that are detailed in the appendix it's not clear what focused goals with strategies trying to achieve here
again that doesn't have to be detailed in this document at this moment, but can we please get assurance, we will get that detailed benefits map soon so that when the strategy is implemented and executed, we can actually measure its success.
Mr Grant.
thank you.
yes, and it will be a key piece of work for the new CD I or the chief digital and information officer to really convert the
a road map at the end into a firm actions with specific deliverables, and some of them will be quite significant projects in their own right, with an investment case and very clearly set out objectives, and they will come to direct support and as required to councillors OK, thank you Councillor Bolton and thank you.
going back to the six principles or other principles anyway, the six themes are key themes I'm particularly interested in the digital inclusion one, I imagine that that on the whole is thought of in terms of how we include, everyone would be surprisingly, it didn't.
but I think there's bound to be some people who are excluded.
perhaps not many nowadays are actually illiterate.
and one can imagine the difficulties of living in modern life if one was illiterate but at least sort of one level of disadvantage one could think of in this area, it's also complicated, it seems to me that you can't be simply illiterate, there's all sorts of gradations of being a little bit computer literate or middle IT literate a bit more IT the church, et cetera et cetera all the way until you get to been 12 year old Wizkid
once what amount of time is going to be spent on in this at all, thinking about how about the people who miss out completely, not about how to get them involved?
but at the top levels, such calls for a level of skill that I think that's gonna be beyond some people anyway.
so how much of this work is going to be well here, we're going into the future and ones really exciting, digital was sort of way, 0 dear, it's not just we'll try and let everyone keep up, but we've got to be really careful that those who can't are looked after and how much is that going to be carried per year or is it elsewhere, do you think?
one and cannot I'd just like to add before you answer Mr Grover, that is one of the things that concerned me is, the links with digital deprivation are exactly the same, it pretty much maps to areas of severe of.
all sorts of other areas of deprivation, and actually how do we make sure that everything can yeah everything comes up to enable people to be digital, but they'll need other stuff as well.
thank you, I think there'll be a number of elements to our digital inclusion work and we will continue to offer training and support to people who want to use technology and perhaps so far in their lives haven't, but that's that's an almost impossible task for the count player and indeed any of his partners to crack in its entirety.
one of the key benefits, I think, of something like artificial intelligence will be that, whilst technology will be being,
the service user won't need to use technology in order to benefit, so a good example of that will be, I think, any increasingly sophisticated automation in our contact centre where sometimes when it's busy we're can struggle to get through and speak to staff now those people who can go online will often do that when the phones are busy. If you can't go online you can sometimes struggle to access services, but it won't be.
Long before a number of those kinds of services we offer in the contact centre are increasingly delivered through a I and not our staff, there are some very sophisticated models out there now this isn't next month stuff but it is two or three years down the road and so as an example of people at the moment may be struggling to access our services where technology will help without them themselves needing to use the technology that helps.
sorry, Councillor Belsen, was that satisfied.
sorry, quick comeback may be slightly unfairly, but one can see it in things like banking.
there are all sorts of back-ups and chat lines, and so on and so forth.
but at 1.00 level it just gets more and more difficult, as we all know, it's a joke, isn't it, I can't actually get through to a person.
and that's a really desperate need, a person I just can't get on with this chat box.
we're gonna make sure that I mean you've made a really good example, I am I see that it could well be very helpful in the garden environment you talked about, but there will be some people who just say.
I want a person we're going to make sure about that. Are we
I am sure you will.
its extent efficiencies arise from this, we will have the choice as to whether we take those efficiencies or we reinvest.
some of the savings into other areas in order to to to reach out to our most vulnerable and those who are most finding it most difficult to access our services.
thank you very much, I actually going to take one more question which was from Councillor Richards Jones, whose is this main, you're prepared to concede when you not like that or let someone else have you got a question, as I was going to accept the offer thank you reply and that's it his is the last one I'll just.
so sorry for the there. I think the last exchanges are really important sort of strategic point. My question, it relates to the case study of the LIFT project. That's on 54 page 54, so it's rather than there's the strategy. I think it's an, as Mr Grover says, a lot of this, pretty around a, I will be apparent and utilise all about two or three years. I've just got a question on a project that's actually being run right now, and it seems to me to be actually astonishingly successful. It's there, so this was when and the Committee be very familiar with this, but this is when the Council procured the low income family tracker data
with the object of identifying households that were not claiming pension, credit and cost of living payments, and it seems to be an example of a project that has on on, on the face of it, achieved exactly what it set out to do with real, tangible benefits to people and wanted to know what what our next steps in the LIFT project because we've identified under claiming or non claiming in pension credit and cost of living payments.
are there other benefits we're moving on to if we've almost reached the limit of the LIFT dataset are there other datasets that we're thinking about procuring okay, and I noticed that Ms Wilson, who is being leading on this and is clearly very very excited by the project, is champing at the bit to come and answer questions.
Councillor Wilshere,
so
we have a programme of work that sits around the lift dashboard, so we've got a number of campaigns that we are looking to take forward in the next few months.
some of which have been prioritised above others, there's lots and lots of different things other local authorities have done and we're trying to to take some guidance from them, as well as support from policy and practice who who have provided us with the dashboard some of the campaign's weaves we've scoped outside of what we've already done we've just had another campaign around free school meals and ones with which has been incredibly successful but to over 200 children identified not.
currently claiming free school meals but eligible, and I think the statements to the Council are about another 4 plus the financial benefits, including pupil premium, grants over 400,000 pounds.
so really significant so, and that is something that we're trying to build into business as usual, so every time we get the school census we then run another free school meals campaign to some of its sort of building on what we've already got and building it into business as usual.
some of the other campaigns we've scoped is campaign around homelessness prevention, so that's identifying people in the private rental sector, where they've got a benefit shortfall, and some of the work proactive work we were going to be doing using the lift data is helping those households improve their financial stability, so getting the benefits that perhaps there they're not currently claiming but are eligible for, but also we intend to do, try and do some work with.
some of the the private rental sector.
things like trying to help negotiate on rents or sorting out alternative payment arrangements, perhaps when they've got into arrears and also looking at you know, potentially tapping into the discretionary housing payments and homelessness prevention grant, so that's a big piece of work that we plan to start, I think it's sort of June time.
there's also a campaign on attendance allowance, take-up council tax support, take-up another campaign on supporting families, and we've had some discussions with Thames Water and we're about to pulled together a campaign on the take-up of water tariffs, so things like water show, but also looking at potentially tapping into other social tariffs available for things like broadband and insurance so there's lots and lots of going on a big programme of work and we're just trying to work through.
in its capacity of of officers, as much as anything to try and run some of the things we want to make, sure we get it right.
you can have a quick follow-up, I'm sorry, and I did say yours was the last question, Councillor Belton, as well, yeah, it's no point pleading with that. Thanks, Minister, was not that all gold that really is and others referrals to citizens advice as part of this process, because obviously a lot of you know their pension credit is one thing, and then there is a whole host of other benefits, then that are incredibly technical and the data might indicate somebody's eligible, but I don't imagine officers have the capacity to do that. Full eligibility tests that possibly has to go through citizens, advice or somewhere else
so with all the campaigns we have, we we set up, we run them as little mini projects as a part of that is about identifying the stakeholders, so who could we, or should we be working with to deliver some of these campaigns so, for example the pension credit campaign we worked very closely with
with the citizens advice and also Age UK because obviously we're relying on them to provide some of the support so so, wherever we are sending out letters to engage or correspondence to engage with individuals to help.
encourage take-up would benefit where we're always considering voluntary sector. Organisations across the borough can help us to do that, so we have conversations with them, are around that to make sure we've got sufficient capacity, both within the council and across the voluntary sector. Ms Wilson, thank you very much and I I know that you Councillor Carter them. I know so long as on this point, so now I think
Councillor Bolton and I have points that are not cantankerous. Unlike Avenue, maybe we can't be cantankerous but are constructive and following on we have plenty of time available and one of the points in a democracy review was the wish that and one of their recommendations for changing and reducing the number of papers was so that we would only consider two or three on an evening, so we had the chance to consider them properly if that's activity is going to be that the right way to get something done sooner was me and I would like to say something to you, what I said to everybody, and I think Upton everyone's been very good, is it's been very constructive debate. However, I also asked for questions and comments to be quite succinct and brief. I did say last one after Councillor Richard Jones is slightly different format tonight, because it's a special, it wasn't expected by everyone, and lots of people have given up extra time, so I think at this stage I've said I'd like that to be the final question, if you've got more points, I'm sure that Ms Ms Wilson, Mr Gravett and the Chief Executive will be happy to have them, but at this point I wish to close down the wide discussion on this because it's been long enough. Well, I closed down. I had to read this paper not once but twice I've had the opportunity to ask one question,
thank you, but that there are actually 60 dollars per one question, I can understand why your son Graham, there are they're meeting remaining people in this, no, I did I said to you very early on, I did not expect this is going to take a fruitful three hours.
hey, you've all had an opportunity to ask questions, you can plan your questions, thank you very much. I'd like to move on now to the next item so, Councillor Gwen, we move on to the new system of only having two or three substantive items. Every meeting is going to end after now and are negating the whole point, that is that one officer and Graham, I think that's going to be slightly different. We do not know how wide scope I would like to move on and take the next paper, which is the cost of living
okay, right now, on this particular one, I'm just going to say the cost of living paper was actually discussed. I don't think any questions on it before the guillotine, but there was an opportunity to ask questions on this paper at the meeting on the 27th of February of 27th February, and Ms Wilson has very short introduction. I will allow a few short questions on clarification for questions that were not covered before, and Ms Wilson, I think she's got some updates on things that have happened since the last meeting.
came and saw someone, and I forgot to save, would you be able to introduce yourself with your job title as well, I think officers have been, we've I've not been pushing officers to do that, it would be very useful. Yes, I'm Alex Wilson and I'm the Assistant Director of Finance and I cover revenue services
as you said chair, and there was some discussion discussion on this paper at the last committee meeting, so I don't propose to go through in in detail, I just wanted to cover two key areas which, as you mentioned, have moved on since the last committee meeting, the first is community spaces. Hopefully we're coming towards the end of winter and some spaces are continuing to operate.
right through until May, they're still seeing quite a significant amount of demand, we're in the process of collecting year end monitoring reports from each of the community spaces, and this will be collated into a detailed report which will be produced some time in May.
the key achievements and learning will then be reported back to this committee in July, just at a headline level, there have been some really positive feedback around the extended offer beyond the warm space provision from last year include to include things like food and wraparound support and links to other services so that's really positive there were also a lot more spaces last year than last year so it's 67 versus 55.
and over 120,000 visits to spaces reported so far that doesn't include our libraries, we're still waiting for all of that data to come in.
sorry, how many did you say 120,000 visits?
two spaces would you be able to?
the second area is the household support funds, so the government announced an extension to household support as part of the spring budget in March we've been given the same level of funding as before, but only for six months to the end of September and that equates to just over 2 million pounds for once with as the paper in paragraph 61 63 states, the councils committed to extend the current support initiatives through the first quarter of 24 25, but this will now be funded through household support fund rather than through the cost of living reserve because, as you know, we weren't sure whether whether the household sport fund would be extended and further than the end of the year.
proposals for the rest of the financial year will be brought back to this Committee in July, and that's likely to include recommendations about whether we continue to fund the holiday food voucher provisions, school uniform or form spend and also some detail around the future operation of the ones with discretionary social fund. Whether HF is extended. Past September is a big question and we might not have clarity on that until after the July Committee, just in terms of the year end position on the household support fund transport spend, we are waiting for final figures to be collated, and then we report that in detail back to the July committee meeting brilliant OK. Thank you very much, Ms Watson, OK, questions
Councillor Ann Mash Councillor Graham
while it was great that we got an 11th hour reply on the household support grant, some time late late in March, didn't really give us very much time for planning.
it would have been nice to have got it a bit earlier, but did the government explain why there were only funding for sit for six months?
is there anything from the chancellor that explained that?
not that I'm aware of no detailed.
information, but it wasn't to do with any elections or anything like that now that wasn't a serious question.
but just just on this point that was made very clearly transfers, budget announcement and and statements and the Treasury red book, which I'm surprised the officer hasn't seen that is being extended to cover the period for which inflation is anticipated behind and normal as Councillor and fashion houses will have noted, inflation is now forecast to fall to 2% or below by the autumn and therefore there is no need for funding to address high inflation when high inflation does not exist. Sorry, Councillor Abbott, has your question being dealt with?
Kerr, yeah yeah, Ms Watson has answered the quest, thank you very much, Councillor Graham, thank you, so one of the things that I've found notable about the cost of living response from the Council.
is the extent to which the money actually spent on cost of living initiatives has come from the government rather than from the reserve, so with that 2 million now, coming on top of the 10 million already spent from government funding that will be 12 million being spent by the Council coming from the government and as of yet despite the fact that we've now allocated 15 million from Council reserves, only 3.7 5 million had actually been spent. Why why is it the case that that further 5 million was put forward when we haven't even spent half of the 10 million allocated to date?
I was going to ask, is that a cow, a question that the officers feel happy to answer, if not, that's something that we can pass over back to the Cabinet Member for Finance, I think I'd get it, I think that would be the best place to do. It. Officers confirmed that that's not their recommendation. It was a political decision then, because if this is relevant, I my understanding was that officers in the papers that they've put forward together suggested that that was something that was coming from them, but if they're for saying that that was a political direction and I absolutely accept the answer, but I think there should be clarified
sorry I.
I think I'm slightly confused here because obviously you were looking at a paper that was written and you had opportunities to ask these questions, it was written in March before we knew about the household support fund and obviously this was a paper that had an opportunity to ask questions about just because I'm suggesting that maybe it's something that might one, for example we haven't got the director of finance here because I think it's worth some is something that may not be able to be answered here, obviously it's up to the officers if they feel able to make a comment.
Mr. M J, looking as if yeah, because I want to come in.
I, I think there's a an important point as well around the the other paper was on the actual committee a few weeks ago, which was the cost of living Commission response as well, which actually set out a series of recommendations and I think we can view the additional reserve puts a commitment from the administration to this in isolation from the fact that it was about trying to support some of the implementation of the recommendations from the commission as well which will be brought forward in in due course, I think that's that that sort of reflects the position we're at at the moment.
but in the brief discussion we have that paper at the last committee, it was noted and agreed that there were no costings for those Commission findings and
it couldn't be explained what if any additional financial commitment will be required to meet them, which is why at the time I think officers accepted that the decision on the 5 million could have easily been appended to the recommendations on this paper as on that other paper so I come back to the point was there a political direction given that at the point these papers were written the Council spent 10 million of government money, it only spent 3.7 5 million over 10 million reserve was it a political direction to increase that reserve to 50 million?
right, Mr residents, do you think this is a question that should be going to the Cabinet Member for Finance?
and I would comment again, it was an opportunity you did have to ask that question. You have very limited time under those me if you want to go back and look at the very limited time, and we only moved on in order to allow other items to accommodate that. Mr Evans is at a senior position in the Council. You must know whether there's a political direction or not. Likewise, this comes back to the point that there should be a member of the Executive here to answer these questions and there isn't, but Mr. Evans is perfectly capable of answering that, so I hope he will so or as Councillor Gruen will know, with all of these, there is a long going dialogue between the Executive and the officers about how to move forward and I think it was felt that the additional resource into what is a continuing cost of living crisis and affecting the residents would allow the Council to move quickly and swiftly to implement the actions that were set out in the cost of living commission report. So the additional money into the reserve was a reflection of of that position.
thank you very much, Councillor, I noticed Councillor belt in your hand, went up as if you wanted to do that, and I know you have a question.
I will let you if you.
thank you, Councillor Corner.
thank you Chair, and and this does this is a point that again might be something that would be good to ask the Leader if he were here.
but in his absence, I'll I'll ask it anyway, and that is related to page 91 on housing ARA, please.
42, which is starting tonight, thank you for indulging, this is the cost of living commission paper, isn't it?
yes, yeah, so that's not on the agenda, the response papers, the Commission paper.
what do you mean?
that the year of our papers about the the response to the commission's proposals. So okay, sorry, I say, sorry, I apologise, I've realised that I didn't manage to clarify that it was the re, the cost of living, quite the council's response to the cost of living crisis. So unfortunately the incorrect paper went out because it was a bit confusing. I do apologise, Councillor Corner the Council's response to the Wandsworth Independent costs. Now it, it was incorrectly should've been the other one, okay, this was sorry, fine, I like that I am shortly. I mean they're both right, okay,
right, are there any further questions, Councillor Graham, and then we will wrap up, yes, so it's just following up on the notion that a decision still has to be taken about whether to use the reserve that has been created, which would now note has a considerable surplus in it.
a decision is yet to be taken about the or Graham, you're gonna, withdraw all your other tax on as for using it, because you now realise that we haven't used to those you're gonna have to bring up, withdraw all those leaflets you've been sending out and say sorry, I got it wrong.
the Labour Council hasn't been as profligate as I thought at all. Indeed, I think there would be more profit going to follow up, but the decisions they have taken the leaflets I, if so, I look forward to hearing it for a bit of political honesty from you. Just finally, after belief, as I've seen, Councillor Button had been about the Council's decision to borrow 450 million not exclusive reserves, and to increase the allowances of his Executive Members, including one by 178%. Nothing to do nothing to do with the household support fund, or indeed the return and Graham I have in the past, says, excuse me, I have in the past suggested that you both like, might like to have this discussion outside. I can ask my questionnaire so a moment where this discussion should be moving outside for the turbulence where he got a quick, yes, I was, I have a question. It is a very popper question, which is that
as you can see, recommendation 2 D of this paper, the one we are discussing now, was to approve the use of the reserve to fund any shortfall
in the household support fund, in other words, to continue those initiatives, and it is the reason I think, why we have seen the high outlay for initiatives funded by the government and a relatively low outlay from the reserve is because the government funding has been used to support all of the most important initiatives. Those are the easiest to justify and therefore they're the easiest wish to deploy government money. Those are also the reasons that the government provide waiting me a question, Councillor Groves, yes, so to die says that the council will pick up any shortfall from the reserve, but we've now had that because the money will be extended to the autumn, but not beyond. There is no decision to to to use a reserve be on that stage trotted. Those two things are in conflict. That is a shortfall compared to the position that they
Councillor Murray can't see him, which is that the funding would be extended for a financial year. Let me remind you that this paper came to us on the 27th of February and we had to make a decision on the best available information that we had on the Twin I'm not disputing library, which was there was no news about the CQC, the household support grant. Obviously, now we know differently, but at the time we didn't and we made a decision. As you are aware, this paper is that they have the oxygen that the officer said in her remarks. That of household funds will not extend beyond the autumn and no decision has been taken and staff will be brought forward as to whether extend those initiatives beyond that date. But the recommendation we voted for was to ensure that any shortfall in the current financial year would be met from the reserve. Now we're not now apparently doing that and I think that conflicts with what we voted on a recommendation. I'd like an answer on that. There may be a good explanation, but I think I'm entitled phenomenon. It's sorry because we voted for one thing and we seem to be being told another
I would just say, is Councillor Graham.
if we could all say into the future about what was going to happen, we'd probably have a very different set of decisions making recommendations to divas without accounting for either to pass in the future one where the government did fund those initiatives financially and he said that the other where it didn't now all we have is a partial branch of that. First, two of the two possibilities where the government has funded the autumn but not be unhappy is a reasonable question pulse to comment on this, but I think this is probably a very reasonable question for you to ask at the next Full Council will be. Is how will we managing this? Ms Wilson
thank you Chair.
paragraph 62 of the paper explains that in order to provide some certainty to residents currently supported by the household support fund, given that we weren't aware at the time about this paper whether that fund would continue, it was agreed that we would commit funding on the current initiatives so that was free school meals.
and it was with discretionary, social finance, school uniform spend, but only for the first quarter of the financial year, and that was what the recommendation related to on the basis that we when we had certainty around the household support fund which we expected to be within the March budget statement, that that we would then come back at a future Committee to make further clarification around continued support after that event and how that would be funded and and does say in the paper in the tale it's actually says June Finance, but it'll be July, fine but there makes sense but before the follow up is this
it if the VA the Council, the saying that the cost of living crisis despite fall of inflation and predicted further falls in inflation to normal levels.
is going to be ongoing and significant enough to require another 11 and justify another 11 million pounds reserves being spent dwarfing the 3.7 5 spent so far
and that these initiatives were so important that if the government stopped funding them, the Council should step in to fund them. Why would it be that these initiatives are not the first to be extended and rather than as a debate about these, and instead we're looking at other stuff which is quite removed from the Councillor Graham confront, we took the decision, as I said before, what, as you know, we will get another report back to the July Committee. There are two avenues open to you now, one of which is to write directly to the Director of Finance at the to decide the Director Finance to the Cabinet Member for Finance
for clarification on this, or the other men is to wait until it comes through to Committee or okay of item interruption. I was eventually able to ask them ask my question, the officer, who gave a reasonable answer. I have another reasonable follow-up question and you are once again trying to prevent her from answering a question she could answer, which would mean none of us had to follow up with e-mails. I don't understand why you keep intervening to prevent officers answering the question. I want this meeting to end fairly promptly. Sorry, then, did it by having this, rather than just leaving the questions being asked
are you happy to answer that, thank you Chair, so the decision just to cover the first quarter was just because of the lack of uncertainty around household support fund and recognising.
the comment that Mr Evans made earlier about some of the commitments that we've made as an organisation to meet the recommendations made by the cost of living commission.
obviously you know, we're not clear as yet how much that will cost, but that's why we suggested that, and we reckon we made a recommendation around committing to just a short, relatively short period of time with a period of review and and then a further update paper to the July committee after some review or you know of the position and in particular one of the things that we're looking to do is to review the crisis support scheme, the ones with discretionary support scheme looking at mapping out crisis, support across the borough and feeding that into a potentially revised scheme that that's more sustainable in the future, so I absolutely recognise that the support is provided currently through the households support fund or as an organisation we recognise the important importance that that the that that funding has to some of our most vulnerable residents, I think that will be subject to a further review, as I said, and that will come back to committee in July. Thank you.
one last comment from Councillor Anne Bash, and then I wish to wrap this up and I just think we're making a bit of a meal of this last paper, we know that is coming back next time and I would just move under standing order 25 that we move to next business.
that's can't move that the question be put when there's no question who's the proposer and seconder of the question that you're proposing be put.
it would drive business finished anyway, I think we were right, we finished OK, thank you everybody, thank you and particular thanks to the officers I know you weren't expecting to come out, thank you so much for coming and for answering our questions and I hope it has been helpful. Thank you everybody.
o I'm sorry, Ms Ritchie and.
thank you.
thank you very much for coming,
- Special Finance Committee - notice of requisition, opens in new tab
- CHANGE PROGRAMME FINANCE UPDATE, opens in new tab
- DIGITAL STRATEGY COVERING REPORT WBC FINANCE CTTEE FINAL, opens in new tab
- Wandsworth Digital Strategy-Prf seven, opens in new tab
- Wandsworth Cost of Living Commission Council Response, opens in new tab
- Final report for WBC Finance Committee Feb-24 Cost of Living Support, opens in new tab