Finance Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Wednesday 4 December 2024, 7:30pm - Wandsworth Council Webcasting
Finance Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Wednesday, 4th December 2024 at 7:30pm
Agenda item :
Start of webcast
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
1 Minutes of the Previous Meeting
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
2 Declarations of Interests
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
3 Wandsworth Heritage Collections Development Policy (Paper No. 24-375)
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
2 Declarations of Interests
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
3 Wandsworth Heritage Collections Development Policy (Paper No. 24-375)
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
4 Change Programme: Progress Update (Paper No. 24-376)
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
5 Infrastructure Funding Statement 2023/24 (Paper No. 24-377)
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
6 Medium Term Financial Strategy (Paper No. 24-378)
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
7 Budget Monitoring: Second Quarter 2024/25 (Paper No. 24-379)
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
8 Treasury Management Mid-Year Review 2024/25 (Paper No. 24-380)
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
9 Annual Corporate Complaints (Paper No. 24-381)
Agenda item :
10 Debt Write Off (Paper No. 24-382)
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
11 Wandsworth Corporate Plan Actions and KPIs Performance Monitoring (Paper No. 24-383)
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
12 The Impact of the Autumn Budget 2024 (Paper No. 24-384)
Agenda item :
13 Actions Related to Winter Fuel Payments (Paper No. 24-385)
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
14 Budget Variations (Paper No. 24-386)
Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.
Hello everyone, welcome to this meeting. My name is Councillor Critchard and I am the
Chair of the Finance Committee. Members of the Committee, I am now going to ask you to
introduce yourselves please for the benefit of anyone watching, starting on my left with
Deputy Chair. Hello, Councillor Sean Lawless.
Hello, Councillor Warrall from Shaftesford in Queenstown.
Councillor Jesse Lee from St Mary's Ward. Councillor Claire Fraser from South Ballum.
Councillor Jeremy Ambash from West Putney Ward. Councillor Alid Richards -Jones from
Councillor Linsley Hedges from Ballinwood.
Councillor Matt Corner from Nine Elms.
Councillor Peter Graham, Wandsworth Common.
Thank you very much, Councillors.
The first item on the agenda is the minutes of the previous meeting.
Are these minutes from 9 October agreed?
1 Minutes of the Previous Meeting
Would you like to say that slightly? Right, okay, they're all agreed so I can sign the minutes.
Excellent. Right. Excuse me one moment. Thank you. Okeydoke. The next item, item two, is any declarations of interest.
2 Declarations of Interests
I'm just going to say members are aware of their duty to declare pecuniary
interests, i .e. interest money, and keep their register for interests up to date, which I
know we all do. And from the benefit of any members of the public viewing, any interest
declared during this meeting should be directly related to the agenda items and the decisions
being taken tonight. We have two sorts of declarations, pecuniary and non -pecuniary,
and I think I would stress something that came up the last time is, if it is a pecuniary
interest it has to be directly related to financial gain for the member of the committee
concerned. Are there any declarations of either pecuniary, other registrable or non -registrable
interests?
I just want to point out that what is a pecuniary interest could still be a declarable interest
but non -precuniary for the purposes of the meeting.
Fine. Obviously the monitoring officer says that too, but we're fine.
Okay. And what I am going to say to you all is I've sort of tried to operate a schedule,
so I'll try and give you a bit of an idea on how long I hope things are going to take.
I will I've also had a request from Councillor Osbourne who would like to
make a say very few words on item three I think the committee has to agree that
understanding order 66 and I just like to seek your agreement that when we come
to them that's first item that it's we're all agreed that he can say a few
words I've asked him to keep it down to three minutes please. Agreed. Agreed
excellent. Okay so we're now going to move on to item three which is the
Wandsworth Heritage Collections Development Policy. Excuse me chair.
Sorry. So before we start. Oh sorry I do for two other things before we start I've
3 Wandsworth Heritage Collections Development Policy (Paper No. 24-375)
2 Declarations of Interests
forgotten on the timings. I'm afraid Councillor Worrall has to leave us at 9 .30 and
And also, Sam Olsen has to leave by 8 .30 at the very latest, so I'm aiming to spend a
short time on the first part, about 10 minutes on the first, and then move on to the change,
so she has plenty of time to meet her next appointment.
OK?
Thank you.
Right, sorry about that.
Thank you, Councillor Worrall.
OK.
And I think we'll let...
Would you like to introduce yourself, please, and a couple of words,
and then we'll hear from Councillor Osborn.
Thank you. I'm Sara O 'Donnell,
London Borough of Culture, Programme Director
and Head of Arts and Culture.
3 Wandsworth Heritage Collections Development Policy (Paper No. 24-375)
Should I introduce the paper?
Yeah. Couple of words, yeah.
You know what I like, three key points maximum.
So this paper seeks the committee's approval to adopt a collections development policy.
So this is something we've been keen to develop since the collections came back in -house in
2021.
So alongside adopting the policy, we're seeking approval from this committee to deaccession,
which is the legal format to withdraw items from the museum collection of a small number
of items that have been identified either as a health hazard or which we feel is no
longer appropriate to be part of our collection.
In particular, the human remains that have been found within the collection.
But also we've received generous offers for a few collections or items to be housed in other collections where they have,
where we feel it would be much more appropriate for them to be stored because that will allow public access to those items.
But also they are better able to effectively care for, conserve those items.
So getting permission to remove them from our collection to their collection is another part of the request.
Okay, thank you very much.
And I think next let's hear from Councilor Osborne.
If you could come up to the table, Councilor Osborne, introduce yourself and
Maximum three minutes, sir.
I'm going to be an officer.
Okay, I'm Councillor Rex Osborne.
I'm one of the Councillors representing Tooting Broadway Ward and I'm the Council's Heritage
and Conservation Champion.
And I want to say it's a very good paper you've got in front of you this evening.
I've got no disagreement with anything in it or anything of the kind.
But I do want to make a plea for a slightly different approach and perhaps a different
take on what's in the paper.
The paper naturally has to deal historically
with the turbulent period, as it says,
period when the museum was closed,
at least once, arguably twice,
in relatively recent history.
One of the things that that provoked
was a problem with the museum collection,
which is that there was no plan for what to do with it.
And so now we're in a little bit of difficulty
about what happens about the stuff that's left over.
And there are all sorts of things you can do,
but that turbulent history has made us, I think, as a council, a bit downbeat about the museum collection.
My plea to you all tonight, and to the council in general, is to be much more upbeat about what we've got.
We do have to have a relatively ruthless deaccession policy, because we've got stuff there that we shouldn't be hanging on to.
But you can't just chuck it away, you've got to do it in a thoughtful way.
For example, we are looking at much more effective access to the collection digitally.
Some would call that a digital museum.
We're also actively looking at getting bits of the collection out into mini museums.
We already have one in the Wandsworth Town Library just across the road from here.
We have another in the family hub in Roehampton.
and there is the potential for many more mini -museums
with bits of the heritage collection dispersed.
And one of the things I think we should do is,
we might use the terms interchangeably,
but as well as talking about the heritage collection,
we should also be talking about the museum collection.
I mean, I think there's a concern somewhere
that that might build up people's hopes
about the possibility of the Council creating a new museum,
a new bricks and mortar museum.
And hypothetically, one day, maybe we shall.
I don't know.
I wouldn't ever want to rule it out as a possibility.
But the fact of the matter is, we as a council believe in a society that has high hopes for
itself.
We want people in Wandsworth to be ambitious for their council.
We want to be ambitious for them.
So I think we should at least interchangeably be talking about the Wandsworth Heritage Collection
and the Wandsworth Museum Collection, and that museum collection is going forward to
be part of a dispersed arrangement of mini -museums all across the borough where we can create
them.
That, I think, is the upbeat approach that this Council needs to take to the collection,
and I would urge it upon you this evening.
Thank you for listening.
Thank you very much, Councillor Osborne.
Okay, questions, please.
Right, okay, I've got Councillor Graham, I've got Councillor Worrall.
Okay, off you go.
So just to begin with, I concur with what Councillor Osborne said,
and I think he's absolutely right about the attitude that we should take towards this collection.
And the collections policy in the appendix, I think, is very sensibly written and from
an opposition perspective will be happy to support it.
My question – I've got a couple of questions, but the main one relates actually to Part
D of the recommendation, because disposals are set out very carefully in the policy in
Section 16 about the process of disposals.
Part D of the recommendation actually seems to contradict that disposal policy.
It seems to give approval to families to trump what's in that policy and potentially remove
the agency of the council to assess whether it might want to keep an item for the public
benefit.
And given that we don't know what's in some of the collection because of the unfortunate
loss of records around fires and putting them out with fire engines and the impact of water
on computers.
Given we don't know what all these items are, I don't think we should just be saying
that a family could take that decision without there being any sense check on that from us
and in contradiction to the policy we're about to approve.
Okay.
Yes, Ms. O 'Donnell.
So, no, thank you very much for that question.
I apologize.
I think in the editing, what was lost from the original paper
is that the family had been speaking to other organizations
to take it, and it's actually the Wandsworth Archive.
So at Battersea Library, where the objects
would be transferred to.
But it's something that the family have been negotiating
with them.
And we've been negotiating with Emma as to how those items could be transferred over
once they're deaccessioned from our collection into that collection there.
So that's for the main part.
Then there are a few other items that the conversation with that family is with the
Wimbledon Museum and those items going there.
those pieces do need conservation and that budget but actually also not linked with Wandsworth,
it's linked with West London.
So Wimbledon.
Thank you.
Well, very quickly.
It says, and who have now identified another organization.
We're not saying, which is what it appears to say, that if a family finds an organization
that trumps the policy.
What you're saying is if the policy has already said
that we're going to get rid of it,
that this thing comes into play as an extension
to the policy.
And I still think it'd be neater if it was in the policy,
but if that's what the intention is,
then I'm happy with that.
Councilor Orell.
Thank you.
I just want to take your attention to paragraph four
about the previous destruction of the archives,
the electronic archives that we had.
In this you've actually said it now it going through a process of re -cataloging the the collection and doing it digitally
I suppose my query is it is how can we ensure that this doesn't happen again?
Digital is is electronically stored in the cloud for example
Technology changes things one day Microsoft or whoever might decide actually they don't want you know
They're gonna introduce new restrictions
I suppose how do we ensure that there are backup mechanisms in place?
And should a system fail or get destroyed for whatever reason or wiped out that we do have we're not gonna have to repeat this
again at a cost
We are trying to work our way through that risk plan
At the moment
We've not worked our way through that because the but the collection itself does not have any budget attached to it
So that we're hoping as part of London Borough of Culture and as part of the legacy that
we will be able to secure a budget line in order to both host, continue the cloud hosting,
but also have an offsite backup version.
What it has proven is the importance of having all those documents, those actual physical
books.
We have also scanned those physical books, so we do now have the PDF of all those pages,
but we really don't want to go through having to type them up again.
So yeah, we're working through it and this collections policy is sort of step one of getting that.
Thank you.
Okay, I had a question from Councillor Lawless, another one from Councillor Richard Jones.
I'm just going to, what I should remind you all is we have a very busy agenda
and I'm hoping we could be quite reasonably quick with this one so I'll
take those two questions then we'll move to a vote.
Councillor Lawless. Thank you, my question was about the London Borough of
Culture and I share Councillor Osborne's passion for the subject. What plans are we
putting in place when we're developing our timetable next year to make sure
that all ones of residents are seeing the rich diversity and heritage that
we've got. So the first phase has been the cataloging of the collections. We've
got the first iteration of an online collections database going on the new
Welcome to Wandsworth website early in the new year. That's around 200 objects
that we have so far managed to photograph and research and then I mean
is 14 ,000 plus items, so it's gonna be a number of years.
But we've been working with volunteers and students
at Roehampton to do that research,
and that will be coming forward year on year in batches.
We're also working on memory boxes,
which is gonna be a part of the program,
but is taking those collections out
into different community settings.
And as Councilor Osborne has already mentioned,
And we've opened two mini museums, we've got a number of other mini museums in the
pipeline.
And again, that's working with partners in particular, a cohort of undergraduates at
Roehampton University who is part of their course, are using the collection as a learning
collection and are researching and creating exhibitions and those exhibitions each year
are bringing more items out of storage, and they will then be going on to public display
across the board.
Thank you very much.
OK, Councillor Richard Jones, last question before we move to vote.
Sorry, sorry. I'll probably turn back on in a moment.
In page 6 in recommendation D, is the term deaccession collection items defined anywhere in the paper?
Yes, right at the beginning, because I...
No, sorry, deaccession is, that's defined, but is the term deaccession collection items
defined anywhere in the paper?
So Councillor Richard Jones, I think you and I have a similar problem with this. Deaccession
of course is not actually a verb but it is used as a verb it seems to me, is that correct?
Well, okay.
No, look.
That's why I asked, right.
My issue is, or rather my question is, is that recommendation D basically says there's
a category of items called deaccession collection items, and it essentially authorizes the custodians
of these items to then dispose them in the way described in recommendation D. But as
I understand it, that's not a defined term, so we don't really know what we're talking
about.
We don't know what it is we're authorizing for disposal here.
So correct me if I'm wrong.
You're talking about which items, so Dr. Sean Crichton and Pamela Greenwood are asking
to remove from the collections and transfer over to other institutions.
Is that correct?
Or are you asking about?
So those items, it's still what we first, step one as it were,
is to have a collections policy so we know what can
and cannot be removed from the collections.
And then step two is having those conversations that, as I said,
have already begun with the ones with the archive
and with the Wimbledon Museum
to see what could be transferred over to them.
But that has not yet been fully agreed.
We needed this step first.
So the question was wrapping this into this paper
rather than bringing it back to another paper
for those specific collections.
But that is an alternative option.
What we wanted was, and as the policy says,
is that the decision is made by a body other than officers making that decision.
So this was a way to try and use committee's time most effectively.
Okay, thank you. Right. I actually said the last question was coming from Councillor Richard Jones.
It's just a helpful point.
Excuse me, Councillor Graham. I'm very happy to take helpful points.
I just make everybody aware that we have a very tight agenda.
And there are things that obviously we would like to get to.
Absolutely, and I don't wish to run into our time.
I think you've already done, but we've already done so.
To be fair, I think that both in my own case and Councillor Richard Jones have both raised
issues around the wording indeed.
Now I think what officers have told us verbally is absolutely fine.
I've got no problem with what seems to be the intention.
The trouble is that the wording and the intention aren't aligned.
I am not going to detain us now by proposing amendments on the fly.
What I was going to suggest is that because there is goodwill and cross -party support
for this, we approve this paper, but some thought is given to maybe amending the wording
of D at the Executive to avoid these issues so that the Alliance of Alliances have told
us.
Is that OK with everybody?
Excellent.
Mr. Newman, OK, thank you.
So all those in favour of a recommendations A to C,
which is to adopt the heritage collections policy,
give approval for the deaccession and transfer to the appropriate organisations,
approval for the deaccession transfer and,
or if that is not possible, safe disposal of anything that's hazardous to public health,
and D, which is the deaccession collection items,
which I think it to allow those to be returned to individuals or families if
they've now found somewhere else better for them to go. Yes okay brilliant that's
agreed thank you very much thank you very much officers thank you very much
Councillor Osborne. Okay before we continue I forgot to say that Councillor
Kemi Akinola, who is our voluntary sector business and engagement and culture cabinet
member is in attendance, as is Councillor Ireland, who is the cabinet member for finance.
We will, they will speak when necessary.
The officers obviously will introduce themselves when necessary.
Thank you.
Item 4 is the change programme.
Welcome again, Mrs Olson.
4 Change Programme: Progress Update (Paper No. 24-376)
We spoke, we had an informal discussion last time.
This time we've got the paper.
So if you'd like to make a very short introduction, and off we go.
Thank you very much.
And as briefed, I will try and keep it to three points for you
and assume that you have read the papers.
So I'm really pleased to be able to present to you the progress so far
on the Council's Change Programme.
It's an initiative that you approved in September 23 and has three very specific
objectives that are about delivering on the council's objectives, about being a
great employer and about delivering financial sustainability. It's very focused
on ensuring that first line that's about meeting the needs of local communities.
The agreed spend to date and focus has very much been as you set out at the
outset about building capacity and capability in order to create readiness for change.
To ensure that we're ready to embrace and embed new technologies and service redesign,
we have to have the right foundations in place.
This is not a new and unusual approach that you're taking here.
This is the approach that all good public sector organizations and private sector organizations
do in terms of readiness for change.
Most of the change we are looking at here longer term of course involves technology.
But technology is only ever one element of it. Just delivering a piece of technology
into an organization will not realize the benefits if you've not done the service redesign,
implemented the policies and thought about what the customer journey is going to be. To do all that
piece of the work, you have to have the skills and capabilities in the organization in the
first place.
Service design has got to start with the user needs.
If we don't know what those user needs are, we won't build the right thing.
We must do our research, we must analyze the data, we must talk to users.
We can't make assumptions along the way.
We have to have empathy for our users, and we have to remember that it isn't always about
delivering what people think they want.
It's about understanding the needs.
Good change and innovation is actually sometimes about doing less.
It's not about running to create a new website.
The answer is never an app.
The answer is a better service design, isn't it?
So I talk about it being human by design, but thinking digital first.
In order to do that, you've got to put people first,
hence the focus on being the great employer.
That said, we have delivered, the council has delivered a huge amount over the nine
original work streams and those are outlined in the paper.
I'm not proposing to go through them in order to keep this brief.
As asked at the outset when I joined you six months or so ago now, and I mentioned the
last time we met, I've done a review of the program.
The area that we focused on the most is about strengthening the link between benefits to be delivered.
We've built capacity, we know that building capacity has been very much in the non -cashable savings,
but there is also a cashable savings element of this program as well.
So in conclusion, I'd say that the change program has progressed as planned so far to date.
We have built capacity and are now focusing on building business cases for projects across the four portfolios
To deliver those benefits. Those are completely aligned to where the service demands and service pressures are for the council
And it was incredibly heartening for me as we've been going through the budget process and of course for me
It's my first year of going through this budget cycle as as we've been going through the process
consistently seeing through budgetary meetings that interconnection between what service
leaders are saying about where their demands are and where the possibilities of savings
are to manage the demand, linking through to what we're saying in the digital change
programs.
So it's been great to see that synergy start to come together.
Specifically we are now in a place where we're starting to investigate 14 individual business
cases that we are looking at the moment that are about delivering savings or about managing
increased demand. And that's something that we'll need to look at as part of our benefits
realization strategy moving forwards. Not all these programs will deliver immediate
cashable savings, but what they'll be doing is about managing down that demand line that
we've got in some of our most stretched services. So I will finish with saying that we are absolutely
absolutely on a journey here.
I can see the direction of travel.
It feels that the portfolios are set up in the right space,
but there's still a long way to go
in order for us to ensure that as we build
the individual business cases for the individual programs
which we are looking at some of the cashable savings,
we must remember that we need to do
the service design work as well.
Just putting an app on top of something
does not deliver cashable savings.
Okay, thank you very much Mrs. Olsen. And I'm just going to remind councillors, try
not to make a speech, clearly make a point, but then ask the question. Okay, I'm going
to start with, let me just take, I've got Councillor Ambash, Councillor Hedges, Councillor,
Are there any other hands up, Councillor Worrall?
That's Peter Graham.
Councillor Fraser.
Okay.
Yes, Councillor Richard Jones, sorry I put you down,
but didn't tell you that I put you down.
Councillor Ambash, off you go.
Thank you, Ms. Salsom, for the presentation
and for the paper.
Appendix 1 identifies projects started
since last February with, I think, intended outcomes and benefits.
As we're now in the second year of the change program, it's been good to hear.
It would be good to hear of the actually outcomes and benefits actually achieved from all projects
from February but also any previous to that.
So two questions.
What are the outcomes and benefits achieved so far or the most notable one rather than
all of them because I gather there'll be a really long list.
And can we in future pay for six monthly reports to this committee
have a full documentation of outcomes and benefits actually achieved
so that we can see progress as we get regular reports?
Thank you.
Okay, Mrs Olsen.
Thank you. So I've tried to summarise some of the key outcomes in the paper
in the boxes further up.
Excuse me, what I should also have said is,
could you give us page number and paragraph as well,
just so we can follow it where we are, if you've got them?
If it's too complicated, we'll hopefully find it.
Thank you. Page 27, Appendix 1,
because I'm looking at it in a individual.
So I have tried to pull out the key ones for you there.
I would completely agree with you on the importance of delivering a benefits tracking process,
which was one of the things that came out of the deep dive.
So the work has been ongoing for the last couple of months, because a lot of this building
capacity, effectively now what you've got to go back to is say, has that role now been
actually recruited and started?
Have they been on boarded? What's the impact and what's the what is it? That's we're delivering differently. So we've started that work
We now have a benefits tracking process in place, which means that the next time I come to report to you. Yes
Absolutely. You'll have a benefits tracking in there
Is that come back when I read it? I thought there were benefits that we were hoping to achieve
These are benefits achieved are they in the final column on the right?
If so, I misunderstood it when I read it.
Sorry, no, you're quite right. It's not that page. It's earlier up in the...
If I look at paragraph 10 under achievements and benefits, that's where you've got the...
Where I've tried to pull out the summaries for you.
Okay, thank you.
Councillor Hedges.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Mrs Olson.
Really appreciate all the hard work you've done.
Just a couple of questions.
One is a follow -up one in regard to the question I asked you the other day about, it's on page
22, creating the 1000 apprenticeship approach.
Keen to understand a bit more information on that.
and then the other question is related to page 22,
secure ongoing financial sustainability.
You talk about establishing a new external funding team.
Just keen to understand more on that as well, thank you.
Thank you, and thank you for the heads up
on the question of apprenticeships,
because it does mean that you've got,
I've got a better answer for you
than I would have had otherwise.
So there are two strands of this work, as you would expect.
One is about apprenticeships that we are delivering
within the council, where these are our staff
who we are running apprenticeships programs with.
That work is ongoing at the moment,
and as somebody who's worked across
multiple different public sector organizations,
I've been particularly impressed with the work
that the team have been doing to ensure that we are full,
that we're not quite fully using our apprenticeship levy,
but relative to most organizations that I've worked with,
that we are doing incredibly well.
So part of this work has been about how we ensure
that they are plugged into our organization
and are aligned to the skills and capacity
we are trying to deliver.
The wider work that we are doing
is the work that we're doing,
as mentioned to you the other day,
around working with the University of Roehampton and local businesses.
So this is collaborative work.
This is happening across the council and across the whole borough.
And this is about working with businesses who are saying to the university that they
don't have the capacity and capability to create apprenticeship roles inside their organizations.
So whilst we have a fantastic university academic opportunities wanting to push forward with
apprenticeships, what we weren't having was the connection with the actual roles in the
borough.
So what the work in this space is aimed at doing is effectively creating a bridge between
those two and supporting the businesses with best practice and connecting them with organisations
that are already doing it.
So some of the work as an example is working with
so Accenture and Marks and Spencer's who have really huge apprenticeship programs and how can we connect the smaller
organization smaller businesses in the borough to some of those programs so that they can work collaboratively together.
Thank you. Okay. Oh
Sorry
and on the financial funding team
The roles have been recruited to,
they have now started in the organization,
and we'll have a fuller update for you at the next meeting.
I thank you very much.
Okay, Councilor Worrell.
Great, thank you.
And thank you for the paper.
I'm also really glad to hear of your viewpoint
that change is just not another app that we introduce,
because I think that's often the response
for many organizations around change.
But I want to take you to page 23, paragraph 22,
where you talk about the decision -making
accountability pilot.
I'd be really interested to hear more about this,
because if it is what I think it is,
it sounds like quite a power shift
in decision -making processes within the council
and how we actually run our services,
and actually giving more responsibility at a lower level
and in that way, obviously making the job more interesting
for staff members as well, as well as around responsibilities.
So I wonder if you could just explain that a bit more.
If you don't have the details at hand,
I'm very happy for you to send me something through as well.
Sorry, Mrs. Elton, yeah.
So I'm happy to do both, actually.
So the DMA tool is a tool that has been designed by the LGA in collaboration...
Sorry, just for...
Sorry, the Local Government Association...
And Decision Management.
Yes. So the Local Government Association have been working with,
I think it's Birmingham University, and also CIPD,
which is the Chartered Institute of...
Thank you very much.
So the Chartered Institute, for people listening, that is responsible for human resources and
organizational design.
So the LGA have been rolling this out across a number of different organizations.
And what it aims to do is to say that ideally any organization does not have more than five
layers in it and looks to roll out some really good practice across what spans
are so how many direct reports somebody has based on the complexity of the role
and the repetitiveness of different roles and they have a very lovely chart
and explanation which I'm happy to send out to you that talks about at level one
you would expect somebody to be spending a hundred percent of their time in the
more strategic space and that at level five you're looking at people spending
their time predominantly in the operational space and there's a nice sort of diagonal
line as you go through.
What we've seen in our own organization is we have got areas where we've got far more
than the five or even if it's pushed six layers.
You know, in my own change and innovation we had a lot of one -to -one reporting lines
which we know are not good for retention, it's not good for customer satisfaction and
And it's certainly not good for ensuring you've got the right decision making at the right
layer in the organization.
Now it's only a tool though.
So it's a really good tool for assessing where your strengths and where your challenges are
as an organization.
It then needs leaders to take it on board, think about what's the direction of travel
of this service and how do I bring these two together to create a revised organization.
We have rolled it out in children's services, the director of children's services really
led by example through it and you can see some of the impact of that.
It has been very positive.
We have looked at it across adult services where interestingly it is a more complex picture
and at the moment we are in the middle of looking at rolling it out across change and
Which is the first time we'll have looked at it as a central team as opposed to a frontline delivery team
But thank you very much
Okay
Counts Peter Graham. Oh, and I'm just going to say to her we need to remember that
Mrs. Olson needs to go in about 15 minutes. So we've got one two, three four five people asking questions
So off we go if it is helpful
My questions are probably are about this paper and recommendation but not for Miss Olson to answer
so I'm happy to wait, provided I do get sufficient time later and let others ask her the questions
so she can depart.
OK. Right. Councillor Fraser, then.
Thank you very much, Anne. Thank you very much for this paper. It's really interesting
to read. I guess for me what I'm thinking about is, and I'm sure it's something that
you're considering, is this kind of look into the future, how you then track kind of good
work going on here. So thinking about the outcomes, KPIs, how you keep yourselves to
account. And I think that would be really interesting, I think, leading on from what
what Councillor Ambach was saying about if this is to come back, it would be really interesting
to see what good looks like for you and us and how we're holding ourselves to account
in that regard.
So this may sound controversial, but ultimately the good sign of a change programme is you
no longer need a change programme.
And actually, what happens to the outcomes and tracking the outcomes moving forward,
but actually embedding change into all areas of the organization.
So it becomes about continuous improvement as opposed to feeling the need to have this
this thing called change is actually what good looks like for me.
OK. Councillor Richard Jones.
Thanks, Chair. Following on from Councillor Fraser's question, actually.
So in terms of measuring, what will be vital for measuring is benchmarking
benchmarking where we begin from. I think it was two or three finance committees ago
we were told that a resident survey had now been completed for the last year. That still
hasn't been published to my knowledge. It has been published. I just see Mr Evans. Is
it on the website, is it?
Sorry.
It's on the website, July, party, and so on.
Sorry, I'll just repeat that. Mr Evans said it went on the website in July as part of the end sale report. Is that correct? Because he's not up with the tape.
Okay. Excellent.
Okay. Excellent. Right. Thank you. So we'll go and look at that next.
Councillor Corner.
Thank you, Chair. Thank you for the paper and the work that's going on here. It will be really exciting to see how it all plays out and the benefits it can deliver.
I have a question related to the project's funding on page 28, related in particular,
sorry 29, related to the asset strategy review and the funding of that of £47 ,000.
It says that the purpose of that money is to fund updated condition surveys, valuations
and resources to support delivery.
So, as this committee will recall, there was an asset management strategy a year or so
ago which was created by the Council, not without controversy.
Could you just confirm what if those resources that that money is paying for are doing a
similar piece of work to identify possible future strategies for key assets in the borough,
and if that will supersede that previous work that was completed.
So I'm unaware of the previous work that was completed so can I come back to you
with an answer on that? Okay. Okay thank you. Right, Councillor Lawless. Thank you.
I think attracting and training the right workforce is a really important
one that we've got a crack and on staff volunteering days which is listed on
page 23 and elsewhere.
Can you talk a bit about that and any maybe examples
or anecdotes that we've got?
Because I think fostering strong connections
with our communities is absolutely vital.
And I think it could be a really impressive piece of work.
Cheers.
So the policy was launched approximately three or four
months ago now.
So all members of staff now have access
to two volunteering days.
They log it on our HR system, it's called iTrent, our HR system, and when they log what
they're doing, they're encouraged to talk to their line manager about it, but they also
have to log which of the council priorities they see that it's most connected with, and
write some free text about what it is they are doing.
Now there is a real balance here, isn't there, because this is a staff benefit, this is not
about us mandating what people should be doing in their volunteering time, but what's been
really interesting is just how engaged staff have been in,
can I use my volunteering time for ELBOC?
Can I use my volunteering time
to help with this faith group?
All the conversations I've had with it so far,
with people so far, have been around doing volunteering
within the borough, within our communities.
So I've had a few conversations with people
who are involved in predominantly brass bands,
working with
people who are street homeless.
We are giving them
an opportunity
to come into somewhere warm,
have a cup of tea, listen to music
and actually they see music
as a way
of bringing people in
so you can
start to signpost people
to other services.
What will be lovely about it
being a very data -driven person
is the fact
that moving forward
we can start tracking
how people are using
their time.
Thank you very much. Before we move on, had anyone else got any other questions about
the work that Ms Elson's doing and the paper? Before we... Sorry, if there's somebody waving
their...
Cancer Ambash.
Cancer Ambash. Okay, this is sort of the final pick up. Yep.
There are one or two points in this paper that indicate they'll need to extend staff
contracts and indeed in a later paper, medium -term financial plan, it says there will be need
to further investment in the change program and savings identified to facilitate longer -term
change. I wonder if you could indicate how many roles will need to be extended beyond
the current time limits of employment contracts and the order of costs involved and explain
why we should be thinking about extending the program to extend the benefits but also
some of the costs for us.
So obviously I'm writing the paper through the context of the skills that the change
program has brought in.
But I also have to work within the financial envelope that the change in the innovation
function has.
So in doing in going through the DMA process and looking at what our HR function looks like,
our IT function looks like and our customer services function looks like, what the team
are doing at the moment with me is working through what are our, what are the recommendations
coming out of DMA and what does the function need to look like in the future? Because we
still have to be able to live within that envelope, but we know from the peer review
and from the change program that we have needed to bring in new skills. And what we've now
got to do is rebalance that and look at what the totality of the function needs to look
like, because the funding moving forward that I need to be talking to you about is individual
business cases for individual new projects, not for the skills and core skills and capability
which is what you've funded up until this point.
Thank you, Ms. Alsop.
Now, I have something that we did mention we would need to talk about.
One thing I'd like to do before you go is, normally you would have stayed for the KPIs
and the customer service one, which I believe is in your area.
I just wondered if, okay, so not quite on the paper, but if while you're here you could
give us a quick update on how on that that's in advance of the KPI paper, which is right
at the end.
Yeah.
Absolutely.
So you'll see the KPI on customer services is red.
It hasn't met its targets. This is for a period of time which was also
Coincides with the change of the waste contract. There was a huge increase in calls during that
During that changeover of the waste contract which you've had many a conversation about here. I now have a live
dashboard of calls
Thank you to the change programme, of course, which means that we have a much closer monitoring
now on customer contact and our service delivery against that.
And I'm pleased to be able to say that we are back on track.
Okay, thank you very much.
Okay, right.
So, Councillor Graham.
So now we've, just to summarise, we've dealt with all the questions we have on the paper
and then Councillor Graham had some comments on the recommendations.
So I'd like to get some clarity on what the delegated authority consists of and the mechanism
for those decisions.
So the recommendation is to agree delegated authority to the executive director, which
would make her the decision maker.
But the information we've had previously is that approvals for these schemes are being
handled by the Change Program Board.
So is the program board a decision -making body or not?
So the change that is being proposed here, when the paper and you first set up the fund,
the change, you didn't have a change in innovation director, so it was the finance executive
director who it was delegated to.
So we are not proposing to change in this anything other than it being delegated to myself as opposed to Fenella
Everything else stays the same as it was
And for clarity all of the schemes in appendix one which have been approved
Were not approvals by the Change Program Board despite the fact we were told that was the body handling approvals
Yeah, everything goes through the Change Program Board
Perhaps it would be helpful if we just listed who, I'm also conscious the Chief Exec has to go at the same time for the same meeting.
Anybody able to help out with who's on the change board, how often it meets?
It's not really a question of who's on it because it could be an advisory board but have no power and when the same people be on it.
The question is its status.
So the status isn't changing, the status is as it was at the outset.
The change programme board is the exec directors and we are not proposing that any of that
changes through this paper.
It's as it was set up at the outset.
Hold on, sorry.
I'm asking what the status is.
Councillor Graham, what would help is I think we're getting some more help coming over from Mr Riley.
Well, hopefully. Can you hear me? Yeah. I think what we're saying here is that the Change Board is the governance structure that helps the Executive Director make those decisions effectively.
And that is the way that it worked previously, but the Executive Director was then the Executive Director of Finance.
So it's an advisory body and for governance.
It doesn't have any, that's fine.
It's an acceptable answer.
But what I then want to know is given that this is being delegated to the executive director for a decision,
and it's a matter that were it not for that delegation would go to the executive,
why haven't there been and aren't there decision notices, public decision notices for each of these decisions,
and the items in the appendix as required by the openness of local government bodies
regulations.
Right.
I think that might be a little bit too much of a detailed question for tonight, but we
will come back to you with a response.
response.
I mean, I have raised this in connection with this and the similar status for the cost of
living program board in emails with officers over the last few weeks, which I assume the
monitoring officer would have seen.
So I'm a bit surprised that there is still no answer to this because it does seem that
we are failing to provide it.
And the problem is that not just is there no decision notice, but then when I have requested
access to copies of the documents, given that they're not coming to committee and there
is no decision notice, I've been refused access.
I would like to ask the Cabinet member, does she have access to the documents going to
these program boards?
Yes, I do.
Marvellous.
So that means they are under the control of the Executive, which means that the legal
right, which has been denied when I've tried to exercise it and which this committee is
supposed to have a written note of the reasons for refusal regarding, and it has not, that
there is no basis for withholding it.
The Cabinet members have confirmed that these items are under the possession of the Executive
and the legal rights of members of this Committee have been violated.
Just very quickly, I think this is the first time you've raised the issue in relation to
the Change Board and in relation to this paper.
You may have a number of wider issues that you are exploring, I'm sure you do.
I just would reiterate that the specific point you've raised in relation to the change paper
is something that we've noted and we will give you a written response to.
So that's the position regarding this item.
Okay, thank you very much.
The legal position in regard to both is identical.
Councillor Graham.
So if it applies to the one, it applies to the other.
I think you've heard that you're going to get, Councillor Graham,
you're going to get a detailed answer.
Obviously, we are expecting this to come back to us again within the next six months,
which I think is June, is something we all wish to do.
And hopefully we can resolve that before, but my thoughts would be that I don't think the situation
has changed since the Change Board was first set up, because it was set up in this way at the time.
and I don't recall what the discussion was then, but we can always check back about what was said then.
As I placed in writing to officers some weeks ago now, which is why it is very surprising that there is no answer on this,
there has been a systemic problem on both boards.
It is relevant because we are voting now to delegate this power,
and yet we don't know if we'll have any access to the documents involved,
even though the law says we have a legal right to them.
And we don't know whether the key decisions regulations are
being dealt with, because none of these items
have appeared in a forward plan, and yet they're financially
large enough to trigger that.
And I have battled now for several weeks
to try and get answers.
I have not got answers.
I've chased for answers.
I still want answers.
The chief executive has been copied into all these emails.
I was assuming that I would at least
be able to get answers in person,
and now I'm being told we'll get back to you.
I have not been got back to.
I have tried time and time again to resolve this before this meeting.
Where am I supposed to raise this if sending an email doesn't get the answer?
Councillor Graham, I appreciate your frustration.
I think we've heard from the Chief Exec on this.
We're obviously, it's going to be an action point for the meeting
and I'm prepared to talk to the Chief.
We can discuss how we handle this in future.
What I now want to do is move to the vote on this
and I can get you...
And I appreciate what you say may mean that you don't feel you can fully...
Well, I don't know, I can't anticipate what you're going to say.
Sorry, Councillor Lawless, I've finished the discussion on this now, thank you.
Okay, so the recommendation in front of us is to agree...
I'd like to raise a point of order.
Standing on 20.
Councillor Lawless, actually I'd rather you didn't raise it unless it's what is it what is
Councillor okay you're entitled to be heard what is it thank you and the
standing on 20 talks about how members should address their questions through
the chair and should respect the position of the chair and I think what
we've heard now is turned into bit of a cross -examination of counselors and in
that case Councillor Lawless I claim to be at fault but Councillor Graham will come
through the chair in future.
I just can't be lost in any way at fault because what just happened is entirely consistent
with the conventions of this council, the way these committees have operated for decades,
the way that now administration members when they are in opposition have conducted themselves
and the standing orders as Councillor Lawler should now apply mutatus mutandis to committees,
not directly and it is appropriate for that level of interchange to occur and that is
compliant with these separate orders that apply to OSE.
OK.
There you go.
Thank you both for that going down a rabbit hole,
both of you.
OK.
And enough.
I think mine is rather more serious than it's the law being
breaking.
We are now going to move to a vote, please.
All those in favor, the one thing
we're being asked to, even though we've heard everything,
is to agree the delegated authority
for the Director of Change to approve and draw down the Change Programme delivery budget.
Okay, so all those in favour please raise their hands.
That's six. Okay, all those against please raise their hands. Thank you and no abstentions. Okay,
thank you very much. Thank you very much Mrs Olsen, thank you very much committee.
Thank you.
Right, okay.
Right, the next paper we have is 24377, which is the...
Oh, excuse me, let me get the paper.
It's...
Sorry, I just looked too many bits off the script.
I wondered off it.
It's the infrastructure funding statement and this is something that comes to us annually.
We'd like a very, and hopefully there won't be too much on it because it's an annual thing
that the council has to produce.
5 Infrastructure Funding Statement 2023/24 (Paper No. 24-377)
And I'd just like one of the officers to say three key points that we need to know about
this and then we can move to questions. Thank you. My name is Fiona Cross. I'm the
information and planning obligations team manager. The report presents the infrastructure
funding statement for the financial year 2023 -24. The IFS is a statement of income allocations
already approved and expenditure from that financial year. It is a statutory requirement
for the council to publish the report by the 31st of December for the preceding financial
year and the recommendation is to approve publication of the infrastructure funding
statement on the website. Okay thank you very much. Okay questions please. Oh there was
Councillor Hedges that was a very swift hand and anyone else going to ask any questions?
Oh, sorry, let's do it like that.
Councillor Ambasch, Councillor Corner.
Okeydoke, off we go.
Councillor Hedges.
Thank you for the paper.
Paragraph 8, the table.
Just keen to understand.
Page please.
41.
41, yep.
The table under paragraph 8, total borough sill income.
Just wondered why the figure is down this year on previous years because it looks like an outlier figure. Thank you
So while there is a reduction on previous years for income of sill its
Relative as Wandsworth is still the third highest collecting authority in the country
sill is collected on commencement of development and
and any prevailing economic uncertainty impacts on starts of development.
Possible reasons include cost of living, interest rates, inflation, build costs,
which impact on buyer confidence, which then impacts on developer confidence.
But it's worth mentioning that the pipeline of secured permissions is still healthy
and the council has 8 ,000 new homes with planning permissions yet to start construction
as at the first of April 2024. Okay thank you Ms Cross and I was just going to
ask something I think this is probably the first time you is it one of the
first times you're presenting to committee? I present a committee once a
year for this particular report. Okay so
Right, okay. So please everyone be gentle.
Councillor Haynes, is that okay?
I guess it's not a microphone free answer but…
Your microphone isn't on.
Can I just ask a quick follow -up directly related to that.
You said this year that Wandsworth was the third highest charging authority.
What was the rank of Wandsworth last year and the year before?
Just so we can get a sense, because that sounds like it's trying to explain away the decrease
in the volume of receipts.
Thank you, Paul.
Let's go for the direct question.
So I only have a figure for last year when we were the top collecting authority in the
country.
So the top last year we've gone down to three this year.
Yes.
Thank you. Right.
So we've fallen absolutely and relatively.
Councillor Ambash.
Thank you. I've got one or two slightly detailed questions,
but I was wondering on the appendix, should you include Section 106 as well as CILL on the heading?
It's going to go on the website, isn't it?
Could you give us page number, please?
Was that it?
The appendix itself will go on to the website, that's true.
It will be published as presented to yourselves.
It's labeled the infrastructure funding statement and section 106 is dealt with on the final,
I believe it's three tables for, well, it's considering more.
So dealt with on page 52.
The heading because it includes both, doesn't it?
It might be included in the heading.
That's all I'm just suggesting presentation point.
Can I get onto my more substantive point?
And that is still was overspent if you add the two together by about 21 million last year
Also section 106 was 12 million under is is it is it prudent to be?
committed over expenditure of 21 million
Sorry, officers, could I have a view on who's going to...
Oh, sorry, Mrs. Mary.
I think it says that will come against future receipts.
So just asking how prudent that is.
You've ably answered your own question.
So as…
So Mrs. Mary is our Director of Finance.
I am Executive Director of Finance, yes.
So as Fiona said, there is a pipeline of developments and I think the estimates going forward are
pretty prudent relative to the number of units that are on that list.
Okay, thank you.
Cats corner.
Thank you, Chair.
Paragraph 9 on page 41 talks about the aftermath of the Council's decision in July 2023 to the new approach for any sale neighbourhood.
Could the officers please confirm roughly how much of the total sale neighbourhood income detailed on page 42 for North Battersea
came from the neighborhood that was previously known as Nine Elms.
Sorry, could you let me know which of you is going to answer that one?
I'll have to come back to you with an answer to that question
because I don't have the information with me.
Okay, thank you very much.
Okay, Councillor Fraser.
Thank you for the presentation this evening of the paper.
Just thinking about, I think some of the questions earlier, we're kind of just trying to understand
kind of the drop this year, but in terms of that, is this kind of similarity in terms
of what we're seeing elsewhere in terms of kind of development at this point in time,
thinking about comparability on a national level to Wandsworth?
Hi, Christine Cook, Head of Spatial Planning. This certainly isn't a unique Wandsworth issue.
This is an economic cycle issue.
It reflects where we are with interest rates,
with house buyer confidence, with developer confidence.
We know that we've got a healthy pipeline of sites.
We're in an unfortunate position in Wandsworth.
About a third of London boroughs can't even
meet their five -year supply as required by government.
We've got more than a five -year supply.
So it's there.
When the confidence returns, there
is a pipeline to deliver.
OK, thank you very much.
Councillor Graham, and after that I'd quite like to wind up.
Yes, quick point and then a substantive point.
The quick point is just in the recommendation.
There's a delegation to both the executive director of finance
and to you, Councillor Critchard,
to agree modifications to these statements when required.
I'm just wondering, modifications
could have very wide or very narrow scope.
What's what what how much change are we licensing?
Officers with with you, and I'm sure you would exercise your duties appropriately categories
But never how much license are we giving you by voting for this recommendation?
We have only had to republish the infrastructure funding statement on a very small number of occasions, and it is purely to reflect
differences between what we have reported this evening and what the accounts are of the Council,
because it is a factual report, so it will always reflect what is being put through the Council's accounts for that year.
That's helpful. I think that is satisfactory.
I'm happy with that.
My most substantive question is actually one for the cabinet member, not for officers.
Obviously, this administration was committed to introducing new levies on property developers
to pay for a range of things, but most specifically for law enforcement officers.
Now there is no power to introduce new levies, but you can divide up or produce new rules
to Section 106 and CIL.
Those are the only levies permitted.
I've looked through this, I can't find any law enforcement officers being paid for in
these schedules.
We've been promised papers like year after year now.
There's only one financial term of this administration left.
Can the cabinet member tell us if there will ever be law enforcement officers paid for
by levies and property developers?
Sorry, Councillor Andrew Graham, who's the cabinet member of finance.
Angela Ireland. Ireland, what am I talking about? Sorry, I do apologize. I really apologize.
In fact, you've got no idea how much I apologize. It's one of the other Councillor's names.
I'm sorry. My understanding is that is the intention,
but I'm not actually the cabinet member responsible for this.
It's either law and order or this area. That's why I'm standing.
Okay, thank you. I'm sorry, but Councillor Ireland is the cabinet
member responsible for levies. That's why this paper is here. The only levies we can
have our section 106 or so that is in her responsibility is why this paper is
at this committee there is one financial year left the budget will be set you know
in a few months and I'm sure that she's already got the papers preparing for
that will there be law enforcement officers paid for by logos on property
developers by May 20 26 as she and all the other counselors on that side of the
table promised.
Would you like me to repeat my answer?
I think you can repeat it and then we'll...
Yes, that is my understanding and the budget will be published in due course.
Okay, thank you very much. Right.
And I...
Councillor Graham.
Actually, I have a question. Now I've discovered I've got powers, which I didn't realise I had.
The one question I had was to do with the way CIL was reported in audit, because I think
we had an issue in Audit Committee over it and I think my question would be is
have we resolved the audit issue that came up about where the sill was
reported before we publish and if you don't know the immediate answer for that
very happy to take that later but I'd like to know that before I sign it off
and as would Councillor Haynes she knows yeah okay thank you very much is that
Okay, you've got the question.
Christine, Mr. Eastcote.
Yes.
We're not familiar with the audit committee paper that was presented, so we'd have to take that one away.
I'm sure that, Catherine, that the team will tell you what it is, and I suspect it's been resolved,
because it was around last year's, but I'd just like for it to be confirmed.
Thank you.
Okay, so we've now asked to agree the recommendation that we publish the report and that the Executive
Director of Finance and I republish anything, look at it and make any necessary changes.
Those in favour of that recommendation agreed?
Right, brilliant.
Agreed by everybody.
Excellent.
Thank you very much, councillors.
Okay. We now move on, about 20 minutes later than I'd hoped, to the medium -term financial
6 Medium Term Financial Strategy (Paper No. 24-378)
strategy paper. And Mrs. Merry, would you like to say a few key words about what we
need to know about this one, please? And again, for anybody watching, it's something we see
regularly. Yes, thank you chair. So this paper would usually come to the committee
cycle before this one but if you remember we delayed the paper because we
were waiting to hear the government's first budget which was published at the
end of October. Where we know what that contained, the budget is reflected in the
figures in this MTFS. The headline for that budget was good news for local
government, there was a significant increase in the level of funding specifically for local
government, a 3 .2 % real terms increase.
So that means 3 .2 % above inflation.
And that was the highest percentage of all the government departments.
So good news reflected in the paper where we know how that will be distributed.
We don't have the detail of the funding settlement and how the extra funding will be distributed.
so we've had to make some estimates.
So that is reflected in the paper throughout.
What the paper shows across the Council's four frameworks
is it shows that we have got pressures coming through
in our general fund, we've got pressures coming through
in our housing revenue account,
and we've got pressures coming through
in our dedicated schools grant.
And they're all the pressures we've spoken about
a number of times, both at this committee
and in the service committees
that consider those in detail.
We've got relatively high inflation coming through
still. We've got service demand pressures linked to a number of our statutory services
and we have got pressures that we think are going to continue into the coming year and
we've tried to forecast those as best we can. So overall we have got some significant pressures
that are coming through but fortunately we're in a position where we've got reserves behind
us that will help us get through that. We obviously need to take mitigating actions
and we are doing that across a number of our services and they are summarized in the paper.
Okay thank you very much Mrs Murray. Okay councillors,
I'm interested in anybody who has questions on this paper?
Right, let me see who I've got. I'm going to let Councillor Lee go first because we haven't heard
from her. Councillor Graham, Councillor Ambash, Councillor Lawless and Councillor Worrall.
Councillor Lee, would you like to ask a question?
I think the point I wanted to make was to draw attention to page 72 paragraph 63 where
we see the reduction in our turnover of agency staff
and social workers.
And I just wanted the chance to draw everybody's attention
to the fact that Wandsworth has been named
Supportive Social Work Employer of the Year
at the Social Work Awards 2024,
which is a really, really good news story
and shows the effort that we are putting
into our social work staff.
I don't think I really have a question. Presumably that has its benefits in terms of finance
as well Mrs. Murray if you'd like to just add that. Yeah, yeah sorry so thank you for
the statement stroke question. Yes and I know that the service are particularly delighted
that they won the award because they have put a significant amount of effort into this
over the past few years with the social worker.
They've got an academy.
They've got extra support over and above the statutory level
of support that's required for newly qualified social workers.
And we have seen a significant drop in the amount
that we are spending on agency as a result.
So the figures do show the good news coming through.
And can I just ask something else?
Is that also directly related to the work
we've had on the change program?
Or is that?
No, I'd say that was put in train a number of years ago, particularly when Anna Popovici
joined us. That was one of her key targets was to tackle what was at that point the highest
level of agency use that we'd had in the council. So I think it would be fair to say that predates
the change program.
Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. Councillor Graham.
Yes. So paragraph 12 talks about the…
Page, please.
Page 61 or 7 of the report, paragraph 12, talks about the real terms increase in core
spending power of 3 .2%.
Can officers confirm that that assumes that the administration, the 3 .2 % we may not get,
but were we to get that 3 .2%, it would assume a council tax increase of 3 % on the main rate
and 2 % on the social care precept.
Yes, that's right.
Actually, if the administration is going to stick to its policy of freezing the main rate,
then there would not be that increase.
So anything less than a full increase would reduce that percentage, yes.
Okay. Can you also confirm that there was a real terms increase in core spending last
year, including in the Council's individual core spending power following the settlement?
Yes, there was. Yes.
Okay. Can I just ask the cabinet member in that case, given that we are now happy to
say that a real terms increase in core spending power is a real terms increase.
Why the real terms increase last year was described in the press releases that she oversaw
as a real terms cut.
Because it was.
Sorry.
I can't see anything that's changed other than the government.
Sorry, makes a difference.
Cancer Island.
I don't understand the question.
Yeah, I think...
Councillor Graham...
Well, I mean, the press releases were ones that she saw.
Although we've had other press releases now go out on other things where apparently they're
sent in error.
So maybe this was another error, but it was raised last year in this committee when she
was here.
I think it wasn't raised as much.
It was raised by me in this committee last year.
OK, well, thank you.
I'm not sure that we're going to...
Given that a conservative real terms increase was described as a real terms cut, I'm assuming
into labour real terms increase will be consistently described and portrayed to residents as a
real terms cut.
Right, thank you for your observation.
Councillor Ambash, next.
I wanted to say it's good news that the Government has come up with core funding for real terms
increase and it's good news that the Government has...
Sorry, excuse me.
Councillor Graham, could you just behave yourself please and not shout.
You've already been asked to go through the chair.
I know it's exciting and I know it's unfortunate that we now no longer have a Conservative
Government, but we just, you know, some of us, you have to learn to live with it, like
the rest of us had to live with a Tory Government for ages.
Enough.
Enough.
As I was saying, it's really good that the Government has committed to multi -year settlements,
for three years I think at least.
It makes it much more possible for the council to plan strategically financially.
I've got a question for Mrs. Mary.
When I look back at last year's paper on the medium financial strategy,
in year one, we had a 27 million projected overspends
and larger figures for year two and year three.
When we compare it with this year,
we've got a 13 million projected overspend
for the next financial year,
and smaller figures than last year.
I wonder why the gap is less.
I know that we're one cycle further on.
So last year we considered this report,
I think in the September committee.
But I'm just kind of wondering if the gap is smaller,
partly because we've got a Labour government now.
But my serious question is how confident are we of the work we are doing to try and bridge
the funding gap and balance the budget by next April?
And that is directed to?
Mrs Mary and the cabinet member.
Excellent.
Thank you very much.
Okay.
Mrs Mary, choose which order you would like.
So I will take those in order.
So comparing the equivalent paper this time last year, although as you say it was September,
Actually the biggest difference is the last settlement, so the previous government's
finance settlement was as we spoke about and Councillor Graham rightly highlighted was
a real terms increase.
At that point inflation was much higher and so real terms increase meant that we did get
significantly more funding, particularly for social care.
So that has moved the figures on.
The second question about how confident are we in balancing the budget.
As I said, we are in a fortunate position that we have got reserves, and so we will be able to balance the budget for next year.
What we need to make sure we do, though, is take action to tackle the fact that there is effectively a structural funding gap,
which will only go away or get smaller if we either reduce our income or reduce our expenditure or increase our income in some way.
The savings programme, the change programme, efficiencies, additional government grant,
there are many accounts of tax income, there's lots of things we can do and we are doing
and we will continue to do in order to bridge that gap.
Thank you.
Councillor Ayles, would you like to add to that?
Thank you, Mrs Mary.
Just to repeat, we're working very hard to make sure we are required by law to publish
a balanced budget and we will do so.
I mean, we are dealing with cuts from the previous government.
I think we've lost £100 million per year in cash terms, more in real terms, 50 % cut
in government funding and increased demand.
So officers are working very hard to make sure we can balance the budget.
OK, thank you very much, Councillor Ireland.
I have Councillor Lawless next.
Thank you.
Councillor Hedges, I've got you off to Councillor Worrall.
I've got two questions, if I may.
The first one was around the point that the Council of Ireland just made around the cuts
that we've seen across the country and the LGA, Local Government Association, said that
councils across the country were feeling over £24 billion worth of spending reductions
as a result of the last government.
Can the cabinet member list some of the impact that that's had on frontline services and
our borough over the last 14 years.
And my second question was to Mrs. Mary.
There's references to the costs,
an increasing cost in temporary accommodation.
What's the council doing around trying to
reduce those costs, if anything?
And I know that the last administration failed to meet
affordable home targets,
where we failed to build an extra 4 ,000 homes.
And that is actually the number of people that we do have
currently in temporary accommodation. Okay, thank you Councilor Lawless. Right,
Councilor Ireland. Thank you for your question. I mean I can tell you what's
happened in my ward. A youth club was closed in my ward, which has had
devastation effects locally on young people and across the borough youth
facilities were closed. I mean we are taking steps to repair decades of
of neglect really. We've got a 10 -year program to improve pavements and roads and repair
all the potholes. I mean, we have increased the hours in libraries. They were cut by the
previous administration. It's just the general neglect of the borough that we are, our decade
of renewal is seeking to fix. But I think everybody can see the cuts, the devastating
effects on social care that the cuts had. And then the second part was around the
accommodation and homelessness. So thank you for the question. The
Housing Committee has talked about this recently actually so there's lots of
information that they've looked at. We've had over the past couple of years a
significant investment in homelessness prevention and homelessness temporary
accommodation officers. So the staffing has really made a big difference
actually on we've got fewer, um, fewer backlogs. We've got quicker decisions
and we're moving people through the system as quickly as we can. We're also
obviously working on increasing supply, which is either our own supplies. You
say we're building building additional homes or procuring supply, looking at
the market and trying to reduce the cost of procuring temporary
accommodation while still sticking to some of the principles that we apply in
terms of the location of temporary accommodation so keeping keeping
households as close to the boroughs as possible and also avoiding the overuse
of bed and breakfast which is something I think that Wandsworth is particularly
proud of so you know there are definitely competing demands because the
if you if you stick by those principles by definition you know you are going to
have to incur additional cost but we're trying our best to mitigate as best we
Okay, thank you.
Okay, Councillor Warrell.
Yeah, I'll assume you think.
Thank you, Chair.
I'd like to take you to page 60, paragraph 7, which is around charging.
I think what worries me about papers like this, and I understand they are financial
strategy papers, is that sometimes we have such an emphasis on numbers that we actually
forget to see the impact of programs, for example,
access to all might have on the well -being of our population
or the health of our population.
And programs like that actually reduce the demand.
I suppose my question is, and there's probably
no answer to this, and I recognize that,
is that how do we capture the value of those programs
and actually reducing demand?
Do we see any way to do it?
Because actually, there is an indirect impact
of things like that on our expenditure in accounts.
And I know the change program and other programs
actually are moving towards that.
But I was just wondering in a case like this,
can we measure it or is it just one of those things
we look at before and after?
Mrs. Murray?
Yeah.
It's actually a really good question.
And I think we need to do more actually
about social benefit.
We look at financial benefit, you're right.
But I think capturing social benefit,
which takes many different forms.
and access for all is a really, really good example of that.
I think we need to work more on that, because it's a really, really good point made.
As a follow -up, just from me then, have we got any further plan?
Yeah, I might have taken that out of Councilor Worrall's mouth.
Are there any plans around the social... I'm sure I've seen something somewhere.
So we tend to do it on specific projects or programmes where it's obvious,
but I think what we need to do is roll it out just wider where we can,
where resource allows. We capture social value really well as part of our procurement now
and that's been incredibly successful and is tangibly making a difference. So I think
we just need to take that away and see what we can do within the resources that we've
got because you're right, it's absolutely the rationale for doing some of the things
that we're doing, it's beyond the finances.
Okay, thank you Mrs. Murray and I think maybe I'm just don't know from the mood of the committee
whether when we hear more about social value and so should we probably be interested to
hear more as a group. I've got a nod, one nod from over there and several nods. Yeah.
Okay. Councillor Hedges. Thank you, Chair. One of the last paragraphs,
Power 81, we talk about the Council will continue to lobby the government about structural underfunding
of local government. Have you done that in the last three to four months and will you
be doing that and is that something that will be made public?
Yes, sorry. So we do most of our lobbying via the groups that we're members of. So London
Council is particularly good at getting across the London position and we're actively involved
in some of the discussions there.
We are also working with the LGA and other groups.
So definitely something that we continue to do
and feeding into the spending review
and the fair funding review and the business rates review.
That's all part of our kind of contribution
in making sure that our particular position
is recognized and heard.
And I'm just going to say,
has cabinet members got any further comments on that?
Also, part of the political point, I guess we liaise and work with our three fabulous
MPs and our excellent Assembly member to do the same. Thank you. Every opportunity.
Okay, thank you very much. Councillor Fraser.
Thank you. I just wanted to touch on a subject that we've not referred to already, which
which is debt levels and it's something that as a majority we now face criticism on about
the debt that we are bringing or increasing at the Council.
I just wonder if, and I don't know if this is a question for cabinet member or Ms. Merriam,
I'm happy for either of you, whoever wants to go first.
It's what we're doing to tackle debt now and moving forward into the future as well
for any debts that we have at the Council.
Can I just clarify, Councillor Fraser, do you mean debts owed to us or debt that we
may have?
Debt that we have.
Debt that we have, okay.
All right, so our current debt position is actually very good.
We've got one last tranche of debt that is due to be paid back this year for some housing
revenue account borrowing.
So at the end of this year we will have zero external debt, completely non -zero.
We do have plans as you know and we've seen that come through some of the indicators,
the potential indicators that come to this committee.
We've got plans to borrow particularly in the housing revenue account to deliver the 1000 homes and the regeneration programs.
We are, I've said this before, we're doing that in a measured way.
we're doing that in a way that maximizes the use of our internal resources to minimize the impact of
the cost of that borrowing. But ultimately we are borrowing to invest and we will have long -term
assets at the end of it and we will have the asset to use to tackle particularly in that case the
housing need that's costing us money. So there are financial benefits of borrowing beyond just
you know, having to repay the debt.
Thank you.
All right.
Last question, Councillor Graham.
Yes, Councillor Ireland referred to devastating cuts to social care.
There's been a massive increase in both funding and spending on social care over the last 14 years.
Massive, huge increase.
I simply don't understand where she's got this idea that there have been
cuts in Wandsworth to what the council has done on social care.
When she looked at any budget paper in the last decade or more, she'd know that wasn't the case.
So have you got a question?
Yes. Well, what we have got now is a situation in which the new government
has just introduced a direct cost on this council of 3 .4 million
for employers' contributions to national insurance.
We don't know whether there's actually going to be additional compensation to the council
for its direct payment costs.
So there could be a $3 .4 million cut
hidden within the real terms increase
that we're about to get.
What we do know is that all of the providers in this borough,
providers of care, contractors for the council, and others,
hundreds of them are saying that the impact of that national
insurance rise will have direct cuts for social care,
direct cuts for all sorts of things.
And I'm going to ask Mrs. Mary, and I've
this before but with the council is doing ongoing work whether she has yet been able to quantify
in terms of knowing for this MTFS what the financial impact of those employers increases
are going to be both on this council and on social care and whether we could see the cuts that we
haven't seen um which despite council island alleging it actually happening because of the
and I think we probably need to be very clear about the different...
Oh, yeah, and I'll come to you, yeah.
Also very clear about the difference between
what will happen for the directly employed staff and what may happen.
And perhaps what I would say in this position is my understanding
is we do not yet know the detail, we do not yet know,
and there is a lot of maze and suppositions coming on with this.
Mrs. Merry.
Thank you.
So, Councillor Graham's right, we've calculated, because we can, because we've got the data,
it's easier to calculate the direct cost potentially of the national insurance contribution changes
to the council is 3 .4 million.
We have had assurance through the policy statement that came out last week that there will be
funding to cover direct costs, quite whether the government will be able to match pound
for pound. I don't know, we'd have to work out what, we'd have to wait for the formula
to come out. But those costs will be covered. They've given a public sector that assurance.
What they haven't done is they haven't taken into account, as you say, the indirect costs.
And there will be indirect costs definitely on the council. Care costs are a particular
concern. We don't have the data from our contractors of exactly how much of our contract cost is
spent on staff. That isn't data that we hold or are able to get access to, but we can kind
of make some rough estimates. So this MTFS doesn't include that, you're right, it doesn't,
but when we come to set the budget in January, February, there will be a figure in there
for inflation, as there always is, and that figure will have to take into account some
assessment of what that additional cost will be because I think there will be an
additional cost. Now whether or not that's a cost that feeds through to the
figures straight away or whether that's something that we see coming through on
the retender of contracts or where we potentially extend a contract under
revised terms and conditions that's the kind of analysis that we're still doing
but you're right social care is a particular issue it's not the only area
where we think there'll be an impact and charities and the VCS sector as well
are potentially going to be impacted so we'll work that through for the next
iteration when we come through for the budget.
Councillor Ireland.
Just to clarify we've experienced increased sorry
increased demand for our services particularly in social care and with
much more complex needs which is much more expensive we did have hyper
inflation, what do we have? A decade's worth of inflation in two years and we
have got additional statutory responsibilities imposed by the
government. So the funding we get is not enough to meet this demand and we are
working hard to manage it.
Thank you.
Sorry, Councillor Graham.
It's in cuts. That's not devastating cuts at all, is it?
Councillor Graham. Excuse me. We've already had one comment about not going through the
chair, the way I operate I would normally let you say, but I was actually going to bring
excuse me somebody else in so please could you just wait if there's any further interruptions
I will need to ask you to go away for five minutes and calm down. I was going, Councillor
Graham sorry please do not go around muttering. What I was going to ask is, excuse me, cancer
Dr. Acanola, we've had some discussion about the voluntary sector as well.
I just wondered if you had anything extra to add from what Mrs. Mary had said about what we're looking at.
Yes, sure.
We have had, not just with the community sector, but also business as well.
We've had conversations with them about the budget and their expectations.
and none of them have come back to me and said that they are worried and we're just waiting to see what the detail is before we make any decisions or move forward.
Okay, thank you very much. Right, now, Councillor Graham. Now I've heard from both of them, would you like to make a comment that you were going to?
Councilor Acanoda just said that none of the organizations she's talked to are worried about the national insurance increase.
We have joint letters from the sector later in the pack which shows that where the signatories are all of the organizations that are working in our borough,
businesses that are based in our borough.
That is simply not true to say that the VCS and businesses are not worried about the impact of the national insurance rise.
They're talking about job losses, layoffs, and closures.
Would you like, sorry, Councillor, I can know who wants to say a bit more.
Happy to respond to someone that is a stickler for detail.
I'm surprised that you would suggest that I am lying when I said none of the organisations I have spoken to have said that they are worried.
OK, thank you.
I can only point out that she clearly hasn't spoken to many organisations given the number that are listed here, or any of the Council's contractors.
Councillor Graham. That may be your opinion, which we've heard. Thank you very much.
Are there, Councillor Fraser next please.
Oh yes, thank you. The question that I thought about actually, and it might well be that
it's something that you'll consider in that future budget round, but is that, will there
be linkages or are there linkages with this to the work on the change programme that we
talked about earlier and how is that factored into this or do we expect that to kind of
see those figures more in the kind of next round of the budget figures.
Thank you. Good question. So the figures here don't assume anything particularly comes out
of the change program until, effectively until we deliver. So we take quite a prudent approach
at this stage, but what we are able to do ahead of the budget is capture where there
are savings and efficiencies that have come out. So the budget will include, for instance,
the impact of the decision -making accountability tool in children's services, which has delivered
savings. We haven't put them into these figures, but we will definitely reflect those and anything
else that comes out in the meantime in the budget that we present next time. Okay, thank you very
much. Okay, we seem to have exhausted questions, so we now move on to the recommendation, which is
in power 2 to approve the medium term financial strategy for 2425 as set out in appendix A.
Those people who are in favour, please raise their hands. Six. Those who are against, please
raise their hands. And any abstentions? Four abstentions. Okay, thank you very much, councillors.
Okay, we now move on to paper 24379, which is the budget monitoring.
And I think Mrs. Merry is sitting there because it will be you again, won't it?
It will, and very, very briefly.
7 Budget Monitoring: Second Quarter 2024/25 (Paper No. 24-379)
So this is the quarter two position for this committee, finance committee, and also the
overall position for the council.
And this is an estimate of what we think the year end position will be.
The table in paragraph three on page 92 is the summary I think that you're best looking
at. What we're showing at the quarter two position is an overspend projected across
a number of services of just under five million, which with some income we're going to get
means a potential overspend overall of just over four million across the whole council.
Each of the service committees listed have had a very detailed quarter two report to
their committees, so I don't suggest we go through the detail of that now. The position
has got worse since quarter one, particularly around housing and the adult social care position
has also got worse. We, as always, are having some additional good news on Treasury, which
is helping the overall position, and I have many times mentioned that that will continue
to some extent, but we'll start to peter out, I'm sure, in the future, so we need to be
mindful of that when we look at the overall position. There are mitigating actions summarised
in this report, but as I said, each service committee has got a more detailed report.
And of course, this is a projection that is informing the figures that are going into
the MTFS and will go into the budget for the next round of committees.
Okay, thank you very much, Mrs. Murray. And I'd just remind members that the other committees
have seen their detailed budgets, but of course we get the finance budget.
Okay, so who is after questions?
You scratching your ear there, Miss?
Okay, thank you.
Councillor Peter Graham first, Councillor Ambash next.
Okay, off we go.
Thank you.
The paper is just for information, so I appreciate that as well.
I just wanted to remind the committee that members on our side were stressing this time last year,
and particularly around the budget setting, that the overspends in adults did not seem to be under control,
and that they were likely to continue, and that we felt that the level of budget allocated to adult social care
was inadequate given the pressures that we were already seeing and that did not seem to be on a trend to come down.
Now, contrary to what Councillor Arden was telling us under the last item,
she was the one and the administration were the ones telling us that a lower budget than what we're actually spending was adequate,
that she had enough resources, not that she didn't have enough resources.
And what I'd like to know is whether the administration now accepts that it was wrong about the demand in adult social care
and whether we should now trust it when it's saying it's setting adequate provision in these numbers.
I think I'm going to, yeah, Mrs. Murray first and then...
So just to give some clarity, I mean all the numbers that we use to set the budget each year, every year,
They are our best estimates at the time.
I don't go into a budget round trying to set numbers that aren't what we think are
going to happen.
I mean, it's as simple as that.
What happened, particularly this year, is the budget for this year was set before the
end of last financial year, as you know, and at the end of last financial year, the position
was worse, so we started off in a worse position than we anticipated.
And you're right, Councillor Gray, the demand has continued.
Ultimately the service user numbers, inclined numbers are relatively close to
forecast but it's actually the pressure on placement costs and market pressures
that are driving the overspend particularly in adult social care.
The same with housing, it's the placement costs that are effectively
pushing that overspend. We'll go into this budget round again setting as
realistic a budget as we can. If you remember last year we put aside four
million pounds as a service pressures contingency we have used that and that
hasn't been enough so that's something that obviously I'll be reflecting on
when I present figures for the committee to consider next time round thank you
very much council Ireland are you alright yeah very happy with that I
don't have to add thank you hold on one minute and I was just going to comment I
actually saw council Worrell was in the meeting where this was discussed
presumably because you're on adults and you confirm that this I just thought
yeah cuz I noticed you nodding sorry councillor Graham I'm disappointed
councillor Ireland doesn't want to go up to answer that and or respond to that
and we could only take silence as confirmation that she accepts that we
were right and she was wrong otherwise she'd be saying so sorry I can't
cast Graham you can assume what you wish you know what they say about she is here
to be held to account. We've got a point to her and she's refusing to respond. That's not scripted, is it?
Right, Councillor Ambash, I think you have a question.
I've got two questions to do with the health budget, interestingly,
which the projected overspend on our standards increased by about half a million to 2 .7 million
to the end of the year. It's not political in the sense like Councillor Graham's asked,
It's more are we doing the best to manage it, particularly in the way we work jointly
with the health authority.
So page 93, para 6, indicates that health are withdrawing continuing health care funding
for care packages, supporting learning disabled people.
But we, it seems to be in contradiction to the fact that we're told that we're, more
people are coming with complex needs.
So the first question is why is continuing healthcare funding being withdrawn by the
NHS and how are we negotiating with them on that?
The second question, it relates to this, maybe or other things, page 94, para 14, on the
fourth dot tells us that we've had a successful pilot with health and care integration.
So I'm wondering, as this has been successful, are we able to extend the pilot across the
whole authority or how are we able to develop the pilot further?
And will this help reduce further pressures on care budgets, including clients that may
need continuing healthcare funding, so jointly funded by us and by the health authority?
Mrs. Murray?
Thank you.
So on the continuing health care, I know that this has been a real pressure area for adults
and lots and lots of work has been going on.
Ultimately, the NHS is facing financial challenges that they are dealing with and part of their
response to that is to have a team of people that are charged effectively with getting
as efficient and effective use of their continuing health care budget.
And we are definitely seeing that, particularly in relation to people with learning difficulties.
So significant costs of health care as opposed to social care.
Ultimately, we've got a duty to support those clients with social care.
And we can't withdraw services because of a funding issue between us and the NHS.
So ultimately, we are left in a position
where we just have to make sure we absolutely work as well
as we can with the NHS.
The pilot that you referenced in paragraph 14
is a really good example of where we can and where we are.
We are having some really good outcomes.
That's specifically about hospital discharge
and working really closely with the NHS
on their hospital discharge program.
But we are continuing to work as best we
can on the continuing health care,
because that is, I think, you're right to highlight that.
That is one of the significant financial challenges that we have because often these packages can be
you know hundreds of thousands of pounds on
On one or two clients and if the NHS share of that funding goes down it really does put a you know
An additional financial cost on the council
Keep negotiating with them. I have some experience in this area and
It's really important. They take their share of the responsibility
Okay, thank you, cancer world
Just to clarify, and this was discussed in the health committee,
one of the things that was shown was that whilst the numbers coming through might not necessarily be increasing,
the range of complexity of support need of a small group of people that we are supporting has increased dramatically.
And we know that the market forces in terms of care needs are significant.
So I think we have to be really careful when we look at paragraphs like this, that it seems
that the system is being swamped by huge numbers of people.
It's not necessarily so.
It's actually acknowledging that as we see a changing population in terms of care needs,
both with learning disabilities and elderly people, that their range of needs is significantly
increasing and more complex.
And that will put a pressure on the system.
and I go back to what Councilor Graham was saying,
is that you go into a budget setting process
on the best of information that's available,
but we cannot account for people that are coming through
that for a sudden increase in numbers of people
who might be experiencing homelessness suddenly,
or have significant care needs that we cannot predict.
And I think that he's being actually unfair
on the offices in terms of some of the budget planning,
because there are certain factors in the equation that are out of the control of
anybody to predict. Okay thank you Councillor Worrall. Right Councillor
Corner actually I've quite a few from Councillor Corner I appreciate there's
quite a lot been said let me hear Councillor Corner first and then you can come back.
Thank you Chair. I don't disagree with what Councillor Worrall just said actually
that's clearly a trend in healthcare generally
in the children's directory as well.
There's a lot of advanced ways you can use
healthcare analytics these days though
to forecast potential increases in complexities
that we're undoubtedly seeing.
What plans do the council have to invest
in those assets and capabilities?
And to what extent do they feel that future capabilities
we acquire might be able to help us
forecast more effectively?
That's interesting. That almost sounds like a question for Mrs. Olsen.
Well, so we do have...
I can't remember if it's in phase one or phase two,
but there is definitely one of our lines of enquiries, exactly that.
It's using data analytics to predict in adult social care.
There are a few providers on the market
and we are definitely looking at that,
because you're right, if there's something we can do,
particularly around falls and hospital visits, et cetera.
If you bring the data together, you can definitely
get some wins on there.
So it's definitely in the program.
I will get an update of where that is
and which tranche of potential business cases
that particular intervention is in.
Thank you.
Councillor Graham.
I accept Councillor Warrell's point
that these things are difficult, and they're
being driven by stuff which makes it difficult to pin down what that demand is going to be,
partly because of court cases where there have been some extraordinary rulings on entitlement
to certain packages of care.
I'm not saying people aren't entitled to care, but some of the demands that are now being
put through as the council being legally obliged to deliver it are, I think, problematic because
the funding isn't there to match it.
Likewise, I think what we were saying was that
there's sort of known unknowns,
that the pressures that we were seeing in the run -up
didn't seem likely to abate, that this was going on.
If we were consistently overshooting
on what we thought the place was gonna be,
it looked likely that was going to continue
unless something had changed and nothing had changed.
That was our point.
And I think there is definitely stuff we can look to do.
One of the things I have raised, partly here,
partly in private, is actually the extent to which I think
some of the private providers are ripping off the taxpayer,
frankly, because they've got a monops on provision
of some of these specialist services.
The state got out of delivering that,
but now there's effectively no competition.
They can charge whatever price they like.
And I have argued that we should try to actually get back
into providing care where we can,
maybe working with other authorities,
because when you're talking about some care packages
being a million pounds for one person,
there's no way that we can't go and hire a load of staff,
even buy a facility and run it,
and not get the unit cost for an individual down on that.
And it's the regulatory barriers, I think,
that are preventing that,
that the work you have to do to satisfy
all of the potential judicial review and legal challenge
presents a really high barrier to entry,
both for other provider providers to come in,
which is why there's not ordinarily somebody else
who think, well, I can do this care,
and they set up a private company.
But the reason they're not doing it
is the same reason the council hasn't been doing it,
because there's huge upfront regulatory barrier
and potential to get taken to court.
But I think that councils are big enough to take that on,
and I think we ought to be, because this is only
getting worse.
OK, Councillor Graham, thank you for that.
And I noticed, Councillor, I mean,
perhaps we should be thinking about how we handle that as again one of the
things that we should look at. Okay so that's the revenue budget monitoring.
We've been asked to note the report for information so all happy to note it?
Agreed. Okay um Councillor Worrall are you okay and we'll say goodbye to
Councillor Worrall at this point before we move on to paper 24380.
Mrs. Mary's still in the hot seat for the Treasury Management.
Thank you, Chair. So I'll be very brief on this one.
Hopefully it's a paper that you're all getting familiar with.
8 Treasury Management Mid-Year Review 2024/25 (Paper No. 24-380)
It shows the mid -year position on our Treasury activity,
which has anything to do with our cash balances and investments.
The good news is we have had a particularly healthy year so far in terms of the returns on our investments
with an average rate of return so far this financial year of over 5%, 5 .16%.
Last year we managed to achieve 4 .8%.
Now, I've sat in this committee a few times and had to justify why I was achieving below inflation returns on the Treasury,
so I will obviously take the plaudits for massively over -achieving inflation.
But I mean this does make the point that I have tried to make a few times before.
You know, we are to some extent, this is out of our hands,
we have an absolutely proactive approach to Treasury.
We put so much effort and resource into maximizing our returns,
but ultimately we are going to be driven by bank rates and what we can do within the realms
of the risk profile that the council has. The good news is we are benefiting from the
high bank rates and you can see that in all the papers that I present at the moment. I'm
talking about high treasury income and that is helping to support the services that are
under pressure. We have got balances. Our cash balances are dropping. We expected
that to happen. We are spending money. We are building homes and investing in
in services, so our balances are going down. But ultimately, we have got, um,
forecast additional income this year, and we expect some of the good news.
What we've tended to do is try to bank and hard code in the higher interest
rates for as long as possible so we will get some of the good news continuing into the
next year and the year after and we will again feature that in the budgets that we present
in January.
Thank you Mrs Mary. Before we do that, we're being asked two things, one of which is to
note the other thing is that there's been a change to the Treasury policy. Could you
just give us a couple of words on the change please because that's what we're obviously
Yeah, sorry, I should have mentioned that. It's a very technical change to the relationship
between investments and asset value on a money market fund capital bearing account. It doesn't
change our risk profile, it just effectively reflects the fact that our investments are
at a higher level and it gives us a bit more flexibility. The challenge with having the
balances that we have is finding somewhere to put the investment effectively, so this
just helps a little bit but as I said no more risk profile attached to that
change okay thank you very much right can I see who's got any questions on
that I'm looking around before I can't Graham I know you will have I'm just
checking there isn't anybody else that's a phrase all right cancer Graham first
then cancer Fraser thank you I think mrs. Mary is fully entitled to her
plaudits and whichever expensive restaurant former councillor carpenter is
currently in, I hope he takes a moment between courses
to reflect.
The Appendix B mentions the prudential indicators.
Now, it was the case that the intention of officers
was to bring revised prudential indicators to this meeting.
I know from discussion beforehand
that there is no malice in the fact that that has been put off.
However, it does mean that the questions
that we were planning to ask around debt
have yet to be put.
Now, it was mentioned earlier in the meeting
that external debt is dropping to zero.
That was on the plans that were inherited.
Obviously, internal debt is currently being accumulated.
The only reason it's not external right now
is because it's being borrowed internally,
but they then transfer out.
Now, within the housing papers recently,
it was confirmed that there would
be a total of $668 million of new borrowing
just within the HRA over the next 10 years.
and that for the first 30 years only,
that would result in debt interest payments of 606 million.
Now obviously, that comes to, on my calculation,
1 .27 billion pounds in terms of the cost
of what the administration is wanting to take on,
but that's with 20 years missing.
So when you add on the full lifetime cost,
is it more than the sum being borrowed, and what is it?
Mrs. Murray, are you okay with that one?
Yes. So I don't have the exact figures to hand, but you're right that over 50 years
the cost of the debt is higher than the debt, but that's effectively what happens when you
borrow over a long term. So if I added up my mortgage and I added up all the interest
over the years of my mortgage, I probably wouldn't take out a mortgage because it's
a big number. But ultimately, we are buying, as I said earlier, we're buying an asset,
We are using that asset. We are avoiding temporary accommodation costs by using the asset.
We are offering social housing, subsidized accommodation to households.
And we've got an asset that lasts beyond the length of that debt.
So even if it is 50 years worth of debt, we've built a property for life.
So you're absolutely right that there is a cost of borrowing,
but we go into that conversation knowing that there is a cost of borrowing.
and we've done the maths and it's an investment that we think is worth making.
And actually, if you remember, it's an investment that the previous administration,
not to the same level, but the principles were there that borrowing to build houses
is something that this council should be doing.
Thank you very much.
Can I come back on that?
Very swiftly.
Well, I mean, if we're going to compare it to a mortgage,
a mortgage advisor would never advise someone to take out a 50 -year mortgage.
And indeed...
We don't live that long.
Well, no, it's not just because you wouldn't live that long.
If you go to a mortgage advisor and ask, because you can get up to 30 years, 28 years, certainly
you can get very easily these days.
They'll say, don't make it longer if you can afford shorter now that interest rates are
not low.
Interest rates are not low.
Yes, councils and organizations are not individuals, but the fact of the matter is taking out loans
for 50 years is not normal.
It is not something that we did before, and it will mean that the majority of that money
it will go on debt interest, not on the asset.
Okay, thank you very much, Councillor.
Mrs Mary is obviously going to reply to that.
So I can definitely reply on the length of debt and whether 50 years is a reasonable
term.
It is a reasonable term.
You know, the Public Works Loans Board, which is the government's debt agency, borrows,
lends, sorry, 50 -year terms.
The fundamental difference between a local authority borrowing to build houses and an
individual taking out mortgage is at some point, you know, I don't want to be working
anymore that I will not have an income stream to pay off the mortgage. We've got an asset
that is in perpetuity and we've got rental income streams that are to some extent guaranteed.
So you know, I don't think we're comparing the same things. I use the mortgage as an
example of how if you take a number and you times it by a number of years and add it to
the original, it will always be a bigger number. I completely accept that. But you know, we've
So, we have got guaranteed rental income streams from those properties and the net cost of
that property will be covered over the life of the asset.
Okay, thank you.
No, thank you.
Councillor Fraser was next.
Thank you very much.
And just on this, I think in terms of the change that you referenced in terms of the
policy statement, that's what's referenced in paragraph nine, isn't it, that explanation?
there. No, and that's really good. I think it's just to, it's very pedantic but it's
not got full stops, I'm just checking that that is where the sentence ends and it's
not meant to have something else. Oh, yes, subjective. Oh, subjective. That's fine,
I wasn't thinking you've subjected something else but no, no, it's good work. So, and
I just want to check that that's what it was, so thank you. Okay, thank you. Councillor
right I'll come to you in a minute is that I can ask ask what's gonna say I
was interested we said a bit more about how much we're actually gaining from
Treasury if we could do that and could you explain slightly in terms for some
of us who aren't quite as okay with the terms is roughly what that change in the
policy is going to do for us I know you did say something and the last point I'd
I'd like to just say is I hear everything everyone says about debt.
Being that my mortgage, I remember mortgage rates being about 15%,
I'm not entirely sure whether they're high or low at the moment.
But one of the things that strikes me in this discussion is we were talking earlier
about social value and something that hasn't been mentioned,
which I'd just like to say is obviously there is a big social value
for people having their own homes.
And in fact, we know that if you have your own home
and it's a secure home, and we will all know through our case work,
that actually that makes a big difference to people's life chances.
So the debt that we're taking on has other effects as well.
Sorry, that was my spiel.
Mrs. Merry, then Cancer Ireland.
I'm trying to scroll to the bit that you referenced.
So how much do we get overall from the Treasury and the change that we make, how much extra
do we hope we're going to get?
Yeah, okay.
So at the moment we are, so let me think, the Treasury, so HRAN general fund is slightly
separate but I know the general fund figure off the top of my head which is about 24 million
in a year of income that we are getting.
I wouldn't say that we get more from the change.
We get more flexibility and we get more options.
So ultimately, I think it's, I can't put a figure on it.
I can just say that it helps us to maximize returns
rather than it will generate an additional return.
Okay, thank you very much.
Councillor Ireland, you wanted to comment as well.
Just to place on record my thanks to Mrs. Mary and her team
for all your hard work on this.
I'm very pleased.
and I would like to point out that interest rates were zero or close to zero for many years during the term of the previous administration
and it's a real pity and a shame that they did not take advantage of that fact.
But we are where we are. Thank you.
Right, Councillor Graham, you had a new point on this.
Yes, well it's the board of...
Excuse me, my committee clerk is just letting me know the time.
We're coming up to, you can see the clock and I can't, we're coming up to 20 to 10.
That's fine.
The broader point here is transparency.
I accept that the reason the credentials indicators aren't here today is not deliberate.
But the fact is, those figures in the housing paper were buried in Appendix B.
We still don't have the figures.
We've put down council questions the last two meetings asking for the total figures and not got them.
If the administration say that they don't mind borrowing,
they don't mind paying more in debt interest to do it over a longer term,
and that they're going to defend that on its merits, that's fine.
They're entitled to do that.
That is their decision to do that.
But they need to be transparent about what they're doing and about what it will cost.
This is likely to be over one and a half billion just on the HRA.
When the general fund borrowing is included,
this could well be likely to be closer to two billion pounds.
I don't think many of them know that and why would they because it's never in the papers and it's not in the council answers
even when we'll ask the question if they want to justify that to
Councillors and to residents and the borough as a whole they can they should but they need to be up front and transparent
Thank you very much council Graham. Miss Mary
So can't agree I'm really sorry because I I have
attempted to answer your question.
So if you haven't felt you've got the answer.
No, no, no, what I'm saying is, so if I turn that around,
and I'll just say that all the figures
that you have been given do include
all external borrowing in the HRA.
They include all external borrowing currently planned
in the general fund as well.
I think the point you've made separately to me
is around internal borrowing and the fact that
the indicator that you have asked me about
is specifically an external borrowing indicator.
What we talked about, I think, for absolute clarity is bringing those two figures together
and presenting them in a way that shows the totality of the borrowing.
I don't have a problem with that, and I will definitely reflect that in the next iteration.
Is that all right?
I'm going to come back and speak to that.
Respect Mrs. Mary's answer, but the fact is she gave her answer earlier this year.
I think it was in the time of the budget setting when I was talking about this total figure
and the absence of total figure and we still don't have it.
We've asked two council questions, we don't have it.
The figure is not in the public domain and it should be.
That's my point.
Thank you very much.
Okay, thank you for your points.
Right, we're now in a position where we are going to look at the Treasury management report.
we've been asked to note the end of year and mid -year review and authorise the change
to the Treasury management policy which is highlighted paragraph 9 and appendix E.
Okay, so it's... Okay, those in favour, please raise their hands. We all agree it.
Okay. That's a bit of a surprise.
Okay, we're now moving on to paper 24381,
which is about our corporate complaints.
And Mr Evans and... Sorry.
Misweight.
9 Annual Corporate Complaints (Paper No. 24-381)
Misweight. If you could introduce this for us.
As ever, a very short introduction.
I have read the papers and I'm going to assure, I'm sure the rest of the committee have as
well so please bear that in mind when you're introducing.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Chair.
So this is the annual complaints report for 23 -24 and it's a report that you've seen at
this committee annually for several years.
It sets out a review of the complaints dealt with by the council as a whole, including
at the various stages of the complaints process.
And the council has a really well embedded stage complaints process that seeks to focus
on a resolution of complaints at the earliest possible stage and as close to the service
as possible, but provides for an escalation, a transparent escalation where that is possible
and where it's needed.
A key facet of our complaints process is learning from the complaints and you'll see from the
report there is lots of focus on learning that the council has taken from the various
complaints process and how that is embedded into services.
And the report sets out the changes needed to comply
with the new joint complaints handling code as well,
which is a new code that we're required to adopt
in all councils required to adopt.
Our performance relative to the Ombudsman investigator case
is also set out where we perform well against upper areas.
And I've got Katrina Waite here as well,
who helps manage the team, the complaints team.
so happy to try and tackle any questions. Thank you very much. Right, questions from
okay, that's okay, Councillor Hedges first, Councillor Lee, Councillor Corner and I see
some other hands, sorry could you, Councillor Ambasch, super, okay, Councillor Hedges first,
off you go. Thank you chair and thank you for the report, very comprehensive and also
for attaching the policy.
My question is related to the chart on page 143,
4 .20, just to make reference to the staff error slash
attitude, so in the 2022 -23 year, it's 11%,
and then in 23 -24, it goes up to 21%,
and then I looked in the appendix as well,
and too often the complaints that are upheld
are as a result of staff needing training.
I mean this to me strikes me as an issue
that needs to be addressed.
I mean is it just because of the turnover of staff
or is there a wider systemic issue here?
Thank you.
Okay, which of you, yep.
I mean, I can attempt, Chair.
I mean, it's a very broad question.
I mean, obviously the complaints apply to all services
across the council.
So indeed, where a complaint is upheld,
it often does relate to the fact that the resolution
of that complaint essentially will make sure
further training is rolled out in that service.
So I don't think it's something we can say
is a blanket issue.
I think it is service by service specific.
So we can try and get a bit more detail for that
after the committee if that would be helpful.
Yep, okay.
Councillor Lee.
Can I just come back on that point as well in that.
There's quite often elements of communications in that,
so clarity, et cetera as well,
and that's something that I think we never stop
trying to improve on.
So I think that it will be something
we continually work on across services.
Councillor Lee.
Yeah, I think that actually relates to the question I had as well, which was about some
of the lessons we've learned through the case studies.
So one talked about the use of communication, how we would written communication, and talked
about correspondence being provided in plain English.
And another was about the use of technology.
I think obviously it's so important that all of our residents can raise concerns and make
complaints if necessary and that we can make it as inclusive and accessible as possible.
So, yeah, just ask if how we are going to take those learnings forward, please.
Well, quite the central complaints team works quite closely with directorates across the
board.
We go to quarterly DMTs.
And I think in building that really strong relationship with directorates and, you know,
myself and my complaint main complaints manager will do that.
But the whole team will work and build relationships.
And that's incredibly important for helping them.
How do we handle complaints better? How do we do things better?
So I think continuing to do that is really important
and that training is a key part of what we do.
Quite often telling people if there is a problem, if there is a delay,
communicating that can help ease the concerns, certainly.
I'm just going to... Oh, sorry.
Mr Evans, then I want to try something. Mr Evans.
Sorry, I can't resist this, but the complaints team won
one of the staff awards earlier today and in recognition of the the support that they
provide across the council. Thank you and I just had a follow -up with this is about the use of
plain English. I noticed it was done in children's but I love getting things that are totally
understandable. There are nods here from everyone up you don't want to know what my parking fine
letter said which was so. Please could we look really hard at rolling out plain
English letters to everybody from all directorates? I mean I'm going to look at
my colleagues on the other side there's nodding going on from Councillor Hagee's
yes plain English. Councillor Graham isn't that something we've talked about?
We concur. Fantastic so that would be great from us as a body of council as if
that can be done. Okay, sorry. I jumped in there.
I think there is something about tone and empathy and compassion as well.
And actually those in our responses are hugely important.
And I think you're absolutely right.
It's just people want to know what's going on.
And my, sorry, getting worked up about complaints.
My experience is most people complain because actually they don't want the thing to happen again to someone else.
And we can learn and we should learn.
and we want our residents to have as good as we all want,
I think it's fair to say, as good as possible.
Sorry, stop going on like complaints, Chair.
Councilor Coroner.
Thank you, Chair.
And this is really just a follow -up inquiry
to Councillor Hedges's excellent question just now.
It's really great that there has been improvements
in a lot of places, but there are some standout figures
on that table on page 145.
The children services are doing excellently but the still children service statutory is
like down 40 % which is excellent but the housing and regeneration up 38.
Why is there such a discrepancy between directorates?
I know that the subject matter is different.
Some might be attract more complaints than others due to the nature of the subject matter
and what's being discussed and what the issues are but surely they're using the
same approaches to try and minimize complaints.
I mean on the children's one I think actually the number of children being
subject to protection orders I won't get that terminology quite right it is in
the paper that has gone down considerably in the service so actually
that's had an impact but in like housing and regeneration I think one of the
things there is actually, you know, the difficulties people are having with housing at the moment
and I think that's probably a national wide issue, the challenges that housing departments
are facing. And actually the housing ombudsman has really rebuffed itself and rebuilt itself
and is actually doing a lot more and really raising tenants' rights and awareness to
it. So we're kind of expecting those figures to go up and that's kind of across the board
as well.
Okay, thank you.
Chancellor Ambasch.
Good.
Thank you for the report.
I particularly found the appendices interesting, and I read Appendix 5, 7, and 9 very carefully.
And somehow you can look at complaints of things that have gone wrong, glass half empty,
but on the other hand, you can look at them of what could we learn from complaint.
I know we're being very positive about it.
So I want to pick out a positive, particularly from Appendix 9,
which is about learning.
But then this is page 219.
If you read right through it from end to end,
you see some interesting repeat issues.
So, the positive thing I wanted to pick out is it's really good that this is documented
in terms of what the learning is and what the management response is around the specific
individual complaint.
But what's not clear to me, where there are common issues, and there are in a number of
departments, whether there's an analysis of what the common issues are, and rather than
just responding to the individual situation,
are there some common weaknesses?
So is that analysis done?
Is it shared with DMT?
I'm very pleased to hear that you go quarterly to DMTs.
Sorry, DMT?
Management, partner management groups.
And I was wondering, I know,
and those are the statutory reporting
for children and adults,
the complaints report goes to the OSCs,
but whether it goes to the housing
and the Environment Committee, and particularly picks up some of the common issues for learning.
In terms of the common issues, I think we're still building. We're a pretty good team,
as we've got recognition, which we're really pleased about. But there's always more we
can do. I think we are now capturing monitoring complaints a lot more comprehensively. We've
got plans to roll out a case management system which will allow us to do that at a more granular
level and what you're talking about, but those conversations at DMTs are helping us identify
those themes and actually begin to address them.
I think one example in housing regeneration recently where there were calls coming through
and actually people struggling to get through to area housing teams, they've now put those
teams on net calls and actually I think 93 % are being answered within a quite short period
of time.
So that's almost an example of where we're seeing a collection of complaints or trend
that those actions are being taken.
And it's rightly obviously it's within the service, so the service will have the right
solutions to support the concerns and needs of their tenants and residents.
Thank you.
Councillor Richard Jones.
Thanks, Chair.
I've got a question about the case study on page 151.
So this was the instance with the failure to send around the reminder for the parking
permits renewal.
And there's a reference here to the number of members' inquiries generated.
I think I myself submitted about 70 in total on this.
And a big shout out to Lisa Poole, actually, who did a lot of work on this issue and was
incredibly helpful.
The case study is really helpful and revealing.
and two things jumped out at me for which I would be grateful for the officer's comments.
First was the comment that the initial feedback from the third party provider was slow and
incomplete with the implication there that actually the provider wasn't perhaps as candid
with officers and issues as it should have been and that perhaps led to some delays in
working out just how widespread the problem was.
Secondly, then, is the final point under learning where it says that in terms of future proofing,
the Council emphasized the need for a resilient permit reminder process going forwards.
My question then is, were any additional checks or have any additional checks been put in
place in this system specifically?
And also, generally, what learnings, if you like, did officers take away?
because there's always a danger with third party provided software that, and as seems
what happened in this case, was that the problem, unless a critical mass of residents had complained
and enough members had kicked up a fuss and officers hadn't identified quickly there was
a problem, the issue wouldn't have been detected. And indeed, one could say it's not always
in the immediate commercial interest of third party providers to surface these things quickly.
Okay. Oh, right. Mrs. Mary, yes, because you've got parking.
Yes, so can I take that? Because this team sits under me, and thank you for recognising
the value of Lisa Paul in particular, who I refer to as Miss Marple, because she will
just keep going until she gets the right answer. I think, so you're right to highlight the
issue with the system provider. They didn't know, effectively they didn't know there was
a gap in some of the controls that they had in place
and some of the processes.
But Lisa, Paul, and her team were dogged
in raising the issue.
As Katrina said, you can't ignore
the quantum of complaints that were coming through
and customer contacts.
We had to keep going back to them saying,
there is more to this than you are seeing.
And they kept looking.
I think it's also a testament to Lisa and the team
that actually, she's got a very good relationship
with the system provider.
She often feeds into their processes. They roll some of the controls and some of the workflows that
Her team asked for out into their wider into their wider contract. So it's definitely a
collaborative
Relationship, but she will hold them to account
We're going through a process now of upgrading the parking system
And we have definitely closed some of those those holes some of those control holes have been closed and we're constantly
learning from where we have got issues that come through and making sure that they're
fed into not just the system we've got but the system that we will procure.
Thank you. Thank you Mrs. Mary and yes I was very happy to receive about three reminders
for my parking because I missed it the year before and I got a letter and I got an email
and I was very happy that Mrs. Paul sorted that out.
Councillor Fraser.
Thank you.
I'll add as well that if we're saying nice things
about Mrs. Paul that she's been very good
at sorting out a number of mine as well.
So I'll add that in, so thank you.
And not mine personally, but for my residents.
I'll hasten to add.
I was just thinking, so it's great to see the case studies
and then the learnings and the kind of work you do there.
I'm wondering, and maybe this is something, again,
linked to Sam Olsen's change program work,
whether that then ladders up to any training needs or training
plans.
And it might not be something that you get visibility
of kind of through your work, but just interested to see
if that triggers any kind of learning plans or development
plans to then help tackle some of that stuff.
I mean, this is more on the strategy side,
but so my complaints and manager will actually
go in and talk with the senior social workers in their professional teams and actually look
at the complaints and the learning and how they integrate that into development and learning
plans as well.
So that's one way.
And the complaints team will also do face -to -face online complaints handling, which touches
on a lot of it is about how you write a letter, the tone of it, making sure you're addressing
all the points and you clarify the movement, we're not clear.
so that actually the response people are getting is comprehensive.
Yeah, happy? Thank you. OK, Councillor Lawless.
Thank you. Question for Mr Herbertson. This is very comprehensive and there's a lot of detail here
and I think it's great that we're being this transparent. We all enjoyed reading the 109 pages, I'm sure,
very thoroughly between us all. Do other councils do this?
I might defer to Ms. Waite on this but I'm fairly sure that we produce a report in the
detail which I think would be difficult to find in many other areas. Most councils, there
There is a requirement for statutory complaints on adults and children to be reported to Committee,
but in this level of detail I think we would be relatively unusual, but I've not checked
that, but maybe is there a way you could answer that?
Yeah, there are quite often are reports, but I don't think they're certainly not at this
level, in this detail.
So, the time has had, like, it's really great that we're using this much detail and being
this transparent, so thank you very much.
Thank you.
Are there any further questions? Oh, there's a further question from Councillor Fraser and then Will.
Thank you and actually it was just linked to that point because it's interesting kind of about the statutory reporting
but then kind of why does housing come here and not to housing? Is there a reason that they don't get that? We do.
So this report is a report on the operation of all the complaints processes across the council,
also housing, ECS, the whole lot.
The difference with children and adults
is there is a separate process of complaints in statute
which has to be reported to those OSCs.
So this is all the entirety of the rest essentially.
So it's a way of the committee looking at
do we have an adequate complaints process
and handling process and are we as a council
learning across the board of these complaints
and many of them are cross -cutting as well.
So it's very important.
Thank you, everyone.
Thanks very much to the team.
I would also just like to reiterate
how important it is for the public to know that they could.
It sounds awful when you complain, but as I say,
most people want us to do it in order to improve our service.
And we hope that we learn.
I wondered myself in terms of learning,
and maybe this is going to be something for WIPs
to think about is whether the councillors themselves could benefit from a session on
how we handle the different sorts of complaints because actually one of the things we do in
our role is we deal, we have to sort of help navigate through that for some of our residents
and it's quite helpful knowing exactly what it was, what it is and how it works and that's
just a potential thought before we move to, any comments from over there or is just?
We can certainly add that into the mix with the member training programme, so that's no problem. Sounds like a good idea.
Okay, thank you. Okay, and we've been asked to... Excuse me. I think we... Right, I'm going to have to find the page now because there is...
Thank you very much, Councillor Ambas. We've got two things to note. The annual complaints
report and learning and then we have to agree the new complaints policy and changes which
actually we haven't discussed. Before we do that, are there any questions on the changes?
In fact, actually what I am going to say, sorry, I hadn't realised that. Could you
just give us a quick summary of the changes, please?
The most significant one is changes to the time scales that we're required to respond
to complaints at the stage one and stage two.
And this...
Could you just elaborate a little bit?
Stage one is...
So it's stage one currently with 20 working days.
That's been moved to 10 working days.
Stage two is 25, moving to 20.
Stage one is an investigation stage and stage two is a review stage.
and we're having to comply with that because that's the local government social care ombudsman
and aligning their complaints handling code with the housing ombudsman service.
So it's something that we are required to do.
And then a follow -up from me there is I've had to do investigations myself
and 10 days can be remarkably tight, especially if people are aware.
Is there any flexibility if we talk to the resident agrees to extend that?
We need to respond within that timescale.
If it is a complex complaint, we may be able to extend it for a further 10.
But there are some stringent restrictions around that.
It can't be because someone's on holiday or lack of capacity.
There has to be a significant reason to extend it.
OK, thank you very much.
Right, so we've got recommendations on page 127 to note the complaints report and to agree
the new corporate complaints policy and the changes associated with it.
All in favour?
Agreed.
We're all agreed.
Excellent.
Thank you very much for your work and thank you for coming.
10 Debt Write Off (Paper No. 24-382)
Okay, so we are now on to item 10, which is the annual debt right of policy, which is
paper 24382. And we have Mrs. Merry and Ms. Wilson here to do a brief introduction with
key points and one of the key points is we've got a new policy as well I'm just
putting that out there already okay thank you. Thank you chair so I'm Alex
Wilson I'm the director of revenue services so this is the annual debt
report for 2023 -24 historically we bring the report to the committee each
November and it looks back at the previous financial year so this report
covers to the year to the end of March 2024. So no members are familiar with
the write -off element of the report which we are required to bring to the
committee but the report has been expanded to include some additional
background into things like external factors like the current economic
climate and its impact on the council's debt levels as well as the work that the
teams across the council do in collecting debts, including the way we engage with and
support those that are struggling to pay.
That also includes some of the wider work that we do, and I know you've heard a lot
about it in previous papers that have come to this committee on the cost of living response,
but how we work to improve, to work with residents and businesses to help improve their financial
resilience and therefore their ability to pay.
So that is all a really important part of our response to collecting debt.
As part of this report, we have also included for the committee's review a new debt management
policy and debt fairness charter.
So the policy establishes general principles of good governance to ensure consistency and
approach and draws on the really good practice we have already got that is embedded across
the Council, acknowledging that obviously there's more that we could be doing and improvements
that we could make.
It effectively sets out the tools that services can use as part of that debt management piece.
It also includes a debt fairness charter that I mentioned as part of the policy, and that
sets out the principles for how people who owe debt to the Council should be treated.
The charter itself demonstrates our commitment to treat individuals and businesses in the
borough who are struggling to pay and do so in a fair and consistent manner, and that's
very much aligned to the council's priorities as a fair and compassionate borough.
So I'm mindful, there's a lot of information in the report, but I'm happy to answer any
questions.
Okay, brilliant.
Thank you, Ms Larson.
Okay, who have I got questions from?
I have got Councillor Hedges, Councillor Lourle, Councillor Graham and Councillor Fraser.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you for the paper.
As per the budget, significant tax is being raised through the new government's first
budget in 14 years, obviously.
And as I understand from Mr Diamond, business rates for high streets had a 75 % time limited
relief during COVID, which will change post -budget to 40%.
Do you foresee this being an issue for struggling businesses in the borough in terms of having
to write off more debt in the future?
I mean, realistically, it will inevitably have an impact.
But I think the team have been working really hard in terms of improving the way that they
engage with businesses.
So one of the things that is really important, if you look at the numbers of alternative
payment arrangements we've actually got in place, they're really high and getting higher.
So where businesses engage with us and tell us that they're having issues with paying,
then we will try and help by making alternative payment arrangements.
I mean, one of the things that we do, of course, is allow sort of 12 months to pay both council
tax and business rates bills rather than the sort of statutory 10 months.
So things like that are all set to help businesses
try and manage their ongoing liabilities.
I mean, the other thing we do as well is do some work
around making sure that businesses are applying for
and getting reliefs that they're entitled to.
So things like the small business rate relief.
Okay, yep.
Councillor Lawless.
Thank you.
I think putting compassion at the heart of this
is really, really important.
And it's good to see some of the work.
Could you talk a bit more about how this policy
was going to ensure family and individuals'
personal circumstances are fully understood
and their debts managed and recovered in a fair way?
So I know I've talked a lot at this committee about things
like the low -income family tracker, and that's certainly something that is being used across
a number of our services to help inform some of the conversations that we have with households
who are struggling. Many of those are families with children. I think there's more that we
could and will be doing around the sort of data piece. So at the moment, we don't have
single view of debt. We've looked at options for that and there's a piece of work happening
at the moment around creating a data lake which will include debt data and we've had
a very recent workshop around developing the single view of debt, utilising that as a basis
for it and I think that will help pull together a lot of debt data across different council
services which will help us understand, give us a more holistic view of a household's debt
because they may owe debt to more than one council service.
So I think that will be incredibly helpful.
I think also we're sort of at the forefront of utilizing the Digital Economy Act to get
access to HMRC and DDOIP data, that's for the purposes of debt recovery.
And it's not just about identifying where somebody can pay but that won't and being
able to secure attachment of earnings and that kind of thing.
It's also about understanding more somebody's debt position so that we're able to make
more informed decision and signpost them to the help that they need.
Thank you.
Councillor Graham.
Yes, so my questions relate to table 19 which is on page 263.
We've got table 19 there looking at tenant arrears and rent arrears including 1 .3 million
written off over the last two years.
I guess my concern with this is that the increase for 23 -24 is actually larger than the increase
at the height of the pandemic.
But when we're looking at the analysis there, it mentions the pandemic and the cost of living
crisis, which the edges come off and now completely come off this year.
It doesn't mention the level of the rents themselves.
Surely the most striking difference is that on the previous columns of the graph,
you were looking at the impact of a cut in rents and then rents being flat.
Whereas in 23 -24, we had a 7 % hike in rents kick in.
That's been compounded by a 7 .7 % additional hike.
And indeed, Council Dicker Dem has confirmed his intention to put the maximum possible increase of rent on council tenants every single year.
Surely it is the administration's decision to put rents through the roof that is driving
that increase for the last year and can officers give us any indication of what the tenant
arrears are for the current year given that this is the second year of maximum possible
increases?
Sorry, one thing I would like to draw the Commission's attention to is there are, anyone
who does logic will realise just because something happens doesn't mean something happens that
it's caused the result. I do not wish you to reply. I would like the officers to
reply about it rather than you trying to lead them about why there might be a
problem. Maybe that and it may be something else. Okay and let's hear from
the officers. So thank you chair. So I'll take that just very quickly.
Obviously the rents that we charge have a direct impact on the arrears and
a rent increase will obviously increase arrears accordingly just like council tax
increases do the same. We do have significant amounts of subsidized rent.
Our rent levels are our average rents and they are a reasonable level and they
are heavily discounted relative to the private rented market. We have a big
program around ensuring that tenants, as Anik said, are claiming the benefits
that they are entitled to and maximizing the benefits and we've got our proactive
response to migration from housing benefits universal credit, which is also helping out.
The big issue, the big change I think in our approach to rents was caused by COVID and it
was the impact of a change in the way that arrears could be pursued through the courts
and we've seen a significant amount of work over the past couple of years
working closely with tenants around repayment of debt and longer payment
plans. The good news is the person that runs the rent team is Lisa Paul who also
runs the park randomly, she does parking and rents which is a very bizarre
combination but as Alex said there are so many things that that team are doing
proactively to manage and to help tenants. The best thing that any tenant
in arrears can do is contact the council because as soon as they do they will get a bespoke
service effectively that will help them to manage their debt, to reduce the worry around
their debt and to maximise their income where they can. We've got financial inclusion officers,
we've got very experienced rent collection officers and we've got income maximisation
officers and we've got tenancy support officers all helping out.
I asked two questions, I don't think, effectively, I don't think either of them were answered
there.
I'm not blaming officers in any case.
Keep going.
Yeah, I'm not blaming officers in any way for the political decision to increase tenants'
rents, and I'm sure they're doing their best to mitigate that.
But my question was why that rent increase, and particularly the fact that there's another
coming in terms of these figures is not referenced in the paper why why we've
admitted that that is a significant aspect and it will have an impact is not
listed here and what the the current figures are as in what we're
anticipating for this year given it's the second year of a big increase two
big increases in a row I acknowledge your point Councillor Graham and I don't
have the current rent figures but I'm happy to share them outside of this. Okay,
thank you very much. Okay, Claire, cancer phaser. Thank you. Almost. Just thinking
about the points that you were raising there on kind of departments working
together and just thinking about some residents who kind of have contacted me
before when they've been worried and quite often what you know and it's
happened on more than one occasion where they've said that they see the
envelopes landing and you know a lot of these things happen digitally now but
Sometimes they see the envelopes coming in,
and they kind of describe being paralyzed with fear.
And they just don't open them for fear
of what's going into them.
And just thinking about the departments working together.
And it might be something that the financial inclusion
team are doing, but just understanding if, say,
for instance, someone is in debt for or in arrears for housing,
if they then use a children's service with their little one,
and perhaps they go there, or someone overhears
a conversation and someone's saying,
I'm struggling, are those linkages made between,
and I'm thinking maybe health and education
are some of those areas where families
or might be interacting with services
where they then hearing about stress or anxiety
that's then created by what's happening at home.
That's absolutely what's happening.
So there's a lot more cross service working
around that kind of thing and referrals that come in.
So I think we've talked a lot about
the every contact counts view of working and that's absolutely what we're trying to get
to.
As I say, it can be difficult and some of the data that we've got, I think we've got
some work to do to try and improve that, but absolutely conversations take place and I'll
give you an example.
So where we have got perhaps a council tax debt and we think it is a vulnerable individual
that is known to adult social care, there will be a conversation that takes place between
the council tax team and adult social care before we take forward any formal recovery
action. So those conversations are happening.
Thank you.
Councilor Richard Jones.
It's been answered already.
It's been answered already.
Okay, Councilor Lee.
Thank you for the paper.
And I want to just reiterate what Councilor Lawless said about the compassionate nature
of this paper and how welcome that is.
I wanted to ask, so you mentioned the low income families database, and I wanted to
and what we are able to do to proactively support those families who are at risk of
going into debt but maybe haven't yet gone into debt to prevent that from happening in
the first place?
So there's some things that individual services are doing proactively.
So for example, the rent team and the council tax team use SMS messaging so that if somebody
misses a payment, it's a proactive and early intervention to reach out to them.
And part of that message is, are you struggling to pay?
If so, please contact us.
So that's sort of happening as part and parcel of what they do.
But part of using the Lyft dashboard is to be able to have access to information that
can be used to have early conversations with households.
So again, I use the lease rules rent team.
They did a piece of work around looking at,
using the LIF dashboard to identify households
that were in quite a small level of arrears,
but where we were concerned that that might start spiraling
and we proactively engaged with all of those households.
particularly where they didn't have alternative payment arrangements in place.
Part of that was firstly to see if that was something that we could organise for them,
but also to do that wider piece of work around what is your financial situation, are you
getting all of the benefits that you're entitled to, can we help signpost you to maybe debt
advice support and that kind of thing so it's a much larger sort of holistic
support package that's provided by by teams like like the financial inclusion
team in in rents but it's happening in other teams like council tax and housing
benefit overpayments they have the same sort of conversations okay right thank
you very much officers thank you miss Wilson I think you're clearly passionate
about this and I just comment that from my perspective I would like to the more
people who can avoid getting into debt the better because it's usually problematic.
Councillor Graham.
Thank you.
This one will be less contentious, you'll be pleased to know.
So, Appendix 1, this is something I raised in the pre -meet and I hope maybe we now have
a slightly firmer answer on it.
We've got, look...
Sorry, could you give us a page, please?
So, page 267, but it goes on through.
I mean, obviously, when an individual dies, they shouldn't be named, you know, and that's
the reason for debt.
But when we're talking about a language school provider or a restaurant or a food exchange or simply an address with no indication of what it was at all,
I'm not sure why companies that have not paid their tax should be protected from any reputational hit that may come from being listed in appendix and council papers that very few people are going to see anyway.
And frankly, if they haven't paid, they probably should be named and shamed over.
Now, I understand there were -
Are you asking why we don't do it?
Yeah, well, I understand from the pre -meets
that there was a general concern about GDPR.
But the fact is that these arguments are often had,
and legal advice is often overcautious.
I remember when people were caught committing
criminal acts on CCTV, and the GDPR legal advice
was that you couldn't put out footage of them,
because it would violate their individual rights under law.
It turned out that you pushed back at that legal advice,
and it collapsed, and you could.
It just seems to me an example of over cautious legal advice that is preventing us from actually
naming companies that should be named for not paying their tax.
Right officers, are you saying this is what we should be doing or do you want to know
why we aren't doing it?
That's right, that took me about 15 seconds to summarise what you said, officers.
Thank you, Chair.
So, I mean, whether we like it or not, we do need to be mindful of GDPR.
And we spoke to the team actually after the question was raised last week, and they pointed
to a very specific incident a few years ago where actually publishing the name of the
company did lead to a challenge and an issue, particularly around a conflict of interest
with the Councillor. Now I'm not suggesting for one minute that that will be something
that would continue or there would be an issue that would come up like that again, but it
has made us reflect on the fact that actually keeping that level of information out of the
paper is probably appropriate. We can share the names of the companies with members of
committee that's you know something that we could do but I'm not sure it
particularly helps what actually you often find is that counselors know which
businesses they are they tend to recognize the address so you know one of
them relates to a large department store in Clapham Junction well it doesn't take
well I'll leave it there but yeah I mean yeah I mean yeah we're cautious because
we think that's probably the best on balance that's probably the better
position to take. Okay, thank you very much. I just think it might be worth us doing it
and if it occasionally costs us something it costs us something but at least we're
exposing those that should be exposed. Councillor Graham, I can't imagine that you're actually
advocating that we should take the risk of spending the money but and the legal, possible
legal action. Well it's often the case that people can tell you that there's a outside
chance of challenge of course you anticipate that might come but if the
principle is such that is actually a good thing to do and you're running an
outside risk and occasionally if theoretically as well I'm not saying it's
not because it actually happened you might get challenged well sometimes the
council should do that and they should do the right thing and if they get
challenged they should fight their corner. I don't think it's a good thing.
Council corner. It's only from a negative thing for the businesses to a
for the council, might it actually be another tool
in the council's armory to be able to name and shame
companies after some correspondence has been had
and you've got nowhere with it?
Is it?
Well, it's something they.
In your experience, does it help recover the death?
Yeah, well, the companies, all the five instances
in the report are all where the companies have gone into liquidation. What I will say is that
there are instances we know where businesses go into liquidation and then they set up with the
same directors and that's I think the kind of instances you're talking about and we do look at
that kind of stuff and the business rates team you know utilise things like Companies House
So they're very mindful of that kind of thing happening.
We also use an insolvency practitioner to help us recover some monies.
And there's actually a – there are a number of specialist insolvency practitioners that
we would utilize if we thought we had a situation where that was happening.
They're experts in that exact, you know, instance.
So we are aware it happens and we do, you know, we do take action where we find it.
I understand that and I'm sure that does happen and but that's not quite my question.
My question is given and I know with all the examples they've gone into insolvency,
but previously in previous years when there's been long running kind of correspondence between the
council and the business about whether they have to pay, has taking it public been a tool that the
council can deploy to make it more likely in your experience for that company to miraculously find
We haven't tried it.
Right, okay.
We have dealt with that.
Okay.
We have now got in front of us two recommendations.
We are requesting to approve the debt management policy which we have seen in Appendix 4 and
and also recommended to write off the irrecoverable debts which are summarised in Table 1, Power
33 in excess of £25 ,000. Are we happy to agree the paper as a whole or are we taking
it in parts? Absolutely, that's agreed. We now move to item 11, the Wandsworth Corporate
11 Wandsworth Corporate Plan Actions and KPIs Performance Monitoring (Paper No. 24-383)
plan and the KPI performance. Mr Evans, any key things for us to note? And I would obviously
we have already talked about the customer services.
To coin a phrase given the lateness of the hour, I will refrain from a big intro. This
is the half year update on KPIs as it relates to this committee and also the
half year update on the corporate plan actions so we've covered a little bit of
this with Ms Olson earlier today with relation to her indicators thank you
okay right thank you very much questions from counselors and I'm okay
Councillor Graham first, then Councillor Ambach, Councillor Hedges and Councillor Fraser.
Thank you.
So page 327, second from the top, a number of people offered advice through the Assistance
Advice Bureau.
Obviously this is significantly under the target and also under where it was, it was
it was in the previous year.
And the council is providing a significant amount of money
to citizens of vice -fure through cost of living program
and, indeed, through some other things as well for immigration
advice and so on.
Isn't this a concern?
If we were funding extra support,
I know not all the support we're paying for is a subset of this,
but isn't it a concern that we put up extra money
and actually there's not the output there
that we were expecting.
So, thank you, Councillor Graham.
The figure on page 17 of the pack,
or the actual report, the figure,
the half year figure of 5738 is still on target
to meet the, or what we hope will be the target
at the end of the year.
I would like to reflect that citizens advice are also funded through the cost of living
fund as well for a significant amount of intervention in relation to cost of living and meeting
some of the demand there.
And I think it's fair to say we probably need to look at the combination of these figures
with that.
And you received reports from the cost of living program at this committee.
and I think it's probably an indicator we need to adapt as we as we move forward.
Okay thank you very much. Right now, Councillor Graham, we're very tight for time and the
next person on the list was Councillor Ambash.
Questions on the corporate plan actions. So first on page 313, the second to last dot on the
year update tells us about the successful Money Advice Roadshow in
Southampton. We've been talking a lot about debt and money advice. What have we
learned from the pilots and where are we going to go next in terms of future
Money Hub events? Okay, thank you. Now, before we get the answer, it's now 22 .33
and the committee has been sitting for three hours. After sitting for three hours, including
any time of the period of time the meetings may have been adjourned, we shall discuss
the remaining business. Let me have a look, write the wording. The guillotine has now
fallen and we will consider the remainder of the agenda as follows. We will continue
our debate on item 11, on this item, for up to a further ten minutes. It doesn't mean
we have to do ten minutes after which we vote on the recommendations and any
amendments. We will then vote without debate on the remaining items for
recommendation of the Executive. If either the relevant Director, the Section 151
Officer, the Head of Page Service and Monishing Officer are of the view that the
Committee must receive advice before the Committee votes then they may address
the Committee with the Chair's permission. Members may ask questions for
clarification only on any advice given by officers and not debated. Any other matters
on the agenda will be formally noted. We will now continue our discussion of the KPIs.
On a point of order, which I am entitled to be heard on as we have related.
What number? Point of order, what number?
I don't need to give the number.
On the remaining two items...
Sorry, could you just do that in order to help?
You didn't ask Councillor Lawless to do that either.
I did.
Well, he said 20, so I'll use 20 as well.
There you go.
On the remaining...
No, it's not the correct one, I'm afraid.
Well, then he's used the incorrect one and you allowed him to.
So either way, consistency means you take my point of order.
Councillor Graham, it's your...
I think it's 22, actually, but anyway, never mind.
On the point...
No, I'm going...
No.
Well, I'm entitled to a point of order and...
You are if you tell me the number, OK?
You can go away and think about the number while the officers go and ask.
They can go...
Councillor, the clock's going down.
That's wasted two minutes.
I want Councillor Ambasch's question answered first,
and if you can check out with the officer the correct number you're going to ask,
that will be fine.
Councillor Ambasch...
Did you get Councillor Ambasch's question? Thank you.
So we had some really positive feedback from the first money hub roadshow in Roehampton
and part of the process of the roadshow was to try and also engage with residents who
might want to have sort of more detailed casework approach.
So there was certainly one person who signed up for that and we'll be working with them
quite closely to help provide some detailed support around improving financial sustainability
and that kind of thing, so helping them get access to support and benefits that they aren't
currently receiving.
So that was really positive from that.
We then subsequently held a similar roadshow in Richmond and again fantastic feedback
and
So we plan to run some more
Roadshows what we might do is tailor that slightly so there we're conscious that there are a number of other
Similar events that happen
particularly ones around housing and it might be that we piggyback on on some of that so there's a lot of
time and resource that goes into running these events and a lot of different services that
attend.
So we might look to just tailor those slightly.
The other thing that we are looking to do is to try and expand that case management
approach and that we're looking at potential to take on some or expand the
current arrangement with citizens advice to maybe help us do some of that case
management. Okay thank you. I've got a second questions but I'm going to
forego it. Given the time and given that Councillor Hedges had a question.
Point of order understanding order 16B in relation to a breach of a statutory
provision.
That's exciting.
If you ask for the detail I can come back with it.
The point is, and this is a serious point, that I've placed two items on the agenda,
items 12 and 13, which will not be discussed.
The law entitles me, the Local Government Act 2000, if we need the details, Chapter
2, Part 9 FC, entitles me not just to place an item on the agenda, but to have it discussed.
Neither item will be discussed. Both items are therefore in breach of a statutory provision.
Can the Monitoring Officer confirm that the way these items have been handled is unlawful?
Would you like to go first and then I'll comment?
Of course. So, Councillor Graham is right that Wright is a member of an OSE to place
items for the Committee to consider and for it to be discussed. But that Wright is still
within the parameters of the standing orders of the council in terms of time and management
of meetings. And if, as a consequence of the way the meeting has gone, it is not possible
to discuss, I'm afraid the standing orders still are still operating.
Why does it have an item discussed and it is not discussed, that must be a breach of
the provision. The provision is that we can have items discussed.
Councillor Graham. It is not discussed. It's a clear breach.
Excuse me. I've been sharing this meeting, right. I have frequently reminded you all
about timing. I frequently just write a couple of minutes ago, you talked for two minutes
to ask a question that I could have summarised in about 30 seconds. I have reminded you throughout
about the timing. You have known I'm getting nods here. There is an element of you managing
your aspect of the meeting in order to get to the points.
I can't talk away my legal rights and the point is I reminded, I reminded the Chief
Executive when I placed these items on the agenda that this discussion was part of the
provision and asked him to remind you that that therefore meant placing the items up
the order would ensure that the statutory provisions could be met.
I understand he did so and you have chosen to place these items at the bottom of the
agenda therefore making discussion in this case impossible.
It may be your right, but that's your right under standing orders and it unfortunately has violated my legal statutory right.
You have no statutory right to do what you've done. I do have a statutory right to have these items discussed and they will not be...
Right, Councillor Graham, may I also remind you it was your side that bought in the guillotine.
Had you not had bought that guillotine in, we would obviously have had to get through the papers.
It doesn't allow you to break the law.
Sorry, Councillor Graham, may I just say something is, we always have a lot of discussion about
law breaking on my side. I am not quite aware about this.
We have now got three minutes left according to me. We had a question from Councillor Hedges.
I'm happy to pass my next question.
I wasn't quite aware that he actually had a question.
No, Councillor Fraser was next.
It took me a minute to compose myself after that,
to remind myself what the question was after that break in, whatever that was.
I think you were going to ask.
I was going to ask the question, yeah, sorry.
So mine was, I had two questions.
So one was thinking about the KPI on customer service.
Presumably that would link in with some of the work on the change program,
perhaps to kind of improvements there.
And also just thinking about, we talk about the warm home packs.
So as part of the cost of living work, are we, and the warm home packs,
could you say how that links to the warm homes approach as well?
Those were my two questions.
Ms Wilson has had to go.
Are you OK to?
That is fine.
That is it.
After that we are into voting.
I will be quick.
In terms of the customer service, the customer services and responsiveness is part of the
change programme.
Ms Wilson, before she left, she mentioned the improvements on recognising that those
indicators are when we where we want them to be. In terms of the warm packs
and we've been very popular very successful with giving out lots of warm
packs as part of things like the leaders road shows around the borough and
they're pretty very popular there and we're trying to get feedback in terms of
you know how people found them whether they've been useful for for them so in
terms of linkage with other programs perhaps I can get some detail to you
from officers after the committee. Okay, thank you very much. What do you reckon, Claire?
One minute forty five. You've got a question on this paper please, if you have one. Thank
you. My question relates to work match, which is on page 327. There's been a reduction in
the number of placements.
Can I just ask officers for a reflection
on the sectors that jobs that people are normally placed in?
My understanding is that work match placements
are often in the construction industry,
so it's quite interesting to see the reduction,
and I wondered if it was linked to potential reductions
in construction activity within the borough.
the work match services.
Unfortunately, Mr Moore, who
helps lead
the work match services is not here.
Certainly work match
has diversified into other areas
including
hospitality and all areas of
boroughs.
Yes, it was a focus on construction,
particularly in the early days work
match.
I cannot comment on the exact reason
for
fall there we can get the information from the service head Ms Daniel after the committee.
Okay thank you. I was just going to say given that we come to the end perhaps Mr Evans do you
want more information because presumably we could actually ask for that to be sent over? Yes and
perhaps it will be on the work match annual report which anyone can read but I just wondered what the
cabinet member thought about that initiative. Yeah we've gone past the time I'm sorry. Okay
Right, we've come to the end of our extra ten minutes, so we now have to move to the votes.
Could I ask a genuine question which will be of help to the committee and the thousands of people listening at home?
I do think that it is right that Councillor Graham's papers should be discussed by the committee,
obviously not tonight, but at the next meeting, so could you undertake to allow them at the next meeting?
May I? I'm going to comment. I'll comment to the whole committee about this.
I always give Councillor Graham the opportunity to talk to me about the timings for the agenda items.
This was not taken up this time. I gave you the opportunity, you did not take it up.
Councillor Critchard, you know very well that I asked for it to be higher up the order and the fact that none of that...
And you didn't discuss it with it?
Well, I tried to ring you this afternoon actually, but that doesn't matter.
It's a bit late.
None of that matters when we're talking about the breach of statutes.
Thank you. Let's move to the vote, please.
OK, so we've got paper, the KPI paper.
It's not good.
It's just like...
Enough, Councillor Corner, this has got...
We've been generally pretty good tonight, but we're getting to the TETCI phase.
It's a very quick question that will be of help to the whole committee.
We're going to do what we're supposed to do, which is take votes on everything.
So the paper we've got in front of us at the moment is paper 24383 on the KPIs.
We are asked to accept this report for information.
Happy with all that everyone?
Brilliant.
Okay.
The next report we have is paper…
Excuse me.
12 The Impact of the Autumn Budget 2024 (Paper No. 24-384)
The impact of the autumn statement paper 24384, we have various recommendations on this paper
that have been put forward. Recommendation A is to write to the Chancellor, recommendation
recommendation B is to assess impact. This is about the national insurance increase.
And 3C is review the council strategy. Can we take those altogether?
Yes. Okay. Those in favour of recommendation A, please
raise their hands. Thank you. That's four. Those against recommendation A, please raise
their hands, that's five. Those recommendation B, sorry, did we say we take them all together?
Yeah, fine, that's done. Okay, so that's sorted. So I'm afraid the executive has not been recommended
to do these things, though I'm sure they've actually certainly will do so.
We have now got 24386 which is approved for general fund.
Sorry, hang on.
385.
We were hoping to get a paper about the winter fuel payments, but we have nothing, so we
can't discuss it, I'm afraid.
13 Actions Related to Winter Fuel Payments (Paper No. 24-385)
And then the last item on the agenda is the budget variations 24386.
14 Budget Variations (Paper No. 24-386)
6. And we have asked to approve the General Fund variations. Could we agree to approve
the General Fund? We all agreed that we... Okay, those in favour of approving the General
Fund variations. Thank you. That's five. Those against? Four abstentions, I guess. Thank
you very much, councillors. Thank you, officers. It's been a long session.
- 24-375 - Report, opens in new tab
- 24-375 - Appendix 1, opens in new tab
- 24-376 - Report and Appendix 1, opens in new tab
- 24-376 - Appendix 2, opens in new tab
- 24-377 - Report, opens in new tab
- 24-377 - Appendix 1, opens in new tab
- 24-378 - Report and Appendix A, opens in new tab
- 24-379 - Report and Appendix A, opens in new tab
- 24-380 - Report and Appendices A to D, opens in new tab
- 24-380 - Appendix E, opens in new tab
- 24-381 - Report, opens in new tab
- 24-381 - Appendix 1, opens in new tab
- 24-381 - Appendix 2, opens in new tab
- 24-381 - Appendix 3, opens in new tab
- 24-381 - Appendix 4, opens in new tab
- 24-381 - Appendix 5, opens in new tab
- 24-381 - Appendix 6, opens in new tab
- 24-381 - Appendix 7, opens in new tab
- 24-381 - Appendix 8, opens in new tab
- 24-381 - Appendix 9, opens in new tab
- 24-382 - Report and Appendices 1 to 3, opens in new tab
- 24-382 - Appendix 4, opens in new tab
- 24-382 - Appendix 5, opens in new tab
- 24-383 - Report and Appendix A, opens in new tab
- 24-384 - Report, opens in new tab
- 24-384 - Appendix A1, opens in new tab
- 24-384 - Appendix A2, opens in new tab
- 24-384 - Appendix B1, opens in new tab
- 24-384 - Appendix B2, opens in new tab
- 24-384 - Appendix B3, opens in new tab
- 24-384 - Appendix B4, opens in new tab
- 24-386 - Report, opens in new tab