Agenda item

To receive the Portfolio Holder Annual Report from the Portfolio Holder for Corporate Management, Councillor Phil Mould.

 

(Questions attached verbal report to follow).

Further to consideration of the Portfolio Holder for Corporate Management’s written report at the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 14th August 2012 and Members’ agreed questions that were based on the report, Portfolio Holder Councillor Phil Mould provided the following responses as part of his annual report.

 

1)         Please could you outline what you consider to be:

 

            a)  The successes within the remit of your Portfolio

 

Councillor Mould advised Members that as he had only been in post for a relatively short period it was difficult to highlight any particular successes. However, he praised the Executive Director for Finance and Resources and her team for the prompt and professional way in which they responded to the changes to the Budget.

 

            b)  Areas of concern within the remit of your Portfolio

 

Councillor Mould was concerned with likely further reductions to the Council’s budget in the coming years together with the impact that the changes to the welfare system would have on the Council.  It was anticipated that this would be particularly difficult for housing benefit claimants who were not used to having full control of their own finances. Concern was raised that the Council’s own finances could potentially be affected by this.

 

It was commented, however, that providing claimants with the opportunity to take responsibility for their own finances could empower them. Members also discussed ways in which the Council could provide support by raising awareness of the changes as soon as possible.

 

2)         What are your long-term plants for:

 

            a)  The REDI Centre

 

Councillor Mould informed Members that it was imperative for new occupants to be found for the building to help make it a sustainable asset. The Centre had remained empty since December 2010. Members were informed that potential tenants had been identified and had been made aware of its available.

 

Reference was made to the Localism Act, with Members being made aware that while no formal legislation had yet been enacted, if an approach was made from the voluntary sector to purchase an asset maintained by the Council then they would be given a six month window to raise capital and bid for the property.

 

It was confirmed that through the agreement with Property Services at Worcestershire County Council (WCC), regular security checks on both the exterior and interior of the building were made.

 

Members also discussed the future plans for Threadneedle House and the remedial work which needed to be completed.  Officers agreed to provide Members with a briefing paper on the currently position with this building.

 

            b)  The Anchorage

 

It was confirmed that the Anchorage was in a similar position as the REDI Centre, although the position was slightly more complicated due to its position within the grounds of the Sandycroft Centre and the involvement of a third party.  It was hoped that the issues which had arisen from this would be resolved shortly. 

 

3)         How will the implementation of new ICT systems at the Council impact on the services delivered to customers?

 

Councillor Mould informed Members that Bromsgrove District Council’s (BDC) and Redditch Borough Council’s IT systems where not fully compatible. BDC had more recently invested in its system and the Council now needed to bring its system up to a similar level.

 

Members were provided with further details of the work that was being carried out and confirmed that currently there was the skill base and budget within the team to cover this work.  The Committee were informed that many of the problems which Members had recently experienced were due largely to this work, however the problems were expected to reduce as the work progressed. It was anticipated that this would be completed within the next 12 months. 

 

The benefits of a joint system would mean staff could work more efficiently and easily across both councils, together with enabling the sharing of data and cost savings, all of which were an important step towards the successful implementation of shared services.

 

4)         Following transformation of the services within your remit:

 

            a)  How will the Council deliver solutions for customers?

 

The Committee heard that each area was different and therefore had its own individual problems.  However, an example was provided of how the transformation process had improved the way in which benefits payment process had been streamlined and simplified for both staff and applicants.

 

            b)  Where will the funding for these solutions be obtained from?

 

Members were informed that savings were made through cutting out waste and the savings that were made funded the changes in processes.

 

            c)  Will any cuts have to be made?

 

It was difficult to provide a response to this question as each service was different.  Some services were particularly labour intensive and every effort was made to redeploy staff where possible.

 

The Committee heard that embarking on shared services with BDC was crucial to preserving services and to making necessary financial savings.  In respect of Transformation, the outcomes for the areas which had gone through the process so far have been positive with improved and more efficient services being provided.

 

5)         How is the Council mitigating the risks involved in reducing the budget available for maintenance of Council properties?

 

This was being achieved through prioritisation which only involved undertaking maintenance that was absolutely necessary.

 

            a)  What are the current methods used for assessing these risks?

 

Health and safety issues were dealt with initially followed by the traditional system of identifying high, medium and low priorities.  Members discussed the reduction in the budget for maintenance and whether this was sufficient for the work that would need to be carried out in the forthcoming year.

 

6)         Does the Council undertake an annual inventory of telephone, ICT systems and PAT testing?

 

The Committee heard that the phones, which are part of a recent new system, were all acquired through IT in order to be compatible with other Council IT equipment.   

 

            a)  If so how does this work?

 

All the equipment is logged on an inventory through the IT system. This inventory also included licenses for software. Property services have a register of equipment with detailing the regularity of PAT testing needed, i.e. annually, quarterly.

 

The Committee discussed how each individual item was recorded for PAT testing purposes and in particular the equipment that was allocated to Councillors, as it was apparent that this equipment had not been PAT tested.  Officers confirmed the Council had a robust service level agreement with WCC and agreed to provide Members with a briefing paper to clarify this issue.

 

            b)  What are the current figures for use of Redditch Borough Council telephone and ICT equipment?

 

Current usage figures were not known and would be very difficult to monitor, particularly as the systems were now used across both BDC and RBC. 

 

Councillor Mould thanked the Head of Business Transformation for her support in preparing the responses for the meeting and for the continued work carried out in respect of the transformation process.

 

On behalf of the Committee, the Chair thanked the Portfolio Holder for his report.

 

RESOLVED that

 

the report be noted.