Agenda item

(Technology & Support Services Portfolio Holder) To consider the attached report (C-032-2015/16).

(1)        That a sum of £185,000 be included in the Capital Programme for 2016/17 for the following ICT projects:

            (a)        replacement of security devices used for authentication of electronic          payment system transactions;

            (b)        upgrade to the Accountancy General Ledger system;

            (c)        Storage Solution for public facing servers; and

            (d)        the implementation of other projects identified from the ICT Strategy to       improve productivity, efficiency or maintain service.

The Portfolio Holder for Technology & Support Services presented a report on the capital requirements for ICT projects in 2016/17.

The Portfolio Holder reminded the Cabinet that, following the revision of the Capital Programme, all proposed ICT projects were considered on an annual basis and funding made available when required. There were three projects considered priority ICT strategy projects:

            (i)         replacement of security devices used for authentication of electronic          payment system transactions;

            (ii)        upgrade to the Accountancy General Ledger system; and

            (iii)       Storage Solution for public facing servers.

The estimated project costs for the financial year 2016/17 for these three projects were £65,000.

The Portfolio Holder stated that there were a number of other projects identified from the ICT Strategy which would improve productivity, efficiency or maintain services. It was estimated that these other projects would cost £120,000, giving a total of £185,000 required to progress and implement all of the planned projects.

The Portfolio Holder reported that funding relating to the Corporate Flexible Working project had been excluded at the current time. The Council was currently looking to recruit a Head of Transformation to facilitate the progression of this scheme. Therefore, it was felt sensible to withhold any request for funding for this specific project until such time as recommendations were forthcoming.

When questioned by the Members present, the Assistant Director of Resources (ICT & Facilities Management) stated that Tape Drives were still the most economical solution for the back up of the Council’s data. Funding for security enhancements had been split into two separate items to make it clearer that a considerable portion of this work was to aid integration with the third party systems that the Council used. The Council would need to embrace cloud computing in the next few years, and all of the Council’s third party systems used the relevant version to ensure that they were properly supported by the suppliers.

One of the local Members highlighted that there had been some recent issues with accessing the Council’s website and hoped that the proposed investment would improve access for residents. The Assistant Director stated that the performance indicators showed that the website was generally running well, with no broken links and 90% availability. Members were requested to inform the Assistant Director of any particular problems encountered with the Council’s website that they were aware of or made aware of by residents.

Decision:

(1)        That a sum of £185,000 be included in the Capital Programme for 2016/17 for the following ICT projects:

            (a)        replacement of security devices used for authentication of electronic          payment system transactions;

            (b)        upgrade to the Accountancy General Ledger system;

            (c)        Storage Solution for public facing servers; and

            (d)        the implementation of other projects identified from the ICT Strategy to       improve productivity, efficiency or maintain service.

Reasons for Decision:

These ICT projects were necessary to maintain the current ICT infrastructure, improve business continuity within the Council and allow staff to fully utilise the benefits available from technology.

Other Options Considered and Rejected:

To refuse the critical projects identified would impact on the reliability of the ICT infrastructure and could result in the inability of residents to make payments to the Council. To refuse funding for the other projects would impact on the implementation of the ICT Strategy.