Agenda and minutes

(Assistant to the Chief Executive)  To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

The Panel noted that there were no substitute members.

To confirm the minutes of the meetings of the Panels held on 31^st March 2009.

The notes from the previous meeting held on 31 March 2009 were agreed.

(Chairman/Lead Officer) The Overview and Scrutiny Committee has agreed the Terms of Reference of this Panel and associated Work Programme. This is attached. The Panel are asked at each meeting to review both documents.

The Terms of Reference and Work Programme were noted.

(Deputy Chief Executive) to consider the attached report.

The Panel received a report on the Council’s consultation plan for 2009/10 and the register for 2008/09.  Valerie Loftis, the Market Research Consultation Officer informed the Panel that this summarised the consultations undertaken by the council. All consultation and engagement exercises undertaken by and on behalf of the council were required to comply with the provisions of the Public Consultation and Engagement Strategy and to this end a revised consultation guide was produced in order to standardise consultation approaches and methodologies wherever possible.

The Panel noted that all dates shown in the plan were best estimates or in some cases had not yet been decided. There were a number of very small scale ad-hoc surveys carried out such as ‘Housing Interview Exit Surveys’ and ‘Safer Communities Exit Surveys’ which had not been reported on.

Probably the most significant however, with regard to size and impact on the community, was the major work which had been ongoing around the Development Plan Provision for Gypsies and Travellers.

Mrs Loftis informed the Panel that under ref.5091, ‘Debden Community Consultation event’ under the method section there was a typo and it should read as ‘events will also be held in Sheering, Roydon, Waltham Abbey and North Weald.’

The meeting noted that the Council was currently carrying out Staff Focus Groups for a Gender Equalities Survey; these focus groups for both male and female staff would help set an appropriate questionnaire to all staff during the summer. A pilot survey was carried out last year with the training course, ‘Springboard’ for women group.

The Consultation Register incorporated the results of consultation exercises undertaken during the proceeding 12 months and gave details as to the purpose, the start and finish dates, and the service area that carried out the survey. Also, where the results were published and some key findings.

The most significant consultation in terms of size and impact were:

·         The Big Youth Debate  (ref 6081);

·         Loughton Broadway Regeneration (ref 6083);

·         Waste and Recycling Service  (ref 8082);

·         The Place Survey (ref 9085);  and

·         Call for Sites and the Gypsy and Travellers Development of Options.

The Gypsy and Travellers Development of Options Survey and Call for Sites were clearly the most significant area for consultation in 2008 and a great deal of work was still being carried out on the Local Development Framework (LDF). The survey was principally carried out by Planning Services with support from Public Relations in setting up an online questionnaire and the use of a software consultant to handle and analyse the huge response to both the paper based and online consultation.

Councillor Mrs Wagland commented that she had not seen anything in the report about the Statement of Community Involvement. In addition, Councillor Mrs Wagland commented that the results of the Gender Equality Scheme did not square with the feedback she had received from the ‘Springboard’ exercise. She also thought it would be useful to have as many figures on this annual report as possible, such as the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

(Director of Finance and ICT) To consider the attached report.

The Assistant Director Accountancy, Peter Maddock introduced the report on the provisional Revenue Outturn for 2008/09. The Panel noted that the final closing balance on 31 March 2009 was £8.19million.

The Continuing Services Budget (CSB) expenditure was £509,000 below the original estimate and £187,000 below the revised. In common with recent years salary savings made up a large proportion of this saving.  The District Development Fund (DDF) showed an under spend of £169,000 net, even taking into account a £280,000 carry forward. The Housing Revenue Account (HRA) balance was still in excess of £6 million and fairly healthy.

            RESOLVED:

(1)        That the overall 2008/09 revenue out-turn for the General Fund and Housing Revenue Account be noted; and

(2)        That as detailed, the carry forward of £280,000 District Development Fund expenditure be noted.

(Director of Finance and ICT) to consider the attached report.

The Assistant Director Accountancy, Peter Maddock introduced the report on the Provisional Capital Outturn 2008/09. This report set out the Council’s capital programme for 2008/09, in terms of expenditure and financing and compared the actual outturn figures with the revised estimates. The revised estimates were those agreed at Cabinet on 5 February 2009. 

The overall position in 2008/09 was that a total of £10,474,000 was spent on capital schemes, compared to a revised estimate of £12,900,000. This represented an underspend of £2,426,000 or 19% on the Council’s revised capital budget.  The underspend was evenly balanced between General Fund and the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) schemes. Expenditure on General Fund projects totalled £3,801,000, which was £892,000 or 19% less than anticipated, whilst expenditure on the HRA totalled £6,673,000, which was £1,534,000 and again 19% less than anticipated.

The majority of the underspends on the General Fund and HRA schemes relate to slippage of expenditure and it is proposed that this is re-phased into 2009/10.The three General Fund projects which incurred the greatest slippage were Bobbingworth Tip, the Civic Office Works and the Children’s Play Programme.

In addition to the above, the General Capital Contingency was not fully utilised in 2008/09 and it was suggested that the full unallocated sum of £177,000 be carried forward to cover unforeseen capital expenditure requirements in 2009/10.

            RESOLVED:

            That the provisional outturn report for 2008/09 be noted.

(Deputy Chief Executive) To consider the attached report.

The Performance Improvement Manager, Mr S Tautz, introduced the key performance Indicators (KPI) relevant to the Council’s core business and its corporate priorities adopted by the Cabinet each year.

He started by drawing the Panel’s attention to an error in the report. Paragraph 11(c) should read: “6 (54.5%) of those (11) that did not achieve the performance target for 2008/09 were within 5% of the target for the year.”

The Panel were asked to consider the Council’s performance for 2008/09 in relation to the Key Performance Indicators adopted for the year. Not all the indicators had finished outcomes so could not be reported as yet. So far they had achieved 57.7% success for the year. The introduction of the new National Indicators set from 1^st April 2009 had meant that it was difficult to assess overall levels of KPI improvement between 2007/08 and 2008/09.

The Panel noted the KPIs for 2008/09 was as follows:

(a)          15 (44.1%) achieved the performance target for 2008/09;

(b)          11 (32.3%) did not achieve the performance target for 2008/09;

(c)          6 (54.5%%) of those (11) that did not achieve the performance target for 2008/09 were within 5% of the target for the year;

(d)          6 (17.6%) cannot currently be reported;

(e)          1 (2.9%) was subject to a revised National Indicator definition that removed the Council’s responsibility to report; and

(f)            1 (2.9%) secured no progress as a result of competing priorities.

Councillor Watts asked when would the 2010/11 KPIs be agreed. He was advised that it was brought forward to March 2010 prior to the beginning of the new municipal year, when they would be looking to identify targets based on third quarter data.

Councillor Whitehouse commented that the Council was some way off the 75% originally proposed. Was there any common factor on the missed targets or were these individual problems. The Deputy Chief Executive, Derek Macnab said it was difficult to identify any particular pattern although the main area of impact had been identified in the Value for Money Review which had also identified that other authorities had taken a more flexible and creative approach to the way data was recorded. We have however, been steady over the year. Councillor Whitehouse asked how we could move on from being just steady. Mr Macnab said the council needed to reinvest in poorly performing services.

Councillor Whitbread added that any money saved would be needed to keep council tax down. Mr Macnab said that the council needed to be more robust in its improvement plans. Councillor Whitehouse said that this committee had expressed doubts whether this was a sensible target to set at the time. Councillor Whitbread believed that the council needed to aim high to achieve the best it could. They had to work for a better performance. Councillor Whitehouse questioned whether the council should just aim high but ignore resource issues. Councillor Whitbread said that they were not ignoring them; but it must use its resources to its best advantage.

NI 57a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

(Deputy Chief executive) To consider the attached report.

The Performance Improvement Manager, Mr S Tautz, introduced the report on the Council Plan for 2006 to 2010 for the period to 31 March 2009.  This is the authority’s key strategic planning document, setting out service delivery priorities over a four year period, with strategic themes matching those set out in the Community Strategy for the district. This was the monitoring report for the third year of a four year monitoring plan. The Panel noted that the figures were in draft and that the figures in the progress report for 31 March 2009, on IP5 (page 123 of the agenda) were out of date. Up to date figures were to be found in paragraph 11 of page 49 of the agenda.

The Panel noted that:

• the progress report for HN5, for 31March 2009 should say 28 weeks and not 17 weeks.
• HN6, progress report for March 2009 said that a review on street cleansing was currently underway, looking for better Value for Money and better performance.
• there was an article in the Members Bulletin associated with HN7 (problems associated with vehicle parking) saying the Epping review was starting, with a view to implementation towards the end of the year. Councillor Mrs Wagland asked if this meant that people would get the consultation papers while on holiday. She was told that this may be but it had to be done as it had been delayed. It was agreed that the consultation period would be extended from 21 days to 28 days.
• under SC2 ‘overall level of recorded crime in the district’, the Neighbourhood Action Panels in the district were of varying effectiveness.
• on FL1 ‘leisure management contract’, that SLM continued to be pressed for information. Noted it was a national problem with SLM who were overextended with contracts.
• the local plan was getting further out of date, but officers were working on this.

RESOLVED:

(1)  That performance against  the objectives, targets and actions contained in the Council Plan for 2006 to 2010, for the period to 31 March 2009 be noted; and

(2)  that the consultation period for HN7 be extended from 21 days to 28 days.

To consider which reports are ready to be submitted to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its next meeting.

To report back to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee with a general update on the reports considered at this meeting.

To consider the forward programme of meeting dates for the Panel.

Meeting are scheduled for:

25 August 2009

17 November 2009

12 January 2010

23 February 2010 and

22 April 2010.

The schedule for future meetings were noted.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive). To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a personal or a prejudicial interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 11 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a personal and prejudicial interest in any matter before an OS Committee which relates to a decision of or action by another Committee or Sub Committee of the Council, a Joint Committee or Joint Sub Committee in which the Council is involved and of which the Councillor is also a member.

Paragraph 11 does not refer to Cabinet decisions or attendance at an OS meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such a matter.

No declarations of interest were made.