Agenda and minutes

To receive a presentation on the Equality Framework for Local Government.

The Panel welcomed Mr Stuart Elrick, who was working on behalf of the East of England Regional Assembly to provide support to local authorities in securing improvement against the requirements of the Equality Framework for Local Government. The Panel noted that the Equality Standard for Local Government (ESLG) had been established in 2001 as a performance and improvement framework to enable local authorities to mainstream equality but had since been revised to take into account feedback received and that the Equality Framework for Local Government (EFLG) replaced the previous ESLG in April 2009.

Members were advised that the EFLG had been designed to build on existing work by:

• Providing a simpler framework, reducing the amount of process and introducing a more outcome focused approach;
• Encouraging the use of the Framework so that it was proportional and relevant to the needs and circumstances of the authority;
• Simplifying the self assessment process backed by peer challenge;
• Integrating the public duties on race, disability and gender and providing a common performance framework for compliance;
• Enabling local authorities and their local strategic partners to identify and analyse equality priorities for inclusion in their Local Area Agreements (LAAs) and complementing the new performance assessment framework and the Comprehensive Area Assessment which took effect  from April 2009;
• Allowing authorities to ‘migrate’ their achievements under the original Equality Standard.

The Council had set a target to achieve Level 2 (achieving) of the EFLG by the end of 2009/10, performance against which was measured by a Local Performance Indicator (LPI 01).

Mr Elrick said that councils should be seeking to secure ‘equality outcomes’ as part of everything they do, devising strategies and using the scrutiny process to make a difference. Equality and diversity was not about treating everybody the same, or providing an extra service for minorities or giving them more rights than others.  It was about getting to know and understand the needs and aspirations of all communities within the district; getting to know and understand the needs and aspirations of the people to whom the council deliver’s services; the Council should be meeting the needs and aspirations through working with them and its partners. The Council should have a workforce profile that represented its communities and service users; and should enable its employees to feel valued, empowered and supported in delivering the services.

The Council should be publicising the good work it does, which the Audit Commission had already recognised using the website to inform the public and other authorities.

Mr Elrick said the Council would also need to collect data and intelligence on its communities and to share this within the authority and with the Local Strategic Partnership and other stakeholders. Members were a good source of intelligence in this respect as they possessed local information about need within their individual wards.  Information should also be fed in from outside sources such as the Primary Care Trust, via the Local Development Framework Consultation and the Fire and Rescue Services. This type of data would be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

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

The Panel noted that Councillor D Wixley was substituting for Councillor K Angold-Stephens.

(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.

To consider and agree the notes from the Panel held on 12 January 2010.

The minutes form the previous meeting held on 12 January 2010 were agreed subject to the addition of Councillor Mohindra’s apologies being added to the minutes.

(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 Panel noted that item 5 on the work programme, Essex Local Area Agreement, that the targets were contained in National and Local Indicators and it would be therefore better to have the report on an annual basis, when the country wide base targets are reviewed, instead of a quarterly one.

They also noted that a follow up report for item 15, Customer Transformation, would be brought to the  April meeting.

(Deputy Chief Executive) To consider the attached report.

Councillor R Bassett, the Performance Management Portfolio Holder, introduced the latest report on the development of the new Corporate Plan. They had tightened up work plans and objectives and had now got just twelve objectives for the plan and this had been broken down into sub-objectives, this was now more complete than the last time it was reviewed. It has now been circulated to Service Directors to enable an early start for next year. Ian Davidson from the Audit Commission has also seen it and said that it looked a lot better than the original draft.

It was noted that a lot of work had been done in a short period of time and officers were thanked for this. This document now referenced other documents; they in turn should be referenced back. It should be a joined up process.

As mission statements, the five overall aims were considered valid as they were backed up and supported by the twelve corresponding objectives. Some of the Panel thought that the five aims should be taken out and the twelve objectives used instead.  It was pointed out that the five aims were not objectives but statements as to what the Council were striving to achieve in general terms over the four year period of the plan. The twelve objectives pulled this all together.

The Panel noted that the LSP were in the middle of a consultation on the new Sustainable Community Strategy and that would eventually feed into the document as well.  The plans were a work in progress and this should not be considered to the final version.

At the April meeting of this Panel they would like a schedule and timetable for the 2011/12 to 2014/15 document and how the various strategies would slot into this. It would also make sense to refresh the medium term aims each year and not re-write them. They noted that there was a commitment for an annual refresh factored into the plans for the document.

The Panel would also like the ‘Key Objectives’ to link up logically with the ‘Actions’ and the ‘Targets and how they are measured’. As presently illustrated, they did not quite link together, although it was accepted that this was a formatting issue with the production of the document and that the linkages would be explicit in the finalised version.

The Panel would also like the twelve objectives to be looked at and set into a priority order. The Performance management Portfolio Holder agreed to take this issue on board when reporting the proposed objectives to the cabinet in April 2010 for final adoption.

            RESOLVED:

(1)               That the proposed structure and format of the Council’s new Corporate Plan for the period from 2010/11 to 2013/14 be agreed; and

(2)               That the Council’s proposed Medium Term Aims for 2010/11 to 2013/14, and the draft key Objectives for 2010/11 be agreed subject to the comments made.

(3)               That the twelve objectives should be put into priority order.

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

The Director of Finance and ICT, Bob Palmer, introduced the report on the Quarterly Financial Monitoring. The report provided a comparison between the original profiled budgets for the period ended 31 December 2009 and the actual expenditure or income as applicable.

The Panel noted that:

• That there was likely to be little change between the originally expected use of General Fund Balances of £704,000 and the revised projection of £837,000;
• The salary schedule was shown on a Directorate basis and that there was a salary underspend of half a million pounds. The most significant underspend was in planning services;
• The pay award was lower than anticipated;
• Building Control was still suffering;
• Investment income – the bank rate was still at 0.5% and it will not do as well as in previous years;
• Recoveries from the Heritable Bank would be at around 85p in the pound;
• Currently MOTs yield a surplus to the general fund of a little over £50,000;
• The Housing repair fund was running at an underspend at present;

The Panel then went through the figures in detail and thanked officers for the work done on the presentations by Mr Maddock who had made it easier to read and understand.

            RESOLVED:

That the revenue and capital financial monitoring report for the third quarter of 2009/10 be noted.

(Deputy Chief Executive) To consider the attached report.

The Performance Improvement Manager, Mr S Tautz informed the Panel that the first part of the report was to review the performance of the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the first nine months for 2009/10. The second part of the report was to review the KPIs for 2010/11 with a view to adoption of relevant indicators and targets reflecting the Council’s core business and its corporate priorities. The Panel also noted noted details of the linkages between the proposed KPIs for 2010/11 and the Council’s draft Medium Term Aims for 2010/11 to 2013/14.

The Panel went through the indicators individually, noting:

NI014 Reducing Avoidable Contact - noted that no target was required to be set for this indicator.

LPI 01 Level of the Equality Framework for Local Government to which the Council conforms – a ‘peer challenge’ of the Council’s equality performance was to be undertaken in early 2010 and it was considered appropriate to retain the Level 2 target for 2010/11, [pending the outcome of this exercise.

LPI 50 Number of elderly people participating in physical activity – the panel noted the low target was due to it not including some of the programmes when it first started. The target will be revised next year.

LPI28 Number of working days lost due to sickness absence – noted that each quarterly figure had decreased and it was heading in the right direction.

LPI 40 Occupation rate of commercial and industrial property – asked if the figures were the number of occupancy days or just a snapshot as at 31 March. Officers were unsure and would find out for the Panel and report back.

NI192 Percentage of household waste sent for reuse, re-cycling and composting – asked why the performance levels were different on Mondays, the Panel was told that Mondays included collections from flats etc. and Mondays were always 3 to 4% down. The full reasons were not completely clear.

NI195 (a) Improved street and environmental cleanliness (Litter) – noted it was proving stubborn to get the figures below 11% / 10.5%. 10% was average for District Councils. Initiatives were being taken forward and a public education exercise was being undertaken.

NI195 (b) Improved street and environmental cleanliness (Detritus) – getting to the target was difficult because of the recent weather.

NI180 Number of changes of circumstances which affect customers ‘Housing/Council Tax Benefit entitlement’ within the year – Noted there should be no ticks on the sheet it should all be crosses. Asked if the target was unrealistically low the officer said that it was a new target and they were unsure as to what target to set. It would be reviewed next year.

LPI23 (a) Capital Projects ‘Cost’ – Noted that this was to be deleted and replaced.

LPI53 Number of completed fraud investigations carried out by the Benefits Investigation Team – noted that an investigation officer had been recruited but another one had resigned – so the section was still one down.

NI158 Percentage of Non-decent  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

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.

The final programmed meeting of the Panel for this year will be held on 22^nd April 2010.

The date for the next meeting was noted.