Meeting documents

There were no apologies.

To disclose any Personal or Disclosable Pecuniary Interests

There were no interests declared.

To agree the Minutes of the Meeting held on 25 February 2014.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 25 February 2014 were agreed as a correct record.

Public Questions is an opportunity for people who live, work or study in the county to put a question to a Scrutiny Committee about any issue that has an impact on their local community or the county as a whole.

Members of public, who have given prior notice, will be invited to put their question in person.

The Cabinet Member and responsible officers will then be invited to respond. 

Further information and details on how to register can be found through the following link:-

http://www.buckscc.gov.uk/about-your-council/scrutiny/get-involved/

There were no public questions.

For the Chairman of the Committee to provide an update to the Committee on recent scrutiny related activity.

The Chairman reported that regular updates will be provided on the Future Shape Programme.

To note:

The Select Committee’s Member-led Governance and Accountability report.  (This is going to Cabinet on 28 April 2014).   

The Chairman reported that the Committee’s Governance and Accountability Report will be presented to Cabinet on 28 April.  A Member welcomed the report which he considered was very good and he endorsed.  The Chairman proposed an amendment to recommendation 2 to include that officers’ reports need to be submitted on time. 

The Chairman welcomed Martin Phillips, Amanda Brooke-Webb and Lisa Cochran to the meeting.  The Cabinet Member reported that the report provided an update on progress and outlined the direction for the future. 

Amanda Brooke-Webb explained that Lisa Cochran was currently Interim Service Director whilst she was seconded to the Future Shape project.  The report looked at the current levels of the contract and suggested improvements in service provision.  During National Customer Service Week a customer promise had been launched which looked at ways of engaging with the customer. 

Members were invited to ask questions and the following points were raised:

·       What was the first contact resolution (FCR) rate in terms of total contracts received and were resolutions recorded?

·       Amanda Brooke-Webb replied that if a query was raised it would only be FCR when the query was resolved for example the contact centre can only raise a service request to fill a pothole they cannot fill it themselves

·       A Member asked what was the first contact resolution rate?

·       Lisa Cochran replied that she did not have this information and would obtain it. 

·       The Member noted that there was a big difference between inbound and outbound contacts and he asked if there was a capacity issue and how this could be improved.

·       Amanda Brooke-Webb replied that the contact centre was set up to deal with inbound contacts.  She explained that the contact centre used to be open on Saturdays and late on Thursdays and that less than 100 calls were received per day.  When the opening hours of libraries were increased there was competition for traffic and a decision was taken to stop the Saturday and late night openings.  However, the Contact Centre was open during the floods and the Olympics.

·       A Member asked for details of the number of FTEs and the resolutions and requested details on capacity. 

·       A Member asked for details of the areas where the Council could add value by dealing with more in depth enquiries. 

·       Amanda Brooke-Webb replied that a number of queries were returned to admissions for example access to electronic documents. For more complex queries a specialist level of expertise was considered to be reasonable.

·       A Member asked if each service had a designated person to say what has happened. 

·       Amanda Brooke-Webb replied that there was a need to be resilient when large mailings go out.  The Future Shape will make changes to ensure that promises are adhered to.         

·       Would it be possible to advise local Members if there was a high concentration of reports?

·       Amanda Brooke-Webb replied that currently this was through the complaints process who were working with the Localities team using the acorn data but this was a manual process and the officers would like to keep Local Area Forums informed of the issues.  There was an awareness that last summer there were difficulties with grass cutting.

·       A Member asked the  following questions about customer satisfaction:

·       Is customer satisfaction measured and tracked

·       Is work recorded when it has been completed

·       How is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The Chairman welcomed Neil Doling, Freedom of Information (FOI) Officer at BCC since 2005 to the meeting.  Neil Doling explained that when he joined BCC there were about 250 FOI requests per year and that in 2013 this had increased to more than 1,600.  An FOI request is where there is a specific reference to the Act.  Requests increased in 2009/10 due to the General Election and it was expected that there would be an increase prior to the next election in 2015.  The majority of requests prior to a General Election were from the opposition. 

If requests were received from other authorities it will be necessary to consider the cost implications.  The majority of requests were received from the private sector and this had been a source of free information to them. 

The majority of requests were for information relating to the road conditions, waste management and the EfW station.  Requests can be refused when it would take more than 18 hours to respond (10.2% of requests are beyond the time limit).  Requests are also refused if the request is for third party information.  

Regular requests were received for information on consultants and the negative burden being placed on public authorities was noted including abuse of the public complaints process and referring to the local Government Ombudsman.  It was noted that the FOI Act was very fluid and that requests for information about participation by Members in the Local Government Pension Scheme had been refused although the requirement to disclose by another Local Authority had not been. 

In 2014 there had been a substantial increase in requests largely attributed to the recent bad weather. The Future Shape could have a substantial impact on the where commissioned bodies work.

Members were invited to ask questions and the following points were raised:       

·       Has the volume of requests been compared to other local authorities?

·       This had not taken place.  UCL used to carry out an annual survey although this no longer takes place.  The last data indicated that BCC received a third more enquiries than others.

·       It was suggested that some information could be provided by Members at LAFs.

·       Could BCC charge for providing information?

·       Neil Doling replied that there was very little opportunity to charge although if more than 50 sheets of paper were used the charge is 10p per sheet. 

·       A Member asked what the cost implications were on staffing.

·       Neil Doling replied that there was one full time FOI officer, 0.75 support data protection and 0.1 officers in the service areas assisting with the requests. 0.8 Children and Families assisting with requests and 2.75 dedicated to the FOI Act trying to train more in the Complaints Team.  The total costs were £263k including staffing costs and efforts were taking place to try and be more efficient in handling volume. 

·       What was being requested and not published.

·       Information on the names of clients.      

·       A Member suggested that this was almost part of the tendering process and was very time consuming.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The Chairman welcomed John Chilver, Deputy Cabinet Spokesman Finance and Resources to the meeting.  Members had been informed that a refresh would be taking place at the meeting in September and a draft document was presented to the meeting.  The following points were made:

·       The key themes highlighted a move away from the default position of disposing of surplus offices such as Old County Offices.

·       There was a greater willingness to include prudential borrowing and BIG plays a central role. 

·       It was noted that it was less costly to treat a road before it becomes failed and a debate had taken place on how fast to proceed on eliminating the backlog.

·       The use of municipal bonds had been suggested.

·       Internal processes include adoption of Gateway monitoring and defined escalation processes to address capital slippage.

Members were invited to ask questions and the following points were raised:

·       The Chairman noted that the estimated cost of eliminating the road maintenance backlog was between £21 - £30 million per annum for 10 years and he asked how realistic was this aim and how could it be achieved.

·       The Deputy Cabinet Member replied that the estimated cost of eliminating the backlog was £112 - £160 million to keep the roads maintained at the current state.  It was envisaged that if expenditure of £21 – 30m continued for 10 years this would eliminate the backlog.

·       The Member noted that the Budget Scrutiny Committee discussed in advance of the prudential borrowing and that this had been declined by Cabinet.  It appeared that this was now being investigated.

·       The Deputy Cabinet Member replied that this was being investigated and that an LGA announcement on municipal bonds will have a significant influence.  Richard Ambrose had estimated that BCC was about a year away from a decision being taken.

·       Concern was expressed that a scrutiny recommendation had been turned down and will there now be a councillor Task and Finish Group and how will it be constituted. 

·       The Deputy Cabinet Member replied that a report will be presented to the Committee in future on the composition of the Group and the frequency of meetings and that there should be nothing in the strategy to impede decisions.  

·       The Chairman asked in what circumstances would the strategy need a refresh?

·       The Deputy Cabinet Member replied that it was a flexible document which was to be included with the departmental plan and that it was necessary to monitor the refreshes.  A change in government policy may impact and any political change within councils may lead to a rethink.

·       A Member noted that there was a reference to being flexible and that there were also references to what could be done and that he would have preferred more statements on the direction of travel.    It was noted that this was more flexible than the previous document and that the focus needed to be on addressing the maintenance backlog.

·       A Member asked if this had been benchmarked against other authorities. 

·       The Deputy Cabinet Member  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

To consider and agree the Finance, Performance and Resources Select Committee Work Programme 2013/14.

The Work Programme was noted.

6 May 2014 – 10am

6 May 2014 at 10am.