Agenda item

The Committee will receive a report providing an update on the Implementation Plan.  Members will have an opportunity to ask questions and comment.

Mr R Goodes, Programme Manager, provided the Committee with an update on the progress made on the implementation programme for the new Buckinghamshire Council.

The following points were noted:

·         The Corporate Management for the new Unitary Council had been appointed.  Service Director interviews were taking place and would be announced during December 2019.

·         Work was being undertaken on the branding strategy and from 1 January 2020 an advertising and marketing campaign would begin for the day one launch.

·         Pay scale for employees had been agreed.  It was noted that all staff would be TUPEd across to the new council.  Only staff in new roles would move to the new scheme and new recruits. 

·         A devolution pilot would be undertaken during the first year of the new Unitary with a 3 year programme.

·         It was noted that throughout the implementation programme work was built on existing good practices across the councils.

·         A shadow Buckinghamshire Growth Board had been established that would help manage the growth agenda across county.

·         The current number of critical ‘Must Haves’ was at 116, these were continued to be reviewed.

·         Further work on the ‘Must Haves’ would be undertaken by the programme boards led by the new Directors and a fuller report on the review would be available in December 2019.

·         It was noted that February and March were busy periods and these would continue to be reviewed.

·         It was reported that there were over 300 milestones underneath the ‘Must Haves’ and a lot of work would be done through the milestones which was expected for this type of programme.

·         Regarding the 10 Amber ‘Must Haves’ these all had plans in place and there was nothing noted as red with the rest, green.

·         Regular meetings were taking place with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) to go through progress and issues.  The MHCLG had worked with other authorities going through the transition process and had reassured the Programme Office that work was on track.

·         An implementation budget of £12.8m had been agreed and a small underspend had been forecasted but this was continuing to be reviewed.

·         The aim was for minimal service disruption for residents on 1 April 2020.  It was noted that 17 council access points had been agreed and a new website and telephone number would be available with the existing contacts also available on vesting day.

·         Confidence was strong that the new Council would be established on 1 April 2020. 

In response to members’ questions the following points were noted:

·         Regarding recruitment of Service Directors this would be done in two stages.  The first stage to be done internally to provide current senior managers the option to apply for the new roles.  If any roles were unfilled then these would then be advertised externally.

·         The five ‘access plus’ centres would be based at the current council offices.  There would be work in the future to review these.

·         Regarding the current pay scales it was noted that the cost of living across the county had been considered however it was decided that there would be no adjustments and the pay scale would be the same across the county.

·         Children’s Services would be accessed as they are now, it was noted that there would be specialist staff to deal with specific issues.

·         The list of partners for the Strategic Partner Board would be circulated to the Committee.

·         It was confirmed that the up to date Risk Register would be provided to all members of the Committee with future updates.  With regards to the red risks once these were mitigated only two would remain as red and these were being managed.  There was confidence with delivery in the plan, it was explained that risks were understanding what could happen and for these to be managed. An example of a previous red risk was the general election and this was now happening and now an issue that was being managed.

·         48 of the ‘Must Haves’ were made up of what were required to do for legal reasons, 36 were linked to reputational risks, e.g. access points, and 32 were for business and political risks.  If required the list of ‘Must Haves’ could be circulated to the wider committee and members could meet with Mr Goodes if required.  An update would be provided to the Implementation Plan Task and Finish Group on 16 December.

·         A robust induction programme would be in place for the new members following the election to help members understand the new council and services.  Work with members would be undertaken regarding the three member wards and how these would be dealt with.

·         Regarding the transformation work, it was noted that this was expected to take three years, but could be longer. There would be significant work required on a new Local Plan, which could take longer than three years.

·         Regarding the ‘Must Haves’ that had not been delivered in October 19, it was reported that one had been delivered after the report had been written and the others would be delivered in December 19 at the latest.

·         Regarding the role of Service Director Corporate Finance it was noted that existing internal managers could apply for the role as well external candidates.

·         Mr Goodes confirmed he would discuss with the Chairman of the Implementation Plan Task and Finish Group regarding the political ‘Must Haves’.

The Chairman thanked Mr Goodes and the officers for all their work.  Regarding resource issues the Chairman understood the pressure on officers with the work involved in the transition and suggested that the Shadow Executive provide additional funding to be made available to support officers.  It was noted that there was no additional financial support from central Government.