Issue - meetings

This report provides detailed business cases for the integration of Children’s Services,  Environment Services, and Adult Social Care Departments, and elements of Corporate Services and boroughs’ Libraries Services.  It also outlines proposals for the appointment of a Joint Chief Executive and Head of Paid Service for the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham.

A report was presented by the Director of Finance and Corporate Services and the Strategic Director Adult and Community on Tri-Borough Implementation Plans.  This provided a brief introduction to the proposals for joint service provision between Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea and Hammersmith and Fulham Councils.  The report provided the detailed business case for the integration of Children’s Services, Environmental Services and Adult Social Care and elements of corporate services and library services. It also outlined proposals for the appointment of a joint Chief Executive and Head of Paid Service for the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and the London Borough of Hammersmith. 

It was reported that joint service provision will start with an emphasis on back office operations and where the councils are currently working with the same contractors and avoid disruption to front line services. 

It was asked if it was possible to extract how many of the financial savings in the report were as a result of the tri-borough joint working arrangements and how many were already anticipated.  It was responded that in some cases savings requirements had already been identified but that the details of how these savings were to be made had not been; now that the tri-borough joint working arrangements had been set in train, savings would be made through this strategy. 

It was asked what accountability mechanisms were in place to ensure that joint resources are not directed disproportionately around the three boroughs, where there are unforeseen pressures.  It was responded that service mandates were being drawn up to provide service specifications and guarantees.  It was important that cost allocations were built in correctly. 

The Chairman requested that the committee be provided with copies of the service mandates as evidence at the next stages of the Tri-Borough inquiry at a future meeting. 

It was highlighted that there was some confusion of terminology resulting from the different ways in which the three councils designated job titles, for example, a “Director” at one council may have been the same grade as an “Assistant Director” at another; which made it appear as if one council had more high grade posts than another, although this was deceptive. 

It was advised that the scrutiny arrangements in Hammersmith and Fulham provided the Select Committees with the role of  reviewing the relevant services within their remits and the Overview and Scrutiny Board with the role of overview of the whole process.  Further consideration of the Tri-Borough arrangements was scheduled for the next meeting. 

Members of the committee were requested to provide any questions on this issue, along with any requests for information and key witnesses, to the scrutiny officer. 

RESOLVED:  that the committee be provided with copies of the service mandates as evidence in the consideration of the tri-borough arrangements at a future meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Board.

This report sets out for comment proposals to combine the management of Environment Services provided by Hammersmith & Fulham and Kensington & Chelsea as agreed at the Cabinet meeting on 20 June 2011.

The Committee gave consideration to proposals to combine the management of Environment Services with those of Kensington & Chelsea.

Members noted that the Cabinet, at its meeting on 20 June 2011, had agreed the development of a bi borough approach with a new joint senior management structure in place by June 2012 and the introduction of combined services by March 2014. The intention was to reduce costs through the merger of management teams rather than reductions to frontline services. While there was no direct departmental fit with regard to provision of services in the two Boroughs, the scope broadly encompassed the majority of the Environment and Residents Services departments in Hammersmith & Fulham and Kensington & Chelsea’s Transport and Leisure Department.

Nigel Pallace, Director of Environment, set out details of the proposed services, structures, principles, implementation and delivery vehicles, programme governance, estimated savings and timelines.

It was reported that there would be a 48% reduction in the three top tiers of management across the two authorities with the 29.5 senior management staff in scope reduced over three years to 15.5, resulting in a saving of approximately £1.33m less £175,000 attributed to capital and other sources in the tier three transport and highways posts at Hammersmith & Fulham. Two Directors would be appointed. Subject to the due process it was anticipated that these would be Nigel Pallace and Lyn Carpenter with Mr Pallace managing shared services half the time and sole Hammersmith and Fulham services for the remainder, whilst Ms Carpenter worked whole time in a shared capacity.

Mr Pallace emphasised that for the moment this was merely a headline integration of senior management and not a combination of services. Indicative figures suggested, however, the potential for a further £1.970m in savings through the merger of services and support by 2014/15. It was anticipated that the move towards shared services would be incremental.

The Committee was informed that although it had not proved possible to include Westminster City Council in the arrangements due to its operating models and contractual commitments, there was scope for it to participate at a later date.

In response to a question from Councillor Lisa Homan, Nigel Pallace confirmed that Planning services were out of scope of the new arrangements. There had been a desire to ensure they continued to be provided locally due to their sensitivity to place. Licensing services were subject to similar considerations and, although part of the joint management structure, would continue to operate independently.

Councillor Homan sought reassurances that the proposals would not give rise to potential conflicts of interest for Officers with dual reporting responsibilities. Mr Pallace emphasised that no participating authority would be denied access to independent advice if required. The problem had not arisen in the five years during which the two Councils had shared an Assistant Director of Highways and Engineering.

Councillor Homan further enquired as to the compatibility of IT systems. Nigel Pallace acknowledged that the integration of systems was a major challenge. In the long term the intention was to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8

This report sets out for comment the detailed business case for the integration of the library services of Hammersmith & Fulham, Kensington & Chelsea and Westminster as agreed at the Cabinet meeting on 20 June 2011.

The Committee received and considered the detailed business case for the integration of the Council’s library service with those of Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster.

Chris Bunting, Head of Parks and Recreation, informed the Committee that the proposals, approved at Cabinet on 20 June 2011, would help sustain frontline services, enhance resilience, provide greater staff development opportunities and improve the customer experience through the offering of a wider range of books and specialist collections and a consistency of service standards across the thee boroughs. The shared service would be delivered in four phases as set out below;

Phase 1; creation and approval of detailed business case

Phase 2; implementation of single management structure and design of single operational structure

Phase 3; implementation of single operational structure

Phase 4; consideration of alternatives for new delivery or trading options

Total savings were forecast at £1.107m, of which £270,493 was attributable to Hammersmith and Fulham.

Councillor Robert Iggulden enquired whether the opportunity had been taken to fundamentally review not only staffing structures but also the purpose of library provision in the 21^st century, in particular the balance of traditional reading and book lending with digital media and new forms of engagement. He further asked whether it was felt that libraries or schools should be responsible for childrens’ reading opportunities.

Mr Bunting confirmed that all three Authorities had re-examined their core principles during the course of the exercise. The pattern of library usage was changing with the number of visitors remaining constant but book lending in decline. Childrens activities in the libraries were highly popular and quickly filled to capacity. Shared services provided the chance to develop more innovative community events which would attract further visitors to the libraries.

Councillor Lisa Homan expressed concern at the proposal’s lack of focus on the customer. Mr Bunting responded that the changes should be seamless from the customer perspective but acknowledged that there needed to be an exercise to communicate the positive service aspects to residents. In response to a further question from Councillor Homan he confirmed that books would be available for lending across all three Borough’s stocks. The respective Boroughs all had different IT systems but it was possible that Hammersmith and Fulham’s would be adopted as the common platform. Councillor Greg Smith, Cabinet Member for Residents Services, commented that local levels of service would be maintained with each Authority’s libraries continuing to reflect existing differences in approach to provision. Back office structures and processes would not be noticed by customers.

Councillor Homan also asked about the extent to which staff had been involved in the development of the proposals and, in particular, the implications of salary harmonisation. The Committee was informed that engagement had taken place with staff at some levels but a wider programme was now being rolled out. For example over 100 library staff from across the three boroughs were due to attend a joint event at Westminster on 18^th July. The impact of salary harmonisation was not yet known.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7

The Leader welcomed everyone to the meeting and invited the Opposition to address Cabinet.  Councillor Cowan noted that the Council had not engaged consultants to develop the proposals but was concerned at the lack of independent advice sought either from a senior academic or central government.  He was of the view that the Council had not followed best practice models used in private or public sector organisations while developing the programme.

He queried the benefit of sharing a Joint Chief Executive with Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea as well as the Council employing a Managing Director and Head of Paid Service.  He was not convinced that the Council required a super Director of Children’s Services, Head of Planning and Director of Resident’s Services. He further queried the resource allocation policy and the possibility of resource shunting between boroughs.  He raised concerns at the possibility of the Council raising fees to levels charged by other boroughs without a corresponding rise  in the quality of services received by residents. 

In response, the Leader expressed his delight that all the work to develop the tri-borough proposals to date had been undertaken in house without costly external capacity support.  The development and implementation of the proposals were owned by the three Boroughs’ management teams.  Finding £33m of savings including the reduction of the management overhead cost is a challenging plan for any management team to develop.  He disagreed that there was no need to appoint a joint Director of Children’s Services across the three Boroughs as it was critical to the implementation plan to have a single point of contact.

He noted that the three Boroughs were developing models to control and cut cuts.  The Council had looked at best practice across the country.  The Adult Social Care model was based on the Torbay model which was commended in research undertaken by the Kings Fund.  Finally, he reiterated that through integration, the three boroughs were working towards saving over £33m, drastically reducing borough overhead costs; over 35% around management overheads for Adult Social Care, Children’s Services and Environment Services.  This will protect frontline services from cuts and improve service delivery to residents.

1.        That the recommendations set out below be approved.

1.1       Children’s Services

• To agree the business case as a basis for moving forward.

• To set up a joint steering group of two Members of each participating Borough to supervise further refinement and implementation of the proposals.

• To endorse the financial implications in the Business Case and to include these in the financial planning for each Borough.

• To note that the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and City of Westminster will appoint Andrew Christie as Designate Director of Children’s Services, subject to a final Member interview before 31st December 2011.

• To proceed to formal exchange of documentation between the three boroughs by the end March 2012.

• To refer the proposals for further comment by scrutiny committees and for further formal consultation with the trade unions.

1.2       Adult Social Care

·        To agree  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6