Issue - meetings

Issue considered in conjunction with minute item 22

This item was discussed in conjunction with the previous minute item 56.

Members considered the report of the Director of Customer Services and Business Transformation. The report and attached strategic case outlined the approach for sharing services between the District Councils of East Kent. It made recommendations on the first tranche of services to be considered and the process by which each council will determine whether or not it will participate in each proposed shared service.

Councillor Wise introduced the report and Councillor Bayford, as the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel, outlined the role the Overview and Scrutiny Panel had played in commenting upon the proposals.

Councillor Ezekiel moved and Councillor Latchford seconded recommendations 5.1 and 5.2 contained in the report and recommendations 1 – 10 of annex 1 of the supplementary agenda Item 7.

Amendment proposed by Councillor Wells and seconded by Councillor Gideon that:

“The East Kent Joint Arrangements Committee shall delegate such powers to officers as it thinks fit in relation to the services and is requested to appoint one of the East Kent Authorities as the host authority by whom all such officers will be employed. Such appointment to be subject to ratification by the council”

AMENDMENT ADOPTED.

Amendment proposed by Councillor Mrs Kirby and seconded by Councillor Day that: “Where either savings of less than 10% are proposed, or where reductions in service are proposed to meet the 10% target, then these must be referred to the Cabinet for consideration and decision”

AMENDMENT ADOPTED.

Amendment proposed by Councillor Bruce and seconded by Councillor Gregory that:

“(5a) That Council agrees that the option of a jointly owned company be kept under consideration and for this purpose the Head of Legal Services be instructed to take the opinion of leading Counsel as to the legality of establishing such a company preferably with the support of the other Councils but individually if this is not forthcoming and to report such opinion to Cabinet with authority to the Cabinet Leader to share the opinion with the Leaders and Chief Executives of Canterbury City Council, Dover District Council and the District Council of Shepway”.

AMENDMENT ADOPTED.

Amendment proposed by Councillor R Nicholson and seconded by Councillor Mrs Johnston that:

“Council notes this report this evening and agrees to defer any decision until the result of the legal opinion on shared companies (JSG) is received”

AMENDMENT LOST.

A recorded vote on the above amendment was requested and taken as detailed below;

Aldred – for, Bayford – against, Brown – against, Bruce – against, Campbell – for, Clark – for, Crotty – against, Dark – for, Day – against, Ezekiel – against, Gideon – against, Goodwin – against, D Green – for, AK Gregory – against, Harrison – for, C Hart – for, S Hart – for, Hayton – against, Jarvis – against, Johnston – for, King – abstained, JD Kirby – against, JM Kirby – against, Latchford – against, Lodge-Pritchard – for, McCastree - abstained, Moores – against, B Nicholson – for, R Nicholson – for, Nottingham – for, Peppiatt –  ...  view the full minutes text for item 116

This business was transacted on 16 February 2010.

The comments of Councillor C Hart were noted by Cabinet and are detailed below;

CLLR CLIVE HART - LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

Firstly I would like to give sincere praise to Donna Reed, the Director of Customer Services, whom I know to be an excellent officer for this council.  Please understand, none of my comments are aimed at her personally, indeed, I believe Donna has been presented with a virtually impossible task by the current administration.

These matters will be the subject of further debate at full council so I will be very brief at this point:

We in the Labour Group have serious concerns about the proposed joint services initiatives.  Much of the process has been, and still is being, extremely rushed and this has led to further concerns regarding the models of governance and management systems being proposed. Through the information provided to date, we are not at all convinced of any financial savings and we have grave concerns about the serious loss of democratic control over these services for the future.

I attended the last scrutiny meeting where these issues were discussed and I was absolutely shocked by the lack of detail available whenever anyone asked a really pertinent question - always 'something more to come' or 'detail will follow later'.  I can only describe what was outlined at Scrutiny as 'the contents of several bowls of spaghetti thrown high in the air, with the desperate hope of catching all of it in one larger bowl on its way down'.  Just give that a try sometime and see what happens.

It appears that the current administration is totally incapable of managing these services effectively and simply cannot wait to offload the responsibility.  As always, ratepayers will pay for any mistaken decisions made in such a desperate panic.

Moved by Councillor Ezekiel, seconded by Councillor Latchford and resolved that;

“Cabinet agree the following recommendations to Council;

5.2 The East Kent District Councils: Canterbury City Council, Dover District Council, The District Council of Shepway and Thanet District Council (“the East Kent Authorities") are minded to merge the delivery of each of the services generally described as ICT, face to face and Contact Centre Customer Services, Revenues and Benefits, residual Housing Services and Building Control ("the services") between two or more of them subject to the following process:-

a) A business case or business cases shall be prepared in respect of each of the services which shall amongst other things describe the proposed merged service, the arrangements between the parties, the savings to be achieved both generally and for each Council and the level of service it is proposed to provide, such business cases to be presented in an agreed format to each of the East Kent Authorities.

b) Each of the East Kent Authorities shall delegate to its Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader the power to approve a business case on its behalf mindful that the business case shows to his satisfaction that savings  ...  view the full decision text for item 142

The comments of Councillor C Hart were noted by Cabinet and are detailed below;

CLLR CLIVE HART - LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

Firstly I would like to give sincere praise to Donna Reed, the Director of Customer Services, whom I know to be an excellent officer for this council.  Please understand, none of my comments are aimed at her personally, indeed, I believe Donna has been presented with a virtually impossible task by the current administration.

These matters will be the subject of further debate at full council so I will be very brief at this point:

We in the Labour Group have serious concerns about the proposed joint services initiatives.  Much of the process has been, and still is being, extremely rushed and this has led to further concerns regarding the models of governance and management systems being proposed. Through the information provided to date, we are not at all convinced of any financial savings and we have grave concerns about the serious loss of democratic control over these services for the future.

I attended the last scrutiny meeting where these issues were discussed and I was absolutely shocked by the lack of detail available whenever anyone asked a really pertinent question - always 'something more to come' or 'detail will follow later'.  I can only describe what was outlined at Scrutiny as 'the contents of several bowls of spaghetti thrown high in the air, with the desperate hope of catching all of it in one larger bowl on its way down'.  Just give that a try sometime and see what happens.

It appears that the current administration is totally incapable of managing these services effectively and simply cannot wait to offload the responsibility.  As always, ratepayers will pay for any mistaken decisions made in such a desperate panic.

Moved by Councillor Ezekiel, seconded by Councillor Latchford and resolved that;

“Cabinet agree the following recommendations to Council;

5.2 The East Kent District Councils: Canterbury City Council, Dover District Council, The District Council of Shepway and Thanet District Council (“the East Kent Authorities") are minded to merge the delivery of each of the services generally described as ICT, face to face and Contact Centre Customer Services, Revenues and Benefits, residual Housing Services and Building Control ("the services") between two or more of them subject to the following process:-

a) A business case or business cases shall be prepared in respect of each of the services which shall amongst other things describe the proposed merged service, the arrangements between the parties, the savings to be achieved both generally and for each Council and the level of service it is proposed to provide, such business cases to be presented in an agreed format to each of the East Kent Authorities.

b) Each of the East Kent Authorities shall delegate to its Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader the power to approve a business case on its behalf mindful that the business case shows to his satisfaction that savings  ...  view the full minutes text for item 142