To: Overview and Scrutiny Panel – 11 May 2010
Main Portfolio Area: All Portfolios
By: Democratic Services & Scrutiny Manager
Ward: N/A
Summary: This report reviews the 2009/10 work programme and introduces the final recommendations reports by the working. This will enable the Panel to make recommendations on the future role of the working parties and the nature of the works programme for 2010/11.
For Decision
1.0 Introduction and Background
1.1 This paper allows the Panel to review the Overview and Scrutiny Panel work programme agreed at the meeting on 23 March 2010. The May 2010 paper also acts as an end of year review report. Five working parties participated in end of year meetings each with the Panel Chairman and Vice-Chairman. Members considered among other things their achievements, plans for the next municipal year and whether there was need to change their respective terms of reference.
1.2 Some of the working parties that did not take part in the end of year session would however make verbal reports about their key activities, citing achievements and recommending their future role in 2010/11.
2.0 The Current Situation
2.1 Seven working parties would present written end of year reports with final recommendations for the Panel to consider.
2.2 The purpose of these reports is to help the Members decide on whether the groups had completed their given tasks or more work still needed to be done.
2.3 The Panel would also have to decide whether to change the terms of reference for those working parties that were to continue into 2010/11.
2.4 The Panel may want to consider whether there were any working parties that need to stand down.
3.0 Table 1 – Work Programme
3.1 Lead Officers for various working parties completed the comments and status columns in the Works Programme table 1 in order to advise the Members of the Panel about the progress achieved by each of the groups in the intervening period between the Panel Meetings.
3.2 As usual, the table is sub-divided in order to illustrate the suggested nature of the work involved:
a) Formal Working Party – a formal sub-committee which will report its findings back to the Panel for recommendation onto the executive.
b) Sub-Group – a working party can set-up a sub-group that will be tasked with carrying-out an in-depth review of an issue and report back to the parent group.
c) Involvement in policy development – this entails the relevant Members being involved by officers in the review/development of policies by the executive. That work will be reported back to the Panel prior to recommendations being passed to the executive.
c) Presentations – these are presentations to the Panel that will allow the Panel to consider whether any further work should be undertaken and a specific item included in the Panel’s work programme.
3.2 The Panel is asked to note that after Councillor Nottingham’s resignation as a member of the Recycling Working Party, a replacement is still to be made.
This matter could be resolved by the reconstitution of the panel membership at Annual Council meeting and a new Works Programme for the next municipal year at the Panel meeting on 20 July 2010.
4.0 Table 2 – Final Recommendations Summary Report
4.1 A summary of the key achievements and final recommendations have been captured in a table 2 attached to the report with more detailed individual working party reports annexed to the main works programme report.
4.2 As usual, the table is sub-divided in order to illustrate the suggested nature of the work involved:
b) Formal Working Party – a formal sub-committee which will report its findings back to the Panel for recommendation onto the executive.
b) Sub-Group – a working party can set-up a sub-group that will be tasked with carrying-out an in-depth review of an issue and report back to the parent group.
c) Involvement in policy development – this entails the relevant Members being involved by officers in the review/development of policies by the executive. That work will be reported back to the Panel prior to recommendations being passed to the executive.
5.0 Final Recommendations Reports From Working Parties
5.1.1 The reports produced by the each of the Formal and Involvement in Policy Working Parties are attached as annexes to the main Works Programme report. It should be noted therefore that Table 2 is read in conjunction with those reports.
|
TABLE 1 |
|||
|
Issue |
Composition/ Members |
Lead Officer |
Comment |
|
Formal Working Parties |
|
|
|
|
Date of Establishment: 02.10.07 Airport Working Party |
Bruce Mrs Roberts Harrison Nicholson R Watkins |
Brian White |
The Working Party has concluded its review of the Kent International Airport Draft Masterplan. Contributing significant changes to the final version of the document. In addition, the Working Party has made recommendations informing how public engagement and consultation regarding a proposed night-time flying policy at the Airport will be organised. So that the Working Party can also review the results of consultation, before final reports are considered by the Council on this high profile subject, it will review priorities at other regional airports. Visits will be made to Luton, East Midlands and Doncaster. |
|
Date of Establishment: 02.10.07 Asset Management Working Group |
Bayford Mrs Rogers Taylor Harrison Johnston
|
Brian White |
Further amendments and improvements have been made to the Asset Management Strategy 2007-2010. Reinforcing, and clarifying how public engagement must operate and confirming that leases of 25 years or longer be henceforth considered as asset disposals.
The Working Party continues to examine the process followed in the case of all disposals. Thereby ensuring that the Council adheres to its Strategy, and procedures. |
|
Date of Establishment: 28.05.08 Corporate Improvement and Budget Working Party |
Bayford Crotty Lawson Mrs Roberts Harrison Green D King
|
Sue McGonigal |
|
|
Date of Establishment: 17.11.09 Corporate Improvement & Budget Working Party – Sub Group – Housing Landlord Service |
Bayford Crotty Johnston |
Brendan Ryan |
Recommendations incorporated in report to Cabinet and Council. Work of group on going so that there can be scrutiny of the consultation programme with tenants |
|
Date of Establishment: 17.11.09 Corporate Improvement & Budget Working Party – Sub-Group – Shared Services Vehicle
|
Bayford Lawson King Nicholson |
Donna Reed |
Three meetings were held to review the Strategic Business Case that was being presented to Cabinet and Council in February 2010. A number of recommendations were made to the Overview and Scrutiny Panel, which were accepted and included in the final report to Cabinet. One outstanding recommendation is for Overview and Scrutiny Panel to consider how they wish to be involved in the future scrutiny of each service business case as it is being developed.
|
|
Date of Establishment: 17.11.09 Corporate Improvement & Budget Working Party – Waste & Recycling |
Crotty Harrison Mrs Roberts |
Mark Seed |
The working party met in December and January in order to develop its recommendation for the special meeting of Scrutiny on 4th February. The recommendation from Scrutiny were considered by Cabinet and then approved by the special meeting of Council on 25th February. The primary change was as follows, which was agreed by Cabinet and Council:
“That the Panel undertakes a review of the delivery of the new waste services in Dover and Shepway once those have been delivered and embedded in 2011. The review will assess the operation of the new collection and disposal arrangements, contract costs, recycling levels, customer feedback and levels of coverage achieved. This review will be used to inform the choices Thanet makes in relation to how it delivers its own collection services in the period up to 2013.”
|
|
Involvement in policy development |
|
|
|
|
The agreed, Council endorsed, development brief for the Dreamland site, stipulates that redevelopment must account for and resolve the Tivoli Brook problem. Therefore, survey of existing sewerage and land drainage must be undertaken by the developer – to produce a satisfactory engineering solution to the problem. Members will recall that intermittent failure of bathing water samples from Margate Bay has been attributed to contamination via the Tivoli Brook. At this stage, redevelopment is not imminent. But as and when proposals come forward, this Working Party, will be needed to maintain progress. |
|||
|
Date of Establishment: 24.04.08 Allotments Working Party |
The Group had one meeting to consider the summarised notes after the site visits. They also discussed the requirements for the report in order to finalise the work of the Group. |
||
|
Date of Establishment: 24.04.08 Museums Working Party |
Mrs Roberts Scobie |
Mike Marsh/Mark Seed |
The Museums Working Party has developed a year end report which is being considered by the Panel at the meeting. Progress by the working party has been affected significantly in the latter half of 2009/10 by the secondment of the Cultural Manager to assist with the management of Ramsgate Port and Marina. This has meant that assistance to the Members of the working party has had to be extremely limited. This secondment is still continuing and will do so for several months until the new staffing structures are in place at the port. This will continue to affect the level of support that is available to the working party from the lead officer |
|
Date of Establishment: 28.05.08 Recycling Working Party |
There have been no meetings of the working party since summer 2009. |
||
|
There was a meeting with one member of the group to advise the group on Phase 3 processing. The Group attended the end of year review meeting with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman & produced the end of year report.
The working group recommends (to the Panel) the continuation of this group until end of March 2011
|
|||
|
Pending first meeting. |
|||
|
See End of Year Report |
|||
|
There is statutory obligation for scrutiny of the community safety partnership. Scrutiny meetings have considered the district assessment and the community safety plan for the coming year.
The Annual scrutiny programme would be linked to planning cycle of Community safety partnership. |
|||
|
Pending first meeting. |
|||
|
|
|||
|
09/10 Presentations by Portfolio Holders and Directors
|
|
||
|
Status to be determined |
|
||
|
TABLE 2 |
||||
|
Issue |
Composition/ Members |
Lead Officer |
End of Year Comments |
Final 2009/10 Recommendations |
|
Formal Working Parties |
|
|
|
|
|
Date of Establishment: 02.10.07 Airport Working Party |
Bruce Mrs Roberts Harrison Nicholson R Watkins |
Brian White |
2009/10 Achievements The Working Party has concluded its review of the Kent International Airport Draft Masterplan. Contributing significant changes to the final version of the document.
In addition, the Working Party has made recommendations informing how public engagement and consultation regarding a proposed night-time flying policy at the Airport will be organised.
Future Role 2010/11 So that the Working Party can also review the results of consultation, before final reports are considered by the Council on this high profile subject, it will review priorities at other regional airports.
The Group would like to continue to help establish the parameters for community consultation and assessment of technical criteria against which the night time flying policy can be judged.
The Working Party would like to be involved in the reviewing of Section 106 Agreement.
The Masterplan is an airport document and there is an identified need to prepare a supplementary planning document relating to the development of the airport to provide a policy basis for the Council to steer airport growth in a manner that is environmentally acceptable.
The Working Party also proposes additional visits to other airports that include Luton, East Midlands and Doncaster to provide further background information and understanding of the implications of their development proposals.
|
That the Airport Working Party continue in 2010/11 |
|
Date of Establishment: 02.10.07 Asset Management Working Group |
Bayford Mrs Rogers Taylor Harrison Johnston
|
Brian White |
2009/10 Achievements Further amendments and improvements have been made to the Asset Management Strategy 2007-2010. The Group developed the original policy position on the need for amendment to the Asset Management Strategy. This reinforced and clarified how public engagement could operate and thereby confirming that leases of 25 years or longer be henceforth be considered as asset disposals.
Future Role 2010/11 The Working Party continues to examine the process followed in the case of all disposals. Thereby ensuring that the Council adheres to its Strategy, and procedures.
The Working Party would like to maintain a monitoring role in the disposal of Council assets and offer its advice. |
That the working party continues to play a monitoring and advisory role in 2010/11 |
|
Date of Establishment: 28.05.08 Corporate Improvement and Budget Working Party |
Bayford Crotty Lawson Mrs Roberts Harrison Green D King
|
Sue McGonigal |
2009/10 Achievements The working party considered matters relating to best value reviews, treasury management and efficiency savings. A number of key achievements of the group were recorded by the three sub-groups set up by the Working Party to each look at shared services issues that related to Shared Housing Landlord Services, Shared Services Vehicle and Waste & Recycling. The sub-groups came up with a total of seventeen recommendations which the Panel forwarded to Cabinet. Cabinet and or Council adopted fifteen of the original recommendations. This has laid the foundation for future scrutiny activities.
Future Role 2010/11 The Working Party would like to be involved in the budget setting process from the early stages.
The three Sub-Groups would continue in their current role into the next municipal year.
It may be useful for each of the sub-groups to co-opt additional Members with relevant experience or interest to enhance the effectiveness of scrutiny with particular reference to business case formulation. |
That the Working Party continues into 2010, That the Sub-Groups continue into the next municipal year and be allowed to co-opt additional Members. |
|
Date of Establishment: 17.11.09 Corporate Improvement & Budget Working Party – Sub Group – Housing Landlord Service
|
Bayford Crotty Johnston |
Brendan Ryan |
Achievements in 2009/10 The Sub-Group made recommendations that were incorporated in report to Cabinet and Council.
Future Role in 2010/11 Work of group is on going more so that Council may undertake the consultation programme with tenants on issues regarding Shared Housing Landlord Services |
That the Sub-group continues into 2010/11 |
|
Date of Establishment: 17.11.09 Corporate Improvement & Budget Working Party – Sub-Group – Shared Services Vehicle
|
Bayford Lawson King Nicholson |
Donna Reed |
Achievements in 2009/10 The Sub-Group reviewed the Strategic Business Case that was being presented to Cabinet and Council in February 2010. A number of recommendations were made to the Overview and Scrutiny Panel, which were accepted and included in the final report to Cabinet.
Future Role in 2010/11 One outstanding recommendation is for Overview and Scrutiny Panel to consider how they wish to be involved in the future scrutiny of each service business case as it is being developed. The Sub-Group would make recommendations on how the Panel could be involved in scrutinising the Shared Services Vehicle.
|
That the Sub-Group continues into 2010/11 |
|
Date of Establishment: 17.11.09 Corporate Improvement & Budget Working Party – Waste & Recycling |
Crotty Harrison Mrs Roberts |
Mark Seed |
Achievements in 2009/11 The Sub-Group made a recommendation that was considered by Cabinet and then approved by the special meeting of Council on 25th February. The recommendation agreed by the Council was:
“That the Panel undertakes a review of the delivery of the new waste services in Dover and Shepway once those have been delivered and embedded in 2011. The review will assess the operation of the new collection and disposal arrangements, contract costs, recycling levels, customer feedback and levels of coverage achieved. This review will be used to inform the choices Thanet makes in relation to how it delivers its own collection services in the period up to 2013.”
|
That the Sub-Group continues into 2010/11 |
|
Involvement in policy development |
|
|
|
|
|
Date of Establishment: 24.04.08 Allotments Working Party |
Achievements in 2009/10 The Group conducted site visits to a number of allotments. They made a number of observations which are in their end of year report attached to the works programme report.
Future Role in 2010/11 The Group observed that there was a growing waiting list for allotments and that there was a need for new allotment sites to be identified.
There was also a need to up date the Allotments Policy and issues around permitted development in relation to fencing of some allotments. The group may want to be involved this exercise.
The Group may want to monitor the hand-over of allotments to Town Councils |
That the working party continues in 2010/11 |
||
|
Date of Establishment: 24.04.08 Museums Working Party |
Mrs Roberts Scobie |
Mike Marsh/Mark Seed |
Achievements in 2009/10 The Museums Working Party identified a number of problems besetting museums facilities in Thanet as detailed in the Group’s report attached.
Progress by the working party has been affected significantly in the latter half of 2009/10 by the secondment of the Cultural Manager to assist with the management of Ramsgate Port and Marina.
This has meant that assistance to the Members of the working party has had to be extremely limited. This will continue to affect the level of support that is available to the working party from the lead officer.
Future Role in 2010/11 The Group may want to consider drafting a report on how the Panel should progress the review of the museums facilities in Thanet. |
That the Working Party continues into 2010/11 |
|
Achievements in 2009/10 The Group made a number of site visits to individual projects that were being funded by Thanet Works and the details of the group findings are in the report annexed to the works programme report.
The working Party observed that all but one project are doing well.
Future Role in 2010/11 The Working Party would continue to play a monitoring role. |
That the working Party continues until end of March 2011 and that its membership be increased to three. |
|||
|
Achievements in 2009/10 The Working Party reviewed the process of how the Local Development Framework had been drawn up.
Future Role in 2010/11 The Group would maintain a monitoring role regarding the Core Strategy which would only be considered by Cabinet and Council later this year.
The Working Party would like to meet to consider the Core Strategy before the strategy is forwarded to Cabinet. |
That the Working Party continues into 2010/11 |
|||
4.0 Corporate Implications
4.1 Financial
4.1.1 None directly from this report but elements of the suggested work programme may have financial and resource implications.
4.2 Legal
4.2.1 None
4.3 Corporate
4.3.1 The work programme should help to deliver the Modern Council theme of the Corporate Plan by focusing on the best use of people, technology, buildings and assets in order to deliver high quality and efficient services. An active Scrutiny programme is part of good governance and will, ultimately underpin the Council’s use of resources assessment.
4.4 Equalities
4.4.1 None directly but the Council needs to retain a strong focus and understanding on issues of diversity amongst the local community and ensure service delivery matches these.
5.0 Recommendations
5.1 The Panel is asked:
5.1.3 To consider any amendments to the current work programme.
5.1.4 To make a recommendation to the first meeting of the Panel in the 2010/11 municipal year regarding the future roles of the current working parties.
6.0 Decision Making Process
6.1 These are all decisions for the Panel.
|
Contact Officer:
|
Glenn Back, Democratic Services and Scrutiny Manager, Ext: 7187 |
|
Reporting To: |
Harvey Patterson, Head of Legal & Democratic Services (& Monitoring Officer) |
Background Papers
|
Title |
Details of where to access copy |
|
|
None |
Annexes
|
Annex 1 |
Final Recommendations Report-Allotment Working Party |
|
Annex 2 |
Final Recommendations Report-Asset Management Working Party |
|
Annex 3 |
Final Recommendations Report-LDF Working Party |
|
Annex 4 |
Final Recommendations Report-Museums Working Party |
|
Annex 5 |
Final Recommendations Report-Thanet Works Working Party |
|
Annex 6 |
Final Recommendations Report – Corporate Improvement & Budget Working Party |
Corporate Consultation Undertaken
|
Finance |
|
|
Legal |
Harvey Patterson, Head of Legal & Democratic Services |