Agenda and minutes
PDF 181 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN
Contact: Bryan Searle
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Minutes: Apologies were received from Zully Grant-Duff and Colin Kemp. Denis Fuller attended as a substitute for Zully Grant-Duff.
|
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING: 02/03/2016
To agree the minutes as a true record of the meeting. Minutes: The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as a true record of the meeting.
|
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
Notes: · In line with the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, declarations may relate to the interest of the member, or the member’s spouse or civil partner, or a person with whom the member is living as husband or wife, or a person with whom the member is living as if they were civil partners and the member is aware they have the interest. · Members need only disclose interests not currently listed on the Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests. · Members must notify the Monitoring Officer of any interests disclosed at the meeting so they may be added to the Register. · Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest. Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS
To receive any questions or petitions.
Notes: 1. The deadline for Member’s questions is 12.00pm four working days before the meeting (7 April). 2. The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (4 April). 3. The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received. Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
RECOMMENDATIONS TRACKER AND FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME
The Board is asked to monitor progress on the implementation of recommendations from previous meetings, and to review its Forward Work Programme. Additional documents: Minutes: Key points raised in the discussion:
1. It was noted by the Chairman that the order of the agenda had changed to accommodate the Chief Executive’s schedule.
2. The Board was informed that a meeting had taken place earlier in the week to discuss Trust Funds. The recommendations for Cabinet would be available in summer 2016.
3. The Chairman drew attention to the forward work programme for June and July and stressed the importance of including the Investment Strategy and the Shareholder Board report. It was agreed that the agency staff item and a paper on scrutiny in a new environment would be taken to the July meeting
4. There was a request for information on the scope and activity of the Public Value Transformation programme and Continuous Improvement Network to brief Members. The Board also queried how the council consults with residents was raised and whether there was an agreed policy framework.
A question was asked about the outcome of audit reports. The Chairman clarified the responsibility for scrutiny of internal audit findings lay with the Scrutiny Board with the relevant remit.
5. Members agreed that the Welfare Reform Task Group would be deactivated and officers would continue to monitor activity in this area.
|
|
|
LEADERSHIP RISK REGISTER REPORT
To provide members will an overview of the council’s risk management arrangements and presents the Leadership risk register. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None
Witnesses:
David McNulty, Chief Executive of Surrey County Council Cath Edwards, Risk and Governance Manager, Finance Nicola O’Connor, Finance Manager (Assets and Accounting)
Key points raised in the discussion:
1. Members of the Board questioned whether the risk management system could be used as a preventative system by ensuring the risks are effectively anticipated. The Chief Executive informed the Board that he took full responsibility for the Leadership risk register and each risk was assessed as high, medium or low for both inherent and residual risks. When asked whether the register might be used to prevent risk the Board he pointed out that prevention was not always a useful concept. The nature of these serious meant they might be mitigated through anticipation but risks would not be removed.
2. Members of the Board questioned the reason for devolution being stated as a high risk factor on the register. The Chief Executive explained to the Board that the 3CS Devolution deal was included as a high risk issue as the council not finalising the devolution deal could result in serious damage to the County due to the significant challenges faced by Local Government and this was an issue beyond the council’s control.
3. The Board was informed that there was no political input before the report had been presented at Cabinet, as it was drafted by officers. It was stated that the Cabinet attended workshops to identify risks and agree how they might be mitigated.
4. Whilst acknowledging the improvement in the risk register, Members stressed concern regarding the risks distinguished and highlighted that there needed to be another way to highlight ongoing risks for example academisation of all schools. The Chief Executive acknowledged this issue but explained that at this point the risks were not entirely clear as it was a white paper but that this issue could end up on the register.
5. A Member of the Board expressed concern at the risk the lack of social workers within Surrey presented. The Chief Executive explained that this was a service rather than leadership risk. The Board were informed that due to the financial pressures of living in Surrey there was limited affordable housing so workers do not tend to work in the area. Therefore one of the key elements was to retain children’s and adults social workers as best possible.
Stephen Cooksey entered the meeting at 10.20 am.
6. The Board noted that the number of high priority risks had gone up and the Chief Executive explained his view that honesty on the issues faced by the council was a priority. This view extended to the public understanding the risks and challenges faced by the council. The main focus was to recognise the risk and to make sure there was a planned mitigation put in place not reducing the size of the register.
7. Responsibilities for the risk register were delegated to senior officers of the Council but the Chief Executive took overall full responsibility ... view the full minutes text for item 27/16 |
|
|
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act. Minutes: The Board agreed for the item to be taken into Part 2 under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act. |
|
|
SENIOR MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE REPORT
This report provides the Council Overview Board with further information on the cost of implementing changes to the leadership team.
Minutes: Declarations of Interest: None
Witnesses:
David McNulty, Chief Executive of Surrey County Council
Key points raised during the discussion:
Recommendations:
None
|
|
|
PUBLICITY FOR PART 2 ITEMS
Minutes: It was agreed that the points raised under Part 2 would not be available to the public.
|
|
|
RESPONSES FROM THE CABINET TO ISSUES REFERRED BY THE SCRUTINY BOARD
Responses have been received on the following Item:
- Review of Service Budgets 2016/17 Additional documents: Minutes: Key points raised in the discussion:
|
|
|
BUDGET SCRUTINY
The Council Overview Board will have a discussion designed to identify issues that arose for Boards in scrutinising service budgets and saving plans for 2016/17. This will assist officers in preparing a report for a future Council Overview Board meeting on how processes can be improved for future years. Minutes: Declarations of interest: None
Witnesses:
Nicola O’Connor, Finance Manager (Assets and Accounting) Andy Tink, Senior Principal Accountant
Key points raised in the discussion:
1. The Chairman highlighted to the Board that the item was an informal discussion, outlining preliminary thoughts for officers to consider. Officers were asked to highlight and outline the typical budget setting process and how this was disrupted in 2016 and asked Members for their views on the budget scrutiny process.
2. Members questioned their involvement in the 2016/17 budget process, highlighting the engagement needed from the Scrutiny Boards to fulfil the Cabinet request for recommendations on how to realise savings. The Board expressed concern regarding the planning of the 2015/16 budget. It was suggested that for the 2017/18 budget monitoring figures should be reviewed by Scrutiny Boards in July 2016 to test projections and ensure that Cabinet and the Council Overview Board had time to consider any findings.
3. The importance of Scrutiny Boards receiving financial information to a high level of detail early in the process to facilitate good scrutiny was raised. Members emphasised that a key aspect of the process was for Finance Officers to provide an honest message on potential service changes to meet savings targets and the possible impact on service users to allow opportunities for Members to influence these options before a Cabinet decision.
4. Members acknowledged the budget proposals they had received for 2016/17, the Board expressed disappointment at the lack of opportunity to influence how the budget figures were set. It was stressed that there had been no update regarding the scope and projected impact of the Public Value Transformation programme.
5. The Senior Principal Accountant informed the Board that the budget setting process was complex due to Cabinet processes, leaving very little time for Scrutiny Board to add their comments. A Member suggested that Cabinet should discuss reviewing the budget plan in advance instead of making a final decision. It was added that it would be useful to have a detailed overview of the Medium Term Financial Plan savings and that when considering budget plans tabled or verbal reports were not sufficient.
6. The Finance Manager thanked the Board for their comments and would feed the information back to the finance team. The Chairman of the Board stressed the importance of trust in allowing information to be given to members of the Board before it reached Cabinet.
|
|
|
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Board will be held at 10 am on 1 June 2016. Minutes: Meeting ended at: 11.35 am
The Board’s next meeting is on 1 June 2016. |