Agenda and minutes
PDF 177 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. View directions
Contact: Huma Younis
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Minutes: There were no apologies. Cllr Mark Brett Warburton would be arriving late to the meeting due to a prior appointment. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
All Members present are required to declare, at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible thereafter (i) Any disclosable pecuniary interests and / or (ii) Other interests arising under the Code of Conduct in respect of any item(s) of business being considered at this meeting
NOTES: · Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest · As well as an interest of the Member, this includes any interest, of which the Member is aware, that relates to the Member’s spouse or civil partner (or any person with whom the Member is living as a spouse or civil partner) · Members with a significant personal interest may participate in the discussion and vote on that matter unless that interest could be reasonably regarded as prejudicial. 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 (Thursday 28 September 2017) 2. The deadline for public questions is seven days before the meeting (Wednesday 27 September 2017) 3. The deadline for petitions was 14 days before the meeting, and no petitions have been received. Minutes: There were none.
|
|
|
RESPONSES FROM THE CABINET TO ISSUES REFERRED BY THE SELECT COMMITTEE
There are no responses outstanding. Minutes: There were none.
|
|
|
FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME
The Committee is asked to review its Forward Work Programme.
Additional documents: Minutes: Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Chairman explained that work was being done with officers to bring an item to the Committee which would consider finance, performance and risk across all services under the remit of the Committee.
2. With regards to the HR item scheduled for the December meeting, a Member of the Committee stated that the report should include more financial data and specific staff job roles. The Chairman explained that HR will be asked will be asked to include specific figures and data before the item was brought to Committee.
3. It was queried whether an item on Member IT could be included on the forward plan, the Chairman stated that Member IT should not be subject to scrutiny by the Committee and anyone who experienced IT issues should contact Democratic Services for support. It was further added that the matter should be raised with the Cabinet Member for Property and Business Services.
|
|
|
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, BUSINESS CONTINUITY AND LOCAL RESILIENCE
This report outlines the current progress and issues relating to recent incidents and the requirement to learn and improve the response by Surrey County Council in coordination with partners to support the needs of residents. Minutes: Declarations of interest:
None
Witnesses:
Ian Good, Head of Emergency Management Steve Owen-Hughes, Deputy Chief Fire Officer
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Chairman briefed the Committee on the purpose of the report.
2. A Member of the Committee queried whether flood sax were being used by the county for dealing with possible flooding incidents. The Head of Emergency Management explained that 20,000 flood sacs had been purchased by the county but that many partners including parish councils were using sandbags. Homeowners were also still using sandbags although in some instances sandbags were not the best flooding protection, and other type of property flood protection would be encouraged.
3.
It was stated by the Head of
Emergency Management that in emergency situations, there were 200
beds available for rest centres. The rest centres vary in size and
their locations are maintained by the boroughs and
districts
4. A query was raised around the location of dangerous pipelines in the county and if the emergency services were aware of the location of these. The Deputy Chief Fire Officer explained that organisations had to inform the fire and rescue service of the location of hazardous pipelines. Maps of these pipelines were regularly updated and a map of these kept on every fire engine.
5. There was a discussion around what work was done with the local community and the voluntary sector to enable access to rest sites in emergency situations. It was stated that in cases where there was an evacuation of the community, rest centres used included local community centres, leisure centres and schools. In cases of a flu pandemic, the advice given to residents would be to stay at home. The Local Resilience Forum (LRF) seek assurance from Public Health that they have the resources and plans to cope in emergency situations. The Head of Emergency Management explained that there were arrangements in place with voluntary organisations, e.g. Red Cross, to bolster up support in emergency situations.
6. Since the change in the terrorist threat level to severe, work has been undertaken with officers from the South East Counter Terrorism Unit to ensure Council buildings were safe and secure. Areas to be reviewed include evacuation arrangements and building improvements. These areas would also be picked up with district and borough partners.
7. Members queried what lessons had been learnt from the Grenfell tower tragedy. The Head of Emergency Management stated that recommendations from the incident were coming through as Surrey Fire and Rescue and the Emergency Management Team were involved in supporting the emergency services during the incident and have also picked up learning from the tragedy. In an emergency situation such as this support would be sought from neighbouring fire and rescue services. The South East 7 (SE7) group were looking into arrangements for this for ... view the full minutes text for item 6. |
|
|
AGENCY STAFFING UPDATE
This report provides the Committee with information on the current contract arrangements, the developments and improvements that have been made since the last report and provides the committee with monitoring information and data analysis of agency staff spend and tenure for the last financial quarter. Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest:
None
Witnesses:
Ken Akers, Head of HR/OD Hannah Dwight, HR Business Services and Programmes Manager Indiana Pearce, HR Contract Manager
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. A Member of the Committee queried how much the contract with Adecco would cost for the year. The Head of HR/OD explained that the contract was reactive and depended on each directorates need for agency staff. The old contract spend for 2015/16 stood at £12.57M. The service hoped to reduce this cost in 2016/17.
2. It was queried why ‘Conversion Conversation’ with agency staff failed on some occasions. It was explained that the main reasons these failed was due to pay and flexibility. It was further explained that some agency workers preferred to take longer leave in the summer and hence there was a need for a more flexible contract. It was added that Memorandum of Cooperation’s (MoC) had been helpful in setting price controls but the social worker role was still very price sensitive.
11.30am Cllr Mark Brett- Warburton arrived at the meeting
3. It was explained that in April 2017, 19 locum workers in total, seven from Adult Social Care (ASC) and twelve from Children’s, Schools and Families (CSF) had converted to permanent employees.
4. It was queried whether there was a target in place for the number of agency workers the Council should be employing. The Head of HR/OD stated that constant uncertainty in the workforce meant that it was difficult to quantify a target agency staff number. As the Orbis partnership grew there would be unpredictable levels of demand. It was further stated that staff turnover for the organisation was around 10% and that the number of locum staff in Surrey was lower compared to other organisations such as the NHS.
5. A Member queried if Brighton and Hove was part of the Adecco agency contract. It was explained that Brighton and Hove were not part of the current agency contract as they had taken the decision to sign another contract before they joined Orbis. It was explained that they were signatories on the (MoC) for social worker locum pay.
6. It was queried if the turnover in agency workers impacted the quality of care. It was explained by officers that previously costs had been prioritised in sourcing agency workers which meant the service selected the agency with the lowest rates above maintaining continuity in care provision. It was explained that the service now seeks to maintain a downwards pressure on costs without compromising the quality of care.
7. Table 5 of the report showed the number of agency workers outside the Adecco contract, of this five business cases had not been approved. Members asked for more details about this. The Head of HR/OD explained that the majority of these had not been approved because the proper process was not being followed by the hiring manager.
8. The Committee asked for more details around the average costs for locum/bank/permanent social workers in ... view the full minutes text for item 7. |
|
|
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Committee will be held at 10:00am on Wednesday 6 December 2017. Minutes: The next meeting of the Committee will be on 6 December 2017, at 10.00am in the Ashcombe Suite, County Hall.
|