Witnesses:
Mel Few, Cabinet Member for
Resources
Zully Grant-Duff, Cabinet
Member for Corporate Support
Key
points raised during the discussion:
- Starting
with the Cabinet Member for Corporate Support’s portfolio, a
Member asked whether the funding for the 700 laptops and deployment
of Microsoft Teams (as mentioned in the report) was part of
transformation expenditure or the Covid budget. The Cabinet Member
explained that it was funded by transformation expenditure, as the
rollouts were effectively a continuation of aspects of the
transformation programme that had already been in the pipeline,
just at an accelerated pace due to Covid. Some schemes, however,
such as deploying technology to other organisations like Surrey
Police, had been funded through the Covid budget.
- The Select
Committee raised the topic of remote care at home. The Cabinet
Member for Corporate Support detailed that remote care was embedded
into the Digital Strategy ambition and the lockdown had accelerated
it further, as many people were not able to leave their homes. The
remote care at home project looked at how artificial intelligence
could be used in preventative services, to reduce pressure on acute
health services. From a digital perspective, it represented an
example of partnership working; Surrey County Council had a new
Joint Strategic Chief Digital Officer, Katherine Church, who
simultaneously fulfilled the same role at Surrey Heartlands,
allowing the Council to look across both health and digital
services, while also integrating ASC. The next stage of work would
involve 1,000 of the most vulnerable households in
Surrey.
- Members
expressed awareness of some failures in developing remote care at
home. A Member asked whether the Cabinet Member for Corporate
Support could assure the Select Committee that the Council would be
using available technology and could overcome challenges; for
instance, GDPR issues had to be considered. The Cabinet Member said
that the implementation of remote care at home was being controlled
by the Council and health partners and within that there would be
contractual obligations for third parties, particularly relating to
the databases. Funding came from Surrey County Council ASC and
Public Health funding.
- A Member
stated that it would be useful when adopting the remote care system
to find out which other councils or providers already used such a
system and build on a system that already worked, rather than
reinventing the wheel. The Cabinet Member for Corporate Support
replied that Surrey County Council had put together the technology
they were using at the moment, such as devices to measure
temperature and heartrate. In future, there may be algorithms,
databases and specialised devices for other measures made by third
parties. She did not have benchmarking with other LAs, but could
refer the Select Committee to health partners who could give more
information on this. The Council had not reinvented the wheel in
the sense that the technology was already used by the NHS in
Surrey, and had just been expanded and adapted by the Council in
partnership with Surrey Heartlands. She acknowledged the
Member’s point, and added that, fundamentally, the Council
had provided a service to vulnerable residents in a short space of
time.
- Moving onto
the portfolio of the Cabinet Member for Resources, a Member asked
if there were cost benefits and a timetable for the ERP (enterprise
resource planning) replacement. What was driving the replacement?
The Cabinet Member replied that the current SAP system was out of
date and would cease to be supported by other software in the
future. A report would be coming to the July Cabinet meeting about
proceeding with a cloud service project as a better
system.
- A Member
noted that at the end of month 1 of 2020/21, a risk of £15m
had been identified, as well as a Covid-related risk of £16m.
How confident was the Cabinet Member for Resources that these risks
could be managed? The Cabinet Member stated that it was too early
to say at the moment, but that the Council was looking at resetting
the budget. On Covid, the Cabinet Member did not believe it would
be possible to close those gaps without further government
assistance. The area with the biggest Covid funding issue was ASC,
due to the spread of Covid in care homes during the pandemic.
Regarding business as usual, each service had a budget cap, and the
Council was working towards achieving that.
- A Member
asked whether the possibility of a second peak of Covid was being
taken into account when developing the 2021/22 budget. The Cabinet
Member for Resources responded that he had given broad indications
on what services should focus on during the pandemic, and this was
open to change going forward.
Actions/further information to be provided:
- The Cabinet
Member for Corporate Support to provide details of health partners
who can give more information on remote care at home in other
LAs.