Agenda and minutes

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the previous meeting.

RESOLVED – the Minutes of the previous meeting on 17 October 2019 were approved as a correct record and signed.

To receive any apologies for absence and notification of any substitute Members in accordance with the Constitution.

Committee Members: Councillor R. Turner and Councillor K. Sachdeva. There were no substitutions.

Other Members: Councillor M. Brunt – Leader.

To receive any Declarations of Interest (including the existence and nature of any Party Whip).

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider progress in quarter 2 against delivery of the 2019/20 internal audit plan.

The Chair welcomed Neil Pitman and Natalie Jerams from Southern Internal Audit Partnership (SIAP) to the meeting. The auditors gave Members an overview of progress on the Internal Audit 2019/20 report in quarter 2. SIAP confirmed that the Council’s internal audit plan was on track with 35 per cent of planned work completed.

In summary, six audits had been concluded so far this year. Two service areas had received a ‘Substantial’ assurance opinion (the best rating) – Corporate Plan and Decision Making and Accountability. Four had received an ‘Adequate’ assurance opinion (a good rating) – Human Resources and Organisational Development, Income collection, Investments, and Refuse, Recycling and Street Cleansing. There were no ‘Limited’ or ‘No Assurance’ opinions, ratings which would detail significant weaknesses. None of the live audits had management actions that were overdue. There were three high priority management actions which were completed at the time of the final report.

Members commented and asked questions about the following areas:

·         ‘Adequate’ rating – Members asked if this was the best phrase to describe a service area performing well. Could a service area be rated ‘good’ or ‘satisfactory’ instead as this would be more reassuring for residents. They felt the quarterly report understated the detailed work that had been carried out which sat beneath the ratings that were given.

·         Areas for improvement ­– Members asked if the report could include not just areas for action but also areas for improvements. For example, could there be more detail about the Refuse, Recycling and Street Cleansing audit in the auditors’ quarterly report. This could set out the types of problems that auditors had highlighted such as an ad hoc record of litter picking and where improvements had then been made.

In response to these observations, it was noted that ‘Adequate’ was an industry standard auditing term that was used across local authorities and other organisations. The reports in the eMembers website showed the detailed management actions that had been taken. One reason why Members did not see greater detail in the quarterly report was because auditors had found that services were performing well which was to the Council’s credit. The auditors offered to forward a link to a report where actions had to be taken by an organisation to show the greater detail set out when significant weaknesses were identified.

Overall, Members were impressed with the degree to which the auditors had investigated service areas. Members were reassured that they could ask the auditors for further information when required.

Chief Executive, John Jory, thanked the auditors for attending the meeting and the robust challenge they were bringing in their audits. The second quarter reports highlighted that the Borough Council was a well-run organisation with good governance processes.

RESOLVED – that the Internal Audit 2019/20 Quarter 2 Progress Report against delivery of the 2019/20 Internal Audit plan be noted.

For the Budget Scrutiny Panel to report back to the Committee with their findings and make recommendations to the Executive in line with the Council’s budget and policy procedure rules.

Members considered the report from the Budget Scrutiny Review Panel which met on 21 November 2019 to discuss and consider the Service and Financial Planning budget proposals for 2020/21. The report would be considered by the Executive on 30 January 2020 in line with the Council budget and policy procedure rules.

The Panel report was introduced by the Chair of the Budget Scrutiny Review Panel, Councillor N. Harrison. The conclusions of the Panel were set out in the report and summarised in the Executive Summary. He thanked the Executive Member for Finance, Executive and Officers for preparing the initial revenue and capital budget proposals for 2020/21.

The Panel concluded that the Council managed its finances well and had maintained services and delivered priority projects despite the removal of the Government Revenue Support Grant in 2017/18. The revenue underspend of £1.6m for 2018/19 compared to the approved budget this year and the current forecast for 2019/20, being an underspend of almost £800k, underlined this point.

The Panel report said that the proposed Budget for 2020/21 was a cautious one as it did not overstate revenue and set out fully costed expenditure items. It was a detailed and well-developed budget. However, there was more detail to come including any additional Capital Programme budget growth proposals for 2020/21 to 2024/25, the review of Central Budgets and Revenue Reserves and the final Council Tax increase proposals. The final budget proposals to support delivery of the Corporate Plan, Housing Delivery Strategy and Environmental Sustainability Strategies were also still to be finalised. Therefore, the Panel recommended that the Committee should allocate time at its 23 January 2020 meeting for a more substantive review of these elements before it drew its conclusions on the overall Budget proposals.

The Panel report noted the increase in the services revenue budget of £2.12m which included funding to pay for 23 new posts. It was concerned that this overall increase could be unsustainable in the long term, unless additional sustainable revenue income sources are brought on stream. The Council was developing its commercial approach, but this work was progressing slowly, and the increase in new commercial investment income for 2020-21 is not significant. In the light of this the Panel advised caution.

The Panel Chair noted that Recommendation (i) (c) considered the potential negative impact of the savings and growth proposals on service delivery to be minimal and there were certain areas where there were service improvements.

Panel Members told the Committee that the recent general election and other areas of uncertainty such as the levels of government spending, pension costs and impacts of cuts to Surrey Council Council’s budgets were also other significant elements of the budget that meant it should be looked at again at the January meeting.

Panel Members highlighted that another area where proposals and spending plans were not yet clear was on environmental sustainability and how the Council was responding to climate change. It was noted that more information was set out in paragraph 27 of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

To receive an update on the work of the Council and future plans.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor M. Brunt, sent his apologies to the Committee. The Leader’s Update would be rescheduled for a future Committee meeting.

To consider Council performance in the second quarter of the year in regard to Key Performance Indicators, Revenue and Capital Budget Monitoring and Risk Management.

Members considered the performance in the second quarter of 2019/20 of the Council’s Service Indicators, Revenue Budget Monitoring, Capital Budget Monitoring and Risk Management.

The Portfolio Holder for Corporate Direction and Governance, Councillor V. Lewanski gave an overview of progress to date on Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and Risk Management from July to September 2019.

Of the 14 KPIs that were reported on this quarter, 10 were on target. The council was unable to report on one performance indicator (KPI 1 levels of self-service transactions) due to a systems upgrade; one indicator (KPI 4 on homelessness) was outside the direct control of the Council. Two KPIs did not meet their target – KPI 2 (Total number of residential completions) and KPI 12 (increase in numbers of trade waste accounts).

The target for the first (KPI 2) was 230 and the actual was 122. This continued the trend from the first quarter. It was due to the low total number of completions caused by the phasing of some major developments, in particular finishing building flats, which can take 12 months or longer to be completed. As the work on buildings that started in 2018/19 was high in comparison to previous years, this should lead to higher numbers of completed buildings in the next half of the year. At the end of quarter 2 there were 2,041 units under construction, of which 56 began construction during the quarter.

KPI 12 was below the target of increasing the number of active trade waste accounts  by 15 and, in fact, 11 customer accounts were closed due to non-payment of invoices. Overall however, customer numbers remained healthy.

There were no new strategic risks to report in the Risk Management section.

Members made the following observations in the debate that followed:

·       Levels of self-service transactions – Members discussed the measurable benefit of reviewing and monitoring the levels of self-service transactions completed online. It was noted that two of the three measures could now be reported on. These were: paying a parking fine which was now exceeding the 80% target with 97% reports carried out online and purchasing a new/additional bin with 92% requests carried out using the online service. While the Council’s strategy was to move these transactions online, it was recognised that not all residents could do this as some did not have internet access. However, it was fundamental to the Channel Shift Strategy to know how many people were using the council’s online services and to move away from requests by telephone. These were high-volume transactions and the public’s online use of these services freed up staff resources to help residents with queries that were more suitable for answer by telephone. Members recognised that these were good results in line with the changes to internal processes. Members asked for the percentage of total self-service transactions that were made online. A written response giving further information would be provided to Members.

·       Trade waste – As the number of trade waste accounts had fallen by 11,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

To consider the proposed Calendar of Meetings 2020/21.

Members considered the proposed Calendar of Meetings for the 2020/21 Municipal Year.

The Calendar of Meetings 2020/21 draws upon the pattern of previous years and is designed to ensure all business is accomplished as efficiently as possible. The proposed Schedule of Meetings was due to go to the Executive meeting on 30 January 2020 for approval by full Council at its meeting on 13 February 2020.

It was noted that:

·         The Employment Committee meets quarterly and on a separate evening to reflect the Committee’s revised Terms of Reference.

·         The Commercial Ventures Executive Sub-Committee (CVESC) has agreed to meet formally every two months for an hour before each Executive meeting. The informal CVESC will meet every other month (between the formal meetings).

·         The deadline for the publication of the Council’s annual Statement of Accounts and the opinion of External Auditors is 31 July 2020. The Executive meeting has therefore been set for Tuesday 28 July 2020 to allow enough time to finalise the Statement of Accounts. In 2021, the Executive meeting will be moved to Tuesday 27 July 2021.

·         Leader’s group requested an additional Executive meeting in mid-August 2020.

·         As in previous years, meetings of the Licensing & Regulatory Committee and its subcommittees and the Standards Committee had not been scheduled except for the initial meetings to make appointments to the Chair. The first meeting of the Licensing & Regulatory Committee will be combined with a training session.

·         As the initial Standards Committee is expected to be brief, this has been scheduled on the same evening as the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 11 June 2020.

·         The proposed schedule includes indicative dates for meetings at the start of the 2021-22 Municipal Year to assist with planning for future business. These dates will be confirmed as part of the Calendar of Meetings for 2021-22.

Members made no comments on the public meetings listed but asked if informal meetings such sub-committees and planning forums could be added to the Calendar. As the Calendar of Meetings 2021/22 listed external public meetings, officers agreed to supply a separate Calendar for internal meetings.

It was confirmed that the additional Executive meeting date in August was scheduled as a contingency date, in case it was needed.

RESOLVED: that the Calendar of Meetings 2020/21 be noted and its observations provided to the Executive for its meeting on 30 January 2020.

To consider updates to the Work Programme for the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for 2019/20 and to consider the Action Tracker from the previous meeting.

Members considered the Committee’s Future Work Programme for meetings in 2020 and the Action Tracker from the previous meeting on 17 October 2019.

It was noted that the next Committee meeting on 23 January 2020 would scrutinise the work of the East Surrey Community Safety Partnership in 2019/20. The Borough Inspector had been invited to attend. Surrey County Councillors from Reigate and Banstead had been invited to the meeting. The Committee would also hear from the Executive’s People Portfolio Holders. At the 20 February 2020 meeting a progress update on 2019/20 Statement of Accounts was scheduled as well as the Executive’s Place Portfolio Holder briefings and discussion on Draft Key Performance Indicators 2020/21. In March, agenda items included the Internal Audit Plan 2020/21 and the Treasury Management Strategy 2020/21.

Members asked for a future item to update the Committee on plans for looking after common land. The Executive’s Place Portfolio Holders would be asked to update Councillors on this as part of the Place Portfolio Holders briefing at the Committee’s 20 February 2020 meeting. It was confirmed that an update on Community Centres would be part of the People Portfolio Holder briefings at the next meeting in January.

RESOLVED: that the Future Work Programme for 2019/20 be noted.

To consider any items arising from the Executive which might be subject to the ‘call-in’ procedure in accordance with the provisions of the Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules set out in the Constitution.

It was reported that there were no items arising from the Executive that might be subject to the ‘call-in’ procedure in accordance with the provisions of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Procedure Rules.

To consider any item(s) which, in the opinion of the Chairman, should be considered as a matter of urgency - Local Government Act 1972, Section 100B(4)(b).

(NOTE: Under the Committee and Sub-Committee Procedure Rules set out in the Constitution, items of urgent business must be submitted in writing but may be supplemented by an oral report.)

There were no items of urgent business.

The meeting closed at 9.05pm.