To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Michael Gold, Co-opted Member.

In accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct, Members are requested to declare any interests orally at the start of the meeting and again immediately before consideration of the matter. Members are reminded to specify the agenda item number to which it refers and whether the interest is of a personal or prejudicial nature.

Members are also reminded of the requirements of Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 that they should declare and not vote on specified matters if they are two months or more in arrears with their Council Tax payments.

No declarations were made.

To consider the minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2011 - attached.

The minutes of 12 September 2011 were received and approved and the Chairman authorised to sign them.

To receive a report providing an update on the Priority Programmes within the Environment Directorate being undertaken as part of the Council’s overall Efficiency and Transformation Programme which forms part of the Council’s new strategic direction, agreed at Cabinet in November 2010.

The report was introduced by the Director of Environment, and the Strategic Cabinet Member for Environment, Planning, Parks and Highways, with additional information provided by the Head of Culture and Service Improvement and the Strategic Cabinet Member for Community, Business and Culture. The Director of Environment explained the context of the Efficiency and Transformation programme which was currently in its third phase. The Council aimed to reduce spending by £30 – £35 million by 2014. An outline of the five Environment Directorate-led third phase efficiency projects was provided to the Committee.

In response to Members’ questions, the following information was provided:

(i) For many of the projects officers were currently working at on the initial exploratory stages. However, for some projects elements of implementation were underway, including the preparation of framework arrangements and the delivery of staffing restructures.

(ii) For the Highways Department it was envisaged that by working with other boroughs to procure contracts such as transport consultancy the Council could create further savings. However, it was noted that it would be difficult to coordinate a programme of joint waste or recycling contracts with other West London Waste authorities because not all authorities’ contracts expired at the same time. The flexible use of the depot site was being investigated as a means of creating an additional source of income for the Council, as was the proposal of processing green waste locally.

(iii) The 10% savings outlined in the report were being achieved by benchmarking the Council’s costs in procuring contracts against those of similar local authorities.

Members discussed the need to ensure that the Council retained a suitable level control over its services whilst also providing value for money to residents by outsourcing where appropriate. It was noted that the private sector could often offer more specialised expertise in areas such as fleet management, which allowed the Council to deliver a more streamlined service to residents.

In relation to the proposals to set up a charitable trust for the Council’s Cultural Services, it was explained that a board of trustees would be created which would consist of elected Members (20%) and community representatives. The contrasting roles of councillors in relation to supporting the Council and supporting a charitable trust were discussed. It was felt that this issue could be further examined.

It was noted that further details of the Efficiency and Transformation proposals relating to Cultural Services (Arts and Libraries, and Sports and Fitness) would be available in the New Year. Members highlighted the importance of the Committee being provided with ample opportunity to scrutinise the proposals before they were considered by Cabinet.

It was RESOLVED:

1. That the update of progress on the priority programmes be noted.

2.  That the proposals in relation to Cultural Services be considered by the Committee before being considered by the Cabinet.  If necessary a special meeting of the Committee to be held to consider this item.

To receive a report which details the Council’s forward procurement activity over the course of the remainder of the financial year and identifies potential areas for future scrutiny.

Report of the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources attached.

Appendix A attached.

The report was introduced by the Assistant Director, Commissioning Corporate Policy and Strategy, and the Assistant Director of Environment. It was explained that the Committee would receive a further update on Procurement Activity at the beginning of the next municipal year. In response to questions about the procurement activity plan as detailed in the appendix, the Committee was informed that:

(i) It was not general policy for mobile street cleansing units to work in conjunction with the refuse collection crew but this system did operate in some locations and could be further examined when the new street cleaning contract was procured.

(ii) Further details about restructuring of services such as libraries would be available in early 2012. Where joint procurement was proposed with other boroughs it would be more complex to arrange exact timings of contracts. The Environment Directorate had long-standing experience of procuring large service contracts and it was possible that it could lead on the establishment of a cross-Council framework.

(iii) The Council was part of a London-wide framework or procuring a new Agency Staff contract which would be based on a master vendor model. This would mean a more managed service based on established job descriptions. The agency requirements of Richmond Council were not necessarily different to those of other London boroughs and for this reason a joint procurement framework was possible.

(iv) The current economic climate had affected the Council’s procurement contracts in that it had been possible to achieve savings when the contracts were renegotiated. £1million had been saved in relation to the Parking Enforcement contract and £2million in relation to Street Cleansing. Councils were also able to make savings by purchasing collectively in many cases.

(v) The more significant procurement contracts would be approved by Cabinet or Cabinet Member Decision, thus allowing Scrutiny an additional mechanism for monitoring the activity.

It was noted that each Scrutiny Committee would consider the procurement activity within its remit, thus ensuring that all procurement was suitably monitored. Where it had not been possible to report significant procurement contracts within the regular procurement report, the Committees could consider these items separately from the procurement update.

The Committee discussed the format of the Procurement Activity reports and the frequency at which they were considered. It was felt that considering the reports more frequently than once a year would allow for more effective scrutiny of the Council’s procurement activity. 

It was RESOLVED:

1. That the report be noted.

2. That future Procurement Activity Plans reported to the Committee include information about the duration of each contract.

3. That it be recommended that an update on the Procurement Activity Plan be received by the Committee on a six-monthly basis, subject to agreement at the meeting of Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen in December 2011.

To consider a report on the current developments and changes being planned for the 2012/13 budget for Environment and Culture Services.

Report of the Director of Environment attached.

The report was introduced by the Director and Assistant Director of Environment, and by the Head of Finance. It was explained that the report outlined the expected budget and significant budget factors for the 2012 – 2013 financial year. In response to questions the following information was provided to the Committee:

(i) In relation to a reported shortfall in funding for the Thames Landscape Strategy, it was noted that the funding partners had been asked to confirm their contributions by 14 December 2011.

(ii) The Council had recently been required to pay £120,000 costs to the Rugby Football Union in relation to a planning appeal decision. Aside from this, the performance of the Council’s Planning and Appeals service was good and it was rare for costs to be awarded against the Council.

(iii) A recent shortfall in the trade waste income could be linked to changes in the construction industry which required companies to implement a materials plan to secure their own recycling. It was also noted that the trade waste charges were set by the West London Waste Authority.

(iv) Inflation had been accounted for within certain Council contracts and the Council had a contingency fund which could be used when inflation was at high levels; however, it was acknowledged that the Council would need to be particularly mindful of rising inflation costs within the context of a commitment to a 0% Council tax increase.

(v) The Council continued to carry out a restructuring programme in order to make more efficient use of staffing levels and to reduce costs. Efficiency and transformation proposals were being developed by in-house employees predominantly, although there was potential for more outside staffing resources to be allocated to projects which would bring funding to the Council, such as the Parks Management scheme.

It was RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

To receive an update on the development of village plans following the report on All in One and the development of the Council’s approach to community involvement provided to the September meeting of the Committee.

Report of the Assistant Director, Commissioning, Corporate Policy and Strategy attached.

The report was introduced by the Strategic Cabinet Member for Community, Business and Culture and the Assistant Director, Commissioning Corporate Policy and Strategy who provided an update on the timeline and development of the Village Plans following from the All in One consultations. It was noted that as the plans developed it was necessary to consider issues surrounding the role and contribution of ward councillors and of residents.

In response to Members’ questions, the following information was provided:

(i) It was intended that the whole community be involved in the development and implementation of the plans. The 14 local areas identified through the All in One programme had been recognised as villages by members of the public who had responded to the survey. The term ‘village’ was commonly used to identify local neighbourhoods across London.

(ii) It was vital that ward Councillors played an active role in the development of the proposals and that Councillors highlighted any concerns about areas being under-represented within the programme. It was intended that the 14 draft plans would be ready for ward Councillors to view by the end of the year.

(iii) The draft plans would outline how the Council would be working with each community and how local partners would be involved. The aim was that the plans would be ‘living’ documents, which would be updated and reflect feedback from residents as this was received. 

(iv) It was recognised that not every resident identified with the 14 village areas identified. However, the village plans would be used as a mechanism to work with residents and to take a proactive lead in resolving local problems.

(v) The Council would need to manage expectations to ensure that residents recognised where change could and could not be effected by the local authority and its partners. The Council could also be more proactive in explaining to residents what action was already being taken in the community.

Members discussed the use of the term ‘village’ and whether this adequately reflected the nature of the communities being represented. Some Members felt that using terminology such as ‘neighbourhood’ or ‘area’ might engage more residents.

It was RESOLVED:

1. That the report be noted.

2. That it be recommended that the draft plans be circulated to Co-opted Scrutiny Members as well as ward Councillors by 1 December 2011.

3. That it be recommended to the Strategic Cabinet Member for Community, Business and Culture that an alternative name to that of ‘village’ be considered for the plans.

To receive an update on the review of the Climate Change Strategy.

Report attached.

The report was introduced by the Director of Environment who agreed that a review of the Council’s Climate Change Strategy was necessary.  This review would need to link to the Committee on Climate Change’s report, expected in April 2012. In advance of this the Council was organising workshops and similar events which would feed into the updated Climate Change Strategy. It was proposed that four key strategy areas would be examined: Energy Efficiency; Energy Supply; Transport; and Risks and opportunities, as detailed at paragraph 4.13 of the report.

The Committee considered the identified areas and discussed issues surrounding how best to encourage sustainable transport within the borough. It was noted that the previous Strategy had focused less heavily on transport issue and this was a possible area for development.

The Committee considered the proposed timeframe for the review of the Climate Change Strategy and felt this to be appropriate, providing that the Committee had the opportunity to review the new Climate Change Strategy before it was agreed by the Cabinet.

It was RESOLVED:

1. That the action taken to date be noted.

2. That the focus areas of the current Climate Change Strategy as contained within paragraph 4.13 of the report be noted.

3. That the proposed approach and timetable to complete the review of the Climate Change Strategy as contained within the report be noted. The timetable to include provision for the final updated version of the Climate Change Strategy to be considered by the Committee prior to being considered by the Cabinet.

This report provides details of Environment Directorate performance for the period July - September 2011. It covers those projects and indicators that monitor the Council’s priorities.

Report of the Head of Finance and Customer Services attached.

Appendix One attached.

The report was introduced by the Director of Environment and the Head of Finance. It was explained that the one highlighted area of underperformance related to the speed at which major planning applications were determined. However, it was noted that the Council prioritised the quality of the service over the speed.

The Committee discussed the number of decisions which accorded with officer recommendation at Planning Committee and it was agreed that further information would be provided about this.

In response to a question on the recent GLA funding bid, it was explained that given the limited time-frame available within which to make the application it had been necessary to focus on areas of the borough which had already been identified for investment, such as Twickenham town centre, and areas where there was a high proportion of empty shops.

The Committee discussed the refunds being distributed to members of the public in relation to parking charges. It was noted that the period in which to apply closed at the end of December and that the figure would reach £1.05million if all potential claims were made.

It was RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

To receive a financial update to enable scrutiny of the Environment revenue and capital budget management.

Report of the Director of Environment attached.

Appendices A, B, C, D1 and D2 attached.

The Report was introduced by the Director of Environment and the Assistant Director. Members discussed the parking enforcement overspend as detailed at Appendix D2. In response to questions relating to this, the following information was provided:

(i) The Council was working more closely with the contractor, Vinci Services, to address identified issues (such as staff turnover and training). It was envisaged that a closer working relationship would result in a substantial decrease in the overspend. The number of penalty notices issued had increased in most recent months.

(ii) Due to the decision to withdraw the use of camera cars, it was not likely that the future revenue from the parking enforcement service would match previous levels. The Council parking policy meant that it was not necessarily desirable to increase revenue by setting a higher target of penalty notices to be issued. However, the majority of the current overspend was attributed to staffing issues experienced by the contractor, which could be overcome.

(iii) Patrolling on foot or by bicycle was viewed to be the most effective manner of parking enforcement and fairer for residents. Stationary cameras were also used to address problem spots, but these could be moved if necessary.

It was noted that the Committee would be able to continue to monitor the effectiveness of the parking enforcement service via the receipt of the quarterly finance reports.

It was RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

This report gives details of the proposed work programme for the remainder of the municipal year 2011/12.

Report of the Head of Democratic Services attached.

Appendix A attached.

Members discussed their work programme for the remainder of the municipal year, and discussed the nomination to the Tobacco Control Task Group.

It was RESOLVED:

1. That the work programme for the remainder of the 2011/12 municipal year be amended as follows:

i. A special meeting to be considered to examine the Phase Three Efficiency and Transformation proposals for Cultural Services. This item to be considered at the ordinary meeting of the Committee on 23 January 2012, if timetables do not permit a special meeting.

ii. Procurement Activity Plans to be included as a recurring work plan item.

iii. The updated Climate Change Strategy to be considered as an item at a convenient date before being considered by the Cabinet.

iv. The Uplift Strategy to be considered by the Committee in early 2012 at a date to be determined by the Chairman and Vice-Chairman.

v. That the Green Travel Plan review be removed as a recommended item.

2. That Councillor Jerry Elloy be nominated as a representative to join the Tobacco Control Task Group.