Issue - meetings

Appendix 7 to the report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services at item 19(a).

[Circulated to key Members and Officers, Group Offices and Members’ Library only]

RESOLVED:  That appendix 8 be noted.

Reason for Decision:  To allow the appendix to be considered in conjunction with the main report at agenda item 19(a).

Alternative Options considered and rejected:  As set out under item 19(a).

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation granted:  As set out under item 19(a).

Cabinet received a confidential appendix setting out the Business Case for the proposal.

RESOLVED:  That appendix 8 be noted.

Reason for Decision:  To allow the appendix to be considered in conjunction with the main report at agenda item 19(a).

Alternative Options considered and rejected:  As set out under item 19(a).

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation granted:  As set out under item 19(a).

Report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services.

RESOLVED:  That having considered the legal implications set out at appendix 8 of the report and having reconsidered the decision of the Cabinet meeting held on 13 September 2012 set out in appendix 4 of the report, in relation to the Public Realm Integrated Services Strategy: Business Case, as a result of the decision of the Call-In Sub-Committee, the original Cabinet decision of 13 September 2012 be confirmed.

Reason for Decision:  In accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 46.8.3, to reconsider the decision within 10 clear working days of a referral by the Call-In Sub-Committee.

Alternative Options considered and rejected:  To amend the decision.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation granted:  None.

[Call-in does not apply].

The Portfolio Holder for Performance, Customer Services and Corporate Services introduced the report, which set out the decision of the Call-in Sub?Committee held on 1 October following receipt and consideration of Call?in Notices in relation to Cabinet’s decision of 13 September on the Public Realm Integrated Services Model (PRISM): Business Case.

The Portfolio Holder added that he had attended the Call-in Sub-Committee meeting on 1 October.  He apologised that a normal legal implications paragraph had not been included in the report considered by Cabinet in September.  However, legal advice had been included in the Business Case, the report had been signed off on behalf of the Monitoring Officer and the Director of Legal and Governance was present at that Cabinet meeting.

The Portfolio Holder stated that the administration took equality impact assessments seriously and assured that these would be ongoing as the project moved ahead, particularly on how it might impact on residents.

The Corporate Director of Environment and Enterprise referred to the legal advice at appendix 8 to the report and asked Cabinet to confirm the original Cabinet decision.  She assured Members that consultations with Portfolio Holder(s) and Unions would continue and that equality impact assessments would be considered at each stage of the process.

The Leader of the Council welcomed the comments of the Portfolio Holder and the Corporate Director.  He referred to appendix 4 which set out the original decision of Cabinet and it was

RESOLVED:  That having considered the legal implications set out at appendix 8 of the report and having reconsidered the decision of the Cabinet meeting held on 13 September 2012 set out in appendix 4 of the report, in relation to the Public Realm Integrated Services Strategy: Business Case, as a result of the decision of the Call-In Sub-Committee, the original Cabinet decision of 13 September 2012 be confirmed.

Reason for Decision:  In accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 46.8.3, to reconsider the decision within 10 clear working days of a referral by the Call-In Sub-Committee.

Alternative Options considered and rejected:  To amend the decision.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation granted:  None.

[Call-in does not apply].

The following documents are attached:-

a)     Notices invoking the Call-in

b)     Minutes of the Cabinet Meeting held on 13 September 2012

c)      Report submitted to Cabinet on 13 September 2012

The Sub-Committee received papers in respect of 2 Call-In notices, the first served by nine Members of the Council, the second served by over 150 members of the public.

The Chairman invited the Member representative of the Councillor signatories and the Unison representative of the public signatories to present their reasons for call-in to the committee.

Each representative outlined their case for call-in; Members considered the points made and the responses provided.

(The Sub-Committee then adjourned from 9.25 pm – 9.55 pm to receive legal

advice).

Having re-convened, the Chair announced the decision of the Sub-Committee, and it was

RESOLVED:  (unanimously)  That

(1)               the call-in on ground (a) – inadequate consultation with stakeholders prior to the decision – not be upheld, as the Sub-Committee did not consider it had been wholly inadequate; however, the Committee stated that it would, in future, look unfavourably on items for decision which might reasonably have been included on the Key Decision Schedule, but which had been omitted;

(2)               the call-in on ground (b) – the absence of adequate evidence on which to base a decision – not be upheld due to insufficient grounds;

(3)               the call-in on ground (f) – insufficient consideration of legal and financial advice – be upheld, as there was no evidence of legal advice having been provided or considered in the body of the Part 1 report;

(4)               that Cabinet give consideration to the inclusion of a paragraph on ‘Legal Implications’ in the Cabinet report template.

Report of the Divisional Director for Environment.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the implementation of the Transformation Project for the Public Realm Integrated Services Model, as set out in the Full Business Case, be agreed;

(2)               the Corporate Director of Environment and Enterprise, in liaison with the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety, take the necessary actions to implement the Project.

Reason for Decision:  To achieve the savings targets agreed previously in the MTFS and transform the services covered by the Project.

Alternative Options considered and rejected:  As set out in appendix 2 of the officer report.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation granted:  None.

The Divisional Director of Environmental Services introduced the report, which set out a summary of the full business case developed for the Public Realm Integrated Services Management (PRISM) transformation project intended to change the arrangements for service delivery in the Environment Division of the Directorate of Environment and Enterprise.  The proposals would also achieve savings for 2013/14 previously identified in the Medium Term Financial Strategy. Cabinet also considered a confidential appendix setting out the full business case for the proposals.

The Divisional Director added that the proposals, if approved, would entail in an increased use of new technology which would also help ensure a greater presence and visibility on the borough’s streets, reduce the number of staff employed although front line service would be protected, and a different way of working.

The Portfolio Holder for Planning, Development and Enterprise, corrected the reference to the Trading Standards service in paragraph 7 on page 459 of the agenda.  The service was described as outsourced to Brent, but it was in fact a formal partnership between Harrow and Brent Councils, hosted by Brent.  The Portfolio Holder asked how the project impacted on Service Standards.

The Divisional Director acknowledged the correction made and, in relation to the question, replied that the project protected current Service Standards and would introduce greater efficiency and performance management, thereby improving value for money.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the implementation of the Transformation Project for the Public Realm Integrated Services Model, as set out in the Full Business Case, be agreed;

(2)               the Corporate Director of Environment and Enterprise, in liaison with the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety, take the necessary actions to implement the Project.

Reason for Decision:  To achieve the savings targets agreed previously in the MTFS and transform the services covered by the Project.

Alternative Options considered and rejected:  As set out in appendix 2 of the officer report.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation granted:  None.