Oral report of the Corporate Director of Environment and Enterprise
Minutes:
The Chair welcomed the Corporate Director of Environment and Enterprise and Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety to the meeting.
The Corporate Director stated that in terms of priorities her mantra was operational excellence and agenda for growth. In terms of operational excellence, this was about putting the customer at the heart of everything her service delivered. It was also about a service that impacted positively on the Council’s reputation and was valued by all as well as having a workforce that felt valued and well led. In terms of agenda for growth, this was about exploiting the opportunities that still existed in Harrow and to recognise the role Harrow played in West London.
The Corporate Director advised that there were a number of challenges ahead. There was no commonly held view as to what ‘good’ looked like in her service and Members often held diametrically opposed views and this had to be balanced. Whilst there were significant challenges in terms of the budget, the budget forecast for the current year was for an underspend. She reported that there was a need to reduce some service specifications and to engage with the community to see if residents were willing to do certain activities themselves. Other challenges included inconsistent levels of staff morale and poor management in some areas of the service.
In terms of opportunities, the Corporate Director reported that whilst there was an opportunity to create a unified workforce and that she was in discussion with her management team on plans, these could not be delivered at a time of intense change. Different ways of engaging with staff had to be found as there had been too great a focus on management in the past. There were opportunities to learn from the best and to put Harrow at the forefront of place shaping.
Members then asked a series of questions which included the following:
· A Member asked what the consensus view of what a good service looked like, what the priorities were and how they were being measured. The Corporate Director responded that this would come out of the service planning process and once the plans were developed they would be shared more widely.
The Member expressed concern at the response received and stated that he had been advised that the commissioning process panel had focused on outcomes and now the budget had been set. He was therefore unclear as to how officers had got this far through the process without knowing the outcomes sought. He sought clarification on the outcomes set in the commissioning process panel and what outcomes were going to be delivered to residents. The Corporate Director advised that the Corporate Plan set out the priorities that would be delivered through the service plans.
· In response to a Member’s question as to the Corporate Director’s ideas for improving staff morale, the Corporate Director advised that it was inevitable that staff would have concerns about their future in an organisation that was down sizing, particularly if the individuals had been employed by the same employer for many years. There had already been significant staff reductions, particularly at management level, and until all those that were leaving had left the organisation and the new employees were in post, the service could not move forward. Currently, the transition was being managed by managers who did not know their own future.
· A Member sought clarification as to what the Corporate Director intended when she talked about ‘learning from the best’ and was advised that many other organisations had already actioned issues/plans that Harrow was doing or intended to do. Many organisations went through the same process and due to capacity issues it would be necessary to use other’s ideas.
· In response to a Member’s query as to what was being done to support those staff with a lack of transferable skills, the Corporate Director advised that a support package had been put in place and included application and interview training. In addition, bespoke sessions would be organised for individuals. The reality was that she would not be able to identify positions for potentially 100 displaced staff.
· A Member stated that through PRISM it appeared that that the directorate would be losing many of its senior officers and he questioned how the service could move forward with the loss of this level of experience. The Corporate Director confirmed that there was to be a reduction from 30 to 15 managers but that the previous management structure had not had the spans of control required by the organisation. She stated that management capacity should be satisfactory but that she was aware that experienced officers would be leaving the Council’s employ. The Portfolio Holder added that the service had changed and that the process would bring forward staff that were capable but who may not necessarily have the experience or years service.
Another Member questioned whether the IT support for the new ways of working had been analysed as implementing new systems could take an inordinate amount of time. The Corporate Director advised that there was already a significant amount of technology in place and that there was a full project implementation plan which she would share with Members.
A Member requested that the new structure in relation to PRISM be circulated to members of the Committee as it might be something that Scrutiny Members would wish to consider. Another Member asked whether there were opportunities within the new staffing structure as there needed to be a balance of staff. The Corporate Director confirmed the need to try and balance expertise but flagged up that there may be potential issues in recruiting managers from within the service in that the result could be an all white male management team. Good managers that understood the impact of their actions on other areas of the service were required.
· In response to a Member’s challenge as to what the Corporate Director had done in terms of viewing the customer experience, what she had learnt from it and something specific that she had changed as a result, the Corporate Director advised that the customer journey was key to the service. She spent one day a fortnight at the Depot and had regular conversations with both the staff and unions.
· A Member sought clarification as to which parks would no longer be closed at night and was advised that the hierarchy of parks was being considered as had been agreed by Council in 2012. Some parks would be exemplar whilst others would be park and meadow land. The Portfolio Holder added that the Council would be working with the Parks’ Users Association.
· In terms of the agenda for growth and the ambitious plans for the borough, a Member questioned whether the enterprise element of the directorate was being undermined and whether there would be sufficient planners and enforcement officers. The Corporate Director shared the Member’s concern but advised that enforcement activity had been safeguarded in the budget. It may, however, be necessary to work with other boroughs. There had been fewer reductions in planning than there might have been and she was confident that the service could cope. In terms of major projects there was, however, no capacity.
The Chair thanked the Corporate Director and Portfolio Holder for their attendance and responses..