Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were submitted from Adrian Mather and Stuart Munro.

Ian Pittock attended the meeting as a substitute.

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 12 June 2023.

The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 12 June 2023 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To receive any declarations of interest.

There were no declarations of interest.

To answer any public questions. A period of 30 minutes will be allowed for members of the public to ask questions submitted under notice. The Council welcomes questions from members of the public about the work of this Committee.

Subject to meeting certain timescales, questions can relate to general issues concerned with the work of the Committee or an item which is on the Agenda for this meeting.  For full details of the procedure for submitting questions please contact the Democratic Services Section on the numbers given below or go to www.wokingham.gov.uk/publicquestions

There were no public questions.

To answer any Member questions.

There were no Member questions.

To consider a presentation from the Leader of the Council on challenges/opportunities for the year ahead – followed by Q&A.

Councillor Stephen Conway, Leader of the Council, attended the meeting to give a presentation (set out at Agenda pages 13 to 20) on the challenges and opportunities facing the Council over the next year. Graham Ebers, Deputy Chief Executive and Director of Resources and Assets, also attended the meeting to answer Member questions.

The presentation highlighted the following challenges facing the Council:

·           an unprecedented financial position with spiralling inflation coupled with a Budget gap;

·           the cost of living crisis, rising inflation and growing financial pressure on local communities;

·           inconsistency in partnership relationships leading to missed opportunities for collaboration;

·           an opportunity to improve governance, scrutiny (especially the “Overview” aspect of Overview and Scrutiny) and review.

Councillor Conway outlined the ongoing work to develop a new Community Vision for the Borough. This had involved a range of workshops with community representatives including Town and Parish Councils, the community and voluntary sector, NHS, Age UK, CLASP, Youth Council and Thames Valley Police. The workshops had developed themes relating to health and wellbeing, equality, inclusion and opportunity, environment and sustainability, community engagement, working with young people and the business community.

Some of the aims of the Community Vision were to empower residents, improve quality of life, reduce inequality, focus on outcomes and build deeper collaboration between partners across the Borough.

Councillor Conway concluded by highlighting the key next steps:

·           continuing to provide a safe Budget position for WBC, now and in future years, whilst protecting the most vulnerable within the Borough;

·           moving forwards with the Community Vision for the Borough, through co-production and community engagement;

·           working in partnership with more organisations to drive better outcomes for the Borough.

In the ensuing discussion, Members raised the following points and questions:

How could the Overview and Scrutiny Committees support the development of policy? Councillor Conway commented that it would be useful if Scrutiny was more engaged in the early stages of policy development, providing “critical friend” challenge and support.

How was the impact of soaring inflation managed within contractual arrangements? Was the difference between projected and actual inflation levels an element in the Budget pressures facing the Council? Graham Ebers explained that there were different contractual arrangements depending on the type of contract. More traditional contracts, e.g. in Place and Growth would be linked to an index. There were also more variable contracts, e.g. in the care services where an understanding of the market was essential, i.e. ensuring that smaller providers were able to continue to operate. The impact of inflation over the past year had resulted in an £11m pressure in the Budget. This was much higher than in previous years.

The development of the proposed Community Vision could be considered as “pie in the sky” and an attempt to offload WBC responsibilities to partners. What tangible benefits would be delivered for residents of the Borough? Councillor Conway stated that the new approach was about working with partners rather than offloading onto partners. It was about working collaboratively in order to deliver more with less  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

To consider the Annual Formal Complaints Report for 2022/23.

The Committee considered a report, set out at Agenda pages 21 to 34, which gave details of formal complaints received by the Council in 2022/23.

Jackie Whitney (Strategic Lead for Customer, Change, Digital & IT) and Daneet Penny (Corporate Complaints Officer) attended the meeting to introduce the report and answer Member questions. This was the first time that the complaints report had been submitted to the Committee. In previous years the report had been submitted to the Audit Committee.

The Council’s formal complaints process contained three stages – stage 1 and stage 2 were internal investigations. Stage 3 was signposting to the relevant Ombudsman. The majority of complaints in 2022/23 were resolved early without recourse to the formal stage 1 process.

The report noted that, in May 2022, Housing Services began managing complaints in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s new complaints handling code.

The report stated that 2022/23 saw a 28.2% increase in the number of formal complaints. This was linked to the introduction of the Housing Ombudsman’s complaints handling code which removed the option of early resolution. Of the complaints received, 78% were resolved early without formal escalation to stage 1. Across all stages, 32.5% were upheld/partially upheld, 55% were not upheld and 12.5% were undetermined. The report included details of the number and type of complaints received in each of the Council’s directorates

In the ensuing discussion, Members raised the following points and questions.

What constituted a complaint? It was explained that a service request, e.g. not cutting the grass, could become a service failure and a complaint if the service request was not responded to in a reasonable time.

Was there a time limit for each of the stages within the complaints process? It was confirmed that the aim was to achieve early resolution within five working days. For stage 1 the deadline for a response was 15 working days. For stage 2 the deadline was 20 working days. The majority of these deadlines were met. It was suggested that the next annual report include details of performance against the deadlines for each stage.

In relation to page 27 of the report – Customer Compliments – it was suggested that a balancing page of Customer Complaints be included in the next annual report.

Was there any benchmarking of the Council’s performance in handling complaints? It was confirmed that benchmarking was carried out through looking at the Ombudsman annual reviews which compared different councils. It was noted that different councils used different stages in their procedures.

The report referred to staff training on the 3Cs – care, clarity and confidence. To date, 122 staff members had undertaken the training. The training had improved the quality of complaint responses, with fewer stage 2 escalations and higher customer satisfaction. Consideration was being given to introducing 3C principles into the corporate induction and annual staff appraisal processes. It was confirmed that a team of six quality assurance assessors was working across services to quality assess, advise on best practice and ensure that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

To consider and comment on the draft Bus Enhanced Partnership and Scheme.

The Committee considered a report, set out at Agenda pages 35 to 100, which gave details of the proposed Bus Enhanced Partnership and Scheme.

Paul Fishwick, Executive Member for Active Travel, Transport and Highways, attended the meeting to answer Member questions. Councillor Fishwick was supported by Giorgio Framalicco (Director of Place and Growth) and Rebecca Brooks (Community Transport Manager).

The report stated that the National Bus Strategy (2021) required all Local Transport Authorities to publish a Local Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) and an agreed Enhanced Partnership (EP). An EP was a legal partnership agreement with bus operators agreed following the publication of the improvement plan.

The aim of the BSIP and the EP was to raise standards of local bus services and ensure that services met local needs. The Council had been unsuccessful in obtaining any BSIP grant funding, but had recently been awarded £400k for 2023/24. In order to receive the full BSIP funding the Council had to agree the Enhanced Partnership by the end of September 2023.

The EP had two components – the Enhanced Partnership Plan (EPP) and the Enhanced Partnership Scheme (EPS). The EPP sets out the Council’s vision for local bus services with objectives for the improvement of local bus services. The EPS formed the basis for the Enhanced Partnership agreement and set out which party would deliver specific improvements by a target date.

The Committee was requested to review the Draft Enhanced Partnership Plan and Scheme. It was noted that any Member suggestions for enhanced services or facilities must be accompanied by a costed proposal.

In the ensuing discussion, Members raised the following points and questions.

It was confirmed that the Enhanced Partnership Forum included voting rights for the Council’s Executive Member (Chair + 1 vote), WBC officers and bus operators within the scheme area.

If the Enhanced Partnership involved a legal agreement, was there an exit clause? It was confirmed that officers would review the supporting legislation to determine whether an exit clause could be included in the agreement. It was noted that any exit clause would have to be equal for both parties – WBC and the bus operators.

If a new bus operator started to run services in the area, would it be able to join the partnership? It was confirmed that if a new operator registered a route, they could become part of the partnership.

Para 1.4.5 of the report referred to the hospital shuttle Park and Ride bus which had the potential to be developed into a local bus service. How would this be communicated to residents? It was confirmed that an update on this new service would be included in the Council’s Travel and Traffic News.

In relation to the Broken Bow Park and Ride – will park and ride tickets be available? It was confirmed that tickets would be available for the journey to the hospital.

In relation to the proposed Bus Stop Audit – would this cover all bus stops or just the bus stops  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

To consider the current published version of the Executive Forward Programme and the Individual Executive Member Decision Forward Programme.

The Committee considered a copy of the Executive and IEMD Forward Programmes, as set out on Agenda pages 101 to 114.

In the ensuing discussion, Members raised the following points.

·           Proposals relating to changes to the litter bin emptying service would be submitted to the Executive after appropriate consultation;

·           Officers to check if the Autism and Neurodiversity Strategy had been considered by the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee – if not, the Strategy to be considered by HOSC;

·           Provision of solar farms within the Climate Emergency Action Plan to be a standing item on the Climate Emergency Overview and Scrutiny Committee;

·           Clarification be sought on the contents of the item relating to “Promotion of WBC Assets”;

·           Clarification be sought that Members were receiving a regular copy of the Executive Forward Programme in line with the Council’s Constitution.

RESOLVED: That the Executive and IEMD Forward Programmes be noted, subject to the further clarification/information requested by Members.

To discuss the work programme of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee and Overview and Scrutiny Committees.

The Committee considered its forward work programme and that of the Overview and Scrutiny Committees as set out on Agenda pages 115 to 140.

The report included details of the suggestions submitted by residents and Town and Parish Councils for inclusion in the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programmes.

In the ensuing discussion, Members made the following comments.

·           3G Facility at Laurel Park – this issue to be considered as part of a wider item on the Borough’s Sports Pitch Strategy.

·           Suggested items relating to road safety, highways maintenance, potholes, etc. be referred to the Community and Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

·           Members noted that an update report on estate infrastructure, following the 2020 Task and Finish Group report, would be submitted to the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee on 11 September 2023.

·           A report on WBC Staff recruitment and retention be added to the Management Committee’s forward work programme.

·           Clarification be sought on the reporting line for the Council’s investment portfolio, i.e. what was currently reported to the Audit Committee and was there a potential role for Scrutiny.

·           Following the successful attendance by Thames Water at Overview and Scrutiny, officers seek possible attendance by representatives from SSEN.

·           Community and Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee consider the inclusion of an item on grass cutting performance in 2023.

RESOLVED: That the Overview and Scrutiny Forward Work Programmes for 2023/24, as amended, be approved.

To consider the regular Action Tracker report.

The Committee considered the regular Action Tracker report.

RESOLVED: That the Action Tracker report be noted.