Members are requested to consider whether they have a personal or prejudicial interest in connection with any of the items on this agenda and, if so, to declare it and state the nature of such interest.

No declarations of interest were received.

To receive the minutes of the meeting held on 18 January 2012

RESOLVED:

That the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 18 January 2012 be confirmed as a correct record.

Councillor S Foulkes informed that he wished to discuss an item of urgent business which had arisen as a result of comments made by members of the Improvement Board.  This was in respect of the possible duplication of work that would arise if it and this Committee continued to meet.  He intended to discuss this matter at the end of the meeting when all the other business had been dealt with.

A report by the Chief Executive updated Members on progress with the delivery of the comprehensive work programme to improve corporate governance.  The report highlighted progress against the 10 Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOEs) approved by the Committee at its meeting on 16 November 2011(Minute No. 13 refers).  It also updated Members on progress with the on going cultural change programme and the resultant communications activities.

Cultural Change and resultant Communications Progress

• Since the last Committee meeting on 18 January 2012 further developments had been made with regard to the cultural change milestones proposed by Anna Klonowski.

An updated status report was available at Appendix 1 to the report to illustrate this progress.

• A series of eleven Destination Excellence events had been held on 12 and 13 January 2012 and over 4,000 Council staff attended. These were delivered to share the vision and values of the draft Corporate Plan.  They also provided the opportunity to inform staff what needed to be done to achieve this vision.  Just over 1,000 staff completed feedback forms at these events.  A summary of the main themes of this would be posted on the Council’s intranet.

• A number of channels had also been launched for staff to raise any of their concerns about corporate governance.  These include the opportunity to book a session for a one to one meeting with Cabinet Members and the ability to raise issues through a secure email address.

• A staff questionnaire had also been launched on 16 January 2012 with on-line; paper versions made available to ensure that all members of staff had the opportunity to participate.  The closing date for this had been 30 January 2012 and the results would be made available as soon as possible and would be formally reported to an appropriate meeting.  These results would also be used to inform a series of staff focus groups commencing in February 2012 which would inform the emerging cultural change programme.

• Progress had also been made in engaging with external partners.  The corporate governance work taking place across the Council had been raised at the last LSP meeting as part of a wider review of partnership working.  A range of meetings would now take place with thematic partnerships in February 2012 at which partners would be requested to provide feedback on a range of issues relating to corporate governance.  This work would inform the review of a number of the KLOEs and also the Cultural Change Programme, the Member Development Programme and the proposed improvement framework.

• Overall the cultural development and communications activity was on schedule with Anna Klonowski’s proposed milestones and timetable as

illustrated in Appendix 1 to the report.

Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOE) Progress

• Work had continued with all KLOEs; it was expected that all products would be delivered within the agreed project timescales. 

A report illustrating progress for each individual KLOE was available at Appendix 1 to the report

• At this stage, only KLOE 4 (Review of Internal Audit) continued to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

A report by the Chief Executive presented an update on the review of Performance Management within the Council.  It had been accepted that a robust Management Framework must be put in place to bring about improvement.  The Cabinet, at its meeting on 16 November 2011, had agreed that a review would be undertaken as part of the Work Programme.  This was now completed and as a result, having taken into consideration the best practice of other organisations, including Councils, a draft amended Framework was now being proposed at Appendix 1 to the report.

An outline business planning process for 2012/13 that reflected the revised Framework, but took on board the constraints associated with undertaking this review within the current business planning cycle, whilst not pre-empting the outcomes of other KLOE reviews was also being proposed at Appendix 2 to the report.

It was noted that a further report detailing the business planning process and the performance appraisal process for 2013/14 and beyond would be presented for consideration to an appropriate meeting in March 2012.

The Committee considered the detail of the Proposed Performance Improvement and Management Framework, the Proposed Business Planning Proces 2012/13 and Performance Appraisal process.

It was noted that the proposals for managing, monitoring, reviewing and reporting performance would be supported by a clear appraisal process that links individual performance to the achievement of the Council’s objectives. The appraisal process would also support the drive to embed an improvement culture within the organisation.  It was also noted that further details of the performance appraisal process would be reported to an appropriate meeting in March 2012 and it was proposed that the appraisal of all Chief Officers, Heads of Service and Service Managers would take place by the end of May 2012.  This would provide the opportunity for individual objectives to be set against the Corporate and Departmental plans and for Heads of Service to take the lead on developing Service Improvement Plans by the end of June 2012.  This would also enable recommendations arising from the work on the Code of Corporate Governance to be developed in that appraisals would be able to ensure compliance with key corporate governance policies and procedures.

The Chief Executive reported that work continued on delivering the objectives of KLOE 7 which would include the consideration and review of:

• the Corporate Business Planning Process; and
• the Leadership and Management approaches.

The Committee was informed that a further report would be submitted to an appropriate meeting in March 2012 which would summarise the conclusions and recommendations following consideration of the key themes.  The report would provide a more detailed business planning process and leadership and management approaches for 2013/14 and beyond, as well as the key milestones and resources required to achieve this.  It would also further detail any additional actions required post-March as part of the Council’s revised approach to performance management, efficiency and improvement.

The Committee was also informed that the good practice exercised by Public Health in respect of its  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

A report by the Chief Executive provided an overview of the products which would result from the work taking place on the Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOEs) that underpinned the Corporate Governance Comprehensive Work Plan.  It also identified a number of linkages between the KLOEs and proposed that they inform the development of a Framework for implementing, sustaining and ensuring compliance of improvement actions.  This Improvement Framework would also provide a clear context for progressing the recommendations contained in the AKA report and other external reports, together with issues raised by employees through the range of discussions, questionnaires, meetings that were currently taking place.

The Committee was aware that work was progressing on each of the KLOEs and this would result in a number of discrete operational proposals that were relevant to each one.  Appendix 1 to the report set out the anticipated Products from each of the KLOEs together with an outline of when and how the improvement proposals would be brought forward.

This work was not being done in isolation, either from the other KLOEs or from existing mainstream delivery, as it was recognised that there were linkages across the programme.  These linkages were still emerging as the reviews neared completion, but a number of strategic actions and principles had been identified.  These included the following:

• Robust evidence base - Review of Policy, Review of Central and devolved functions, Review of Performance

• Involvement of partners, service users etc in developing evidence base - Review of Equalities, Review of Code of Corporate Governance

• Shared Vision and Values – Review of Corporate Plan and Budget, Communications, Review of Member Capacity, Review of Equalities

• Cultural Change – Review of Equalities, Communications Plan, Review of Performance Management

• Budget – Review of Corporate Plan and Budget, Review of Fees and Charges, Strategic Change programme

• Performance Management Framework – Review of Policy, Review of Performance management (HR and Corporate); Review of Committee Services

• Self assessment – Review of Policy, Review of Performance, Review of Corporate plan (alignment of resources), Peer Review – stress testing current improvements

It was proposed that these strategic actions formed the basis of the March report on the outcomes of the Corporate Governance Work Plan.  This report would be supported by a number of annexes setting out specific detailed recommendations relating to the individual KLOEs where relevant.  The Committee was informed that the majority of the work to deliver the ten KLOEs would be completed and reported on by the end of March 2012.  However, whilst this work ensured that a range of improvement actions were put in place, it also highlighted further longer term actions that would be required to ensure that improvements to corporate governance were fully embedded in how the Council did its business.

In addition, the range of employee engagement activities that Members had now put in place would give rise to a wealth of feedback that was likely to inform, not only issues relating directly to corporate governance, but also potentially to wider  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

A report by the Chief Executive set out the conclusions of a review of policy undertaken as part of the governance work programme agreed by the Cabinet at its meeting on 16 November 2011.

The Committee was informed that the Director of Public Health had been appointed as the project manager to undertake the review of policy and a project team had been established in November 2011.  The scope of the review had been agreed by the Chief Executive as project sponsor and the Deputy Leader of the Council as Lead Member, and the agreed objective had been to identify a model for a Council Policy Unit and take the necessary action required to implement this by April 2012.

As the result of the review, the Chief Executive’s report made proposals with regard to the decision made to establishment of the Policy Unit by April 2012.  Set out within the report was:

• the methodology and key findings of the research undertaken to inform the review;

• the proposed core functions of the Policy Unit based on these findings;

• an assessment of the requirements necessary to ensure the effective delivery of these functions; and

• the initial staffing and resource considerations.

The proposed functions of the Policy Unit were as follows:

To lead on a coherent and joined up approach to policy, planning and strategy development for the Council

The products and features of this function would include:

• regular policy briefings;
• well coordinated policy framework;
• development of the Council’s Corporate Plan and other strategic plans as appropriate; and
• policy network for the Council with all departments represented.

The intended outcomes of this function would be:

• Elected Members being well informed on current and future policy issues;
• an effective collaboration between departments on cross cutting policy issues;
• an robust implementation and review of policy decisions; and
• effective sharing of learning and best practice

To ensure that there is a robust knowledge and evidence based approach to decision making in order to tackle the key challenges for Wirral

The products and features of this function would include:

• a robust approach to ‘horizon scanning’ and dissemination of information;
• regular policy briefings;
• a single knowledge ‘hub’ / evidence base e.g. statistics, demographic information;
• an annual ‘state of the borough’ report; and
• a joined up approaches for research and information.

The intended outcomes of this function would be:

• the consistent use of evidence to develop Council plans and strategies; and
• a shared view within the Council and amongst partners about the key challenges / opportunities for Wirral

To engage with local and sub-regional partners to shape and respond to policy developments and implement decisions

The products and features of this function would include:

• utilising the Local Strategic Partnership to discuss policy drivers;
• innovative partnership working; and
• a clear briefing process in place to inform the Council’s contribution at City Region, regional and national level

The intended outcomes of this function would be:

• the Council and LSP proactively anticipates and plans for policy changes;
• shared view within the Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

The public may be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information.

RECOMMENDED – That, in accordance with section 100(A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined by the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A (as amended) to that Act. The public interest test has been applied and favours exclusion.

The Committee considered section 100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, whereby the public could be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined by paragraph 1 of Part I of Schedule 12A (as amended) to that Act.

The report contained information relating to an individual who had bid for a contract to support the Council’s Corporate Governance Improvement Programme and been successful.

When the Public Interest test was applied the Committee did not favour exclusion because it was considered that. it was in the public interest to make the information contained in the report available to the press and public.

RESOLVED:

That the press and public be not excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the next item of business as the public interest test has been applied and the Committee considers that it is in the public interest not to do so.

A report by the Chief Executive reminded the Committee that it had agreed the procedure for recruiting external assistance to support the Corporate Governance Improvement Programme at its meeting on 16 November 2011 (Minute No. 13 refers).  The overarching objective was to comply with the Council's Contract Procedure Rules.

The intention had been to source three quotations, one from the Local Government Association and others from two suppliers recommended by Anna Klonowski (AKA)

The LGA had confirmed on 7 December 2011 that it did not wish to tender for the work.

A procurement process using the Council's eTendering and sourcing portal (The Chest) had beenconducted for the two suppliers recommended by AKA. The process had closed on 23 December 2011 and neither supplier had responded and it had been confirmed on 29 December 2011 that one had officially withdrawn, and the other would participate if return period was extended.

Following discussions between the Council's Corporate Procurement Manager and the Deputy Chief Executive/Director of Finance it had been agreed to offer the remaining supplier the opportunity to bid, having due regard to the urgency of the work.

Consequently, the procurement process had been repeated and a subsequent proposal was received by the closing date of 20 January 2011.  Confirmation was then sought on the cost of the proposal.  This was received on 26 January 2011.  The cost was £15,000 (£1,000 per day) including expenses.

The Committee was informed that in the opinion of the Deputy Chief Executive/Director of Finance the respondent was appropriate to appoint for the following reasons:

• the bidder has appropriate skills, abilities and experience as evidenced in his CV;
• the bidder has extensive experience as finance director with more than 20 years at Board level, the last nine being at the City of London;
• the bidder is an experienced non-executive director and Audit Committee Chair;
• the bidder has wide knowledge of investment strategy, fund management and pensions;
• the bidder has deep understanding of the intricacies of public sector policy, finance and administration;
• the bidder has sound knowledge of property development and practical experience of major project management;
• the bidder has direct involvement in promoting carbon reduction projects at Salix Finance Limited and keen interest in environmental issues;
• the bidder has been recommended by AKA;
• the bidder’s charges are not unreasonable given the Council's timescale the nature of the work; and
• the alternative is to enter a further procurement process, which would mean that the work could not be completed within the timescale laid down by the Committee.

In accordance with Contract Procedure Rule 19.1.4 Peter Derrick, BA, CPFA had been appointed to undertake the External Support for the Review of Internal Audit at a cost of £15,000.

RESOLVED:

That the decision of the Deputy Chief Executive/Director of Finance to appoint Peter Derrick, CPFA, as an external assistance to support the Corporate Governance Improvement Programme , at a cost of £15,000 be endorsed.

Councillor S Foulkes provided the Committee with an account of the proceedings of the first Improvement Board meeting which had been held on 3 February 2012. The discussion had centred round the good work that had already been completed and what future issues would require Members to make decisions.  The Board in an attempt to avoid duplication had considered whether it was necessary for both it and this Committee to drive through improvements.  The overwhelming view was that the Improvement Board was the best vehicle to take the improvements agenda forward.  It was noted that the Board was not a decision-making body.  It had been established in purely an advisory capacity.  It was agreed to bring this proposal to this meeting to see if the Committee agreed with the Improvement Board’s view.

Some very good work was ongoing in respect of the ten Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOEs) and it was reported that the Improvement Board had been very clear that it would like this work to continue.  The original proposal had been that, by April 2012, this Committee would have the basic building blocks in place for improvements but it was noted that the Improvement Board had been set up for the longer term and had a two year programme of work to get through.  If the Committee was to be disbanded recommendations made by the Improvement Board must be referred to the Cabinet for its agreement or otherwise.

RESOLVED: That

(1)  this Committee will no longer meet;

(2)  reports scheduled for future consideration by the Committee will now be considered by the Improvement Board instead;

(3)  any recommendations of the Improvement Board will be referred to the Cabinet for decision; and

(4)  the Deputy Director of Finance be requested to draw up an appropriate schedule and timetable of Improvement Board meetings, reports it will be asked to consider at each of its meetings etc. and highlight which Cabinet meetings will be considering referrals and making decisions to bring about the improvements in Corporate Governance required.