SUMMARY/PURPOSE

1. To report the Corporate response to the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the Corporate processes surrounding the 2002 Music Festival launch event.

BACKGROUND

2. In June 2002 the Council promoted a Music Festival with a one day launch event, branded Rock Island, as the cornerstone.

3. The launch event was run on the basis of the Council assuming all financial risk (and potential reward). Despite optimistic financial projections, due to ticket sales being less than anticipated, a trading loss of £380,000 was incurred by the event.

4. As the decision making leading to, and delivery of, the event was analysed, it become apparent that key players had a range of understanding about the unfolding of events. Significant questions were being asked about the quality and lawfulness of the decision making processes and of the contractual structure.

5. In order to obtain a clear picture of events, the Monitoring Officer commissioned a report from Neil Newton (a highly experienced, recently retired, Local Authority Senior Manager, selected from a short list of three similarly experienced names put forward by the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives). The report he produced represented an informed analysis of the decision making in relation to the 2002 event with which to inform decision making about future events.

6. The report (which was circulated to all elected Members, the press and to interested members of the public, and is a background paper to this report), identifies a number of positive elements about the launch event, including;

§ It was run with an appropriately selected commercial partner.

§ The operational aspects were delivered successfully.

§ Substantial economic and PR benefits arose.

§ There is a sound basis for future events.

7. The investigation was not specifically an enquiry into why projected ticket sales failed to fully materialise. In November 2002 the Executive had decided not to run future festivals on the basis of the council should not carry unnecessary financial risk and it, therefore, became less important to ascertain why the forecasts in relation to the 2002 event were proved wrong. For the purposes of this report it is sufficient to note that Neil Newton concluded that the selection of Solo as a partner was reasonable. It follows, therefore, that it was reasonable to rely upon a forecast of ticket sales validated by Solo.

8. There were a number of failings identified, which are corporate rather than individual. These can be summarised as a failure to take timely, well informed decisions based on sufficient communication between key officers and members using (at the time new and sometimes unfamiliar) internal processes to their full and proper effect. In this context there was a question about whether the projections on ticket sales were subject to a timely risk assessment – and indeed whether magnitude of the risk being assumed was made fully known to the Executive.

9. In particular, Neil Newton identified as areas which could be learned from-

§ A lack of ownership of the festival project amongst senior officers, reflecting

§ Misunderstandings about the respective roles of officer–member working groups, select committees and the Executive, leading to

§ A lack of timely collaboration between officers in preparing formal reports to members, and

§ Lack of clarity over the contractual position in relation to future events.

10. Three formal recommendations were made by Neil Newton;

§ There was and maybe still is, a widespread misunderstanding about the formal decision making processes in a Leader/Cabinet model of operation. Officers were quite clearly treating the Select Committee as a decision making Committee as under the previous Local Authority Committee system. The new Monitoring Officer should in my view undertake a widespread training exercise to explain in words of one syllable how the decision process works to all Members and the top layers of management of the Authority. During the course of this training for Officers they might also be reminded of the old and on-going requirement to include all relevant factors in a report.

§ The new Head of Paid Service should consider in the light of the failures in Senior Officer communications I refer to, how best to foster a more open and co-operative culture at the top of the organisation. The e-mail is now ubiquitous, but talking to each other is still a wonderful medium.

§ There is a danger of a “them and us” situation developing between Wight Leisure and the rest of the organisation. This needs stamping on before it significantly affects the success of the externalisation of Wight Leisure.

11. The Audit Commission has received objections to the accounts in relation to the 2002 event and have indicated that they will be undertaking specific work to identify any recommendations which can be made from the perspective of the external auditor. Any such recommendations will be reported to the Executive or to Full Council separately from this report in due course.

CORPORATE RESPONSE

12. Neil Newton’s report came at the end of a period of intense inspection activity and reflection by the Council on its own strengths and weaknesses. The recommendations made by the report into the festival launch event are entirely consistent with the messages from the comprehensive performance assessment and Members can base some confidence on the fact that many of the actions which are identified below as addressing Neil Newton’s recommendations were planned, or contemplated, in any event. This is not to suggest that the response to the recommendations by Neil Newton is being marginalized. To the contrary, Neil Newton’s work emphasised and supports the Councils existing analysis of areas of its performance which need to be improved.

13. Specific actions which have been taken, or are planned, are as follows:

· A programme of training, titled Decision Making, and encompassing context; rules; processes; performance management and prioritisation – to be run monthly for the rest of this year and thereafter on a regular basis. A proposed programme is attached as Appendix 1. The training will be mandatory for the groups of officers identified in the Appendix.

· The strategic management team (Heads of Service and Strategic Directors) is an increasingly active and focussed unit. Three two day residential sessions and bi-monthly meetings have generated tangible outputs such as priority led budget process, performance management processes and the Great Access to Great Services agenda, which are beyond the scope of this report. Equally important the group is now demonstrating a sense of common purpose and understanding which makes the occasional poor practice of the past significantly less likely.

· A new approach to Executive decision making is emerging. Decisions by the Executive are already less in number, and more strategic in nature, than in November 2001 when the 2002 launch event was approved. This is being supported by a re-engineering of the strategic decision making process. Currently, by using the Forward Plan to it’s maximum effect, the corporate/strategic significance of all decisions which are not genuinely so urgent that they could not have been predicted are considered by the Directors Group prior to determination by the Executive. This process also provides for a quality check on options appraisal and risk assessment/management.

· The Select Committee work programmes have already been designed as a parallel approach ensuring those Committees have the opportunity to consider Executive decisions before they are made. The priority, which requires further investment in the systems, technology and staff supporting decision making, is to ensure strategic decision making is a seamless process from inception through delivery and monitoring to evaluation.

· A review in Autumn 2003, of the constitutional arrangements and documentation to ensure the constitution is fit for purpose and supports the delivery of excellent corporate governance.

· To ensure that the work of the select committees adds value to corporate decisions making processes, and that none of their recommendations are “lost”, a simple but effective tracking system is being developed, which will collate all select committee recommendations and record the outcome/response to them.

· A programme of technical risk management training has been delivered to 21 senior officers and 13 members by Marsh Associates.

· Establishment of a quarterly meeting between the Head of Paid Service, Chief Finance Officer and Monitoring Officer to monitor ethical and governance issues

· Corporate performance management arrangements make the implementation of decisions better planned, monitored and evaluated.

WIGHT LEISURE

14. Since the receipt of Neil Newton’s report members and officers have made concerted efforts to ensure that the decision making and operational processes are conducted properly and in a constructive manner. Particular actions include:

· Formation of a core group of Executive Members consisting of the Leader, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Tourism and Leisure to both drive and monitor the process.

· A personal role for the then Chairman of the Economic Development, Planning, Tourism and Leisure Services Select Committee in ensuring good communication with the senior management of Wight Leisure.

· Appointment of Tony Hall as an additional resource to review the process to date and to ensure delivery of the necessary procedural steps.

· An increased role for the Strategic Director of Education in chairing fortnightly meetings of the key officers and members involved in the process.

15. No decision in relation to Wight Leisure will be taken until the process is complete to the extent that transparent and unimpeachable decisions can be taken. This approach will be demanding on the time and energy of members and officers, particularly staff within Wight Leisure whose future employment will be directly affected. The acknowledgement that there is a tension between the desire to see a speedy and to achieve a positive outcome to the ongoing process and the need to ensure a robust process is an essential part of the response to Neil Newton’s third recommendation.

STRATEGIC CONTEXT

16. The Council has adopted in the Corporate Plan four commitments to improve the Council’s way of working including strong political leadership and continuous organisational improvement . This encapsulates and goes beyond the spirit and letter of Neil Newton’s recommendations.

17. This report emphasises the link between specific actions to address the recommendations in Neil Newton’s report and other organisational development activity. A primary driver for that activity is the Corporate Performance Assessment Improvement Plan, approved by the Executive on 26 March. The plan, which compliments the Corporate Plan and precedes the annual action statement is wider in scope and ambition than the actions necessary to respond to the lessons of the festival. Those lessons, as set out by Neil Newton are, however a useful additional source of advice on how to achieve organisational improvement and a reminder of the potential consequences of not doing so.

CONSULTATION

17. This report discusses internal decision making processes and consultation has therefore been internal only.

FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPLICATIONS

18. Changes to the way the Council manages its finances are underway at present, and form part of the Council’s CPA action plan, and are consistent with Neil Newton’s recommendations. They are designed to deliver a stronger link between resource allocation and the Council’s priorities and will be delivered within the Council’s current improvement agenda.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

19. The delivery of a well considered response to the lessons to be learned from the 2002 festival launch event, co-ordinated with other corporate development activity, is an essential part of demonstrating that the council is a learning organisation, improving the quality of corporate governance and of service delivery, which is a hall mark of good and excellent councils under the CPA regime.

OPTIONS

20. i. To adopt the corporate response set out in paragraphs 12 to 15;

ii. To encourage members to attend the Decision Making training events as a matter of priority

iii. To add further strands to the corporate response.

EVALUATION/RISK MANAGEMENT

21. The Council is committed to a programme of improvement and reform. To miss the opportunity to reinforce and/or refine that programme through learning from past poor practise is to miss an opportunity to deliver better and quicker improvement and to increase the likelihood of such poor practice in the future.

RECOMMENDATIONS

22. i. and ii.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

23. Neil Newton Report, CPA Improvement Plan, Reports to Executive

Contact Point : John Lawson, ( 823207, e-mail: [email protected]

M J A FISHER

Chief Executive Officer and Strategic Director of Corporate Services

S A SMART

Leader of the Council