MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE RESOURCES SELECT COMMITTEE HELD AT COUNTY HALL, NEWPORT, ISLE OF WIGHT ON MONDAY, 2 FEBRUARY 2004 COMMENCING AT 9.30 AM
Present :
Mrs M J Lloyd (Chairman), Mr M J Cunningham, Mr J F Howe, Mr P D Joyce, Mrs B Lawson, Mrs M J Miller, Mr K Pearson, Mr G P Price, Mr I R Stephens, Mr R A Sutton, Mr D T Yates
Apologies :
Mr V J Morey
Portfolio Holder:
Mr R R Barry
Also Present (non voting) :
Mr A C Bartlett. Mrs M A Jarman, Mr R G Mazillius
63. MINUTES
RESOLVED :
THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 18 December 2003 be confirmed.
64. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Mr R A Sutton declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Minute 66 – Printing Procurement as he was related to the Print Unit Manager – and left the room.
65. BUDGET CONSULTATION
The Chief Financial Officer reported on the 2004/05 revised budget and 2005/06 forecast. He advised members that although the Council had received an improved Formula Spending Share for 2004/05 this fell short of providing the level of financing required for a standstill. The final Grant Settlement had now been received, which was £180,000 less than anticipated, this meant an extra 0.35% increase above the 5.9% required to provide for a standstill budget. It was therefore anticipated that a rise of 6.25% in Council Tax would be needed. This took into account additional funding being made available on a one off basis, and changes to discounts in Council Tax on second homes and empty properties.
Members asked if the revised members’ allowances was included in the increase and were advised that they were. They also wanted to know if any other such increases were included. The Portfolio Holder advised that a comparison of last years and this years accounts could be undertaken. The Committee asked for clarification on the £100,000 for the Home Improvement Agency Staffing and whether it also included the setting up costs. The Committee believed it was necessary to clarify matters but believed the details contained in the report were confusing.
All ICT work appeared to have been taken out and the Committee questioned how the Council were to achieve e-government this year what liabilities would be incurred if not achieved. Members asked if any progress had been made on finding a Strategic Partner for GAGS. The Portfolio Holder advised that no decision had yet been made although there had been five presentations to date. There was also some debate on S.17 Crime and Disorder budget.
As the Council was working towards Investors in People (IIP), members queried why the staff career pathway planning was to be cut from the budget and what was to be gained by IIP if staff were not being invested in.
In respect of the revenue budget for Policy and Economic Development the Head of Corporate Policy and Communications advised that two staff had been transferred from the Partnership although there was no budget for their salaries. Members suggested that such action should not have taken place without the transfer of the appropriate salary funding.
RESOLVED :
THAT no recommendations be made, on the basis of lack of information in
the report.
66. PRINTING PROCUREMENT
(Mr R A Sutton declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item and left the room).
(During the debate Mrs M A Jarman declared a personal and prejudicial interest, as her son operated a photocopying business, and left the room).
The Compliance and Risk Manager reminded members that at its meeting on 18 December 2003, the Committee had requested a further analysis of the arrangements for procuring the printing needs of the Council.
The Select Committee were advised that if implemented correctly, the policy of sourcing all Council printing requirements through a central point had the potential to achieve significant savings for the Council.
The Portfolio Holder advised members that it was Council policy, which had been set by the Executive in March 2002, that all printing orders should go through the Print Unit. After receiving advice from the Head of Legal and Democratic Services the Portfolio Holder was told that the resolution would require the approval of the Executive, but this had not been done. Subsequently he had, under his delegated powers tried to reinforce the policy, but had not signed the decision form as the wording that had been used did not accord to what the Select Committee had wanted.
The Head of Corporate Policy and Communications told members that he had sent an e-mail to all Directors and Heads of Services advising them that all printing was to be countersigned by the Print Unit Manager. A subsequent letter to a councillor dated 19 August 2003 advised that the recommendation was still to go to the Executive for approval, but members were now being told that that approval was not necessary. The Head of Corporate Policy and Communications advised the Select Committee that the Chief Executive Officer had indicated that no formal decision from the Executive was required. The Head of Corporate Policy and Communications would send further instruction to all users, advising that all printing was to be sourced through the Print Unit and countersigned by the Print Unit Manager.
There was some discussion with regard to artwork being undertaken externally, members questioned this as the Council had three Graphic Designs Teams internally. They believed an investigation into this should also be undertaken.
Members were reminded that a consultant had been engaged in 2000. The Print Unit was operated on a breakeven status but fell short in 2003 by £35,000. A post for a modern apprentice had been advertised and interviews held. Unfortunately no one was appointed to the post and there was no longer funding for the vacancy. The Committee asked if funding was available for another study to be undertaken and were advised that there was. Members did not believe a further study was needed, and the Print Unit Manager should be able to put a budget together to enable it to run to its fullest extent, thereby achieving a trading surplus.
The Committee were told that the volume of photocopying done within the print unit had fallen. Members believed that an investigation into photocopier use throughout the Council should be undertaken. An update on printing services and photocopying use should be brought back to the Committee in six months to ensure that appropriate actions were being implemented.
RESOLVED :
THAT with the approval of the Portfolio Holder :
(i) all printing work is to be sourced through the Print Unit.
(ii) all orders for printing must be countersigned by the Print Unit Manager.
(iii) a letter and e-mail be sent to all users advising them of this.
(iv) the Print Unit monitors all invoices for printing and anyone not complying be brought to account.
(v) a monitoring report on printing and photocopying be brought back to this Committee in six months.
(vi) the functions of the Council’s internal Graphic Design Teams be investigated.
67. SURVEY OF OUTSIDE BODIES
The Head of Select Committee and Best Value Support told the Select Committee that on 24 November 2003 a questionnaire had been sent to all 138 outside bodies, on which the Council was represented, with a return deadline of 31 December 2003. To date 77 responses had been received, of those 72 still required Council representation, 5 did not and 61 had not responded.
A second questionnaire would be sent to all those who had not responded with a further month in which to reply. If a reply was still not forthcoming then members on those outside bodies would be asked for their views.
RESOLVED :
THAT the views of those Members serving on those outside bodies not replying to the current questionnaire be sought.
68. FORWARD PLAN
Members were made aware of items in the Executive’s Forward Plan for February to May 2004 for matters relating to the Resources Select Committee.
There was some discussion in relation to Prestwood Farm. Members were advised that advice received from Counsel was for a Discontinuance Order to be sought. The Executive would recommend this action to the Development Control Committee. Members asked which Select Committee had Planning Policy as its remit and were advised it was Economic Development, Planning, Tourism and Leisure Services. The Committee believed that planning policies should be looked at as a matter of urgency.
RESOLVED :
THAT the Forward Plan be noted.
68. MEMBERS’ QUESTION TIME
Mrs M J Miller asked a question in relation to Select Committee recommendations being passed to the Executive or relevant Portfolio Holder. (MQ 7/04)
Mr A C Bartlett asked a question in relation to sourcing of orders through the print unit. (MQ 8/04)
A copy of the questions and replies given are
contained in the Members’ Question Register.
CHAIRMAN