Agenda, decisions and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meetings of the Committee held on 14 June 2018 and 21 June 2018.

The Minutes of the meetings held on 14^th and 21^st June 2018 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Leader.

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any personal, disclosable pecuniary or other registrable interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Councillor Marcus Franks declared an interest in Agenda Items 8 and 12, but reported that, as his interest was a personal or an other registrable interest, but not a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in the debate but did not vote on the matter.

Members of the Executive to answer questions submitted by members of the public in accordance with the Executive Procedure Rules contained in the Council’s Constitution.

There were no public questions submitted.

A full transcription of the public and Member question and answer sessions are available from the following link: Transcription of Q&As.

“Could the West Berkshire Council website have a tab to report Road Traffic Accidents?”

A question standing in the name of Deborah Bartley-Brown on the subject of whether the West Berkshire Council website had a tab to report Road Traffic Accidents, would receive a written response from the Executive Member for Planning, Housing and Waste.

There were no petitions presented to the Executive.

(CSP: SLE & HQL1)

Purpose: 

·         To agree the actions set out in this report to progress a Council Lottery Scheme.

·         To secure approval for use of the Aylesbury Vale Lottery Implementation Service on the basis of their established track record of providing support to other Councils and a good success rate.

·         To propose the Commissioning Service leads on contractual arrangements, implementation and ongoing operation of the Lottery.  Timescales to be agreed once formal approval has been secured.

·         To agree funding requirements as identified.

Resolved that:

(1)       The actions set out in the report to progress a Council Lottery Scheme be agreed;

(2)       To secure the use of the Aylesbury Vale Lottery Implementation Service on the basis of their established track record of providing support to other Councils and a good success rate;

(3)       It was agreed that the Commissioning Service would lead on contractual arrangements, implementation and ongoing operation of the Lottery.

(4)       Funding requirements as identified was agreed. 

This decision is eligible to be ‘called-in’.  However, if the decision has not been ‘called-in’ by 5.00pm on 2^nd August 2018, then it will be implemented.

The Executive considered a report (Agenda Item 6) to agree actions set out in this report to progress a Council Lottery Scheme.

Councillor Anthony Chadley confirmed that transformational funding would be used to cover one-off set up costs of £13k and that the benefits of running the scheme would only be realised in the long term. Income in excess of £100k was anticipated which would be used to support local discretionary services and good causes. This was a new, exciting and innovative idea which had been brought forward by a member of staff.

Councillor Alan Macro advised that the idea of a lottery had first been raised in 2016 by the Resources Select Committee and he stated that it was a shame that it had not been implemented earlier. He queried how much the prizes would be, how the prizes would be funded in the first stage and how the Management Company had been selected. Councillor Anthony Chadley responded that the External Licensed Manager formed part of the contract with Aylesbury Vale and was a standard system used for other Councils who operated a lottery. There was an indemnity in place to ensure that there were sufficient funds to cover off the prizes in the early stages. 20 pence of the £1 ticket price would go into the prize fund and the top prize would be £25k.

Councillor Chadley stated that it was proposed that the Community Solutions Panel should have its terms of reference expanded to include the award of lottery funding against a set of criteria to be agreed as part of the implementation plan. Marketing would be an essential part of the success of the lottery and any suggestions were welcome as to how this could be promoted across the whole community of West Berkshire.

RESOLVED that the proposed actions be agreed.

Other options considered: None

Purpose:  This report sets out the options available for the supply and provision of agency and temporary workers following consideration of all of the options, and their relative benefits and risks. The proposals are based upon an analysis of spend and category data that is available to review the options for purchasing.

Resolved that:

(1)       The ESPO framework be used;

(2)       Delegated authority to be given to the Head of Commissioning (in consultation with the Head of Finance and Head of Legal) to enter into a call off contract 5to the successful managed service provider via mini competition.

This decision is eligible to be ‘called-in’.  However, if the decision has not been ‘called-in’ by 5.00pm on 2^nd August 2018, then it will be implemented.

The Executive considered a report (Agenda Item 7) which set out the options available for the supply and provision of agency and temporary workers following consideration of all of the options, and their relative benefits and risks. The proposals were based upon an analysis of spend and category data that was available to review the options for purchasing.

Councillor Anthony Chadley in introducing the report advised that agency spend was a necessity. Many of the roles were diverse and varied and some were specialised. The Council currently spent around £4m per annum on agency and temporary staff and therefore it was hoped that savings in the region of £150k per annum could be achieved. He thanked Councillor Alan Law for his continued encouragement to look at reducing the amount spent on agency staff.

Councillor Alan Macro explained that Councillor Jeff Brooks had been in the business of agency staffing for around 35 years and he believed that a £4m spend was comparatively low and that the Council would have difficulty in achieving savings. He would be keen to meet with Councillor Chadley to offer advice and discuss this issue. Councillor Chadley assured the Executive that the £4m figure quoted was correct and the saving was a safe estimate. Areas had been identified where it was thought that there had been an overspend and he was confident that the savings would be achieved. He would, however, be happy to meet with Councillor Brooks to discuss the issue.

Councillor Alan Macro asked how managers would be made aware that there was a framework in place. Councillor Alan Law advised that managers would only be able to procure temporary or agency staff through the framework and therefore they would have to use it.

RESOLVED that:

(a)       the ESPO framework be used; and

(b)       authority be delegated to the Head of Commissioning (in consultation with the Head of Finance and Head of Legal) to enter into a call off contract to the successful managed service provider via mini competition.

Other options considered: n/a

(CSP: P&S, HQL, P&S1)

Purpose: This paper seeks to inform the outcome of the tender process and seek delegated authority to award the contract. The existing arrangements are commercially unsustainable for the provider. The tender is running on an ‘accelerated open procedure’ which will give WBC the ability to conclude a tender process, and allow sufficient time for the provider to resource the schemes, in line with a start date of 1 October 2018.

Resolved that delegated authority be given to the Head of Adult Social Care in consultation with the Head of Finance and Head of Legal Services to enter into a contract with the successful bidder following conclusion of the evaluation.

This decision is not subject to call in as:

·      a delay in implementing the decision this would cause the Council serious financial implications or could compromise the Council's position.

therefore it will be implemented immediately.

(Councillor Marcus Franks declared an interest in Agenda Item 8 by virtue of the fact that he was employed by Sovereign Housing Association. As his interest was personal or an other registrable interest, but not a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in the debate but did not vote on the matter.)

The Executive considered a report (Agenda Item 8) which set out the outcome of the tender process and sought delegated authority to award the contract. The existing arrangements were commercially unsustainable for the provider. The tender was running on an ‘accelerated open procedure’ which would give the Council the ability to conclude a tender process, and allow sufficient time for the provider to resource the schemes, in line with a start date of 1 October 2018.

Councillor Graham Bridgman stated that the report set out the options and sought approval of a way forward.

Councillor Alan Macro asked how this situation had arisen and how the decision to procure had been taken. June Graves responded that current service provision was at risk due to bid errors by the incumbent provider and this had been causing quality issues. There had been some misunderstandings about what was required in the contract. The current contract would terminate at the end of September and therefore a re-tender of the current contract was required as quickly as possible. Councillor Bridgman confirmed that Allied was in financial difficulty and June Graves had come to a decision with them that they could not continue to provide the service and therefore the process of accelerating the procurement of a new contract had commenced in order to provide a safe transition.

RESOLVED that delegation be granted to Head of Adult Social Care in consultation with Head of Finance and Head of Legal Services to enter into a contract with the successful bidder following conclusion of the evaluation. 

Other options considered:

·         Tender with restricted budget (not likely to encourage quality provision).

·         Do nothing (would likely result in legal challenge and put service user safety at risk).

·         Tender with guide budget standard procedure (would cause undue delay in securing a new supplier).

·         Tender with guide budget on an ‘accelerated procedure’ – to ensure shortest possible timeframe for new supplier contract award and start date.  This was the recommended approach.

Purpose: To seek approval to award a contract to West Berkshire Mencap for preventative day services known as Link Up, Growing for All and Friendship Skills.

Resolved that the contract for preventative day services known as Link Up, Growing for All and Friendship skills be awarded to West Berkshire Mencap as set out in the report.

This decision is eligible to be ‘called-in’.  However, if the decision has not been ‘called-in’ by 5.00pm on 2^nd August 2018, then it will be implemented.

The Executive considered a report (Agenda Item 9) which sought approval to award a contract to West Berkshire Mencap for preventative day services known as Link Up, Growing for All and Friendship Skills.

Councillor Graham Bridgman stated that Councillor Rick Jones had been more involved with this in his time as Portfolio Holder and he applauded him for that.

Councillor Alan Macro asked how the Council could avoid getting into the same situation again. Councillor Bridgman responded that the provider market was often limited. The service took care around the contractual process but sometimes things happened whereby it was necessary to react. Councillor Rick Jones confirmed that there was a limited provider market which meant that they could dictate timescales.

RESOLVED to award the contract for preventative day services known as Link Up, Growing for All and Friendship Skills to West Berkshire Mencap as set out in this report.

Other options considered: Terminate services – Adult Social Care relied on these essential services to deliver on their Care Act prevention agenda.

There were no Member questions submitted.

A full transcription of the public and Member question and answer sessions are available from the following link: Transcription of Q&As. (right click on link and ‘Edit Hyperlink’. Insert URL to pdf on website in ‘address’ field)

“What is the Council doing to reduce pollution and emissions from vehicles queueing for the Thatcham level crossing?”

A question standing in the name of Councillor Alan Macro on the subject of what the Council was doing to reduce pollution and emissions from vehicles queueing for the Thatcham level crossing, which was answered by the Executive Member for Highways and Transport, Environment and Countryside.

“Why will the Council not enter into a short term lease with the Newbury Community Football Group for use of the Faraday Road site?”

A question standing in the name of Councillor Lee Dillon on the subject of why the Council would not enter into a short term lease with the Newbury Community Football Group for use of the Faraday Road site, which was answered by the Executive Member for Planning, Housing and Waste.

“What plans does the Council have to accept more types of materials in kerbside recycling boxes?”

A question standing in the name of Councillor Alan Macro on the subject of what plans did the Council have to accept more types of materials in kerbside recycling boxes, which was answered by the Executive Member for Planning, Housing and Waste.

“What plans does the Council have for school provision in the Theale area if the new primary school is not delivered for September 2019?”

A question standing in the name of Councillor Mollie Lock on the subject of, what plans the Council had for school provision in the Theale area if the new primary school was not delivered for September 2019, was answered by the Executive Member for Children, Education and Young People.

“Can the Portfolio Holder for Waste provide an update on when residents will have to start paying for their green waste collections?”

A question standing in the name of Councillor Alan Macro on the subject of whether the Portfolio Holder for Waste could provide an update on when residents would have to start paying for their green waste collections, was answered by the Executive Member for Planning, Housing and Waste.

RECOMMENDATION: That members of the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items as it is likely that there would be disclosure of exempt information of the description contained in the paragraphs of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 specified in brackets in the heading of each item. Rule 8.10.4 of the Constitution refers.

RESOLVED that members of the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the under-mentioned items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as contained in Paragraphs 3 and 5 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information)(Variation) Order 2006. Rule 8.10.4 of the Constitution also refers.

(Paragraph 5 – information relating to legal privilege)

(CSP: P&S, HQL, P&S1)

Purpose:  This paper seeks to inform the outcome of the tender process and seek delegated authority to award the contract. The existing arrangements are commercially unsustainable for the provider. The tender is running on an ‘accelerated open procedure’ which will give WBC the ability to conclude a tender process, and allow sufficient time for the provider to resource the schemes, in line with a start date of 1 October 2018.

Resolved that delegated authority be given to the Head of Adult Social Care in consultation with the Head of Finance and Head of Legal Services to enter into a contract with the successful bidder following conclusion of the evaluation.

This decision is not subject to call in as:

·      a delay in implementing the decision this would cause the Council serious financial implications or could compromise the Council's position.

therefore it will be implemented immediately.

(Paragraph 5 – information relating to legal privilege)

(Councillor Marcus Franks declared an interest in Agenda Item 8 by virtue of the fact that he was employed by Sovereign Housing Association. As his interest was personal or an other registrable interest, but not a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in the debate but did not vote on the matter.)

The Executive considered a report (Agenda Item 12) which sought to inform the Executive on the outcome of the tender process and sought delegated authority to award the contract. The existing arrangements were commercially unsustainable for the provider. The tender was running on an ‘accelerated open procedure’ which would give the Council the ability to conclude a tender process, and allowed sufficient time for the provider to resource the schemes, in line with a start date of 1 October 2018.

RESOLVED that the recommendations in the exempt report be agreed.

Other options considered: as outlined in the exempt report.

(Paragraph 3 – information relating to financial/business affairs of particular person)

(Paragraph 5 – information relating to legal privilege)

Purpose: To seek approval to award a contract to West Berkshire Mencap for preventative day services known as Link Up, Growing for All and Friendship Skills.

Resolved that the contract for preventative day services known as Link Up, Growing for All and Friendship skills be awarded to West Berkshire Mencap as set out in the report.

This decision is eligible to be ‘called-in’.  However, if the decision has not been ‘called-in’ by 5.00pm on 2^nd August 2018, then it will be implemented.

(Paragraph 3 – information relating to financial/business affairs of a particular person)
(Paragraph 5 – information relating to legal privilege)

The Executive considered a report (Agenda Item 13) which sought approval to award a contract to West Berkshire Mencap for preventative day services known as Link Up, Growing for All and Friendship Skills.

RESOLVED that the recommendations in the exempt report be agreed.

Other options considered: as outlined in the exempt report.