Agenda item

To provide the Joint Public Protection Committee with an overview on the approach to service recovery as we move from interim service delivery arrangements.

The Committee considered the report (Agenda Item 9) which provided an overview on the approach to service recovery alongside the move from interim service delivery arrangements.

Sean Murphy (Public Protection Manager) introduced the report. He began by describing the balance to be struck between response and recovery work. A Recovery Plan was in place that included community protection work, protecting/improving health, and providing health and safety advice to businesses. The service had a role to play in economic recovery, by supporting businesses and helping to build residents’ confidence by providing assurance. Regular communication would need to continue to help achieve that. Communication with businesses was at an increased level and it was the intention to build on positive working relationships.

However, it was also necessary to conduct business as usual as much as possible and progress service development priorities.

Part of the return to business as usual was to restart routine work around food safety inspections. This would help to provide the reassurance to residents. However, this type of work was also important for businesses in terms of receiving hygiene ratings and in following the advice of the Food Standards Agency.

The report outlined the approach to taking forward this challenging workload. Much of the work was a high priority, but work would be conducted with higher risk premises first.

One of the many challenges arose from the fact that court cases had been adjourned to the end of June 2020 and there would therefore be an increased workload once the courts reopened.

Anna Smy (Strategic Manager for Response) added that licencing applications continued to be processed. She explained that the opportunity had been taken during these challenging times to work more flexibly and undertake increased cross-authority work to become more resilient and widen the capability of officers.

Councillor Hilary Cole gave thanks for the very comprehensive Recovery Plan. However she questioned whether there was sufficient resource to implement the plan.

Sean Murphy explained that this was very much the challenge. For example, staff involved in track and trace work would normally be conducting food safety inspections and health and safety audits. However there was also the high priority of helping businesses to reopen safely to aid the economy.

It would not be possible to accommodate all areas of work and there would be an ongoing need to prioritise. Areas identified as being of greatest risk would come first. An update report would be provided at the next meeting of the Committee.

Councillor Hilary Cole noted that the vast majority of the priorities in the plan were rated as high level, making prioritisation of work streams very challenging. She queried whether the priority list would be revisited with the aim of making it more manageable.

Sean Murphy acknowledged this point, consideration had been given to those areas of work that could be reduced and/or delayed. Adjustments were being made to the staffing structure to enable officers to work across different areas and different disciplines. New ways of working could also assist, telephone contact could be made with businesses in some cases rather than face to face contact.

Councillor James Cole highlighted that track and trace work could be a requirement for some time. He queried whether Government funds could be accessed to help meet the requirements for this work.

Sean Murphy explained that funding allocations had been made to each of the three local authorities and discussions had followed with Public Health Teams to identify what needed to be put in place and how best to put funding to use. Rosalynd Gater confirmed that an 18 month period was anticipated at this stage for track and trace.

Sean Murphy added that resource requirements were being and would continue to be looked at, but it was difficult to be clear on the requirements moving forward. It was also the case that the service often had to react within short notice to Government announcements about premises that could reopen.

Best practice had been shared between local authorities to see if further efficiencies could be put in place. Close working arrangements with other local authorities was an important aspect of that.

Councillor John Harrison noted that in 2019/20 the service was very close to being on budget, but there was a loss of income within 2020/21 and Councillor Harrison queried the impact of this. Sean Murphy reported that there had been a reduction in income in April and May. The longer term position was at this stage unclear with some businesses not looking to renew their licences or pause existing licenses. It was hoped that during the course of the financial year businesses would resume operations and would therefore require licences, and this had begun in some cases, but the level of need was uncertain.

Income levels would continue to be routinely monitored and this was often a challenge for the service. However, the budget had been balanced in all previous years of the PPP’s operation. Budget discussions would continue at the September 2020 meeting when the situation would be clearer.

Mitigation grants were available and it was hoped that some lost income could be recovered via this route. However, pressures were being felt across council service areas and some pressures would need to be absorbed within services.

Councillor Chris Bowring was pleased that the meeting was being live streamed as it was a useful and more accessible way of publicising the PPP’s many areas of good work. He felt that meetings should continue to be live streamed for this reason. Councillor Hilary Cole agreed, but raised the importance of finding a way to enable public participation within meetings if they continued to be held on a virtual basis.

RESOLVED that:

·         The approach to recovery be noted.

·         The proposals set out in the report be noted.

·         The Committee would receive a further update on progress at its meeting in September 2020.