Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Dave Callaghan.  Councillor Richard Clifton was present in his place.

Sanjay Prashar, the Executive Head of Legal and Democratic Services, outlined the new requirements for declaring disclosable pecuniary interests with effect from 1 July 2012.

No disclosable pecuniary interests were declared.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 21 May 2012 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

That, subject in Minute 444(b)/12 to the addition of the word “Resolved:” at the start of the Minute, the minutes of the meeting of The Executive held on 8 May 2012 were approved a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Finance and Performance outturn 2011/12

The Committee had before them a report which summarised the performance of the Council in the last quarter and over the last year against the key priorities set out in the 2011/12 Budget and Delivery Plans.  The provisional financial outturn for 2011/12 against approved estimates, together with actions taken and significant budget variations was also reported.

The Smarter Services Sutton programme had delivered savings of £9.9m in 2011/12.  It had an overall target of £29.5m of which £26.3 m had been identified and £16.2m approved as part of the decision making process.  Three reviews remained to be completed.  It was noted that there was ongoing monitoring to ensure that these savings were achieved.  It was also hoped that significant savings would result from the joint procurement of new waste disposal arrangements. However, it was anticipated that there could be a potential shortfall of £2m against the original savings target.  It was noted that Customer Satisfaction had been maintained at 91% since 2009 as measured by the borough wide survey. 

The provisional General Fund revenue budget outturn showed an underspend of £2.137m after taking into account requests to carry forward budgets to 2012/13.  Options to utilise this underspend were as follows:

·                     to provide for additional investment during 2012/13 to address issues arising from the Ofsted inspection - £500k

·                     to set aside a specific sum in an earmarked reserve to manage treasury management risks in the medium term

·                     make an additional contribution to the redundancy reserve

·                     to make a one off payment to the pension fund to reduce current liabilities which would result in annual savings of £450k in future years - £1,637k

Capital expenditure in the last year stood at £61.085m or 93% of the capital budget.  It was proposed that the 2012/13 capital budget be reduced by transferring the net unspent sums (£5.105m) and the budgeted receipt (£5.43m) from the old Stanley Park High School site from 2011/12 to 2012/13.  Details of the schemes to be carried forward directorate by directorate were reported.  Further improvements to the reporting and control over capital projects and changes would be implemented for 2012/13.

The achievements of each Directorate were reported.  A Peer Review challenge organised by the Local Government Association had been carried out and reported on in detail to the Executive in May 2012.  (Minute 435/12 refers).  The review had reflected on achievements, the challenges ahead and had identified areas for improvement from a council-wide perspective with a focus on the profile of economic renewal work and ensuring a council-wide understanding of the approach to commissioning. 

Attention was drawn to the recent Ofsted inspection on Safeguarding and Looked after Children.  The Inspectors had judged safeguarding services as inadequate.  A major programme of work was being carried out to address these concerns that had been reported to the Children, Family and Education Committee.  (Minute 578/12 refers)]. 

It was noted that the high cost of providing bed and breakfast accommodation for homeless families continued to be an area of concern. 

During the forthcoming year  ...  view the full minutes text for item 611.

Business and Finance Report to Month 2

The Committee had before them a report which summarised the performance of the Council in April and May 2012 against the priorities set out in the Council’s Budget and Delivery Plans 2012/13 and the performance measures and targets associated with them. The report had been prepared early in the annual cycle so that an early view of performance in the first two months of the financial year could be seen.

Following an inspection by Ofsted, the safeguarding and looked after children service had been found to be inadequate.  An Improvement Board had been established to lead and monitor the progress in improving this service whose reports would be seen by the Children, Family and Education Committee. 

Parking services had also been highlighted as an area of concern in the residents’ survey.  The council was currently undertaking a review of parking services which would be considered by the Environment and Neighbourhood Committee and the local committees.. 

Good progress was being made in prioritising the plans for promoting local growth in the borough and the recent conference, “Opportunity Sutton” held at the Holiday Inn in Sutton had been very positive and well received.

As part of the Council’s commitment to reducing inequality and promoting diversity a draft Equalities Plan for 2012/13 had been developed and was before the Committee for approval.  The Plan provided a strategic overview of the work being carried out on equality and diversity, how the Council would meet its legal obligations under the Equality Act 2012 and what would be achieved over the rest of the year.

The Major Programmes and Project Board continued to ensure that key risks and issues for the Council were dealt with at an early stage.  It had been agreed that all officers who managed projects had to have, as a minimum, the Association for Project Management Introductory Certificate or relevant experience in the delivery of projects. 

Sutton Common Pavilion had been subjected to an arson attack in June 2010 which had resulted in the demolition of the building.  The Council’s insurers had offered £320k (£277k after deductions for costs and fees).  It was suggested that the Capital Programme be amended by adding £277k for the construction of a new pavilion to be funded from the insurance settlement.

Details of the work being carried out in each Directorate were also reported as well as the Corporate Risk Register.  It was suggested that a brief description of the risk involved would aid understanding of that document.

Resolved:  (i) To note the improvement actions set out in respect of Children, Families and Learning Services and how these will be monitored;

(ii)  To agree to the draft equality action plan set out in Appendix D to the report;

(iii)  To amend the 2012/13 Capital Programme by adding the construction of a new pavilion at Sutton Common Park at a cost of £277,000.

The report sets out the medium term financial forecast.

The Committee considered a report which set out the Council’s medium- term financial position in order to inform the business and financial planning round for 2013/14.

It was noted that there would be a number of significant changes in the policy context in the next few years.   The Council’s key policy drivers include a greater emphasis on economic growth and prosperity in the borough and the encouragement of investment and sustainable employment, the development of locality and neighbourhood working taking advantage of the opportunities given by the Localism Act and gaining a better understanding of the changing demography in the borough and its impact on long term planning especially with regard to school places, services for the elderly and vulnerable children.  Significant items of legislation that were expected to be enacted in 2013/14 together with other matters which would have an effect on services provided were also reported.  The demands of policy initiatives from the Mayor of London had also to be borne  in mind.

Taking into account a number of different factors including feedback from residents and available resources, it was proposed that the community policy priorities for 2013/14 should be

Safer

Reducing crime and fear of crime with a focus on the link to drug and alcohol misuse.

Ensuring vulnerable adults and children are safe with a focus on prevention and the development of multi-agency approaches.

Zero tolerance on all kinds of anti-social behaviour including litter, graffiti and dog fouling.

Fairer

Economic prosperity and growth through inward investment, local employment and a skilled workforce.

Working with our residents and businesses to build capacity and capability to improve their quality of life and well-being of local communities.

Increased provision of new social housing and improving the standard of existing housing.

Reducing health inequalities and improvements to public health.

Greener

Continued delivery of One Planet Sutton priorities.  

Maintain resident satisfaction with street cleaning services, waste collection and disposal and recycling.

Implementation of sustainable transport measures. 

Smarter

Increase opportunities to deliver savings through smarter  commissioning and the continued implementation of Smarter Services Sutton savings

It was noted that, as previously announced, the formula grant received by the borough would reduce in 2013/14 by £0.5m and a further £3.6m in 2014/15.  Further planned reductions in public expenditure of 0.9% were expected in 2015/16 and 2016/17.  Details of how these reductions could affect the borough were reported.  Reductions in specific grants received from specific government departments were also likely and possible scenarios were reported. 

Other effects on the medium term financial forecast included provision for increases in  pay and prices together with growth and investment as well as a number of other changes and variations.  The effects of these on the reserves and balances and capital programme were reported as well as important budget risks and possible mitigating measures.  A funding gap of £23.5m was projected by 2016/17.

It was proposed to prepare Directorate  Commissioning and Financial Plans for 2013/14 through an integrated business and financial planning process. Draft guidance to officers to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 613.

This report details the steps that are being taken to re-tender the Council’s current arrangements for the procurement of building design services.

The Committee considered a report which set out the procedure that had been taken to retender the procurement of building design services.

The procurement of a new Construction Professional Consultant Framework had started in September 2011 in conjunction with the London Boroughs of Merton and Richmond upon Thames with specifications designed to cover the individual and shared requirements of all three local authorities.  Tenders from companies who wished to be part of this Framework had been obtained.  Officers from the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames were leading on this process.  They hoped to be able to award the Framework Contracts to the successful companies on 17 July 2012. 

Details of the range of services and procurement options were reported to the Committee.  It was noted that although a list of consultants were included within the Framework document, they would only be used where necessary and paid when they carried out specific work for the Council.  When the tenders received were compared with current fee levels being paid, it was suggested that savings of up to 23% on current fees being paid, would be made, thus enabling more money to be made available for capital projects.  This saving could be achieved due to the current economic downturn in the construction industry.

            Resolved:  (i)  That the Strategic Director – Resources, in conjunction with the Lead Member for Resources be authorised to sign up to the framework contract being procured by the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames and enter in a building design services contracts with the consultants  appointed to the framework;

            (ii)  That the Executive Head of Property and Procurement report on the outcome of the procurement exercise to the October 2012 meeting of this Committee with full details of the consultants appointed to the framework and the agreed terms of their appointment.

Multi Agency Alcohol Strategy Report

It was reported that Sutton’s alcohol strategy had last been reviewed in 2008 and was largely a summary of activity in respect of regulation, enforcement and treatment.  A new strategy had now been proposed which recognised a fuller role for public health (in line with the Council’s new responsibilities from April 2013) and associated broader behavioural change. It also took into account the new Government Strategy and changes in legislation.

The proposed Sutton Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy 2012-15 ‘Healthier, Safer, Responsible, Social’ was a multi agency approach to tackling alcohol misuse locally.  It had been developed by the Safer Sutton Partnership Service in close collaboration with partners in Sutton Council, Sutton Police, London Probation Trust and NHS South West London (Sutton & Merton).

It was noted that the development of a local harm reduction strategy was timely as the Government’s Alcohol Strategy 2012 had reaffirmed the importance of taking action to ‘crackdown’ on binge drinking, cut alcohol fuelled violence and disorder and greatly reduce the number of people drinking to damaging levels.  The core delivery themes of the Strategy had been agreed as:

Combating Alcohol related Crime and Disorder

Working with the Alcohol Industry to tackling associated harm

Improving Communication and Understanding

Improving Treatment and Outcomes and

Changing Social Behaviour.

These themes had been developed and specific outcomes identified to ensure the success of the Strategy.  They were supported by a work plan which was a realistic appraisal of the key issues and what could be achieved within available resources.  Specifically, under crime and disorder, there were actions to improve the response through robust and better evidence.  Working with the industry involved a range of carrots and sticks to persuade the industry toward safe and healthy outcomes.  Communication was about clear joint messaging relevant to target audiences and focussed on harm reduction through more understanding of safe levels of alcohol and the health and social impact.  Messages to young people needed to be very stark.  Messages for older people would focus more on health impact.  Behaviour change was about understanding the barriers to change.  When working with young people peer pressure was a real issue but also one that they themselves would not want to be seen to be initiating.  Key target groups that efforts had been made to understand in more depth were the over 65s, 18-24 year olds, and under age drinkers.  All these groups in different ways had heightened risk of harm from alcohol.

The Strategy would be presented to the Safer Sutton Partnership Board on 24 July for final agreement by partners, the statutory Community Safety Partnership and the Drug and Alcohol Forum.  It would also be reviewed after a suitable period of time.

Resolved:  (i) That the Sutton Multi Agency Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy 2012-15 be approved for presentation to the Safer Sutton Partnership Board;

(ii)  That the Strategy be shared with the Equality and Diversity Forum

This report sets out the rationale for a new approach to commissioning substance misuse treatment in Sutton

Members of the Committee considered a report which set out proposals to re-commission a substance misuse treatment system for adults and young people in the borough.

Historically, services to support adults had been commissioned through the Safer Sutton Partnership Service with funding from the National Treatment Agency who had been very directive on what this funding could be used for.  Services for young people had been commissioned through the Children, Young People and Learning Services Directorate with funding through the National Treatment Agency, the Criminal Justice System and the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime.  However, in the last year, the contribution from the Mayor’s Office had reduced and funding gaps had been identified elsewhere.

With effect from April 2013, the Council would become responsible for public health functions and responsibility for substance misuse services would pass to local authorities.  Funding would form part of the Public Health grant to Councils though it was noted that this was not a mandated service under the transfer of responsibilities.  However, the service would have a direct effect on many of the areas that the Health and Wellbeing Board would be responsible for.  It was therefore important that the services that were commissioned met identified local need, contributed to strategic objectives and responsibilities, were more cost effective and delivered outcomes to improve the health of the local population.

In looking to re-commission services, more emphasis would be put on outcomes rather than processes which could encourage innovation, develop local providers and explore payment by results which could reduce the financial risk to the Council.  Three options for re-commissioning services were put forward as follows:

a)            Re-commission the substance misuse treatment system;

b)            Re-commission the drug treatment system only or

c)            Re-model the substance misuse system in Sutton.

Only the first of these options met the full range of benefits and requirements identified in the report. The Safer Sutton Partnership Board had supported Option (a) at its meeting in April 2012.

It was noted that the 2012/13 budget available for all aspects of the substance misuse treatment system was £1,849,835.  This included funding from the Council, NHS and the Mayor’s Office for policing and crime.  The re-commissioned service would need to be contained within existing resources.  Furthermore, there would be increased pressure on the public health budget which would transfer to the Council in 2013/14.  It was, therefore, essential that this service delivered value for money.

Resolved:  (i) To agree the need for the re-commissioning process for the substance misuse treatment system for adults and young people;

(ii) To agree the approach to re-commission an integrated outcomes based service for adults and children;

(iii)  To agree to explore payments by outcomes achieved to enable sharing the financial risks to support value for money for this service

(iv)  To delegate authority to appoint the successful tenderer(s) to the Strategic Director of Adult Social Services, Housing and Health in consultation with the Executive Head of Legal and Democratic Services and Deputy Leader of the Council.

To seek authority to make compulsory purchase orders regarding regeneration of four sites which have Orlit properties on them.

The Executive Head of Legal and Democratic Services outlined the responsibilities of members who sat on this Committee and those who sat on the Development Control Committee.  Councillors could be members of both Committees but had to consider the matter before them purely within the terms for which the particular committee was responsible.

Further to Minute 647/11 it was reported that terms had now been agreed (subject to contract) between the Council and Affinity Sutton (a grouping of Broomleigh and two other housing associations), to take forward the regeneration project in relation to Durand Close and associated sites which had Orlit houses on them as part of the existing Development Agreement arrangements.  These sites were in Duke of Edinburgh Road, Fellowes Road (south), Nightingale Close, Green Wrythe Crescent and Green Wrythe Lane.

Two options for the development of these sites were considered.  One option was to leave the existing Orlit dwellings in their defective state.  This would leave those tenants living in unsatisfactory housing and the existing right to buy freeholders in defective dwellings which were unmortgageable and therefore unsaleable.  The alternative would be to carry out a regeneration project on these sites by building high quality affordable homes for people to live in.  It was considered that (particularly with the swap option described later in this minute) all parties would be better off than they were at present if these sites were redeveloped. 

Details of the consultations that had taken place with residents who lived in Orlit properties were reported.  Following negotiations with the freeholders, it was not possible for the Council to satisfy itself that all the freeholders with an interest in the four sites (including public utility providers) would be willing to sell their interests to the Council by agreement.  It was therefore proposed to obtain a Compulsory Purchase Order for each site to ensure that the Council could be certain of acquiring all the properties to complete the regeneration projects. 

In relation to the Green Wrythe Crescent/Green Wrythe Lane site, consideration was also given as to whether the Compulsory Purchase Order should relate to all the properties within the red line shown on plan VAL 3467 or whether a middle terrace of 8 or 10 freehold dwellings should be excluded.  An alternative scheme could be developed for Green Wrythe Crescent that excluded the middle terrace of properties.  On balance, it was felt that the better scheme would be to include the middle terrace in the Compulsory Purchase Order.  However, to preserve flexibility on this issue it was proposed to make two separate Orders in relation to those properties, one of which would affect only the middle terrace.

In seeking authorisation for the making of the Compulsory Purchase Orders, the rights of third parties that might be affected (including the property rights of the current property owners of the sites) had been balanced against the public interest in acquiring the sites.  The proposed regeneration of the sites would result in clear qualitative and quantitative gains, including the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 617.

Modernising the Council’s capability procedures

The Executive Head of Human Resources reported that he had been in consultation with Trade Union representatives on a new capability procedure which was easier to follow, had shorter timeframes and separate management guidance from the key procedural stages and requirements.  Changes between the existing procedure and the proposed new procedure were reported.

This matter had been considered at a recent meeting of the Council and Employee Joint Committee where the Employee Side had expressed concerns about the procedure.  It was noted that discussions concerning this revised procedure had been going on for seven months and that the proposals were sensible and rational. Since the meeting of the Council and Employee Joint Committee the Trade Unions had registered a Clause 5 dispute with London Councils.

Resolved:  (i)  To note the progress and agree proposals relating to the draft procedure as outlined in the report;

(ii)  To agree the revised policy as set out in Appendix B to the report for adoption as Council policy with effect from 2 July 2012. 

The report considers two options for the future supply of temporary staff.

It was reported that, since April 2006, the Council had had a contract for the supply of temporary staff with Comensura Ltd.  That company had supplied workers from employment agencies at reduced agency fees which had resulted in savings estimated to be over £4.6m.  The Contract was now due for renewal.

Since that Contract had been entered into, the market in managed services had developed and the current economic situation evolved.  A national framework agreement organised by the Eastern Shires Purchasing Organisation, which offered improved financial benefits was now available.  This Purchasing Framework was separated into lots according to method of service delivery.  Sutton had joined a London collaborative mini-competition (approved by a Delegated Decision Notice dated 23 June 2011) led by the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.  This had led to the award of contracts to Lot 1a - Neutral Vendor (Comensura) and Lot 1b Resource Pool (Adecco).  These two lots included the main agency worker managed service providers who operated in the UK.

Details of how these two supply models worked was reported.  The Committee considered which of these Lots would provide the best service for the Council.  In coming to a decision, various factors were taken into account including the quality of services, the effect on the local economy and local workforce and whether one particular contractor had demonstrated added value over the other.  The report outlined the various factors that had been taken into account.  Cost schedules showed that savings would be achieved with either contractor.  Based on the expenditure on temporary staff in 2011/12 it was estimated that the Neutral Vendor would return an 8.7% saving whilst the Resource Pool would have returned a 9.6% saving.  The overall evaluated score made was in favour of Adecco.  Overall, it was felt that Adecco would offer the most advantageous contract in terms of price, quality of service, added value and support for local workforce and the economy.

Details of how the transfer of the contract to Adecco would be carried out were reported.

Resolved:  (i) That the Council enter into a contract with Adecco Ltd, the managed service provider appointed through the London collaboration through the Eastern Shires Purchasing Organisation framework agreement for a period of three years from 1 October 2012 with the option to extend for a further year,

(ii) That the existing Contract with Comensura be extended until 30 September 2012;

(iii) That a report updating the Committee on how the changeover of contractors had worked be submitted in due course.

To note that Councillor Simon Wales has been appointed Lead Member for Resources.

            Resolved:  To note that Councillor Simon Wales has been appointed the Lead Member for Resources until the annual Council meeting in May 2013.

To exclude press and public from the remainder of the meeting on the grounds it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972

Resolved:  That, in accordance with Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information, as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act, which would not be in the public interest.

Members of the press and other members of the public thereupon withdrew from the meeting.

The Chair welcomed Bernadette Majoram, the Interim Strategic Director for Environment and Neighbourhoods to her first meeting of Strategy and Resources Committee and apologised for not welcoming her earlier in the meeting.

Further to Minute 617/12 the Committee gave further consideration to this matter and, in particular, the possible costs involved in obtaining the Compulsory Purchase Orders.

Resolved:  (i)  That the Executive Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised  (a)  to make separate Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) pursuant to Section 17 Housing Act 1985 (as amended) and the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 (as amended) in respect of each of the four Orlit Sites and up to two separate Compulsory Purchase Orders on the Green Wrythe Crescent/Green Wrythe Lane site, shown edged red on Plans numbered VAL 3467 (239 - 249 Green Wrythe Lane, 1 – 18 Green Wrythe Crescent); VAL 3466 (Nightingale Close); VAL 3464 (42 – 56 Fellowes Road) and VAL 3465 (41 – 51 odd numbers Duke of Edinburgh Road, Carshalton); (12 votes for the recommendation, two votes against)

(b) To take all necessary steps to secure the confirmation of the Compulsory Purchase Orders; (12 votes for the recommendation, two votes against)

(c) In consultation with the Executive Head of Community Living & Strategic Commissioning, to authorise the acquisition of  the land and all interests in or over it being the subject of the Compulsory Purchase Orders by agreement in advance of the confirmation of those Orders at market value; (12 votes for the recommendation, two votes against)

(d)  In consultation with the Executive Head of Property and Procurement be authorised to approve agreements setting out the terms for withdrawal of objections to the order (to include payment of compensation); (13 votes for the recommendation, one vote against)

(e)  To serve Demolition Notices under Schedules 5 and 5A Housing Act 1985 withdrawing the tenants’ right to buy in respect of those properties. (13 votes for the recommendation, one abstention)

(ii)  To increase the estimated costs [15/12 para 3] and endorse in principle the financial commitment of £3.55m to fund the acquisition of the land and interests in it for the Orlit sites as referred to in (i) above, the money to be recouped from the Durand Close Regeneration Project’s Financial Model with a neutral impact on the Council’s capital programme; (12 votes for the recommendation, one vote against and one abstention)

Councillor Graham Whitham withdrew from the meeting during the consideration of the above matter as he was a member of the Development Control Committee.