Notes of inquiry day 5
26 July 2016
Key areas of focus:
· Views on existing governance arrangements, including strengths and weaknesses of current structures and processes.
· Looking ahead to 2021, how governance arrangements may need to develop.
Kate Kennally: Cornwall Council Chief Executive
Current Governance
Cornwall is a large, relatively new council. Members have pride of Cornwall first and politics second. There is a joint administration of Liberal Democrats and Independents. Representation of the local area by members is strong. The style of politics is one of coalition and consensus building, which leads to pragmatism. Decision making is on an evidence based approach, combined with good advice from members.
We have a significant number of regulatory committees. The planning peer review has looked at and identified concerns about strategic place leadership.
Policy Advisory Committees (PACs)
We have a small officer team currently trying to engage 123 members. This can lead to a feeling amongst members that they are not fully engaged with. The last governance review led to the creation of PACs, which engage the wider membership but can lead to a more cumbersome decision making process. The focus of these committees on portfolios can lead to a lack of focus on place.
The role of scrutiny has lost teeth due to the work being done on the PACs. PACs are effectively carrying out scrutiny role.
Partner working
Relationships are good with partners, with cross fertilisation of ideas. However, there are frustrations around boundaries/where power is seen to lie.
Members do not want the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) to take over responsibility for fire and rescue. Instead there is a belief that PCC functions should be devolved to council.
Scrutiny
The scrutiny management committee has some discreet responsibilities such as scrutiny of the devolution monitoring board. There has been some useful work based on select committee approach which has been well received. The committee doesn’t look at performance of financial information; it relies on others to set work programme rather than setting its own agenda. Scrutiny could take responsibility for place.
Locality Working
We are one of leading councils on double devolution but we need to take stock on where we have got to. Town areas have been the main focus for devolution. The challenge is to develop the right governance arrangements at a town and parish council level to deal with greater devolution of service delivery.
Community network areas operate differently in different areas. The motivation of officers and members impacts an individual Panel’s effectiveness. If we want them to do more, we need to empower them. What are skills needed to move from 30% devo to 100%? We need to get the input of CALC to identify these.
Engagement and Communications
Should a wider range of partners be involved earlier in decision making processes?
Co-production has come out as issue in Planning peer review. Members need to be clear what they want to achieve to enable pre involvement to be effective. We could make better use of social media. The information put out can be seen as flat, and there is a perception we are not engaging people as well as we could.
Devolution Implications
The role and purpose of members would be changed with further devolution. More powers from Westminster would require more devolution down to communities.
We could look at what the council chamber is responsible for scrutinising as opposed to taking responsibility for.
London Assembly model could be used to consider how PCC responsibilities could link into council governance.
We need to give serious thought to how we achieve the devolution approach within Cornwall if we are to retain leader model?
Joyce Redfearn: Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) Lead
Cornwall Public Sector Collaboration
I am the independent chair of the Transformation Board. The draft Transformation Plan has been developed since June. These views are my personal impressions.
Cornwall, like other areas, has no surplus money and overspending in the entire system. Cornwall has more challenges than other parts of the South West – the financial system is precarious and pressing now and for future years as demand increases.
We are starting to model the future picture. To do this we need openness about issues and the things that need to change, in some cases with great haste. Quality is seen as a key issue by workforce. The current model is not sustainable; there is need for a shift in how we deliver services.
I was brought into this role jointly by health and the council. We are shared across 4 organisations and are more joined up than many other areas. The Council’s financial challenges are an issue too but there is a real sense of partnership in place and a genuine commitment amongst chief officers about what’s best for Cornwall.
We need to look at system leadership for Cornwall as a whole, rather than for individual organisations.
Should public sector governance build on local authority governance? What could the future look like in an environment of further devolution?
Manchester is looking at fire and police. However, Cornwall’s population base if very different to Manchester. Cornwall’s future is about less fragmentation in governance – we need a joined up offer to the public. We are all agreed that integration is the right approach but making that happen is an issue.
Form needs to follow function. The sector needs to look for opportunities that are within the system and understand where it wants to be in 5 years. Making sure there is clarity around accountability is an important part of this. The future governance system will need to be capable of making significant change. The question should be around the future of public sector governance, not just the local authority.
Councillor Role
In order for backbench members to feel fully engaged, they need to have a common vision and purpose. Local members’ localities need to be seen as part of a wider vision. There needs to be engagement of all members in change process. Inlogov 21st Century councillor publication is useful reference.
The Council needs to look at developing the skills that help people to help themselves – creating conditions for people to help themselves. This is a new skill for members to acquire. There has to be a greater focus on enabling. The role of local members in building community resilience could be significant.
Local governance sees local members making choices within a framework. The NHS has greater variation in provision and quality than it feels comfortable with. There needs to be common standards of quality and cost effectiveness. There is a need for shared learning across the system.
A stronger clinician to politician link would be valuable – joint leadership with complementary skills. Both have a strategic view.
Local member culture needs to focus on a preventative approach. This is a hard shift for members, to move away from their role of treating symptoms of dependent communities to a more enabling approach. Local members being supported by councillors could test out approaches within communities focused on community resilience, moving towards tackling causes of issues rather than tackling symptoms.
The relationship between officer and member is changing towards more of a partnership.
Phil Mason: Head of Planning
Governance Arrangements
This governance review is seen as a chance to look ahead, to look at numerous issues and as a peer review.
The Peer review should be the key element; we are currently operating an amalgamation of where we have been not where we are now. Governance works well in planning, 93% of decisions do not go to committee.
This compares very highly with other authorities. Here we have one issue though, which is where some members drive things through to committee in some areas, but not in other areas. Members in some areas are not standing as community leaders. Only in 8-9% of all cases where planning is recommended the Parish does council disagree with the decision.
Decision making is generally good and works well. The number of members we have and what they do is out of kilter. Do we need 21 members to make a decision? Do we have to be so big to be representative?
Strategic Committee for example is St Austell biased so a large committee does not necessarily work. Proper planning decisions need to be made, not geographically influenced.
I will repeat that the size of committees is too big, just because we are large do we need a large committee? 8/9 people works elsewhere but here we could achieve 11 only.
Partner Working
How do we create holistic planning?
A full plan/map of the process involved was shown and described to the panel members.
Does the current Governance model need work or does the cultural aspect need work?
No, but it’s about a relationship and culture, it’s too hard at the moment to get Health involved in new places. The Governance relationship is working, maybe the Governance needs to change so it can force change?
CEG works well but its outside Governance is that why it works?
We have started to engage with CEG. Things are starting to work in CEG, maybe we are stifled by too much Governance and the fact we simply have too many meetings. Even with PACS we must learn to involve members and get buy in. Even if you get to a PAC you still do not necessarily engage members.
Would discussion via video conferencing help with communication issues?
The planning portal is very good as virtually everything is online now.
Locality Working
Could Community Officers have a role in planning?
They could do, but not at present. We had a useful roadshow but only met 19 of 213 parish councils. It was not useful at an individual level but was at Town allocations recently.
Should there be training available at community level?
At Parish level yes, but not at community level, as each group have different needs.
Cath Robinson: Corporate Director for Communities and Organisational Development, Cornwall Council
Finances
Finance appears good in Cornwall Council. Are councillors aware of money matters and how they influence decisions?
How porous is the Council about decisions, e.g. a developer or another corporate body?
How much money we have does rule decisions. We have had a massive cut in funding but we work on a four year basis. I can see some challenges in financial details as the districts used to have more detailed views. We do however have a good track record of investment. The capital programme is investment, such as the Highways Agency being a good example. I think there is a balance but we should look at the big picture not in minutia.
Councillor Role
Some councillors said they were disengaged?
Most want the committee model so they can get directly involved. Until you go back to the old model some will never feel involved. It was a previous Governance review that formed PACs and the numbers involved in them.
Who sanitizes Cornwall Council?
We have an external audit company and internal audit and both report to the Audit committee. It is thorough and the scrutiny committee can call anything in at any time.
Is it difficult to get financial information from councillors?
I don’t think so. We have a policy of working with members, the amount of info they want sometimes is not enough for them as again they are used to knowing every detail from the old district councils. We always try to have an open door and offer what has been asked for.
Governance Models
Do we need a mayor?
If we are joining up Governance and joining up budgets then we can make it work in Cornwall, it’s a price worth paying.
Locality Working
Double devolution - do the parish councils have capacity?
I agree that the bigger councils have the structure and capacity as they are good with budgets. Smaller ones are forming clusters to take on services, but some will never want to get there.
Is it effective not to devolve and keep some services?
It can be seen that way but the ones we keep will look very different i.e. self-service libraries. The local communities are deciding what is best for them. It can actually empower the local community however it could create a postcode system.
I would like to see devolved budgets so they can make their own local budget decisions.
Staff group
· Julian Commons, Antisocial Behaviour Team Manager
· Beverly Hill, Devolution, Consultation and Engagement Specialist
· Leah Thomas, Strategic Finance Manager
· Simon Deacon, CORMAC Operations Director
· Anita Searby, Democratic Team Leader
· Carolyn Cadman, Corporate Organisational Development Manager
· Jen Fishwick- Hannaford, Cabinet and Civic Office Manager
Councillor Role
We need to help members and officers engage effectively with their communities. We need to find a model to help the council get out amongst communities more.
Member induction should cover all roles – strategic, local case work, scrutineer – members need to have the information and support they need to do all these roles effectively.
There is a perception that the council is slow to respond. There has been a move to be more customer and business focused. More responsive member role needs to be in step with business needs within Cornwall. A one size fits all approach for communities and businesses isn’t necessarily the best way to work.
An important focus after elections is to help guide members how they get information.
In order to embed our customer focus in the future, we could have groups of members with specific focus upon the needs of particular service users.
Partnership Working
There is confusion over what council wants from its arm’s length companies.
The cabinet structure works, with good engagement with portfolio holders. But we need to clarify the purpose of our services and what they deliver. Approach for CORMAC could be replicated elsewhere within council.
There can be mixed messages at corporate level which impacts on clarity at service delivery level.
The children’s services business model is based on co-production. We need to get better at managing the market, in investing to save. We need to look at relationships with key partners, working towards integrated services and the trust and honesty around our collective financial situation.