Invitation to Participate: request for evidence
July 2012
Request for Evidence
As you willno doubt be aware, theLocalism Act2011has put in place the opportunity for local authorities to change their governance arrangements. This permits Cornwall Council to either maintain the current model of governance i.e. a Leader and Cabinet, to opt to change to a committee system, to move to a Mayor and Cabinet model or to adopt an alternative arrangement. Any alternative governance model must be put forward for approval by the Secretary of State. Attached is a very brief explanatory note on different governance models available to local authorities under the new legislation.
Given the interest from Cornwall Councillorsin this subject and broad political support across Cornwall Council for a review of its current arrangements, the Council has appointed a politically balanced Governance Review Panel comprising 16 elected Members to lead the review.
The Council required that an independent group be established to support this process. The Governance Review External Group (GREG) comprises the Right Reverend Tim Thornton, Bishop of Truro, Debbie Wilshire, Deputy CEO of Cornwall College and Martin Parker, Vice-Chairman of Cornwall Council’s Standards Committee and former District Auditor and Head of Performance at the Audit Commission. This Group is tasked with supporting the work of the Member Panel by gathering evidence and reporting to the Panel with their findings. The Group will examine written evidence from relevant specialists and interested parties and has so far hosted two cross-sector inquiry days, where witnesses gave evidence on key issues under consideration. These are available on the council’s website here together with other archived webcasts.
As part of the evidence gathering phase of the review, we would be very interested to hear your views on Cornwall Council’s existing governance arrangements and your suggestions for improvements that could be made. You need not focus on the decision making processes alone, but wider governance issues too. We have prepared a template to assist you in framing your response should you wish to use it. This can be submitted via email to: posted to: the Policy Team, Chief Executive’s Department, New County Hall, Truro, TR1 3AY. The deadline for your written submissions is 7 September 2012.
If you have any questions about the review, please contact a member of the support team via please telephone Rebecca Lloyd-King, Legal Officer, Governance on 01872 32 3520
Enc: Response proforma
Governance Models briefing note
Cornwall Council Governance ReviewResponse form
July 2012
How can Cornwall Council improve the way it works together with relevant partners and stakeholders, both now and in the future?
It is always tempting to criticize the structure, processesand achievements of an organisation as large and complex as Cornwall Council.
As the biggest employer the Council exerts a major influenceon the social, economic and cultural life of the County. Its activities permeate all levels of society and have a very direct, and indirect, impact on the quality of everyday life.
Unfortunately the recentdisenchantment with the national political process has had a negative impact on how many people view local democracy. The potential impact of this collective negativity and cynicism should not be understated.
In order to work more effectively with ‘relevant partners and stakeholders’ the Council must acknowledge this significant shift in public attitudes and do everything possible in order to regain the support and trust of the local electorate.
The need to ‘serve’, rather than self-serve, is fundamental. Processes and decisions should be based on a set of values that are clear and consistent.
The combination of a low-wage economy and the predicted substantial cuts in public spending present a very worrying scenario for Cornwall. As the cuts impact on current living standards of people,they will need, more than ever, to understand and empathise with the ‘difficult’ decisions made by the Council.
It is worth recording here that two major challenges, the transition to unitary and the achievement of a stable financial position, were addressed and achieved with a considerable degree of skill and professionalism. However, both of these ‘successes’ could have been better presented to the public and all relevant partners. It is not a time for misunderstanding, or for false modesty!
In my view Cornwall Council should endeavour to counter the public’s growing cynicism by making a strong declaration in relation to openness and transparency.
They need to provide objective INFORMATION to the local electorate about major, national issues and how these will/could impact on local services and facilities. This means taking a pro-active position in relation to consistent and clear COMMUNICATION and not simply responding to political and media pressure.
For example, they might considera series of public workshops where people have the opportunity to explore and better understand the many pressures surrounding the decisions made by local councillors. This commitment to EDUCATION will, in the longer term, produce better-informed stakeholders and hopefully encourage a more diverse range of candidates to seek election as local councillors. In an increasingly diverse county there is a continuing need to ensure that elected councillors are truly representative of the electorate.
By raising the level of political awareness local people would be enabled to ask more, and expect more, of their local representatives. Surely a prerequisite of a critical and mature democracy.
I would hope that outward-facing initiatives like these would make a significant difference and, in the longer term, contribute to the Cornwall ‘brand’ by enhancing the county’s growing reputation for boldness and innovation.
So far as you have experienced or have knowledge of, what aspects of Cornwall Council’s decision making processes work well and what not so well? What are your reasons for saying this?
Although I write as someone ‘outside’ the internal machinations of the Council’s decision-making processes I have been close to some major decisions and can also offer some observations gleaned from other professional colleagues.
If this consultative process is to be meaningful and intended to bring about change it is important to recognise that the ‘old ways’ of working are entirely inappropriate for the first few decades of the 21st Century.
My overall impression is that the sheer size of the Council makes it very difficult for it to reach agreement and thus make informed and timely decisions. It is almost as if the structure is designed to be an insurmountable obstacle to efficiency and clarity of intent.
This obfuscation is well illustrated by the complexities of the planning system and the endless ingenuity used to say ‘no’. I fully realise that some of these decisions are multi-faceted and politically sensitive. However, inconsistency in the interpretation of the rules, combined with a lack of empathy with new ideas will have a detrimental affect on our economic prospects and encourage our emerging entrepreneurs to try other parts of the UK.
This one example is representative of a bigger issue – too much emphasis on tradition and a predictable antipathy towards new ideas (eg. the on-going opposition to the proposed Strategic Partnership.
Another issue of concern relates to the local media’s persistent negativity in relation to the work of the Council. Party divisions can sometimes appear toundermine the ‘good’ news stories. It is tiresome and boring to see yet another story attacking the Leader and/or the Chief Executive. These anonymous sources are corrosive and,over the long term, undermine the confidence of those people charged with delivering the Council’s political strategy.
Even when interesting initiatives are announced - the 16-19 bursary scheme and the 18+ scholarship scheme – some predictable negativity can be anticipated.
I believe that very few people remain unaffected by this constant questioning of their personal and professional integrity. Ultimately it could discourage good people from becoming fully involved in the local political process.
In your experience, would you say that Cornwall Council has open and transparent decision making processes? What are your reasons for saying this?
My answer to this question is a qualified ‘yes’.
At the heart of this question is the sensitive and complex issue of trust. If the public really trusted the Council they would be more inclined to forgive it when things go wrong.
Without trust the public and the local media will remain sceptical about the Council’s decision-making processes and the rationale underpinning high-profile decisions.
Whilst this situation must be frustrating and irritating to councillors and senior management it would be entirely wrong to ignore the problem.
Bearing in mind the worsening financial prospects for the public sector and the consequential impact on the quality of life for many individuals I would suggest that it would now be productive for the Council to initiate a review of its Communication Strategy. Currently I would suggest that there is an over emphasis on the downward dissemination of digital information and not enough time spent by staff ‘going into’ the community and spreading the message.
I know some staff may find this difficult, but a sensitively managed pro-active programme of public engagement would certainly help to counter the endless criticisms of ‘faceless bureaucrats’. Despite the predictable response that ‘we are too busy to do this!’ I do believe it could have a profound impact on how the Council is perceived.
Perhaps each senior manager and councillor should be asked to make three or four external visits a year to explain the Council’s plans for the year ahead? (If some are already doing this then more needs to be made of it!)
These visits shouldcover all aspects of Cornish life and include schools (future voters) and residential homes (experienced voters). The key requirement would be to avoid the temptation of only talking to professional and/or business groups.
Again we come back to the concept of service and the importance of listening to stakeholders. Without this, there will always be a destructive gap in empathy or understanding for what the Council is doing and what it hopes to do.
It should be remembered how fundamental the volunteer ‘Games Makers’ were in helping spectators to engage with and enjoy the London Olympics. This decision to ‘engage’ with visitors at street level was of central importance in helping each event to run smoothly.
In conclusion I would simply ask the question ‘To whom would the public look to for a fair and honest assessment of how the Council is performing? I would expect many people to refer to the local press. If I am correct then this substantiates many of the points I have outlined above.
It would be entirely inappropriate for the Council to concede the high moral ground of its public responsibilities to the daily/weekly tittle-tattle and negativity generated by the local media. Every effort should be made and new avenues explored in order to become a confident and trusted outward-facing organisation.
If you have a preferred option for Cornwall Council’s future governance arrangements, please indicate below and note the reasons for this:
(Please refer to the attached Governance models briefing note)
I would suggest that Option (b) The Committee System,is unworkable if the current number of councillors remains unchanged. Although democratic in ethos there is little evidence to suggest that large committees have the independence, vision or consistency to make efficient and effective decisions.
Over the next2/3 years Cornwall Council will be required to implement budget savings at a level never previously experienced. In order to do this councillors and management will need to generate new ideas and take bold decisions.At the same time they will need to put the needs of the County above party politics.
I remain unconvinced that large committees, without any precise executive responsibilities, are capable of taking on these tasks and delivering tough decisions.
I have two preferences from the three options listed:
(a) The Leader and Cabinet Model
and
(c) The Mayor Cabinet Model
My reason for preferring these two options is that they are more focussed on actions, with specific executive responsibilities. Based on established commercial/industrial models they can choose to cascade ideas downwards within the organisation and also choose to develop any significant ideas that have filtered upwards.
In overall terms both these models would probably allocate the specific responsibility for the development and delivery of the Council’s Strategic Plan to the Cabinet. Whilst this clarity of intent is essential it can, at the same time,create a level of disaffection and suspicion within the wider body politic.
Without this sharp focus on delivery and a precise designation of individual executive responsibilities I fear that the Council would have a structure ‘not fit for purpose’. Certainly it would be ill-prepared to cope with the financial trials and tribulations of the next few years.
Whilst Model (a) based on a ’Leader and Cabinet’ is tried and tested its success is very dependent on the strength and determination of the person appointed as Leader. He or she must quickly gain the trust and respect of colleagues, opponents and the public. It is not an easy job and, at certain times, the ferocity of the attacks by opponents and a hostile media must make the job less than attractive.
I am aware that Model (c) based on a ‘Mayor and Cabinet’ would probably not find much favour at present. However I think it would still be productive to explore all of the pros and cons of creating a Mayor before the idea is dismissed.
The selected structure must enable Councillors to make the RIGHT decision, based on the RIGHT information, within the RIGHT timescale. The Chief Executive of the Council (and the Leader) must do everything possible to make this happen.
My final point is to emphasise the fact that a structural model, on its own, will not automatically generate great ideas and produce brilliant solutions. Only people can do this, and they will do this more effectively if and when they understand how the structure works. They should also believe that the structure is capable of responding to changing and challenging circumstances.
With this in mind the selected structure should be presented and explained to a diverse range of audiences by the Chief Executive. Listening and responding to informed comments/criticisms would be an important part of this exercise!
What are the key factors or issues the Council should consider when reviewing its governance arrangements?
1 Structures should be kept as simple as possible. Ideally they should encourage decision-making and facilitate an appropriate range of outcomes. Peopleinside and outside the structure should understand the rationale for the selected model and perceive opportunities for individual engagement.
2 The Council needs to recognise and fully understand why the public and the local media are often sceptical/critical of their services and longer-term strategic plans. This despite the fact that many recent initiatives – Cornwall Together, the Strategic Partnership, and the creation of 3 new Innovation Centres – are significant achievements worthy of national interest. Hopefully the new structure will enable senior staff to address this ‘gap’ in empathy
Additional comments
Your views on the governance review are appreciated and if you have any additional comments you would like to make, please do so.
I remain convinced that the future of Cornwall is dependent, to a large extent, on the strategic leadership provided by a creative and effective Cornwall Council. Although this may be ‘obvious’ I do not believe many local residents would agree with this statement. People are disinclined to recognise the enormous influence exerted by the Council through its financial investments and the intellectual capital of its staff. We urgently need to move from a ‘them and us’ attitude to a ‘together we can make a difference’ attitude. In other words ‘One for all, all for one’.
Like any other organisation the future of Cornwall Council is dependent on the quality of its current and future. More attention needs to be paid to ensure that the Council becomes a desirable ‘first choice’ employer for future staff. The emerging generation need to better understand the range of careers offered by the Council and the amazing opportunity to make a real contribution to the future of Cornwall.
Please return the completed form to or post it to: The Policy Team, Chief Executive’s Department, New County Hall, Truro, TR1 3AY.
Cornwall Council Governance reviewBriefing note
Governance models