Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Thursday 31 July 2025, 10:00am - Gloucestershire County Council Webcasting

Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Thursday, 31st July 2025 at 10:00am

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Twitter

Forums

Speakers

Please let us know your experience of our webcast

Votes

Speaking:

Start of webcast

Share this agenda point

Webcast Finished

Select an agenda point

Scroll with video

Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.

Thank you.

holiday so you can't attend and Lisa Spivey has sent her apologies.

We have the minutes of the previous meeting.

I know only a couple of us were there.

You may have watched it back on the webcast, but are we happy to approve those minutes?

Those in favour, please raise your hand.

Okay.

You okay, Andrew, with those?

I'm not very well.

Is the leap system working?

I just want to retune my hearing aids.

Okay.

But I think anybody against those, if not, we'll approve those.

And I can sign those later.

We then move on to declarations of interest.

Are there any members of the committee who are invited to declare any pecuniary or personal

interests relating to specific matters on the agenda?

Anyone wish to declare any interests?

No?

Thank you.

We now move on to our first substantive item and I introduce Jenny Godzicka to talk through

request management and your report.

Thank you.

Thank you, chair.

As the chair mentioned, I am the head of information management and I am here to present the 2024 -25

annual report on request management.

It provides assurance on how the council is meeting its statutory obligations under the

freedom of information act, the environmental information regulations and data protection

legislation.

The report highlights the performance, key themes and improvement work we have undertaken.

I will go through the first stage and put the key points of freedom of information and

then open up for questions and then talk about the subject access request separately, as

they are two significantly different functions.

With regard to freedom of information and environmental information inquiries, we received

1 ,551 requests in the year.

That doesn't really explain the complexity of the request that we get, so we may get

requests that have upwards of hundreds of questions within them.

So they are very complex, they cover lots of years.

That is a slight drop on the number received from the previous year and we think that's

to do with the work that we've done with our highways colleagues on improving the approach

to the site history reports.

Thank you, my brain just disappeared there for a minute.

So with regard to performance, we're expected nationally to meet a performance of 90 % of

requests responded on time and we hit 93 .4%, so we are slightly above the national target,

which is a really positive position.

And then working through the report, so that was, so the main requests are types under

2 .2.

The majority of our requests do come from members of the public.

We don't always know where they come from and people don't have to tell us but we do try and keep record of that

Then commercial organisations were the next and the media we do get significant number from them

And we work closely with our colleagues in communications on those sorts of requests

The popular sort of topics we get

Probably no surprise to you as counsellors

regarding things like potholes

contract spend budgets school placements

and looked after children, asylum -seeking, so they're all probably similar topics to

what you see day to day. We do get those from the FOI point of view as well. And when I

say FOI, sorry, I mean freedom of information.

So 2 .3 looks at the outcomes. So we are in a really strong position. 71 per cent of our

requests result in at least some of the information being provided, as it helps demonstrate the

transparency that we have here in the organisation and 32 % of those are for everything that the

requester has asked for. There are a number of legal reasons why we don't disclose information

and we have to work through those with the business area to agree what those will be.

The majority of the time actually when we are refusing a request is because it's already

available to somebody elsewhere, they have not necessarily looked on the website or they

looked at what other organisations provide, so we point them towards that.

So it's not just a section 21, this is available to you somewhere else, we actually direct

them to where it is to assist them.

The second highest exemption we use is around section 40, which is the personal data, so

it's where it's the personal data of somebody else.

That may be a member of staff, it may be another member of the public, and that reflects a

really strong focus on data protection that we have in the organisation.

So one of the questions we usually get is around vexatious and repeated requests, so

we have included that in the report under section 2 .4.

So in the year we had three requests that were closed as vexatious or repeated, and

that was a significant drop from the previous year.

The previous year we had had a significant campaign from a number of people that we were

able to amalgamate and refuse as being vexatious.

One of the requests we refused in that period was related to a campaign, again, that we

received in January 2024, so it's related to an earlier campaign, and two were from

the same individual.

We don't take these refusals lightly, we do warn people and ask them to modify their

think about how they're going to respond and ask us questions.

So we do that ahead of refusing them in most cases, unless it's part of a campaign.

We've done lots of significant reviews.

We had 51 internal reviews conducted.

This is up quite considerably from the previous year.

But in the main, the position is upheld that we have applied exemptions appropriately in

the first place.

Sometimes we do find a bit more information and we're able to provide that in that internal

review.

And five cases were escalated to the Information Commissioner's Office, who is the independent

regulator for these requests.

And in all of those cases, the Information Commissioner upheld the Council's position

or required no further action because we had already dealt with the issues that had been

raised. With regard to improvement work, we have done some improved routing of requests

in children's social care to make sure they are picked up when they should be. We have

done a full review of a publication scheme, this is a technically legal requirement we

have to have and it is published on our website and it helps direct people to where they can

find information about common questions.

We've done a lot of targeted training

for areas where they get high volumes of requests

so people know what to do and how to make sure

that they're processed appropriately

and develop lots of guidance and procedures to support us.

We do have some more planned improvements,

especially with strategic engagement

with traffic and transport.

They seem to be a popular area for requests.

And use of digital tools,

So we're looking at how M365 can support us better with our request management.

That's a bit of a tour of FOI and EIR.

Does anybody have any questions on those?

Thank you, Jenny.

I'm sure we'll have some questions in a second.

I just wanted to ask on page 12 when you talk about the types of requester, there are three

bars but the legend only talks about two types.

So we've got member of public and press and media.

What's the purple bar?

Any questions from the committee?

Jeremy

I just wonder, most of the requests made to for FYI can be anonymous, can't they?

And I just wonder what the legislation is with regard to who's able to ask a FYI request

and I'm thinking about people that live in the UK.

I just wonder whether there's any filtering or anything you do with regard to international

requests?

Do we know whether they are?

Thank you.

So the law allows anybody anywhere in the world to ask under the legislation, so we

can't say we're not providing an answer to you because you live somewhere else.

It does require them to provide a name and contact, so we do – and that includes a

first and surname.

so we do validate those requests and go back to people that try to submit them anonymously.

So there is a process to philtre those. I don't think we would know where somebody is located.

Unless they told us and they wouldn't have to tell us if they don't want to. We only

need a name and a contact address, that usually is an email address and obviously people can

make whatever name they like, we don't verify it with IDs.

There's something that came to me, I was intrigued, anonymous, people do have email accounts with

false names in it, you might get one from John Smith but it might not be John Smith,

it might be somebody else, so you can't cheque those out at all.

We can't cheque those, we just need a name for contact and that's what the law requires.

In the past people have put requests in under celebrity names and things like that but there's

nothing we can do to refuse them. Ian. Thank you chair. Jenny on page 16 you talk about

development of an information FOI checklist and a review of the process is that going

to be measurable in results, that improvement in process and use of the

checklist and we're going to see.

Oh I'm sorry there we are I'll repeat the question thank you. On page 16 we've

got an officer checklist for FOIs and we reviewed the process. Is this measurable

and results, are we getting things quicker or better?

So the checklist is to ensure that our quality standards are incorporated into the response

so that the aim is to reduce the number of reviews that we get because the quality is

improving. Last year we would say that that's something we've introduced because we've seen

a number of internal reviews increase, so we're hoping that that will reduce in this

coming year. So that's how we measure those to see if they're working.

And that will continue to be monitored?

Yeah, absolutely. We look at this on a monthly basis to cheque how things are working and

make sure that we're not having too many cases that go out of time or are seeing a significant

increase in those reviews and cases that go to the Information Commissioner. The statutory

Any more questions?

I have one

if there are no further ones.

You talked about the work

you did in reducing the number of

requests by working with

departments.

Are there other opportunities you

think where you can work with

departments to get information out

proactively to reduce the number of

requests?

We are reaching out

to departments proactively.

We do try

to identify where we get

So we do have a lot of work to do with the integrated transport team around transport

for example, that is a common request we get very often.

So where we do identify those we reach out to the team and see if there are opportunities

to publish that information proactively on our website.

So when we do reviews of cases we do look where we get in common questions to establish

if there is scope for that.

Do you think that might be productive, those looks at how to reduce the number?

It's a difficult one to measure because if you publish information sometimes you then

attract different questions.

So they might be the slightly more complex questions if you're publishing the statistics,

the performance of the service, the general policies, you then start to get the more complicated

questions that come through this route.

Any more questions?

Thank you.

Andrew.

Okay, so I'm you, it looks like.

So I was just trying to see, Chair, if there is any breakdown by postcodes.

In other words, to see what the spread is across Gloucestershire.

I suspect some areas submit more than others which perhaps submit significantly less and

I'm sorry to spring that on you happy to take a written answer

The majority of our requests come in online or via email so we because we don't have to collect a physical address

We wouldn't be able to do that sort of demographic split

afraid

Do you have a sneaking regard where most of them and a few of them might come from

And so I don't I'm not trying to catch you out or play games, but just be interesting to know

We do occasionally get ones that are related to like a specific road or area

But obviously within that we don't know if the person putting the request in is living in that area

So it's it would be very difficult to sort of pull that information out

Okay, I'm just trying to make sure that I'll be dealing up in me

Don't talk with a list and their local council is not doing his duty

Okay, I'm glad you want to be told about list

up to you. Any more questions?

Thank you.

Rebecca.

It's just a quick one, really. It's with relation to what Jeremy was saying about the anonymous

questions that you get in, and I'm just wondering, interested really, about the process in terms

of security. And I was thinking more international security in those countries that are deemed

as being MI5, GCHQ led countries.

I wondered what would be the process if something came in that was very sensitive?

How would you deal with that?

We do look at each request as it comes in on what it's asking for.

That's what we base our responses on rather than who has asked for it.

If they are asking for sensitive information which might include technical security details

for example, of our IT infrastructure, then we would work with our colleagues or experts

in that area to understand what can and can't be released to the public as a whole.

So when we're releasing information, we think about it's going to go to the whole world.

So it's that basis, and it's likely that some of that information is already in the public

domain because of procurements, but it would be very high level of we've purchased this

kind of technology.

We wouldn't then go into the detail of that and there are exemptions around national security

that we would use.

Any more questions?

If not, I'll thank Jenny and Beth for that helpful report.

Are we okay to move on to the second part of the report?

Yes.

Thank you.

So data protection and subject access requests and the other types of requests that we get

which include things like people asking for information to be made accurate or destroyed

and those sorts of requests that we get. These are much more complex in the way that they

have to be handled. They often relate to very sensitive topics, so it might be people that

been in social care for their entire life and they're wanting to understand what happened

to them, so they're asking for access to their records.

So whilst the numbers received at 437 subject access requests and 27 information rights

requests are much lower than the freedom of information requests, they're actually more

resource intensive, so when we get small fluctuations in the numbers that has a significant impact

on performance, so that's where some of that comes in.

So just covered the numbers.

We had 84 % of our subject access requests are responded on time.

That can be either within a month or within three months, depending on the complexity

of the case.

Again, the national target is 90 % and we aren't quite there at the moment, but as I said,

a few cases can tip us over that balance quite quickly.

And for the information rights requests, 63 % were responded on time.

These are often quite complex because you have to talk to service areas about whether

information is accurate or whether it's professional opinion and there's quite a lot of tilling

and frilling that goes on to get to that position.

Children's services are the highest area that get the number of requests in the council.

They receive 326 of the subject access requests directly related to children's services.

and that involves us working really closely with them to make sure that we're getting

the right answers and providing the support in the best way possible for the individual

who's asked for that information. Quite often they're care leavers and it's part of the

ongoing service to make sure that they're supported so we work closely with children's

social care to try and make sure that that's done in the best possible way for the citizen

or they may have moved on but they're still a citizen of the UK.

With regard to internal reviews, we had 5 % were escalated to internal review.

Again, that's a slight increase on the previous year, but we do get a number of people who,

because of maybe their experience in care or with the council previously, they're not

happy in the first place when they come to us, so it can be quite challenging to make

sure that we meet their expectations.

So that's why we get a number of those. It's quite hard to tell people sometimes that information

doesn't exist, that they believe does exist and trying to prove a negative can be quite

challenging. That's usually the reason why people ask for information to be reviewed,

they think that something else exists when it doesn't.

So only three of those cases got escalated to the Information Commissioner's Office

and one in individual rights request was referred to the Information Commissioner's Office.

And again, most cases the Information Commissioner believes that we have taken the steps that

we need to by the time that it gets to them.

So again, as usual, we do some improvement work and we talk about working with children's

social care in that process and we formalise that to make sure that that's reviewed on

every case. Monthly training is undertaken so that we can continuously update and learn

from cases and we've been exploring our e -discovery tools within Microsoft 365 to see how we can

help officers locate information more easily. More planned training with looking at redaction

and how that works, we have to go through all the information, take out the parts they

are not entitled to, that might be about a member of their family, it might be about

someone else in the school that they went to, so we have to go through those and take

all those out. So we are making sure that that training is consistent and we are doing

wider awareness sessions and reviewing existing processes to make sure that they are still

valid. Any questions on that part? Okay Jeremy's got one, anyone else? Yeah well

we heard with the freedom of information it just can be an email making a request

I'm assuming there's a lot more due diligence done on people requesting this

sort of information because it's personal data so it can't just be an

email in the name of the individual I assume, there's got to be clear

I'm just wondering how we do that and two, some individuals might find this sort of process

too difficult for them, they might have professional advice, a lawyer, and I'm assuming we deal

with that as well, I just wonder how we do do that, because some people might be complaining

about what happened in their childhood when they were in care and they've got legal advice,

So how do we go around all that?

Yeah, absolutely.

You're right.

We do have to be cautious.

And we undertake cheques for identity.

So we have some form of sort of, I

think it's two forms of identity,

so like a passport, a driving licence, birth certificate,

and some form of proof of address.

So especially if we're sending something to somebody's house

in the post, then we want to make sure

that they get that to them.

And sometimes we may work with a social worker who's

working closely with that person to make sure they confirm who they are as well. There are

cheques that we do. With regards to, you can authorise anybody to act on your behalf, it

could be an advocate, it could be a solicitor, but we make sure we get proof of identity

from that person but also the person they are asking for the information and written

consent to do that. There are robust cheques in place to make sure that that information

goes to the right person.

What happens if you've got the local member of parliament making a request on that behalf

through their case officer? Would that be acceptable? Would you still deal with the

member of parliament? Particularly if it wasn't a service being provided by the government,

it was a service being provided by the council.

Yeah, there's legislation that allows us to correspond with MPs around those issues and

elected members, we make sure it's on the understanding that they've made those cheques,

so we go back to them. We can't insist on those cheques. We ask them to verify that they've

done that.

Good questions, Jeremy. Thank you. Ian?

I'm a big fan of chat GBC and information being obtained through artificial intelligence

like that. I just wondered whether that is being used already or something similar to

that is being used in your work or whether you have plans to do so and what are the opportunities

but also the risks and challenges in using artificial intelligence for your work?

Thank you, that's a really interesting question. So as a council we're using co -pilot, we've

We've undertaken security cheques on that particular piece of software to make sure that the information

remains within our environment, because there are concerns if you put information into chat

GBT, it gets put into the wider model and is used for training and could surface anywhere.

So we are exploring how co -pilot can work within our field of work.

It's something we've just recently kicked off.

It's probably going to mainly work with regard to freedom of information inquiries rather

than the subject access requires because we still need to make sure people know that we're

using artificial intelligence for their cases so we'd have to make sure that we're transparent

about how we're using it. It's not always 100 % accurate so there still need to be cheques

and balances put in so it's how much time would it save with regards to subject access

requests, especially when you are dealing with cases that are very personal to people

and if we get our responses wrong when we're going out to them, we could significantly

harm them.

Would it be appropriate that a report on how you're doing on that comes to this committee,

or would it be another committee – I'm looking at Rob now – would another committee

be looking into the use of artificial intelligence to provide information to requests?

No, it would fall to this committee.

We would need to frame that obviously a little bit more clearly to give officers as to what

they are looking for.

I agree with Ian when he says he wants to hear more about it.

They are often in relation to the most vulnerable in our communities.

We want to make sure it is right, particularly on the SARs.

I can see the benefits more easily on the freedom of information, but that I think that

that's probably something we should add to our agenda,

but when do you envisage using it in anger type stuff?

Well, that is tied up with a wider copilot project

that is being managed by DICT and the licences,

so I'm not 100 % sure on the timescales,

I don't know, Mandy, if you know what they are.

I think the bigger point is,

yeah, we can bring it back here.

We're just wrapping up the first stage of a formal pilot,

So we've got the findings so we're putting the plan together with next steps and that would be an appropriate time to think about

Okay, you can let us know when that's likely to come

Be produced and we'll put it in front of this committee and that would be something for our committee any more questions for Danny

So anything else you need to cover Jenny I will thank you now

Again, thank you for that. It's been very helpful

Thank you chair. We move on to our next item which is council strategy

development and I'm hoping the IT is working now for Colin. I'll introduce

Colin to cover that. Over to you Colin.

It's not working Colin.

So if he's going to try some other things.

Is that any good now?

We can hear you, Colin. We're grateful for you joining us.

Our personal appearance will be even greater, but we appreciate it.

Sometimes it can be difficult. Over to you.

I have to say, we made a commitment that the relevant cabinet members would be there.

And at one of the first ones, neither of us can actually be there.

And I'm afraid this is very much second best.

At least it does really apologise for not being able to make it.

And this shouldn't be the way that things go forward.

So it is a sincere apology.

But yeah, there we are.

So I'm here for about another possibly, well, at least another half now, maybe.

I can stretch that to an hour, I'm not sure.

So the corporate strategy and the paper that you have in front of you has the timelines that we were hoping to bring.

But I have to say that in reviewing this in the last few weeks, the timeline in saying that in November we'd be approving a corporate strategy

may have to slip a bit.

And the reason for that is we were given three options

as to whether to come up with a corporate strategy

really before the summer, November,

or bring it to the budget meeting.

And we were really quite keen that council had an idea

of what the council strategy would be in November.

However, since then, we've had the fair funding review,

which has caused or is causing us quite a bit of a problem.

And it's a problem because we could be losing some

40 million for next year's budget,

which is very, very substantial.

Now the Fair Funding Review is still being consulted on.

So don't really know what that's going to produce.

And we felt that actually having a definitive council

strategy which would cover the next four years when we don't really know what kind of resources

we might have was probably premature. However, we are keen that in November we will come

forward with a draught strategy which will be as full as we can make it and it will be much

more about our intentions and our intentions in terms of administration reflecting the

manifesto that we fought the election on. So there's a bit of a difference there from

really what's in the papers, but it seemed to us that it would be very difficult and

we don't want to be in a position of having to revise the corporate strategy at the budget

meeting and the budget meeting will have a section in it to do with the corporate strategy.

My intention would be that that would be a separate item so that it's not confused with

the debate on the budget. We will have to go out for budget consultation on what we

believe at that particular moment in time is the worst case scenario, which isn't very

helpful. On the other hand, if we took a view that, well, it might not be so bad,

and we went out with a budget which didn't look at the worst case, we then

might have to revise it if it was the worst case, which would be even worse,

and our budget consultation would be that much more difficult. So that's the

We will eventually make it as full as possible.

From that budget strategy, there will be annual plans.

Those annual plans will set the targets for the year, which previously

haven't been probably as good as they might have been, but we're

hoping they're a lot more comprehensive.

and certainly in an annual plan, you're taking into account the amount of money we have to

spend, the savings we're making, and so the targets will be there.

So as a bit of an introduction in terms of that slight delay, I'd probably leave it at

that.

I think the rest of what's in the paper is fairly self -explanatory, as I say, apart from those dates.

And I have to say, we also took into account the amount of officer time that's being devoted to LGR,

which I think is, we knew there'd be a lot, but actually, simply the amount of time,

on top of which trying to get a refined budget strategy by November, we felt that it just

wasn't feasible.

So that's my opening statement really, two apologies, one for not being there and two

for the delay in what we'd hoped would be coming in November.

But there's still quite a lot of work that will be done.

So, in November, I think you'll have a good picture of where we intend to go, but the

detail may not be there as full as it might be.

Thanks.

Thank you, Colin.

Any questions from the committee?

Craig and then Ian.

Thank you, Colin.

That was a helpful clarification.

However, I'm still a little confused about the sequence that happens between the publication

of the full strategy, corporate strategy, and how that feeds into discussions about

budgeting, etc.

Can you clarify how that process works?

So I think in November we'll be bringing a draught budget strategy for further consultation.

I mean, there will be consultation with COSC in the run up to that draught strategy.

So the corporate plan, if you like, will be corporate strategy, will be what we intend

to do, where we intend to be, what we intend to have done in the next four years.

We have to do that despite the fact that we know that LGR will probably supersede that.

And our budgeting will be how much of that strategy, how far we will get on that strategy in a year.

And that will be our annual plan, which will be linked to next year's budget.

it. The MTFS will be the overall plan for the next three years and maps out what our

expectations of our spend and etc will be over the next three years. And though all

those plans need to align, hopefully that's answered your question, but clearly if you

want some more then ask me again.

Thank you, Colin.

My question is about annual plans and when they will run from and to.

You mentioned how annual plans will follow on from the corporate strategy.

I see the logic there, absolutely.

And you've also talked about possible delays in the corporate strategy.

So therefore, the annual plans, will they be delayed?

or are we talking about the first annual plan, i .e. the first tangible, effective plan which

will hit the ground and really make a difference, not appearing until, I guess, April next year?

I mean, is that, what will happen between now and April next year in terms of planning,

or will we still be run on the basis of the annual plans from the previous administration?

The answer to that is no.

What I'd hoped to do is bring the corporate plan in November so that we could agree that that was the direction of travel for the Council.

All that's happening is that the corporate plan, the Council strategy will come at the same time as the budget.

Now, clearly, when we've set the budget for next year, 26, 27, the annual plan will have

to be agreed at that time as well.

So that will be there because it's the annual plan that, well, the two are interlinked really,

the annual plan and the annual budget.

So they go together.

So they have to be agreed at the same time.

So it will be a busy meeting on budget day.

Can I just be absolutely clear here Colin, the first annual plan will start from April next year.

So at the moment there is no annual plan because we've got the corporate strategy to work out.

I can see the logic, but there won't be any practical annual plan until another, well rather more than,

well a lot more than six months time so it will be not until April that there will be an effective

annual plan and it will run April to the end of March is that right?

Yeah the budget runs from the 1st of April and so will the annual plan

and we are running on an annual plan it was called something different but we're running on that

at the moment and any variations to that are brought to Council.

And well, there's some variations that cabinet can make itself so long as it's broadly in

line with budget.

So that's what we're dealing with.

We inherited a budget.

We inherited an annual plan.

The first opportunity to make a major change on that is really the budget meeting in February

where we will set next year's budget and next year's annual plan, which will run from April 26.

Thank you for that Colin. I appreciate the fair funding at roughly 6 % of our net budget is a factor you need to take into account. Andrew's got a question.

Just two very quick questions.

I read in the report that the strategy will go to the same meeting as a local government

review meeting in November, is that right?

There will be two items on the agenda for 12 November, one the strategy and one local

government review and submission.

Is that right Colin?

Or have I misread the report?

As I said, the strategy will be a draught strategy and the strategy to be approved will be at

the Budget meeting in February. But we would like to know we are going in the right direction.

So as we said we would bring the strategy, we still feel that we ought to bring something

to that November meeting.

Both again, so chair to

To follow on from that. Wow both of those

Items a huge item and in my opinion would warrant a meeting almost just on their own

what time at the evening just call anything that

November the

Forgot the date in November

To which way?

12.

That's where I thought.

I was going to say 12th to 24th.

What time in the evening does Colin expect that meeting

to end with such weighty items if we're

able to give them the due amount of time and scrutiny

that they deserve?

And I'm not sure I understand why the leader of the council

isn't here this morning to explain to this committee

why there are the delays in implementing or getting

the strategy, the draught strategy, to us.

Colin has put up a good explanation and he has done his best to convince us.

But I just wanted, Chair, as the new Chair of this committee, whether or not you will

be expecting the leader and the relevant members of Cabinet to come before us and take our

questions.

We will be expecting, but I will let Colin answer that question.

He probably knows Lisa's whereabouts better than I do, Andrew.

To be honest, I can't remember.

But I know it was unavoidable and I know she was really disappointed not to do it, particularly

because of the commitment we've made.

And apart from my finance role, I am deputy leader, so I deputise for the leader.

I've got no idea when it might finish.

That will depend on members of council.

There will be, the papers will be ready beforehand.

And as I said, we'll bring as much as we can to cost ahead of that.

So there's a much greater understanding.

But, you know, your guess is as good as mine is to when it will finish,

because that's in the hands of members and indeed the chair of the county council.

If I can just come back on that, my guess is that we're going to be hard pushed

to do both items, to take both items and give both items the attention

and the scrutiny that they require.

And I think that one might be rushed

at the expense of the other.

And I really am looking for an assurance

that that won't be the case.

And I'm disappointed that the leader's not here.

I think I've made that point.

I don't want to repeat that too often.

But also, I think it's a disappointment

that the cabinet don't have anything to bring us

until several, several months after they took over

the administration here at Shire Hall.

That's so disappointing.

And I do appreciate, Colin, that you are the deputy leader.

You're not the leader, but I think it's disappointing.

And you're putting up a good show

in answering these really quite tough questions.

But it's the one on November the 12th, sorry,

that gives me the concern.

I just so do not want to see this rush.

This is the most important piece of legislation

that this County Council will have considered since its inception and it

deserves the attention and the time that that's going to take not to be put in

with yet another seriously huge item the corporate strategy I think this is by

planning and this isn't going to help democracy in in in Gloucestershire by

having these two substantive items on the same agenda I would have thought

that the local government review warrants a meeting just with that item

on the agenda. I'm just really disappointed and very concerned.

Jeremy just wants to come in and then we'll go to you. Yeah I'm finding it really

interesting listening to Councillor Gravel's talking about members of the

leader of the council turning up to corporate governance. Well I've sat on

this committee for about four or five years and I never saw once the former

Conservative leader of Gloucestershire County Council ever turn up. At least we've

We've got two cabinet members, one online,

but another one here.

So that hypocrisy from Councillor Gravel's

needs to be condemned.

Secondly, I'm sure we can manage two agenda items at Council

in November.

I mean, it just means maybe the Conservative group

and other opposition groups will lay off

having motions which are not necessary on that occasion,

because we have two big issues.

An LGR is a big issue.

It's a waste of time, it's causing a lot of disruption for local government services,

but the government are hell -bent on delivering it, so we're going to have to deal with it.

But we are spending, as local authorities, an inordinate length of time trying to reorganise,

and when we have a final template, it'll take us another five to ten years to sort it all

out and get it settled down.

And in the meantime, public services will be harmed and won't be as good as they could

otherwise have been.

We should, as a newly elected council, be concentrating on delivering a new corporate

plan and a new load of services for this council for the next four years.

Unfortunately, the government seems hell -bent on abolishing this council and all the district

councils as well.

We've got to deliver, we've got to deal with that.

And I think some of the criticisms by Councillor Gravel's are unwarranted.

OK, I'll let Colin come in as well. Colin?

Yeah, the one thing I would agree with is that Councillor Gravel's may be disappointed, and I know that Lisa was disappointed as well.

So at least that's in common.

And if anything, the corporate plan, the strategy was going to be a full document and now it

will be a draught.

So if anything, there needs to be less discussion because you can keep the full discussion to

when it's actually approved at the budget meeting.

He may have the same view about the budget meeting.

But I have to say that, you know, we, I'm here, and this is pretty much just pointing

out that timetable.

And yeah, they're all meaty items, which is part of the reason why we don't think we can

get that, the corporate plan in the form that we want it to.

Both of them have come from government.

One is the fair funding review, which has thrown things and made things more difficult,

and two, LGR itself.

So I mean, it is what it is.

We need that decision on LGR.

I'm sure that if he goes to his group leader, he'll make those protestations, that it should

have been a separate council meeting.

That isn't how it's planned at the moment, and that's how we're going to deal with it.

I am annoyed that Jeremy has walked out.

I just said to him I will reply to some of the points you have made.

Jeremy will know for a while that meetings of Gloucester City Council occasionally go

on until 11 at night.

I hope that is not what we are setting up for here.

I think as Colin just alluded to the two items are serious. They possibly deserve a council meeting

For both of them, but I'm just flaking up and I hope I'm proved wrong

I hope that everybody agrees with the proposals that are contained in both of them and it doesn't take so much time

but I think you know, I you cherry call a serious responsibility as chair of this committee and it's up to you and this committee to

provide the administration with the scrutiny that they need and not to be

feeling at any meeting that we're under pressure not to ask questions not to

come back on points that are made because that would be an awful way to

run scrutiny particularly when it's a new administration and we need to really

see what they're up to finally I think it's regrettable that there's such a

delay between May the 1st May the 2nd whatever the date was of the County

Council elections and the administration actually bringing something forward to

Council via this committee. I think they've missed an opportunity in terms of

the amount of time they've had and I think that's especially disappointing.

And I'm disappointed that Jeremy's walked out when I was answering his points.

I'll repeat them elsewhere at Gloucester City Council for sure. Thank you.

I don't think he did it on purpose. Richard. Thank you. I just wanted to say as a new

member that there's a lot of assumed knowledge here and I've obviously a

written under the council so I'm you know used to talking about corporate

strategies but I don't know if someone who's completely new to being a

councillor whether they would even have a real background in what the heck we're

all going on about and I just wonder if maybe there was a bit of an opportunity

to just explain that a little beforehand either here or to any members maybe if

no one needs it and maybe it was just me but I was sort of thinking is this done

the same way as we do it at borough level or are we talking about something

different I guess the the questions for Colin or for anyone really you can

answer this is the existing corporate plan that we have.

How long was that approved for?

Like, how long has that got left to run?

And I don't think it's necessary.

I know we're all politicians and we couldn't possibly

imagine carrying on someone else's plan for a little

while, but actually sometimes it is sensible

to do that and to carry on what you've inherited

whilst you take the time to plan properly and get

your plan right.

So, it'd be helpful just to know when that plan is due

to run till and how long we have.

And then my second question is, what, if anything,

will the leadership be doing to work with all councillors

to feed into the corporate plan?

Is it just this is our manifesto and so this is what we're doing?

Or is it actually an opportunity to learn

from cross -party different groups

and for all councillors to feel that they have some ownership

of the corporate plan, which is what we did at Tewkesbury.

And it actually worked really well.

we held a number of engagement sessions and we ended up with council plan that's

two years running had unanimous support cross -party because everyone felt they

could see a little bit of their groups wishes for their residents in it so that

that would be my two points thank you okay don't comment back on that gone in

by agree with the richest points

From memory, there's a COSC meeting in September, so we hope to be bringing something there.

And also, I would hope that my colleagues bring forward ideas in terms of how the manifesto

is likely to be delivered into the corporate plan during that period. And as I said, the

corporate plan will be draught in November. And then there's also further opportunities

between November and the February meeting to make changes. We'll be, I think, exploring

those ideas because it is important. This has to be approved by council as a whole.

And so it does mean that all members need to have had the opportunity to have some input.

All I was bringing today is the timetable for approval of the corporate plan.

And just to answer the question, corporate plans are four years.

So this is the last year of the previous corporate plan.

So and the corporate plan was very, the existing one was very much about aspirations.

plans, but it didn't really say where we expected the council to be in four years' time. So

it was quite difficult to establish annual plans to see quite how far we'd got in terms

of delivering that council strategy, corporate plan. And I'm hoping to tighten that up a

But there is a lot of change due in the next four years, so crafting that is going to be quite difficult.

But as an administration, we are committed to being open and transparent, and that means engaging with all members,

and to see how the corporate plan can be developed in conjunction with all councillors.

To answer another point, the corporate plan is that, in a sense, it's self -explanatory.

It's where this council hopes to be in four years' time.

And so, and that will then, underneath that, will say how each part of the council will

work and will deliver that plan.

The annual plans are much more detailed as to what's going to happen in the year in question and how that contributes to that four -year plan.

Thank you Colin, that was really helpful and it's covered pretty much everything. The only thing, and I could probably Google this, but if anyone could just tell me when the, I know it's got one year to run, you've sort of answered that, but what month or particular when it's due to run out, thank you.

Sorry, it runs from April and it will be April for the next four years.

Thank you, as you were saying I was also getting it in my ear, so April heard loud and clear,

thanks all.

Yeah, and just to clarify, because that was a helpful interjection bearing in mind the

majority of the committee are new to this council if not to councils altogether, just

clarify the kind of roles and responsibilities. So the council strategy

is one of a handful of documents that are reserved to council itself for

decision. That's because they're the documents that they're the policies and

documents of the most strategic nature and essentially the way it works is that

the council strategy provides cabinet with a mandate within which it can

operate. So that's the important role is it plays it essentially puts a

a fence around what cabinet is able to do.

Now obviously the administration has looked at that

and are comfortable that it affords them the latitude

to do the things they need and wish to do this year.

But part of your role of scrutiny is ensuring

that cabinet's actions are in line

with that broader strategy.

So that's an important control role

that you have to play as scrutiny

and part of what you need to be thinking about

when you're looking at that corporate plan.

That said, if there are occasions where cabinet needs to take a decision outside of the plan,

there are ways of doing that, but that then needs to be referred back to council.

And again, your role is to make sure that the appropriate actions are being taken when

that is the case.

Thank you, Rob.

Any more questions?

I have a couple of questions, Colin.

The first is, given that these change deadlines, but also between meetings, how do you envisage working with both councillors from different parties and with this committee?

I'll have to come back to you on that. We need to work something out and I would hope

that I will be saying to Lisa that the next group leaders, we come up with a method of doing that.

Anything else from committee? No, thank you Colin. Are you able to stay for another half an hour?

Sorry, I will try and stay for this next item.

But if I don't manage it all, apologies for that.

That brings us on to our next item, which is corporate performance risk and financial

monitoring.

I will introduce Paul and Rob to deal with that.

Paul.

Okay, thanks.

So this is quarter four, so because of the timings of the elections, et cetera, and the

committee, this is a little bit of old information and it has gone to cabinet, but just to remind

councillors and to answer any questions that obviously this is for the end of the last

financial year, we ended the position in quite a healthy position with a 13 .8 million revenue

underspend which was kind of good news and detailed in the report the proposals that

were approved by cabinet about how to use that 13 .8.

Such things as like it's already been mentioned in this meeting by Councillor Haye about the

fair funding review and there was a concern that that will have a large impact so one

of the biggest items is to put four and a half million into that reserve to fund those

costs and also local government reorganisation as Councillor Hilton pointed out is a very

time intensive and costly exercise so from that for tuition one off under spend we have

put five million into a reserve to cover those non -recurrent costs of local government reorganisation.

So that was the healthy position in terms of the revenue position at the end of the

Reserves, general reserves are healthy, they're kind of the minimum level of 5%, which is

part of our kind of MTF strategy to keep reserves at that level.

Could be flicking to capital, yeah, capital is, you know, I think we're ending in a good

position as far as capital is concerned.

Some underspend, but those schemes still need to be, that's actually slippage in the capital

schemes rather than an underspend, so that's been carried forward, that money, so those

schemes can be completed in the current financial year.

So I mean it's quite a detailed report, so that's just the very edited highlights, and

happy to answer any questions.

Craig.

Thank you for that, that's obviously quite a detailed report.

Am I right in understanding that the healthy end of year has resulted from a lot of savings

in all the other services bailing out an overspend in adult social care and is that sustainable?

There is an overspend that was reported, just looking at what the figure is to remind me

because it was for adults of 2 .5 million overspend.

These services are demand -led and quite volatile.

And if you look back several years,

adults have underspend and children have overspend.

That position's been reversed in this financial year.

So there is an underlying overspend within adults

of 2 .4 million, and that is being looked at seriously.

And there is a board that's looking at that

to iron out those problems to ensure that underlying overspend isn't recurrent in future

financial years.

So yeah, just for the last financial year, yes, that overspending in adults was offset

by underspends elsewhere, but it's an issue that's been recognised and is being looked

at.

I think that's a good point.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Just on the question of reserves, is there a standard

level recommended for county councils of reserves or is that

a level we set for ourselves?

levels.

There's two main approaches, kind of risk based approach and also recommended level.

So a rule of thumb that obviously the external auditors often look at and benchmark against

us is the 5 % rule, 5 % of net expenditure.

It's not hard and fast rule, it's not laid down in legislation, but it is guidance, it

is best practise and if we were below that or significantly above that external audit

would ask us questions to say, you know, why is it at that level?

And then you would – that's when you go to the risk -based approach and say, well,

it's higher or lower because we – that's where we assess the risk.

But five percent is generally seen as a rule of thumb and good practise, and really, if

you're going to move away from that, the external auditors would come and ask you why

and would want some evidence, some risk -based evidence to say why you're higher or lower.

Thank you.

Any more questions for committee?

Just a quick question on the schools in deficit on page 37.

It's really helpful and really interesting.

But there's 30 schools in deficit.

I wonder if committee might be interested to see at a future point of those 30, how

long those 30 have been in deficit, whether it's the same 30 all the time or whether they

improve but then another drops into deficit.

So quite interesting to maybe see some more data behind that.

I agree with that and I also think the size of those deficits, you know, if they're two

pounds in deficits, that's one thing.

If they're 200 ,000 in deficit, it's a completely different thing.

As you would expect, I haven't got that level of detail with me, but we do, when everyone

is in deficit, it is compulsory to have a deficit recovery plan, which we kind of monitor

with the school governors.

But we can get that information if the committee wants it to have what those schools are.

We probably won't name the schools but we can say what level they are and the historic

trends.

That would be very interesting, thank you.

My question, we often think of underspends as good things, well accountants obviously

think of underspends as good things but we've underspent by 6 % in children's

services is that a good thing and if it isn't what risk does it hold in store

for us

yeah I mean children's services is very much kind of demand -led so and it is

kind of is very volatile you can get one or two placements that can add quite

significant amounts so there has been over the last few years of a trend at

looking at the figures, understanding those figures and historically those Councillors

who have been here a while, this is a reversal of the normal position where Children's Services

has overspent and we have added significant amounts to the budget each financial year

for the last five or six financial years.

So I think this is now a position where I think it's benefited from all the hard work

that we've done over the last four or five years to get to this position.

And so we're not refusing services, I think it's just actually we've improved commissioning,

we've improved social work practise to come to this position.

But as I said, it is very volatile, hence why we probably wouldn't be necessarily reporting

that kind of underspend in this financial year because it was some one -off issues due

to volatile demand.

So it sounds more like a prediction issue than a delivery issue, but hopefully Colin

might have an answer too.

Yeah, thank you.

On the children's services budget, I think it is really a good news storey.

So over the years, a lot of hard work, a lot of money being put in, a lot of investment

in social workers in terms of training and understanding the whole bit about not leaving

placements to the last minute. I actually have to say that one of the introductions which has been

really, really well received by social workers is something called magic notes, which is an AI

system, which means that in an interview, instead of having to jot down notes, and then write them up later,

the magic notes, listens to the conversation, the interview, and delivers those notes with action plans and everything else.

They have to be reviewed by the social worker. But it's saving an awful lot of time a week. And I've forgotten the number of

hours, but I think it's about six or more hours a week is just

saved by not having to write up reports. And those are instant.

And it also means that the interview itself isn't disrupted

by taking those notes. So it's a lot better interview. It means

that social workers are also can understand the people that

talking to in terms of if a placement is beginning to look difficult, they know why it's going wrong

and they can make those placements not as an emergency when suddenly there's a crisis,

but that can be planned. That can make a huge difference in terms of the costs of that placement

because they can describe why it's broken down. And that's just in a sense one of the factors

we've stabilised the workforce because it presumably Gloucestershire is looking like a

better place for social workers to come and stay. That's made a big difference too. So

those are two examples of a lot of strands which have been taking place in children's services

and we're all looking forward to how Ofsted sees that improvement. So that's that one area.

I will just mention that it is healthy to come through with an underspend.

However, from my point of view, it didn't seem quite so joyous because there were quite

a number of commitments that didn't seem to be funded.

And the savings that we have to make and the savings that were planned by the time you've

added in inflation and, you know, extra costs, there's an awful lot that has to be done this

year to bring the budget into, at least in line with the budget, plus the fact that we've

got huge savings to be made next year.

So it's not that easy, I have to say.

And in terms of the capital programme, that's jumped up quite a lot.

But that's because we've made provision for new care homes because previously there was

a lot of commissioning from adult social services and that's not proved as cost effective as

it might be.

So in effect, we're bringing a lot of that in house.

The trouble is we've got to build the house to bring it back into.

So those are being planned. So there's been some good work been done previously, which we need to see to fruition.

So there are major challenges this year. But we need to keep the reserves as they are.

It simply is no good to think about money that might be spent and say, well, if we need

to, we'll just dip into reserves.

That isn't what reserves are for.

You can't plan to use reserves.

That goes against all financial prudence.

So we were just trying to get to grips, manage, understand and get the budget into good shape for the end of the year in 2026.

Thank you Colin. I've got a question from Ian.

Thank you chair. Paul I'm looking at the table which is titled right of overview 2024 -2025

and it appears that we've got a total right off of about £630 ,000 of which 99 point something

is coming from adults which I presume is adult social services do we know what

that write -off is in any detailed way and if you don't have an answer you can

write I mean we do have a detail that because each write -off every write -off

over a thousand pounds has to come to me and then you write off over ten thousand

and has to go to Councillor Hay or the cabinet member for finance.

So we have got details of those.

Obviously the issue with adult social care is that like most we have to provide the service

but we can't refuse to provide that service.

If people aren't paying, if you're running a business and the customer wasn't paying,

you would just stop providing them that service.

But obviously with adult social care you can't turf people out of their home so we have to

continue to provide that service.

We take, you know, we register debts, we go through probates, you know, we take legal

action et cetera.

So, you know, we have robustly followed that.

It does seem a high figure, but if you look at the actual percentage that we invoice,

it's under 1 % that we actually write off of the amount we invoice.

Who is the customer in this case?

Normally it's individuals. We send an invoice to an individual person and then if they don't

pay we then kind of chase them up, follow the indirect recovery process but the customer

that we're invoicing is the individual. In some cases it's a care home that's gone bankrupt

and insolvency and we follow that through the liquidation process but in the majority

cases it is individuals who are paying for their care so they're people that you know

who have to make a contribution to their care and we chase that contribution up.

Thank you Paul.

One last question I think Paul.

We've obviously got dedicated schools grant statutory override.

Without that what would our reserves position be in relation to our net spend?

At the end of the financial year, the position was that we had a 78 million DSG deficit.

Our general reserves, which are our kind of free reserves to use, you know, 30 something,

32 million.

So, you know, we've got other reserves, but they're specified reserves for specified projects.

So, yeah, so the deficit does exceed our general reserves.

Okay, so the auditors are relatively relaxed about that?

No, neither are officers.

I think it's a huge issue across the country, the DSG deficit.

In the majority of councils, the DSG deficit exceeds their general reserve

and it is an issue.

The statutory override has been extended for two years

because it was going to run out in March 2026.

It's now March 2028, but that only buys us time.

It hasn't resolved the issue

and it is looking at both nationally and locally.

It's a big issue that's being looked at.

I'm not sure if Colin's still got his hand up.

Is that a legacy man?

Colin, or did you want to come in?

No, I want to come in on that

because the DSG's deficit is a huge headache.

And it's, you've heard the figure of 80 million this year.

What that does, that means that we do not have 80 million

that we can either use to build stuff,

Or if we're not using it, that could be put into, you know, it could be gathering interest.

So we're losing out on that.

This council has used internal borrowing a lot for its capital programme.

That's using cash that isn't needed at the moment.

and you can use that in terms of borrowing to build stuff.

So it's having a huge impact on us.

And if it continues to grow,

and without the, well, even if it continues to grow,

we might not be able to keep that within our own budget.

And if that gets to the point

where we're having to borrow money in effect,

or cut services, that's a real issue.

And we've been talking about LGR

and the fast pace that government wants for us to act on this. But I have to say, they promised to

come up with a solution, if you like, for the SEND deficit in the spring of this year. That was moved

back to the summer and it's been moved back again to the autumn. This is having a major problem for

and it is tying our hands.

I can't stress enough how difficult this is,

not just for this council,

but for other councils up and down the country

and governments, I use that in the plural,

have just been kicking the can down the road

and then just expect local councils to get on with it.

And from my point of view, that's just totally unacceptable.

It is being raised, it continues to be being raised, but until it really hits the headlines

big time, I just think they're going to just do as little as they can in trying to solve

it.

And I just don't think it's good enough.

Okay, thank you for that Colin.

You might not be here when we talk about the risk report, but that dedicated school was

is I think it's four and four.

Do you have a view that it might be worse than four and four?

I don't know. I think four and four is OK, because we're just about managing it.

Depending on what's said, hopefully in the autumn, unless they postpone it again,

At that point we might have to look at it again.

I'm not optimistic when the statutory override has been extended for two years

that it's going to be a solution there in the autumn but we can talk about that

later. Any more questions? We'll move on to the council

strategy progress report.

I may have to go now, so can I just say cheerio and say sorry that we can't be there.

Thanks Colin.

All right.

Okay.

If I can introduce the report.

I would normally talk you through the content of the report at headline level.

I will spend less time doing that today because I am very conscious that it is essentially

a report on the previous administration's delivery of the council strategy and as Paul

has said, is somewhat old now given that this meeting was put back to after the election.

But it might be helpful just me to talk you through the format of the report because I'm

conscious it's got a lot of information in it and if you've not seen it before it can

be a little bit daunting.

So if I can just explain to you what we try and give you is both a broad summary of how

we're doing against the council strategy but also some of the more detailed data that sits

below that.

I'm conscious that not everybody in the room is likely to be a data freak like me but for

those that are it just provides that additional level of assurance and the opportunity for

to ask questions at a more detailed level and hopefully as I explain how the report

works you'll see why that's a good thing. I hope you agree it's a good thing.

So from page 63 on you've got some tables that are each headed strategic priority and

I've got a strategic priority written next to them. Those relate to the council strategy

that we were talking about earlier. So each of those is a chapter in the existing corporate

strategy and the key objectives that sit underneath that are the key objectives that sit within

that current corporate strategy. The comments section then is the senior officer's account

of how we're doing against those objectives that we've set ourselves. So it will describe

both the actions we're taking within that strategy but also some of the performance

measures within it and how we're doing against those. And then at the top of the page you

get an overall status which is a subjective judgement on whether the strategy is on track

but based on the information within that report. The next section of the report starts at page

105 and that's where you start to get into the more detailed information about the metrics.

So the first part of that from page 101 onwards highlights some of the key metrics that are

important to us as a council because they reflect an important area of our business

or something we need to achieve.

And this is the performance team rather than the services

themselves highlighting to you what

we think are some of the significant shifts

in those metrics.

So trying to sift through the plethora of different metrics

and performance indicators we use

to highlight those that seem to us

to be significant at the moment, either because they're improving

or because they're at risk of going off track.

But because that relies on you trusting us to come up with the right ones, we also hold

ourselves to account by giving you the full dataset and that's the table that you'll see

on page 115 onwards.

So page 115 onwards lists all of the indicators that we're tracking at the corporate level.

Clearly not all the indicators we track across the entire organisation because we really

would drown in that detail, but those that we track at a corporate level so that you

can see that alongside those we are highlighting we are tracking all of our performance and

you are very welcome to ask questions about those as well as the ones that we have highlighted.

And then if you scroll on down to page 147 you will reach the strategic risk monitoring

report and that lists all of those risks within our strategic risk register and the assessment

in the latest quarter of the status of that risk along with a commentary against each

one that justifies that status and tells you what actions are being taken to manage those

risks.

So normally in this meeting when this report comes I would introduce to you each section

separately and then pause to give you the opportunity to ask questions.

Just as with the finance report there's a certain amount of information I carry around

in my head but obviously because of the breadth of the report on some occasions we'll need

refer you back to directorates and get a written response back to you on items of detail.

Equally if you do get a chance to review the report in advance, and there are things that

you want to ask at the meeting, it's really helpful if you can drop me or Sophie a line

with any questions you intend to raise, and then that enables me to do some of that homework

before we come, which is then potentially a bit less frustrating for you than being

told we'll get you in response to that so if you're able to do that that's

really helpful. As it is our first time through this report with the new

committee I won't go into the headlines of each section but I will just

highlight those first sections the council strategy progress report just to

explain where we are against those. The vast majority of those are

reporting as being on track and achievable.

There are some exceptions to that where we've indicated

that elements of the strategy are at risk,

and I'll just take you through those.

So the first of those is in relation to climate change,

and we make a distinction there between the actions

we've agreed to undertake as a council,

and the wider impact that those actions are having

on levels of carbon emission across the council

and the county as a whole.

In the first instance, we're saying the actions

we've agreed to and signed up to are on track.

We're doing what we said we would do in the strategy,

but a flagging that actually in terms of the impact

that's having on CO2 emissions, it isn't enough

and we will need to do more.

One of the things that we need to do more

and are doing more of is in relation to our supply chain.

So focus to date has been on our own emissions

as an authority, but obviously the vast majority

of our services are delivered through third party contracts.

certainly in terms of spend, the vast majority, and we need to get better at tracking, recording

and incentivising our providers to reduce their climate impact and their carbon emissions.

So that's the element where we're recognising more needs to be done.

In terms of roads investment, again a similar situation. In terms of the actions we've agreed

to take. Under the last administration there was lots of trialling of new technology to

improve the efficiency with which we were able to repair potholes. But we recognise

that the underlying condition of the roads is still deteriorating at a level that we

are not able to invest to keep pace with. The underlying condition is something that

is gradually heading in the wrong direction and that really is a matter of investment

and the need for more government funding in order to be able to keep pace with that.

We've then got two outcomes that are showing, were showing at the end of the quarter as

at risk, those being children's services improvement and fire and rescue service improvement.

That reflects the fact that as it stands both of those are still at levels of intervention

with inspectors that we aren't yet out of. So in the case of Children's Services, we

are judged as requiring improvement. We know that we've recently had an Ofsted inspection

and are expecting the results of that to be published next week and if that's improved

the situation then that will turn that outcome to green but at the time of writing we were

still in that requires improvement state.

So I wanted to reflect that in that report.

Similarly, GFRS, we've recently undergone a review

in awaiting the outcome of that.

But at the time that the report was written,

we were still in intervention with the inspector there.

And then the final one that's off track

is transforming procurement.

That is because one of the key elements in that programme

is the implementation of our new IT system that

will link financial spend with contracts.

At the moment, our system doesn't allow us to do that,

which means that we have limited visibility of

contractual spend and limited ability to analyse

and spot those opportunities to drive

greater value for money.

The new system will mean that no orders can be

raised without being linked back to a contract,

and that will give us much richer data that enables

us both to track for compliance,

but more importantly, to drive value for money

through the business.

That was due to have gone live by this point, but for various technical reasons hasn't done,

and until it goes live we won't be able to reap some of those benefits, which is why

we are reporting that particular outcome as AMBA.

That's all I intend to say, but as I say I'm happy to take any questions you've got, either

general or specific, relating to any of those four sections of the report.

Great, first. Thanks for that Rob. Just looking through the strategy reports, as is often

the case, social value being the very very last thing in it, there's lots of good work

going on there and I've been in contact with the social value lead. Which committee scrutinises

activity in that space? That will, so, environment, that's a very important thing to know. And

The Environment Scrutiny Committee do get updates on that because it's delivered within

the Environment Directorate but actually if you wanted to do a deep dive with it that

would probably come to this committee because this is the corporate committee and obviously

social value is delivered across the whole of the organisation rather than just through

environment contracts.

Do you have a view on when that might be best considered by this committee?

I don't personally, there's no particular milestones that we're due to hit with that,

so I think it just becomes a matter of work planning and when this committee's got the

space to give it the attention that it needs.

Any more questions for Rob?

I have some, Rob, in Dingo, so easily.

In our corporate performance and risk report, we have a target of 65 % being on track.

Why is that target there when it means one in three were off track?

So historically that's what we've tried to balance is the fact that you want to be ambitious but not so ambitious you don't hit anything.

And so what we try and do is set that target at a level that we think stretches us.

us, but recognises that individual targets are set to be challenging and therefore we

don't expect to hit all of them. Historically our performance has been about 65 % level,

you'll see at the moment we're at 75 % being on or close to target. That probably reflects

the fact that we are nearing the end of that four year period and therefore those areas

we've been focusing over those four years are starting to be achieved. The thing that's

prevented us previously getting higher than that 65 has been the fact we've had children's

services in intervention with historically poor levels of performance. Because we were

so determined to turn that around, we decided at a strategic level it wasn't appropriate

to set incremental improvement targets. So although we knew that over the four years

we would expect to see a gradual improvement against children's indicators, strategically

it was really important to set our sights where we wanted to get to. So every children's

target was benchmarked against good and outstanding authorities to make sure that we were aiming

for the right goal. The consequence of that is that we knew it would take a while to get

there and therefore you would see a number of targets throughout the lifetime of that

strategy being missed but hopefully getting closer to the mark and that 75 % signifies

that we are now much closer to that mark.

We had a discussion earlier about the new council strategy.

One of the things the new administration will need to think about is what approach it wants

to take to target setting.

and their arguments for both setting targets that are realistic as opposed to really stretched

targets and it will be for the administration to decide how it wants to approach that. I

guess the important thing is you understand what it is they're doing and what the rationale

is behind that.

Craig and then Ian.

Thank you, Chair. Looking at the scorecards under climate change particularly, you've

three headline figures. The only one related to transport is the EV charge

points. Do we measure anything else in terms of success of integrated transport

in terms of impact on climate change and can we report on that? And secondly is

there a transport scorecard or something some equivalent? In terms of measuring

transport emissions, those will be built into the council emissions figures that you see in here. So

one of the things that contributes to that overall CO2 emissions by the council is transport.

Obviously that's looking at our direct supply chain rather than wider supply chains.

I don't know, there is a set of indicators that sit under the local transport plan,

but I'm not closely involved in that, so I don't know whether there's anything that you would see

as more useful and more relevant, but nothing in the core data set that

miraculately measures that kind of impact of sustainable transport.

I was thinking more in terms of the impact that transport policy, integrated

transport has on the switch from private cars to public transport and the impact

that might have. Yeah, they will be in those more detailed figures you've

pointed towards, I think it would be valuable to bring something which reflected that into

here.

I think Roger's probably best placed to answer that question.

Yeah, I'm not pretending to have the full answer off the top of my head, but certainly

the answer is that we have done, and we had quite a detailed presentation a couple of

years ago, which we're just talking about refreshing, on decarbonisation generally,

of which transport was not only a major part but in fact the largest part.

As to what metrics we keep as it were ongoing, I can't tell you.

I suspect that there are some, but they're exactly the ones you want, I don't know, but

I'm happy to take the question away.

Thank you.

If you could minute that.

Ian.

Thank you very much, Rob, for that discussion.

And I'd like to give a little bit of thought to the points that you made about stretch

targets and other targets.

And if I may, also key targets, and those are important, everything in the report is

important.

But the key targets that are somehow linked to the vision, the plan of the new administration,

and now we're coming into a new administration, perhaps this offers us an opportunity to reconsider

the way that we look at the targets that we have, and you've alluded to how you can do

it in different ways. And I'm particularly keen on the idea of stretch targets. I dealt

with them in my previous employment.

And also, if you don't reach stretch targets,

that can also be a very good thing.

And you shouldn't be beaten up about it.

But people should realise that it is a stretch target.

And I think, going back to my other point,

people should also see, and also members of the cabinet,

and we who are scrutinising them,

should also see which targets are regarded

as central and crucial.

because you can only really, truthfully, you can't manage every single target, you can't

give it the same amount of attention. So I was just wondering, Rob, if at this opportunity,

this new time, where there's a new administration, there's going to be a new corporate plan,

can we please look at the way that we define our key targets and also whether we can, I

don't know, somehow star those which are truly stretch targets so that people can appreciate

the difference between doing a really good job and failing to meet a target or hitting

a target for something which is not quite so crucial to the corporate plan. So I just

wondered if there's some way that you could look at that and with your experience, your

great experience, maybe come back to this committee with a suggestion or maybe come

back to the administration, the new administration, with a suggestion. Because I think that it's

a really important we take the time, new administration, to step back and think about how we define

our targets, what's most important to the strategy, and also which are stretched and

which are not stretched. So what's your thoughts on that?

Yeah, I'm very happy to do that, and it's part of what we'll be doing as part of the

the

the Council's development strategy is think about how do

we want to performance manage it and monitor it, how do we want

to present targets. I think our aspiration would be to have

fewer targets and greater clarity that we are trying to

hit them. So what you are saying is very much in line with

where we are thinking.

Just go back to the earlier conversation about Council's

It sounds as if that will be in a stage

where we're still trying to define ambition and outcome

at that stage.

But that's not a bad stage to start to think about

and to discuss, OK, so how are we going to measure it?

What are the key metrics that we see as indicative of that we're

meeting these outcomes?

If I may just comment on that.

In my experience, setting strategy and at the same time

setting targets is part of the same process, surely.

And also, your point is a very, very good one

about have a limited number of targets and not too many targets and as I say indicate

which are stretch and which aren't.

Any more points?

Chris had his hand up.

Yeah, Rob, this question to Rob.

You mentioned regarding suppliers, you said incentives.

What kind of incentives do we give our suppliers?

So the discussion we're having at the moment is just that what's the best way of building

this into our contracts.

We haven't got an answer to that yet, but we are thinking about – I mean, in general

terms, the way that we incentivise our suppliers is by building targets into their contracts,

and then when those contracts come up for renewal points or for annual monitoring, then

and obviously making sure they hit those, and often there's penalties that we can apply

if they don't. With respect to specific targets around climate reduction, which is what we're

talking about there, we haven't yet worked out what the mechanism is going to be, but

that is a live conversation with CLT at the moment. I would say, when I say we haven't

worked out what the mechanism will be, there will be mechanisms within individual contracts,

but that's done on a contract by contract basis.

The discussion at the moment is,

do we need to have a standard approach

across the whole of the council and all of our contracts?

And because of the diversity of our business,

that ends up being a bit more complex to land,

because we're dealing with a very, very different source of contracts.

I've got a couple of questions.

So, we talk about public health and the impact on the new provider

can't recruit sufficient resources.

What remedies do we have in that contract?

On that particular contract, but also in general,

a significant proportion of our services are outsourced.

What controls do we have around our suppliers not delivering?

So we have a contract management framework

that devolves responsibility to contract managers

within individual directors.

but there is a framework that sets out quite clearly what level of contract monitoring

we expect in place given the level of size and risk of each contract. And it's that contract's

manager's job to meet with those providers, hold them to account, make sure that things

are working in the intended way. Often with specific contracts, as I said earlier, there

are break clauses where if performance isn't up to scratch we can exercise those break

clauses. In other instances there are extension options where, you know, a contract will run

for three years, then there's an opportunity to extend it for a further two if we're satisfied

with performance. There's some kind of hard levers we can pull as well.

In relation to the individual public health contract that you've highlighted there, there

are issues around the mobilisation, the winding down of the old contract and the winding up

of the new contract, many of which aren't in the new provider's gift to resolve.

And I guess that's the other thing that's important to remember when we're talking about

contractual information.

Sometimes a contract can underperform because of the provider, other times it's contextual

factors beyond that provider's ability to improve.

And we do try to have that adult to adult dialogue with our providers that gets to the

the issue and in this case I know there's really close monitoring of that contract,

really detailed understanding of why there have been issues in the mobilisation of that

contract and we do expect it to improve in time.

I can't say more than that because there are contractual issues that I can't discuss in

a public session but the previous committee before the election did have a short briefing

an exempt session just to explain it is only a five minute briefing.

So if you do want to know more we can always use that option perhaps at the end of the

meeting to go into exempt session.

But that's within your gift.

Andrew.

That issue that you raised is a very important one I think.

These were the sort of issues along with housing which drove me to become a Councillor in the

first place.

This is a sort of issue where it would be really

useful to have sat next to you, the lead member for

public health, who we could ask questions to and who

would have all of the facts and figures at their

fingertips, and I'm certainly obviously not

being disrespectful to Rob.

I don't expect him to know absolutely everything, but

these are key issues which affect the people who vote

for us, who live in our communities, and I think

that is worthy of some scrutiny at meetings of

this committee.

The report here, the commentary is, Rob said he can't go into too much detail, but what we've already had is, I'm choosing my words carefully now, I suspect merits more attention if I can put it that way.

The commentary is actually, I'll leave it there because I don't want to finish that sentence how I want to finish it because I'll be in trouble.

But I think it's an area, Chair, where you're right to raise it and where there is some

worth in doing some more scrutiny.

In terms of finance, it's not a huge issue, but in terms of people's lifestyles and life

choices, it's a big issue.

So just to reiterate, I can give more information.

If I do that, we would need to go into exempt session.

It's up to you, Chair, but I suggest we do it at the end of the session rather than have

to turn the internet feed off and then back on again, which always risks that it doesn't

come back on again.

I have a couple more questions.

One of the key messages that we get from the new Administration is the importance of partnership

working.

And we have a report on key relationships with partners.

That doesn't paint a particularly good picture, and it's got a different owner than we have

now.

Is there – has there been any movement in that, do you think, in terms of the quality

of our relationships, partly thinking from – the previous administration was different

from all the district powers and city councils in terms of their political makeup.

Do you think there's been a change, one, from those aligning, generally speaking?

And that's not a political point.

It's just that parties tend to agree with themselves more than other parties.

And do you think also the kind of mood music in the council has changed in terms of how

important relationships with other providers, with other organisations are?

I think that question is exactly the reason why it's wise to have cabinet members at these

meetings responding to them, but I'm really conscious that Roger wasn't in the room to

hear the question.

I mean, what I will say is the reason the score has changed is unrelated to anything

the Council is doing at the moment.

It's simply that with LGR on the horizon and with major reorganisations taking place in

health and extreme budget pressures in the constabulary, it recognises that we're going

into a situation where maintaining good partnership working is more challenging than ever.

So I think I am comfortable saying contextual factors are

making it more challenging environment for partnership

working, and therefore we have to work much more,

in a much more focused way at sustaining those partnerships

and keeping those lines of communication open.

As for whether this administration is,

how this administration is approaching that

differs from how the previous administration approached it.

I think that's one for Roger rather than me.

So is the general question, do we want to carry on with partnerships?

And the answer is yes.

Or was it specific to a particular partnership?

No, it was more, has the direction and the overall view

of how well we're doing on partnerships changed

since the new administration has come in?

I'm not sure we've necessarily even had a chance

to think about it in the terms that you posed the question.

But what I would say is, as an administration,

we are very keen to work with other partners,

whether we're talking about health or the police,

or any other ones that I could call to mind.

And my last question is on page 172,

which is failure of GCC Gloucestershire

to mitigate and adapt to a more volatile climate.

We've got a likelihood of three when we know nationally

there's insufficient work being done to prepare for a changing climate? Are we comfortable that

that is only a three?

That's one of those I want to refer to the own Rob that I'm very happy to take that challenge back and I think get a response on it.

But just to reiterate what what I said earlier about the Council Strategy monitoring, we're certainly not

We are not comfortable that we are on track to hit the CO2

reductions targets that we have set ourselves as a county.

But I think that is a slightly different issue to whether we

are adapting and ready to mitigate the impacts of that.

Thank you very much.

Any more questions? No? Thank you for that.

I think we move into our next item, which is ICT service

improvements and digital strategy. Mandy and Jim are

going to do all that. I'll pass it over to them.

Thank you.

Good morning, all. My name is Mandy Quayle. I am the director

who is responsible for digital and people services.

That sort of includes human resources, organisation

development, so training and all the people staff. But obviously

the reason we're here this morning is more to talk about

We're aware that a number of members

are new to this committee, and there's been a lot of history,

which Ian will remember from before when I picked up

responsibility for ICT.

So we felt that it would be helpful,

and the chair asked us to do a bit of, on this occasion,

a bit of the background so you understand the context,

as well as what's coming down the line.

I'll ask my colleagues to introduce themselves

who are relatively new to scrutiny,

So be nice to them is my answer.

Hi, I'm Jim Donaldson.

I'm the head of service management for digital and ICT.

So that means primarily responsible for the operation and improvement of the ICT services we deliver to our employees here and yourselves.

Hi, David Lord, head of digital innovation.

So primarily looking after the digital project management office, some of our modern development

capability, our power platform and our business partnering into the rest of the organisation.

Thanks both.

So we're having some technical issues moving on the slides.

So here we go.

So these slides are in your pack if any of the text is a little bit small up there.

So going right back, prior to 2021, for absolutely understandable reasons, during the period

of austerity quite a lot of money was taken out of ICT, rolling programmes of improvement

were suspended, you know, there were some really tough choices having to be made generally at the

time. But as a consequence, as we were going into the pandemic, just prior to this was when a number

of people around the table and I started these conversations, we'd had sort of an outsourced

contract for about 25 years, very little capability within the organisation in terms of how to manage

that or understanding of ICT.

And there had been, I think it's fair to say,

was certainly very little investment

in any of the infrastructure.

When I arrived in the organisation

and asked for a laptop, I was looked at with surprise.

We were still at, and this was 2018,

we were still at hardware on desks,

no Microsoft capability to any real extent.

And it became very obvious.

and I wouldn't have said this clearly at the time,

but our cyber security and our general security position

was not in a good place.

And users in the council would say,

just their experience of trying to start up in the morning

was very bad, they were never quite sure

whether it was gonna work or not.

And there was a lot of conversation

about impact on staff wellbeing,

what that meant for our service delivery,

the amount of wasted time.

So we did start at a very, it's fair to say I think we started at a very low base.

And that three -year journey, going into it I just didn't realise how long it was going to take.

It took us about 12 months to wrap up the old contract and during the height of the pandemic

we had to get sort of 2 ,000 laptops out the door and deal with the consequences of people

not having worked in that way before.

So the skills stuff, and again, the pressure

that put on staff, and then the impact

that had on the services we were able to deliver.

So it wasn't great.

So the focus between 21 and 24, as I say,

was re -establishing some skill set within the organisation

with a new service model.

We brought all the stuff that Jim,

we recruited Jim at the time to manage the help desk,

the basic support for our teams.

And then with a third line, we retained a sort of

outsourced third line provider that was wholly owned

by Kent County Council.

We went for public, because of the public mindset,

to do our sort of third line support,

and they managed a major transformation programme for us,

and did really help us for a number of years

in terms of rolling out Microsoft,

a modern suite of software, moving to cloud -based services

and software as a service for the first time, if you know what I mean by that.

Whereas previously we'd managed all our kit and all our software on our own servers, we

managed everything.

They were out of date, not very secure, needed, you know, the whole lot needed replacing,

so we moved more and more to cloud.

And the network around the council, again, had been managed on our own kit, hadn't been

invested in.

We bought in BT and replaced every bit of switch, wire, everything right around the

to upgrade our software and as you can understand a lot of focus on improving

our cyber security readiness and that includes the sort of hardware that

you have in place and make sure everything's supported and the

protections around the estate to stop attacks getting in but it also is a lot

of work with people so they understand the consequences of the actions that

they're taking. I'm sure you've heard about email phishing and famous emails that pretend

to be trusted partners and then you click on the wrong thing and you can get very major

and you'll know that the city council, Gloucester City Council very close to us had a very serious

successful attack. We learnt a lot of lessons from that. So I think hopefully you're getting

this was a real fundamental rebuild of our ICT infrastructure, the kit on the

desks and people's capability both in terms of our ICT teams but also moving

to a more modern organisation and a skills programme for the whole

organisation. And whilst I would say we are not there entirely, it is in a better

place and I'd hope that some of your initial experience of ICT has been

at least OK.

Let's put it that way, which I wouldn't

have guaranteed a while back.

And so that stage, this model that you see here

is a sort of off the shelf how you manage ICT.

And so we've been in that sort of stabilise and fix,

just get the basics right.

And it's taken significant investment and at least three

is a really tough activity.

And then sort of moving on to the how we optimise

the benefit of the investment in that

and then how we grow our technology

and move more towards modern organisation.

And we just included this as it gives a bit of an indication

of the type of things that we're working towards.

And over the last year we've developed,

oh yeah, before I go onto that,

I was going to go on to digital strategy.

Just a couple of slides, which is all due to Jim and Dave

and colleagues' work in terms of a completely different customer

mindset in the way that we support people.

And the digital help hub, which all of you can use as well,

is a drop in any time.

And Mythliot Shire Hall, although the team

does do sort of road shows around the county,

but a turn up and talk to them at any time

and they'll fix things in the moment.

But if you can see, this was just

to give an indication of the sort of direction of travel

around performance.

And the last quarter, we had one what we call a priority one

incident.

A priority one incident is where a piece of software

or a service that impacts either the whole organisation

or a very significant part of the organisation,

like if LiquidLogic were to go down,

which we use for children's and adults' social care,

we would count that as a priority one.

And you're always going to get some.

and it's keeping those numbers low

and then looking at how quickly you turn it around

and get it back stood up.

And as you can see right at the beginning of that,

that was our low point, 10 priority ones in a quarter.

But the basic service, the request fulfilled in five days

is just how quickly we get kit out the door,

how quickly we set up new email accounts,

all that sort of stuff.

So that's the sort of past and where we've been.

And then working to the future in terms of the stuff I hope you'll be more interested

in.

We have worked collectively with partners, with services across the organisation to say

where do we focus our activity moving forwards and we attach the digital strategy to this

and I'm sure we'll come back many times

in terms of different elements of the strategy.

But this, obviously the focus is around

supporting the people of Gloucestershire,

how we do that, just working up the vision.

There was a lot of conversation around

how we enable people to access services through choice.

So whilst it might be digital first route,

that's not the only route.

It is about enabling choice and engagement.

It is about promoting independence.

So for example, there's a stream of activity within adults

about how digital can help people stay in their own homes,

how it can help people help others.

And so we've structured the strategy

around those four key areas.

So that's the vision and that maximising use of data,

better services, enabling some innovation

and the data security and compliance and our general

cyber security position.

And so a lot of our activity at the moment is in these six key

areas.

We're an entirely in -house model now in terms of the day -to -day

delivery but clearly there are some sort of really key

relationships in a cloud -based environment.

So System C, for example, host our social care systems.

Microsoft, you can understand.

BT provide our networks.

NCC is our security partner.

You've experienced the modern desktop programme

in terms of moving to Windows 11 and how that kit works.

focus on digitalisation and how we innovate and enable services to innovate and so forth.

Still a significant focus on digital skills.

Parts of our organisation still really struggle and I think because we've layered on a lot

of digital change over a relatively short period, whereas staff will tell me they're

to get their stress from opening their laptops and not being sure whether they would work

or not.

Now they get their stress from opening their laptops and not being sure how to use it because

the change is still happening and how we take people on a journey.

We've touched on, this was just a couple of examples of the type of digital innovation

that we are working on.

Colin mentioned Magic Note, which is the social care specific AI tool to help social workers.

It's designed to help social workers do social care assessments and integrate with assessment

tools, whereas Co -Pilot is a general AI tool for all of us.

And we've just done a structured pilot where people are demonstrating how much time and

efficiencies it can save.

Per person.

per person.

Yeah, per person.

So we're just wrapping this up at the moment and looking at how that approach will, what

the next steps are in terms of deploying this more widely.

Some basic examples of the type of sort of small innovation stuff that we're working

with locally.

And I thought it was worth touching on.

Obviously we're working with digital skills at a number of layers.

We've got what we call the digital skills starter, which is an induction for everybody.

The digital smartest champions, which is a network of super users to support their services

and their own teams with the sort of next stages of development.

And then the Power Platform University, for example, how we get the most from our Microsoft

365 infrastructure by training people around the organisation potentially to improve their

processes, automate stuff using Microsoft and we're training how many people?

We've got four cohorts of around 50, so around 200.

People around the organisation. And then the Data Academy for example is a way of using

our apprenticeship levy which is an amount of money that we have to as a big employer

put money into a pot for learning. We've got a number of people going through data

apprenticeships on a part of a data academy to improve how we're using our

data, how we're presenting our data, how we're using it to drive decisions

depending on the level of that apprentice. So I just wanted to give you

a bit of a flavour of what's going on and then in the pack you've got the

digital strategy. So I'll stop there and Jim and David are with me to pick up any

questions if you have them.

Thank you.

Great.

Thanks for that.

That was a good overview.

I'm interested in the cybersecurity side of things.

You touched on it very briefly in that presentation.

So do you work to secure by design principles and do we know where data is hosted for the

various cloud systems?

Go on Dave.

Feels like a Dave question.

So, Secure by Design, we're not a software house, typically, so we do a lot of application

configurations so that the products that we choose are, Secure by Design goes through

a robust, very robust security review and which is periodically reviewed.

When we do build things ourselves, typically now it's within that Microsoft estate, so

we've got the guardrails that are set up there as part of that wider ecosystem.

them. What was the second part of your question? Do we know where data is hosted? Absolutely,

yeah. So the default, and this is by extreme exception, is UK or European Economic Area,

so that we're covered by data protection, the information security rules, or countries

that have got comparable safeguards in place. But we've got a, Rob will testify to this,

a very good information governance team that keeps us honest with that sort of thing, keeps

us safe.

And it's worth saying, what we've done for the last couple of years is once a year we've

done a detailed cyber security position statement but in exempt session, so to this committee,

so if you're interested in that we can continue to programme it, exempt for obvious reasons.

Yeah, I'd certainly be interested in that.

I think I'd agree that it's important, you know, when you have to see what happened,

it lost the city to know how important it can be and other organisations.

Any more questions?

Glenn?

Yeah, just a quick one.

The more liberal use of artificial intelligence we're using, is that having any effect on

energy consumption within the building?

So we are aware and we've got lots of officers asking the same question.

We've got some rudimentary figures that come out of Microsoft, the co -pilot platform, but

it's something that we're working on as part of the wider digital industry to understand

power consumption in a better way.

Part of the structured business case to take copilot forward will need to take into account

it will need to be part of the consideration.

Obviously there is various costs associated with copilot including the environmental you

want.

Andrew?

I think looking around, there were any members of this committee in the previous committee

before the election, so they're all new members.

But those, if there were any who had been here before,

they would know, Mandy, that I was quite vocal in saying,

we all need training here.

Well, not all of us, but a small number of us need training,

it's complicated, it's a generational thing,

and all the rest of it.

And I never thought I'd say this, but these things,

these machines, they are so easy to use.

They're almost idiot -proof,

and I'm not implying that I'm an idiot,

But just want to say thank you.

It's really good to have the opportunity

to say thank you for listening to us

and for making things a lot smoother for elected members,

those of us at any rate who were struggling.

I'm really happy to admit that at times I was struggling.

But just thank you, all of you, for listening and giving us

something that we can make better use of than the equipment

we had before.

I'm just interested and intrigued by the maps you have

of digital engagement in Gloucestershire.

I don't think I've ever seen those before.

So can somebody quickly highlight

where digital engagement is at a higher level,

and those areas where you wish it was higher?

Does that make sense?

So for example, there's one headed digital literacy

very significantly across Gloucestershire.

And we need to know where those areas are.

If we're trying to get information out to them,

there's no point sending information out to areas

where they're finding it difficult, struggling to get a signal or whatever.

And I think that sort of information would be very helpful to us in terms of

getting useful information out to the population who return us here in the

first place. Interestingly I've been doing some work with Linda Cohen, who's a

member of your cabinet, different political party to me, but we will we

both want to see the County Council doing more to get the information that

we have in bundles, in stacks, out to the people

we represent.

And that includes information held by the

National Health Service.

There is so much information out there, but

Linda and I and others don't feel that we're

doing sufficient to get that information out to

the people who really could benefit from it.

So, a bit of a long question there, but the

most important thing is to thank you for listening.

And you know, you must have wondered if I'd left

I lost my seat.

I have got to be on the road from Cravales.

Seriously, thank you so much.

Just some comments on the digital engagement map

diagram that you show

and the one about digital literacy.

If any of you can comment, a written answer would be fine.

Well, what I was going to say,

and thank you for the thank you, I really appreciate it.

I know that it took some time,

but I would say widely,

the offer around one -to -one support for councillors to get familiar with the way our set -up is

because it might be unusual for some people and we're specifically preparing some training around SharePoint

and various other things that are specifically targeted for councillors in groups or individuals

so that offer is always on the table.

I'm not going to pretend to be an expert around digital literacy and engagement

but there is quite a lot of work going on around digital inclusion and I think

Dave's gonna add a little bit once I'm done. But whether it's here or a

different Group New Committee but certainly there's some work going on

across adults and health particularly about digital inclusion and that is both

from a availability of networks but also the literacy aspect and how we work with

people and how the choices that we make about how we deliver our services can have a disproportionate

impact as a consequence.

So there is work going on in that and if committee here or whether it's adults somewhere is interested

we could certainly put that on a future agenda because to do it justice it needs a proper

item.

But was there anything you wanted to add Dave?

I'm just going to say that as we have moved into a more stable set up at home if you will,

the team is starting to work with the folks in the ENI directorates who are doing that

sort of digital outreach work already, both for businesses and for residents. So we're

starting to do that and that includes offers to leverage our relationship with Microsoft

to support that sort of work. Microsoft are quite, well not quite very interested in the

sort of CSR elements of their work as well. So we're trying to act as a broker through

digital and ICT to make that impact directly on residents. But it's sort of early days

but it's...

CSR?

Corporate social responsibility, apologies. Working tech, love a three letter acronym.

Sorry I'm catching up, you said it so quickly, corporate...

Corporate social responsibility.

Okay.

how can they give back via their relationship thus, I'd be keen to do that.

Rob?

Andrew, the strategic intelligence team produces a couple of pages on informed Gloucestershire

about levels of internet use, access to mobile phones, that kind of thing.

I've just dropped you a link on Teams to that page if you want to look at that, but I've

also sent it to Sophie so she can circulate it with the minutes of the meeting.

You've got Ian and then, no, yeah, Ian Dobie and then Ian.

Okay, so thank you very much to Jim and David and Mandi, that's really interesting and I

think you're not the only one who's not comfortable with digital literacy. The fact is that learning

a new system is difficult and the fact is also that some of us do everything on our

mobile phones. So I know that this is, I'm finding more and more this is quite easy to

use but I will still always reach for my mobile phone first. So councillors and maybe the

members of the public will be using their mobile phones at least as much as, well a

more than this, actually.

So do you give as much effort to ensuring

that the facilities such as, I mean,

facilities for us such as claims or something,

as easy to access on a mobile phone

as they are on a laptop or a pad?

Because I have noticed that there

are two different systems, for example,

on claims, you know, you have to learn two different systems.

So I'm just wondering if there's some plan to at least maintain the amount of effort

that's put on some mobile phones as opposed to pads and laptops and maybe to extend all

of, everything you can do on a pad to a modern up -to -date phone.

Is that your vision?

I'll jump in with this.

So we talk about secure by design,

so trying to consider accessible by design as well.

It's not just because we want to use different devices,

people use or work with our platforms in different ways.

So all the modern software that we're looking at

should be compatible from a desktop,

a laptop style and the phone view.

You talk about claims, I'm sorry, part of SAP.

Massive piece of work there to replace and modernise that.

But it is absolutely something that we consider.

I'm the same as you.

I cheque Teams, email, SharePoint, take notes.

It's all on my phone within that Microsoft ecosystem,

which is built out of the box to work well on a mobile device.

And as we look at other larger platforms,

as they modernise that, that's exactly what they're trying to do.

It's cheaper for them for it to work on a phone than to bank a separate app.

Okay, so it makes a lot of sense.

Ian.

Thank you, Chair.

Mandy and team, thank you very much for your presentation.

I'd like to say thank you along with Andrew.

As a new member here, this has been pretty seamless.

I walked right into it.

It's excellent.

I've got a specific question on SAP, which I understand you are in the process of using

with contracts purchase management.

Are you looking at other modules of SAP going forward?

So we currently use an on -premise SAP solution that covers finance, HR, payroll and certain

elements of procurement. The new cloud -based offer is a service that we're moving to with

SAP which does have some frustrations for me because the way that the desktop is designed

and the way that it's designed on mobiles is inconsistent.

That's how it comes out of the box.

And it does come with we are looking

at increased functionality around the procurement space,

which Rob's closer to than I am.

But also the second phase of the HR element,

it broadens the work around a learning management tool

and online goals and appraisals, and so our internal performance

and development systems, which is the bit that I'm most

looking forward to if anything. But does that answer your question? I think so

Mandy it's just there's a lot of capability in SAP and it's good to

see that just using one module you can add modules onto it. Budget

permitting of course but it does make up a good way of running a

business or a corporation.

Any more questions?

If not, I've got a couple of quick ones.

The maps on page 208, I don't want a detailed explanation, but I would quite like to know

whether green is a good thing in the first map and whether red is a good thing in the

second map.

Can you explain?

So green is a good thing on the first map.

Right, so they're more likely to use the internet on the first map if they're green.

Okay.

Yep.

That's right, because it's written, never use the map, isn't it?

a while since I've looked at these.

Like, researching information.

Yeah, and green's the good thing on the second map as well.

And then my other question is about the strategy.

The roadmap overview, there's quite a lot of 2024

items not yet started and 2025 items not yet started.

Now, I accept we're only halfway through 2025,

but should we be worried by 2024 not being started and some 2025 not yet

being started? So a top -level, I have to admit this was written and published in

this format at a point and it hasn't been updated so perhaps what we need to

do is update it and bring it back. Okay thank you. Any more questions? We've been

going for two and a quarter hours do people want to come for a break or move on

to the next item? One item but it might be a chunky item I don't know can I have

a view of who might have questions on the next item? But you will yeah I think

we probably do have maybe just a five or five minute comfort break if that's okay.

Thank you.

Yeah, sorry, I just put something in the message but I don't know if anyone saw. I've got something

at half twelve, so right if I shoot off. Yeah, thank you for joining us.

Yeah, sorry I couldn't be there, but I can't drive at the moment, so I'm not able to get to the

building. Okay, we understand. Thank you. Cheers. Okay, brilliant. Thank you. Cheers, bye.

Thank you.

We will start in a second.

Our next item is local government reorganisation.

I've got Nina Filippidis to give us an update on that. Over to you Nina.

Thank you chair. So what you've asked for as a committee is to have this as a

bit of a standing item to take you through where things are at. So given

where we are in the process what I thought would be useful for this

committee is just to do a bit of a kind of a process and governance update on

what's going on where we are in the process in readiness for your meeting on

the 24th of September where we'll be getting into more detail in readiness

for council to take a decision on the 12th of November.

See if this works.

So as I just mentioned, what we'll talk to you today about

is around some partnership principles,

around how we're working together across the county,

what the programme plan is looking like to take us through

to proposal stage, what the key risks are

around the programme at the moment,

a little bit around the government grant funding

that we've received, and just a bit

around the overarching timeline.

For those of you that are kind of new to this, because I

I do appreciate this is a really complicated programme.

The programme that we're looking to do

is effectively put into government in November

a submission about how we want to reorganise

local government in Gloucestershire.

So at the moment we're structured with the county council,

which you're sitting on at the moment,

and we've got six district councils within Gloucestershire.

What government has said is they no longer

want two -tier government, they want unitary authorities,

which brings together both tiers of government.

So the work we're doing at the moment is to effectively develop two business cases within the County Council

Working with partners one that looks at having one unitary authority that does all of those services across Gloucestershire

So bringing together all seven councils or looking at having two unitary councils one on the east of the county, which would be

Cotswold, Tewkesbury and Cheltenham and one on the west which would be Stroud Gloucester and the Forest of Dean

So we are working up both of those options.

We are intellectually neutral is the phrasing,

so we're working up both options to be deliverable.

And what you will be asked as councillors to do when you get

into council on the 12th of November is to make a decision

about which submission you want the county council

to put into government.

I think the important bit to remember is that,

well there's two bits.

We have to respond.

It's a statutory invite from government.

An invite is a loose phrase.

We have to respond to it.

So we haven't got the option to opt out of this.

This is policy direction from the Minister.

And ultimately, what will happen is we will put in

our submissions, what our preferences are at the county

and then at the six districts, what their preferences are.

And then it will be the Minister

that will make the final decision.

So the Minister will then go out to consult with residents,

with partners, with stakeholders in a formal way,

take those views into consideration

and then make the final decision.

So although your decision -making in November is really critical, it won't be what actually

happens in Gloucestershire necessarily, because that will ultimately be the Minister's call.

But your views are really important, and whatever decision you make then goes into the Minister

for consideration.

Can I just say, there is a third model which you haven't mentioned.

Absolutely.

right on here. No so absolutely completely right Councillor

Trimnell. So what we're looking at is how well actually I'll take a step back

because now the question has been raised. So from the County Council's

perspective we've commissioned two models and say the single unitary and

the east and west model. What Gloucester City is developing at the moment is a

greater Gloucester model which is an expanded Gloucester unitary authority, so picking up

a number of towns and parishes that sit around the centre and then effectively having a unitary

authority that sits around with the rest of Gloucester.

This county council is not working actively on that model.

We don't have a political steer to do that.

However, what we are doing, hence why these partnership principles are really important,

is working jointly on making sure that the same data is available, similar assumptions are made, and that we're working in partnership

so that the Gloucester City model as it's produced will be

as good a quality as it can be and it's all on the same basis.

That's a very important point you make isn't it that the Gloucester City option is not being

supported in any way by the administration here.

It's a standalone option from Gloucester City.

Whereas on three, East -West option, single unitary,

are being developed jointly by all councils.

That doesn't apply to option four,

a bullet point forward, does it?

That's very important.

For those of us from Gloucester, anyway.

So absolutely, so I think that point is, yes, so the administration is neutral.

So they haven't made a position on which option they are preferring, the administration here.

But as I say, from a resourcing perspective, us as officers within the County Council have

been asked to work up the one and the two.

But likewise, we have got strong programme governance around all three options.

So the Greater Gloucester model is sitting within our overarching programme governance.

We are making sure that Gloucester is around the table for all the work we are doing so

they have access to the same information and data is being shared.

You put that very diplomatically.

Brilliant.

So partnership principles.

You can imagine working across seven councils at the moment doing something that is incredibly

and challenging for individuals and for our respective politicians on a really aggressive

timeline is going to be difficult.

So what we've tried to do is establish some really clear partnership principles about

how we're going to do that in an incredibly complex arena.

I think I've talked through most of this so I won't go into any more detail.

I'll move on to the next one.

So these are the sort of partnership principles that we have developed.

Now, what I would say is I'm sharing these with yourselves.

We are going into our Gloucestershire leaders meeting this evening where I'm hoping that

these will be agreed.

So there may be some changes to them, but this is the draught as it currently stands.

So the way our governance works is that we take proposals into all of our chief executives

across all of the seven councils, and then we meet weekly with our leaders of the respective

seven councils as well so they can endorse and agree steps and principles etc.

So first one is all around deliverability.

What we put together has got to be deliverable and that's a really, really important point.

That's why it's number one because what we can't do is submit something into government

that government then consults on, potentially gets agreed and then we say later on actually

well that's not going to be doable, that won't work.

So we've got to make sure that if it's a one, if it's a two, if it's greater cost it can

be delivered, it can be made to work. Now there'll be pluses and minuses and pros

and cons on each of all of these options. There will be no one option that ticks

everybody's boxes and does everything everybody needs or everybody wants, but

either which way they have got to be deliverable. We want to be working in a

way that allows constructive challenge so that we get stronger proposals. As I

say there is no right answer to this, it's got to be what makes most sense for

Gloucestershire and again there's going to be different views about that and how

we get to that place so it's important that we have that constructive challenge

and respect people's differing opinions.

Shared accountability.

So it's everybody's responsibility.

Even if a council has declared a position politically,

it's still everybody's responsibility to make sure

that each option is as good quality as it can be.

And that we have the right data, the data's all provided,

the outputs are provided, we resolve disagreements,

et cetera, as much as possible.

Sharing of data sets and assumptions.

That is really, really important,

and government has made that point multiple times to us.

They want to see that the same data sets have been used.

You might come to different conclusions about that data,

but they've got to be the same starting point.

So we're making sure that we're doing that.

From a practical perspective, we've

got shared SharePoint sites, all of the data's in one place.

People in the programme can access it.

This last point makes the point around how

government want us to respond.

So again, this is picking up the fact that we've got two

responses being developed or led, if you like, from a

sort of programme management perspective by the county

working with partners.

We've got to effectively put one response into government.

So what they want is a covering letter that says

Gloucestershire says these are the options within Gloucestershire.

Now, within that there will be, you know, I would

expect there to be three proposals ultimately that go

forward and they will be supported by whichever councils have taken them

through their processes and agreed them but we've got to make sure that we're

still sending in a Gloucestershire wide response.

When it comes to, I mean I think you said even if the council has declared a position politically,

I'm sure the government would like us to have declared a position but you're

saying one response to two proposals.

Is there, I wouldn't describe it as a risk,

maybe I'm looking at Rob as well as you,

but when these things come to be discussed in full council,

is it constitutionally possible,

or I'd say a constitutional risk,

if I'm speaking part politically,

that someone in the council chamber could say,

let's have a vote on which one we're going to support.

Are you saying that that could never happen?

Or are you saying, actually, within the rules of democracy,

it could be that one of the parties

could say, I want to have a vote on this at the county council.

I mean, I know the district council will all, in my,

I'm from Cheltenham, we're solid on one.

But could that happen?

or are you saying that it's ruled out because it's one response to proposals?

We're not going to allow any messing around at the County Council, that's my words,

to say we'll push this to a vote and propose that this should only be one.

So, I might not have explained that very well. So the County Council will have to take a position,

so you will all have to vote on which proposal.

It wasn't clear to me.

No, so I apologise if I haven't made that clear.

So the county council will be a vote for all councillors where you will be asked of individual councillors to vote on one option?

No, to vote on what will come to county council will be either a single unitary or an east -west.

I'm suddenly saying no, we're only going to allow a vote on, or a sub -military vote, and we'll just have one option on the table.

I want to see if everyone can have a hand up for four against one option.

The usual rules of debate will apply, exactly the same as a motion.

There will either be a proposal from cabinet, so if cabinet chooses, cabinet may put it

to council that we support a single unitary or a two unitary option or may leave it open.

There will then be a debate and at an appropriate time, at any time a member could move to put

it to the vote that this council supports a single unitary or two unitaries. Obviously

the numbers will dictate whether they win that vote or not, but yeah, it will work in

exactly the same way as any other council debate. And it will be for the chair to, if

a member does propose that it is put to the vote, then it will be for the chair to decide

whether that's premature or not.

Can I just come in exactly to what you were saying.

So in the sense of the Gloucester City model that the Gloucester City is developing,

and you're saying if it went through the same route of motions,

then technically we could actually put that as an amendment, could we?

You could move that amendment, you'd need a seconder for the amendment

and then the amendment would be put to the vote.

So then there's a few others.

So really trying to keep the focus through the development stages

about this being about the place and not the politics.

And I appreciate how difficult that is,

but how do we build that sort of primary driver

about a new organisation being focused on the best possible outcomes

for our residents, communities, economy and visitors.

Having a really clear and agreed governance and decision -making route, so we've got a

joint programme that sits around this, agreed structure, as I say it's got a programme board

of chief executives and then a political oversight of our leaders across the seven councils and

an approach around how disputes need to be handled.

We've got a commitment in here at the moment to sort of joint neutral local engagement.

What you'll see at the moment in the communities is we are doing local engagement with residents.

There's a survey at the moment.

There's also been some active groups, sorry, events happening across each of the districts

where people are being asked their views.

Again, that's not asking people for their opinion about which proposal.

It's asking people's views about their place, the services they use, so those insights can

be effectively translated into the proposals that come forward into November.

What will then happen after the submissions have gone in is that residents will be asked

their preferences.

So that will happen.

And then finally, that final point around respect for final positions.

There is going to be differences.

There already is differences across Gloucestershire.

And as I say collectively there's a commitment there about having respect for that fact and

respect that there are different proposals in play.

Thank you.

Obviously a lot of this is focused on the top tier, whether it's going to be one

unit or two and what format those are in. What's emphasis is being put on the

tiers layers beneath that because depending on how those local

neighbourhood etc structures are placed it may directly influence which of the

the options is more important. Yeah that's a really really good question so

We've had a number of work streams operating.

I'm not sure if it's on the next slide.

It might not be.

So I'll try and talk you through.

So one of the work streams that we've had operating

is around place and localities, because that's

exactly the right point.

If you're going to bring together

two tiers of government, how do we

make sure that we've got those connexions to our places?

Different communities need different things.

We've got to have strong models in place to do that.

And whether you're one, whether you're two,

you still need to make sure that those things are in place

and built into the DNA.

They might look slightly different, but you still need to make sure that they are embedded

from the outset.

Government have come out and they are particularly interested in advocating for a sort of a local

area committee model.

So they've sort of stepped back from trying to increase the number of town and parish

councils and they're looking for these embedded committees.

And the rationale that they're using for that is that town and parish councils don't negate

unitary authorities or local governments' responsibilities to be working with their

working with their localities and having those deep, deep connexions.

So we've had this work stream.

It's headed up by Siobhan Farmer, our Director of Public Health, and co -chaired with Alistair

Cunningham, who is the Chief Executive of Tewkesbury Borough Council, and they've been

developing proposals around how place and localities could work.

So I would imagine when we come back to you on the 24th with more detail about what's

going into those proposals, those would be the sorts of things that we'll talk through

with you.

And likewise, we also need to be talking some of these things through with all members through

and monthly or member briefings as well because things like that are going to be top of everybody's

list of how will this work.

Yeah I understand that from a sort of across the cost cost structure piece.

It's just thinking about some of those boundaries that will come into place for the two unitary

option will directly impact the potential for those neighbourhood panels, local area

panels.

and again depending on whether those themselves are seen to be more valuable

combined rather than separated will impact the decision on whether a unitary

or two unitaries. How is that information going to be

garnered and fed up? So the way that the East -West model is structured is on

district boundaries so effectively districts are the building blocks

that are in place. Now within that, district administrative boundaries don't necessarily

represent exact communities because of the way communities develop and how they work,

etc, etc. So the work that Siobhan and Alistair have been leading on is trying to understand

what are the size of those communities, how do they work, what does that look like in

terms of governance structures, ways of working, etc. Within that work stream we've got GAPTC,

which is the Gloucestershire Association of Town and Parish Councils and also SLCC

which is the Society of Local Council Clerks which is also part of Town and

Parish Councils so that we're having their views coming into it. We've also

got colleagues from the BCSC, from our health colleagues, so we're building up

those views about how does that need to look and feel and that works

been pretty well developed but what we do need to do now that's getting more

well developed is start playing that back to members more broadly so they can

see what that work is starting to look like. Thank you. So we've got a programme

plan that I'll share with you. So what this is showing you is as at the 18th

when these were put together what the programme plan is looking at looking like

it's a working document is subject to continual change we are very much in

that kind of response mode about how to sort of hit those November November

deadlines. The activities we've got show how the seven councils are working on

The two options, what our programme plan doesn't have

within it is specific milestones connected with

the Greater Gloucester proposal.

So I'm sure Gloucester does have those and are sharing

those within their own governance arrangements,

but we haven't got those available to share.

Key point there, the timeline is incredibly pressured.

You know, this is, you could do with another six months,

12 months on this.

It is really, really grippy, really tight.

So making those joint working arrangements work

really hard is requiring an intense amount of effort.

there's a huge amount going into these meetings, people having to turn stuff

around incredibly quickly so that we can hit those November deadlines. I think

government has been asked recently if they'll slip the November deadline, it's a

hard no. So you know there's no flexibility in that if I know as much as

we might all like it. So this is in your pack as well so I won't go through it

you know line by line with you but I think what's important to point out here

is on the section on the left -hand side in blue this is all the different

sections of the business case that we're having to put together.

So you've got an executive summary that will come together at the end of it.

You've got an introduction and context, a little bit around what's Gloucestershire

about, explain it to the minister, et cetera.

Strategic case, which is all about what's our vision and ambition for

Gloucestershire.

What do we want to be achieving?

What's our opportunities?

What's our appetite for public service reform, for instance?

And that's in the midst of being developed at the moment with support from

who have done a lot of work with Cheltenham previously,

that they're supporting us with pulling that together.

There's a whole section around evolution,

because we can't lose sight of that.

That is the prize here.

If we can get into a unitary authority,

that gives us the leverage then to move

into a strategic, mayoral, combined authority,

which in turn should release money

and should release powers to effectively

bring on Gloucestershire and deliver some of our aspirations.

Then we have the big options analysis and financial comparison.

Very quick question, what does lock in mean?

Literally what it says, people locked in a room.

Without their phones?

I think it is a strength and it means the outputs will get at the end of this will be

stronger.

How do you get into a space where you can get people to have consensus or at least have

an agreement about what's going forward.

So the way that we're structuring it

is in a series of lock -ins.

We had the first one on Friday in Cheltenham,

and that was with the chief executives looking

at vision and ambition.

We've got another one coming up tomorrow, again,

with the chief executives, which is looking at what we call

target operating model.

How do we structure ourselves?

How are we going to deliver services, et cetera?

And then what follows is lock -ins with the leaders.

So they will all be locked in a room together and we will be getting to a place where we have outcomes that then go into those business cases.

So they will have to be grippy, they will have to be really carefully choreographed and managed to make sure that we do get those outcomes but we've got to get to these deadlines.

So everyone's committed, I think there's a real appetite to get this done.

So, and I say the first lock -in session went really, really positively.

So, yeah.

Options analysis, financial comparison, you will all be incredibly interested in this

section when we get to being able to share that with you.

That will be looking at, you know, what are the cost differentials, what does council

tax look like, what does demand and service aggregation, how do we split our services,

how do we bring them together, you know, all of those questions will be answered.

the

question.

When it comes to analysis and comparison, where does the

Gloucester

city option come in?

It won't come into this at this point in time.

Gloucester city has its own programme plan.

It is managing that development singly.

However, what we have got wrapped around it is that

programme governance so we are getting regular reports in about

getting any of the data or any of the support or the information that they need then they've

got the same mechanisms to make sure we're all supporting Gloucester to develop their

proposal.

So at what point would we see their finished proposal?

So because this council is effectively considering two options we won't be directly bringing

the Gloucester model through County Council.

Now you will see it through different routes.

Okay.

Then the next big section is all about what will that new council look like.

So your point, Councillor Horak, is about localities.

What will that look like?

That will all fall into that section.

What will democratic arrangements look like?

How many councillors we have?

How will that work?

Where will our assets sit?

What will our target operating model, how we deliver our services look?

So that section, there's a lot going into that.

And you can see the timelines are incredibly tight for finalising that work.

Then this is the last slide.

We have the overall financial case.

This will look at contracts, what do they look like being split, being brought together,

assets, debts, liabilities, workforce cost, as you can probably manage bringing together

workforces, whether that is one or two.

There will be cost differentials, we need to reduce the headcount and deliver savings

off the back of this.

Also the opportunities for transformation.

The big section on engagement, the government wants to know what our engagement is, what

is the outcomes of the work we have been doing publicly, what our stakeholders are doing,

so that will all come together and be documented in the business case.

And then finally an implementation roadmap.

How do you get from November submission to a new unitary authority?

The timelines at the moment, submission in November, minister makes a decision by the

summer of 2026.

We potentially then have elections for a new council or councils in May 27 and then we

start in our new one council or two councils in May 2028.

So you can imagine the roadmap to get to that 2028 date needs to be fairly robust at this

stage and costed and understood with what we need to be getting on with.

And then a conclusion at the end.

So I think you can see it's a lot of work to get done.

We have a number of risks we are managing at the moment.

There is a risk register that sits around this project.

Given you are COSC, it is important you understand them.

First off, we have a legal challenge risk.

We are actively trying to mitigate that down around taking legal advice,

making sure we have stakeholder and resident engagement,

and making sure the options appraisals we are putting together are of a high quality.

You can imagine, you are all politicians.

There is a big risk around political division and disagreement within this process.

It is set up to create that, sadly.

So hopefully what you've heard from me today is that we're aiming to mitigate that as far

as well, recognising it will happen, and that's absolutely right and proper.

Politicians are entitled to have different decisions and make different calls.

That's the beauty of working in political environments.

But what we do need to have is strong working relationships and collaborative arrangements

and the

information that you have in the political debates.

A risk around stakeholders not feeling

engaged or their views are heard.

Again, having our joint councils and

communications and engagement activity

working hand in glove.

Officer capacity strain, that one is real.

This stuff is a lot to do on top of people's day jobs.

We have brought in additional resources to

support on the programme and obviously we have

got our joint governance arrangement.

Government level risks.

We have got an awful lot of policy changes coming

down the track.

This is just one of many things that the

government is reforming on.

So we do have a kind of bottleneck of change

happening.

So we are actively working with MHCLG and County

Council network to make sure we are up to date

with our information and understand where

governments direction of travel is.

And then MP alignment.

Obviously we have got seven MPs across the

across Gloucestershire.

They all will need to have views on what this looks like as well.

So the leader and the chief executive are meeting

with them regularly.

MHCLG did give us a little bit of money to help

towards this process.

We asked for about three or four million.

We got a little bit.

I can't get excited about it, but you know,

it is what it is.

So we got 266 ,000 in Gloucestershire.

They awarded 7 .6 million across the whole country,

so this was the share that we got within Gloucestershire.

We've agreed to hold the money within the county council,

just as the accountable body,

but what we are doing is sharing that

across all of the councils.

So the first call on it has been on paying

for the shared engagement,

because all of the seven councils are benefiting

from the insights that that comes from,

and a number of our councils felt incredibly strongly

that we wanted to have that active engagement,

going to community events for instance and we've been doing that across the board.

So we've paid for that.

We've had a bit of contingency in case extra events needed to happen and then the remainder

of the proposal at this point is the remainder of that money gets split between county, Cheltenham

and Gloucester city recognising that those are the three councils carrying the main burden

of developing up proposals.

That needs to be finally agreed by leaders this afternoon so subject to them being happy

with that, that's what we'll go forward. And then here's our timetable. It makes it

look really simple, doesn't it? So where are we now? We are in that pink box

development of proposals, that's where we are. We're working now headlong going

into full council where you all as individual councillors will need to make

a decision and then our deadline for submission to government is the 28th of

November. What happens after you guys meet is that all of the districts will

meet as well and have their equivalent processes,

and they will make their own equivalent decisions.

And we will pull together a collective letter,

hopefully, if it's agreed by all leaders, that says,

this is what Gloucestershire's view is.

And that will go in by the 28th.

Then government will have their consultation.

Surrey is open at the moment for a consultation that the

Minister has started.

So there's this, if you're interested, have a look at

Surrey about what's happening in progress currently.

We'll get a decision midway through 2026.

As I have talked about, shadow elections, May 27, and then vesting day is planned for

May 2028.

What we don't know at the end of this is when we get a regional mayor.

Whether that is joining Weka, which is the West of England combined authority across

the border towards the south of us, or if we ended up in a different combined authority

arrangement where it is a new one and have a new mayor elected, government haven't given

as the timeline on the next round of those.

So it's the difference between local government reorganisation and devolution.

So devolution is a decision about our preference as to whether we might like to join the West

of England combined authority as a partner or whether we want to set up a new authority

with Herefordshire and Worcestershire or look to Oxfordshire.

And that's what that's talking about.

Yeah.

It's the larger...

Exactly.

...other than how we divide Worcestershire.

Precisely.

Because...

That's not quite clear.

Oh, apologies.

Yeah, so that's...

Government would like to know what our preferred devolution arrangement is, whether we get

to that place or not, that will be part of the political debate that needs to happen

between now and then.

So yes, I think overall the timelines, what we put in in November is dependent on what

different councils say.

We cannot put an option in if at least one council hasn't voted for it, hasn't decided

it's their preference.

So that is a level of jeopardy if you like.

I think somebody has to vote for each of them for them to go through.

Obviously we will be getting the decisions from all seven councils.

You guys are meeting on the 12th of November and I think I have talked about consultation.

The point at the bottom, the Minister has powers to modify proposals.

So if he doesn't like what we submitted, he could change them.

I would like to think that we are mitigating that risk by putting together strong proposals

that are deliverable and that we have gone through the right processes to put forward

something that, you know, some things that can be delivered within Gloucestershire, because

okay, historically it is quite rare, but obviously worth being aware of it.

And then, as I say, we will be switching immediately into how to get together the plans for how

we go about delivering this.

So although this feels like a huge piece of work, actually this is the start and the tip

of an iceberg about what we're going to have to be doing.

So I think that's it.

I think I'm done.

Thank you, Nina.

Any questions for Nina?

All right.

So in terms of population, obviously the County Council works across the whole population

at the moment.

So it's about 650, 660 ,000 in Gloucestershire.

The east -west split would be about 320 on one side, 340 on the other or there or thereabouts.

Sorry, I wasn't really clear.

Rob, do you want to talk to that point?

Yeah, so obviously we're still working through that, but the submission is likely to be that

we're using existing boundaries and elect two councillors to each boundary, so yeah,

exactly twice the size of the current. That's because that avoids the need for

a boundary review this side of unitarisation. The proposal then is that

we'd have a boundary review within the first term of that new council. It would be

likely to result in a council size of 80 to 90.

I've got a few questions, Nina. The first is how are we going to ensure that

members at TCC and at District Borough and City Councils have a proper say

because of the speed of it, officers are taking quite a strong role in it but you

know they they ought to be doing the politicians bidding how we're going to

ensure they have their their proper say. Yeah I think it's a really important

point so we're meeting with group leaders every week as well now so we

had previously been meeting with group leaders fortnightly before meeting

We have now ramped that up to weekly because the pace we are working on is particularly

rapid.

I think there is a day -to -day ask for group leaders to be keeping groups updated with

what they are seeing.

I know groups are working on how to go about doing that.

Alongside that is how do we support group leaders with that information and presenting

that and playing that through with members.

So we've now set up monthly member briefings as well.

So you've had one, I think, in July.

There'll be another one in September and October.

And we're just starting to develop up plans as well about

how we make sure you're all as briefed as possible leading

into that final November session.

Because I do appreciate this is incredibly complicated.

And we do need to make sure that you all feel confident

that you understand what you're taking a vote on as we go

forward.

So it's as I'm sure it is, it's front and centre of my mind,

and we're working up that plan.

The MHCLG have got a two to three month consultation

when we're finished.

How are they gonna get proper views

from the whole of the affected people?

So I think the timeline will be likely in the new year,

so January time they will start a consultation

for a few months.

They will work with us within Gloucestershire

to make sure we're targeting the right people,

making sure that everybody in the county

has got an opportunity to respond, that stakeholders are engaged with, etc.

So it will be led by MHCLG but we will collectively support them to make sure that the right people

have got access to that information.

And obviously as councillors your roles will be really important in that as well, in making

sure people know and respond accordingly to that.

You talked about the jeopardy that we face with district councils maybe not voting for

a proposal.

Do we know when the district borough and city councils are due to meet in respect to the

November meetings?

We've got the dates.

I couldn't tell you them off the top of my head, but my understanding at this point is

they all happen after the 12th of November, so effectively the county is scheduled to

go first and then the districts meet in the days following all the way through to the

28th of November.

Just to be really clear, to make a submission, one council has to support it, so it doesn't

need to be a majority of the seven councils, we just need to make sure there is a majority

of councillors in one council to make sure a submission can be put into government.

My final question, clearly working with other organisations is going to be vital post LGR,

how are we managing the interconnections with those and getting their views on board?

Yeah, no really good question. So we have been doing active stakeholder management,

stakeholder engagement.

So colleagues across the council have been meeting

with various different stakeholders to get their

views, that is all being collated so effectively

there will be a pack of information with people's

views that will be shared across all of the districts

and it will form part of the information that you as

councillors get.

So, you know, some of the areas that have been really

important, you know, what do our parent carer forum

think, you know, what does our school system think,

what do our big businesses within Gloucestershire think.

Now, their perspectives are really important.

They're not necessarily going to drive what your political views are going to be, but

it's important that you have that information as you go into your decision -making.

So yeah, it's been a whole work stream as part of the engagement and consultation strand.

I don't think there's any more questions.

Thank you for that.

I'm sure it's going to be, when it comes up, pretty much every meeting.

I'd expect so.

We move on to our last item which is the work plan.

Thank you.

We have the corporate scrutiny committee work plan.

Is there anything anyone wants to add?

Bearing in mind that February is already a very busy meeting.

If there is anything you want to add, just either say it now or let me know and Sophie

and I can talk about it for December and January.

And if it justifies it for September.

Craig?

Yes.

As mentioned earlier on, social value.

I will add on to the future items list.

This is something I banged on about before.

I might have mentioned it on one of the training sessions.

On all of these committees it applies to E &T as well.

That members feel they can contribute to the work plan and it is not just officer led all

time I agree with that entirely so feel free to you and your group's members to

say what we should be talking about and then go to other groups too

at times you'll see work that out for yourself but around the council's draught

strategy I thought that was going to November is it going to both of them I

I thought that too so if we if your dozy -on -dozy

Is going to both of those so something will be brought forward

but it won't be as developed as it might go to September then back to the

the vote on the future of the council

For you to feed into it as scrutiny the November date is the full council date

So it will still meet the September but it will just not be in the same format as Colin wanted it to be

All right with no further points, thank you Oh go on Ian just

The staff survey when are the results actually

So the results are out

Yeah, yeah, so we've already got the data and we've got an action plan off the back

of it.

I think it will largely be whether there's space on the agenda for it or not.

So whenever works on the programme.

That's what I was wondering because I think staff says they're really, really important.

I'm just wondering whether...

We have the plan now.

I will be sure we will enable the cabinet members to have enough notice so they are

able to come and talk to the committee and take questions.

That's really important.

It's already in their dairies untold.

Okay, but looking at what the work plan says, that's going to be quite a few of them, isn't it?

You'd expect the leader and the deputy leader to be present at cost.

We wouldn't expect all cabinet members to attend for all areas just because they have their responsibilities to their individual areas.

Obviously if Lisa and Colin can't answer anything they can always take it away and refer back or if officers can contribute.

I don't think we can get to a place where we've got all of them at every meeting.

Anything else? No. Thank you all for your contributions and I hope we'll close the meeting.

Thank you.

If you are having technical problems, or want to give some feedback on our webcasts, please use the form below

Required field

Name

Comments

Need an accessible hCaptcha?
Check available options.
Sign up to hCaptcha or Log in to hChaptcha.

By clicking Send feedback, you agree that Gloucestershire County Council and Public-i can use the information above to review your feedback and contact you about it. See our Privacy Policy for more details.

Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Thursday 31 July 2025, 10:00am - Gloucestershire County Council Webcasting

Corporate Overview and Scrutiny CommitteeThursday, 31st July 2025 at 10:00am

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Twitter

Forums

Speakers

Please let us know your experience of our webcast

Votes

Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Thursday, 31st July 2025 at 10:00am