Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors C Manning and S Patel.

To approve the minutes from the Corporate Performance Panel held on 2 June 2021.

The minutes of the Corporate Performance Panel held on 2 June 2021 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Please indicate if there are any interests which should be declared.  A declaration of an interest should indicate the nature of the interest (if not already declared on the Register of Interests) and the agenda item to which it relates.  If a disclosable pecuniary interest is declared, the Member should withdraw from the room whilst the matter is discussed.

These declarations apply to all Members present, whether the Member is part of the meeting, attending to speak as a local Member on any item or simply observing the meeting from the public seating area.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

To consider any business which, by reason of special circumstances, the Chairman proposed to accept as urgent under Section 100(b)(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972.

There was no urgent business.

Members wishing to speak pursuant to Standing Order 34 should inform the Chairman of their intention to do so and on what items they wish to be heard before a decision on that item is taken.

Councillor M de Whalley for all items.

Councillor A Holmes was present for all operational matters on the Agenda.

Councillor C Joyce for items 11 and 13.

There was no Chair’s correspondence.

There were no call-ins.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

Councillor Dark as Chair of the Informal Working Group introduced the report and advised that the Corporate Performance Panel was invited to consider the recommendations put forward.  Councillor Dark outlined the deliberations of  the Informal Working Group and drew Member’s attention to an omission from the report discussions had taken place at the Informal Working Group in that, once this really prestigious honour had been given to someone, there should be a mechanism in the very unlikely event of that person doing something wrong that the honour could be also removed.  Councillor Dark thanked the Informal Working Group for their input, specifically Councillor Ayres, Chair of the Standards Committee.

The Democratic Services Manager provided background information following the submission of a Notice of Motion from Councillor Rust on 28 November 2019, which was referred to the Corporate Performance Panel for consideration, an Informal Working Group was set up to look at the Motion along with the existing criteria to review.  It was highlighted that the Standards Committee would consider nominations received which would require the approval of Full Council.  The current criteria stated that any former council member would remain ineligible for nomination for 10 years after they cease to be a councillor, the Informal Working Group felt that this placed Councillors in an unfair position and therefore recommended this be deleted.  The Informal Working Group also asked that details of other awards available to be nominated for, for example, the Mayor’s awards should be made clear on the council’s  website.

Councillor A Holmes addressed the Panel under Standing Order 34.

The Democratic Services Manager responded to questions and comments in relation to the recommendation of the Informal Working Group to delete 11 from the current  criteria:  Any former council member will remain ineligible for nomination for 10 years after they cease to be a Councillor.

The Chair thanked Councillor Dark and the Democratic Services Manager for the report.

RESOLVED:  That the Corporate Performance Panel supported the criteria set out at 1 to 7 in the report.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Assistant to the Chief Executive presented the interim report which focused on the performance indicators where performance was worse than the previous year as at the 31 March 2021.  It was highlighted that the indicators were linked to the Covid-19 Recovery Strategy and were grouped under the Corporate Business Plan’s priorities.

The Panel’s attention was drawn to the following sections of the report:

·         Job Seekers allowance claimant rate reduced considerably on last year

·         % rent arrears on industrial units some feedback has improved in June/July 2021

·         Waste and recycling tonnage had reduced but with the reintroduction of the food collection it was anticipated the rate would improve.

The Assistant to the Chief Executive responded to questions in relation to:

• Why there had been an increase in the number of crime and anti-social behaviour incidents within the Borough and undertook to provide the Panel with the information requested.
• How the data was collated in relation to the anti-social behaviour incidents set out at 2.5.2 of the report and undertook to circulate a response to the Panel.

Councillor Holmes addressed the Panel under Standing Order 34 and asked if officers had an insight into the overall trends for the indicators .  The Chair invited Councillor Holmes to identify any indicators he wished to have further information on and to inform the Assistant to the Chief Executive so the information could be brought back to a future meeting.

Councillor de Whalley addressed the Panel under Standing Order 34 in relation to anti-social behaviour within his ward and expressed thanks to borough council officers and the police for the multi-agency approach to address this important issue.  Councillor de Whalley asked if there was anything wider the Borough Council could do to assist, In response the Assistant to the Chief Executive explained that the council worked in partnership with other organisations and that a multi-agency approach was taken.  It was explained that there was a police presence in the King’s Court office and regular meetings were held.

The Chair thanked the Assistant to the Chief Executive for the interim report.

RESOLVED:  The Panel reviewed and noted the report.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Chief Executive presented the report and responded to questions and comments, a summary of which is set out below.

Councillor Spikings commented that the current response time of 10 days was too long and asked if it could be reduced in any way,

Councillor Joyce addressed the Panel under Standing Order 34 and concurred with the comments made by Councillor Spikings.

The Chair commented that he also concurred with the comments made by Councillor Spikings and thanked the Assistant to the Chief Executive for the introduction of the Members Enquiries Inbox. The Chair referred to the Member/Officer Protocol and the timescale to respond which was 3 working days and proposed that:

Recommendation 3.1 be amended to read:  It is recommended to Cabinet that the Constitution is changed to permanently retain the Members Enquiries Inbox. This will enable responses to questions to be collated and responded to in a timely manner in consultation with the appropriate officers.  ADD – in line with the timescale set out in the Member/Officer Protocol.

In response, the Chief Executive explain that she was happy to retain the existing Member/\officer protocol of 3 working days but highlighted that some complex enquiries required longer than 3 working days but would aim to respond within no longer than 10 working days.

Under Standing Order 34, Councillor Joyce commented that if no response was received from the relevant officer within the timescale then the enquiry to be referred to the Executive Director or Chief Executive.

In response, the Chief Executive agreed to the request from Councillor Joyce set out above.

Following questions from Councillor Spikings on the monitoring undertaken, the Assistant to the Chief Executive explained that details were kept of the enquiries received and response times were monitoring.

The Chair invited the Panel to agree to the recommendation subject to the amendments set out above, which was agreed by the Panel.

There was general consensus from the Panel that they would like to receive an annual update.

RESOLVED:  The Corporate Performance Panel supported the recommendation that Cabinet amend the council’s constitution to retain the Members Inbox as a permanent measure to respond to general Member enquiries to enable them to carry out their roles within their constituencies, subject to the amendments set out below:

1)            Recommendation 3.1 be amended to read:  It is recommended to Cabinet that the Constitution is changed to permanently retain the Members Enquiries Inbox. This will enable responses to questions to be collated and responded to in a timely manner in consultation with the appropriate officers. 

ADD – in line with the timescale set out in the Member/Officer Protocol.

If no response was received from the relevant officer within the timescale, then the enquiry be referred to the Executive Director or Chief Executive.

2)            The Panel to receive an annual update report.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

In presenting the report, the Chief Executive provided an overview of the current arrangement with Eastlaw and the reasons why the council should appoint a full time monitoring officer.  The Chief Executive outlined the recruitment process.

The Chief Executive responded to questions and comments in relation to:

·         The job description and personal specification.

·         Role of the Monitoring Officer

·         Provision of assistance and advice to both Town and Parish Councils.

·         The separate requirements/arrangements for the subsidiary companies.

·         The role of the council’s Appointments Panel in the recruitment process.

Under Standing Order 34, Councillor Joyce addressed the Panel and highlighted the importance of the Monitoring Officer role and supported the proposal.

Under Standing Order 34, Councillor Holmes addressed the Panel and asked what support would be available for the Monitoring Officer.  Councillor Devereux commented that the Chief Executive would monitor the performance/workload of the Monitoring Officer.  The Chief Executive added that currently Eastlaw provided the legal service to the council which had a Deputy Monitoring Role together with admin support.  The next stage of the process would be to undertake a review of the provision of legal series going forward.

The Chair commented that he shared the concerns raised regarding the subsidiary companies and Director roles, but that he welcomed the proposal that the Monitoring Officer would be attending meetings of the council.

RESOLVED:  That the Corporate Performance Panel supported the recommendation to Cabinet to agree that the borough council create a post and proceed with the recruitment and appointment of a full time Monitoring Officer to be employed solely by the council.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Assistant to the Chief Executive presented the report which proposed that the borough council introduce a Councillor Community Grant Scheme with the aim of funding community projects and initiatives that will deliver better outcomes for residents in their Ward as well as contributing to the achievement of the Council’s Corporate Business Plan priorities.  Each ward councillor will be given a budget of £1,000 per annum to assist their constituents with funding for projects which meet the criteria for the scheme.

The Assistant to the Executive responded to questions and comments in relation to:

·         Risk exposure of £55,000 and reputation of the council.

·         Admin required for the scheme.

·         Due diligence checks to be undertaken.

·         2.1 Financial Assistance Grants Scheme – the total amount and 5.1 Financial implications.  The Assistant to the Chief Executive undertook to email details regarding the total amount of grants and current underspend in the Financial Assistance Grants to the Panel.

·         The level of minimum grant of £100.

·         Applications not being considered during the period of purdah up to borough and county elections.

RESOLVED:  That the Corporate Performance Panel supported the recommendation to Cabinet to introduce the Councillor Community Grant Scheme and set aside the budget required for the scheme.

The Committee adjourned at 5.40 pm and reconvened at 5.55 pm.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

In presenting the report the Assistant to the Chief Executive explained that following the expiry of the powers granted by Section 78 of the Coronavirus Act 2020, from 7 May the council had reverted to face-to-face meetings for Members, supported by Democratic Services Officers in the room.  The report considered the impact of the decision not to extend the facility of virtual meetings for councils and to recommend to Cabinet/Council, interim measures to enable the council to fulfil their statutory obligations in respect of council meetings whilst maintaining social distancing and COVID-19 safety measures at all times.

The Assistant to the Chief Executive informed Members of the increase in the number of Covid cases in Norfolk and the difficulties to allow all officers back in the meeting room.  The advice therefore was to have as few officers as possible in the meeting room to reduce the risk of infection.  Officers presenting reports would join the meeting via Zoom.

Councillor Mrs Spikings commented on the efforts of officers undertaken to allow meetings to take place, but  added that the sound quality in the Assembly Room was poor and in some cases inaudible and asked if any changes could be made to improve the sound quality. 

Councillor Hudson concurred with the comments made by Councillor Spikings.

Councillor Nash explained that he was using headphones via Bluetooth which could be used for all microphones.

With regard to the comments made regarding the use of headphones, Councillor Morley added that he had observed Councillor Nash and that headphones and a mask was too onerous and asked if IT could come up with a better system with the use of loudspeakers.  In conclusion, Councillor Morley commented that he was against the recommendations and it was far better for physical presence of officers in the meeting room.

Councillor Devereux commented that the compromise should be made as effective as possible for the decision making process.

Councillor Kirk added that he favoured hybrid meetings as in the meeting room he found it difficult to hear and that he was in favour of the use of headphones.

Councillor Rose made reference to internet difficulties when zoom meetings took place.

Councillor Tyler commented that he had taken the advice of Councillor Nash and had invested in a set of earphones.

Under Standing Order 34, Councillor de Whalley commented that he found it difficult to hear in the Assembly Room and commented he had discussed earphones with Councillor Nash.  Councillor de Whalley asked if there was a possibility that sound engineers could be contacted to improve the sound quality.

Under Standing Order 34, Councillor Joyce addressed the Panel and commented that better sound quality was required but emphasised the importance of reducing the risk and protecting everyone against Covid.

In response to the comments made, the Chief Executive provided an overview of the increase in the number of Covid cases both in West Norfolk and Norfolk and highlighted  ...  view the full minutes text for item CP26

To give consideration to the request from Councillor Nash.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The Chair explained that he had received the request with Councillor Nash and that it had been placed on the Panel’s work programme for the 1 September 2021 meeting.

Councillor Nash stated that he had had a discussion with the Monitoring Officer and the Chair prior to the meeting and wished to bring the item as a matter or urgency.  Councillor Nash read out a statement as to why in his opinion the policy was unlawful and proposed that the current policy be suspended pending the September review.

The Chair added that it had been agreed the item would be considered by the Panel on the 1 September 2021 in the presence of the Monitoring Officer and that there no persons currently listed under the Unreasonably Complainants Policy.

RESOLVED:  The request from Councillor Nash would be considered by the Panel on the 1 September 2021.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The following item was identified for consideration at the Corporate Performance Panel meeting on 1 September 2021:

·         Review of the Corporate Business Plan (currently scheduled for 21 September meeting).

To note the Panel’s Work Programme.

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

The following items were identified:

1 September 2021

·         Hunstanton Tourist Information Centre – request from Councillor Paul Beal.

·         Cabinet Report;  Review of the Corporate Business Plan (currently scheduled for 21 September meeting).

·         How new Portfolio objectives met the Corporate Business Plan objectives via Directorate/Service Plans/key performance indicators/timescales.

To note that the date of the next meeting of the Audit Committee will take place on 1 September 2021 at 4.30 pm in the Assembly Room, Town Hall, Saturday Market Place, King’s Lynn.

The next meeting of the Corporate Performance Panel will be held on 1 September 2021 at 4.30 pm in the Assembly Room, Town Hall, Saturday Market Place, King’s Lynn.