Agenda and minutes

Councillors are required to comply with the requirements of the Localism Act 2011 regarding disclosable pecuniary interests.

The Chairman noted that members were not required to declare their membership of any bodies to which they had been appointed by their local authority.  The Monitoring Officer clarified that members needed to declare any financial interests.

There were no declarations of interest.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the previous meeting held on 31 July 2018.

In respect of minute 12 with regard to Town and Parish Councils – Principles for transfer and disposal of assets and the bullet point with regard to the DAPTC working with the Shaping Dorset Council’s Programme Team (page 2 of the minutes), it was noted that the DAPTC continued to work with the programme team.

The Chairman noted that the last meeting had been a difficult meeting with people getting to know each other and how people worked together.  He asked members to bear with each other during this early period for the committee.

It was proposed by J Sewell seconded C Brooks

Decision

The minutes of the meeting held on 31 July 2018 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman subject to the note about the DAPTC above.

To receive any public questions or statements on the business of the Shadow Overview and Scrutiny Committee in accordance with the procedure rules as set out in the Shadow Dorset Council Constitution.

There were no representations from members of the public.

Stephen McNamara, a Consultant with VWV Solicitors attended the committee and provided a statement with regard to the discussion that had taken place at the meeting of the committee on 31 July 2018, with regard to the process for the appointment of the Interim statutory officers for the shadow period.  The statement is attached at appendix A to the minutes.

The Chairman reported that he had agreed to change the order of the following two agenda items and that the item on the process for the appointment of a permanent Chief Executive for the Dorset Council would be taken as the next item at the meeting.

To receive a presentation from the HR Strategic Lead, Shaping Dorset Council.

Nicola Houwayek (HR Strategic Lead, Shaping Dorset Council) attended the meeting to provide a presentation with regard to the process for the appointment of a permanent Chief Executive for the Dorset Council.  The presentation included background to the process, including the recruitment process timeline and detail of the membership of the Senior Appointments Committee.

In response to questions raised with regard to the composition of the Senior Appointments Committee it was noted that the members were acting in their role as Shadow Councillors and that it was a politically balanced committee.  There were 8 members appointed to the committee which had been agreed by Full Council at its first meeting and it was noted that the Chairman would have a casting vote in the case of an equality of votes.  A concern was noted that there should be an odd number of members on the committee.

Clarification was sought in respect of the members of the Senior Appointments Committee and which councils they were also members of.  A concern was expressed in respect of the public perception of this.  The Chairman confirmed the councillors’ council membership as follows:

Councillor Anthony Alford – West Dorset District Council

Councillor Andy Canning – West Dorset District Council and Dorset County Council

Councillor Graham Carr-Jones – North Dorset District Council and Dorset County Council

Councillor Jeff Cant – Weymouth and Portland Borough Council

Councillor Spencer Flower – East Dorset District Council and Dorset County Council

Councillor Colin Huckle – Weymouth and Portland Borough Council

Councillor Rebecca Knox – Dorset County Council

Councillor Gary Suttle – Purbeck District Council

In response to a question, it was confirmed that the process for appointing tier 2 officers would be similar but with a lower level of stakeholder engagement.  Further information on the tier 2 appointment process and timescale would be considered at the next meeting of the Shadow Executive Committee.  It was agreed that a further presentation would be provided to the next meeting of the Shadow Overview and Scrutiny Committee with regard to this process.

Members considered the issues arising from the presentation and during discussion the following points were raised:

·                The stakeholder involvement could include representatives of public sector partners that the council worked with including, health partners, housing associations, youth panel and the Local Enterprise Partnership as well as businesses.  The stakeholder feedback to the panel would be important and properly considered

·                In respect of the psychometric testing, members were informed that an occupational psychologist would attend to talk through the results with the panel.  It was noted that psychometric testing was used widely for senior appointments

·                In response to a question, organisational costs in respect of redundancies were noted which would be met by each council

·                It was noted that the final approach to the Chief Executive salary had not been agreed and would depend on the successful candidate offered the appointment.  A salary range had been agreed

·                Terms and conditions such as amount of annual leave were standard terms offered to Chief  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

To consider the Highlight Report – August 2018 which includes an Internal Audit report and follow up report produced by SWAP to provide a high-level review of the LGR programme governance.

This report for the Shadow Executive Committee will be considered at the meeting of the committee on 21 August 2018.

In response to a request by the committee at the last meeting, members received a copy of the Highlight Report – August 2018, considered by the Shadow Executive Committee at their meeting on 21 August 2018, which included a Programme Governance Report and follow up report produced by South West Audit Partnership (SWAP).  Sally White, representing SWAP, attended to provide an overview of the issues raised in the reports.

Detail of the ‘Headline Conclusions’ from the initial report was set out at page 21 of the agenda.  In response to these points raised, the Programme Director had provided a detailed report on progress made in the areas and this had led to SWAP producing a follow up report.  It was noted that the follow up report set out that the direction of travel was positive and identified key changes such as the formation of new themed boards and changes to previous task and finish groups.  The report also recommended a schedule of further detailed audit work.

Members considered the issues arising from the reports and during discussion the following points were raised:

·                Members were aware of the amount of work to be undertaken and the short time scale for undertaking the work required to meet the 1 April 2019 deadline

·                It was noted that support could be provided by the Centre for Public Scrutiny and the Local Government Association

·                Reference was made to comments made in the report with regard to Dorset County Council involvement and support in terms of their contribution to the Shaping Dorset Council programme and consideration was given to inviting representatives of Dorset County Council to the next meeting of the committee to discuss these issues with them

·                The Programme Director provided information on the level of staffing within the team which currently stood at 21 people with recruitment ongoing.  In addition nearly 200 people within the councils were engaged with the plans including an oversight of areas and work around service continuity.  He felt that significant progress had been made since the first SWAP report had been produced.  The SWAP report had been requested by the Programme Board to ensure that processes and capacity for the work was in place

·                Members recognised that improvements had been made but some issues had been carried forward to the update report

·                Further audit work was to be undertaken to look at the governance of the programme

·                An externally run Gateway review towards the end of September 2018 would involve SWAP and a transformation consultant and would set out to confirm whether the discovery phase had been satisfactorily completed in readiness for the main implementation phase.  A second Gateway review would take place towards the end of January 2019 and would confirm all work carried out along with any contingency plan for any areas not covered.  The ‘go live’ date for the new Council could not be moved but there could be consideration as to what would be in place by 1 April 2019 and what plans needed to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

To review the Shadow Executive Committee Forward Plan.

The Shadow Executive Committee Forward Plan was considered alongside the item on the Shadow Overview and Scrutiny Committee Work Programme.

To suggest items for potential review by the committee during 2018/19.

The Scrutiny Officer noted that following a meeting with the Chairman and Vice-chairman of the committee and relevant officers, a draft work programme would be brought to the next meeting of the committee.  From September, the cycle of meetings would see the committee meeting in advance of the Shadow Executive Committee.  In future the Shadow Executive Committee Forward Plan would be considered during the review of the committee’s work programme.

Members considered issues for the work programme and during discussion the following points were made:

·                There was a need for assurance with regard to the readiness of critical services and any contingencies in place

·                The committee had a focus on ‘Safe and Legal’ from day 1

·                A request was made to include a review of the future operation of leisure facilities in Dorset, which was to be considered by the Shadow Executive Committee on 17 September 2018

·                The Chairman asked for there to be a presentation of services covered by each council to be held in the autumn

In response to a comment, the dates of future meetings of the committee would be recirculated to committee members.

To consider any items of business which the Chairman has had prior notification and considers to be urgent pursuant to section 100B (4) b) of the Local Government Act 1972. The reason for the urgency shall be specified in the minutes.

There were no urgent items.

Statement and advice to the Shadow Dorset Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee

Chairman and members,

Intro

Thank you for giving me the opportunity of addressing you  this morning on a matter of urgency. I intend to present to you the results of my investigation into the allegations made by Cllr Trite to the OS Committee on 31/7/18. He said that  the selection procedure for the interim statutory positions was uneven, unfair and inappropriate. He said that the selection panel was "loaded in favour of certain candidates"

These are extremely serious allegation

 I will set out my reasoning shortly but at the very start I want to make clear that my conclusion and professional advice Cllr Trite is mistaken. This selection was neither uneven, unfair nor inappropriate.

Who I am

I am Stephen Mcnamara, a consultant with VWV solicitors. I am a solicitor of over 35 years' experience including 24 years in local authorities and most recently 16 years as HoLs at BCC. I have been a consultant with VWV for 6 years bar for one year in Myanmar where I was a consultant on a rule of law programme

Why an independent person was appointed

When Jonathan Mair learnt of the allegations he was of the view that this should be immediately investigated. Firstly because of the seriousness of the allegations and also because a selection process is being undertaken for the permanent positions.

 He was rightly of the view that this had to be investigated by an independent person given that he has been appointed as the interim Monitoring Officer. He wanted there to be no possibility that he would be accused of bias

The allegations

I have not had the opportunity of meeting with Cllr Trite (he is now on holiday until 31/8), but on 15/8 he  sent a detailed account of what he said at the meeting on 31/7 to Mr Mair. This explains his reasoning as to why he believes the selection process unfair and includes the text of the statement he made to you on 31/7. I have reached a definitive view on the merits on his allegations on the basis of his letter. I would have liked to have met him, as a matter of courtesy, before giving my advice but the urgency of the matter precludes this.

This is his statement

"Mr Chairman, thank you for allowing me to speak when I'm not a member of this Committee. I feel quite uncomfortable saying this, but I would feel more uncomfortable within myself if I didn't say it. My concern centres on the process recently used for the selection of an Interim Head of Paid Service and an Interim s.151 Officer.

"A senior serving council officer in Dorset has described the composition of the selection panel to me as, in practice, loaded in favour of certain candidates, and I regret to say that I have to agree. If each of the six council leaders who comprised the selection panel had had a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.