Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Kate Lymer, Colin Smith and Diane Smith.

Cllr William Huntington Thresher acted as substitute for Cllr Diane Smith.

Cllr Stephen Carr acted as substitute for Cllr Colin Smith.

Cllr Nicholas Bennett acted as substitute for Cllr Lymer.

Apologies were received from Mandy Henry, Kirsty Wilkinson, Jackie Goad, Duncan Bridgewater and Olumide Odubawo. 

There were no declarations of interest.

The minutes had been adjusted subsequent to the previous meeting to incorporate a change that had been requested by a Member and Kathy Smith.

The minutes had been adjusted to read as follows:

‘The Vice-Chairman and one Member raised concerns that the minutes of the LJCC meeting for 25th February 2016 did not properly reflect the tone and nature of the meeting regarding the Library Service.

There were no concerns raised regarding the factual accuracy of the minutes for 25th February 2016, and so they were agreed as a correct record’.

With this adjustment, the minutes were agreed as a correct record.

The Staff Side would like to ask the following question:

Following the discussion about the public accessibility of the Risk Register at the last LJCC, the decision has been taken NOT to make this publically accessible. Similarly the requested “lessons learnt” reports on contracts are not currently public.  Without transparency, how can Members be confident that lessons have been learnt, that the commissioning process is being undertaken in an appropriate manner, defining outcomes in terms of genuine sustainable economic, social, and environmental benefits,  and that there is effectively Council accountability for decisions taken?

The Staff Side had asked the following question:

“TRANSPARENCY--Following the discussion about the public accessibility of the Risk Register at the last LJCC, the decision has been taken NOT to make this publically accessible. Similarly the requested “lessons learnt” reports on contracts are not currently public. Without transparency, how can Members be confident that lessons have been learnt, that the commissioning process is being undertaken in an appropriate manner, defining outcomes in terms of genuine sustainable economic, social, and environmental benefits, and that there is effectively Council accountability for decisions taken?”

The following written response had been provided by Mr Dave Starling (LBB Head of Corporate Procurement):

‘In terms of Council Practice , for its contracts valued over £500k there are set requirements around reporting on performance of contracts and the matter is covered in a number of areas of the Procurement and Commissioning advice given – which are included in the attached documents – and which can be found within the ‘Managers Toolkit’.  Essentially the answer is “The matter is covered, and to the extent they result in a Part 1 Report–are public documents, and therefore the Members are properly informed in making any decisions required.

There is also additional advice on the matter in the ‘Project and Programme’ element of the Toolkit. However, please note that all these Guidance Notes are being reviewed to reflect the new Council Structure. You may also be aware that he arrangements on Client and Contract Monitoring and Contract Management are under discussion at CLT level -  and the content of the Toolkit will need to be amended to reflect the outcome from this management review.’

This written response had been provided and disseminated to all parties prior to the meeting. Three documents had also been provided with the written response:

·  Procurement Gate Reviews Briefing

·  Report Template for Gateway Reviews

·  Issues to consider when looking at outsourcing of Services

The Procurement Gate Reviews Briefing was broken down into 5 sections:

1.  Gate Review Zero was the Strategic Assessment

This “Gate” related to the report of procurement needs resulting from a Best Value or Service Review and the suggested implementation plan.

2.  Gate Review 1 - Business Justification

This Gate related to the option appraisal stage of a procurement exercise.

3.  Gate Review 2 - Procurement Strategy

This Gateway confirmed the preferred procurement option and method to be used (Open, Restricted, Competitive Dialogue or Negotiated etc.).

4.  Gate Review 3 - Investment Decision

This Gateway would be applied just prior to contract award to ensure there were no factors that could prevent the successful completion of the project

5.  Gate Review 4 - Readiness for Service

This Gateway applied after the contract was let and the Transition Plan agreed.

6.  Gate Review 5 - Benefits Evaluation

Post implementation review was a valuable step that was often omitted. It was paramount that lessons were learnt and fed back into the Council's Procurement Strategy.  Reviews should be undertaken periodically during the duration of any contract  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

The next meeting of the LJCC is scheduled for 6^th December 2016

The date of the next meeting was agreed as 6^th December 2016.