The last LJCC resolved that there be member training to aid them in the understanding of the commissioning process, and the monitoring of contracts.
The Staff Side would like to be involved in the training programme to ensure that the training is balanced, so that members can make informed decisions.
The Staff Side would like to be updated concerning progress made in the implementation of this training.
Minutes:
The matter of training for Members concerning contract monitoring was re-visited by Gill Slater for the Staff Side. She reiterated issues that had been discussed previously by the LJCC, where it was agreed that some form of training for Members should be formulated to provide a better understanding of the processes involved in the formulation and the monitoring of contracts. The concern expressed by the Staff Side was that reports were not always adequately highlighting the risks and complexities of contracts to Members.
A Member reminded the Committee that what had been agreed at the previous meeting of the LJCC was to progress the matter of Member training for those Members who were interested, and not for trade union representatives.
Cllr Carr asked why the Staff Side were so interested in this particular matter.
Mr Glenn Kelly responded that the Staff Side were hoping to aid in the scrutiny process. He stated that Capita had lost the Housing Benefit contract, and that the unions had been aware for some time of hidden contractual problems. He informed the Committee that most unions had scrutiny trainers, and felt that the unions could help.
Cllr Turner expressed concern that the matter of Member training had been discussed for some time, but no decisions had been made. He proposed that the training relating to contracts that had been used internally, could be used to provide appropriate training to Members at very little cost.
Mr Kelly expressed the view that there was need for this process to be speeded up.
Cllr Fawthrop commented that the key was to ensure that officers dealing with contracts should be properly trained from the offset to avoid problems occurring later.
Cllr Dunn referred to the Executive & Resources PDS Committee of the 12th March 2015 where Capita reported and attended to answer questions. He stated that a Member had asked for further detail on the failure to meet the KPI of completing 95% of service requests within 5 days, and that the question was not answered on the night. He stated that contractors should not be allowed to get away with their failures.
Cllr Colin Smith expressed the view that funding should not be made available to fund member training, as Members were already paid and should be able to bring relevant experience and skills to the table. He felt that contracts could be adequately monitored via the PDS system. If problems emerged subsequently, then they would be vigorously investigated. He felt that there was no need for unions to be involved with the scrutiny of contracts.
Cllr Stevens expressed the view that there were certain Members that had requested training and that for those who were interested this should be facilitated. He stated that any such training would be for Members only, and not for union representatives.
Kathy Smith declared that understanding was required, and that it was important for those scrutinising contracts to know what they were doing and to be able to ask the right questions.
Cllr Fawthrop highlighted that resources were not available for extensive training, and that scrutiny of contracts could work through the PDS Committees, as long as Members were able to look at the documentation in plenty of time.
Mr Kelly stated that LBB had a “thin client side” that was under resourced which was a problem. The unions were offering to help and to add resource and expertise.
Cllr Carr expressed the view that these were matters that could be dealt with by the PDS Committees and the Executive, and this was a view endorsed by Cllr Diane Smith.
Cllr Turner pointed out that most Members did not have experience with contracts and so would require training. He felt that it was very important to avoid problems with contracts from the offset, and that perhaps a dedicated Committee should be established to deal with the scrutiny of contracts.
The Director of Human Resources commented that training had a role, but it should not supplant but rather complement other measures aimed at improving the Council's capacity to manage and monitor outsourced services.
He maintained that LBB officers did not lack the ability to monitor and scrutinise contracts and in most cases were successful in doing so. He was of the opinion that there was no requirement or need for the unions to be involved in contract scrutiny, and that this would be unworkable.
The Chairman closed by stating that details of contracts were published by Mr Dave Starling, and that these details went to the E&R PDS Committee; the staff side were free to ask questions at PDS Committees, and to ask questions of procurement officers.
It was RECOMMENDED that further consideration be applied to the training of Members with respect to contract monitoring, but that this would not include training for union representatives.