Agenda item

SCRUTINY OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

Minutes:

The Chief Executive, Mr Ade Adetosoye, attended the meeting to respond to questions from the Committee. The Chief Executive had circulated a written update for the Committee as part of the agenda papers.  Mr Adetosoye responded to questions, making the following comments –

 

  • The constitution of Health Scrutiny was prescribed in legislation.  In the main, services for very sick children were provided by health services which were in turn scrutinised and held to account by the Council’s Health Scrutiny Sub-Committee.
  • Future Member scrutiny arrangements in respect of the integration of health and social care were yet to be determined.  Whilst current scrutiny arrangements were adequate primary legislation directing future scrutiny arrangements had not yet been issued.
  • In terms of the integration of health and social care, Bromley had not pursued full integration and whilst the CCG and the Council were working together on policy formulation there the Council retained responsibility for determining spend.  However, consideration would be given to joint services if savings could be delivered.
  • The Chief Executive agreed to provide an update on the Greenwich Leisure Ltd strike following the meeting.
  • The Chief Executive took on comments that were made in respect of lost revenue through failing to monitor and maintain parking meters and the need for parking wardens to adequately monitor meters.  It was also noted that it was not possible to report issues with parking meters on fix my street.
  • There would be Member involvement in the development of the Building a Better Bromley priorities.
  • Scrutiny and challenge of planning decisions at Bromley was of a high quality.  Officers were given the opportunity to clarify key points at meetings and key Planning Officers would be encouraged to attend meetings of the Development Control Committee and Plans Sub-Committees for professional development.
  • The Chief Executive was not aware of Chairman at Planning meetings directing approval or refusal of an application at the start of a debate.
  • Bromley had been classified as ‘low priority’ in relation to Prevent funding received from central Government.
  • There had been some interest in the Director of Children’s Services post which had been advertised at the beginning of the month and the Chief Executive hoped that there would be some applicants.  There were three other vacancies for Director of Children’s Services across London including one in a neighbouring borough.  LB Bromley had taken a conscious decision to keep the salary band within the base rate that had been collectively agreed across London and Bromley was seeking to promote its advantageous work/life balance and employee benefits.
  • The post of Director of Adult Social Care would be advertised in November.
  • Two senior officer posts had been made in the past three months and both posts had involved internal recruits.
  • The Chief Executive was not aware of any plans to merge London borough and have 5 ‘Super Boroughs’.  This was not something that had been discussed in recent year and any such plans would require primary legislation.
  • Following an incident of staff intimidation following a meeting held in public, security arrangements had been reviewed and five committees requiring additional security had been identified.
  • The Chief Executive reported that he would ask the Director of Finance to provide an update on the London Business Rate Pilot following the meeting.
  • Officers considered to plan for Britain’s exit from the European Union at the end of the month.  A baseline assessment of the 15 key areas identified by London Councils had been undertaken and LB Bromley appeared to be well placed.

 

The Committee thanked the Chief Executive for his update.

 

Supporting documents: