Transcript
All right, there we are, we can all start speaking now, yeah. I thought I'd gone deaf with all these characters not speaking, so. I wasn't specifically looking at you there, Chancellor Curtis, but you just happened to be in my eye line.
So, welcome to this afternoon's meeting of the Resources and Fire and Rescue Overview Introduction Committee. The meeting will be webcast live on the public ITV website, so make sure, if you are speaking, you are logged in, so the members of the public are watching.
I'm sure there's thousands of them can hear your Dorset tones, so thank you for that. Yes, I'm receiving a lot of support today. I've got Caroline Gutteridge from our Legal Services Department keeping me and the rest of the meeting on the straight and narrow, so I'm sure Caroline will sort us out.
She might have a work cut out, but I'm sure she'll sort us out, so that was good. And the meeting is going to be clerked by another Andy. You can never have too many Andes in a meeting, that's what I say.
Somebody said they always come in handy. And Andy Carswell, and supported by Amy Bridgewater-Carnall in the corner there. So I'm sure they will keep them straight and narrow.
And thank you for your attendance today. Item 1 is 1.1. Apologies, Andy, please.
Thanks, Chair. Apologies have been received from Councillors Bannister, both in Commonwealth Court.
Councillors Scott and McAllister are attending as substitutes today. Apologies have also been received from Pernima, Candela and Chris Norton.
Brilliant. Thank you for that. Item 1.2, members' disclosure of interest, non-pecuniary and pecuniary.
I've not received any notice. Any members want to declare anything there? No? That's fine.
Chair's announcements. Just a brief one. There isn't a planned fire test this afternoon, so if you do hear the firearm, please evacuate in an orderly fashion.
And it's good that we've got the Chief Fire Officer here, so I'm sure Ben will be able to lead us to safety, if he can catch me, because I'll be out in front of him.
So, yes, hopefully that won't happen.
Item 1.4 is the minutes of the previous meetings.
Meetings were held on the 5th of March 25 and the 16th of May 25, but on the part of the agenda.
Have members any comments on those minutes, or can I take those lack of comments that you're happy to agree those, for those to be signed off at a later date?
Thank you very much.
Right, so we'll now move to item number 2, which is the principles of effective scrutiny, which is on page 11 of the agenda papers, agenda item number 2.
Who's going to be leading on this one today, then, please?
Andy, yeah.
Thanks, Chair.
So, this was a set of scrutiny principles, which were agreed by the Council a couple of years ago, and this is just a reminder, basically, to all new members of the panel, that these would be principles of effective overview and scrutiny, and that we will abide by over the course of the municipal year.
Just asking for members to formally endorse this, please.
Thank you for that.
Any comments on this item?
I've got one too, but I'll let members come in first, if you don't want to keep on listening to me all day.
Councillor Curtis.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
Yes, I'll just say I welcome these principles.
It's a useful reminder that this is an important committee, and that effective overview and scrutiny helps lead to better decisions and better policy.
So, I welcome these comments.
Thank you.
I'll certainly endorse that.
I'll say I know we're talking about bringing improvements to services for our residents.
Obviously, we're corporate parents for the whole of Warwickshire, so we need to look at that.
And, again, the willingness to challenge.
And, again, if there's a point in paragraph three, willing to change based upon evidence.
And I think, you know, I've got to make sure that the council is making its decisions based on up-to-date, relevant and accurate information.
And I think that's one of our motor scrutiny roles.
And, again, I think, again, we need to hold the cabinet to account to make sure they are demonstrating the performances linked to the council plan.
And, again, we need to make sure they understand what risks are associated with any decisions they make.
So, I think a lot of solid principles here.
So, if we can remember them, I'm sure, when we're having meetings throughout the year, we'll go through these options and we'll talk about those and remind the cabinet and the administration of what our role is, our purposes as well.
So, thank you for that.
Any other items on that?
Or we note the report and the recommendation is that the committee endorses the principles of effective overview and scrutiny set out in the appendix to the report.
So, we all in favour of that?
Good.
Thank you.
That's the first vote we've got through without any contention.
So, always a good sign.
Right.
Next item on the agenda is the public question time.
And, I believe I've got Mr. Connor Edwards, who's requested to speak.
Mr. Edwards, you will have three minutes.
Two questions, I believe.
Yeah, as long as you cover the three minutes.
Yeah.
Cool.
And, do you want to warn in within 30 seconds or just carry on?
I don't think it'll say three minutes, but I really appreciate that.
I'm sure that.
Yeah.
Brilliant.
Thank you.
Okay.
Have you logged in, Connor, please?
Yes, yes, yes.
That's it.
Good, no, thank you.
We're ready?
Cool.
Thank you for the time today to ask this question.
I am here as a professional scientist and a former on-call firefighter in Warwickshire.
And, I'm just going to give a bit of context before I get into my question as to why I'm
here.
And, just ahead of time, if I get a bit far in Brimstone, I do apologise.
I get a bit passionate about this stuff.
So, let's get started.
Resource risk is the first time a UK fire brigade has tried to allocate life-saving resources
based on primarily data.
And, during the public consultation, the fire leadership and the portfolio holder stated
that these models, statistical models, were created with the expertise of world-leading
scientists.
This is not the case, I'm afraid.
In fact, there's a freedom of information request I have here to evidence that.
The models were, in fact, generated internally using Warwickshire County Council expertise
and they were rubber-stamped by the external modelling company.
So, just to be crystal clear on that from a scientist's perspective, these models in no
way, shape or form predict future risk.
They give you a patchy picture of previous demand.
Now, concerned about the potential damage this has caused, and as the on-call firefighters
are generally quite passionate, quite nerdy about the fire service, myself and fellow
scientifically trained on-call firefighters, we went to find the top experts in the land
and we found some people who work in applied statistics and risk at a national and international
level.
I have sent that PowerPoint to the council members, but the identities of those expertise must
remain confidential for the sake of, I think, national defence.
So, just, the phone's locked, apologies.
Yeah, so we got the top raft statisticians and they ratified our concerns.
We presented this during the public consultation through the official channels to the leadership
team and to the portfolio holder at the time.
And we did that in spring 2024 and I am here because we felt our concerns were not heard
to the level where it would keep Warwickshire residents safe.
Following on from that, the leadership, in our view, technically speaking, began to cherry-pick
data to support their case.
There was a problem here because, for instance, Warwickshire had now been left vulnerable to danger in the community and, for example, Bedworth and Loneaton under
the new model, there was an incident yesterday where 134,000 people in this county would have
left without fire cover.
My question is to the portfolio holder currently, is this really the reform Warwickshire asked
for when it came to safety, cutting the cover in our most deprived areas like Bedworth and Loneaton,
hiking costs for taxpayers and treating the county like a scientific guinea pig?
Thank you.
I'd just let you finish that.
Thank you.
Thank you for that.
All right.
We will move on to...
That was a question.
Yes.
That's how it works.
Yeah.
It doesn't answer straight away.
And we'll move on to questions to the portfolio holder.
And I'm sure Mr. Brook will probably be able to assist the portfolio holder, if required, with some extra detail as well.
So we'll move on to item four, which is questions to the portfolio holders relevant to the overview and scrutiny.
Obviously, we've got Dale here today.
So I think it's right...
Yep, I've got you, Nicky.
Thank you.
I think it's right and proper if we go through and ask whether the portfolio holder will be able to respond to that question
and whether Mr. Brooker would want to come in and add on to that as well.
Is that all right, Dale?
Yeah, that'd be perfect.
Yep, I can answer that question.
It all happened before my time.
Basically, this is the most scrutinised project that this council has ever done.
It's been scrutinised more than anything else.
All these questions and more would have been answered during the scrutinised...
They would have went over every scenario possible, you know.
So I think the questions were answered way before my time.
But if you want Ben Brook to answer, you know, in more detail, he's more than welcome to give you...
But it's not fair for the portfolio to be expected to know everything operationally as well as strategically.
So I think that's where the officers do support the portfolio holder.
And that's not just in this council.
It's in all councils throughout the country.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Connor.
Good to see you again.
So just in relation to some of the points you've raised and the question.
Firstly, because we haven't seen this question before, I'm very, very happy to have a chat after OSI or at another time to talk about it in more detail.
Do you want to say, though, that this is not the first time a fire and rescue service has done this?
Every fire and rescue service across the country puts resources where the risk is.
They do this.
They use it.
It's called a community risk management plan.
It's within the national framework document for England, fire and rescue services, where resources are using risk to align them to where they're required most.
Well, the way we've approached it is in line with the National Fire Chief Council standard for community risk management planning.
So it's the national standard for this.
And we've worked in line with that.
We've had the National Fire Chiefs Council and other fire and rescue services and other chiefs review and scrutinise our proposals.
As an overall principle, we average, when activity is highest in the day, 12 fire engines being available.
Under the new model, 14 will be available with four additional fire appliances.
There is no way that an additional two fire engines being guaranteed to be available across the county at all times doesn't make the communities of Warwickshire safer.
We've considered all the points you've raised, Connor, throughout the process.
We've absolutely done that in line with what the portfolio holder has said.
In relation to Nuneaton and Bedworth specifically, the Bedworth on-call fire appliance is currently available on average 16% of the time in the day.
So Nuneaton's fire engines have covered Nuneaton and Bedworth the majority of the time before this changes.
The changes actually took place yesterday, the majority of the changes.
I've visited all of the stations involved in the changes yesterday.
And they were very much looking forward to the future.
And the dynamic cover tool shows that our response times currently are down to nine minutes, which is where we need our response times to be.
I'm afraid you can't come back.
Can I request a source for that information?
You can.
I can't do it now because it's a meeting in public rather than a public meeting.
But if you email me as the chair or the portfolio holder or Mr. Brooker, I'm sure you'll be able to get a response to that.
Thank you.
Again, we're not trying to be awkward, but unfortunately this is the way the protocols work.
It's a meeting in public rather than a public meeting.
And the public is limited to a certain amount of time at the start of the meeting to make a point over.
So it's quite similar to a planning meeting where they have a representation and then they can't speak any other.
But we're not trying to stifle democracy.
This is the way it works, unfortunately.
Well, fortunate in cases and unfortunate in other cases.
Is that right, Caroline?
It's fine.
Councillor Scott, do you want to come in then, please?
You've got a question?
To the portfolio holder?
Yeah, please, yeah.
It is quite a long one, so I'm going to read it out.
So, I understand that this committee has a responsibility to scrutinise HR matters, including absence levels, disciplinaries and grievances, which have previously been reported on.
Given recent events where our most senior officer was very publicly hauled over the coals for a decision that was completely within her remit,
and this despite the fact that she has been appointed within a thorough recruitment process,
can the portfolio holders reassure myself and other councillors that officers will not be subject to bullying and harassment in the workplace,
especially those from the LBGQT community and those outside of that community who are feeling anxious and concerned by the rhetoric peddled against them in the last few days.
By peddling such rhetoric, levels of absence and stress will have inevitably risen amongst officers,
leaving the council at risk of reduced productivity, an increase in short and long-term absences,
and potentially even tribunal claims, which will stretch our budgets even further.
For clarity, I will repeat my question to the portfolio holders.
Can the portfolio holders reassure myself and other councillors that officers will not be subject to bullying and harassment in the workplace at Warwickshire County Council?
I think that question needs to be going to Cabinet when all the portfolio holders are here.
Thank you.
Thank you. I do have 20 years senior HR experience.
I would recommend you, and all other councillors, should acquaint themselves with the Equality Act 2010,
enshrined in UK law, especially in relation to protected characteristics.
Of course I will.
Thank you, Councillor Clark.
I think the question will be in the minutes when to Andy.
And it will be asked to, before we're done, to Cabinet for a response, if that's suitable.
Thank you.
But there will be much of a public record there.
Any other questions to...
Oh, yes, Councillor McCullough, sorry, I do apologise.
You did indicate...
I've written your name there, but then I got distracted.
So then Councillor Curtis, then, please.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I also have a question for the portfolio holder for customer and localities.
I know he's not here today.
In fact, only one of the three portfolio holders have made it in today.
I want to ask my question anyway, and then we'll see where we go.
Maybe the only portfolio holder that has come in today might be able to answer it.
So it does follow on from Councillor Scott's question.
With the recent local elections and the recent resignation of the leader, there has been a lot of change for staff to contend with.
As the portfolio holder responsible for HR, what are you doing to support staff during this period of uncertainty?
That's a great question.
Can I get back to you on that?
Is there any officer who would like to come in from an officer point of view, how staff are being supported?
Well, in general, really, but if there's anything they would like to comment upon?
Mr Powell, I'm sorry for putting you under.
Changes of administration are the day job for officers.
We're ensuring that staff are working closely with new counselors from all groups.
And we've got a very extensive well-being offer for staff, should they need it at any time.
And we regularly remind staff of the availability of the support that we offer at all times.
Want to follow up on that, Councillor?
I do.
And I do appreciate Mr Powell's reply.
But could I get an answer, perhaps, either through Cabinet or in writing from the portfolio holder?
Again, if you do the similar to what, in relation to Councillor Scott's question, we'll be able to have something, it'll be a formal record, and we'll be able to get a response back.
No, thank you.
I've worked as a local government officer for 30-plus years, and, you know, straight from school, as you can tell.
And officers are quite resilient, too, when it comes to changes, but it doesn't mean to say we have to accept any potential behavior that's not appropriate.
So, I did almost knew the answer anyway from Mr Powell that there are lots of support mechanisms in place to help officers.
But, again, as counselors, we've got a duty to point out any inappropriate behavior towards officers who may not be able to respond back in the way that they would hope to be able to.
So, I think that is important, but, again, we've got something in writing, so if members are happy with that.
And there's been a previous portfolio holder, and it is good that we can get as many portfolio holders to these meetings, because it does make sense.
But sometimes it's not always possible to get them to come to the meetings due to various different reasons as well.
So, I always tried to get to as many as possible, but didn't necessarily have 100% attendance rate when it comes to these extra meetings.
So, I've rumbled on. So, Councillor Curtis, I hope you've still got your question and you haven't forgotten it.
That microphone is programmed to proceed along where you were.
So, would you mind logging into the microphone that can...
Thank you, Chair.
It's more a comment, if I may, on the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
Item two that we looked at today were the principles of effective scrutiny, which I think unanimously were welcomed by everyone in the room.
And then, Chair, you further said that Overview and Scrutiny is about holding Cabinet to account.
I would like it minuted that the purpose of these meetings is to hold the Cabinet member for their portfolios to account in a public place.
That cannot be achieved by asking officers to write responses on their behalf.
Officers are not the responsible decision-makers, and a written response does not allow for questioning in public.
With only one out of the three portfolio holders present here today, members of the public may be forgiven for thinking that this administration is actually trying to avoid scrutiny.
I would like that minuted. Thank you, Chair.
Yeah, it will be minuted. I would like to come back. Obviously, I'm not part of the administration, and I do believe it's our responsibility, our strong responsibility, to hold the Cabinet to account and scrutinise effectively.
And there's the whole point. That's the name of what it says on the tin, doesn't it? Scrutiny.
That's part of our remit. Like I say, sometimes members can't come, and sometimes I do believe a portfolio can be supported by an officer during the meeting when it adds weight to the question to get a more meaningful response.
So, I'm sort of like in between on that. So, I do take the point, and we've got it minuted as well, so I think it's fair.
But I think there's other sides as well to the argument as well.
So, I think we could encourage as many portfolio holders to attend.
We can't really demand, and I don't like, you know, I'm an awkward person, and when somebody tells me something or demands something, it tends to send me the other way.
But we could strongly request that we, as many as possible, attend as often as possible.
And sometimes, when there's a complicated question, it's not possible to get a full answer.
I would ask, if we do have a written question, a question, that any responses back are then attached to the minutes.
So, they, again, become a public record.
So, we're being open and transparent, and then if members of the public did want to see those questions, they will be available.
Are members happy with that?
It's, Caroline, are we, I'm not going part of our next-side standing orders, and we go, right, I'll bring you back.
I assume we've got a supplementary, then I'll bring Councillor Scott back in there.
It's simply a question that overview and scrutiny cannot, in my view, function effectively unless the portfolio holders are present, to be questioned, in a public forum.
So, perhaps it's simply a question of trying to organise the overview and scrutiny committees around the portfolio holders' availability.
I appreciate that, you know, if there are other diary clashes, it may not always be possible, but I think perhaps with judicious use of diaries in advance, we could maximise the possibility.
Thank you, Chair.
We will try and use the best options available to maximise attendance from all members of the community and portfolio holders.
So, I think that's best.
Councillor Scott, please.
Just picking up a little bit on your point and your response.
So, I presume if we are, if I will get a written response to my original question, and indeed the one subsequently, that we may be able to ask about them again in the following committee, if we do not feel that the answer has been adequate.
Yes.
Okay.
I do have another totally unrelated question, if that's any help.
Yeah.
Can I just bring Councillor Brown in?
Did you, because you've asked the question, I'd just like to spread them out.
So, Councillor Brown, please.
Yes, thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
I really like the look of the fire report.
The fire and rescue report looks fantastic.
I've got 57 years' experience in the public sector.
Most of that is as an operational planner in the fire service, not the fire service, but with the fire service.
In the police service, part of the London liaison panel for emergency services.
And I was part of an investigation for the Bradford fire.
I was part of an investigation for the King's Cross fire.
I've seen a fire plan for Grenfell Tower.
None of those plans actually lasted the first five minutes of contact with the fire.
Are you happy that this fire plan is going to work?
Yes, I believe it is.
I've asked Ben Brook on a number of occasions to basically keep the reports up to date at the end of the first year, after December,
to just to show that the numbers are working the way they should be.
And I believe in it.
Thank you.
Do you want to come back, Councillor Brown?
I'm happy you believe in it, and obviously we'll tell with time.
Unfortunately, we're putting people in south-west Warwickshire at risk, and they are not very happy with the plan.
Councillor Brown, you can raise a point.
I think the ultimate arbiter will be HMICFRS, who will be doing the inspection.
You know, they have the ones that the government rely on to do these things,
and they're not all shy in letting people know their opinions.
So they are the ultimate arbiter.
You know, we can put our points for them.
I think the ultimate arbiter will be the coroner, unfortunately.
And, well, we could say that.
I'm slightly disappointed with that comment, to be fair.
We can say that about anything in life.
Whatever decision we make in life can have an impact.
And I don't think that type of use of language is probably appropriate to it.
I think we have to be calm and collected when we are responding, when we are scrutinising it.
And that's the whole point of being effective and standing back.
And I'm sure Councillor Scott will be effective in standing back and calling Calculative with our next question, please.
Thank you.
I'm not entirely sure who the best person is to write it at, so I will direct it at the portfolio holder,
but I appreciate he may need support with the answer.
Given the increasing impact of climate change on our county, visibly demonstrated within the last two weeks with the heat waves,
as well as some shocking house fires that have happened here in recent months,
can you please provide data about fire call-out levels so far this spring and summer in comparison to last spring and summer?
Thank you.
Can you clarify the question?
Is it call-out response?
I'm not sure what your...
So, in essence, have the number of call-outs increased due to the rising temperatures of our county?
Brilliant.
No, that's great.
Thank you.
That's nice and clear.
That is definitely a question for Ben Brooke there.
Yeah, thanks for the question.
We can get you exact figures.
What I can tell you is that, on average, Warwickshire Fire and Rescue Service does about 4,500 emergency incidents.
That's what we attend each year.
The incidents we attend are absolutely weather-related.
So, in warmer periods, we have more incidents in different times of the year, storms, flooding, those type of things.
So, absolutely, there is a seasonal trend.
Fires have actually reduced by about 40% over the last 20 years across the sector.
And we're now attending more of other types of incidents.
Very recently, I've had a report around actually what the increase is.
And a lot of the increase, actually, for Warwickshire Fire and Rescue Service is assisting other agencies,
usually forced entry on behalf of the ambulance or other services.
So, that's where we're seeing the biggest increase.
But very happy to share more data with you outside of this meeting.
Thank you.
That would be really interesting.
In terms of those other incidences, would they majoritively be flood-related?
So, the highest increase we've had is in allowing assistance to other agencies.
That's forced entry, generally.
Flood-related incidents will be on the increase.
They tend to be, again, evacuating people from properties.
In relation to flooding, we generally can't move the water from one place to another because it floods somewhere else.
So, it will be in relation to evacuating people.
So, that will have increased.
I can get the exact figures.
Thank you.
Mr Curtis, please.
Thank you, Chair.
Can I move on to the Treasury Management and Investment Outturn reports, or should that wait?
I think it would probably be better to wait.
We're still on questions to the portfolio holders.
We're coming to the end of the time, anyway.
It is a question to the portfolio holder in absentia.
Well.
To Councillor Shaw.
Yeah, probably it might be better now because the officer will be producing a report
for the Treasury Management.
So, you might be able to get a fair response.
But, again, we can go on the principle that we've been doing for the previous few questions
that we can minute the question and send it to the portfolio holder for a response as well.
It's a pretty short question.
On page 64 of the papers, if I can just find it.
Yes.
The Treasury Investments income amounted to $16.77 million compared to a budget of $4.9 million.
I mean, that's obviously welcome.
But I wonder if the portfolio holder could look at what the previous year's estimate and outturn was
and see if there is some way.
I mean, obviously, that surplus is very welcome indeed.
But I wonder if there's a way that we can, the portfolio holder could look into seeing how we can budget
for invested income more accurately in future.
Yeah, I don't think that's an unreasonable question.
Obviously, the markets are quite volatile.
And I know in your other role at another council, you've probably been through similar things.
What I'd also be interested, again, is the benchmarking of how we're performing against other authorities
and how we're performing against the markets as well, which I think is reasonable.
But, again, I don't think that's an unreasonable question to ask the portfolio holder.
Are you OK, Robert, or do you want to come on with this one?
Well, we'd have covered that when I introduced the report.
Oh, sorry.
So maybe I'll pick it up when I do that, under that item.
Future councillor Curtis.
Any more questions to the portfolio holder?
I think we're coming to the end of the time.
Obviously, it's our first meeting in the new administration of the scrutiny committee.
Definitely some learning points.
We can request...
We can look at timetables of an attendance.
We can also potentially put questions in advance where we can get probably a better response.
We've got some items that we can put back in the minutes
and request to the Cabinet to look at these things.
But I think for a first go is the new committee with question time.
I think we've covered quite a few areas, some quite a few questions,
and I'm sure the process will evolve over the next few months as well.
So I think that's pretty positive.
Yeah, Dan, we have a question for you.
It's just about Mike Bannister, Councillor Mike Bannister,
who wants to answer your question.
He's actually at the LGA today, so up north.
So he's getting put in that at the minute.
So I just wanted it on record.
I've got your last question.
I'm sure that the Lib Dems will say the same as me.
We have councillors that should be on this committee at that same place,
but they did nominate a substitute.
Yeah, unfortunately, it's difficult to nominate a substitute for portfolio holders.
Yeah.
No, that's why you can't nominate a substitute for a portfolio holder.
So, yeah, unfortunately.
It's like the Cabinet.
You wouldn't have a substitute portfolio holder if the Cabinet member couldn't attend.
Sometimes the original portfolio holder wouldn't mind a substitute in their place,
especially if it's a contentious meeting, but unfortunately, that's not the case, I'm afraid.
That's right, isn't it, Caroline?
Good, I like it.
It's when the legal people tell me I'm right here.
I'm not used to being told I'm right, so I have to make the most of it.
So, thank you for that.
Next item.
Now we've moved on to item number five is the Resources Directorate Custom Feedback Report.
It's on page 15 of the agenda, which will be, yeah, that makes sense.
And I believe Ruth Rollins, the Service Manager for Customer Relations, will be introducing this report.
Hello, Ruth.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you for coming here today.
So, the report provides an overview of compliments, complaints and comments received by the Resources Directorate and Fire Service.
So, the key highlights is we've had a new feedback system implemented in January 2024, which is improving complaint handling, categorisation and reporting.
Overall, for the whole council, the trends are complaints have decreased by 43%, compliments have increased by 43%, and comments have increased by 89%.
Just to give some explanation behind that, there's a notable drop in complaints and a rise in comments, largely due to two factors.
Firstly, the improved functionality of the system, which now allows us to recategorise feedback at the point of contact.
And the second factor is training for my team to be able to act on that and recategorise at the point of first contact.
That new training does align with the new Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code.
We have done some benchmarking, as previously requested by the committee.
Warwickshire's complaints per 100,000 residents have dropped from 246 in 2023 to now 141, 24, 25.
If we go down to the Resources Directorate, complaints have increased from 187 last year to 188, so some stability there.
Compliments have increased from 10 to 83, and comments have increased from 17 to 292.
For the Fire and Rescue Service, complaints have increased from 1 to 3, compliments have increased from 0 to 4, and comments have remained the same, one last year and one this year.
In terms of the top categories, so what's complained about most, council service standards is at the top of 43%, communication is second with 14, and staff conduct at 14.
In terms of whether we're hitting our time scales, Resources Directorate, 71% of complaints are now completed within time scale, and Fire and Rescue, 50% of complaints are now completed within time scale.
The remedies, which is how we make sure we put things right.
For the Resources Directorate, an explanation provided was the 79%, an apology accounts for 12%, and the service provided accounts for 8%.
For the Fire and Rescue Service, for the Fire and Rescue Service, 100% were closed with an explanation.
Outcomes given to complaints, this is where they are upheld, partially upheld or not upheld.
The top one is upheld by 43 complaints, partially upheld 36%.
Lessons learned this year include web page updates, to now have dates added to web pages, so people know the information is relevant.
Complaint remedies, applied at stage one, for all upheld complaint points, is now something of a good standard.
And improved accessibility, so we have recently launched a sign live, a 24-7 British sign language interpreting service, to ensure the deaf and harder hearing people can contact the customer service centre by phone.
We have got some planned improvements going forward, which is to bring the complaints policy for Warwickshire, completely in line with the new Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code, training on letter writing and complaint resolution, and continued system and process enhancements.
I know that was a whistle-top stop tour, but yeah.
Questions?
Thank you.
Ketra McCullough, so you can open on this one for us, please.
Thank you.
I have a couple of questions, if I may.
So, I had the pleasure of hearing from the children and young people over the New Scrutiny, the same report, but focused on that, so I probably have a bit of more insight in it.
But I wanted to ask, the reassignment of cases, is that traffic of reassignment from complaint to comment, mostly?
Or do you also see that comments are reclassified, for example, as complaints or compliments?
Is the traffic in every direction?
The traffic is in every direction, but the main traffic is from complaint to comment.
The new handling code gives us a clear, is this the first alert?
Are you asking us to reconsider a decision?
If they're asking us to reconsider that first decision, we're putting that through as a comment now, whereas before, everything would have just been a complaint.
So, the main traffic, but we do change them from a comment into a compliment is another one where we, a customer, will think it's a comment, but actually it's a compliment.
So, yeah, there's traffic all over.
Okay, thank you, if I may carry on.
That's very good.
Do we have the data on how many are being reclassified?
I'm just thinking that that would be like a test of the policy.
So, we're testing that we're carrying out the policy correctly.
So, yeah, perhaps answer that one before we go on.
Well, we've recently looked into where we're sending it and the services disagree with our decision.
It looks about 7% of where the services are saying.
So, there is some work, perhaps, that we need to do on that, but that's not a massive error rate at the moment, considering we've only introduced that recently.
In terms of, I think we need to sort of re-educate the customer on what a complaint is, because they will say, I want to complain.
It's for us as a team then to go back and say, this is the part that we're using to say, this is, give us a chance to fix it.
If we don't, within timescale, then this is a complaint.
Specifically, then, on that point, from a customer point of view, if they've complained, it doesn't matter what we think internally, that it's not a complaint, it's a comment.
In their eyes, it's a complaint.
So, there would be a value in knowing how many complaints are coming in versus how many are reclassified as complaints.
We could do that, but that would be a manual count-up.
We may be able to get that for you for next year, perhaps, but at the moment, they come in as a blank, so the customer will say, feedback, complaint.
We may be able to get you where we change it to a comment.
We can have a look at that.
Yeah, we can have a look at it for you.
That's fine.
Mr Powell, do you want to come in, please?
Yeah, I just want to expand a bit on the framing of this, because actually we were over-recording previously.
We were not accurate in our recording complaints, because we didn't have the system and the data we now do.
So, there's not a cottage industry of changing the classification of things.
We've got a complaints policy signed off by members, and we work to that, but we classify accurately in terms of the nature of what's coming in.
So, nobody who's complained under our definition should have their contact with us classified in any other way, and I just want to be clear, because I don't want anybody listening or in the room to think that we're doing anything gun-toward with classification of what's coming in.
We're actually doing it better, a lot better, than we ever did before.
I think that's quite important, because my point is, on page 33, regarding item number four, benchmarking, I think we have to make sure when we are doing benchmarking with other local authorities, we're comparing apples and apples.
So, we have a consistent policy around complaints, comments, et cetera, that has fallen in with our peer group that we're benchmarking in, because if we're doing something different, it makes the benchmarking exercise irrelevant.
So, I think that's an important point.
We ensure our benchmarking is comparing apples with apples, rather than apples with pears.
So, I think that's quite reassuring them that we are doing that.
Now, what potentially I would have liked to see, and again, this is not a real complaint, it's more of a comment, you'll get used to these, Councillor McAllister, these bad puns.
It would be nice to see in the complaints received per 100,000 residents, 23, 24, whether we could add the table to see what they were in 22, 23.
So, we've got a little bit of a, where we can compare how they're doing compared to previous years.
It might not be possible because of the reclassifications, but again, if we can have a pattern of how we're doing, to see whether any improvement was a one-off, or was a consistent improvement over a number of years.
Yeah, time to come back on that, please, Ruth.
Just to reiterate what Rob says, we weren't classifying properly in the previous years, so if we went back, I don't know if it would be a true reflection of where we are now, when we are classifying the right things of the right things.
So, yeah, that's good, so 23, 24 can be our base year then, and then from now on, if we can do, and then from this time next year, we'll have 23, 24, and then 24, 25, so I'll start the process.
No worries.
Is that okay, members, happy with that? Good stuff.
Can I ask the Scott, please?
You mentioned that 14% of the complaints were regarding staff.
We have, I haven't got that, but I can probably get that to you.
Yeah, I wouldn't know that offhand.
That would be great, thank you.
No worries.
No worries.
No, I'm still on to it.
I appreciate some of them.
It's difficult, and it's personal, so just the percentage would be great.
Thank you.
Brilliant, thank you for that.
Could we be councillor, please?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah, hi, thank you for that, I appreciate it.
So my question is, I'm quite new to this group, I just joined this week, actually, but in terms of the trend, particularly around the service standards, it seems to be going one way.
It's been going up in terms of the overall share of complaints being from service standards point of view.
So what are we doing to combat that?
That would need to be held locally by services.
We will provide lessons learnt, but in terms of the actual improvements driven, that would be operationally by the services.
So I don't know if anyone's here from the services in particular, whether Rob?
I mean, we look at the trends from complaints.
Not every complaint about a service standard is upheld.
So where we feel there's been a problem or there's a pattern, we would use that data to drive improvement, and certainly I expect the directors in my directorate to be on top of this and, you know, looking proactively for those improvements, and I'm confident that they are.
But I could only give a general answer to a question like that.
But I think our culture is very strong in terms of looking for continuous improvement, which, of course, we're legally bound to do.
I have a follow-up, if that's okay.
Thank you.
Could that breakdown be shared?
I mean, it's 82, isn't it, I think, the number?
I've got the report here.
It infringed me, actually.
It's 82, I think, in that category.
Because to understand, again, someone who's, you know, not...
I've worked in complaints before, actually, as my first job, funnily enough.
But in this sort of area, so what's constituting in 82?
Is it a particular type of complaint?
Is it a trend, as I said before, that we should deal with?
Yeah, right, yeah.
Thank you.
Just to stay, with resources, my team operate within this directorate, and my team will take over the Stage 2s and the Stage 3s.
So, although we will count as service standards, it may be a children's complaint.
It could be another services complaint.
We could get that to you, if you'd like, which directorate are upheld against service standards.
Yeah.
Is that your request, Councillor?
That'll be great, yeah, thank you.
Thank you.
We've got much going to be in the minutes as well, so thank you for that.
Any other questions?
Councillor Wayne, please.
Thank you.
The chart on page 17, headed total WCC feedback cases, appears to show a welcome reduction in the total number.
If you add the complaints and comments together, it seems to have reduced over five years quite substantially.
Is this reflected in the level of resources which have to be allocated towards dealing with complaints and comments?
I think the resources in terms of dealing with complaints has remained pretty static.
I'm not sure that would be the indicator for the downward trend.
I would hope and suggest that it was service improvements made at service level that are leading now,
and the learnings from complaints have been implemented and leaning to reduce numbers.
Thank you.
Can you come in, please?
Yeah, thank you.
And just to carry on with Sansa as well, the years covered COVID and the aftermath of COVID as well,
so complaints, comments, feedback were high naturally as a response to the pandemic response as well.
That's also a reason why we've seen the trend come down.
Thank you.
Any other comments before I come in?
I've seen the report that we're getting richer data from the comments and the contacts about how our services are perceived and the patterns in complaints.
And it said we're using it to improve our services.
Can you just give us some examples of how the comments and complaints have been used to improve our services, please?
I'd say from, I can only talk from my direct point of view, but we've had training on neurodiversity that has been from a complaint.
Cross-team working has now been identified as an area that we've had lessons learned and cross-working on complaints.
So, a customer that touches different directorates, we've took that on board and now that works more smoothly.
In terms of what we need to do, there's still a bit of, like, we need to make sure we align with the handling code.
The main lessons learned, though, that drive improvements will be dealt with by the operational services on the ground.
We give them that information and they will do that.
I can only talk from my little team, for want of a better word, and give you an overview of the data.
That's brilliant. Thank you.
Any other comments on this?
Brilliant. Thank you, Ruth.
You must have answered all the questions, and thank you for your intervention, Mr. Cusack, as well.
That's very helpful.
Right.
And next item on the agenda is the Year-End Integrated Performance Report.
It begins on page 39.
And we've already mentioned Mr. Cusack, Director of Inaiop and Services, and he will be introducing this report.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
Good afternoon, Councillors.
I'm here to introduce, as the Chair said, the performance year-end report.
I'm planning to take about three minutes if I can.
It being the first meeting of the cycle, I'll explain a little bit more about some of the context behind the information and hopefully highlight areas that the committee may wish to consider.
I'll endeavour to answer any questions we can in the committee, but as per previous items, there's directors also around me who may be able to provide more information should you require it.
I'm also joined by my expert colleague, Vanessa, who will be able to dive into any data or detail you want.
We also have the Power BI platform, should you want to, after the session, dive into that and see the detail there.
The report you have is the year-end for the County Council's performance, covering April 24 to March 25.
It evaluates our progress and performance against the Council delivery plan, performance against key business measures, and looks at financial information and risk management across services under this committee's remit.
That means that we're looking at progress of 18 council delivery plan, activities, 19 KBMs, financial performance, and the strategic service level risk for those services.
Some highlights and good performance, if I may share with committee members.
So, of the CDP, 89% of the 18 activities were on track, with 11% covered in the previous quarter.
KBMs, 68% of the 19 were on track by year-end, showing improvement from previous quarters.
I appreciate the committee was not formed at that point, but I'm just comparing it to the previous cycle.
Financial managements, who had a net revenue underspend of 2.6 million, which was circa 3% under budget.
100% of our savings delivery in the services covered.
But we have been transparent about the capital programme delays.
You may find those in section 4.1.
We have 16 service level risks covered in this report, and they're actively monitored.
Six strategic risks directly relate to this committee, including workforce capacity, cyber attack, and governance failures.
There may be areas you wish to question.
I wouldn't want to stay in members, but the areas I would highlight is for information, the percent variation of revenue savings against the MTFS, staff absence, and also risk exposure.
There are some persistent strategic risks with which we're aware of and monitoring.
But with that, councillor and chair, thank you very much.
I'll pass back to you for comments and questions.
All right, anybody want to shout at once?
Any other key highlights?
Okay, I'll try and fill the gap then before somebody comes in with a question.
I noticed that the over-underspend on the budgets were particularly close on most of the occasions.
Again, I'll assume that it was part of various different ongoing control measures, perhaps Mr Powell might come in as well, to ensure that any measures are taken to respond to potential overspends reported out through the year.
Yeah, just wonder about the process, about that for our newer members in particular.
If I may, then I'm fortunate that Mr Powell is my boss, so I'll defer to him at a certain point.
I can certainly say that for the leadership team, of which I'm a member of, so that's directors and executive directors, financial management is something we cover every week and formally monthly in our meetings.
We review our forecasts with our team members, and we introduce spend controls, which the finance team and Mr Powell reported back to corporate board and to us,
making sure that we were within, if you like, the guide rails of where spending should be within the limits set by our budget.
That's my view, I'll pass them as Mr Powell as Section 151 to pass you on further in from me.
You didn't quite get that right, Craig, you should have said, Mr Powell, my wonderful boss, and that would certainly be good for your performance.
Every day's a school day, Chair, I'll learn.
That's it. Anyway, Mr Powell.
Thank you. Yeah, the directors are expected to be truthful at all times, so I'm sure Craig wouldn't have said that.
Yeah, I mean, you'll probably know we hit real difficulties with the budget during the first quarter of last financial year.
We had a forecast overspend of about £47 million.
We implemented a comprehensive financial recovery strategy, which we had planned long in advance of that eventuality, knowing it was a risk, and there were a number of elements to that.
I think what this report shows you is how successful that was in mitigating the pressures that we had.
One big part of it was the very sensible way we budget for Treasury management income, which I will come back to on the relevant item, but that picks up Councillor Curtis's question.
We treat a certain amount of that as windfall, which helps us in year.
We've had to rely on the statutory override on SEND.
We implemented stringent financial controls, which apply to this day, and brought down our spending in year very significantly, particularly in my directorate, where we were able to take about £2.5 million off our spend in the year.
Not easy and not without consequence and not necessarily sustainable, but we did it, and other parts of the council did extremely well in mitigating their overspends or containing those overspends in the face of some shockingly high levels of demand.
So that was a very deliberate strategy.
It's brought us back down to within our plus or minus 2% tolerance, and we have reserves to manage that sort of variation, but £47 million we couldn't have covered.
And so I think the council did extremely well for bringing it back as far as we did, but it was quite a big strategic approach that we took, and certainly all of the services in the remit of this committee pulled their weight and more.
A question on 3.4 in terms of the absence.
Is that everybody within the council?
So that's education and everybody else?
Okay.
And then...
I haven't answered, sorry.
I was rude.
I was just nodding you.
That's okay.
I'll accept a nod.
And just secondly, I mean, obviously, it's not changed much unless you take out the people that have already left the organisation.
This does go back to my original comment to the portfolio holder, but I will be interested to see next quarter's results and to see if any actions have resulted in an increase in absence.
Anybody who wants to come back on that one?
We monitor absence really closely.
So what we have at an operational level, just for elected members' comfort really, is we have a dashboard of live sickness and welfare measures.
I know certainly my team and all my colleagues around me, we monitor that with our teams literally daily.
And we have active management of those on short-term and long-term.
And I can certainly say from my own directorate, but I may want to come in at an organisational level, those figures are moving in the right direction because of the very, very close support we give to our staff in all circumstances.
I'm confident that our teams and our support services in HRD are helping us get that down.
It is difficult at the moment just because of the circumstances we work in with high demand, high pressure.
I think Mr. Powell said that the colleagues and the teams we work with are highly resilient.
But we are monitoring it really closely.
I wonder if Ms. Jacob would like to come and just back it up at an organisational level.
Okay.
Afternoon, everybody.
So, yes, just following on from what Craig just said, we've been supporting the organisation in this space quite rigorously, particularly with attending directorate leadership teams, meetings.
So, my team have been attending those meetings to give more support and guidance and steer in terms of what they can and can't do, what they should be looking at and what support mechanisms can be put in place to bring people back.
And, yes, we are, in my own function, in my service area, my employee relations team have split into a dedicated resource looking at absence specifically and supporting the organisation.
So, rather than just, rather than where they'd be more generic and looking at employee relations across, what we've done is taken a few people out to specifically support on absence management to give that support to the organisation.
With the aim to bring in the percentage and days down.
Thank you.
Ms. McCaster, please.
Thank you.
My questions are around resourcing at risk.
Oh, sorry.
Yeah, my questions are around resourcing at risk.
I am substituting for Councillor Boat, so I feel I ought to ask some questions about this.
So, I'm looking at page 54, where there's the on track, not on track, and I see that there's the percentage of times a fast appliance arrives at life risk of property incidents within agreed response standards, is not on track, and is declining.
Is that the old measure, or is that the new measure?
I'm new to this, but I know there's a new measure coming.
I just wanted clarity on that first, if I may.
It's the old measure.
Okay, thank you.
Is the new measure available yet?
And if not, when will it be?
Mr. Brooke will be able to answer that one.
Yeah, thanks for your question.
So, this is a backward-looking report, so the new measure was as of the 1st of April, so that will come in into the next reporting cycle around that.
So, that's what we'll be looking at.
Okay, that's good, because there will be some sort of baseline data there, because am I right in thinking that the resource at risk is an 18-month implementation, so is it due to end at the end of this year?
So, resource at risk is about 90% implemented now.
The final next steps are as of the 1st of December, which is just changes, really, to one station, which is Kennewuth, and then the removal of a few on-call units in the day at that point in time.
So, we will start seeing the performance improve from next year, the 1st of January.
What we've got is a performance dashboard that's been developed and can be brought into this room.
What that looks at is we had four challenges that we're trying to resolve through Resourcing to Risk.
One of those was response times, so you'll see the annual and what that looked like, looking backwards and forwards.
The second one was around the number of resources we have available day and night, so you'll be able to see that.
The third element was around on-call availability, and it will show our five night-time on-call available resources, how much they're available.
And the final one will be around our unlawful shift systems, so there'll be a performance dashboard that gives you a benchmark from today, moving forward and looks forward,
and gives you absolute clarity on whether we've achieved the four challenges we were trying to overcome.
Thank you.
In the reply to the public speaker, you mentioned something about nine minutes.
that you're seeing an improvement and it's nine minutes.
Is nine minutes old measure, nine minutes new measure, and how come you've got data and we haven't got data?
Yeah, thank you.
So the old measure is that we'll respond to life and property incidents within 10 minutes on 75% of occasions.
The new measure is a 10-minute mean average.
What I was talking to is we've got now a dynamic cover tool, which we'll be showing you on the 15th of July.
So if you're coming to the Fire and Rescue Service Open Day, which I hope members are, we'll be able to show you that there.
That gives me a live picture of where all our fire engines are, because we've got automatic vehicle location now as well.
It shows their position and the impact that has on our response times.
So our current response times across the county is a mean average is nine minutes and 12 seconds, which is under that standard.
And if I, Vanessa, can I just ask you a point about Power BI, that members will be able to access this information currently
for Power BI if they had logged in and chosen to do so. Is that correct?
The new framework is being built as we speak, so it'll be available in August with all the new data,
and we're collecting the current data against the new performance management framework now.
And the plug is to make sure people attend on the 15th of July at Leamington Fire Station at 2 o'clock, 1.30, sometime anyway.
It's been an email to you.
Yeah. So 15th of July, and it's better to be early in to be late to that one or not.
Do you have a follow-up then, Kessler?
Yeah, I have one more last one. Sorry.
Will the new measures that I've just mentioned will be available,
will they also report the range of attendance times that make up the mean average?
Yeah, sorry, Vanessa.
Yeah, so what's been agreed up until this point is that there'll be an annual report that comes into the OSC
that shows all the outliers, because we absolutely understand that there'll be a group in the middle that hit that,
and then there'll be some outliers.
There are at the moment.
We've got a Power BI dashboard, actually, that enables us to look at all of those outliers,
and we investigate every single one where it's involving life and property.
We haven't got within the response time.
But what's been decided at previous OSCs, and it's up to this group and through the chair,
where I want you to do, there'll be an annual report that comes to this group,
talking about all of those and coming from the Power BI dashboard.
But I'm very happy to share that Power BI dashboard with you if you want to come and meet and talk about that.
But we're not trying to hide anything at all.
Councillor Curtis.
Sorry.
Trying to multitask there, weren't you?
Yeah, I'm trying to do some sums at the same time.
Thank you very much, Kerry.
I'm just looking at page 59, the management of finance table.
And I'm just...
Maths was never my strong point at school.
But I'm just...
I assume the approved budget, the total is a total.
Forecast spend total is a total.
Underspend, overspend...
But a couple of these don't seem to quite add up.
So I'm just wondering, so looking at the final column,
is the 2.9% an average of the five figures above?
This is an integrated report.
We have finance colleagues that actually put this together.
I can get an answer for you, because I don't know that detail, I'm afraid.
Fine, because...
So columns one, two and three, the bottom figure stacks up.
I think the investment fund, that stacks up.
But some of the others don't actually add up
or average out of the figures in the final column...
In the final line, sorry.
More than happy to look at it, councillor.
I am an ex-maths teacher,
and I'm not going to put my head on the line for that.
Mr Cowell is indicating...
I'm an ex-Viola player, so I refer to your superior number.
The figure of the 2.9% negative variance is 2.608 divided by the budget,
which is 90.805, and it is correct.
So, Robbie, it's not an average?
It's not an average, no.
Fine, thank you very much.
Yeah.
Brilliant.
Any more maths teachers?
Does, you know, we want to come in or, you know?
No?
Good, good.
Thank you for that.
Any more questions on that?
I'll be happy to move on.
Have I missed anybody?
Shout if I have.
No?
Good.
This is a good sign.
So, well, now I'll move on to item number seven.
I think there might be a question for Mr Powell
from Councillor Curtis on this one.
Mr Powell, do you want to introduce the report
that begins on page 63 of our papers?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Yeah.
We operate, as you'll know,
to a treasury management and an investment strategy,
which are agreed at the Council's annual budget day,
and that is subject to reporting twice a year to Cabinet,
once mid-year and once of the year-end outturn,
and similarly to this overview and scrutiny committee,
you'll probably...
So, this is one of those reports.
It went to Cabinet in June,
and it's the year-end for 2024-25.
Treasury management, investment management,
non-treasury investments is unseen,
often unheralded work,
but with very high consequences if it goes wrong,
and we're very lucky, and Chris Beckley,
who's on my right,
and their teams who do a first-class job
looking after our money.
Treasury management is the management of our cash balances.
That's essentially making sure we have enough money
to meet our needs,
pay our dues as and when we need to.
It's about cash flow.
We have a very, very low tolerance to risk
in terms of treasury management,
as you would expect,
and we prioritise in this order
security, liquidity,
and then yield.
So, it is more important
that the money is secure
and that we can get at it when we need it
than it is to maximise returns,
although we seek to maximise returns
as far as we can.
The non-treasury investments
are more accepting of risk.
They relate to service objectives and outcomes,
and typically they see much higher returns
than treasury activities,
but they are much smaller in nature,
and all of this ties in with our capital strategy,
capital framework,
and capital budget.
So, that's just a little bit of an introduction
in terms of what we do,
how we do it,
and why we do that.
Obviously, borrowing is in there.
All of our borrowing by statute
has to relate to investment,
capital investment.
We're a growing county.
We have huge demand for investment,
and many of the demands
that we have to meet
by our capital investment
are statutory in nature as well.
Not all, but some.
And that's all governed
by the prudential framework,
which is set by the Chartered Institute
for Public Finance and Accountancy.
So, there is a huge amount of governance
and control around that,
which does occupy a fair number of pages
in the report, quite rightly,
so that you can see how we're getting on
against the prudential indicators
that we set for those purposes.
Treasury management is more challenging
than usual at the moment
because of the impact of special educational needs
and disabilities deficits,
which are a national problem.
We are not unusual,
but it is an enormous challenge,
and by a significant distance,
the biggest financial challenge
facing this council.
And one of the many impacts
of those deficits relates to cash flow.
So, again, members probably know
that the government has allowed councils
to effectively ignore the deficits
for the purposes of budget setting
by applying a statutory override
so that those deficits
are not seen on balance sheets.
That is a very unusual accounting practice,
and there is a good reason
why it's unusual,
because what that means
is that our real cash balances
are very much lower
as a result of those deficits.
So, while the budget might be able to be set,
there are indirect costs
from the treasury management income
that we lose
by not having the cash there to invest,
and because there are risks
of pulling forward borrowing
sooner than we would otherwise
have needed to do,
as opposed to using internal balances
for capital investment purposes,
which is the most efficient way
we can do that.
So, that does complicate it,
and it will make it even more difficult
as each passing month goes by.
All of that said,
I think it's a really positive report.
The performance of our treasury management team
was exceptionally strong last year.
We generated nearly £14 million
above the £5 million budgeted amount.
And we are very, very prudent
when we set the budgets.
Coming back to your question,
Councillor Curtis,
treasury management income
can go up as well as down.
And the last thing that you want to do
is set a budget too optimistically
and then have to make savings elsewhere.
And it is more prudent,
in my judgment,
to take a degree of windfall.
And certainly that was a significant factor
in the financial recovery strategy
last year.
It does play into our budget
because we do forecast.
We have a very detailed balance sheet model,
so we know what our treasury management costs
are going to be,
even if we don't budget for them recurrently,
if you see what I mean.
So, we do set the budget
based on what we think we're going to need
for treasury management purposes
and generate.
And you'll also see in there
the various non-treasury investments,
particularly in our property
and development company,
the Warwickshire Investment Fund,
and some smaller investments.
And you'll notice in there
that we're getting about double
the level of return as a percentage
than we get from the treasury management
investments that we make.
But they do carry higher risk
and that's why they're smaller.
Just in terms of benchmarking
our treasury management performance,
we came in at 4.9% return.
The benchmark was 4.6%.
So, we were ahead of it,
but we are not seeking out great deals
that carry a lot of risk
with our treasury management
because we must ensure the security
and liquidity of those cash flows.
But we're achieving a higher return
on the non-treasury investments.
But again, my judgment
is not to budget for that
because it puts too much pressure
on those things.
It is better to deal with that
as windfall.
If I thought the long-term
treasury management income
would be higher
and we could confidently
set the budget higher,
I would consider that.
But the correction is very, very painful
if you go the other way.
So, I wouldn't recommend it.
And I think with that, Chair,
there's lots more in there.
There are obviously a lot of risks
around geopolitics,
interest rates, inflation.
I've talked about deficits,
SEND deficits,
which we very carefully manage
in Appendix 2.
You can see the risks
that we're dealing with
and how we govern some of those.
And again, I can go into more detail
if helpful.
So, I'll leave it there
and open up for any questions.
Rob, thank you for that.
That was sort of stopped
through treasury management
and benchmarking, etc.
Councillor Curtis.
Thank you.
Come on in, please.
Thank you, Rob.
I mean, I think absolutely.
Thank you very much.
That was a really very helpful answer.
And yes,
it's a very uncertain world
at the moment.
We have no idea
price oil going up,
going, whatever.
I would agree
that it's much more,
it's prudent
to be more cautious.
Yeah.
Given the circumstances
that we live in.
But thank you for the answer.
That's very helpful.
Any other questions?
Councilmore, please.
Hi.
Thank you for that.
I notice the council
have a few partnerships
and liability companies.
Is there any reports
of how much income
they generate
and where the money
actually goes back to?
Yeah, we bring a report
particularly on the
Property and Development Group,
which is the biggest of those
through to this committee
each year.
So you'll get a report.
I think it's scheduled
in for December on that.
We report quarterly
to Cabinet on performance.
And there is a 3.4 million benefit
from the Property and Development Group
baked into our budget recurrently.
So that's about 1%.
We're building up to that
because obviously
the company's quite young
and we manage that fluctuation
through a reserve set up
specifically for that.
But the level of work in progress
on the various schemes
that the company have developed
means we're very confident
that over the medium term
that should come through.
And there is information
in the detail of this report
on both that
and the Warwickshire Investment Fund.
And I'll do a plug as well
for new members
that we've got an induction session
I think this month
on both of those
and some of our other
non-treasury investment
type activity
to take you through
the sort of background
and set up.
So happy to elaborate more then.
But hopefully that gives you
a start.
Just a point of inquiry.
How many companies
do Warwickshire County Council
have in partnerships?
We've got two companies
that we own.
One is a school catering company
and the other is
Warwickshire Property
and Development Group.
We've got some shareholdings
in a company called Scape
and we receive a good dividend
for that
which is also in this report
and the Eastern Shires
Purchasing Organisation
or ESPO.
We've got some very small
shareholdings in other entities.
Then you've got the
Property and Development Group
which I've mentioned.
The Warwickshire Investment Fund
is a fund that we run
or commission that invests
in local businesses
through loans.
Very successful creating
and safeguarding jobs
and the loans are performing
well as well
and there's detail of that
in the report in front of you.
I need to call you
Councillor Cousat.
Craig, I do apologise.
Mr Cousat, yeah?
I nearly devoted you then.
No one would want that, Chair.
Just to carry on for Mr Pell's
answer as well
if I went back to the
commercial companies
and partnerships.
Now, I'm meeting Councillor Shaw
on Friday
to go through those in detail
and one of the options
available to him
as portfolio holder
is to constitute
something we call
Member Oversight Group
which was a more regular meeting
for interested members
to see performance
of the company
the schemes we're working on.
It's also just to add
additional flavour
to Mr Powell's answer
every single business case
and proposal
is scrutinised
through Cabinet
and it is then
available for onward
scrutiny should it
so be required.
And just a final point
of detail if I may
there is a partnership
with Vistry Group
which are one of the largest
home builders
in the country
so we have WPDG
and we have a joint venture
with a large property
development company
as well
and on top of the
commercial induction
we're looking to get
as many members
as interested
to Top Farm
up in the north
of the council
which is our largest
and most prestigious
housing development
so we're setting days
up there
when members are able
to come along
and see
and talk to the property
company
and the type of housing
we're delivering
for residents of Worcestershire.
Any other questions?
Yeah, I'd just
say obviously
it's a slightly
in the tooth
of the councillor
it's some reassurance
that Mr Powell
will always keep us
on the straight
and narrow
I think we're one
of the few councils
with a five year
medium term
financial strategy
and I'm sure
when it comes
to the budget
setting process
you'll be aware
of the hard work
that Rob
and his teams
do
in presenting
making sure
we have a
balanced budget
which is becoming
more and more
challenging
and then we potentially
have the fair
funding review
that could
be potentially
not necessarily
as fair
as it could be
to Worcestershire
but that's another issue
and I don't expect
officers to
comment on that.
Any more items
on that?
Or can we move on
to agenda item
number eight
which is a work programme
on page
107?
Do you want to come in
on that one?
No, Mr.
Carswell
please.
Thanks, sir.
Yes, this just outlines
the programme
of items
which are coming
to forthcoming
meetings.
Most of them
have been scheduled
there is just one item
which still needs
to be found
at a date for
but things we could
look at in the future
then feel free.
That would be good
yeah, again
just emphasising
that point
fresh pair of eyes
on the committee
if they would like
to see more ideas
and Councillor McAllister
I can see
you've probably got one.
Well, it was a comment
really rather than
an idea
I'm not usually
on this committee
but the resourcing
to risk update
I see that it's
scheduled for April
that seemed like
a long time
away
but is there
any of the other
things on the
December and March
committee
do they also
include
sort of an
interim report
or am I missing
something
or is that
the only time
we're going to
first hear about
sort of an update?
I think it was
a commitment
to look for 12 months
wasn't it Ben?
Do you want to come
inside Mr Brooke?
Yeah, so
thanks for the question
the commitment
was to a 12 month
report
the reason for that
is you've got
sufficient data set
to be able to
really look at it
however
very very happy
to provide
any ongoing updates
to the committee
as required
very happy to do that.
Thank you
and again
I think we can
evolve the work
programme
as time goes on
so I think
that's fair
and reasonable
right
any urgent matters?
I've got a couple
of ones
firstly
if we can
if we do have
some convocated
questions that
require in-depth
responses
it's not fair
on offices
to be expected
to have a
plethora of
papers
to be able to
answer those
questions
or virtual
papers
or electronic
papers
to have them
if you've got
some really
complicated
questions
you will probably
get more
meaningful answers
in the public
domain
from offices
if they could
be submitted
but this is
just a suggestion
and the other
urgent matter
was I forgot
to mention
that we've
got some
young
you're thinking
the committee
has got
rather younger
and much
better looking
and fit and
active compared
to the rest
of the committee
we've got some
of our students
here
I think we've
got Felix
Amelie
Veronica
Evie
Kieran
and Hannah
and I think
Felix and
Kieran are doing
as they're told
because they're
being kept under
control by
Amelie I believe
Amelie Sutton
so well done
for that
thank you for
coming to see
how councils
work
hope it hasn't
put you off in
your future career
and what you
intended to do
I believe one
of the young
ladies was
intending
potentially doing
history and
politics
now she's
just told me
she's just
going to do
history
no I didn't
make that
so thank you
for attending
again any
questions feel
free to ask
us afterwards
and hope
we do keep
you awake
I know it's
warm and hot
and it's past
after school time
as well probably
now and you'd
rather go and
have a glass of
something cool
or an ice cream
which I will
probably be doing
afterwards
so thank you
for attending
and smiling
as well
which is always
good
we don't get
many people
smiling at
meetings
grimacing at
my bad jokes
but thank you
for turning
up
so thank you
very much
I've got no
any other urgent
matters
the committee's
next meeting
has been
scheduled for
the 24th
of September
2025
and we will
try and ensure
better attendances
the highest amount
of attendance
as we can
thank you
and I now
close the
meeting
at 15.25
thank you
thank you
thank you
thank you
thank you
thank you
thank you
thank you
thank you