Agenda item

Reports to be considered by District Executive on 4 June 2015

Meeting of Scrutiny Committee, Tuesday 2nd June 2015 10.00 am (Item 8.)

Minutes:

Members considered the reports outlined in the District Executive agenda for 4 June 2015. It was agreed that the following comments would be taken forward to District Executive for consideration.

SSDC Annual Performance Report (Agenda item 6)

· Members formally recommended that Scrutiny are actively involved in any future review of Performance Indicators, as mentioned by the Performance Manager at the meeting.

· Members queried if recent changes to working practices, in particular the introduction of hot-desking arrangements had had any impact on the sickness absence levels?

· Clarity was also sought over PI’s 006 and 007 relating to Inward investment – Scrutiny recommend that the reporting against these indicators is clarified to show the number of jobs actually created.

Capital Outturn report (Agenda item 7)

· On page 18, members questioned why only two post completion reports had been completed?

· Members also asked for an explanation as to why the Capital Spending Pattern on page 16 consistently shows an underspend, although it was noted that the gap is narrowing.

· Members noted that there is no reference to the Infrastructure Reserve, and although they noted that very little of this reserve has been spent, it would still be useful to see it reported.

Revenue Budget Outturn Report (Agenda item 8)

· Members sought clarification on the figures relating to NNDR contained in paragraph 22 on page 44 – does this figure mean that we had an additional £132k NNDR debt than that of the grant? What is being done to mitigate this in the future?

Superfast Broadband (Agenda item 9)

· This complex issue has been the subject of a detailed Scrutiny Task and Finish Group, and as we have reported in the past, this is a very frustrating issue, caused mainly by the lack of information from the CDS project team. When this matter was considered by DX in June, members of the Scrutiny Committee fully endorsed the recommendations that although an agreement in principle to provide the funding could be made, no actual monies should be released until assurances had been provided that:

a) Businesses premised would be a priority; and

b) That the money would be spent in South Somerset.

· Members of Scrutiny Committee note that despite the best endeavours of officers, these assurances have not been provided and this now poses a difficult decision going forward. Members noted that the Devon District Councils are having their contribution covered by Devon County Council and so essentially; this leaves SSDC as the only District yet to commit the funding.

· Members noted that the provision of reliable Broadband is very much a local priority and the risk of taking a decision that results in not providing this service to our residents is very real.

· In conclusion, members felt that in the absence of the information that would be presented verbally to DX members, they were unable to support a decision either way at this stage.

· Members also suggested that approach to this matter could be referred to the National Audit Office as the whole process involves significant amounts of public money and this authority is being asked to proceed in the absence of the usual safeguards that we have come to expect.

ICT Software and hardware upgrades (Agenda item 10)

· No Comments

Designation of a Neighbourhood Area – Castle Cary and Ansford Parishes (Agenda item 11)