Report of Scrutiny Task and Finish Group – Somerset Local Authorities Civil Contingency Partnership

Lead Member:	Sue Steele, Chair of Scrutiny Committee
Assistant Director:	Ian Clarke, Assistant Director Legal and Corporate Services
Service Manager:	Emily McGuinness, Scrutiny Manager
Contact Details:	Emily.mcguinness@southsomerset.gov.uk or 01935 462566

Purpose of the Report

To present the findings of the Scrutiny Task and Finish Group established to consider the role and function of the Somerset Local Authorities Civil Contingencies Partnership (SLACCP).

Forward Plan

This report appeared on the District Executive Forward Plan with an anticipated Committee date of January 2015.

Public Interest

Following on from the Major Incident declared in early 2014, the Scrutiny Committee commissioned a Task and Finish Group to consider the role and function of the Somerset Local Authorities Civil Contingencies Partnership and how the partnership will deliver effective Civil Contingencies arrangements going forward.

Recommendations

Members of the Task and Finish Group recommend that SSDC actively supports the review and re-launch of the Somerset Local Authorities Civil Contingencies Partnership as outlined in the Debrief Report and that:

Clarification is sought from Somerset County Council at the earliest possible opportunity as to:

the anticipated timescale for the review and re-launch as described in the debrief document – It is strongly recommended that the entire, comprehensive review is completed well in advance of the current partnership arrangements expiring in April 2015. In order to ensure value for public money, members recommend that no funding is agreed beyond April 2015 until the review as proposed has been completed.

The Review process, in particular, who is conducting the review? Is the review sufficiently prioritised and adequately resourced? Such is the significance of this piece of work, members ask the Executive to consider offering some resource to assist with conducting the review.

What is the scope of the review, in detail, and how can partners influence the scope and be actively involved in the review process?

Members recommend that the review considers the governance arrangements within the partnership. At the very least an annual report should be considered by each authority providing an opportunity for elected members to agree on shared aims, objectives and priorities and to consider performance over a preceding period. This is the minimum to ensure meaningful accountability within the partnership.

Any re-launch of the partnership should clearly state what each partner can expect in return for their funding contributions, something similar to the SLA model considered by members during this review could be a useful template?

Background

The report of the Task and Finish Group is attached at Appendix A.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications of this report, other than members recommend that the SSDC financial commitment to the SLACCP is not increased until the proposed review is completed.

Risk Matrix

This matrix only identifies the risk associated with taking the decision as set out in the report as the recommendation(s). Should there be any proposal to amend the recommendation(s) by either members or officers at the meeting then the impact on the matrix and the risks it identifies must be considered prior to the vote on the recommendation(s) taking place.

Impact
R
CpP CP CY F

Likelihood

Key

Categories	Colours (for further detail please refer to Risk management strategy)
R = Reputation CpP = Corporate Plan Priorities CP = Community Priorities CY = Capacity F = Financial	Red = High impact and high probability Orange = Major impact and major probability Yellow = Moderate impact and moderate probability Green = Minor impact and minor probability Blue = Insignificant impact and insignificant probability

Council Plan Implications

Continue to support communities to minimise flood water risks.