Agenda item
East End Life Budget and future arrangements
To consider the contents of the report.
Minutes:
Mr Takki Sulaiman, Service Head Communications, in introducing the report, which provided a summary of the events following the decision of Budget Council [7th March 2013] to delete funding from the Communications Budget used to fund East End Life (EEL) and the subsequent Mayoral decision to provide funding to continue EEL, and summarising the key points contained therein, highlighted that:
· He was preparing terms of reference and a programme of work to deliver a review of EEL and would be agreeing this with the Mayor shortly.
· The review process could not commence until the Mayor had reaffirmed his original decision, on 17th April, to provide funding to continue EEL.
· The 2011 review of EEL had taken 9 months and been less complex, so it was anticipated that this review would take longer.
A discussion followed which focused on the following points:-
· Consideration that the anticipated timescale for completion of the EEL review was overly lengthy, with clarification sought and given as to the rationale for its anticipated duration. The previous review could not be relied upon, as this review had more complex elements: a fuller EQIA was required than in 2011, the closure of EEL that would result from the Budget Council decision required consultation with staff and trades unions which had not taken place before, and impending legislation would also need to be taken into account. The new review had only been able to commence in mid- April, when the Mayoral Decision had been confirmed, and a full terms of reference were being drawn up now for agreement with the Mayor.
· Whilst acknowledging that consultation with staff and trades unions was a requirement of the authority’s HR procedures, consideration that time needed for this would not amount to 9 to 12 months. It was noted that other recent reviews, which were as complex or more complex, such as the restructure of Children’s Centres which had involved TUPE or the 5% reduction in the Social Care staffing budget, had been completed in a shorter time. Consideration that the EEL review was unlikely to be as significant in its impact as that of such reviews, and the EQIA process therefore no more complex and lengthy. Consideration therefore that a full review had been conducted in 2011, and the additional complexity of this review, provided as a justification for a longer review, was not convincing. Clarification was sought and given as to the requirement to undertake an EQIA.
· Further detail was sought on the terms of reference and methodology for the EEL review. These had yet to be discussed and agreed with the Mayor, and legislation in the Queen’s speech on 8th May would also need to inform the review.
· Consideration that full Council had already given a steer on the nature of the EEL review and the only locus for the Mayor was to make a decision on the basis of the outcome of the EEL review not to write the review. Officers were clear that a review of EEL was an Executive function and therefore terms of reference for the review required discussion and agreement with the Mayor before proceeding. These could be made available to OSC once agreed.
· Mr Holme undertook to provide details in writing as to the HR processes/ timescales relating to consultation with staff/ trades unions on staffing reviews and also those relating to re-deployment.
The Chair proposed that the deliberations and additional comments of the OSC on the EEL review be forwarded to the Mayor to inform his consideration of the nature/ timescale for the review. The Chair subsequently Moved and it was:-
Resolved
1. That the contents of the report be noted; and
2. That the deliberations and additional comments of the OSC on the EEL review be forwarded to the Mayor to inform his consideration of the nature/ timescale for the review.
Action by:
Angus Taylor (Principal Committee Officer, Democratic Services, CE’s)
Takki Sulaiman (Service Head Communications, CE’s)
Supporting documents: