Agenda item

Cabinet Member: Leader of the Council, Councillor Hamida Ali

Officer: Chief Executive, Katherine Kerswell

Key decision: no

The Leader of the Council delegated authority to the Cabinet to make the following decisions:

RESOLVED: To

1.    Note the update provided by the non-statutory review team in relation to their original recommendations and milestones; and

2.    Note progress made by the Council’s response, nine months on, to those same recommendations and milestones.

Cabinet considered a report which summarised the findings, acknowledgements and recommendations of an independent follow-up report. It highlighted where progress has been made and included any additional recommendations the Council could consider to take stock, learn lessons, or provide the assurances that will be required moving forward. The Leader of the Council (Councillor Hamida Ali) provided Cabinet with an introduction which set out:

• That in October 2020 the Ministry for Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG) commissioned a non-statutory rapid review, following which the Improvement & Assurance Panel was established;
• A year on from the non-statutory rapid review, the council had invited the team back to assess the council’s position against the Improvement & Assurance Panel recommendations, the recommendations of the non-statutory rapid review and to consider questions the council had in relation to the financial position of the organisation in particular;
• Given the council’s different position from a year ago, the Leader welcomed the positive assurance within the report; that significant progress had been made and that there were positive signs in relation to the council’s financial performance;
• Notable changes were included in the report, such as organisational cultural but it was recognised that the council was at the start of a three to four year journey of recovery and that there was still much to do; and
• Thanking Chris Wood (lead reviewer) and the panel for their work and Mr Wood for joining the meeting to speak to his report and answer questions.

The Lead Reviewer (Chris Wood) provided Cabinet with an introduction to the report and set out:

• That good progress had been noted, in particular in terms of emergency measures and it was felt that those steps were the right measures;
• Difficult decisions had been made;
• It had been noted that those in the council had noticed the change, with one person remarking that the council previously had not cared about money but had become one which cared about money;
• The unsophisticated emergency measures were felt to be right but were not sustainable and the council needed to develop more elegant and sophisticated measures to manage the council going forward, which the council recognised;
• It was felt that what had saved the council in the last year was that no one was in denial and those in the council continued to recognise that the council was only at the start of the road to recovery; and
• The council was facing a range of complex challenges and it was imperative that it developed a sophisticated and transformative approach; such as by committing to digital service delivery, shared services and redesigning services.

During the consideration of the recommendations, the following points were made:

• The Leader noted that the Improvement & Assurance Panel had raised the importance of moving to a more transformative approach. This was a move that the council wanted to make, however it was noted that it would be challenging;
• The Cabinet Member for Croydon Renewal (Councillor Stuart King) stated that he felt the one year review had been helpful and that it would be something the government may consider for other local authorities which had undergone a non-statutory rapid review;
• The Cabinet Member for Croydon Renewal noted the report was an independent assessment and he hoped that residents would take confidence from the amount of progress which had been made, both in terms of implementing recommendations and the improvements in financial management, however it was reiterated that there was more work to be done;
• The Cabinet Member for Homes (Councillor Patricia Hay-Justice) stated that since March 2021, the council had needed to focus a great more deal on housing in particular on repairs and resident engagement. It was noted that in the report the Housing Improvement Plan was in draft format and the Cabinet Member requested Mr Wood’s view on that draft Plan
  • In response, Mr Wood advised that many of factors that led to the council being in difficulty were also present in the issues raised at Regina Road, in that the checks and balances in the council had failed 18 months before, including ensuring complaints were dealt with;
  • The real focus for the council was to ensure it was listening to customers and it was felt that this was an issue that was found across the organisation; and
  • Mr Wood advised he had spoken to the Interim Corporate Director of Housing (David Padfield) in relation to his concerns on the Improvement Plan. It was reported that the Plan felt like a tick box exercise, that it lacked small targets, focused too much on technical solutions rather than the customer service challenges and ensuring that empathy was at the heart of work.
• The Cabinet Member for Resources & Financial Governance (Councillor Callton Young) noted the council was undergoing a transformative process in terms of financial governance, culture and service delivery. It was stated that it was important to put residents at the forefront and to empathise with them. He queried what Mr Wood would like to see should he return to assess the council in a year;
• The Cabinet Member for Children, Young People & Learning (Councillor Alisa Flemming) stated that the commitment of the administration was to protect frontline services by renegotiating contracts and to reduce costs, but queried what Mr Wood had seen successfully done in other local authorities
  • In response, Mr Wood advised that he would like to see a permanent leadership team who would be in place throughout the council’s journey;
  • He felt that the digital service was a key area of transformation as it supported delivering services at a lower cost; and
  • It was noted that there were talented people in place looking to resolve the issues which had been uncovered in commissioning and procurement which would support better outcomes.
• The Leader of the Opposition (Councillor Jason Perry) thanked Mr Wood and the panel for their work and welcomed the reported progress which had been made but suggested that the state of the council could not have been any worse. It was noted that there were themes within the report and the reports of the Improvement & Assurance Panel in relation to the pace of change and lack of transformation; and
• The Leader of the Opposition further stated that the council’s financial position was relying on government loans, Covid grants and traffic management fines. It was suggested that the council’s cuts were hitting the most vulnerable in the borough, but the council were not listening to concerns which were raised.
  • In response, the Leader of the Council stated that there would be a proper scrutiny process as part of the budget development process and that the administration were seeking to protect the most vulnerable.

The Leader of the Council delegated authority to the Cabinet to make the following decisions:

RESOLVED: To

1.    Note the update provided by the non-statutory review team in relation to their original recommendations and milestones; and

2.    Note progress made by the Council’s response, nine months on, to those same recommendations and milestones.