Agenda and minutes

To record the attendance of substitute members, if any, who have been authorised to attend in accordance with the provisions of standing order 17(1), with notification having been given to the proper officer before the start of the meeting and to receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillor Andrew Crawford and it was noted that Councillor Dudley Hoddinott was in attendance as a substitute member.  

To adopt and sign as a correct records the minutes of the committee meetings held on 23 June and 21 July 2011 (previously published). 

The minutes of the meetings held on 23 June and 21 July 2011 were adopted and signed as a correct record.  

To receive any declarations of personal or personal and prejudicial interests in respect of items on the agenda for this meeting. 

None

To receive notification of any matters, which the chair determines, should be considered as urgent business and the special circumstances, which have made the matters urgent, and to receive any announcements from the chair.

The Chair announced that on 15 September 2011 Memberswere invited to attend a briefing by officers about the service plans for the coming year.  It was noted that the scrutiny committee would be asked to identify topics to include in the work programme following this briefing.

Any statements and/or petitions from the public under standing order 32 will be made or presented at the meeting.

None

To consider report 16/11 of the head of economy, leisure, and property. 

The committee received and considered report 16/11 of the head of economy, leisure and property.

The committee was advised that the contract had not been set up with key performance indicators at its conception.

When asked whether there was any reason for the step down in usage figures, Chris Webb, (officer) reported that it was difficult to capture user data at the centre, given its open plan layout.  He advised that there was no controlled access and that many customers using, for example, the café or spectating were not being included in the data.  He added that spectator data would not be reflected in revenue.

It was reported that the centre performed as expected in respect of energy costs and usage, when considering its size and age.

One member asked why according to paragraph 16 of the report, there was no requirement for the contractor to improve performance.  It was advised that this had not been written into the contract.  Members commented that this was surprising and they would have expected a view to have been taken on performance by the officers. Chris Webb advised that he was content with the visitor numbers and that the centre performed well.

With respect to the customer survey, members commented that the numbers returned were so low that it would not give a true reflection of the customer experience.  It was suggested that the contractor should offer incentives to customers to complete the survey.

One member asked for clarification on the issue of corporate identity. Officers advised that it was important that the centre be recognised as a council facility, given the strong Active Nation brand.

Members considered the trend monitoring data in open session, having been agreed by the head of economy, leisure and property.

One member questioned why there had been a drop in the standards of cleanliness. It was advised that following the contract for cleaning being contracted out the standards had fallen. It was reported that standards had improved since cleaning had returned in house. Mr Webb confirmed that the result of ad hoc visits to the site suggested that standards had improved.

One member questioned how the problems with telephone systems were being addressed. It was reported that from October the centre would be offering online booking and in addition the contractors would be looking at different options for the phone system.

Mr Rolls, from Active Nation, commented that he was disappointed with the scores, however it was an improving picture. He advised that the centre was recruiting more experienced staff and that the turnaround of staff needed to be reduced.

One member suggested that communication between the Vale and the centre should be improved, the Vale officers should be more proactive.

One member commented that the performance management of contracts should be more like the private sector model. He did not consider the current method adequate and suggested that the cabinet should be tasked with looking at how  ...  view the full minutes text for item Sc30

To continue the committee’s consideration of the independent review report on the conduct of the 2011 local elections.  

Mr Tim Revell, Local Democracy Consultant, appointed to undertake the review, presented his report to the committee meeting held on 21 July 2011 and responded to questions.  Mr David Buckle, Returning Officer, and his deputy returning officers also answered questions.  However, the committee ran out of time to consider Mr Revell’s recommendations and deferred consideration to this meeting. 

Committee members are requested to bring their report with them to this meeting.  This formed part of the agenda for 21 July meeting.  

The Chair invited Members to ask questions of the officers, following on from the meeting which was held on 21 July. 

Members asked a series of questions, outlined below and the chief executive, head of legal and democratic services, democratic services manager and elections officer assisted in answering them.

To consider report 17/11 of the head of corporate strategy. 

The committee received and noted report 17/11 of the head of corporate strategy.

One member suggested the scrutiny committee should receive the impact assessments on vale budget cuts.

One member commented that he did not believe that the Mantra group had yet been introduced, he advised that he would be pushing this at the community safety partnership.

RESOLVED: To note the content of the report.

To consider report 18/11 of the head of corporate strategy. 

The committee received and considered report 19/11 of the head of corporate strategy.

One member suggested that it would be helpful to get an overview of what the emissions were from other facilities in terms of usage so that a comparison could be made.

RESOLVED: To note the content of the report.

To consider the attached scrutiny work programme, amend as necessary and recommend its approval to council. 

The committee agreed to review the work programme at its next meeting. 

None