Agenda item

For Overview and Scrutiny to comment on the Draft Business Plan 2021-2022

Members considered the Draft Business Plan 2021/22 presented by Councillor Boden. 

Members made comments, asked questions, and received responses as follows:

1.         Councillor Cornwell referenced page 62 Economy saying a large section of that relates to businesses. He asked if we could have some performance    indicators developed in relation to this, i.e. jobs, new businesses created. Councillor Boden said performance indicators are used for us to measure what we are doing and to try to control it, however in terms of jobs it is difficult to measure the effectiveness of what we do. So much of in relation to jobs is influenced by external factors therefore it is difficult to create a true PI on something like employment. He would ask that members consider and suggest any meaningful PI to him going forward. Councillor Cornwell said he appreciated some of the difficulties outlined but there must be some way of judging the success or otherwise of our team. It could be the amount of time taken to work with new businesses for example, we need to be creative. Councillor Boden agreed there are a number of indicators that can be used in replacement to direct indicators of output, but he finds these to be too indirect. Many of these do not measure output but rather measure activity. For a PI to be meaningful it should be a measure of success in outcome, hence he would welcome suggestions from all FDC members for ideas for robust, meaningful and fair performance indicators for economic growth relating to our officers’ achievements.

2.         Councillor Booth said he had made an observation repeatedly over the years that our performance indicators do not match our priorities. We have a lot of priorities and no real way of measuring these and as he has said in the past, we need to come up with a system with quite specific measurable priorities to help us determine how successful we are. We have some 37 priorities with no decent indicator that we can measure against so how can we say we are a successful council? Councillor Boden thanked Councillor Booth for many of his points that were valid, but it is not appropriate for us to look for different priorities so we can have indictors to measure them. Our priorities should be there regardless of whether they can be measured or not. The problem we have is that many of our priorities are difficult to measure the outcome of objectively but need more subjective assessment and not everything can be measured in percentages.

3.         Councillor Miscandlon said performance indicators are difficult to quantify but suggested engaging a consultant to correlate and create some meaningful indicators, as happened with the PAS review for Planning. Councillor Boden responded that it is possible but transactional events are more meaningful than percentages. We have already looked for better alternatives.

4.         Councillor Yeulett asked if we measure job creation. Councillor Boden said we do attempt to measure the effect we have on job creation and job retention, but it is difficult to say that our intervention has been the catalyst for creating jobs or saving them. There is a degree of subjectivity in such assessments that makes it difficult to measure.

5.         Councillor Booth pointed out the text on page 52 of the report did not mention that the telephone support hub worked in partnership with other organisations, community groups and volunteers. He also referred to page 59 of the report in respect of projects being delivered across Fenland and made the point, as he has in previous meetings, that the majority of those were based in the towns, with little concentration on the villages and rural areas. 25% of the population live in these areas and they deserve better investment. Councillor Boden responded that the support hub has been dependent on the partnerships it has and without the volunteers at grass roots level within our communities, we would have been able to do little so he pays full tribute to the work done by our partners. Regarding projects being delivered in the towns, it must be remembered that the towns are generally the engines of economic activity within the district hence the focus taking place on the towns, which does ultimately benefit the villages also.

6.         Councillor Wicks said we have so many blackspots within the rural areas as broadband is an ongoing issue with the rural areas. We do not seem to be focusing on trying to improve the coverage being provided by commercial companies, therefore failed to see the benefit to these areas.

7.         Councillor Booth said in respect of Councillor Wicks’ comment he had seen the Government were being criticised for leaving rural areas behind, so how can we ensure that our rural areas are not left behind in respect of this issue. The impact of COVID has enhanced the need for connectivity with more people having to work from home. Councillor Boden said it is not necessarily true that rural areas are worse off than urban areas; one of the worst areas for connectivity is in the City of London. However, he agreed with Councillor Wicks that poor connectivity is an issue in some of our rural areas and we need to continue to raise this issue with central Government and at the Combined Authority so that when resources are available we manage to ensure that Fenland gets its fair share of resources made available.

8.         Councillor Count pointed out that although he has sympathy for those who do not have great mobile phone or internet coverage, all of Fenland and Cambridgeshire was well placed at the start of the pandemic with over 98% of premises receiving superfast broadband throughout the county. That is due to excessive investment of some £28m by the County Council and is well in excess of other rural communities throughout the UK.

The Overview and Scrutiny Panel commented on the Draft Business Plan 2021/22.