Agenda item

For Overview and Scrutiny to comment on the Draft Business Plan 2022-2023.

Members considered the Draft Business Plan 2022-23 presented by Councillor Boden.

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

• Councillor Mason commended the Council for the Future initiative. He noted that every portfolio holder had a set of tasks but that these tasks should be based around SMART targets. He noted that the tasks should be time-bound and that regular updates should be given regarding key performance indicators (KPI’s) which are monitored and recorded. Councillor Boden explained that KPI’s were monitored and recorded but not deemed necessary to come before Councillors. He noted that the KPI’s that are reported to members are the ones which provide the most value to Councillors in judging how the Council was performing. He explained that setting targets can be very difficult and can be hard to hit when matters that are out of the portfolio holders control affect their work. Councillor Boden informed the Council that they had slimmed down the number of KPI’s reported as they were previously drowning in numbers. He explained that the thought behind this was one of quality over quantity to allow Councillors to focus on the key areas rather than taking an overly wide view and missing the key points due to too much information. He said that if the panel wanted to make changes, they would want to look at a one in one out policy of changing which KPI’s are reported. He noted that the KPI’s were not meant to be performance indicators for the portfolio holders themselves but for the work of the Council. He ensured that they do set their own targets and that the portfolio holders work to these themselves but that there was not a direct line of accountability. He stated that they did not want to return to a bureaucratic system as this would use up valuable officer time, but he would be happy to hear any suggestions for change. Councillor Mason acknowledged Councillor Boden’s points and reiterated that being more specific and measurable is advantageous as it prevents tasks from taking too long.
• Councillor Booth noted that the current KPI’s did not reflect the actual priorities of the Council and noted that the priorities and KPI’s do not always relate. He noted that some of the priorities are difficult to measure and hard to show when they have been delivered. He suggested that the Panel set up a Task and Finish Group to relook at this. Councillor Boden agreed with Councillor Booth’s points around the difficulty of accurately measuring some priorities and supported the idea of setting up a Task and Finish Group to review the current system.
• Councillor Miscandlon supported Councillor Masons earlier point about introducing timescales and noted that portfolio holders are free to ask other Councillors for assistance if needed. He also supported the idea of setting up a Task and Finish group. Paul noted that KPI’s are helpful way of performance managing the Council’s key Business Plan objectives. It is important that KPI’s don’t become excessive and distract from service delivery priorities. Sometimes certain projects don’t lend themselves to KPI’s and where this is the case the performance management is undertaken through the project governance arrangements such as project board and action plan.
• Councillor Yeulett noted that the report mentioned that Fenland faced some challenges around deprivation regarding health and education. He argued that this was a misdemeanour as there have been a significant number of challenges over a long time and questioned whether the Council could place more emphasis upon that along with the fact that the Council would be working alongside partners to reduce this. Councillor Boden agreed that the issues had been around for many years and stated that they would unfortunately be around for many more as Fenland is significantly under the average for the area. He also agreed that the challenges would not be met alone, stating that the work to improve this area would not be easy or cheap. He noted that despite this Fenland should not be defined by its problems and challenges and assured the panel that these issues are constantly being raised with the Combined Authority and across other relevant forums. Paul Medd supported Councillor Boden’s points and noted that members had been supportive of economic growth, infrastructure, and regeneration as the basis of making Fenland a more prosperous place. He suggested inviting Jyoti Atri, Director of Public Health to make a presentation on Fenland’s health inequalities and how the Council can look at tackling these issues to which Councillor Mason agreed.
• Councillor Miscandlon asked whether the panel could ask Jyoti Atri to include any hotspots for health inequalities in the presentation if she came before the panel. Paul Medd suggested that the panel and supporting officers would be responsible for defining the scope of the presentation from public health so this could be included. Councillor Boden suggested that it would be good to examine the extent that public health had focused on deprivation areas over general areas as he felt that there were inequalities here with not enough focused work.
• Councillor Cornwell asked why there was a difference in wording between the items labelled supporting our local community by delivering the leisure strategy and to work collaboratively with partners to deliver our health and well-being strategy as working collaboratively with partners should be common to both items. Furthermore, he asked whether the Leisure and Health and Well-Being strategies had been revisited as they ran out in 2021. Councillor Boden noted that the leisure and health and well-being targets were very much interlinked but that they were still separate targets. He explained that the leisure strategy primarily related to the performance of the leisure centres and outreach services explaining the emphasis of collaboration on this item. He noted that there were significant changes taking place regarding health and leisure, particularly with the regards to legislation changes surrounding health. Councillor Boden stated that once the changes had bedded in it would be more appropriate to revisit these strategies. He also noted that there was a hope that the effects of Covid were coming to an end from a leisure point of view and that they would be revisiting the partnership with Freedom Leisure following this. Councillor Cornwell replied that he agreed with the points made by Councillor Boden but noted that there did not seem to be an opportunity to review the strategies in the business plan.
• Councillor Cornwell noted that there seemed to be some shortfalls in the relationship between economic development and the planning team and asked whether there could be a review to see if the Council could get better value out of this relationship. Councillor Boden corrected that the Council now promotes economic growth rather than economic development. He agreed that the relationship between planning and economic growth was key and that the Council needed to continue to work on the impression that they were a burden to economic growth. He noted that they had been working hard to remove this perception, with special mention to Councillor Laws for her work on this issue. Paul Medd went on to inform the panel that the Council had developed a culture where the Economic Growth and Planning teams communicated and worked closely together, and that planning was aimed at facilitating rather than hindering growth. He explained that the Council had moved from simply selling land assets to looking at what growth value they have before taking them to auction as one observable on how growth was being pushed by the Council. He recognised that there was scope to improve the interface between Economic Growth and Planning but that they had been working on this.
• Councillor Booth said he was pleased to see that the Council was looking at the importance of rural areas within the district but noted that projects are very town centric. He noted that there was more to be done to look after the rural areas specifically regarding the Fenland Walking and Mobility Improvement Strategy which had very little focus on improving cycling and mobility into the towns. He finished by commenting that more needs to be done to improve the quality of life in the rural areas specifically around isolation and lack of mobility. Councillor Boden agreed and noted that it can be easy to overlook rural isolation and poverty as it is not concentrated as in the towns. He noted that despite most of the population living in the towns this should not be an excuse to overlook the rural areas. He assured that there had been efforts to get push the potential for improvement in the villages such as installing footpaths where there currently are none and that there had been an attempt to change the focus from solely around the towns. He accepted that there were problems in the rural areas and assured Councillor Booth that they would not be ignored.

The Draft Business Plan 2022-23 was noted for information.