Public Document Pack
MEETING OF THE LIVERPOOL CITY REGION COMBINED AUTHORITY
To: The Members of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority
Dear Member,
You are requested to attend a meeting of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority to be held on Friday, 19th August, 2016 at 1.00 pm in the Authority Chamber - No.1 Mann Island, Liverpool, L3 1BP.
If you have any queries regarding this meeting, please contact Trudy Bedford on telephone number (0151) 443 3365.
Yours faithfully
Head of Paid Service
(Established pursuant to section 103 of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 as the Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Sefton and Wirral Combined Authority)
LIVERPOOL CITY REGION COMBINED AUTHORITY
AGENDA
1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
3. MINUTES OF THE COMBINED AUTHORITY MEETING HELD ON 15 JULY 2016 (Pages 1 - 8) EMPLOYMENT AND SKILLS
4. AREA BASED REVIEW To consider the report of the Lead Officer: Employment and Skills. (Pages 9 - 20) TRANSPORT
5. LIVERPOOL CITY REGION DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT ACCESS FUND BID SUBMISSION To consider the report of the Lead Officer: Transport. (Pages 21 - 30)
GOVERNANCE
6. LIVERPOOL CITY REGION COMBINED AUTHORITY GOVERNANCE REVIEW AND SCHEME To consider the report of the Lead Officer: Governance. (Pages 31 - 114)
7. DEVOLUTION OF POWERS AND RESOURCES TO THE LIVERPOOL CITY REGION - PROGRESS ON EXECUTIVE CAPACITY To consider the report of the Head of Paid Service. (Pages 115 - 178) 8. COMBINED AUTHORITY BUDGET MONITORING STATEMENT APRIL 1ST 2016 TO JUNE 30TH 2016 (QUARTER 1) To consider the report of the Treasurer. (Pages 179 - 182)
OTHER
9. MINUTES OF THE MERSEYTRAVEL COMMITTEE HELD ON 30 JUNE 2016 (Pages 183 - 194)
10. MINUTES OF THE LIVERPOOL CITY REGION COMBINED AUTHORITY AUDIT COMMITTEE HELD ON 5 APRIL 2016 (Pages 195 - 198)
11. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE HEAD OF INTERNAL AUDIT 2015-16 In accordance with Minute 22 of the Combined Authority Audit Committee meeting on 5 April 2016, the attached Annual Report of the Combined Authority Audit Committee is to be noted by the Combined Authority.
(Pages 199 - 208)
This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 3
LIVERPOOL CITY REGION COMBINED AUTHORITY
At a meeting of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority held in the Authority Chamber - No. 1 Mann Island, Liverpool, L3 1BP on Friday, 15th July, 2016 the following Members were
P r e s e n t:
Mayor J Anderson OBE Chairperson of the Combined Authority (in the Chair)
Councillor P Davies, Councillor R Polhill, Councillor I Maher, Councillor M Murphy (Substitute Member) and Councillor A Bowden (Substitute Member from Item 29)
19. MINUTES SILENCE
Prior to the start of the meeting, the Chairperson referred to the terrorist attacks in Nice and the Combined Authority stood for a minute’s silence as a mark of respect for those killed or injured.
20. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for absence were received from Councillor A Moorhead, Councillor B Grunewald, Asif Hamid, Councillor T O’Neill (Associate Member), and Councillor I Moran (Associate Member).
21. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
It was reported that no declarations of interest had been received.
22. MINUTES OF THE COMBINED AUTHORITY MEETING HELD ON 17 JUNE 2016
RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority held on 17 June 2016 be approved as a correct record.
23. SINGLE INVESTMENT FUND ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK
The Combined Authority considered a joint report from the Treasurer and the Head of Paid Service which sought Members approval of the Single Investment Fund Assurance Framework. It was reported that a key element of the devolution agreement was the commitment to the establishment of a Single Investment Fund (SIF) which would align national and City Region funding to allow greater flexibility over local investment, which included the Single Pot funding.
The Single Pot allocation for the City Region was £458 million which would be committed over the next five years. To ensure the funding could be fully devolved an Assurance Framework had been developed which would explain how projects would be appraised, monitored and evaluated and investment decisions assessed.
Page 1 RESOLVED – That:-
(i) the LCRCA Assurance Framework as set out in Appendix One to the report now submitted be approved; and
(ii) delegation be granted to the Treasurer to make any final amendments to the LCRCA Assurance Framework following its submission to Government.
24. LIVERPOOL CITY REGION LOCAL GROWTH DEAL 3 SUBMISSION
The Combined Authority received a presentation from Wes Rourke, Operational Director, Economy Enterprise and Property, Halton Borough Council which provided an update on the process for the submission of the Local Growth Fund 3. It was reported that areas had been invited to submit a proposal to the Local Growth Fund to support further growth in the City Region. Accordingly, the presentation set out the following:-
the process for applying for Local Growth Fund 3, which was a competitive process and the deadline for submissions was 28 July 2016. outlined the format of the proposed bid which emphasised the strong history of collaboration and set out the ambition and assets of the City Region. explained how the LGF3 would run in parallel with the Single Growth Strategy which was launched on 30 June 2016. the Submission would have a strategic approach which would focus on productivity, people and place.
The Chairperson welcomed the presentation in particular recognising the importance of the close collaboration with the private sector in the development of the submission.
RESOLVED – That:-
(i) the proposed LCF 3 draft submission as outlined in the presentation be approved; and
(ii) any amendments and approval of the final Local Growth Deal 3 submission be delegated to the Head of Paid Service, in consultation with the Chairperson of the Combined Authority.
25. NOVATION OF CHRYSALIS FUND TO THE COMBINED AUTHORITY
Members considered a joint report from the Head of Paid Service and the Treasurer which set out the key principles of the proposed novation of the Chrysalis Fund to the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority.
RESOLVED – That:-
(i) the novation of the Chrysalis Fund to the Combined Authority be approved;
(ii) the approach being taken to novate NWUIF to the Combined Authority be endorsed;
Page 2
(iii) the establishment of “NewCo” as the corporate structure, subject to external legal advice, as set out in the report now submitted be approved; and
(iv) authority be delegated to the Head of Paid Service in consultation with the Treasurer and Monitoring Officer to finalise the terms of any legal documents and enter into any legal agreements necessary to facilitate the above recommendations including the setting up of separate legal entities required for the corporate structure following external legal advice.
26. LIVERPOOL CITY REGION GROWTH DEAL SCHEME - LITTLEWOODS STUDIOS
Members considered a report from the Lead Officer: Economic Development which sought the approval of a Full Business Case for the Littlewoods Studios proposals. It was reported that the City Region had been allocated £15.6m of Local Growth Fund (LGF) in order to support land and property schemes.
At its meeting on 18 March 2016 the Combined Authority considered the Outline Business Case for Littlewoods Studios and had provisionally committed to a £4.95m allocation subject to the full business case being satisfactorily appraised. Accordingly, the Full Business Case had been submitted and assessed independently by Regeneris Consulting and was also consistent with HM Treasury’s Green Book. Furthermore, the appraisal of the Full Business Case was also consistent with the approach adopted in the Single Investment Fund Assurance Framework.
RESOLVED – That subject to the conditions identified in the independent appraisal summarised in Appendix One of the report now submitted the Full Business Case for the Littlewoods Studios proposals to the value of £4.95m of Local Growth Fund be approved.
27. LIVERPOOL CITY REGION GROWTH DEAL SCHEME - ALSTOM TRANSPORT TECHNOLOGY CENTRE
Members considered the report of the Lead Officer: Economic Development which sought approval of the outline business case for the Alstom Transport Technology Centre proposal and allocated £5 million to the project subject to the satisfactory appraisal of a Full Business Case.
It was reported that the Business Case submitted by Alstom Transport UK Ltd (Alston) was to create a major new rail facility for the UK. If all three phases of the project were taken forward it could involve approximately 450,000 sq ft being constructed on the HBC Field site at 3MG Widnes with the potential to employ 600 people and provide a new North West Rail Skills Academy. The Outline Business Case has been independently assessed by Amion Consulting and was broadly consistent with HM Treasury’s Green Book and Business Case Appraisal process.
The Combined Authority welcomed the Business Case for the Alstom Transport Technology Centre and the potential to create 600 quality jobs and a skills Centre.
Page 3 RESOLVED – That:-
(i) Alstom be invited to submit a Full Business Case application in respect of the Alstom Transport Technology Centre for a £5m allocation of Local Growth Funds, in accordance with the Assurance Framework process agreed by the Combined Authority and shared with Government;
(ii) £5m of Local Growth Fund be available to the project subject to a satisfactory Full Business Case being independently appraised by the Combined Authority and the S73 Officer and the project applicant being informed of this so they can further develop the project; and
(iii) the Full Business Case be considered by written procedure to allow an urgent approval if necessary and in line with the scheme requirements.
28. LOCAL GROWTH FUND: APPROVAL OF FULL MAJOR SCHEME BUSINESS CASE FOR A570 LINKWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The Combined Authority considered the report of the Lead Officer: Transport which sought approval of the Full Business Case for the A570 Linkway Improvements major scheme and for it to commence delivery in the 2016/17 financial year. In line with the assurance framework the A570 scheme was endorsed by the Local Enterprise Partnership Board (LEP) at its meeting on 9 June 2016.
It was further reported that the scheme evidenced the successful delivery of the Local Growth Fund and would provide a positive improvement to the transport infrastructure in St Helens Town Centre.
RESOLVED – That:-
(i) the contents of the report be noted; and
(ii) the Full Business Case for the A570 Linkway Improvements Scheme be approved.
29. TRANSPORT FOR THE NORTH (TFN) UPDATE
The Combined Authority considered a report from the Lead Officer: Transport which provided an update on the progress of developing Transport for the North (TfN) as an established sub-national Transport Body (STB) for 19 Local Transport Authorities in the North.
It was reported that proposals were being discussed with the Department for Transport which contained provisions for TfN to have transport and public authority functions on a concurrent basis with its constituent Authorities. Members were further advised that the concurrent power would not be exercisable in the area of a constituent Authority unless that Authority agreed to it and as such this would not bind the LCR Combined Authority to the final agreement.
The Chairperson stressed the important role TfN had to continue to lobby for the development of east to west rail connectivity.
RESOLVED – That:-
Page 4
(i) note the update in relation to Transport for the North (TfN);
(ii) agreement in principle be granted to TfN to enable discussions with the Department for Transport to progress a sub-regional transport organisation to be created for the North of England; and
(iii) the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority will not in the future be required to contribute financially to TfN unless it agrees to do so.
30. SKILLS CAPITAL INVESTMENT
Members considered the report of the Lead Officer: Employment and Skills which provided an update on the progress of implementing the Skills Capital Investment Fund. The report also sought approval from the Combined Authority on the Skills Capital Investment Panel’s recommended investment package to support two Full Applications as received under the latest round of the Skills Capital Investment Fund.
It was advised that the two Full Applications related to the creation of specialist new build facilities for equine and animal study courses at Myerscough College and the development of a University Health Campus at Wirral Waters Enterprise Zone. There was a third Full Application from the City of Liverpool College for their Digital Academy. However this Full Application required further development and would be presented to the Combined Authority at a future meeting.
Members received a presentation which highlighted the first Skills Capital schemes which had been completed. The schemes included the Port Academy at Hugh Baird College, the STEM Centre at Wirral Metropolitan College and the proposed development of the University Health Campus at Wirral Waters.
RESOLVED – That:-
(i) the progress made to date on the Skills Capital projects as set out at section 3 and Appendix One of the report now submitted be noted;
(ii) the recommendations made by the Skills Capital Investment Panel as set out at Section 5, paragraphs 5.4 and 5.5 of the report now submitted be approved; and
(iii) the grant commitments at section 6 and the next steps set out in section 7 of the report now submitted be noted.
31. SKILLS FOR GROWTH DELIVERY MODEL FOR 2016/17 AND 2017/18
The Combined Authority considered a report which outlined the proposals for the implementation of an impartial skills and apprenticeship brokerage service to deliver the Skills for Growth programme in 2016/17 and 2017/18. It was reported that the creation of an independent brokerage service would work with businesses to improve their skills, with the majority of the £2.250m funding looking to support businesses with training grants.
Page 5 RESOLVED – That:-
(i) Model A be approved as the operating model to establish the Liverpool City Region impartial skills and apprenticeship brokerage service aligned with the Local Growth Hub; and
(ii) the Lead Officer: Employment and Skills be requested to progress this work.
32. HEALTH AND WORK INNOVATION FUND SUBMISSION
The Combined Authority considered the report of the Lead Officer: Employment and Skills which outlined a submission to the national Health and Work Innovation Fund. The report explained that the Combined Authority had been invited to submit an expression of interest to the Health and Work Unit’s Innovation Fund. £40m was available nationally to test new approaches to support people with health conditions into work and it was understood that 3-4 places would benefit from the Innovation Fund. The application was a 2 stage process, if the Combined Authority was successful at the expression of interest stage, funding would then be granted to support the development of the proposal, which subject to final approval would allow delivery from spring 2017 onwards.
RESOLVED – That:-
(i) the submission to the Health and Work Innovation Fund be noted;
(ii) if the expression of interest was successful an update be provided to a future meeting of the Combined Authority; and
(iii) authority be delegated to the Treasurer to accept development funding should the Combined Authority submission be successful.
33. HOUSING AND SPATIAL PLANNING STATEMENT OF COOPERATION
The Combined Authority considered the report of the Lead Officer: Housing and Planning which provided an update on the development of a Single Spatial Framework for the City Region, which included the production and agreement of a Statement of Cooperation.
The report outlined that the Statement of Cooperation, attached at Appendix One to the report now submitted, which had been drafted by all 6 City Region Councils as well as West Lancashire Borough Council. The Statement of Cooperation had also been agreed by District Planning Officers and by the Housing and Spatial Planning Board. The Statement of Cooperation was required to progress the Single Spatial Framework and subject to approval by the Combined Authority would be presented to each of the Constituent Local Authorities and West Lancashire Borough Council for adoption and to ensure alignment and uniformity of approach.
RESOLVED – That:-
(i) the content of and actions arising from the Liverpool City Region Statement of Cooperation on Local Planning be approved; and
(ii) the Liverpool City Region Statement of Cooperation be presented to each Constituent Council (plus West Lancashire) for adoption.
Page 6
34. LOCAL GROWTH FUND PERFORMANCE 2015/16
The Combined Authority considered the report of the Treasurer which set out the financial outturn of various schemes within the 2015/16 Local Growth Fund allocation (Local Growth Fund 1). The report also sought approval for measures to ensure the delivery of the Local Growth Fund Programme in 2016/17 and beyond.
RESOLVED – That:-
(i) the contents of the report and it’s various appendices be noted;
(ii) the creation of a post of Project Manager to provide dedicated resources to the Employment and Skills Capital programme be approved; and
(iii) regular updates on progress against Local Growth Fund 1 targets in 2016/17 and beyond be provided to the Combined Authority.
35. COMBINED AUTHORITY NOMINATIONS TO AUDIT COMMITTEE
The Combined Authority considered a report which sought two nominations to the Combined Authority’s Audit Committee.
RESOLVED – That Councillor A Moorhead and Councillor R Polhill be nominated to the Combined Authority Audit Committee.
36. DEVOLUTION OF POWERS AND RESOURCES TO THE CITY REGION - PROGRESS ON EXECUTIVE CAPACITY
The Combined Authority considered a report from the Head of Paid Service which outlined the steps which had been taken to implement the recommendations to establish a dedicated executive capacity by May 2017 for the Combined Authority.
On behalf of the Combined Authority, the Chairperson requested that copies of the report on the ‘Devolution of Powers and Resources to the City Region – Proposals for Executive Capacity’ which was considered at the meeting of the Combined Authority on 17 June 2016 be sent to the two Labour Party LCR Combined Authority Mayoral candidates.
RESOLVED – That:-
(i) in principle agreement be granted to the Combined Authority to recruit and employ staff directly;
(ii) authority be granted to the implementation team in conjunction with the relevant Combined Authority officers to develop proposals and documentation in respect of:
a. Review of the Scheme of Delegation to Officers and associated decision making mechanisms; b. Establishment of an appointments panel; c. Code of Conduct for officers of the Authority; d. Protocol for relationships between officers and members; and e. Anti-Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Policy.
Page 7
(iii) the constitution of the Combined Authority be amended and submitted to the next meeting of the Combined Authority for consideration and approval;
(iv) the relevant officers approach Merseyside Pension Fund to establish the pension arrangements for the Combined Authority as the employer; and
(v) copies of the report ‘Devolution of Powers and Resources to the City Region – Proposals for Executive Capacity’ which was considered at the meeting of the Combined Authority on 17 June 2016 be sent to the two Labour Party LCR Combined Authority Mayoral candidates
37. MINUTES OF THE MERSEYTRAVEL COMMITTEE HELD ON 7 APRIL 2016
The minutes of the Merseytravel Committee held on 7 April 2016 were received and confirmed by the Combined Authority.
Minutes 19 to 37 be received as a correct record on the 19th day of August 2016.
Chairperson of the Combined Authority
(The meeting closed at 1.34 pm)
Page 8 Agenda Item 4
LIVERPOOL CITY REGION COMBINED AUTHORITY
To: Chair and Members of the Combined Authority
Meeting: 19 August 2016
Authority/Authorities Affected: All
EXEMPT/CONFIDENTIAL ITEM: No
REPORT OF THE LEAD OFFICER: EMPLOYMENT AND SKILLS
AREA BASED REVIEW
1. PURPOSE
1.1 This report provides an update to the Combined Authority on the Liverpool City Region Area Based Review at the mid-point of the process.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 It is recommended that the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority:-
a) Note the progress made to date on the Area Based Review; b) Endorse the actions taken around the key themes set out in section 5; c) Agree that the Lead Portfolio Holder for Employment and Skills, Chair of the Combined Authority and Chair of the Local Enterprise Partnership meet prior to the next Area Based Review Steering Group meeting to assess how the emerging options will support the City Region’s economic growth ambitions; and d) Note that a further report on options will be available at the Combined Authority meeting on 21 October 2016.
3. BACKGROUND
3.1 The Combined Authority is working jointly with Government to conduct an Area Based Review of post-16 education and skills provision. The process forms part of the national reforms to the post-16 education sector, with the stated aim of raising productivity and economic growth. The policy objectives are to:-
Develop clear, high quality professional and technical routes to employment, alongside robust academic routes, which allow individuals to progress to high level skills valued by employers; Create strong education and training institutions which have high status and are genuine centres of expertise; Ensure the right balance and mix of provision, including the capacity and capability nationally to deliver 3 million apprenticeships by 2020; and
Page 9
Deliver better responsiveness to local employer needs and economic priorities, supported by local commissioning of adult provision, which will help give the sector the agility to meet changing skills requirements in the years ahead.
3.2 The Combined Authority is committed to a full and active engagement with the Review process. The first stage of the process is very mechanistic working to a structured agenda and a set timetable of themed Steering Groups which conclude on the 26 October 2016. Post review will be less prescriptive as we move forward with the implementation of the Review outcomes.
3.3 The Review will help the Liverpool City Region to establish the best institutional structures to meet its needs. This may include, for example, merged institutions, proposals for new specialist institutions and stronger provider collaboration with the Combined Authority on curriculum planning and apprenticeship delivery. Ultimately, the outcomes of the Review must pass the test of providing access to high quality and relevant provision, based on the current and short term needs of employers and learners, as well as the flexibility to respond to the economic priorities of the future.
3.4 The key deliverables are:-
Institutions which are financially viable, sustainable, resilient and efficient, and deliver maximum value for public investment; A skills offer that meets Liverpool City Region’s educational and economic needs; Local providers with strong reputations and greater specialisation; Sufficient access to high quality and relevant education and training for all; and Provision which is well equipped to respond to the reform and expansion of the Apprenticeship programme.
3.5 For the Combined Authority, the Area Based Review is only the start of the process providing the catalyst for changes to institution and locality infrastructure. The real opportunity for step change will be during the implementation stage. The Combined Authority has put down a clear marker during the Review process that it will be exercising local leadership throughout the implementation phase to get stronger traction on curriculum planning. The devolution of the Adult Education Budget from 2018/19 and the introduction of Local Outcome Agreements will provide the lever for wider discussion and influence within the natural business cycle of post-16 institutions.
3.6 The Area Based Review process includes the 7 General Further Education (FE) Colleges and 3 Sixth Form Colleges across the Liverpool City Region, plus South Sefton College.
Page 10
4. AREA BASED REVIEW PROGRESS
4.1 The Review is structured around a data analysis phase and 5 themed Steering Group meetings. These are intended to flesh out and test options which include appraisal of the following:-
Rationalisation of provision; Mergers/federations/alternative structures; Sixth form college converts to academy status; Shared back office functions; Better use of estates; Agreements as to affordable levels of service; Greater degrees of specialisation; Apprenticeship units or companies; and New Institutes of Technology.
4.2 The institutions in scope for the Review are required to consider their individual structures and prospectus and present their conclusions in the form of options (this includes the option of no infrastructure change) to the Steering Group. Each option presented is required to show how it will deliver financial sustainability and efficiency alongside supporting the City Region’s economic growth ambitions outlined in the Single Growth Strategy and delivering the right balance and mix of curriculum to meet employer and learner needs.
4.3 At the Review Steering Group meeting on 16 June 2016 the Colleges verbally shared on an informal basis their emerging options for infrastructure change.
4.4 The process to date clearly demonstrates that the national structure and imposed timetable for the Review is heavily weighted towards delivering options that address financial sustainability and efficiencies rather than allowing sufficient air time for meaningful dialogue on curriculum offer options. Therefore on behalf of the Combined Authority, the Chair has taken the steps to make sure that this issue is not overlooked within the process, especially as it relates to specialisation and apprenticeship expansion.
4.5 Immediately following the 16 June 2016 Steering Group meeting the Chair of the Review wrote to all College Principals and Governors to set out the next steps from the Combined Authority’s perspective in terms of formulating options, via:-
Conducting an initial validation exercise with Local Authority colleagues on each option being proposed; A series of detailed case conferences with each College or cluster of Colleges if mergers are being proposed; Reviewing specialisation options via a working group; Holding a curriculum planning workshop with Colleges; and Developing options for apprenticeship delivery.
All of the above actions are being progressed over the summer to assess options robustly against local criteria.
Page 11
4.6 The validation meetings with Local Authority officers to explore the potential impact of the emerging proposals were held in early July 2016. The headline issues that have emerged from these validation meetings are:-
Meeting Local and Liverpool City Region Employment and Skills Needs Colleges need to engage with the Combined Authority in curriculum planning both at a strategic and operational level; this dialogue should include an annual discussion on both the current and emerging economic development needs and priorities for both learners and businesses, with a key test being alignment to growth sector needs.
Special Educational Needs – the City Region’s requirements for this provision is set to increase in the future so the FE Sector will need to show that it can respond to an increase in numbers and deliver a more coherent and joined up approach with specialist schools. This includes providing improved progression for students from learning into employment.
Sixth Form Provision – many students currently travel out of their local area for good A level provision. Stronger joint planning of progression routes between schools and Colleges will require increased levels of collaboration, particularly for Sixth Form and A level provision.
Specialisation – there is some evidence of College efforts to specialise their provision through the Skills Capital programme but this is an area that does not come through strongly enough within the current proposals from the Colleges. Linked to this it will be important to consider how vocational and technical pathways / routes to employment from aged 14 years onwards will be delivered and aligned with local growth sectors.
Reducing Unemployment and Economic Inactivity – provision needs to be available in each locality to encourage participation, reduce travel to learn time and costs, especially for NEET young people and unemployed adults.
Apprenticeships – apprenticeship reforms present particular challenges for the Liverpool City Region. The emergence of the apprenticeship levy in April 2017 will change the way in which employers will access apprenticeships and will raise the bar in terms of expectations on employers to pay for skills through apprenticeships.
Higher Level Skills Progression – FE Colleges can play a positive role in access to Higher Education and the City Region would like more collaboration in this area particularly linked to the specialisation theme.
One Public Estate – estates rationalisation may form part of any College merger/cluster proposals. The Review process should align to the ‘One Public Estate’ agenda so that all estates are utilised. Estates may also need to be considered in terms of higher level specialisms to ensure wherever located there is access to good facilities and transport links.
Page 12
5. NEXT STEPS
5.1 The above areas have all been played back to the Colleges as further lines of enquiry in the form of a series of challenge questions. Appendix One provides more detail on the issues and questions raised and it has been made clear that Colleges will be expected to respond to these questions in detail both at the case conference discussions (see paragraph 5.8) and when presenting their options in writing at the Steering Group in September 2016.
5.2 The Combined Authority has identified three themes from the list of issues in paragraph 4.6 as requiring particular attention and further analysis as follows:-
Specialisation
5.3 A working group has been set up to explore opportunities for greater specialisation linked to economic growth and replacement demand in key sectors. The group has sourced representation from Local Authority economic development teams, the Local Enterprise Partnership, FE Colleges and Universities to do this.
5.4 The group is considering employer demand for specialist skills both now and in the future and will assess the evidence base for specialisation to identify gaps and opportunities. The objective is to identify options for specialisation with a particular focus on the sectors within the Single Growth Strategy, for example Creative and Digital, Advanced Manufacturing, Maritime and Health and Life Sciences. The process will consider provision from Entry Level to Degree Level with the view to promoting career pathways from school through to university.
5.5 The options emerging from this research will inform the Area Based Review and will be framed around the following:-
Opportunities for more provider collaboration around specialist provision; Proposals for new Institutes of Technology to address identified gaps; and A strategic longer term view of specialist needs to inform the Single Investment Fund and the devolution of the Adult Education Budget.
Special Educational Needs Provision
5.6 This is an area of growing need and there is an emerging rationale for a Liverpool City Region wide strategy to respond to this; the work will be progressed with the Directors of Children’s Services and other colleagues over the summer.
Apprenticeships
5.7 A working group is considering how to maximise the opportunities afforded by the Apprenticeship Reforms and the introduction of the Levy in the City Region. The expectation by Government is that Colleges will step up to this challenge but current data shows that 70% of apprenticeships within the City Region are delivered by private providers. Clearly Colleges will need to raise their game in this market and the working group will consider options and potential new delivery models for increasing volumes and the breadth of the apprenticeship offer to feed into the Review process.
Page 13
Assessing Options and Making Recommendations
5.8 In the coming weeks meetings will take place with College Principals and Governors which will allow the Combined Authority to explore and challenge the thinking on their emerging options in terms of how they will meet the Liverpool City Region’s growth ambitions and the curriculum issues and needs identified above.
5.9 Given the importance of skills in driving sustainable growth, it is recommended that the Lead Portfolio Holder for Employment and Skills, Chair of the Combined Authority and Chair of the Local Enterprise Partnership meet to assess how these emerging options will support the City Region’s ambitions. There is a clear link between skills levels and qualifications and the potential for increasing business growth and productivity. These are also a key factor in any decisions investors would make in relocating to or remaining within the City Region.
5.10 There will also be an additional Area Based Review Steering Group workshop session on 17 October 2016 to bring together all of these areas / lines of enquiry in advance of the formal discussion on recommendations at the final Steering Group Meeting on 26 October 2016.
5.11 The final Steering Group meeting will set out the recommendations that will be submitted to the Secretary of State. As Members will recall the options chosen are not the decision of the Combined Authority: it will be for the governing bodies of each individual institution to decide whether to accept the Review’s recommendations, reflecting their status as independent bodies.
5.12 However, implementation of some of the options will require more direct Combined Authority leadership and influence throughout the implementation stage to ensure the curriculum offer and future post-16 provision meets the City Region’s growth ambitions.
6. RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS
6.1 Financial There are no direct issues as a result of the recommendations set out within this report.
6.2 Human Resources There are no direct issues as a result of the recommendations set out within this report.
6.3 Physical Assets The recommendations within this report have no bearing upon any land/ buildings/other physical assets owned by the Combined Authority or its constituent Councils.
6.4 Information Technology The recommendations in this report will not have any direct impact upon the use of IT, or need for IT support.
Page 14
7. RISKS AND MITIGATION
7.1 There is a risk that the Area Based Review will not deliver the necessary infrastructure changes or required change in curriculum to meet the City Region’s economic needs. This will be mitigated by ensuring the Combined Authority plays a full and active part in the process and future implementation, provides a robust challenge to the options presented and clearly articulates its needs and expectations of the Review process.
8. EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY IMPLICATIONS
8.1 There are no direct issues as a result of the recommendations set out within this report.
9. COMMUNICATION ISSUES
9.1 Ensuring good communications around the Area Based Review continues to be a priority. An overarching stakeholder communication plan has been developed which is regularly reviewed at the Steering Group meetings and several events have already been held with employers, providers and other stakeholders to inform the Review process.
9.2 Plans are in place over the summer to carry out one to one consultations with a number of large employers across the Liverpool City Region (supported by Local Authority Economic Development teams and the Local Enterprise Partnership) on the Review and wider skills reforms such as apprenticeships. The Combined Authority is also writing to employers and Higher Education Institutions to gather views. A further consultation event with employers (supported by the Local Enterprise Partnership) is taking place on 23 September 2016. This will be followed up with an event in the autumn to outline the post review outcomes and plans for implementation.
9.3 The Directors of Children’s Services will be writing to local schools in September 2016, seeking their views on the post-16 provision in the area, including progression pathways. Opportunities for consultation via Association(s) of Secondary Heads or via a specific workshop session are also being considered.
Page 15
10. CONCLUSION
10.1 This report has informed the Combined Authority of the progress made to date in the post-16 Area Based Review. The report has outlined some of the emerging issues and sets out the next steps in terms of actions to progress the Review. A further update on the emerging recommendations of the Area Based Review will be brought to the meeting of the Combined Authority on 21 October 2016.
MIKE HARDEN Lead Officer: Employment and Skills
Contact Officer: Sue Jarvis, Knowsley Council (0151 443 3559)
Appendices: Appendix One – Area Review Emerging Options: Validation Issues
Page 16
APPENDIX ONE
Area Review Emerging Options: Validation Issues
1. Meeting Local and Liverpool City Region Employment and Skills Needs
There is a need to engage more with Colleges on curriculum planning both at a strategic and operational level; this dialogue should include an annual discussion on both the current and emerging economic development needs and priorities for both learners and businesses. Whilst there are some good examples of Colleges responding to Liverpool City Region skills priorities by making changes to the curriculum offer and through applications to the skills capital programme, this practice needs to be more common place and underpinned by evidence of good communication and co-operation with Local Authorities and local employers.
Challenges and questions emerging from the validation meetings include:-
The Liverpool City Region requires a post-16 learning sector that can meet the needs of local businesses in particular skills requirements at Level 3 and above. How will FE Colleges engage the Combined Authority, individual Local Authorities and employers to help better align their provision to needs? How will FE Colleges collaborate on curriculum planning and flex their provision to collectively meet City Region needs? FE Colleges should have clear pathways in place to enable residents to access Level 3 training to support them into the employment opportunities available in priority sectors. How can gaps in provision be better understood, mapped and addressed? Progression pathways will need to reflect and support the Government’s aspirations in the Post-16 Skills Plan (published in July 2016) over time with collaborative curriculum planning. How will post-16 providers come together to plan provision in the future?
2. Special Educational Needs
FE institutions are proud of their SEN provision. However, learners travel out of area to different Colleges, in some cases by preference, but also due to availability of places. Reducing travel to learn distances for these learners was much preferred by local areas. Progression for SEN learners into employment and other skills was also identified as a need. Challenges and questions emerging from validation meetings include:-
A more coherent and joined up approach is required between specialist schools and FE post-16 provision. This would provide more SEN learners with the opportunity to study in an adult FE setting with access to vocational learning opportunities and resources to support further progression. The City Region’s needs for SEN provision is set to increase in the future which includes an emerging larger cohort of learners with social and emotional behavioural issues, this may also include learners with autism related learning needs. How will the FE sector support this cohort of learners in greater volumes?
Page 17
3. Sixth Form Provision
Many students currently travel out of their local area for good A level provision. Stronger joint planning of progression routes between schools and Colleges will require increased levels of collaboration, particularly for Sixth Form and A level provision. Whilst there was some evidence of this in some areas, it is not universally the case.
4. Specialisation and Collaboration
The discussions at the validation meetings reflected on College efforts to specialise their provision by area and better meet priority sector needs in each locality. Investments in skills capital to support Health, Construction, Maritime, Digital and Logistics have already been made and there was interest in how these capital investments will transform into greater proportions of learning that support priority sectors.
In parallel, lines of enquiry are being taken forward by a task and finish group to review what we know about the demand and supply sides for Level 3 and Level 4+ linked to economic growth opportunities / key employment sectors and through a gap analysis to identify where increased specialisation in the curriculum may be required. Initial areas identified include for example Manufacturing with specific reference to Maritime, Automotive and Rail Engineering skills; Digital; and demands for pathways to Level 4+ provision in the Health and Life Sciences sector.
Challenges and questions include:-
How can the post-16 sector build upon strengths, meet City Region technical and higher level skills needs and avoid unnecessary duplication through more collaborative curriculum planning of pathways? A number of Colleges focus on STEM and this will support the volume of jobs and skills needs in related sectors. How will FE Colleges collaborate in their delivery of STEM provision across the City Region to avoid unnecessary duplication and competition? What is the potential for an Institute of Technology to provide higher level education in technical and professional skills?
5. Reduce Unemployment and Economic Inactivity
Whilst specialisation is required in the FE sector, it is recognised that other provision needs to be available in each locality to encourage participation, reduce travel to learn time and costs especially for NEET young people and unemployed adults. Challenges and questions emerging include:-
Accessibility of provision is thought to be a key barrier for learners in more economically deprived areas with a strong correlation to lower skills levels in these areas. How will the FE Colleges ensure appropriate access to skills provision (including English and Maths) for unemployed learners and those with low skills levels? In recent times, provision supporting unemployed adults has been removed or significantly reduced by some FE Colleges following reductions to the Adult
Page 18
Skills Budget. How will Colleges collaborate to ensure capacity is available to meet local needs and provision is aligned with other back to work support? How will Colleges adopt a collaborative approach to curriculum planning for community learning with other providers (including local authority provision) to ensure more localised access points for progression to intermediate level skills and higher learning? ESOL needs may expand in response to an increase in volumes of refugee and asylum seekers needing support. How will Colleges work together with other providers to meet any increases in demand?
6. Apprenticeships
Apprenticeship reforms present particular challenges for the Liverpool City Region. The emergence of the Apprenticeship levy in April 2017 will change the way in which employers will access apprenticeships and will raise the bar in terms of expectations on employers to pay for skills through Apprenticeships. Challenges and questions include:-
Contributing to the national target of the 3 million apprenticeships, ensuring the City Region maintains or increases its proportion of apprenticeship delivery. How will FE Colleges support the City Region to accomplish this? Ensuring that City Region employment and skills priorities are delivered in meeting this target. What plans do FE Colleges have in place to work with both levy and non-levy paying employers? How will FE Colleges work to expand the use of the new standards? Supporting local Colleges and providers as they increase their capacity to deliver Apprenticeships individually and collectively. What is needed locally to accomplish this?
7. Higher Level Skills Progression
The City Region recognises the role that FE Colleges can play in access to Higher Education and would like more collaboration in this area particularly linked to the specialisation theme. Challenges emerging questions include:-
College progression routes to Higher Education are evident in some areas; but further work is needed if the City Region is to close the gap to the national average for level 3 and level 4+ qualified residents. How can greater progression linkages between FE and HE be achieved to close the gap in skills at Level 4 and above through academic qualification routes? How will FE Colleges and HEIs collaborate to deliver Higher and Degree Apprenticeships aligned to priority sector skills needs?
8. One Public Estate
Estates rationalisation may form part of any College merger/cluster proposals. The Combined Authority should ensure that all Colleges are aligned to the ‘One Public Estate’ agenda so that all estates are utilised. Estates may also need to be considered in terms of higher level specialisms to ensure wherever these are located have good facilities and transport links.
Page 19 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5
LIVERPOOL CITY REGION COMBINED AUTHORITY
To: The Chairman and Members of the Combined Authority
Meeting: 19 August 2016
Authority/Authorities Affected: ALL
EXEMPT/CONFIDENTIAL ITEM: No
REPORT OF THE LEAD OFFICER: TRANSPORT
LIVERPOOL CITY REGION DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT ACCESS FUND BID SUBMISSION
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 This report updates the Combined Authority on the approach to the development of the City Region„s bid for the recently announced Department for Transport (DfT) Access Fund for Sustainable Travel. The aim of this approach is to adhere to the bid guidelines and to submit a City Region bid in time for the deadline of 9 September 2016.
1.2 Merseytravel is currently developing the Access Fund Bid on behalf of the Combined Authority. The approach outlined in this report explains the project plan and the inclusion of independent support for the development of the economic case for the bid, as well as an additional role as critical friend to provoke independent challenge.
1.3 The Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) Board on 21 July 2016 gave “in principle” endorsement to the development of the bid, and delegated authority to the LEP Chair to provide endorsement for the final bid for submission on 9 September 2016.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 It is recommended that the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority:
(a) Note the contents of the report and that the City Region will be submitting a bid to the DfT Access Fund by 9 September 2016; and (b) Delegate authority to the Lead Officer: Transport in consultation with the Portfolio Lead: Transport to approve the submission from a Combined Authority perspective.
Page 21 3. BACKGROUND
3.1 The City Region submitted its outline bid for Local Growth Fund 3 (LGF3) on 28 July 2016. The outcome of this bid is likely to be made known in the Government‟s Autumn Statement. Concurrently, the Government has made available the Access Fund which is intended to provide revenue based support for the sustainable travel measures outlined in LGF3. Therefore the City Region‟s Access Fund bid must be related to transport proposals in the City Region‟s LGF3 application, i.e.:
• Key Route Network Enhancement Package; • Capacity and Enhancement Package on the local rail network; and • Housing and Employment Site Access.
3.2 This funding application supports the City Region‟s aspirations outlined in the Local Transport Plans and the Transport Plan for Growth, and fully aligns with the LGF3 bid. If successful, the funding will help to deliver the aspirations for sustainable travel as outlined in these strategies, as well as fully aligning with the overarching Liverpool City Region Shorter Journeys Framework. This is currently in development and brings together all sustainable travel activity into a co-ordinated approach around shorter journeys in the City Region.
3.3 “Shorter journeys” are defined as those which are less than 5 miles and account for over 80% of all journeys in the City Region. Notably, only 15% of these journeys are currently made by walking or cycling. This illustrates the scope of opportunity for the City Region to improve upon walking and cycling levels, now and in the future. The City Region Shorter Journeys strategic framework is summarised in Appendix One.
Scope of the bid
3.4 The Department for Transport has £60 million in revenue funding available for sustainable travel projects from 2017/18 to 2019/2020. Local Transport Authorities are invited to bid for a share of this £60 million for 2017/18 through to 2019/20. The Access Fund is a significant contributor to the financial resources available for the Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy, and all schemes must therefore demonstrate strong or very strong support for cycling and walking. The primary objectives for the Access Fund are:
• To support the local economy by supporting access to new and existing employment, education and training; and • To actively promote increased levels of physical activity through walking and cycling.
3.5 To be considered for funding, bids should articulate a strategic narrative around how their scheme will contribute to economic growth; should demonstrate support for boosting the numbers of people cycling and walking; and should articulate how the scheme will improve access to jobs, skills, education and training. Bids that receive the highest scores against defined assessment criteria will be awarded funding.
3.6 Additional guidance has been received which outlines that successful bids must be inextricably linked with the LGF3 capital submissions. Therefore in the Access Page 22 Fund bid the economic appraisal will cover the impacts of both the capital and revenue elements. This influences the development of the strategic and economic cases of the bid. The economic case as part of the bid is being independently completed will itself be independently reviewed to provide challenge and feedback.
Approach to the bid
3.7 The City Region Access Fund details a set of revenue interventions which are wholly linked and supportive of specific asks within the LGF3 application. Feedback from DfT following our previous Local Sustainable Transport Fund 2 bid and Sustainable Transport Transition Year bid, and the local and City Region transport pipelines, are being used to inform the strategic and economic case in the Access Fund bid.
3.8 The structure of the City Region Access Fund bid is shown in Appendix Two. This shows how the bid is clearly aligned to the People, Place and Productivity themes in the City Region‟s Growth Strategy. If successful, this bid will enable us to secure funding to deliver walking and cycling interventions under 2 key themes:
• Enabling Business Growth; and • Journey to Employment.
3.9 Revenue activities will be targeted around LGF3 infrastructure proposals with the aim of increasing physical activity and supporting the local economy. The bid covers interventions which can be made between 2017/18 and 2019/20.
4. RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS
4.1 Financial
Managing the bid
4.1.1 Development support costs are already covered by Merseytravel. It is proposed that the important “Critical Friend” challenge role will not exceed £10,000 and will be covered by the Integrated Transport Block Core Activity Budget.
Financial profile of the bid
4.1.2 The proposed current bid is approximately £4.2 million, of which £3.85m is requested from DfT and the remaining 10% is the required local match contribution. This will need to be found from across the Partnership if the bid is successful. In return for this investment, and in line with the LGF3 (capital) bid, the key outcomes are aligned to the Access Fund guidelines and include:
• Supporting NEETS into long term employment; • Improving the skills of the workforce for businesses; • Increase in walking & cycling and physical activity; • Increasing use of the City Region cycle hire scheme; and • Engagement with businesses to make them more efficient, healthier and a more productive workforce.
Page 23 4.1.3 The final bid will be assessed by the City Region‟s independent business case assessors.
Access Fund Bid Element DfT Ask 10% local match Enabling Business Growth £1,800,000 £180,000 Journey to Employment £2,050,000 £205,000 TOTAL £3,850,000 £385,000
4.1.4 A full economic appraisal of all interventions is currently being undertaken and will be included within the bid.
4.2 Human Resources
There are no Human Resources implications associated with the implementation of the recommendations contained in this report.
4.3 Physical Assets
There are no Physical Assets implications associated with the implementation of the recommendations contained in this report.
4.4 Information Technology
There are no Information Technlogy implications associated with the implementation of the recommendations contained in this report.
5. RISKS AND MITIGATION
5.1 There is a risk that if the Access Fund is not successful there will not be sufficient revenue capacity to support the capital investment being made in the City Region, or for the captial measures outlined in LGF3, if this bid is successful.
6. EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY IMPLICATIONS
6.1 There are no significant equality implications associated with the projects.
7. COMMUNICATION ISSUES
7.1 No specific issues anticipated. Should the bid be successful then a communications strategy will be put in place and aligned to the LGF3 bid.
Page 24 8. CONCLUSION
8.1 This report outlines the Liverpool City Region approach to the DfT Access Fund bid, which will deliver walking and cycling revenue interventions to support LGF3 capital infrastructure investment.
FRANK ROGERS Lead Officer: Transport
Contact Officer: Carole Carroll, Merseytravel (0151 330 1672)
Appendices: Appendix One – Shorter Journeys Strategic Framework Appendix Two – Structure of Access Fund Bid
Background Documents: None
Page 25 This page is intentionally left blank APPENDIX ONE
Page 27 Page This page is intentionally left blank APPENDIX TWO Structure of Access Fund Bid LCR Access Fund Bid (Revenue) and LCR Local Growth Fund 3 Bid (Capital)
Local Growth
Productivity Fund 3 Place People
Key Route Capacity & Housing and Network enhancement Employment Site LGF 3 Enhancement package on the Transport ask Access Package local rail network
Promoting physical Supporting the local Access Fund activity economy Bid Objectives
Journey to Enabling Business Access Fund Bid employment Growth Themes
Improved safety for cyclists and Delivering Business skills pedestrians Reduction in long term Reduced congestion unemployment
Reduction in harmful emissions Increased awareness and Outcomes Healthier residents engagement of businesses in the LCR on active travel benefits Behaviour change interventions Up skilling in the transport Enjoying the place where you live sector and work
Increased cycle ownership and use Page 29
This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 6
LIVERPOOL CITY REGION COMBINED AUTHORITY
To: The Chair and Members of the Combined Authority
Meeting: 19 August 2016
Authority/Authorities Affected: ALL
EXEMPT/CONFIDENTIAL ITEM: No
REPORT OF THE LEAD OFFICER: GOVERNANCE
LIVERPOOL CITY REGION COMBINED AUTHORITY GOVERNANCE REVIEW AND SCHEME
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 This report details the outcome of the public consultation undertaken on the powers outlined in the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (LCRCA) Scheme and an analysis of the responses received.
1.2 Following Combined Authority consideration, the summary of the consultation responses (Appendix 1) will be forwarded to the Secretary of State to be considered alongside the Governance Review and Scheme before draft orders are laid before Parliament.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 It is recommended that the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority:
(a) Notes the outcome of the consultation undertaken as outlined in Appendix One; (b) Agrees to submit the outcome of the consultation at Appendix One alongside the Governance Review and Scheme to the Secretary of State; and (c) Delegates authority to the Combined Authority Monitoring officer to make any amendments to the consultation summary report prior to submission to DCLG which are deemed necessary as a result of the Combined Authority consideration of this report.
3. BACKGROUND
3.1 Liverpool City Region Combined Authority has the opportunity to have a major transfer of resources, powers and responsibilities from Government conferred upon it, alongside governance changes to adopt a directly elected City Region Mayor. These powers and functions were set out in the devolution agreement reached between Government and the Combined Authority in November 2015 which gives the City Region greater control over transport, skills, business support and other
Page 31
areas. The Chancellor announced the devolution of further powers and responsibilities to the City Region in the March 2016 Budget.
3.2 Legislation requires that the City Region undertake a Governance Review in order for the Secretary of State to make the required legislative changes and confer additional functions and powers on the Combined Authority and directly elected mayor. The Scheme is a companion to the Review and sets out the statutory powers which will be transferred in order to realise the conclusions detailed in the Review.
3.3 It is a legal requirement that public consultation must be undertaken where additional functions are to be conferred on a Combined Authority and the Combined Authority, at their meeting on 17 June 2016, approved the timeline for the formal consultation on the Combined Authority Governance Review and Scheme. It was also agreed that the Combined Authority would review the responses to the consultation at this meeting before the Governance Review and Scheme and a summary of the consultation responses are submitted to the Secretary of State for consideration in laying the appropriate orders before parliament.
3.4 The consultation has been open for a six week period from 24 June 2016 to 5 August 2016. The consultation timetable was developed to ensure that it was aligned to the order-making process.
3.5 The Combined Authority and the six constituent councils will need to consent to any draft order before it is laid before Parliament.
4. PUBLIC CONSULTATION METHODS
4.1 The consultation sought views from the public and stakeholders on the additional functions proposed to be conferred on the Combined Authority as set out in the Scheme. The consultation was led by the Combined Authority, in partnership with City Region local authorities and the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP). A toolkit was developed to provide all communications teams with draft content for websites, social media, printed publicity and staff messaging.
4.2 Residents, businesses and stakeholders in the Liverpool City Region had the opportunity to respond to the consultation either by email, letter or through the online survey. The consultation was promoted through a variety of methods including:
Proactive media releases; Proactive engagement with regional and local media; Web content summarising the information under each policy area in the Scheme for the Combined Authority and LEP websites, including an online survey; Locally adapted content for local authority and partner websites; Social media; Staff messaging; Workshops with elected members; and Letters to key stakeholders including MPs, businesses and business representative organisations, health consortium, learning providers and
Page 32
universities, cultural organisations, voluntary sector, elected members and others.
4.3 Hard copies of the materials and a leaflet summarising the consultation were made available in public buildings, such as libraries and local authority reception areas, alongside copies of the questionnaire for members of the public to complete.
5. SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION OUTCOMES
5.1 The full report summarising the consultation activity and responses is attached at Appendix One.
5.2 A total of 930 responses were received (15 by email or in writing and 915 through the online survey). These responses were received by the general public and from a variety of stakeholders as illustrated in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Respondent type Type Number of responses % On own behalf 806 86.7% On behalf of an organisation 100 10.8% - Business or business representative 24 - Public sector 28 - Third sector 29 - Cultural organisation 5 - Political 2 - Not specified 12 Preferred not to say 12 1.3% Not known 12 1.3% TOTAL 930
5.3 Table 2 below illustrates the geographical analysis of responses across the City Region and from outside the City Region.
Table 2: Respondents by local authority area Local Authority Area Number of responses % Halton 201 21.6% Knowsley 104 11.2% Liverpool 195 21.0% Sefton 121 13.0% St Helens 45 4.8% Wirral 153 16.5% Outside of the Liverpool City Region 76 8.1% Liverpool City Region wide organisation 6 0.6% Not known 29 3.1% TOTAL 930
5.4 The Combined Authority is encouraged by the strong response to the consultation. In comparison, the consultation undertaken when it was originally established produced less than 200 responses suggesting residents and stakeholders are now considerably more engaged in this agenda and have responded to the devolution agenda.
Page 33
5.5 Tables 3 and 4 detail a summary analysis of the comments received on all policy areas which the consultation was established. Comments have been classified as positive (which includes all explicit statements of support and/or which provided constructive and positive comments in respect of each theme), negative (all responses which made explicit statement not supporting the proposals being consulted on and / or provided negative or unsupportive comments) and comments which were outside the scope of the consultation.
Table 3: Summary of all responses to policy areas and new powers as identified in the LCRCA Scheme
Theme Number of Positive Negative Outside comments Scope Skills and Employment 184 59% 14% 27% Housing and Planning 182 74% 19% 8% Transport and Highways 182 80% 10% 10% Business Support 135 61% 9% 30% Innovation 126 56% 9% 35% Energy and environment 180 43% 26% 31% Culture 144 63% 8% 30% Finance 131 58% 17% 25% Information Sharing 106 74% 16% 10% Constitutional and Governance 146 50% 34% 16%
Table 4: Summary of those responses received from stakeholders
Theme Number of Positive Negative Outside comments Scope Skills and Employment 31 94% 0% 6% Housing and Planning 30 100% 0% 0% Transport and Highways 26 96% 0% 4% Business Support 26 84% 4% 12% Innovation 23 96% 0% 4% Energy and Environment 25 80% 4% 16% Culture 23 91% 0% 9% Finance 22 77% 5% 18% Information Sharing 18 100% 0% 0% Constitutional and Governance 26 92% 8% 0%
5.6 As the tables above indicate the majority of comments and responses were supportive of the proposals outlined in the City Region’s scheme. Transport and Housing and Planning in particular had considerable positive responses on the proposals.
5.7 There was less support provided in relation to Governance proposals and Energy and Environment although there was a majority of supportive responses in each case.
5.8 Stakeholder responses to the consultation were overwhelmingly positive and provided constructive and supportive statements about the proposals being consulted upon and their implementation. Appendix One contains many examples of stakeholder comments which Combined Authority Members may wish to consider.
Page 34
5.9 Some of the general themes which can be drawn out from the consultation responses are:
High level of support for devolution to the City Region; Recognition of the scale of the opportunity and challenges facing the City Region; Concern over levels of funding and the need to provide support and investment to key growth areas of the City Region; A concern that all parts of the City Region need to benefit from devolution and that devolution has to support and reflect the individual identity and needs of each of the localities; A concern to balance strong leadership with checks and balances in the system and the need for transparent decision making; and Support for continued and enhanced engagement with stakeholders and elected members across the City Region.
5.10 These views are to be welcomed by the Combined Authority. The Combined Authority’s view is that devolution is a positive development for City Region, providing local communities with greater decision making abilities over the things which matter to them and over the levers of economic growth and public service reform.
5.11 It is also recognised that different parts of the City Region have different needs, history, politics and their own unique strengths and assets which need to be built on. It is the Combined Authority’s view that local leaders are best placed to understand these issues and to work collectively at the City Region to address the challenges and unlock those opportunities which can drive growth.
5.12 Many of the responses to the consultation referred to broader issues relating to devolution, rather that the specifics of the Scheme. These responses are for the purposes of this consultation defined as out of scope and will be dealt with in another manner.
6. NEXT STEPS
6.1 The timetable below highlights key milestones in laying the Liverpool City Region Order which will determine the functions and powers for the directly elected Mayor.
19 August 2016 Combined Authority to review the responses to the Liverpool City Region Governance Review and Scheme before submission to Secretary of State
26 August 2016 Formal submission to Secretary of State of the Governance Review, Scheme and summary of consultation responses
October 2016 Individual local authorities and the Combined Authority consent to the Liverpool City Region Order which the Secretary of State will lay to establish the devolved functions for the directly elected Mayor and Combined Authority
May 2017 Liverpool City Region Mayoral Election
Page 35
6.2 All Councils will receive the draft order and will be required to consent to the order before it is laid before Parliament. DCLG will lay the Order sometime before early November 2016 and Liverpool City Region local authorities and Combined Authority will therefore need to provide consent for this before the end of October 2016.
7. RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS
7.1 There are no specific resource implications to this report.
7.2 However the Governance Review, Scheme and public consultation are legal requirements in order that the City Region can accept the devolved powers and resources on offer to it through the devolution agreement. This will give the City Region greater control and influence over approximately £3bn of national resources.
8. EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY IMPLICATIONS
8.1 There are no specific equality and diversity implications associated with the implementation of the recommendations in this report, however, equality analyses will be undertaken on the individual elements as they relate to the Scheme to assess the equality and diversity implications as projects and programmes are progressed.
8.2 In terms of the public consultation, equality monitoring questions were asked as part of the online and hard copy survey and an analysis has been included in the report summarising the outcome of the consultation.
9. COMMUNICATION ISSUES
9.1 The consultation was conducted primarily through digital channels with consultation feedback gathered via the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority website. Respondents were also able to submit responses by letter or email and consultation documents and publicity materials were made available in key local authority buildings.
9.2 Other channels included media releases, web content for the Combined Authority, local authority, Local Enterprise Partnership and partner websites (including a feedback form) social media and staff messaging.
9.3 A toolkit was developed to ensure that all communications teams had draft content for websites, social media, printed publicity and staff messaging.
Page 36
10. CONCLUSION
10.1 A wide ranging public consultation has been undertaken and evidenced in the report. The approach and methodology follows the Cabinet Office Statement of Consultation Principles 2016 and the arrangements seeks to satisfy those which are required in order for the Government to establish the necessary legislation to devolve the powers and functions agreed through the Devolution Agreement, for the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority and directly elected Mayor.
10.2 The outcome of this consultation now needs to be reported to the Secretary of State for consideration alongside the Governance Review and Scheme.
DAVID PARR Lead Officer: Governance
Contact Officers: David Parr, Halton Borough Council (0151 511 6000) Jeanette McLoughlin, CA Monitoring Officer, Liverpool City Council (0151 233 0400)
Appendices: Appendix One: Liverpool City Region Governance Review and Scheme Summary of Consultation Responses
Page 37 This page is intentionally left blank
GOVERNANCE REVIEW AND SCHEME
SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Page 39 CONTENTS
Page
1. Introduction 3
2. Consultation 3
3. Summary of responses 7
4. Analysis under each of the policy areas 12
5. Next steps 49
APPENDIX 1: Communications and Consultation Plan 50 APPENDIX 2: Communications Toolkit 52 APPENDIX 3: Communications Activity 64 APPENDIX 4: Examples of Communication Activity 68 APPENDIX 5: Equality Monitoring Information 71 APPENDIX 6: Stakeholder Responses 74
Page 40 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (LCRCA) has the opportunity to have a major transfer of resources, powers and responsibilities from Government conferred upon it, alongside governance changes to adopt a directly elected Liverpool City Region (LCR) Mayor. These powers and functions were set out in the devolution agreement reached between Government and the LCR in November 2015 which gives the LCR greater control over transport, skills, business support and other areas. The Chancellor announced the devolution of further powers and responsibilities to the LCR in the March 2016 Budget.
1.2 Legislation requires that the LCR undertake a Governance Review in order for the Secretary of State to make the required legislative changes and confer additional functions and powers on the LCRCA and directly elected mayor. The Governance Review must reach the conclusion that conferring on the Combined Authority and directly elected Mayor the additional functions set out in the Scheme would likely improve the exercise of statutory functions in the Combined Authority’s area.
1.3 The LCRCA approved the timeline for a formal consultation on the Governance Review and Scheme at its meeting on 17 June 2016. This report summarises the methods of consultation and the outcome that will be considered by the Secretary of State alongside the Governance Review and Scheme before draft orders are laid before Parliament.
2. CONSULTATION
2.1 It is a legal requirement that a public consultation be undertaken in most cases where additional functions are to be conferred upon the Combined Authority. The consultation undertaken related to the proposals contained in the Scheme. The public consultation was launched on 24 June 2016 and ran for a six-week period to 5 August 2016. The consultation timetable was developed to ensure that it is aligned to the order-making process.
2.2 This document is the Summary of Consultation Responses as required by s113 of the Local Government, Economic and Construction Act 2009.
Page 41 2.3 The consultation was led by LCRCA and delivered in partnership with the LCR local authorities, LEP and other stakeholders. The consultation sought views from the public and stakeholders on the additional functions proposed to be conferred on Liverpool City Region Combined Authority as set out in the Scheme. Residents, businesses and stakeholders in the Liverpool City Region have had the opportunity to respond, if they wished to do so. The consultation plan is attached as appendix 1.
2.4 A variety of methods have been used to consult including: - Proactive media releases; - Proactive engagement with regional and local media; - Web content summarising each of the policy areas detailed in the Scheme in plain English for the LCRCA and LCR LEP websites, including an online survey; - Locally adapted content for local authority and partner websites; - Social media; - Staff messaging; - Workshops with elected members; - Letters to key stakeholders including MPs, businesses and business representative organisations, health consortium, learning providers and universities, business leaders, voluntary sector, elected members and others; and - Hard copies of the materials have also been made available in public buildings, such as libraries and local authority reception areas.
2.5 A toolkit was developed to ensure that all communications teams had draft content for websites, social media, printed publicity and staff messaging and this is attached at appendix 2.
2.6 Responses could be submitted online, by email or by post. The online form requested comments in relation to the specific themes as outlined in the Scheme and all questions were asked in a free text format. The consultation included equality monitoring questions.
Page 42 Press and Media Coverage
2.7 Press releases were issued widely by the City Region’s local authorities and other partners as detailed in appendix 3.
2.8 There was limited coverage of the consultation through the press and media. This is not unexpected given the timing of the consultation shortly after the EU referendum and also the subject matter. Other methods were expected to reach residents and stakeholders in a more effective manner. Some examples of press coverage include details of the consultation reported through the Runcorn and Widnes World website on 29 June 2016 and in the Runcorn and Widnes Weekly News on 30 June 2016.
Local Authority Engagement
2.9 The LCRCA provided each LCR local authority and partner organisations with a toolkit to aid local engagement. This included draft content for websites intranet sites, staff messaging, social media and printed publicity. This toolkit is attached at appendix 2.
2.10 LCR local authorities and other organisations used this toolkit with staff and public extensively as detailed in appendix 3. Examples of activity can be found at appendix 4.
Targeted Engagement with Key Stakeholders
2.11 More than 100 stakeholders were invited to engage in the consultation through direct communication with established organisations and partnerships, including MPs, businesses and business representative organisations, health consortium, learning providers and universities, cultural organisations, voluntary sector, elected members and others. A full list of stakeholders contacted as part of the consultation can be found at appendix 3.
2.12 A list of those stakeholders who responded to the consultation on behalf of an organisation and gave details is attached at appendix 6.
Page 43 Engagement with the General Public
2.13 The consultation received 930 responses, including hard copy and online submissions, from residents, businesses and other stakeholders from across the Liverpool City Region and beyond. Over 800 responses were made by individuals on their own behalf.
2.14 The LCRCA website was dedicated to the consultation and a questionnaire was available alongside the full details of the governance review and scheme. The website received over 3,000 page views.
Page 44 3. SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
3.1 A total of 930 responses were received (17 by email or in writing and 913 through the online survey).
Table 1: Respondent type Type Number of responses % On own behalf 806 86.7% On behalf of an organisation 100 10.8% - Business or business representative 24 - Public sector 28 - Third sector 29 - Cultural organisation 5 - Political 2 - Not specified 12 Preferred not to say 12 1.3% No response 12 1.3% TOTAL 930
Table 2: Respondents by local authority area Local Authority Area Number of responses % Halton 201 21.6% Knowsley 104 11.2% Liverpool 195 21.0% Sefton 121 13.0% St Helens 45 4.8% Wirral 153 16.5% Outside of the Liverpool City Region 76 8.1% LCR wide organisation 6 0.6% No response 29 3.1% TOTAL 930
3.2 The LCRCA is encouraged by the strong response to the consultation. In comparison, the consultation undertaken when the Combined Authority was originally established produced less than 200 responses suggesting residents and stakeholders are now considerably more engaged in this agenda and have responded to the devolution agenda.
Page 45 3.3 Tables 3 and 4 below detail a summary analysis of the comments received on all policy areas which the consultation was established. Comments have been classified as positive (which includes all explicit statements of support and/or which provided constructive and positive comments in respect of each theme), negative (all responses which made explicit statement not supporting the proposals being consulted on and / or provided negative or unsupportive comments) and comments which were outside the scope of the consultation.
Table 3: Summary of all responses to policy areas and new powers as identified in the LCRCA Scheme Theme Number of Positive Negative Outside comments Scope Skills and Employment 184 59% 14% 27% Housing and Planning 182 74% 19% 8% Transport and Highways 182 80% 10% 10% Business Support 135 61% 9% 30% Innovation 126 56% 9% 35% Energy and environment 180 43% 26% 31% Culture 144 63% 8% 30% Finance 131 58% 17% 25% Information Sharing 106 74% 16% 10% Constitutional and Governance 146 50% 34% 16%
Table 4: Summary of those responses received from stakeholders Theme Number of Positive Negative Outside comments Scope Skills and Employment 31 94% 0% 6% Housing and Planning 30 100% 0% 0% Transport and Highways 26 96% 0% 4% Business Support 26 84% 4% 12% Innovation 23 96% 0% 4% Energy and Environment 25 80% 4% 16% Culture 23 91% 0% 9% Finance 22 77% 5% 18% Information Sharing 18 100% 0% 0% Constitutional and Governance 26 92% 8% 0%
Page 46 3.4 As the tables above indicate, the majority of comments and responses were supportive of the proposals outlined in the LCR scheme. Transport and housing & planning in particular had considerable positive responses on the proposals.
3.5 There was less support provided in relation to governance proposals and energy and environment, although there was a majority of supportive responses in each case.
3.6 Stakeholder responses to the consultation were overwhelmingly positive and provided constructive and supportive statements about the proposals being consulted upon and their implementation.
3.7 Some of the general themes which can be drawn out from the consultation responses are:
High level of support for devolution to the City Region; Recognition of the scale of the opportunity and challenges facing the City Region; Concern over levels of funding and the need to provide support and investment to key growth areas of the City Region; A concern that all parts of the City Region need to benefit from devolution and that devolution has to support and reflect the individual identity and needs of each of the localities; A concern to balance strong leadership with checks and balances in the system and the need for transparent decision making; Support for continued and enhanced engagement with stakeholders and elected members across the City Region.
3.8 These views are welcomed by the LCRCA. The CA’s view is that devolution is a positive development for LCR, providing local communities with greater decision making abilities over the things which matter to them and over the levers of economic growth and public service reform.
Page 47 3.9 It is also recognised that different parts of the City Region have different needs, history, politics and their own unique strengths and assets which need to be built on. It is the Combined Authority’s view that local leaders are best placed to understand these challenges and opportunities and to work collectively at the City Region to address the challenges and unlock those opportunities which can drive growth.
3.10 Examples of the broad comments from stakeholders in support of the governance review and scheme included:
On behalf of the Liverpool City Region’s Housing Associations: “This consultation reflects one of the next steps in realising greater devolved arrangements within the City Region that will ensure the Region can ensure investment available is spent in a way that will create better outcomes and futures for residents and businesses alike. Our consultation response is very supportive of the consultation and what it aims to achieve and we would be delighted to work closely with the combined authority as strategic partners and to support the Mayor and the Combined Authority to achieve its aims and create greater prosperity across the Merseyside City Region.”
From VS6 (partnership of voluntary, community, faith and social enterprise infrastructure agencies operating across Liverpool City Region): “We would like to stress our support in LCR Combined Authority’s move towards securing greater devolved powers for the region. Greater local control allows for better democracy, improved provision of services, and ultimately a healthier and happier society. Broadly, we want to emphasise our willingness to work in partnership with the Combined Authority, the new Mayor, and other city region operators.”
From Merseyrail: “I would like to declare Merseyrail’s endorsement of the proposed changes that enable more decisions to be made locally. We believe this will allow the regional economy to flourish, boost jobs and GVA and further the development of a 21st century transport network to underpin it. As such, we welcome the proposals to bring increased powers to the City Region, and along with Merseytravel, will continue to support businesses and the local communities in the region.”
Page 48 From Arts Council England: “We commend your comprehensive approach to developing the principles and practice of devolved governance in order to maximise the considerable potential of the City Region… We see ourselves as partners in that growth and hope to continue to work closely with officers as plans develop further. Our investment of almost £52million over the 2013-16 period reflects the importance we place on the cultural sector in the City Region, and we value highly the visible importance which you and colleagues from all of the constituent authorities place on culture and its roles.”
From the Mersey Dee Alliance: “The MDA supports a Combined Authority to provide strong leadership, whilst protecting the integrity and the existing role and functions of local authorities. The MDA further supports a governance proposal that will ensure a system of checks and balances providing accountability and transparency.”
From Cheshire and Warrington Economic Prosperity Board: “As members of the Cheshire and Warrington Economic Prosperity Board, we would like to signal our support for your proposed devolution deal and supporting governance arrangements. The Cheshire and Warrington sub-region wholeheartedly agrees with the principle that decisions that affect our residents should be made at the most local level possible. Devolution offers the opportunity to increase local prosperity and ensure our public services meet local needs.”
3.11 Many of the responses to the consultation referred to broader issues relating to devolution, rather than the specifics of the Scheme. These responses are for the purposes of this consultation defined as out of scope and will be dealt with in another manner. These are none the less relevant to the future work of the LCRCA and the Combined Authority will reflect on these responses as it continues to communicate with residents and stakeholders as part of the implementation of devolution.
3.12 A summary of the equality monitoring information is detailed at appendix 5.
Page 49 4. ANALYSIS UNDER EACH OF THE POLICY AREAS
4.1 The analysis below provides quantitative and qualitative analysis under each of the policy areas with new powers as they are set out in the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Scheme.
4.2 The themes are detailed below in Table 5. Responses have been grouped into positive, negative and outside the scope of the consultation.
Table 5: Number of responses per policy theme Theme Number of respondents % of total respondents who left comments who left comments under this theme Skills and Employment 184 19.8% Housing and Planning 182 19.6% Transport and Highways 182 19.6% Business Support 135 14.5% Innovation 126 13.5% Energy and environment 180 19.4% Culture 144 15.5% Finance 131 14.1% Information Sharing 106 11.4% Constitutional and 146 15.7% Governance
Page 50 Policy Theme: Skills and Employment
4.3 As illustrated in the chart below, 184 respondents left a comment under the skills and employment part of the consultation. Of these, 109 (59%) were positive, providing constructive and positive comments whilst 26 (14%) were negative. 49 (27%) comments raised issues that were not in connection to the governance review and scheme that were the subject of the consultation.
4.4 Of the 184 responses, 31 were from key stakeholders and 29 (94%) of those responses were positive in relation to the specific issues raised through the governance review and scheme and two (6%) were outside the scope of the consultation.
Chart 1: Analysis of comments relating to the skills and employment theme
4.5 Table 6 highlights the key themes from those comments as far as possible to illustrate the broad areas within which comments were made.
Page 51 Table 6: Key themes from comments made under skills and employment
Classification Comments related to Total Positive No specific issues raised 31 Skills needs 10 Cross region working 8 Apprenticeships 7 Post 16 provision 6 Jobs 5 High level skills/jobs 5 Education 5 Careers Hub 3 Funding 3 NEETs 2 Household approach 2 Digital 2 Other comments included upskilling, young people, equality, culture, universities and high level skills, job NEETs, household approach, skills needs, funding and opportunities for under 21s 20 Positive Sub Total 109 Negative No specific issues raised 10 More local level 7 National issue 2 Unemployed 2 Other comments included more unskilled opportunities, devolve to local deliverers, oversight more difficult and lack of information. 5 Negative Sub Total 26 Outside Scope Sub Total 49 Total 184
4.6 The stakeholder responses were without exception supportive of the general approach being taken and realistic about the challenges that the City Region face.
4.7 A number of organisations highlighted some concerns around the lack of engagement with third sector and targeting of areas of inequality including:
“Need for more third sector involvement.” (Network for Merseyside)
Page 52 “Gender and other areas of inequality have been largely ignored.” (Women’s Organisation)
4.8 Unison provided one of the most in depth responses around this area and although supportive of cross region working in general, they also raised some concerns around the pressures on further education colleges to consider mergers as consequence of inadequate central government funding and the Area Review Process. They felt this lead to less locally tailored provision. Emphasis on careers advice and guidance being “employer led”. They felt this can be too focused on immediate needs of local employers. Instead careers advice should aim to encourage young people to achieve maximum individual potential. Unison welcomed the increased number of apprenticeships although believed there needs to be greater emphasis on their quality. “Apprentices need to receive high quality training in safe working environments.”
4.9 The majority of responses were general in nature and supportive of the proposals as well as welcoming the opportunity to work with the LCRCA around this in the future:
Workers Educational Association: “In general we welcome devolved local control of the post 19 Adult Education Budget but highlight that as a national charity they already have the flexibility to move resources to areas with the greatest need.
Merseyside Civic Society stated: “Although outside their normal scope the Civic Society recognised Skills and Employment as a “…vital component of the City Region’s future needs….and they welcome the establishment of the Employment and Skills Board…”
4.10 LCR Housing Associations’ response (First Ark Housing Group) supported a devolved approach to the provision of employment and skills initiatives. In particular they welcome the establishment of a Careers Hub, new approaches to support benefit claimant and an area based review of education and training.
Page 53 4.11 Science and Technology Facility Council stated: “Welcome working with Combined Authority to ensure that businesses in the region can access the skills they need now and in the future, and that will sustain Sci-Tech Daresbury in the long term.”
4.12 There was considerable support for co-commissioning and the need to bring local priorities into the design of employment and skills programmes.
VOLA welcomed recognition that successful support programmes in the past have been rooted in local communities. “Welcome opportunity to work with partners to co- design local programmes for local people.”
FACT welcomed the proposals, particularly the focus on “…digital skills, alongside basic literary and numeracy; increasing the pace and responsiveness of the skills system to meet the changing demand; the promotion of apprenticeship opportunities and improving accessibility to post 16 and post 19 skills provision or disadvantaged young people and hard to reach communities.”
Arts Council England stated “We specifically welcome the powers required to instigate 19+ adult skills commissioning, the plans to maximise apprenticeships, the area review of post-16 education and resulting skills strategy. The cultural sector in Liverpool already has played a strong role in this area and, in particular, LARC have been involved in creative apprenticeship programmes with real success.”
Cheshire Constabulary were supportive of proposals “…clear that offenders with stable and quality employment are less likely to re-offend- which include drugs use … Welcome being involved in co-designing programmes with partners.”
The Police and Crime Commissioner for Cheshire also commented “Designing future employment support with a household/family builds on existing integrated approach to complex families and could impact positively on offending behaviour and specific issues such as domestic abuse.”
4.13 A number of private sector responses and others expressed support for proposals designed to ensure that employers needs were better understood and addressed.
Page 54 ULEMCo Ltd stated: “Imperative that we secure powers to locally address the gap in skills and employment – local knowledge and ownership of this agenda.”
Liverpool Schools’ Parliament said: “Important that schools deliver required skills to their students that enhance their employability - work experience, support students going into apprenticeships.”
NW Systems stated: “I think the region should focus more on high value jobs and look to create and promote for technology businesses to establish themselves and cluster in the area.”
Policy Theme: Housing and Planning
4.14 The chart below shows that 182 respondents made a comment under the housing and planning element of the consultation. Of these, 134 (74%) were positive whilst 34 (19%) were negative. 14 (8%) comments raised issues that were not in connection to the governance review and scheme that were the subject of the consultation.
4.15 Of the 182 responses, 30 were from key stakeholders. All 30 (100%) were positive in relation to the specific issues raised through the governance review and scheme.
Page 55 Chart 2: Analysis of comments relating to the housing and planning theme
4.16 Table 7 illustrates the main issues on which responses were made. A strong history of housing partners working together already exists at a city region level and this is reflected in the positive responses made by the majority of key stakeholders to this consultation exercise.
4.17 Common issues raised by respondents included: housing affordability (especially for young people); providing housing choice; ensuring a central role for social housing in the development of any spatial planning and housing strategies; and the need to consider housing as part of a wider socio-economic strategy for the City Region was also raised with respect to the need for access to finance, generating higher wages and more investment in the City Region generally.
Page 56 Table 7: Key themes from comments made under housing and planning Classification Comments related to Total Positive Housing 42 Spatial Framework 24 Affordable housing 23 No specific issue raised 12 Brownfield Land / Green Space 5 CPOs 5 Lack of evidence 2 Housing & Employment 2 Mersey Waters 2 Community Facilities 2 Infrastructure 2 Governance / Decision Making 2 Other comments included Land Commission, MDC, power competence, heritage, social housing, retail, community, crime, environment, housing and employment, air quality and green belt 11 Positive Sub Total 134 Negative Governance / Decision Making 13 Housing 5 Spatial Framework 4 CPOs 4 Brownfield Land / Green Space 2 Other Political 1 Other comments included retail, environment and affordable housing 5 Negative Sub Total 34 Outside of Scope of the Consultation 14 TOTAL 182
4.18 First Ark Group submitted a joint response to the consultation on behalf of some of the Registered Social Landlords in the City Region. A number of individual RSLs also made individual responses.
Page 57 4.19 LCR Housing Associations welcomed the powers outlined in the Governance Review and Scheme. “We strongly support a plan for devolution which will address the needs and ambitions of varying housing markets. We strongly support the planning, housing and regeneration powers being devolved to LCR.” In relation to housing they believe that this “... will improve the supply and quality of housing, regeneration of areas, availability of land for housing development and recognition of the importance of housing in the wider public sector reform agenda.”
4.20 Together Liverpool supported the legal powers being sought by the LCRCA as the needs are clear but stressed that social housing balanced with affordable homes is vital.
4.21 Riverside Group warmly welcomed the proposed housing and planning powers which will be vested in the Mayor. They also welcome the proposed development of a LCR Statutory Spatial Framework should be evidence based and ambitious considering the housing demand and need at a city region level.
4.22 They make a further point that there is a strong history of Registered Providers working in partnership with local authorities across the City Region and this should be built upon to develop a serious strategic partnership at City Region level.
4.23 Luciana Berger MP submitted a wide ranging response which was broadly supportive of the housing and planning powers being sought. Ms Berger stated that provisions to better support the strategic development of land for housing, employment, and the Duty to Co-operate Protocol to establish good working relationships between the Combined Authority members and between them and neighbouring authorities will be useful tools to unblock supply side challenges across the City Region.
4.24 Ms Berger MP also laid out some broad concerns but recognised that the proposed Single Statutory City Region Framework offers the opportunity to set a clear strategic direction for how we use available land to support new jobs, homes and communities.
Page 58 4.25 The HCA have indicated a high level of support of the aims and objectives of devolution and was positive about the opportunities this brings for the Liverpool City Region. The Agency is also committed to working collaboratively with the LCRCA to support the delivery of new housing and wider regeneration activity.
4.26 The HCA response highlights support for the transfer of specific planning, housing and regeneration responsibilities and powers that have been agreed between LCRCA and Government through recent devolution agreements.
4.27 For example the HCA response highlights support for the principles of LCRCA having compulsory purchase powers, enabling the ability of the Combined Authority to unlock key sites to deliver housing and employment land. The HCA suggest that the LCRCA‘s Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) powers should be widely drawn so as to enable a CPO to be made for any of the statutory purposes and objects of LCRCA to ensure that the widest regeneration objectives can be achieved within the planning regime. The HCA state that CPO powers should not be exercisable over HCA land as the use of this land will be aligned to locally desired outcomes, achievable through existing working arrangements.
4.28 HCA suggest in their response that any surplus public sector land transfer in the Liverpool City Region area should be achieved through a new Protocol between HCA and LCRCA. This approach builds on the partnership approach HCA and LCRCA have taken to existing work.
4.29 HCA also expressed support for the establishment of the LCRCA Land Commission and the establishment of a Mayoral Development Corporation (MDC) although suggests a single MDC with the ability to bring parcels of land within it (rather than setting up many delivery arrangements) would be preferable.
4.30 A supportive response was also received from Cheshire and Warrington Economic Prosperity Board, who stated that they believed new powers over housing and planning will help the LCR to meet local needs.
Page 59 4.31 The Police and Crime Commissioner for Cheshire stated “The developments present both an opportunity and risk for policing. There are clear opportunities for the Constabulary to be involved at the early stages to influence the safe and secure design for homes, business premises and commercial infrastructure, including the adoption of the principles of Secure by Design in each development. The additional demand on policing needs to be factored into the resource implications and options explored to support this such as the use of the Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act and the Community Infrastructure Levy. Early inclusion…given the footprint of policing straddles two areas.”
4.32 VS6 is the partnership of voluntary, community, faith and social enterprise (VCFSE) infrastructure agencies operating across Liverpool City Region (LCR). With regards to housing and planning powers being sought, VS6 supported the development of community regeneration strategies, especially where most needed, drawing on and developing our understanding of how to build resilient and resourceful communities. The work of the City Region's two Well North pathfinder areas could be useful test beds.
4.33 LCR Housing Associations welcomed the powers outlined in the Governance Review and Scheme. “We strongly support a plan for devolution which will address the needs and ambitions of varying housing markets. We strongly support the planning, housing and regeneration powers being devolved to LCR.” In relation to Housing they believe that this “.. will improve the supply and quality of housing, regeneration of areas, availability of land for housing development and recognition of the importance of housing in the wider public sector reform agenda.”
4.34 The LCRCA welcomes the support and has noted the comments made. The Combined Authority will continue to work with partners in order to help meet the City Region’s housing need and, more specifically, the issue raised about social housing will be considered within the context of national policy and funding regimes. Comments on the Spatial Framework will be addressed as the work proceeds and other areas, for example in relation to CPOs, land transfer, the Land Commission and MDC, will be taken into account in further detailed discussions with key partners.
Page 60 Policy Theme: Transport and Highways
4.35 As illustrated in the chart below, 182 respondents left a comment under the transport and highways part of the consultation. Of these, 145 (80%) were positive whilst 19 (10%) were negative. 18 (10%) comments raised issues that were not in connection to the governance review and scheme that were the subject of the consultation. This demonstrates a considerable level of support for the transport proposals and the LCRCA which allow greater local control over transport issues and in particular support the rationale for aligning decisions over transport alongside other key decision at the City Region in economic development, housing and planning for example.
4.36 Of the 182 responses, 26 were from key stakeholders. 25 (96%) were positive in relation to the specific issues raised through the governance review and scheme and one was outside the scope of the consultation.
Chart 3: Analysis of comments relating to the transport and highways theme
4.37 Table 8 highlights the key themes under which the majority of comments were. Of the 182 responses to Transport powers, 26 were from stakeholders. These were overwhelmingly positive. In cases where concerns were highlighted, these were focused on the issues which the City Region has to address rather than being unsupportive of the devolution proposals and powers.
Page 61 4.38 Stakeholders recognised the need for continued collaboration on the City Region footprint while also driving forward much needed transport improvements across the Northern Powerhouse and into neighbouring economic areas such as Flintshire and Deeside.
Halton Chamber of Commerce responded by saying: “Transport and highways are as essential as any part of the devolution deal - good, accessible transport systems and well maintained roads are key to ensuring that the Liverpool City Region and especially its outlying boroughs have the right infrastructure in place to provide good connectivity.”
The Mersey Dee Alliance responded positively to the opportunity devolution offers for enhanced connectivity with the City Region: “The MDA already has strong links with Liverpool City Region via our longstanding partners in common; Wirral Council and Merseytravel. There is potential great benefit for the businesses and residents of Wirral and wider Mersey Dee area if economic development is supported and promoted for the LCR. We expect the links between LCR and the MDA to grow and develop as we continue to work with Wirral Council and Merseytravel in the future.”
The Police and Crime Commissioner for Cheshire commented that “The proposed road and rail network will impact on the local economy, making employment opportunities in Manchester and Liverpool more accessible. The rail and road networks impact on the regional and national infrastructure and so the proposals and funding need to consider this wider footprint across policing to ensure the safety and security of users and communities (e.g. joining up technology such as Automatic Number Plate Recognition and CCTV.”
4.39 The need to improve east-west transport links was recognised by a number of stakeholders such as local business NW Systems LTD who responded by saying: “North - South transport links are not a problem. The biggest problem is the lack of East - West transport links. This hinders business activity within Northern England and part of the Midlands. East - West infrastructure desperately needs improving to close the North - South divide and to make the Northern Powerhouse work.”
Page 62 Table 8: Key themes from comments made under transport and highways Classification Comments related to Total Positive No specific issues raised 25 Integrated transport system 17 Public transport is key 15 Investment in highways 15 Improve rail 14 Improve bus services 12 Connectivity 9 Mersey Gateway, road and rail improvements 6 Political 5 Port access 3 Environmental impacts 3 Tunnel tolls 2 Other comments included airport, business needs, distribution of funding, HS2, tolls, key route network, cost of public transport, distribution of funds and HS2 19 Positive Sub Total 145 Negative No specific issues raised 3 Investment in highways 2 Lack of evidence 2 Mersey Gateway, road and rail improvements 2 Political 2 Tunnel tolls 2 Other comments included highways management, impact of new road building, bus services, key route network and tolls 6 Negative Sub Total 19 Outside Scope of Consultation 18 Total 182
4.40 A number of stakeholders raised some concerns about transport services and recognised the potential to improve bus services through devolution.
Liverpool Schools Parliament response included the following statement: “Schools' Parliament played a key role in the introduction of My Ticket. This has made public transport much more affordable to young people. Their main concern now is regarding reliability of public transport particularly in the evening. Great concern is when bus does not turn up or drives straight past saying 'Not In Service' as driver is behind schedule.”
Page 63 Copperwood Media CiC raised the following concerns: “The highways in Liverpool are less than satisfactory, potholed and worn, the amount of traffic use is rising daily and the deterioration of the roads worsens, public transport is being choked by the influx of private vehicles into the City centre, we need a comprehensive overhaul of public transport to make it easier, safer and cheaper to travel in and out of the City.”
4.41 LCRCA recognises the concerns expressed by such stakeholders and believes that devolution, with greater local control over business and the rail network and transport investment will give the City Region a better opportunity to address these issues.
Policy Theme: Business Support
4.42 135 respondents left a comment under the business support part of the consultation. As the chart below illustrates, of these, 83 (61%) were positive whilst 12 (9%) were negative. 40 (30%) comments raised issues that were not in connection to the governance review and scheme that were the subject of the consultation.
4.43 Of the 135 responses, 26 were from key stakeholders. 22 (84%) were positive and one (4%) was negative in relation to the specific issues raised through the governance review and scheme and three (12%) were outside the scope of the consultation.
Page 64 Chart 4: Analysis of comments relating to the business support theme
4.44 Table 9 illustrates the key themes on which comments were received. More specifically, stakeholders provided a number of comments on the proposals. These proposals largely welcomed the greater collaboration and alignment of business support proposals which are at the heart of the LCR proposals.
4.45 In particular the private sector welcomed the inclusion of business support as an area within the devolution agreement and stressed how important it is for the future growth of the City Region’s businesses.
“Absolutely essential if we are to create and maintain sustainable well paid jobs.”
“It is welcoming to hear that the LCRCA is proposing to implement a simplified locally delivered and demand led strategy for business support, and hopefully remove the bureaucracy associated with assisting development and growth.”
Halton Chamber of Commerce has stated: “Locally based and locally developed programmes of support for business are essential if we are to build business density, sustain our existing businesses, and encourage new businesses to start. National programmes do not necessarily reflect the individual needs of specific areas and often prevent the support going to areas/businesses where it is most needed or of greatest value.”
Page 65 Table 9: Key themes from comments made under business support Classification Comments related to Total Positive No specific issue raised 38 Business support 9 Business rates 5 Inward investment 4 Skills 3 Lack of evidence 3 Incubators 2 Reduce number of organisations 2 Simplified delivery 2 New companies 2 Other comments included creative sector, Baltic, office space, skills, SMEs, support for young people, bring forward investments, evidence need, inward investment, region wide strategies, political and skills/third sector 13 Positive Sub Total 83 Negative No specific issue raised 5 Political 3 Other comments included business investment, jobs, inward investment and that others were already doing this 4 Negative Sub Total 12 Outside scope 40 Total 135
4.46 A significant number of respondents took the opportunity to comment on wider issues in relation to specific business support activities which sit outside of the scope of the consultation. However the LRCA recognise these as important issues for implementation moving forward.
“The quality and quantity of business support available to SMEs in the Liverpool City Region has declined considerably in the past 10 years and we welcome any steps that can be taken to address this. The proposals to "develop and implement a simplified, locally delivered and demand-led approach to business support" are welcomed, subject to ensuring (1) that attempts to simplify do not result in an over-simplistic approach that fails to address the diverse and specialised needs of businesses in different sectors [for example, Liverpool's fast-growing digital & creative industries sector] (2) that a localised focus does
Page 66 not come at the expense of connectivity with wider regional and national support mechanisms such as Creative England, Tech North and UKTI.” Liverpool FACT
“I see very little support available for tech companies, like ours, in the region. Even just finding adequate office space is a problem. The support available is often at a basic level only.” Private sector response
4.47 LCRCA welcomes all of the comments and constructive suggestions for how devolution moves forward and will engage with key stakeholders in moving the devolution business support proposals forward.
Policy Theme: Innovation
4.48 126 respondents left a comment under the innovation part of the consultation. The chart below shows that of these, 71 (56%) were positive whilst 11 (9%) were negative. 44 (35%) comments raised issues that were not in connection to the governance review and scheme that were the subject of the consultation.
4.49 Of the 126 responses, 23 were from key stakeholders. 23 (100%) were positive in relation to the specific issues raised through the governance review and scheme and one was outside the scope of the consultation.
Chart 5: Analysis of comments relating to the innovation theme
Page 67 Table 10: Key themes from comments made under innovation Classification Comments related to Total Positive No specific issue raised 26 Business development 14 Education 8 Inward investment 6 Universities 3 Create employment 3 Culture 3 Funding to capture innovation 3 Create media city 2 Comments included build on existing structures, lack of information and superfast broadband 3 Positive Sub Total 71 Negative Political 6 No specific issue raised 4 Business development 1 Negative Sub Total 11 Outside Scope Sub 44 Total 126
4.50 Table 10 highlights the key themes on which comments were made. Of these responses 19 were from stakeholders who provided a number of comments on the proposals. Many of these comments were outside the scope of the consultation and related generally to innovation rather than the devolution proposals.
4.51 A number of supportive comments included views from the private sector such as: “Innovation and R&D are costly and carry high risk within smaller companies, whilst it is exactly this sector where most of the innovations are being generated. This sector needs financial assistance and support (may be through further tax breaks) to take the benefits for R&D and innovations to the next level and make them commercially pay off. Clustering tech firms within the region would be hugely beneficial to the regional economy and prosperity.”
Page 68 “It's a bit harder to be clear how local intervention will have a material effect on growth from innovation, however using innovation to feed commercial exploitation of research and development as an opportunity for export and or to attract inward investment has to be a significant key to local growth, therefore having levers on this locally is an important part of the tool kit.”
“Funds should be made available to capture innovation from Merseyside residents & company's”
4.52 The importance of innovation as a theme for economic growth was recognised by many stakeholders and applied to their own area of responsibility. For example Liverpool Schools Parliament suggested “young people are much interested in this. Support for their involvement needs to be given.”
4.53 A key local arts stakeholder responded by saying “Innovation and design are paramount if we are to be seen as a forward thinking international city”.
4.54 The LCRCA recognises the vital importance of innovation to the economy and to future growth aspirations. Much of innovation policy is influenced by national policy and through devolution, the LCRCA intends to continue to articulate the needs and opportunities of the City Region and to seek to influence policy and achieve greater local decision making.
Policy Theme: Energy and Environment
4.55 180 respondents left a comment under the energy and environment part of the consultation. As the chart below illustrates, of these, 77 (43%) were positive whilst 47 (26%) were negative. 56 (31%) comments raised issues that were not in connection to the governance review and scheme that were the subject of the consultation.
4.56 Of the 180 responses, 25 were from key stakeholders. 20 (80%) were positive, providing support for the proposals and constructive comments and one was negative in relation to the specific issues raised through the governance review and scheme and four were outside the scope of the consultation.
Page 69 Chart 6: Analysis of comments relating to the energy and environment theme
4.57 Table 11 below illustrates the key themes which have been raised through the comments. Many of the 25 responses from key stakeholders were supportive of the energy proposals or the ambition and provided general support. Some examples of stakeholder comments include:
“Conservation of energy is essential and investment into non disruptive environmental energy producing sources should continue to be improved upon and encouraged.” (North West Training Council)
“We support the proposals.” (First Ark)
“We support this area as a further essential requirement of the devolution deal for the Liverpool City Region.” (Halton Chamber of Commerce and Enterprise)
“Proactive long term view and plan.” (Community Foundations for Lancashire and Merseyside)
Page 70 Table 11: Key themes from comments made under energy and environment Classification Comments related to Total Positive No specific issue raised 28 Tidal power 16 More solar wind and tidal 10 Energy saving 6 Energy efficient buildings 4 Renewable energy 4 Local benefit 2 Other comments included air quality, community energy, CHP/incineration, local control, saving energy and tidal power but not at the expense of a functioning river 7 Positive Sub Total 77 Negative Tidal barrage impact on wildlife 38 No specific issue raised 5 National issue 2 Political 1 Tidal power 1 Negative Sub Total 47 Outside scope 56 Total 180
4.58 The main concern which was highlighted by a number of stakeholders highlighted reservations about mega schemes as the best way to achieve the ambition to create green energy:
“The provision of an efficient and green energy supplies are essential for business development and growth and are one of the key area's in being able to attract new Business to the LCRCA. The LCRCA should not just focus on the Tidal Power scheme but also on other schemes likely to provide an advantage to business.” (unidentified organisation, Halton)
“Add the rapidly developing biomass industry as an important feature for the City Region. The natural environment plays an enormous role in quality of place and life in the City Region. The Local Nature Partnership can play a role in supporting the City Region to maximise the value of this asset.” (The Mersey Forest)
Page 71 “There are many opportunities for energy generation in LCR. We should be careful of focussing too strongly on giant projects (such as tidal) rather than smaller distributed models - which can be developed and installed much more rapidly, and are more robust.…. Encouraging the 6 LAs to work together is very much welcomed, as is devolution of powers. But there are almost no references to civil society, the Third Sector, and the involvement of the people of Liverpool. We need real partnerships to bring about the needed changes in LCR.” (Network For Europe)
“Tidal power is still a bit of a pipe dream, we should really look into creating our own power via CHP and incineration of rubbish instead if shipping it to the North East.” (Halton Chamber of Commerce)
“Too focused on tidal when development in energy and environmental are much wider than that - this needs further expansion.” (The Women’s Organisation)
4.59 Several responses supported the economic potential of the low carbon sector:
“Glad to see wind becoming a real contributor to the local power generation. There is a lot of potential for green power / technology firms. This is another area the region potentially could focus on as a key economic driver. Decarbonised energy is the future and will be decentralised. The devolved powers are essential on this.” (ULEMCo Ltd)
4.60 Several respondents objected strongly to the use of the word “obstacles” in relation to the Estuary:
“This content fails to recognise the international environmental asset that the Mersey and Liverpool Bay already is, in terms of the natural environment, other than to express it, by inference, as an "obstacle". A more integrated approach is essential and would express a wider ambition. The current phrasing is too narrow.” (The Wildlife Trust for Lancashire, Manchester, and North Merseyside)
4.61 Another respondent was critical of the proposal and emphasised the importance of zero carbon housing:
Page 72 “I think this is probably the weakest part of the document and should go much further. I totally agree with the emphasis on sustainable energy sources BUT that without high quality homes with as near zero energy usage will fall short.” (Together Liverpool)
4.62 The Local Nature Partnership felt that the City Region needed to better integrate environmental sustainability and the blue-green economy:
“The economic prosperity, health and well-being of the City Region depends upon a resilient, well managed and cared-for environmental resources. The natural environment defines our unique sense of place. The commitment to sustainability through the Strategic Spatial Framework is welcomed and supported but the LCR Devolution and Governance arrangements could be significantly strengthened through the integration of environmental sustainability / blue-green economy. Constraints to the delivery of projects, including tidal energy, and how these can be effectively managed within the existing regulatory framework will need to be integrated into any assessment of scheme risk and/or feasibility.”
4.63 The written response from RSPB highlights concerns about a tidal power scheme and in particular, its impact upon migrating birds, stating that it “may threaten the health and wellbeing of your iconic natural asset, the River Mersey.”
4.64 The LCRCA recognises the considerable environmental assets and opportunities which exist in the City Region. Such ambition will require substantial planning and feasibility and many of the concerns raised by stakeholders can be addressed through the planning stages of any developments and schemes.
4.65 A large proportion of the overall negative comments made, as illustrated in table 11, related to the development of a tidal power scheme and its potential impact on wildlife in the estuary. LCRCA recognises the concerns expressed and these will be addressed as part of the development of a scheme and the wider stakeholder involvement that will be undertaken. The LCRCA believes that devolution will give greater local control over the development of energy schemes and other environmental initiatives and will give the City Region a better opportunity to address the issues raised above.
Page 73 Policy Theme: Culture
4.66 144 respondents left a comment under the culture part of the consultation. As the chart below shows, of these, 90 (63%) were positive whilst 11 (8%) were negative. 43 (30%) comments raised issues that were not in connection to the governance review and scheme that were the subject of the consultation.
4.67 Of the 144 responses, 23 were from key stakeholders. 21 (91%) were positive and none were negative the specific issues raised through the governance review and scheme. Two comments were outside the scope of the consultation.
Chart 7: Analysis of comments relating to the culture theme
4.68 Table 12 shows the main themes which were raised by respondents in their comments.
4.69 All comments from key stakeholders were broadly supportive of the focus on culture and many emphasised the strength of the cultural offer in the City Region:
“We are blessed with a rich heritage of cultural venues, we just need to help promote these.” (Halton Chamber of Commerce)
“I think Liverpool has one of the best offers on the international platform.” (Bluecoat Display Centre)
Page 74 “…we are a City of Culture, that is what we have grown up on, in this aspect we are innovators and trend setters and we need to continue with this growth, we need to invest heavily and strengthen our place as cultural leaders.” (Copperwood Media CiC)
“One of the best in the UK. That's what makes the region attractive. It is not exploited enough to keep high achievers and young talent in the area though.”
Arts Council England commented “We are extremely pleased that culture has such a strong role in your devolution plans; we believe that this is a national benchmark. We hope you share the notion that culture is an essential attribute in place-making and, as such, contributes to all the areas in this review.”
Table 12: Key themes from comments made under culture Classification Comments related to Total Positive Wider economic and social benefits 30 No specific issues raised 25 Create pride/cultural identity for region 15 See benefits locally 13 Diverse culture 2 Cross region working 1 Engagement 1 Fair and accountable governance 1 Liverpool Cultural Partnership 1 Funding 1 Positive Sub Total 90 Negative No specific issues raised 4 No additional benefit 3 Balance across region 1 Local areas will miss out 1 Money best spent elsewhere 1 See benefits locally 1 Negative Sub Total 11 Outside scope 43 Total 144
Page 75 4.70 Three responses specifically supported the cultural partnership approach:
“We welcome the explicit inclusion of culture within the proposals, including the establishment of a Cultural Partnership to lead the development of a coherent strategy for the City Region.” (FACT Foundation for Art and Creative Technology)
“We would propose that the Mayor should lead a process to establish a cultural partnership at high level with the express aim of creating a twenty year plan for culture which places Liverpool as the strongest cultural and creative city in the UK outside London. The plan should then become the means of aligning resources from the various local authorities, as well as national funding from DCMS agencies and others.” (Royal Liverpool Philharmonic)
“We welcome the direct focus on culture as a driver for growth, and on the establishment of a cultural partnership.” (Arts Council England)
4.71 Arts Council England raised specific issues in relation to their role: “We do not anticipate devolving decision-making power over investments, but we do anticipate decisions taking strong account of mutual priorities. We also anticipate sharing and, indeed, shaping our knowledge and expertise in the development of the cultural strategy. We are confident that our track record of mature partnership working in the City Region will support a game changing cultural partnership.”
4.72 A majority of responses made positive suggestions for an area or theme that should be emphasised within culture activity and devolution proposals with repeated points made including:
More partnership working: involve 3rd sector, private sector, faith sector Use social media and enhance marketing of events Involve young people even more Reflect/involve diverse communities , promote multi culturalism Ensure a geographic spread of activity
Page 76 4.73 A number of responses focussed on culture’s positive impact of the visitor economy, e.g.
“Liverpool as the attack brand has a significant cultural offer already, which can be maximised through the devolution deal, providing a knock-on effect to the region as whole.” (Halton Chamber of Commerce & Enterprise)
“Increasing visitor numbers to the LCRCA Region will provide opportunities for increased interest as well as income and employment.” (unidentified organisation from Halton)
Some comments highlighted or welcomed the potential of working at City Region scale:
“LCR will be in a position to promote the whole region internationally.” (Eco Hubs Merseyside)
“Encouraging the 6 LAs to work together is very much welcomed, as is devolution of powers.” (Network for Europe)
“We are pleased to see the proposed amendment to give visitor promotion powers, and we hope to continue to find ways to support the successful cultural aspects of the visitor economy. We support a strong and vibrant set of cultural organisations in the City Region and recognise their role in attracting visitors to the city.” (Arts Council England)
4.74 Many organisations made comments supportive of the inclusion of culture as part of the devolution proposals and recognising its importance to wider economic growth. STFC Daresbury stated that “We would advocate for science, technology and innovation to be promoted as part of the cultural offer of the region, complementing and in many cases augmenting the region’s strong cultural identity in the arts, music, sport and architecture.”
4.75 LCRCA notes these comments and given the unique importance of culture to the LCR devolution agreement welcomes the significant level of support for these proposals as it moves forward to implementation.
Page 77 Policy Theme: Information Sharing
4.76 106 respondents left a comment under the information sharing part of the consultation. As the chart below illustrates, 78 (74%) were positive whilst 17 (16%) were negative. 11 (10%) comments raised issues that were not in connection to the governance review and scheme that were the subject of the consultation.
4.77 Of the 106 responses, 18 were from key stakeholders. All 18 (100%) were positive in relation to the specific issues raised through the governance review and scheme.
Chart 8: Analysis of comments relating to the information sharing theme
4.78 Table 13 shows the main themes which were raised by respondents in their comments.
Page 78 Table 13: Key themes from comments made under information sharing Classification Comments related to Total Positive Collaborative Working 23 No specific issue raised 21 Data protection 10 Transparency 9 Communication 5 Innovation 3 Lack of information 3 Governance & Decision Making 2 Safeguarding 2 Positive Sub Total 78 Negative Communication 4 Data Protection 4 No specific issue raised 3 Transparency 3 Collaborative Working 1 Consultation 1 Lack of information 1 Negative Sub Total 17 Outside scope 11 Total 106
4.79 Stakeholders provided a number of comments on the proposals. All were positive and examples include:
From Bluecoat Display Centre: “Collaboration can prove helpful to small businesses who cannot access large funding pots individually.”
Halton Chamber of Commerce stated: “Greater information sharing between partners is essential if we are to build trust, work together more effectively and avoid past, parochial issues.”
Network for Europe commented: “Important. Not just for education - we need a more joined up, comprehensive understanding of what are our problems, and which activities are effective. Encouraging the six local authorities to work together is very much welcomed, as is devolution of powers. But there are almost no references to civil society, the Third Sector, and the involvement of the people of Liverpool. We need real partnerships to bring about the needed changes in LCR.”
Page 79
ULEMCo Ltd stated that “The new structures will definitely help this, with less overlap and a more cohesive decision making environment.”
Policy Theme: Finance
4.80 131 respondents left a comment under the finance part of the consultation. Of these, 76 (58%) were positive whilst 22 (17%) negative. 33 (25%) comments raised issues that were not in connection to the governance review and scheme that were the subject of the consultation.
4.81 Of the 131 responses, 22 were from key stakeholders. 17 (77%) were positive and one (5%) was negative in relation to the specific issues raised through the governance review and scheme. Four comments were outside the scope of the consultation.
Chart 9: Analysis of comments relating to the finance theme
4.82 Table 14 illustrates the key themes which were apparent in the comments made in this area. Stakeholders provided a number of comments on the proposals. These were almost all supportive and constructive.
Page 80 Table 14: Key themes from comments made under finance Classification Comments related to Total Positive Funding 23 No specific issue raised 16 Investment 12 Financial management 10 Transparency 3 Business rates 2 Lack of information 2 Other comments included borrowing, support for business, concern will over commit, culture, policing, culture, voluntary sector and welfare 8 Positive Sub Total 76 Negative Funding 9 Taxes & Levies 4 Business Rates 2 No specific issues raised 2 Other comments included financial management, investment, political and transparency 5 Negative Sub Total 22 Outside Scope 33 Total 131
4.83 Supportive comments included views such as those from the Science and Technology Facilities council (STFC) at Daresbury in relation to the establishment of the Single Investment Fund:
“We anticipate that the creation of the Single Investment Fund will be helpful in this context as a clear and strategically managed pathway for allocation of resources. Speed of decision making will be critical for Sci Tech Daresbury as a high growth location and we look forward to establishing a positive and proactive interface with the Combined Authority and Mayor.”
4.84 Neighbouring authorities are also in support of the proposals and for greater fiscal devolution. Warrington Borough Council responded by saying that they particularly welcome “greater devolution of financial powers vital for further growth”.
Page 81 4.85 Arts Council England stated “We expect to align our resources and priorities to support the city regions and will endeavour to allow as much flexibility as possible in order that our investment can match, unlock or lever other resources. This may apply, for example, to the single investment fund or the business rates pilot.”
4.86 The LCRCA is working hard to ensure that its proposals for the Single Investment deliver a step change in local decision making and unlock those projects which will best deliver growth for the City Region. The supportive nature of the comments in this area is welcomed and will be built upon moving forward.
4.87 Some concern was expressed over the potential ability to levy business rates or precepts from the private sector:
“Any further supplements and levies on Business rates or local councils will undermine the opportunities to generate interest for new business development or expansion in the region and may disadvantage the LCRCA versus other regions in the UK.”
4.88 Some respondents felt there remain areas of fiscal devolution for the Combined Authority to consider, First Ark Housing group stated: “We support the proposals and would add additional powers to add all health and social care finance and expenditure and we would also link this to housing.”
4.89 Halton Chamber of Commerce suggest that greater devolution requires significant control over resources and stated “We will only be devolved when we have the ability over finances.”
4.90 The LCRCA remains committed to making the most effective use of public funds and to exploring further stages of devolution with Government. The Combined Authority is committed to public service reform and believes that greater collaboration and alignment of budgets will enable us to better target our resources, reduce duplication, improve public services and deliver better value for money for residents. The Combined Authority is committed to transparent financial decision making and this will continue to form a key element of our approach.
Page 82 Policy Theme: Constitutional and Governance
4.91 146 respondents left a comment under the governance and constitutional part of the consultation. As the chart below shows, 73 (50%) were positive whilst 50 (34%) were negative. 23 (16%) comments raised issues that were not in connection to the governance review and scheme that were the subject of the consultation.
4.92 Of the 146 responses, 26 were from key stakeholders. 24 (92%) were positive and two (8%) were negative in relation to the specific issues raised through the governance review and scheme and none were outside the scope of the consultation.
Chart 10: Analysis of comments relating to governance
4.93 Table 15 summarises the comments received under this theme in relation to the key issues raised.
4.94 The comments from stakeholders were largely supportive and constructive. Many respondents recognised the demand and need for devolution in the City Region and agreed the proposals were an important move forward. Supportive comments included views such as:
Page 83 “The MDA supports a Combined Authority to provide strong leadership, whilst protecting the integrity and the existing role and functions of local authorities. The MDA further supports a governance proposal that will ensure a system of checks and balances providing accountability and transparency.” Mersey Dee Alliance
“In general terms, we support the proposed Combined Authority and Mayoral constitutional and governance arrangements.” Riverside Housing Group
Table 15: Key themes from comments made under governance Classification Comments related to Total Positive Needs to be fair and accountable 30 Not enough information 12 No specific issues 8 Essential for business 2 Should think bigger 2 Strong City Region 2 Comments included involve Trade Unions, inclusive, better framework to deal with budgets, communication with businesses, Scrutiny key, devolved further to community level, interaction with MPs, careful balance with checks, how will voice of YP be heard and strong City Region 17 Positive Sub Total 73 Negative Don’t feel part of City Region 9 Undemocratic 8 Not enough information 8 Borough level governance 8 No specific issues 2 Added level of bureaucracy 2 Comments included need assembly, don’t support mayoral system, powers from local council, governance is poor, keep local, fair and accountable 13 Negative Sub Total 50 Outside scope 23 Total 146
Page 84 4.95 A number of private sector views were submitted and included support for the proposals as an important element of the business environment: “Essential for business security”.
4.96 This support also raised the need for checks and balances “Business needs to have confidence the powers in charge are steering them in the direction they need to go. Consultation and communication is essential.”
4.97 Many views from stakeholders also provided comments, recognising the value of collaborative decision making which has been taking place in the City Region and highlight a desire to see this approach to collaborative governance continue.
4.98 A voluntary and community sector response includes the following comment:
“We would like to stress our support in LCR Combined Authority’s move towards securing greater devolved powers for our region. Greater local control allows for better democracy, improved provision of services and ultimately a healthier and happier society.”
4.99 Many respondents highlighted the opportunity for greater democratic engagement which a directly elected Mayor offers and also the opportunity to strengthen local engagement and co-operation.
A response from Unison states: “Decision making in the LCR should be characterised by clear lines of democratic accountability and meaningful public engagement…. It is important that structures and procedures are put in place that involve trade unions so that the workers voice can be heard.”
4.100 Luciana Berger, MP states “It is clear from the range of functions, powers and budgets that are to be devolved that this new role of Metro Mayor of the LCR is of regional, national and international significance. As such, it is a role that must be properly democratically accountable and be seen to be democratically accountable to the people of the LCR, not only through regular direct elections, but through meaningful and engaging scrutiny by stakeholders across the region.”
Page 85 4.101 The Police and Crime Commissioner for Cheshire commented “The LCR cuts across two policing areas with separate governance and funding arrangements. Potential benefits, investment and requirements for policing need to be considered in this context. This is not considered to be a barrier to the LCR. The arrangements for influencing, decision making and accountability need to be an early consideration within the governance arrangements. This is an opportunity, however, to improve the working relationship between the public services and ultimately improve the service delivery for the communities across the six local authority areas.”
4.102 A number of respondents highlighted the opportunity to address equality and diversity in a more meaningful way at the local level. The Women’s Organisation responded by saying:
“The Combined Authority has the responsibility to set the tone at the top by working proactively to improve diversity and set the best practice standard for diversity at all levels from strategy to implementation. “
4.103 These are comments with which the LCRCA would agree. As we work towards the implementation of the full range of devolution powers, we will continue to consult with those organisations and partners who have an important role to play in delivering devolution. The LCRCA continues to review its functions and arrangements and work is already being undertaken on proposed new scrutiny arrangements which will be fit for purpose for the new governance model from May 2017 and will encompass all those requirements of Central Government which will be set out in an Order outlining Overview and Scrutiny arrangements.
4.104 The LCRCA recognises that there are many concerns over the how the devolved powers are to be implemented and that strong engagement with all stakeholders, the public and elected members will be an important focus for it work. We believe that the directly elected mayoral model, as outlined in our proposals with appropriate checks and balances will support this.
Page 86 4.105 LCRCA is pleased that so many of the respondents recognised the scale of the opportunity and challenge facing the City Region and that these can be addressed effectively by a stronger model of governance. These comments have been made in respect of the many devolution proposals which will be implemented for transport, employment and skills, housing and planning etc. and recognise such powers will strengthen the LCR’s ability to deal with a range of issues which affect growth.
5. NEXT STEPS
5.1 Following the consideration of the consultation responses, LCR is satisfied that devolving the powers as set out in the Scheme will lead to an improvement in the exercise of the functions in relation to the LCRCA area.
5.2 The views expressed will support the work of the Combined Authority in shaping the devolution agenda and taking forward the implementation of the devolution proposals agreed so far.
5.3 The general responses to the consultation will be used to inform the work of the LCRCA.
Page 87 APPENDIX 1: Communications and Consultation Plan
Below is a summary of the planned activities to be undertaken as part of the consultation.
The consultation will be conducted primarily through digital channels with consultation feedback gathered via the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority website, although respondents will be able to submit responses by email to a the LCR Devolution email account [email protected] or in writing to Lucy Horne, Liverpool City Council, Municipal Buildings, Dale Street, Liverpool, L2 2DH.
The consultation will commence on Friday, 24 June and will run for six weeks. The deadline for feedback is Friday, 5 August 2016. This would enable the findings to be presented at the Combined Authority meeting on Friday, 19 August 2016.
A communications toolkit has been developed by Knowsley Council’s communications team (Appendix 1) to ensure consistency of messages. In addition, FAQs have also been developed to help inform the process.
Date Method Target Feedback mechanism audience 24 June 2016 CA website Public CA Website/email/letter 24 June 2016 LA / Merseytravel and LEP Public CA website Website/email/letter 24 June 2016 Media release Media partners CA and public Website/email/letter 24 June 2016 Social media – LA / Public, CA Merseytravel and LEP stakeholders Website/email/letter accounts 24 June 2016 Internal communications Staff CA channels within all LA / Website/email/letter Merseytravel / LEP 24 June 2016 Member update to all Councillors CA Councillors in each of the Website/email/letter LA areas 24 June 2016 FAQs for LCR CA website Public CA to assist with consultation Website/email/letter 24 June 2016 Information leaflet plus Public CA hard copy questionnaire Website/email/letter/ available in Council questionnaire reception areas
Page 88 24 June 2016 Letter to key stakeholders Stakeholders CA including G12, MPs, Website/email/letter Members in each of the six LA areas, Chambers of Commerce, business groups / email newsletters, strategic partnership boards in LA areas 24 June – 5 Local seminars for Elected CA August 2016 members as appropriate Members Website/email/letter 6 July 2016 LCRCA Scrutiny Committee to review the Review and Scheme 18 July 2016 Refreshed web and Public and CA intranet copy reminding stakeholders Website/email/letter residents and stakeholders of the consultation deadline 1 August 2016 Refreshed web and Public and CA intranet copy – still time stakeholders Website/email/letter to feed back comments 5 August 2016 Consultation closes 9 August 2016 Collation of feedback received via the CA website / email / postal address 19 August Presentation of findings to 2016 LCRCA meeting and publish on CA website 26 August Submission to Secretary of 2016 State including summary of consultation responses
Page 89 APPENDIX 2: Communications Toolkit
CA / LA / LEP and Merseytravel website text plus resident communications e.g. residents’ magazine, Community Messaging
Consultation on devolution arrangements for the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority
We're living through the most exciting changes to how England is governed for generations. The Liverpool City Region is one of the few areas that has led the way on ‘devolution agreements’ that will move decision-making on crucial public services like local transport, housing, health and skills training closer to local people.
The Liverpool City Region Combined Authority was established in April 2014 and over the last two years, it has achieved a great deal. From £150 million investment in 14 transport improvement schemes, £9 million of Growth Deal funding invested in the International Festival for Business 2016 and Littlewoods Studios (a project that will transform the empty iconic Littlewoods building on Edge Lane into state-of-the-art film studios), through to £21.5 million invested in over 30 projects to enhance current learning facilities or build new ones, along with the identification of key housing and development sites across the region to drive future economic growth, this is just the start!
We made our devolution agreements with Government in November 2015 and March 2016 showing how the Liverpool City Region’s 1.5 million people could benefit from a new kind of local control of vital aspects that impact on the region, their life, the local economy and their future. The initial devolution agreement secured £900 million of funding and identified a number of priority areas where resources and decision making would be devolved from central Government to the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority and the Liverpool City Region Mayor.
The priority areas are employment and skills, housing and planning, transport, innovation, business growth and support, energy, culture and finance. Devolution means that decisions about these priority issues will be made locally, by people who know the area better (and the challenges we face) than people in Whitehall. In addition to greater funding and control over decision making, part of the devolution deal was also a commitment to have a directed elected Mayor for the Liverpool City Region in May 2017.
Furthermore, in March 2016, further powers and responsibilities were announced giving the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority additional new powers over transport, piloting the 100% business rates retention approach across the Liverpool
Page 90 City Region, plus working in partnership with the Government on children’s services, health, housing and justice.
In order for devolution to happen under a Mayoral Combined Authority, we need to review the functions and governance arrangements of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority. In addition, we need to set out the specific powers to be devolved from Government to the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (LCRCA) and directly elected Mayor in a Scheme. LCRCA won’t be using its proposed powers alone – but rather in partnership with the six local councils (Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Sefton and Wirral), Government and other public bodies.
This Review and Scheme has now been published and we now need your views on the legal powers proposed for the LCRCA in the Scheme and the associated governance arrangements. We will outline what the proposals, inform you of where to find more detail if you need it, and ask for your comments.
You can tell us your views on the new devolution powers by completing the online survey, via email or in writing. The closing date for feedback is Friday, 5 August 2016 and further information, including Frequently Asked Questions, can be found on the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority website – www.liverpoolcityregion- ca.gov.uk
Media release
Consultation on devolution arrangements for the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority
We're living through the most exciting changes to how England is governed for generations. The Liverpool City Region is one of the few areas that has led the way on ‘devolution agreements’ that will move decision-making on crucial public services like local transport, housing, health and skills training closer to local people.
The Liverpool City Region Combined Authority was established in April 2014 and over the last two years, it has achieved a great deal. From £150 million investment in 14 transport improvement schemes, £9 million of Growth Deal funding invested in the International Festival for Business 2016 and Littlewoods Studios (a project that will transform the empty iconic Littlewoods building on Edge Lane into state-of-the-art film studios), through to £21.5 million invested in over 30 projects to enhance current learning facilities or build new ones, along with the identification of key housing and development sites across the region to drive future economic growth, this is just the start!
Page 91 We made our devolution agreements with Government in November 2015 and March 2016 showing how the Liverpool City Region’s 1.5 million people could benefit from a new kind of local control that impact on the region, their life, the local economy and their future.
The initial devolution agreement in November 2015 secured £900 million of funding and identified a number of priority areas where resources and decision making would be devolved from central Government to the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority and City Region Mayor.
The priority areas are employment and skills, housing and planning, transport, innovation, business growth and support, energy, culture and finance. Devolution means that decisions about these priority issues will be made locally, by people who know the area better (and the challenges we face) than people in Whitehall. In addition to greater funding and control over decision making, part of the devolution deal was also a commitment to have a directed elected Mayor for the Liverpool City Region in May 2017.
Furthermore, in March 2016, further powers and responsibilities were announced giving the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority additional new powers over transport, piloting the 100% business rates retention approach across the Liverpool City Region, plus working in partnership with the Government on children’s services, health, housing and justice.
In order for devolution to happen under a Mayoral Combined Authority, we need to review the functions and governance arrangements of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (LCRCA) and set out the specific powers to be devolved from Government to the Combined Authority and directly elected Mayor in a Scheme. LCRCA won’t be using its proposed powers alone – but rather in partnership with the six local councils (Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Sefton and Wirral), Government officials and other public bodies.
This Review and Scheme has now been published, but key to this process is seeking the views of people who live or work in the Liverpool City Region. You can provide feedback through an online survey, available at www.liverpoolcityregion-ca.gov.uk. There you will find a summary of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority’s functions, what powers will be devolved, how the Combined Authority plans to manage them and then ask for your comments. In addition, comments can be provided via email or in writing, plus hard copies of the survey are available in each local authority reception area.
Page 92 The closing date for feedback is Friday, 5 August 2016 and further information, including Frequently Asked Questions, can be found on the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority website – www.liverpoolcityregion-ca.gov.uk
The findings of this review will be presented to The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Greg Clarke MP. He will then consider approving a Liverpool City Region Order, which enables the powers and resources for the directly elected Mayor and Combined Authority to be devolved by Government.
Ends
For further information, contact the Communications Team on 0151 443 3536.
Internal communications / intranet / staff newsletters etc.
Consultation on devolution arrangements for the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority
The Liverpool City Region Combined Authority was established in April 2014 and over the last two years, it has achieved a great deal . . . .
From £150 million investment in 14 transport improvement schemes, £9 million of Growth Deal funding invested in the International Festival for Business 2016 and Littlewoods Studios (a project that will transform the empty iconic Littlewoods building on Edge Lane into state-of-the-art film studios), through to over £21.5 million invested in over 30 projects to enhance current learning facilities or build new ones, along with the identification of key housing and development sites across the region to drive future economic growth, this is just the start!
Through the Combined Authority, the Liverpool City Region is one of the few city regions who have led the way on ‘devolution agreements’ that will move decision- making on crucial public services like local transport, housing, health and skills training closer to local people. We made our devolution agreements with Government in November 2015 and March 2016 showing how the Liverpool City Region’s 1.5 million people could benefit from a new kind of local control that impact on the region, their life, the local economy and their future.
The initial devolution agreement secured £900 million of funding and identified a number of priority areas where resources and decision making would be devolved from central Government to the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority and City Region Mayor.
Page 93 The priority areas are employment and skills, housing and planning, transport, innovation, business growth and support, energy, culture and finance. Devolution means that decisions about these priority issues will be made locally, by people who know the area better (and the challenges we face) than people in Whitehall. In addition to greater funding and control over decision making, part of the devolution deal was also a commitment to have a directed elected Mayor for the Liverpool City Region in May 2017.
Furthermore, in March 2016, further powers and responsibilities were announced giving the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority additional new powers over transport, piloting the 100% business rates retention approach across the Liverpool City Region, plus working in partnership with the Government on children’s services, health, housing and justice.
In order for devolution to happen under a Mayoral Combined Authority, we need to review the functions and governance arrangements of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (LCRCA) and set out the specific powers to be devolved from Government to the CA and directly elected Mayor in a Scheme. LCRCA won’t be using its proposed powers alone – but rather in partnership with the six local councils (Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Sefton and Wirral), Government officials and other public bodies.
This Review and Scheme has now been published and we want to hear your views on the legal powers proposed for the LCRCA in the Scheme and the associated governance arrangements. We’ll outline what the proposals are, show you where to find more detail if you need it, and ask for your comments.
You can tell us your views on the new devolution powers by completing the online survey, send us an email at [email protected] or write to us at Lucy Horne, Liverpool City Council, Municipal Buildings, Dale Street, Liverpool, L2 2DH. An information leaflet and hard copies of the survey will also be available in each local authority reception area. The closing date for feedback is Friday, 5 August 2016 and further information, including Frequently Asked Questions, can be found on the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority website – www.liverpoolcityregion- ca.gov.uk
Page 94 Letter to stakeholders
Please note the Chair of the CA will write to stakeholders in Appendix 1, but please use this template letter for other stakeholders not on this list
Dear
As you know, the Liverpool City Region has big ambitions for the future and great opportunities lie ahead.
Since its establishment in April 2014, the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority has achieved so much. From £150 million investment in 14 transport improvement schemes, £9 million of Growth Deal funding invested in the International Festival for Business 2016 and Littlewoods Studios (a project that will transform the empty iconic Littlewoods building on Edge Lane into state-of-the-art film studios), through to over £21.5 million invested in over 30 projects to enhance current learning facilities or build new ones, along with the identification of key housing and development sites across the region to drive future economic growth. But this is just the start!
We are now at a point where we have secured a devolution deal with the Government and we are now in the process of securing a major transfer of power (including decision making and funding) enabling us to build on our existing strengths and advantages, including our history and heritage, deep water ports, strong cultural offering and growing knowledge and manufacturing sectors.
The initial devolution agreement secured £900 million of funding and identified a number of priority areas where resources and decision making would be devolved from central Government to the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority and City Region Mayor.
The priority areas are employment and skills, housing and planning, transport, innovation, business growth and support, energy, culture and finance. Devolution means that decisions about these priority issues will be made locally, by people who know the area better (and the challenges we face) than people in Whitehall. In addition to greater funding and control over decision making, part of the devolution deal was also a commitment to have a directed elected Mayor for the Liverpool City Region in May 2017.
Furthermore, in March 2016, further powers and responsibilities were announced giving the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority additional new powers over transport, piloting the 100% business rates retention approach across the Liverpool City Region, plus working in partnership with the Government on children’s services, health, housing and justice.
Page 95
In order for devolution to happen under a Mayoral Combined Authority, we need to review the functions and governance arrangements of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (LCRCA) and set out the specific powers to be devolved from Government to the LCRCA and directly elected Mayor in a Scheme. LCRCA won’t be using its proposed powers alone – but rather in partnership with the six local councils (Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Sefton and Wirral), Government officials and other public bodies.
This Review and Scheme has now been published and I am now seeking your views on the legal powers proposed for the LCRCA in the Scheme and the associated governance arrangements. You can tell me your views on the new devolution powers by completing the online survey, you can email devolution@liverpoolcityregion- ca.gov.uk or send your comments in writing to Lucy Horne, Liverpool City Council, Municipal Buildings, Dale Street, Liverpool, L2 2DH. The closing date for feedback is Friday, 5 August 2016 and further information, including Frequently Asked Questions, can be found on the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority website – www.liverpoolcityregion-ca.gov.uk
Yours sincerely
Businesses, stakeholders and Members – email / letter / meetings
Consultation on devolution arrangements for the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority
We're living through the most exciting changes to how England is governed for generations. The Liverpool City Region is one of the few city regions who have led the way on ‘devolution agreements’ that will move decision-making on crucial public services like local transport, housing, health and skills training closer to local people.
The Liverpool City Region Combined Authority was established in April 2014 and over the last two years, it has achieved a great deal. From £150 million investment in 14 transport improvement schemes, £9 million of Growth Deal funding invested in the International Festival for Business 2016 and Littlewoods Studios (a project that will transform the empty iconic Littlewoods building on Edge Lane into state-of-the-art film studios), through to £21.5 million invested in over 30 projects to enhance current learning facilities or build new ones, along with the identification of key housing and development sites across the region to drive future economic growth, this is just the start!
We made our devolution agreements with Government in November 2015 and March 2016 showing how the Liverpool City Region’s 1.5 million people could benefit
Page 96 from a new kind of local control of aspects that impact on the region, their life, the local economy and their future.
The initial devolution agreement secured £900 million of funding and identified a number of priority areas where resources and decision making would be devolved from central Government to the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority and City Region Mayor.
The priority areas are employment and skills, housing and planning, transport, innovation, business growth and support, energy, culture and finance. Devolution means that decisions about these priority issues will be made locally, by people who know the area better (and the challenges we face) than people in Whitehall. In addition to greater funding and control over decision making, part of the devolution deal was also a commitment to have a directed elected Mayor for the Liverpool City Region in May 2017.
Furthermore, in March 2016, further powers and responsibilities were announced giving the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority additional new powers over transport, piloting the 100% business rates retention approach across the Liverpool City Region, plus working in partnership with the Government on children’s services, health, housing and justice.
In order for devolution to happen under a Mayoral Combined Authority, we need to review the functions and governance arrangements of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (LCRCA) and set out the specific powers to be devolved from Government to the LCRCA and directly elected Mayor in a Scheme. LCRCA won’t be using its proposed powers alone – but rather in partnership with the six local councils (Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Sefton and Wirral), Government officials and other public bodies.
This Review and Scheme has now been published and we now need your views on the legal powers proposed for the LCRCA in the Scheme and the associated governance arrangements. We’ll outline what the proposals are and show you where to find more detail if you need it, and ask for your comments.
You can tell us your views on the new devolution powers by completing the online survey or you can email [email protected] or write to us at Lucy Horne, Liverpool City Council, Municipal Buildings, Dale Street, Liverpool, L2 2DH. The closing date for feedback is Friday, 5 August 2016 and further information, including Frequently Asked Questions, can be found on the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority website – www.liverpoolcityregion-ca.gov.uk
Page 97 Text for leaflet / printed materials
Consultation on devolution arrangements for the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority
We're living through the most exciting changes to how England is governed for generations. The Liverpool City Region is one of the few city regions who have led the way on ‘devolution agreements’ that will move decision-making on crucial public services like local transport, housing, health and skills training closer to local people.
The Liverpool City Region Combined Authority was established in April 2014 and over the last two years, it has achieved a great deal.
From £150 million investment in 14 transport improvement schemes, £9 million of Growth Deal funding invested in the International Festival for Business 2016 and Littlewoods Studios (a project that will transform the empty iconic Littlewoods building on Edge Lane into state-of-the-art film studios), through to over £21.5 million invested in over 30 projects to enhance current learning facilities or build new ones, along with the identification of key housing and development sites across the region to drive future economic growth, this is just the start!
Through the Combined Authority, the Liverpool City Region is one of the few city regions who have led the way on ‘devolution agreements’ that will move decision- making on crucial public services like local transport, housing, health and skills training closer to local people. We made our devolution agreements with Government in November 2015 and March 2016 showing how the Liverpool City Region’s 1.5 million people could benefit from a new kind of local control that impact on the region, their life, the local economy and their future.
The initial devolution agreement in November 2015 secured £900 million of funding and identified a number of priority areas where resources and decision making would be devolved from central Government to the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority and City Region Mayor.
The priority areas are employment and skills, housing and planning, transport, innovation, business growth and support, energy, culture and finance. Devolution means that decisions about these priority issues will be made locally, by people who know the area better (and the challenges we face) than people in Whitehall. In addition to greater funding and control over decision making, part of the devolution deal was also a commitment to have a directed elected Mayor for the Liverpool City Region in May 2017.
Page 98 Furthermore, in March 2016, further powers and responsibilities were announced giving the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority additional new powers over transport, piloting the 100% business rates retention approach across the Liverpool City Region, plus working in partnership with the Government on children’s services, health, housing and justice.
In order for devolution to happen under a Mayoral Combined Authority, we need to review the functions and governance arrangements of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (LCRCA) and set out the specific powers to be devolved from Government to the Combined Authority and directly elected Mayor in a Scheme. LCRCA won’t be using its proposed powers alone – but rather in partnership with the six local councils (Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Sefton and Wirral), Government officials and other public bodies.
This Review and Scheme has now been published, but key to this process is seeking the views of people who live or work in the Liverpool City Region. You can provide feedback through an online survey, available at www.liverpoolcityregion-ca.gov.uk. There you will find a summary of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority’s functions, what powers will be devolved, how the Combined Authority plans to manage them and then ask for your comments. In addition, comments can be provided via email – [email protected], or in writing to Lucy Horne, Liverpool City Council, Municipal Buildings, Dale Street, Liverpool, L2 2DH.
The closing date for feedback is Friday, 5 August 2016 and further information, including Frequently Asked Questions, can be found on the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority website – www.liverpoolcityregion-ca.gov.uk
The findings of this review will be presented to The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Greg Clarke MP. He will then consider approving a Liverpool City Region Order, which enables the powers and resources for the directly elected Mayor and Combined Authority to be devolved by Government.
Page 99 Social Media Facebook – 24 June 2016 In order to progress the devolution deals agreed with Government in November 2015 and March 2016, which will see £900m of funding coming into the Liverpool City Region over the next 30 years, a review is being undertaken of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (LCRCA). Part of the deal was also to have a directed elected Mayor for the Liverpool City Region, who will chair the Combined Authority. We need your views on the legal powers proposed for the LCRCA in the scheme and the associated ‘governance’ arrangements. We’ll outline what the proposals are and show you where to find more detail if you need it, and ask for your comments. . . . Link to website
Facebook - 29 June 2016 The Liverpool City Region Combined Authority would like to hear your views on new devolution powers – enabling funding and decision making to be made a local level rather than by the Government.. Tell us your views on the proposals before 5 August 2016. Link to website
Facebook – 5 July 2016 The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government needs to approve a Liverpool City Region Order, which would enable the powers and resources for the directly elected Mayor and Combined Authority to be devolved by Government. We are asking for the views of people who live or work in the Liverpool City Region on the proposed legal powers for the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority and City Region Mayor. Link to website
Facebook – 10 July 2016 The Liverpool City Region Combined Authority is consulting with people who live and work in the region on the proposed legal powers. Find out more and complete the online survey by 5 August 2016. Link to website
Facebook – 16 July 2016 There’s still time to tell us your views on the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority review of its functions and governance. Complete the online survey by 5 August 2016. Link to website
Facebook – 22 July 2016 If you live or work in Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, Sefton, St Helens or Wirral, then the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority would like to hear from you! Link to website
Page 100 Facebook – 28 July 2016 Tell us your views on the priorities and governance review being undertaken by the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority. Link to website
Facebook - 1 August 2016 There’s still time for you to tell us your views on the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority review of functions and governance. This will enable devolution to be implemented in our region – that’s powers, funding and decisions that affect local people being made by local people. Link to website
Twitter – 24 June 2016 In order to progress the devolution deals agreed with Government, a review is being undertaken of the LCR Combined Authority – link to website.
Twitter - 30 June 2016 Tell us your views on the legal powers proposed for the Liverpool City Region as part of the devolution deals..- Link to website
Twitter – 6 July 2016 Tell us your views on legal powers proposed for the Liverpool City Region as part of its devolution deals..... Link to website
Twitter – 11 July 2016 If you live or work in the Liverpool City Region, the Combined Authority needs your views before 5 August! Link to website
Twitter – 17 July 2016 There’s still time to tell us your views on the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority review of its functions & governance. Link to website
Twitter – 23 July 2016 If you live or work in the Liverpool City Region (LCR), the LCR Combined Authority would like your views on its functions & governance. Link to website
Twitter – 29 July 2016 Tell us your views on the priorities and governance review being undertaken by the LCR Combined Authority. Link to website
Twitter - 2 August 2016 There’s still time for you to feed in comments about the LCR Combined Authority review of functions and governance. Link to website
Page 101 APPENDIX 3: Communications Activity Delivered 24 June 2016 until 5 August 2016
Halton Website – item posted in newsroom on 24 June 2016. Facebook – 24 June, 29 June, 5 July, 10 July, 16 July, 22 July, 28 July and 1 August. Twitter – 24 June, 30 June, 6 July, 11 July, 17 July, 23 July, 29 July and 2 August. News release – issued to local media list on 24 June 2016. Leaflet / Survey – sent to Halton Direct Link and Contact Centre, together with briefing note on 24 June 2016. Intranet – news item posted on staff news section on 24 June 2016. Item included in ‘News in Brief’ bulletin issued to all Members and staff – issued on 27 June, 8 July and 22 July. Stakeholders – letter from Chief Executive emailed on 24 June to HSPB Board members – Cheshire Fire, Bridgewater NHS, PCC, Cheshire Police, Riverside College, Wade Deacon School, HHT, Halton Chamber of Commerce, DWP, Halton & St. Helens VCA, CCG. In addition, letters sent to Derek Twigg MP, Graham Evans MP, CCG, HHT, Warrington & Halton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Warrington & Halton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, St Helens & Knowsley Hospitals NHS Trust, St Helens & Knowsley Hospitals NHS Trust, Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Bridgewater Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, 5 Boroughs Partnership, Cheshire Police Chief Constable, Chief Fire Officer, Chair of Fire Authority and Chief Executives of Warrington, Cheshire East and CWAC Councils - Langtree, STFC, STFC and SOG. Letter also sent to Members of AEM Group/Advanced Manufacturing Network Group – AD Aerospace Ltd, APPH, Héroux-Devtek, Applied Computer & Engineering Ltd, Catalytic Support Systems Ltd, Knitwire, Delavan, UTC Aerospace Systems, E-scape, Fibre Force, Exel Composites, Hosokawa Micron Ltd, Liverpool City Region Local Enterprise Partnership, LJMU, LPW Technology, Norcott Technologies, Riverside College, Saint-Gobain Sekurit, Sigmatex UK Ltd, Unifrax Emission Control Europe Ltd, Virtual Engineering Centre, MTC Business Launch Centre, 4D Products, ABM Ltd, ACAL Energy, D-2Tech, Denca Controls, Ineos Chlorvinyls, Ionotec Ltd, Kaltec Automation UK Ltd, M7 Visuals, Mexichem Fluor, Opto (UK) Ltd, Trimite Global.
Knowsley Media release issued to local / regional news outlets on 24 June and 20 July.
Page 102 Website - News item on Knowsley Council website (home page) and Knowsley News online website - uploaded on 24 June and a further updated posted on 20 July. Community Messaging issued on 24 June and 20 July (9,500 subscribers). Printed copies of the materials available in each Council One Stop shop reception area – available from 28 June. In addition, a briefing note was issued to staff in the reception areas, as well as the council’s contact centre, should enquiries be received. Special business e-newsletter issued on 30 June and 26 July (3,400 subscribers). Team Briefing - June 2016 (internal communications). Intranet - 24 June and 20 July (internal communications) Weekly news bulletin - 27 June and 1 August 2016 (internal communications). Chief Executive’s blog - 22 July (internal communications). Email sent on 21 July to Chief Executive of Knowsley CCG, Knowsley Chamber of Commerce, Knowsley & St Helens NHS Trust, Knowsley Community Voluntary Services, Chair of the Knowsley Health & Wellbeing Board and members of the Knowsley Partnership (Knowsley CCG), (Merseyside Police & Commissioner), (Knowsley Council’s Cabinet Member for Children’s Services), (Knowsley Health & Wellbeing Board), (Chair of First Ark), (Knowsley Community College), (First Ark), (Merseytravel), (Merseyside Fire & Rescue Service), (Merseyside Fire & Rescue Service), (Knowsley CCG), (Merseyside Police). Email to training and learning providers – (Hugh Baird), (Riverside College), (Liverpool College), (Knowsley Community College), (Wirral Metropolitan College), (St Helens College), (Southport College), (Sefton Sixth Form College), (King George V College), (Carmel College), (VOLA – consortium of voluntary, community and social enterprise), (Greater Merseyside Learning Provider Federation), (Edge Hill University), (John Moores University), (Hope University), Liverpool University, (DWP), Education Funding Agency Knowsley Councillors – presentation delivered to members on 25 July. Facebook – 24 June, 29 June, 5 July, 10 July, 16 July, 22 July, 28 July and 1 August. Twitter – 24 June, 30 June, 6 July, 11 July, 17 July, 23 July, 29 July and 2 August.
Liverpool Mayor emailed all Liverpool City Region MPs Mayor emailed all Liverpool Councillors Message on the Council’s intranet – 6 July 2016 Included in Chief Executive’s weekly briefing emailed to all staff – 8 July 2016 Liverpool Express news item – 6 July 2016.
Page 103 Twitter – message tweeted on 5 July 2016. Letter from Mayor sent by email and followed up with email reminders to G12 (business representative organisations including Chambers, Downtown Liverpool, Institute of Directors and Federation of Small Businesses), Health and Wellbeing Board, CCG, Hospital Trusts, LCVS, Arts Council, Liverpool John Lennon Airport, Merseyside Police, Merseyside Police Commissioner, Housing Associations, Merseyside Recycling and Waste Association, City of Liverpool College, cultural organisations including Everyman and Playhouse Theatre, National Museums Liverpool, Liverpool Philharmonic, FACT, Tate, Biennial and LARC, Professional Liverpool, Merseyside Civic Society, Merseyside Fire and Rescue and LCC Senior Management Team.
St Helens Comment forms and guidance notes issued to reception staff – 23 June 2016. Press release issued to all local and regional media – 23 June 2016. Press release posted on the council website – 23 June 2016. Consultation document considered at Overview & Scrutiny Commission, with agreement to submit comments to LRCA by 5 August – 18 July 2016. Report discussed at Cabinet - which noted the consultation process in relation to the Governance Review and Scheme – 20 July 2016.
Sefton Council website – uploaded on news pages on 24 June 2016. Twitter – 24 June, 5 July, 22 July, 23 July, 28 July, 29 July, 1 August and 2 August. Facebook – 5 July, 22 July, 23 July, 28 July, 29 July, 1 August and 2 August. Information shared with Contact Centre (to assist with enquiries) – 24 June 2016. Printed copies of the consultation available in the Council reception areas and libraries. Information shared with Sefton Council’s Strategic Leadership Board – (Sefton CVS), (Mersey Fire & Rescue Service), (Southport & Ormskirk NHS Trust), (South Sefton CCG), (Merseyside Probation Service), (Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust, (One Vision Housing), (Merseyside Probation Service), (DWP), (Merseyside Police), (Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust), (Hugh Baird College), (Merseyside Police), (DWP), One Vision Housing, (Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust). (Hugh Baird College). News update on Sefton Council intranet. News updated shared on Yammer for information the council’s workforce. Further social media messages are also scheduled via Hootsuite on July 22, 23, 28, 29 and August 1 and 2.
Page 104 Wirral Press release shared with media and on Wirral Council internet and intranet (on 24 June and also shared at later date). Shared on social media (Twitter / Facebook) on 24 June and also at regular interview between 24 June and 5 August. Email sent to staff on 24 June directing them to a news item on the intranet. Shared with Members on weekly news update. A Members seminar took place on 26 July and a presentation was delivered on the governance review and the proposed scheme. Stakeholders – Email sent to Wirral Chamber of Commerce, Wirral University Teaching Hospital, Wirral CCG and Wirral Community Trust. In addition, there was a discussion at the Wirral Partnership Delivery Group on 30 June 2016 and this was followed up with an email to the Group which enclosed a link to the Consultation Survey – (Merseyside Fire & Rescue), (Merseyside Police), (NHS), (Wirral Chamber of Commerce), (Wirral Metropolitan College), Voluntary Community Action Wirral.
Merseytravel Website – text uploaded on 6 July. Twitter – 6 July, 11 July, 17 July, 23 July, 29 July and 2 August. Letter to stakeholders from Frank Rogers, Chief Executive – 11 July – Transport Times, TfN, Rail North, Merseyrail, Northern Rail, Arriva, Arriva, Stagecoach, Network Rail, DfT, First Group, Dft, Cilt, Highways England, Travelwatch North West, Urban Transport Group, Campaign for Better Transport, Transport Focus, Dft, Peel Ports, Maritime Coast Guard Agency, Greener Journeys, Mersey Maritime, Port Authority, UK Road Tunnels Operators Forum Staff briefings – x 3 editions – distributed to 800 staff.
LEP Twitter – 4 July, 6 July, 14 July, 22 July, 26 July, 27 July and 29 July 2016. LinkedIn – 5 July, 8 July, 14 July, 18 July, 22 July, 25 July and 28 July 2016. LEP Website – news item posted on 24 June 2016. Mailout to LEP members – 6 July 2016 – there are 244 business leaders on this distribution including ACC Liverpool, Camel Laird, Jaguar Land Rover, Grant Thornton and higher and further education establishments. LEP Corporate newsletter – 14 July 2016 – there are 1,210 recipients of the newsletter consisting of the LEP members plus others who have subscribed to receive the newsletter.
Page 105 APPENDIX 4: Examples of Communication Activity LCRCA webpage
Local authority webpage
Page 106 Facebook and twitter posts
Page 107
Page 108 Leaflet (first two pages only)
Page 109 APPENDIX 5: Equality Monitoring Information
The following tables present the demographic and equality information of the people that responded to the consultation. Percentages are calculated based on the number of people who have answered that question.
Percentage Where in the Liverpool City Region area do you Number of of live? Responses Responses Halton 201 21.6% Knowsley 104 11.2% Liverpool 195 21.0% Sefton 121 13.0% St Helens 45 4.8% Wirral 153 16.5% LCR wide organisation 6 0.6% I live outside of the Liverpool City Region 75 8.1% Unknown 30 3.1% Total 930 100.0%
Percentage Number of What is your Gender? of Responses Responses Male 173 64.3% Female 82 30.5% Other please specify 1 0.4% Prefer not to say 13 1.4% Number of people responding 269 4.8% No Response 661 Total 930
Percentage Number of What is your Age? of Responses Responses 18 to 24 6 2.3% 25 to 34 23 8.7% 35 to 44 48 18.2% 45 to 54 73 27.7% 55 to 64 68 25.8% 65 to 74 35 13.3% 75 or older 11 4.2% Number of people responding 264 No Response 666 Total 930
Page 110 Percentage Number of What is your sexuality? of Responses Responses Heterosexual / Straight 200 80.0% Bisexual 4 1.6% Gay Man 10 4.0% Gay Woman / Lesbian 3 1.2% Other please specify 3 1.2% Prefer not to say 30 12.0% Number of people responding 250 No Response 680 total 930
Percentage Number of Do you consider yourself a disabled person? of Responses Responses Yes 31 11.7% No 216 81.5% Prefer not to say 18 6.8% Number of people responding 265 No Response 665 Total 930
Percentage Number of To which ethnic group do you belong? of Responses Responses Black or Black British – African 2 0.8% Black or Black British - Caribbean 2 0.8% Mixed Heritage - White and Asian 1 0.4% Mixed Heritage - White and Black Caribbean 1 0.4% White - British 131 51.8% White - English 85 33.6% White - Irish 6 2.4% White - Scottish 1 0.4% White - Welsh 2 0.8% Other please specify 8 3.2% Prefer not to say 14 5.5% Number of people responding 253 No Response 677 Total 930
Page 111 Percentage Which of the following best describes your Number of of current relationship status? Responses Responses Single, never married 27 10.8% Single, but cohabiting with a significant other 13 5.2% Married 142 56.6% Divorced 12 4.8% In a domestic partnership or civil union 10 4.0% Separated 7 2.8% Widowed 11 4.3% Other please specify 1 0.4% Prefer not to say 28 11.1% Number of people responding 251 No Response 679 Total 930
Percentage Do you identify with any of the following Number of of religions or beliefs? Responses Responses Buddhism 2 0.8% Catholicism 48 19.7% Christianity 53 21.8% Hinduism 1 0.4% Judaism 2 0.8% Protestantism 14 5.8% No religion 82 33.7% Other please specify 9 3.7% Prefer not to say 32 13.2% Number of people responding 243 No Response 687 Total 930
Percentage Number of Do you have caring responsibilities? of Responses Responses Yes, children under 16 34 13.8% Yes, children with additional caring needs under 16 1 0.4% Yes, for a young person or adult over 16 25 10.1% No 161 65.2% Other please specify 7 2.8% Prefer not to say 19 7.7% Number of people responding 247 No Response 683 Total 930
Page 112 APPENDIX 6: Stakeholder Responses
Written submissions
1. Arts Council England 2. Cheshire and Warrington Economic Prosperity Board 3. Cheshire Police and Crime Commissioner 4. Homes and Communities Agency 5. LCR Housing Associations 6. LCR Liberal Democrat Leaders 7. Local Government Ombudsman 8. Luciana Berger MP 9. Mersey Dee Alliance 10. Merseyside Civic Society 11. Merseyrail 12. RSPB 13. Science and Technology Facilities Council 14. St Helens Council 15. Unison NW 16. VS6 (LCR partnership of voluntary, community, faith and social enterprises) 17. Wirral Council
Page 113 Online submissions (where organisation details have been given)
1. Age UK Wirral 32. NES 2. AMION Consulting Ltd 33. Network for Europe 3. Blackburne House Group 34. NHS HALTON CCG 4. Bluecoat Display Centre 35. NHS Liverpool CCG 5. Bridgewater NHS Foundation Trust 36. North West Training Council 6. Cheshire Constabulary 37. NW Systems Group Limited 7. Community Foundations for 38. One Vision Housing Lancashire and Merseyside 39. Progress to Excellence Group Ltd 8. Copperwood Media CiC 40. Royal Liverpool Philharmonic 9. Dynamic Dyslexics 41. St Helens and Knowsley Hospitals 10. Eco-hubs Merseyside.com NHS Trust 11. ESL Electromech Limited 42. Stobart Group 12. Express Direct Training Ltd 43. The Community IT Company Ltd 13. FACT (Foundation for Art and 44. The Greenbank Project Creative Technology) 45. The Riverside Group Ltd (housing 14. First Ark Group association) 15. Frodsham Marsh Birding 46. The Wildlife Trust for Lancashire, 16. Halton Chamber of Commerce Manchester & North Merseyside 17. Historic England 47. The Women's Organisation 18. Hugh Baird College 48. Together Liverpool 19. Jarvis Training Management Ltd 49. ULEMCo Ltd 20. Knowsley Disability Concern 50. UNISON North West 21. Knowsley MBC 51. Unlock Democracy (Merseyside 22. Liverpool BID company and West Cheshire Group) 23. Liverpool Biennial 52. VOLA Consortium 24. Liverpool Mutual Homes 53. Wirral Chamber of Commerce 25. Liverpool Schools' Parliament 54. Workers' Educational Association 26. Lm6 Commercial Property Ltd 55. Youth Federation 27. Maritime and Engineering College 56. YouthFed North West 28. Mersey Estuary Conservation Group 29. Morthyng Group Limited 30. Myerscough College 31. Nature Connected, Local Nature Partnership
Page 114 Agenda Item 7
LIVERPOOL CITY REGION COMBINED AUTHORITY
To: The Chair and Members of the Combined Authority
Meeting: 19 August 2016
Authority/Authorities Affected: ALL
EXEMPT/CONFIDENTIAL ITEM: No
REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PAID SERVICE
DEVOLUTION OF POWERS AND RESOURCES TO THE LIVERPOOL CITY REGION – PROGRESS ON EXECUTIVE CAPACITY
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 The purpose of this report is to set out the immediate changes which are required to the Constitution of the Combined Authority to enable the Combined Authority to build executive capacity and to gain the approval of the Combined Authority to those changes. The report also outlines further issues which the Implementation Team will continue to work on with progress reports being brought back to the Combined Authority.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 It is recommended that Liverpool City Region Combined Authority:
a) Approves the establishment of an Appointments and Disciplinary Panel which shall consist of the Chair of the Combined Authority together with the Leaders of two of the Constituent Authorities of the Combined Authority; b) Considers nominations for the two members of the Panel to sit alongside the Chair of the Combined Authority; c) Approves the Terms of Reference for that Panel referred to in (a) as set out at Appendix One; d) Agrees to the adoption of a Code of Conduct for officers encompassing the principles set out at Appendix Two and authorises the Implementation Team to revise Appendix Two to have specific reference and application to the Combined Authority. The Implementation Team to bring the revised version to a future meeting of the Combined Authority; e) Agrees to the adoption of a Protocol for Officer / Member relations encompassing the principles set out at Appendix Three and authorises the Implementation Team to revise Appendix Three to have specific reference and application to the Combined Authority. The Implementation Team to bring the revised version of Appendix Three to a future meeting of the Combined Authority;
Page 115 f) Agrees to the adoption of an Anti-fraud and Corruption Policy Statement encompassing the principles set out at Appendix Four and authorises the Implementation Team to revise Appendix Four to have specific reference and application to the Combined Authority. The Implementation Team to bring the revised version of Appendix Four to a future meeting of the Combined Authority; g) Authorises the Treasurer to the Combined Authority to progress discussions with the Merseyside Pension Fund in relation to the Combined Authority status in relation to pensions; h) Authorises the Implementation Team to appoint Independent Persons to the Combined Authority in accordance with Statutory requirements; and i) Notes the outstanding matters to be finalised when DCLG decisions are to hand.
3. BACKGROUND
3.1 In June 2016 the Combined Authority agreed the proposed scale and scope of executive capacity and approved the establishment of a ‘task and finish’ team led by the Head of Paid Service to facilitate the implementation of the executive capacity arrangements. An Implementation Team comprising Legal, Finance and Human Resource officers from a number of constituent Authorities was duly established.
3.2 In July 2016, the Combined Authority agreed to the principle of employing staff directly and authorised the Implementation Team to develop proposals for progressing this and to commence production of any necessary documentation.
3.3 The initial recruitment to increase capacity is at Executive level and therefore a Panel needs to be appointed by the Combined Authority to carry out the recruitment on its behalf. The report to the Combined Authority in June 2016 recommended that the determination of Head of Paid Service and Chief Officer posts should be made by the chair of the Combined Authority with two Leaders of Combined Authority Constituent Councils. This report therefore recommends that the Panel reflects that agreed arrangement.
3.4 The June 2016 report stated the need for recruitment to several senior posts as soon as possible and therefore this report asks that, at the same time that it agrees to the creation of an Appointments Panel in principle, the Combined Authority approves the Terms of Reference at Appendix One and considers nominations to the Panel.
3.5 In accordance with the practice in all Constituent Authorities, the Combined Authority, as an employing Authority, should have certain policies and procedures in place, particularly a Code of Conduct for its employed Officers, an Officer / Member Protocol and an Anti-Fraud and Corruption Statement. Attached as Appendices Two, Three and Four are a suite of documents produced by one of the Constituent Authorities and very recently consulted upon and updated. It is recognised that the documents are specific to that Authority but the Combined Authority is asked to agree the principles contained in those appendices and the Implementation Team will then revise the documents to be specific to the Combined Authority.
Page 116 3.6 The employment of Officers by the Combined Authority clearly brings issues with it relating to pensions. Following initial discussions amongst the Implementation Team, the Treasurer to the Combined Authority has had initial discussions with Merseyside Pension Fund and raised some questions, in relation to which some answers are still awaited. The Combined Authority are asked to agree that the Treasurer continues those discussions on behalf of the Combined Authority and reports progress back to the next meeting.
3.7 There are certain circumstances in which the Combined Authority is required to have appointed Independent Persons. These circumstances include the requirement to have an Independent Person looking into complaints made against Members of the Combined Authority and also the requirement for Independent Persons to be Members of the Appointments Panel if the dismissal of the Head of Paid Service, Monitoring Officer or Chief Finance Officer is under consideration. The Combined Authority needs to recruit Independent Persons now and the Implementation Team will progress that immediately.
3.8 There are other issues which the Combined Authority are asked to note which are in progress at present but in some cases are reliant upon further decisions being taken by the Combined Authority or third parties. These are as follows:
a. The Human Resource Officers are currently working on the Job Descriptions and Person Specifications for the posts and the Job Evaluation process which they will undergo; b. Consideration needs to be given to the remuneration of the Elected Mayor and other Members of the Combined Authority but DCLG have indicated that there is likely to be a mechanism for remuneration prescribed by Government. The Combined Authority, in a practice consistent with all Constituent Authorities, would expect to establish an Independent Panel to deal with allowances but the decision of Government will need to be awaited until any further steps are taken. A timescale on that decision is being sought from DCLG by the Implementation Team; c. There have been discussions about changing the Combined Authority scrutiny arrangements in the light of the additional powers to be devolved. Officers are working on that at present but there is to be an Order laid down by Government which may not be wholly prescriptive but which is likely to contain a number of elements which Government will require to see in any scrutiny process; d. The current Scheme of Delegation will require a complete review once the workforce structure has been finalised and lines of reporting and responsibilities are known; and e. There will be further changes to the Constitution which shall become necessary as the work with DCLG develops to physically devolve the powers from central Government by means of the bespoke City Region Order. Amendments to the Constitution will specify how and by whom those devolved powers are to be exercised within the City Region Mayoral model.
Page 117 4. RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS
4.1 Financial
There are no direct financial implications arising as a result of this report. Any appointments made to the Combined Authority as part of the Executive Capacity proposals will be subject to the appropriate budget setting procedures and will be in accordance with the Combined Authority’s previous agreement and framework to establish Executive Capacity for the Combined Authority.
4.2 Human Resources
The report sets out necessary steps to allow the Combined Authority to make appointments and this will include establishing all of the necessary HR policies and procedures required of the Combined Authority as an employing body.
4.3 Physical Assets
There are no physical asset implications arising from this report.
4.4 Information Technology
There are no Information Technology implications resulting from this report.
5. RISKS AND MITIGATION
5.1 The risks lie in not taking the proper steps to ensure that the Combined Authority recruits in a proper manner. The recommendations if agreed will address that risk as they put a proper compliant framework in place.
6. COMMUNICATIONS ISSUES
6.1 There are no communications issues as a result of this report .Once any constitutional amendments are agreed to allow appointments to take place, the revised Constitution will be made available through the Combined Authority website and appropriate channels.
7. EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY IMPLICATIONS
7.1 There are no specific equality and diversity implications arising from this report but, at the point where the Combined Authority is making appointments, it will adhere to all legal requirements for recruitment and selection.
Page 118 8 CONCLUSION
8.1 The report follows on from the recommendations in June and July 2016 to increase Executive Capacity for the Combined Authority and agreement to the recommendations in this report will progress those earlier recommendations in a proper and compliant manner.
GED FITZGERALD Head of Paid Service
Contact Officers: Ged Fitzgerald, Head of Paid Service (0151 233 0048) Jeanette McLoughlin Monitoring Officer (0151 233 0400)
Appendices: Appendix One – Appointments and Disciplinary Panel: Terms of Reference Appendix Two – Officer Code of Conduct Appendix Three – Protocol for Member/Officer Relations Appendix Four – Anti-fraud and Corruption Policy Statement
Page 119 This page is intentionally left blank APPENDIX ONE
APPOINTMENTS AND DISCIPLINARY PANEL
TERMS OF REFERENCE
The Appointments and Disciplinary Panel has the power to deal with the following:
1. To approve Person Specifications and Job Descriptions for Head of Paid Service, Chief Officers and Deputy Chief Oficers
2. To shortlist applicants for interview and to interview and make recommendations to the Combined Authority in relation to the appointment of the Head of Paid Service.
3. To shortlist applicants for interview and to interview and make appointments to Chief Officer and Deputy Chief Officer posts. Deputy Chief Officer refers to a Deputy Chief Officer as defined by section 2(8) of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989.
4. To approve any specific terms and conditions within approved Combined Authority budget and policy framework
5. In addition to the above the Appointments and Disciplinary Panel may deal with the discipline and dismissal of Chief Officers and Deputy Chief Officers but any dismissal of the Head of Paid Service, the Monitoring Officer or the Chief Finance Officer must be approved by the Combined Authority and such dismissal proceedings shall comply with Schedule 3 of The Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2015 including the requirement to appoint two independent persons to the Panel.
Page 121 This page is intentionally left blank APPENDIX TWO
OFFICER CODE OF CONDUCT
APPLICABLE TO:
All Council Employees [except School based staff employed or managed by a Governing Body under LMS Regulations]
1. INTRODUCTION
The NJC Scheme of Conditions of Service for local government services [Part 2, Section 2] refers to official conduct and reads as follows:
"Employees will maintain conduct of the highest standard, such that public confidence in their integrity is sustained".
This Officer Code of Conduct is based on this principle and should assist employees in their day to day work.
Although the Conditions of Service referred to apply only to certain officers, this Code will cover all employees of the Council, although some of the issues covered by the Code will affect senior, managerial and professional employees more than it will others.
The Code itself cannot cover all cases likely to arise in practice, but the principles do. Ultimately, the Council relies on the integrity, common sense and professional judgement of individual employees. It is not enough to avoid actual impropriety. Employees must, at all times, seek to avoid any occasion for suspicion or appearance of improper conduct.
Employees must not hesitate, at any time, to seek advice from their line manager and/or Employee Services on the interpretation of the Code, or when circumstances arise which it does not cover.
Directors may supplement the Code by more detailed guidance where this is considered necessary for particular services.
It must be emphasised that the Code is not intended to prohibit all social involvement by the Authority's staff with the outside world. Nor would it be right to restrict private dealings between staff and any particular firm. It is, however, important that any staff must judge the wisdom of their actions not by any comparison with the practices which, no doubt for good reasons, are followed in the private sector, but rather by reference to the traditional public service principles of accountability and responsibility as in the extract from the NJC Conditions set out above.
May 2016 Page 123 APPENDIX TWO
The principles embodied in this Code are not regarded as exhaustive, either in the examples quoted or the regulation and guidance prescribed.
The Code has been produced to protect employees and the Council. It represents the standard against which the conduct of employees will be judged by the public, elected members and their fellow employees.
It is the responsibility of all employees, without fear of recrimination, to report to the appropriate level of management and/or to the Council's Internal Audit Service any impropriety or breach of procedure.
In any case of doubt about the interpretation of this Code, employees must consult Employee Services. The onus is on the employee to seek clarification should there be doubt regarding any particular issue.
2. CORPORATE STRATEGY – STATEMENT OF VISION AND VALUES
The Council has already agreed its Statement of Vision and Values and it is essential that these are taken into account by staff when working within the framework of this Code.
Our vision
In 2008 the Council, together with its partners, set a vision to make Knowsley ‘The Borough of Choice’ – a place where people would choose to live, work and have their children educated.
The ‘Strategy for Knowsley: the Borough of Choice’ identifies three strategic outcomes that the Council and its partners have agreed to work towards in order to realise the long term vision by 2023. These are:
A thriving and diverse economy; Healthy, safe and financially secure residents; and Attractive and sustainable neighbourhoods, towns and green spaces. ving and diverse economy Values and Behaviour Frameworks
The Council has approved core values which all employees must embrace:
May 2016 Page 124 APPENDIX TWO
CORE VALUES: Being accountable Openness and Respect for people transparency Acknowledges and Makes decisions in Champions equality and assumes responsibility an open and diversity with all people at for actions and transparent manner all levels decisions Shares information Treats people in the way Takes ownership and whenever possible they would like to be responsibility for Explains when treated resulting information can’t be Values people and their consequences and shared contributions does not seek to Is open to new ideas Shows consideration for apportion blame on and new ways of others through thought and others working action
The Council has also a Behaviour Framework for Senior Managers and a Behaviour Framwork for all employees below senior managers. Senior managers and employees are expected to work to these behaviours.
3. GIFTS, HOSPITALITY AND OTHER FAVOURS
This part of the Code has been divided into three sections for ease of reference: Gifts, Hospitality and other Favours. The guidelines relating to each section, however, apply equally to each other.
3.1 Fundamental Considerations
In the private sector, corporate hospitality and promotions are accepted as part of the normal conduct of business. However, the Bribery Act 2010 creates a criminal offence for commercial organisations failing to prevent bribery and recognises that there is an important role to be played by business itself in ensuring that commerce is undertaken in a transparent manner. Commercial organisations should have their own guidance on appropriate levels and manner of provision of bona fide hospitality and promotional gifts to ensure that their purpose is ethically sound and transparent.
Within local government the burden of responsibility rests with Members and employees, not only to ensure the propriety of all dealings, but also to be able to demonstrate it publicly.
Gifts and hospitality must not be accepted from the same party on a frequent or regular basis, to avoid any concern that proper working relationships are consequently being compromised.
May 2016 Page 125 APPENDIX TWO
It is impossible to set and adhere to a financial limit on the value of favours which may be regarded as acceptable. Generally any favour accepted should be low in value.
If a favour, particularly in the form of hospitality, proves to be significantly more valuable than expected when it was accepted, this should be reported immediately to the appropriate Director.
Whilst many of the favours likely to be offered will be in the form of gifts or hospitality, there is a variety of other favours which may be offered, including loans [preferential or otherwise], works to personal property or holidays, which are likely to be substantial in value, and personal in nature. Such favours must be refused.
Due regard must be paid to the circumstances of any offer of a favour. For example, a working lunch immediately prior to the acceptance of a tender, or the letting of a contract, may be questionable, whereas it could be acceptable during the currency of the contract.
The essential principle is that favours must not affect proper working relationships, or allow concern that they are affecting proper working relationships.
A secretive treatment of favours is much more likely to give rise to concern of impropriety than favours dealt with in the open knowledge of colleagues.
3.2 Statutory and Legal Considerations
Insofar as Members are concerned the Code of Conduct for Elected Members deals with these matters.
In relation to Officers specifically, Section 117(2) of the Local Government Act 1972 states that an Officer shall not, under colour of his/her office, accept any fee or reward whatsoever other than his/her proper remuneration. Any breach is a criminal offence.
Employees must always be aware that the acceptance of inducements is improper and corrupt and is a criminal offence under the Bribery Act 2010. This Act covers the requesting, agreeing to receive, or accepting of an advantage or bribe as well as the offering, promising, or giving of an advantage or bribe to another person.
3.3 Register to be Maintained
To demonstrate the openness and integrity of the circumstances relating to the offer and acceptance of gifts, hospitality or other favours, the Ethics and Culture site is available for officers to record all gifts, hospitality, favours etc offered, detailing the nature of the favour and indicating whether such favours are declined or accepted. Each person
May 2016 Page 126 APPENDIX TWO
will be responsible for entering details of all favours offered to, or accepted by, them in the appropriate formal declaration record. The Chief Executive will maintain an individual formal declaration record and the Monitoring Officer will review the entries.
Registers must be open for inspection at any time, and without prior notice to the following:
[a] Chief Executive
[b] All Directors/Assistant Chief Executive
[c] Monitoring Officer
[d] Internal Auditors
[e] External Auditors
3.4 Gifts
There are a number of considerations to be taken into account where gifts are concerned. The nature of the gift in terms of value and the motivation of the person giving the gift are the two main issues. A distinction must also be drawn between items which may be used at work, as opposed to gifts of a personal nature which should be refused.
Most firms, as part of their normal commercial activity, distribute gifts which range from the promotional [e.g. calendars, diaries etc] to the more expensive [e.g. wines and spirits]. The more expensive gifts are obviously distributed where they will have the greatest specific impact. Although this may be acceptable conduct to some private organisations or individuals, the requirements of the public sector are very different.
3.5 Guidance
[a] Officers must refuse any personal gift offered to them by any person or firm who has or seeks dealings with the Council.
[b] The exception to this is modest promotional material of low value such as calendars and diaries which are, in many cases, unsolicited and simply delivered by post. Even here, however, staff must use judgement, and more expensive promotional items must be refused and returned.
[c] From time to time, staff may find themselves in a position where they have to refuse and/or return gifts. This requires diplomatic handling and staff must not behave in ways which donors of gifts might regard as impolite or unnecessarily critical of a recognised private sector practice.
May 2016 Page 127 APPENDIX TWO
[d] It is sometimes acceptable to the giver for a gift which in other circumstances would be refused as in [c] to be donated instead to charity. An arrangement of this sort must only be made with a Director's approval, must be entered in the formal declaration register, and recorded by letter to the giver indicating that the gift has been donated to charity.
3.6 Hospitality
Contacts established socially can be helpful in the Council's interests. It is therefore appropriate in certain circumstances for the Authority's staff to accept invitations for social involvement with persons or bodies, including those who have, or may seek to have, business dealings with the Council. At the same time it is very easy for such involvement to be misconstrued as providing an opportunity to bring about undue influence and there will, therefore, be occasions when hospitality must be declined.
Where hospitality is offered to staff, it may be accepted where it appears reasonable in all the circumstances to do so. Due regard must be taken as to whether the invitation has been extended to other Officers of the Council or to Officers of similar standing from other public authorities. Where hospitality is offered to one employee only, special caution is needed as an employee alone may be viewed as more vulnerable than a number of employees. However, such "safety in numbers", whilst more likely to demonstrate the principle of openness, must not be seen as absolute protection, particularly where the host is seeking to do business with the Council or to obtain a decision from it.
Hospitality or entertainment is sometimes offered to an official representative of the Council and may be accepted in the following circumstances:
If the Chief Executive, as Head of Paid Service, or his/her nominated officer, can justify acceptance in the context of fulfilling duties as a representative of the Council; and If the extent of the hospitality/entertainment is reasonable, and is likely to be regarded as a normal part of the courtesies of public life.
It is important to avoid any suggestion of improper influence. Again, this is a matter of judgement, and the following examples are intended to give general guidance:
[a] Acceptable
(i) A working lunch of a modest standard provided to allow the parties to continue to discuss business.
May 2016 Page 128 APPENDIX TWO
(ii) Invitation to a society or institute dinner or function.
(iii) Invitation to take part in company jubilee or other anniversary celebration.
(iv) Invitation to trade fairs or similar events, where there is a general invitation to customers.
(v) Invitation to cultural or sporting occasions 'sponsored' by the company concerned.
[b] Unacceptable
(i) Offer of a holiday, hotel accommodation, or company flat at the company's expense.
(ii) Offer of theatre tickets or tickets to a sporting occasion etc, except under [v] above.
(iii) Invitation to personal celebrations (eg: birthday parties) where the invitation is from a person who the employee knows, or should reasonably have been expected to know, has, or would have had, regular dealings with the Council for business purposes, and with whom the employee predominantly has a work relationship or with whom the relationship has evolved primarily through work. In considering this, the employee should think carefully about whether the relationship could be seen to impact on their ability to carry out their role in the Council. (NB In the event that the person has a relationship with you in another capacity (eg close personal friend or relative) then guidance should be obtained in advance from your director.)
It is generally more acceptable to join in hospitality offered to a group than to accept something unique to the individual. When a particular person or body has a matter currently in issue with the Council [e.g. arbitration arising from a contract or an industrial development proposal], an offer of hospitality must clearly be refused even if in normal times it would be acceptable.
Where an external organisation requires an employee of the Council to visit workshops to inspect plant, etc, it is expected that the organisation concerned would provide reasonable travel expenses.
If an employee is invited to give a lecture in his/her capacity as a Council employee reasonable travel expenses may be retained by the employee but any fee payable must be paid to the Council.
If you are in any doubt as to whether any restriction in this paragraph applies to you at any time you should immediately consult your director to discuss the circumstances.
May 2016 Page 129 APPENDIX TWO
3.7 Favours
It is accepted that favours may often be offered by outside agencies in good faith and to promote a good working relationship and understanding. Constant refusals to accept such offers could impair essential working relationships and possibly create an atmosphere of distrust with a consequential detrimental effect on the business being conducted.
However, it is vitally important to be able to demonstrate that local authority business is conducted with the utmost integrity, without any taint of impropriety or corruption. Accordingly, offers of personal favours by organisations or individuals with whom the Council deals must be treated by employees with due caution. Favours must not affect proper working relationships, or allow concern that they are affecting proper working relationships.
A distinction must be drawn between favours perceived to be offered as goodwill gestures and those which might be seen to be inducements. Any favour which could be regarded as an inducement to influence the business of the Council in an improper manner cannot be accepted. The offer of any such favour must immediately be reported to the employee's Director.
3.8 Donations
From time to time, individuals or organisations may wish to make donations to the Council as a gesture of thanks. For example a family may wish to give a cash donation to a service to express their thanks to staff who provided care services to a member of their family or alternatively a business may wish to donate money as a way of giving something back to the community in which they operate their business. It is important that officers do not accept donations personally. Any such offers must be paid into the Council bank account and recorded as a donation. Again, it is vitally important to be able to demonstrate that local authority business is conducted with the utmost integrity, without any taint of impropriety or corruption. Accordingly, offers of personal donations by organisations or individuals with whom the Council deals with must be treated by employees with due caution.
4. PROVISION OF HOSPITALITY BY OFFICERS
These guidelines should be observed whenever hospitality is provided by the Council. For the purpose of these rules, hospitality is deemed to exclude the refreshments normally provided at meetings.
[a] Any hospitality must be proportionate and reasonable to the occasion.
May 2016 Page 130 APPENDIX TWO
[b] Wherever possible, hospitality should be provided on Council premises and, wherever practicable, the services of the Civic Suite should be used.
[c] Generally, only soft drinks should be provided in the work place. Any variation from this guideline should be authorised by the Director or their nominee.
[d] Any hospitality provided at civic events and/or ceremonial events will be at the discretion of the Assistant Executive Director (Governance).
5. OTHER EMPLOYMENT
5.1 Officers above Pay Grade G shall devote their whole time service to the work of their Council and shall not engage in any other business or take up any other additional appointment without the express consent of the Council.
Therefore those officers, i.e. senior officers and above, therefore need specific permission to undertake outside work of any kind and this permission must be sought, in writing, from the relevant Head of Service, Assistant Executive Director, Executive Director/Assistant Chief Executive or the Chief Executive as appropriate. Each case will be considered on its individual merits.
5.2 In addition, the general guidance applicable to employees at all levels is that they must not undertake any outside work which would put them in a position of conflict of interest with their Council employment. Such a conflict would arise when an employee is to be paid by a member of the public, or any outside organisation or body, for work which is in any way connected with the scope of his/her official duties.
5.3 All employees must ensure that they do not undertake any work if their official duties overlap in some way with their proposed work. It is irrelevant whether or not such work is paid for. However, the Council encourages employees to get involved in public duties and allows employees to have reasonable paid time off during working hours. Any employee wishing to make an application should refer to the Time off Work Policy. If work is undertaken which makes use of materials which are similar to which the employee has access by virtue of his/her Council employment, receipts for the purchase of such materials must always be retained.
5.4 No outside work of any sort should be undertaken at the employee's place of work or on any Council premises. Correspondence and telephone calls related to outside interests are not allowed during working hours.
May 2016 Page 131 APPENDIX TWO
5.5 Exactly what constitutes a business can be open to interpretation. The amount of time such an activity occupies, and/or whether additional income is received as a result, are examples of factors to be taken into account in determining this. For the purposes of this Code, a business will be construed as incorporating any work or activity of whatever nature, whether paid or unpaid, undertaken by an employee in connection with any trade, profession, occupation or commercial venture including the purchase and sale of goods and services.
If employees are in any doubt, they must discuss with their line manager and/or consult Employee Services.
6. DATA PROTECTION AND INFORMATION SECURITY
It is vital that all information (both electronic and paper) owned and managed by the council is adequately protected as required by the Data Protection Act 1998.
Failure to keep information secure can result in large financial penalties and severe reputational damage for the Council and may lead to disciplinary action being taken against an employee.
Information security and data protection is the responsibility of every single person who works for the Council. You have a responsibility to: act in accordance with the information security acceptable use policy and data protection policy; protect the council’s information assets from unauthorised access, disclosure, modification, destruction or interference; and report any information security incidents.
The key employee responsibilities are available here.
7. DISCLOSURE OF OFFICIAL INFORMATION
7.1 Employees often receive official information which has not been made public and is still confidential. Such information must not be used for the personal advantage of an employee or his/her family or friends, nor must they pass it to others who might use it in such a way.
Financial Procedure Rules provide guidance regarding the use of and sharing of information relating to the Council’s bank accounts.
Employees are barred from disclosing Council information to any media or press and from making public comments regarding this information unless expressly authorised to do so. Where approaches are made to employees by representatives of the media seeking comments concerning Council information or decisions, they should be referred to the Council’s Corporate Communications Team.
May 2016 Page 132 APPENDIX TWO
Whilst the Council is keen to create a culture of "openness and transparency” and will appropriately share information, as required in the interest of the public, it is important that the Corporate Communications Team manage the timing and the detail of the information to be shared or disclosed, to protect the privacy of service users, protect the integrity of our plans and protect legitimate confidential commercial information.
7.2 Information must not be disclosed to, elected members, unless it is through the formal consultative processes of the Council agreed with the appropriate Director.
7.3 Proceedings of Committee
"No Officer shall communicate to the public the proceedings of any committee meeting etc, nor the contents of any document relating to the Authority, unless required by law or expressly authorised to do so".
It is recognised that Officers, as part of their normal duties, will have contact with the public concerning committee proceedings. In relation to this paragraph, the appropriate Director will determine which officers are authorised to disclose information.
7.4 Information Concerning Officers
"Information concerning officers' private affairs shall not be supplied to any person outside the service of the employing authority unless the consent of such officer is first obtained".
7.5 Guidance
(a) Information which is confidential and/or classed as personal or sensitive personal information in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998 must not be disclosed to third parties except in response to a written request, e.g. from the Police, other local authorities, solicitors, Inland Revenue, Department of Work and Pensions, bank managers or building societies. Some requests will be disclosures required by law. However, for requests relating to crime and taxation and legal advice and proceedings it is for the Council to determine whether the information can be supplied. If there is a doubt as to whether information should be disclosed advice should be sought from Employee Services, the Data Protection Officer or the Corporate Records Manager.
(b) Staff are restricted, when acting in a private capacity, from commenting publicly on the Council's policy or a specific decision. If any circumstances do arise in which staff find it necessary to make public comments, they are expected to exercise discretion, professional judgement and properly
May 2016 Page 133 APPENDIX TWO
recognise the fact that there will be grounds for misinterpretation or misrepresentation of this information. Occasions for such comments, only in exceptional cases, are for example:
(i) recognised trade union officials will from time to time be required to issue statements on behalf of their trade union commenting on a matter relating to the Council;
(ii) statements made by staff acting as officials of bodies such as parish councils and community and professional associations.
(c) Advance knowledge of any impending Council decision, particularly those relating to investment decisions or proposed developments, must not be used to further private interests.
(d) All employees must use their professional judgement and restrict what is said outside the Council about matters going on inside it and, if in doubt, employees are strongly recommended to seek advice from their line manager and/or Employee Services before making comments publically on the Council’s policy or a specific decision.
8. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY AND NON-PECUNIARY INTERESTS
8.1 The Local Government Act 1972, Section 117 makes specific provision requiring employees to disclose pecuniary interests, whether direct or indirect, in any contract with which the Council is concerned. The relevant extracts from Section 117 are as follows:
(a) If it comes to the knowledge of an employee employed, whether under this Act or any other enactment, by a local authority that a contract in which they have any pecuniary interest, whether direct or indirect [not being a contract to which they are themselves a party], has been, or is proposed to be, entered into by the authority or any committee thereof, they shall as soon as practicable give notice in writing to the authority to the fact that they are interested therein.
(b) An employee of a local authority shall not, under colour of his office or employment, accept any fee or reward whatsoever other than his proper remuneration.
8.2 Failure to declare an interest may be a criminal offence
(a) Section 117 of the Local Government Act 1972 states that employees are required to give notice in writing to the Chief Executive as soon as practicable of any interests under that section.
May 2016 Page 134 APPENDIX TWO
(b) There are also areas other than contracts where a pecuniary interest must be disclosed, even though there is no statutory requirement. Remuneration from a firm which has dealings with the Council is a direct interest. If the remuneration were to be paid by the firm to a partner or relative, this would also be regarded as direct interest. Further information can be obtained from the Managing Conduct Performance and Information Policy.
8.3 Guidance
(a) All members of staff must disclose in writing a relevant pecuniary interest in a contract to their Director.
(b) Staff must carefully consider their position to avoid conflict of interest where either there is a direct pecuniary interest but no contract, or they, or their partner or a relative, are receiving remuneration from a firm which is dealing with the Council.
"Remuneration" includes commission, honoraria, dividends, agency fees and interest, as well as salary, wages or fees. "Firm" includes all organisations and individuals.
8.4 Non-Pecuniary Interest
There may be a conflict of interest even where no pecuniary interest or advantage exists or accrues. This covers areas where relationships might be seen to influence judgements and convey the impression of personal motive. A simple example is where a Council employee, who acts as an honorary officer of a voluntary association, is also directly involved during the course of his/her employment with claims for grant from the Council. When such circumstances arise, the employee must advise their Director in writing of their interest.
Employees must not allow the impression to be created that they are, or may be, using their position to promote a private or personal interest including those of their family and friends as well as those arising through membership of, or association with, clubs, societies and other organisations.
In order to avoid any possible accusation of bias, employees must not be involved in an appointment where they are related to an applicant, or have a close personal relationship outside work with him/her. Similarly, employees must not be involved in decisions relating to discipline, promotion or pay adjustments, for any other employee who is a partner or relative. Equally, the canvassing by an employee of Members or Officers of the Council for themselves or anyone else in relation to a job appointment is strictly prohibited and will lead to the
May 2016 Page 135 APPENDIX TWO
automatic disqualification of the person concerned and disciplinary action for the employee.
8.5 To demonstrate the openness and integrity of the circumstances relating to the pecuniary/non pecuniary interest, the Ethics and Culture site is available for officers to record all interests, detailing the relationship that the employee has with an organisation or person. Each person will be responsible for entering details of all interests in the appropriate formal declaration record. The Chief Executive will maintain an individual formal declaration record and the Monitoring Officer will review the entries.
9. USE OF SERVICES OF FIRMS DEALING WITH THE COUNCIL
9.1 Staff must be extremely cautious when using the services of firms which they know to have dealings with the Council. Particular care must be taken where staff deal with outside firms or companies who they deal with as part of their normal Council duties.
9.2 Guidance
(a) Goods or services for private use may be bought from firms trading with the Council, providing the price offered is readily available to the general public, either directly or by way of a recognised trading organisation.
(b) Where however an employee has good reason to believe that an offer of preferential terms, in the form of either goods or services, might in fact be a specific inducement to promote a firm's interests he/she must decline to have such dealings with that firm. Nor must a member of staff use his/her position with the Council to obtain a discount or preferential terms. The purchase of goods and services at discounted terms under a scheme or arrangement which applies to members of a trade union or other organisation is excluded from this paragraph. In addition, officers are able to take advantage of discounts with organisations where they have been agreed by the Council for the benefit of staff.
(c) Staff must avoid contact with firms engaged in "pressure selling", where inducements and discounts are offered in return for orders. The proper action is for the officer concerned to report the matter immediately to their Director.
To avoid any suggestion of restraint of trade or unfair discrimination against any particular firm, the staff involved must always explain diplomatically the dangers to both parties inherent in such preferential offers.
May 2016 Page 136 APPENDIX TWO
10. USE OF COUNCIL FACILITIES
10.1 Employees of the Council are provided with facilities, including office equipment, computer facilities, transport, telephones, secretarial services etc, to use in carrying out their official duties. Certain facilities, such as telephones and photocopiers, are available to staff for private use on agreed terms. However, Council work must always be given priority and, if employees wish to make use of Council equipment for their own use, prior approval must always be obtained by consulting their line manager and/or Employee Services in the first instance. Unauthorised use of equipment will render an employee liable to disciplinary action and/or legal proceedings.
10.2 The Council recognises the importance of information technology in delivering efficient, high quality services. All employees are required to take appropriate measures to ensure the security of information, and the protection of IT equipment and information from threats such as computer viruses and theft. There have been instances where a computer virus has been introduced onto computers by employees utilising their own software and this must in no circumstances take place without the prior written approval both of the Council’s Head of Information Technology and the employee’s Director.
10.3 The use of IT equipment is regulated by various Procedure Rules including the Council’s Acceptable Use of IT Policy and acts of parliament including the Data Protection Act (1998) and the Freedom of Information Act (2000). All employees are obliged to act in accordance with these regulations and employees must be aware of the requirements of these policies for both business and personal use of IT equipment. Details can be accessed through the Council’s Intranet site (Managing Conduct, Performance and Information Policy and within the information security acceptable use policy) paper copies are accessible through Employee Services, the Data Protection Officer, the Corporate Records Manager.
10.4 Employees who have responsibility for the use of equipment, machinery, etc must always ensure that routine checks are carried out prior to use. Any defect or damage must be reported immediately by the employee to their supervisor.
11. ATTENDANCE AT PUBLIC MEETINGS
11.1 There exists some uncertainty in the minds of senior management and Members about the circumstances in which employees are expected to attend public meetings which are not hosted or organised by the Council. This is a particular problem for officers who, on the one hand, recognise their responsibilities to Members but, on the other, are hesitant to be drawn into issues which might be more appropriately settled in the political arena. Understandably, Officers are particularly
May 2016 Page 137 APPENDIX TWO
reluctant to become involved in such meetings immediately prior to an election.
11.2 Members have expressed the view that they should be able to rely upon the support of Officers in dealing with matters of concern within their wards. Members are often called upon to explain Council decisions about which they have no detailed or technical knowledge and which, in some cases, they do not personally support. In these cases, Members consider that the attendance of Officers at meetings with the public is essential.
11.3 Guidance
Members must be able to count on the support of Officers to explain particular proposals and schemes in detail [but not to deal with general issues affecting an area or a ward]. This may be required at public meetings in the Member’s ward, subject to the following conditions being met:
[a] the appropriate Director agrees that it would be appropriate for an Officer to attend the meeting in his/her professional capacity and that this is an appropriate use of the relevant Officer's time in all the circumstances;
[b] the venue for the meeting is not in the ownership of, or occupied by, a particular political group;
[c] notices inviting attendance at the meeting do not refer to any political group;
[d] costs involved in meetings called by ward members are not to be met by the Council;
[e] the Director is satisfied that notices inviting attendance at the public meeting have been widely distributed in the area concerned;
[f] all Councillors for the ward[s] affected, together with the Chair and Opposition Spokespersons of the committee[s] concerned, are invited to attend the meeting;
[g] all requests for attendance at public meetings are vetted by the appropriate Director or a nominated officer to ensure that all appropriate services are represented and that these guidelines have been observed; and
[h] Officers must not be required to attend public meetings during the period preceding European, parliamentary or municipal elections from the notice of election to the day of the poll.
May 2016 Page 138 APPENDIX TWO
12. CUSTOMER CARE
12.1 It is important that, as an employee of the Council, you carry out your duties to the best of your abilities and give the best professional advice on all matters. Many employees of the Council are 'front line' service providers and it is essential that the image portrayed reflects the quality of the organisation. The reputation of the Council depends on the conduct of its employees and it is important, therefore, that the highest standards of conduct and service to the public are maintained at all times. You must always be courteous, helpful and efficient when dealing with members of the public and other outside bodies and give adequate information to ensure that they receive a satisfactory service. In achieving this, you must ensure that your safety and that of your colleagues is always taken into consideration.
12.2 In your relationship with the public you must:
- put the public first
- be polite, whatever the circumstances
- listen and show interest
- remember to demonstrate to the customer that you are here to provide a service
- make the customer feel that they matter
- keep the customer informed
- maintain a high standard of work
12.3 When receiving telephone calls:
- give the name of your service and also your name
- speak clearly, use plain language not jargon
- treat the person as if you were talking to them face to face
- take the caller's name and call back if necessary
- always remember that your tone of voice will convey as much information to the customer as the words you use.
12.4 When dealing with customers/clients on a face to face basis:
- be courteous at all times
May 2016 Page 139 APPENDIX TWO
- treat people's property as if it was your own
- be patient, allow time for our customers who are elderly or disabled
- introduce yourself, wear your identification badge where it is appropriate
- wear the correct type of clothing, always taking into account any health and safety considerations.
12.5 Always remember that customer care is the link between you, the customer and the Council.
13. DEALINGS WITH THE COUNCIL
13.1 You may have dealings with the Council on a personal level, for example as a Council Tax payer, as a tenant, or as an applicant for a grant or planning permission. You must never seek or accept preferential treatment in those dealings because of your position as a Council employee. You must also seek to avoid placing yourself in a position that could lead the public to think that you are receiving preferential treatment.
13.2 Similarly, you must never use your position as an employee to seek preferential treatment for friends or relatives or any firm or body with which you or your friends or relatives are personally connected.
13.3 All employees must disclose to the appropriate Director any personal interests which may conflict with the authority's interests [e.g. acting as a school governor within schools maintained by the authority, involvement with an organisation receiving grant aid, involvement with an organisation or pressure group which may seek to influence the authority's policies]. Each Director will maintain a register of such disclosures which must be available for examination. If employees are in doubt as to what should be included they must err on the side of caution and disclose the interest.
14. RELATIONSHIP WITH ELECTED MEMBERS
14.1 Both Councillors and employees are servants of the public, but their responsibilities are distinct. Councillors are responsible to the electorate and serve only so long as their term of office lasts. Employees are responsible to the Council and their job is to give advice to Councillors and to carry out the Council's work under the direction and control of the Council and its committees.
14.2 Mutual respect between Councillors and employees is essential and close personal familiarity between individual Councillors and employees can damage the relationship and prove embarrassing to other Councillors and employees.
May 2016 Page 140 APPENDIX TWO
14.3 Employees serve the Council as a whole and consequently must serve all Councillors, not just those of any controlling group. Some employees are required to advise political groups and must advise minority groups as well as controlling groups. They must do so in ways which do not compromise their political neutrality.
14.4 Employees, whether or not politically restricted, must follow every lawfully expressed policy of the Council and must not allow their own personal or political opinions to interfere with their work.
14.5 Political assistants appointed on fixed-term contracts in accordance with the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 are exempt from the advice in paragraphs 14.3 and 14.4.
15. PROTOCOL FOR PROCESSING CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESSED TO ELECTED MEMBERS
15.1 Letters addressed to Elected Members are their property and, generally speaking, the permission of the addressee must be obtained before the contents are revealed to, or shared with, any other person. In the circumstances where a Member requests an Officer to treat a matter on a confidential basis, this must be respected except in the following circumstances:
(a) If an Officer believes that, in keeping a matter confidential, the Council’s Financial Procedure Rules or other established procedures, policies, etc are likely to be breached. In such circumstances he/she must discuss the matter with his/her Director;
(b) If the content of a letter from an Elected Member, or the response, is likely to be the subject of a report to committee, or if it impinges upon an existing policy of the Council or if it is known that there is media interest, Officers must acquaint the appropriate committee Chair and Spokesperson[s] of the main opposition political group[s] of the existence of the letter.
15.2 If a letter is addressed to an Elected Member in circumstances which might be regarded as akin to an official communication to the Council, there is a responsibility on the part of Officers to advise that such a letter must be dealt with through the appropriate democratic processes of the Council. Official correspondence on behalf of the Council should normally be handled by Officers, and it would be appropriate for an Officer discussing such correspondence with a Member to suggest that course of action and to offer to deal with the correspondence on behalf of the Council, or at least offer to prepare the reply for the Member concerned.
May 2016 Page 141 APPENDIX TWO
An example of such circumstances would arise if a Member were to receive an invitation, in his/her capacity as an Elected Member, to represent the Council on the management committee of an outside body. In such a case, the relevant Officer must report the invitation to the appropriate Committee and/or Executive Member.
15.3 Officers must note that letters received by Members from Officers in response to ward matters may be circulated in the neighbourhood concerned, within the criteria laid down and provided that party political slogans, or references to a political party, do not appear on the face of the Council communication, which must remain in its original form.
[Details of the criteria referred to are available from the Assistant Executive Director (Governance)].
15.4 Candidates in an election who are not serving Members of the Council must be treated in the same way as any member of the public and must not be given the facilities enjoyed by Elected Members to pursue ward issues.
16. PROTOCOL FOR RELAYING VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS WITH ELECTED MEMBERS
Should it be necessary to reproduce any part of the contents of a verbal communication with an Elected Member in written form, Officers should, as a matter of courtesy, send a copy of the correspondence to the Member with whom the conversation was held.
17. AWARDING OF CONTRACTS/TENDERS
17.1 Employees who are privy to confidential information on tenders or costs for either internal or external contractors must not disclose that information to any unauthorised party or organisation.
17.2 Employees must exercise fairness and impartiality when dealing with all customers, suppliers, other contractors and subcontractors and be able to demonstrate that this has been done. Employees must ensure that no special favour is shown to current or former employees or their partners, relatives or associates in awarding contracts to businesses run by them or employing them in a senior or relevant managerial capacity.
17.3 Employees must also ensure that they are aware of, and comply with, the Council’s Contract Procedure Rules and Financial Procedure Rules when awarding contracts for goods and/or services.
18. EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY POLICY
18.1 The authority has equality and diversity outcomes incorporated in the Corporate Plan. In addition the council has an Equality and Diversity
May 2016 Page 142 APPENDIX TWO
Policy which, in particular, commits it to working towards equality of opportunity for gender, ethnicity, disability, age, religion and belief, sexual orientation, gender identity, carer’s status, offending past, pregnancy and maternity and marriage and civil partnerships. All employees must ensure that policies relating to equality issues are complied with, in addition to the requirements of the law, e.g. the Equality Act 2010. All members of the local community, customers and other employees have a right to be treated with fairness and equality.
18.2 The Authority also has a specific policy to combat harassment, discrimination and bullying. The Occupational Health and Wellbeing Policy – Dignity at Work guidance policy (the Dignity at Work Policy) sets out the standards of behaviour expected from all employees. It:
- emphasises the need to treat everyone fairly;
- draws attention to the many forms of harassment, discrimination and bullying at work and to their serious adverse effects;
- makes explicit those behaviours which will not be tolerated;
- provides practical guidance to all employees on how to deal with harassment, discrimination and bullying;
- explains the support mechanisms for employees.
It stresses that all employees have the right to be treated with dignity, integrity and respect.
18.3 Offensive language or behaviour will not be tolerated by the Council. Employees found guilty of such language or behaviour are likely to face serious disciplinary action up to and including dismissal.
18.4 In addition, all officers who come into contact with children and young people – whether they are paid, unpaid, volunteer, casual, agency or self-employed workers – are required to comply with any requests or requirements of the Council’s Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) to allow that Officer to fulfil his/her duties in relation to any safeguarding allegations against staff where a child may be involved.
19. USE OF OFFICIAL CARS
19.1 Official cars which, for the purposes of this Code, include private hire vehicles, must be used only in the conduct of the official business of the Council. Vehicles must be booked through the prescribed service and no private hire operator must be contacted directly, except when the journey concerned is outside normal working hours and unforeseen.
19.2 Vehicle waiting time should be kept to a minimum.
May 2016 Page 143 APPENDIX TWO
19.3 Wherever practicable, public transport or private vehicles must be used. The use of official cars must be governed by the following considerations:
(a) there is a substantial saving in expenditure and time, or the journey is essential and a matter of urgency;
(b) due to disability, illness, or potential risk of bodily harm or distress, the use of other means of transport is not possible;
(c) it is necessary to carry bulky documents or materials;
(d) there is an urgent need to carry out essential work during the journey;
(e) the nature of the journey, i.e. lengthy travelling time/short waiting time, as opposed to a short journey/long waiting time;
(f) the need to use an official car in order to reflect the status of the occasion [subject to the provisions in paragraph 18.5[c] below].
19.4 All journeys by official cars must be authorised by an Officer of appropriate seniority.
19.5 Official cars must not be used for travelling to or from home unless under exceptional circumstances, i.e.
(a) emergency callouts or duties;
(b) out of hours working in circumstances where, if a private vehicle had been used, car mileage allowance would be claimable;
(c) the Officer concerned is representing the Council on formal ceremonial occasions, in which case the use of official cars is restricted to Directors.
20. GUIDELINES FOR USE BY DIRECTORS IN DETERMINING THE NEED TO ACQUIRE/USE MOBILE PHONES
20.1 The Council is a large multifunctional organisation with a large number of employees. It is committed to providing high quality, efficient services to the public in the most cost-effective way. It recognises that to do this it needs to employ modern methods of operation and equipment. Some of these methods and equipment are, however, expensive and the Council wishes to ensure that additional expense is both appropriate and necessary.
20.2 The Council is satisfied that there are many circumstances in which it is beneficial to clients, staff and Council services to use mobile phones.
May 2016 Page 144 APPENDIX TWO
Such phones are, however, relatively expensive and charges are incurred for rental or purchase and line charges. Call charges to and from mobile phones can be more expensive than for landline phones. The Council has therefore approved the following guidelines which Directors must have regard to:
(a) before deciding to acquire; and
(b) in deciding to continue to use mobile phones.
20.3 Guidelines
Mobile phones must only be acquired/retained when one or more of the following criteria are met:
(a) When their availability is essential to provide for the security of staff visiting sites or clients away from their normal base and where there are identified risks to staff [e.g. on certain home visits and visiting empty properties and sites with clients].
(b) Where mobile staff need to be able to take immediate and effective action when away from their base in order to protect the public [e.g. building surveyors in relation to dangerous structures, etc and traffic engineers regarding traffic signal failures].
(c) Where staff regularly operate away from a fixed base and there is a demonstrable need to have immediate two-way contact [architects, etc visiting and between sites].
(d) Where staff need to be in immediate contact outside normal working hours to activate/implement arrangements to deal with minor/major emergencies.
(e) Where it is cost effective and enables the Council to deploy its human and material resources in a way which improves its ability to provide services [e.g. in achieving more productive use of mobile work teams].
(f) When staff need to be able to resolve staffing shortages/issues at residential establishments [e.g. in the Homelessness Service] outside normal working hours.
(g) When providing services for outside agencies where the contacts require the availability of mobile phones.
(h) When it is necessary for open air events organisation and associated public safety.
May 2016 Page 145 APPENDIX TWO
(i) Where it is not sufficient to use landline telephones, pagers or other methods of communication [e.g. radio telephones].
(j) When there are other special needs not referred to above, which must be approved in every case by the relevant Director personally.
Subject to item [i], in every case where mobile phones are acquired, the personal approval of the Director must be obtained.
Directors must be satisfied that, in determining the number of mobile phones to be used, it is not possible and appropriate to reorganise working methods so that shared use of such phones can be arranged.
The use of BlackBerry devices to provide mobile access to email must be agreed by the relevant Director and agreed with the Head of Information Technology.
20.4 Records and Ongoing Control
(a) Directors must maintain a register of mobile phones in use within their services. The register must indicate the criteria which justify the acquisition and use of each phone.
(b) Itemised billing is mandatory and Directors must make arrangements for the scrutiny of each bill. Where personal calls are likely to be made the employee must join the payroll deduction scheme to make an agreed monthly contribution towards the line rental and inclusive calls. All calls that fall outside of the inclusive tariff (e.g. international or premium rate calls) will be emailed to the employee registered for the mobile phone number and all personal calls in this notification must bepaid for by the employee concerned.
(c) The register must be available for inspection by Officers of the Internal Audit Service and shared with the IT Service on request.
(d) Each Head of Service is required to review, at least annually, the numbers, uses and justifications for retention of mobile phones within their services.
(e) Where a mobile phone is available, users must, consider whether it is cheaper to use a landline or mobile phone. For example, within the UK, calls from a Council mobile phone to another mobile phone are included in the line rental tariff and are therefore cheaper than from a landline.
May 2016 Page 146 APPENDIX TWO
21. NO SMOKING GUIDANCE
21.1 The Council has operated a no smoking policy since 2004 and its object is to establish a healthy environment for all persons [Elected Members, employees, contractors and visitors], employed in or visiting Council premises, including travelling in Council vehicles.
21.2 A number of new devices have been developed which mimic tobacco smoking. These e-cigarettes look like cigarettes, produce a vapour and are used in the same way as cigarettes. They are a new product and as such their safety is currently unknown. This guidance applies to all products that supply nicotine (e-cigarettes as well as tobacco cigarettes) for logistical, protective and promotional reasons as follows:-
It would be difficult to implement this guidance if e-cigarettes were allowed as it is not easy to distinguish those who were using e- cigarettes from tobacco cigarettes.
As the safety of e-cigarettes is unknown a precautionary approach to protecting the health of employees should be taken. This approach will be reviewed in line with Council Policy.
21.3 This guidance is extended to include all privately owned vehicles, when passengers are carried in regard to official council business.
21.4 The guidance accepts that an environment polluted by smoke is inherently unhealthy.
21.5 The sale of tobacco products, including cigarettes, e-cigarettes, cigars, hand rolling or pipe tobacco, or chewing tobacco on any land/premises/ hoardings/vehicles or other advertising media on directly controlled council premises is prohibited (excluding commercially leased Council premises).
21.6 Employees who smoke will be allowed reasonable time off with pay to attend smoking cessation classes should they choose to do so, to encourage as many employees as possible not to smoke at work. Further details are available from the Employee Services.
21.7 The Employee Services will be responsible for ensuring that all job applicants are aware of the guidance before offers of employment are made or accepted.
21.8 Line Managers, through their normal managerial duties, will be responsible for overseeing the management of this guidance for all areas of their responsibility.
May 2016 Page 147 APPENDIX TWO
21.9 Certain specified council buildings will be exempted from the guidance (i.e. residential establishments). It must be noted that whilst the building is exempt from the guidance (thus allowing residents / clients to smoke), council employees are not exempt and must not smoke or use e-cigarettes whilst on duty.
21.10 Employees may smoke or use e-cigarettes during their own official breaks, which have been authorised by their line manager, subject to service provision being maintained. However, these must take place away from council buildings and their perimeters, as it creates an unprofessional image of the council to visitors and Knowsley residents.
21.11 Employees who refuse to refrain from smoking within council buildings and council vehicles will be deemed to be in breach of council guidance. They will initially be counselled and encouraged to comply with the rules as they would for any other council guidance.
21.12 However, persistent, intentional breaches of the guidance will become a disciplinary matter, dealt with by the Council’s Managing Conduct, Performance and Information Policy.
21.13 In the event of any employee persisting in smoking in contravention of the No Smoking Guidance, line managers/supervisors must initially contact Employee Servicesbefore implementing any disciplinary action.
22. CASH HANDLING
22.1 Every employee engaged in any way in the handling of money must accept that once he/she has received it, it is his/her own individual and personal responsibility, which cannot be abrogated or shared with any other person, to ensure its correctness and safe custody and that he/she will be held responsible and may be liable for any failure to account properly for the money until he/she parts with it in an authorised way.
22.2 The proceedings and business of the Council are regulated by various Procedural Rules, including Financial Procedure Rules and Contract Procedure Rules. All employees are obliged to act in accordance with them and employees are therefore advised to familiarise themselves with their requirements.
23. CORPORATE IDENTITY
23.1 The Council adopts a corporate approach to image, communications and customer care. A co-ordinated approach to the use of a symbol and colour scheme is an effective method of increasing public awareness of Council services.
May 2016 Page 148 APPENDIX TWO
23.2 The Council has published a 'Corporate Identity Style Manual' which gives advice to employees on the implementation of the corporate image. This is available from the Corporate Communications Team and must be followed.
May 2016 Page 149 This page is intentionally left blank APPENDIX 3
PROTOCOL FOR MEMBER/OFFICER RELATIONS
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The purpose of this protocol is to guide Members and Officers of the Council in their relations with one another in such a way as to ensure the smooth running of the Council and foster good working relationships for the benefit of the community.
1.2 Given the variety and complexity of such relations, this protocol does not seek to be either prescriptive or comprehensive. It simply offers guidance on some of the issues which most commonly arise. It is hoped, however, that the approach that it adopts to these issues will serve as a guide to dealing with other issues.
1.3 This protocol is to a large extent no more than a written statement of current practice and convention. It seeks to promote greater clarity and certainty. If the protocol is followed it should also ensure that Members receive objective and impartial advice and guidance, and that Officers are protected from accusations of bias and any undue influence from Members.
1.4 This protocol also seeks to reflect the principles underlying the respective Codes of Conduct which apply to Members and Officers. The shared object of these codes is to enhance and maintain the integrity (real and perceived) of local government and they, therefore, demand very high standards of personal conduct.
1.5 In line with the Code of Conduct's reference to treating others with respect, it is important that any dealings between Members and Officers should observe reasonable standards of courtesy and that neither party should seek to take unfair advantage of their position.
1.6 Members should not raise matters relating to the conduct or capability of a Council employee or of employees collectively at meetings held in public. This is a long standing tradition in public service. Employees have no means of responding to criticisms like this in public. If Members feel they have not been treated with proper respect, courtesy or have any concern about the conduct or capability of a Council employee they should raise the matter with the Director responsible for the service area concerned. Any concern about a Director should be raised privately with the Chief Executive.
1.7 The Director will look into the facts and report back to the Member. If the Member continues to feel concerned the Member should then report to the Chief Executive who will look into the matter afresh. Any action taken against an Officer in respect of a complaint will be in accordance with the provisions of the Council’s disciplinary rules and procedures.
May 2016 Page 151 APPENDIX 3
1.8 Where an Officer feels that he or she has not been properly treated with respect and courtesy or is concerned about any action or statement relating to him/herself or a colleague by a Member they should raise the matter with their Line Manager, Director or Chief Executive as appropriate, especially if they do not feel able to discuss it directly with the Member concerned. In these circumstances the Chief Executive will take appropriate action either by approaching the individual Member and/or Group Leader.
2. OFFICER SUPPORT TO MEMBERS: GENERAL POINTS
2.1 Officers are responsible for day-to-day managerial and operational decisions within the Council and Members should avoid inappropriate involvement in such matters. The respective roles and responsibilities of Members and Officers in relation to employment issues are set out in the Officer Employment Procedure Rules. Officers will provide support to both the Executive and all Members in their respective Council roles.
2.2 Certain statutory Officers – the Chief Executive as Head of Paid Service, the Assistant Executive Director (Governance) as the Monitoring Officer and the Executive Director (Resources) as the Section 151 Officer – have specific roles. These are addressed in the Constitution. The roles need to be understood and respected by all Members.
2.3 The following key principles reflect the way in which Officers generally relate to Members:
all Officers are employed by, and accountable to the Council as a whole; support from Officers is needed for all the Council’s functions including Full Council, the Policy and Performance Committees, the Cabinet, Regulatory Committees, individual Members representing their communities etc; day-to-day managerial and operational decisions remain the responsibility of the Chief Executive and other Officers; Officers will be provided with training and development to help them support the various Member roles effectively and to understand the structures.
2.4 The Scheme of Delegation to Officers sets out Officer responsibilities in respect of delegated decision making, Also, on occasion, a decision may be reached which authorises named Officers to take action following consultation with a Member or Members. The Member or Members may offer his/her views or advice to the Officer who must take them into account, but the decision remains the responsibility of the Officer him/herself. It must be recognised that it is the Officer,
May 2016 Page 152 APPENDIX 3
rather than the Member or Members, who takes the action and it is the Officer who is accountable for it.
2.5 Finally, it must be remembered that Officers within a Service are accountable to their Director and that whilst Officers should always seek to assist a Member, they must not, in so doing, go beyond the bounds of whatever authority they have been given by their Director. Where appropriate, Officers should make a Member aware of the limits of the Officer’s authority and explain that the matter would have to be referred to the Director.
3. OFFICER SUPPORT TO EXECUTIVE MEMBERS AND COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSONS
3.1 It is clearly important that there should be a close working relationship between an Executive Member or Chairperson, the Director and other Senior Officers of relevant departments. However, such relationships should never be allowed to become so close, or appear to be so close, as to bring into question an Officer’s ability to deal with other Members and other party groups.
3.2 Whilst an Executive Member or Chairperson will routinely be consulted as part of the process of drawing up the agenda for a forthcoming meeting, it must be recognised that in some situations a Director will be under a duty to submit a report on a particular matter. Similarly, a Director or Senior Officer will always be fully responsible for the contents of any report submitted by his/her service area. This means that any such report will be amended only where the amendment reflects the professional judgement of the author of the report. Any issues arising between an Executive Member or Chairperson and a Director in this area should be referred to the Chief Executive for resolution in conjunction with the Leader of the Council.
3.3 The Cabinet and its Members have wide ranging leadership roles. They will:
lead the community planning process and the search for Best Value, with input and advice from the Policy and Performance Committees and any other persons as appropriate; lead the preparation of the Council’s policies and budget; take decisions on resources and priorities, together with other stakeholders and partners in the local community, to deliver and implement the budget and policies decided by the Full Council; and be the focus for forming partnerships with other local public, private, voluntary and community sector organisations to address local needs.
May 2016 Page 153 APPENDIX 3
3.4 A Director will seek to ensure that the relevant Cabinet Member, Cabinet Lead Member or Committee Chairperson is fully briefed about business within that Member’s area of responsibility.
3.5 Where functions which are the responsibility of the Cabinet are delegated to Officers or other structures outside the Cabinet, the Cabinet will nevertheless remain accountable to the Council for the discharge of those functions. That is to say, the Cabinet will be held to account for both its decision to delegate a function and the way that the function is being carried out. The Policy and Performance Committees may call in and review the decisions of the Cabinet and key decisions of Officers acting under delegated authority and report the outcome of their review to Council, the Cabinet and Officers as appropriate.
3.6 Officers work for and serve the Council as a whole. Nevertheless, as the majority of functions are the responsibility of the Cabinet, it is likely that in practice many Officers will be working to the Cabinet, and all Executive Members, for most of their time. The Cabinet, and all Executive Members, must respect the political neutrality of Officers. Officers must ensure that, even when they are predominantly providing advice and assistance to the Executive, their political neutrality is not compromised.
3.7 Members and Officers need to be aware of additional Codes and Protocols which may refer to their specific area, such as the Local Government Association protocol ‘Probity in Planning’ for Councillors responsible for determining Planning applications.
4. OFFICER SUPPORT TO THE POLICY AND PERFORMANCE COMMITTEES
4.1 The Policy and Performance Committees have both a scrutiny role and a policy development and review role. Provisions relating to the attendance of Officers at meetings of the Committees are set out at Paragraph 16 of the Policy and Performance Committee Procedure Rules.
4.2 Cabinet/Executive Members and Senior Officers may be required to attend meetings of the Policy and Performance Committees to respond to questions from Members. Questions to Officers should be confined to questions of fact and explanation relating to policies and decisions. Officers should not be requested to, or expected to, be drawn into the discussion of the merits of alternative policies where this is politically contentious. Any comment by Officers on the Council or Cabinet's policies and actions should always be consistent with the requirement for Officers to be politically impartial.
4.3 Officers required to attend a meeting of the Policy and Performance Committees should be given adequate notice of the meeting and the
May 2016 Page 154 APPENDIX 3
nature of the item on which he or she is required to give account and whether any written report is necessary.
4.4 It is not the Policy and Performance Committees’ role to act as a disciplinary tribunal in relation to the actions of Members or Officers. Neither is it the role of Officers to become involved in what would amount to disciplinary investigations on behalf of the Policy and Performance Committees. This is the Chief Executive’s function alone in relation to Officers and the Monitoring Officer’s functions as regards the conduct of Members. The Policy and Performance Committees’ questioning should be directed towards establishing the facts about what occurred in the making of decisions or implementing Council policies, and not towards the allocation of criticism or blame.
5. OFFICER SUPPORT TO MEMBERS AND PARTY GROUPS
5.1 It must be recognised by all Officers and Members that in discharging their duties and responsibilities Officers serve the Council as a whole and not exclusively any political group, combination of groups or any individual Member of the Council.
5.2 There is now statutory recognition for party groups and it is common practice for political groups to give preliminary consideration to matters of Council business in advance of such matters being considered by the relevant Council decision making body. Officers may properly be called upon to support and contribute to such deliberations by party groups but must at all times maintain political neutrality. All Officers must, in their dealings with political groups and individual Members, treat them in a fair and even-handed manner.
5.3 The support provided by Officers can take many forms, ranging from a briefing with the relevant Executive Member prior to a meeting to a presentation to a full party group meeting. Whilst in practice such Officer support is likely to be in most demand from whichever party group is for the time being in control of the Council, such support is available to all party groups.
5.4 In supporting and advising political groups, certain points must, however, be clearly understood by all those participating in this type of process, Members and Officers alike. In particular: -
(a) Requests for Officers to attend any party group meeting must be made through the appropriate Director. The Director will advise the Chief Executive of any requests made.
(b) Officer support must not extend beyond providing information and advice in relation to matters of Council business. Officers must not be involved in advising on matters of party business. This distinction will be assisted if Officers are not present at
May 2016 Page 155 APPENDIX 3
meetings or parts of meetings, when matters of party business are to be discussed. If Officers are requested to attend Group meetings, their role will be limited to giving a presentation or briefing to Members and responding to questions on the content of the presentation or briefing.
(c) Party group meetings, whilst they form part of the preliminaries to Council decision making, are not empowered to make decisions on behalf of the Council. Conclusions reached at such meetings do not therefore rank as Council decisions and it is essential that they are not interpreted or acted upon as such.
(d) Any request for advice, together with the advice given to a political group or Member will be treated with strict confidentiality by the Officers concerned and will not be accessible to any other political group. It is acknowledged, however, that factual information upon which any advice is based will, if requested, be available to all political groups.
(e) It must not be assumed by any political group or Member that any Officer is supportive of any policy or strategy developed because of that Officer's assistance in the formulation of that policy or strategy.
(f) Officers must respect the confidentiality of any party group discussions at which they are present in the sense that they should not relay the content of any such discussion to another party group.
(g) Where Officers provide information and advice to a party group meeting in relation to a matter of Council business, this cannot act as a substitute for providing all necessary information and advice to the relevant meeting when the matter in question is considered.
(h) Officers involved in providing information and advice to party group meetings at which non-elected members are present should be mindful that although such persons may be bound by the political group’s own Standing Orders, persons who are not Councillors or co-opted members of the Council are not bound by the Code of Conduct. In particular, they cannot be bound by the provisions concerning declaration of interests and confidentiality which are contained in the Code of Conduct.
5.5 Any particular cases of difficulty or uncertainty in this area of Officer advice to party groups must be raised with the Chief Executive who will discuss them with the relevant Group Leader(s).
May 2016 Page 156 APPENDIX 3
5.6 In relation to budget proposals:
(a) the controlling political group shall be entitled to confidential discussions with Officers regarding options and proposals. These will remain confidential until determined by the group or until published in advance of Committee/Council meetings, whichever is the earlier; and
(b) the opposition groups shall also be entitled to confidential discussions with Officers to enable them to formulate alternative budget proposals. These will remain confidential until determined by the respective opposition groups or until published in advance of Committee/Council meetings, whichever is the earlier.
6. SUPPORT SERVICES TO MEMBERS AND PARTY GROUPS
6.1 The only basis on which the Council can lawfully provide support services (eg stationery, typing, printing, photocopying, transport etc) to Members is to assist them in discharging their role as Members of the Council. Such support services must therefore only be used on Council business including surgery and casework. They should never be used in connection with campaigning activity for a political party or for private purposes.
6.2 In particular photocopying and postal services should only be used by Members for circulating correspondence and literature specific to Council business, including Group correspondence directly relating to Council business.
7. CORRESPONDENCE
7.1 Correspondence between an individual Member and an Officer will not, as a matter of course, be copied (by the Officer) to any other Member. Where correspondence is copied to another Member, the original Member will be informed. In other words, a system of "blind copies" should not be employed. Members will, of course, bear in mind that Officers will brief Executive Members and Chairpersons as outlined in paragraph 3.4 above.
7.2 Official letters on behalf of the Council should normally be sent out in the name of the appropriate Officer, rather than in the name of a Member. It may be appropriate in certain circumstances (eg representations to a Government Minister) for a letter to be signed by a Member, but this should be the exception rather than the norm. Letters which, for example, create obligations or give instructions on behalf of the Council should never be sent out in the name of a Member.
May 2016 Page 157 APPENDIX 3
7.3 On receiving correspondence from the Borough Council’s Elected Members or MPs, Officers will:
(i) within two working days from receipt of the correspondence, acknowledge receipt and assess the correspondence to determine whether the matter is time critical (i.e. whether there is a specific and imminent deadline for action/objections/submissions) or contains allegations of misconduct, fraud or criminal activity;
(ii) if any of the categories specified in (i) above apply, the correspondence must be responded to within the required timescale or a maximum of five working days following receipt;
(iii) in all other cases (i.e. where the categories specified in (i) above do not apply), Officers will respond to correspondence from Members and MPs as follows:-
(a) subject to (c) below, a full response will be sent to the Member/MP within a maximum of ten working days following receipt;
(b) if the enquiry relates to a matter involving the input of a partner agency, the relevant aspect of the enquiry will be forwarded to the appropriate agency. The Officer will then liaise with the partner agency to ensure that a single response is sent to the Member/MP, subject to (c) below, within a maximum of ten working days following receipt;
(c) if the enquiry is complex and cannot be answered in full within ten working days, an email will be sent to the Member/MP explaining why and setting out the date when it is anticipated that a full response will be sent. In such circumstances, the full response must be sent within twenty working days following receipt; and,
(d) if the enquiry relates exclusively to a partner agency’s remit, the enquiry will be forwarded to the relevant agency and the Member/MP will be informed of the appropriate contact details.
8. MEMBERS' ACCESS TO INFORMATION AND TO COUNCIL DOCUMENTS
8.1 The following paragraphs identify arrangements for Members' access to information and documents. It is important to note that such access only applies where Members are undertaking Council business. Where a Member has a declarable interest under the Code of Conduct in a particular matter, the Member will only be entitled to the same access to documents as would be the case for a private individual. In these
May 2016 Page 158 APPENDIX 3
circumstances, the Member must make it clear to the employee that he/she is acting on his/her own behalf and not acting as a Councillor.
8.2 Members are free to approach any Council Department to provide them with such information, explanation and advice (about that Department's functions) as they may reasonably need in order to assist them in discharging their role as Members of the Council or any particular role eg representative on an outside body to which they have been appointed by the Council. This can range from a request for general information or research about some aspect of a Service’s activities to a request for specific information on behalf of a constituent. Such approaches should normally be made to the Director or other appropriate Senior Officer of the Department concerned. In cases of doubt, the appropriate Director or Monitoring Officer should be asked for assistance.
8.3 With regards to the legal rights of Members to inspect Council documents, these are covered partly by statute and partly the common law.
8.4 Members have a statutory right to inspect any Council document which contains material relating to any business which is to be transacted at a meeting of the Council. This right applies irrespective of whether the Member is a Member of the Cabinet or Committee concerned and extends not only to reports which are to be submitted to the meeting, but also to any relevant background papers. This right does not, however, apply to documents relating to certain items including background papers which may appear on the private agenda for meetings (i.e. green papers). Members do not have a statutory right to inspect exempt information eg that relating to employees, occupiers of Council property, applicants for grants and other services, the care of children, contract and industrial relations negotiations, advice from Counsel and criminal investigations. As indicated in paragraph 8.1 above, any member who would have a declarable interest in a matter if it were reported to a committee of which he/she was a member will only be entitled to the same access to documents as would be the case for a private individual.
8.5 The Data Protection Act 1998 regulates the holding and processing of personal information relating to individuals. This includes the disclosure of personal information and in many circumstances is not permitted without the express consent of the individuals concerned. Where it is unclear whether consent has been granted Members may be required to demonstrate that consent has been given. This may include obtaining the written consent of the individual(s) concerned, eg, by completing the generic data protection consent form.
8.6 The common law right of Members to inspect documents is much broader and is based on the principle that any Member has a prima facie right to inspect Council documents so far as his/her access to the
May 2016 Page 159 APPENDIX 3
documents is reasonably necessary to enable the Member properly to perform his/her duties as a Member of the Council. This principle is commonly referred to as the 'need to know' principle.
8.7 The exercise of this common law right depends therefore, upon the Members' ability to demonstrate that he/she has the necessary 'need to know'. In this respect a Member has no right to a 'roving commission' to go and examine documents of the Council. Mere curiosity is not sufficient. The crucial question is the determination of the 'need to know'.
8.8 This question must initially be determined by the particular Director whose Department holds the document in question (with advice from the Monitoring Officer or Head of Legal Services).
8.9 In some circumstances (eg a Committee Member wishing to inspect documents relating to the business of that Committee) a Member's 'need to know' will normally be presumed. In other circumstances (eg a Member wishing to inspect documents which contain personal information about third parties) a Member will normally be expected to justify the request in specific terms. Furthermore, there will be a range of documents which, because of their nature are either not accessible by Members or are accessible only by the political group forming the administration and not by the other political groups. An example of this latter category would be draft documents compiled in the context of emerging Council policies and draft reports, the premature disclosure of which might be against the Council's and the public interest.
8.10 Whilst the term 'Council document' is very broad and includes for example, any document produced with Council resources, it is accepted by convention that a Member of one party group will not have a 'need to know' and, therefore, a right to inspect, a document which forms part of the internal workings of another party group.
8.11 Members do not have the right of access to information or documents in circumstances where the role they are undertaking may conflict with the authority's interests eg as a school governor.
8.12 Further and more detailed advice regarding Members' rights to inspect Council documents may be obtained from the Monitoring Officer or Head of Legal Services.
8.13 Finally, any Council information provided to a Member must only be used by the Member for the purpose for which it was provided, ie in connection with the proper performance of the Member's duties as a Member of the Council. Confidential information provided to Members should not be discussed with, or released to, any other persons without appropriate consent. This point is emphasised in the Code of Conduct in the following terms:-
May 2016 Page 160 APPENDIX 3
(Section 3.3(b)) A Member must not –
“disclose information given to you in confidence by anyone, or information acquired by you which you believe, or ought reasonably to be aware, is of a confidential nature, except where:-
(i) you have the consent of a person authorised to give it;
(ii) you are required by law to do so;
(iii) the disclosure is made to a third party for the purpose of obtaining professional legal advice provided that the third party agrees not to disclose the information to any other person; or,
(i) the disclosure is-
reasonable and in the public interest; and,
made in good faith and in compliance with the reasonable requirements of the Authority; and,
you have consulted the Monitoring Officer prior to its release.”
9. INVOLVEMENT OF WARD COUNCILLORS
9.1 Whenever the Council undertakes any form of consultative exercise on a local issue, the Ward Members should be informed or involved, as appropriate, not later than at the outset of the exercise. Similarly whenever a public meeting is organised by the Council to consider a local issue, all the Members representing the Ward or Wards affected should, as a matter of course, be invited to attend the meeting.
9.2 Officers agreeing to meet with a group of residents to discuss an issue of local concern should consider the need to raise with the organiser of the meeting (either Elected Member or resident) whether it would be appropriate for Ward Members to be invited to the meeting also. Officers should also consider the need to brief Ward Members about the purpose and outcome of the meeting whether or not Members were invited. This is to ensure that Ward Members are fully appraised about issues affecting their area. Similarly, Officers attending residents/community group meetings on a regular basis should arrange to keep local Ward Members briefed on issues raised.
9.3 Where Officers regularly attend residents/community group meetings they should consider what action is necessary to keep Ward Members appraised of support being provided to the organisation by the Council.
May 2016 Page 161 APPENDIX 3
9.4 Members invited to meetings which relate to issues which will be considered at a future meeting of a committee of the Council (particularly those undertaking quasi-judicial functions) of which they are a Member should consider carefully whether it is appropriate for them to attend to avoid the appearance of partiality.
9.5 Requests for Officers to attend public meetings will be dealt with in accordance with the guidance set out in Appendix 1.
9.6 Nothing within this Section precludes an Officer from arranging a site visit with an individual Ward Member.
10. CEREMONIAL EVENTS
10.1 The Mayor or in his/her absence a nominated Senior Elected Member will be the appropriate person to lead ceremonial events at which the Council is represented which are of particular significance or are not specifically associated with a particular portfolio. Similarly, the Mayor or in his/her absence a nominated Senior Elected Member will be in the appropriate person to represent the Council at ceremonial events of other organisations which are not specifically associated with a particular portfolio.
10.2 Subject to paragraph 10.1, Executive Members are the appropriate representatives for ceremonial events within the scope of their portfolio. Where the relevant Executive Member is not available then any other Member may be nominated by the Finance and Governance Portfolio Holder.
10.3 Local Members should always be informed of, and, where possible, invited to ceremonial events taking place within their own wards.
10.4 Any Member taking part in a ceremonial event must not seek disproportionate personal publicity or use the occasions for party political advantage bearing in mind that the Member is representing the Council as a whole.
11. PUBLIC RELATIONS AND PRESS RELEASES
11.1 The Council's Media Section serve the Council as a whole and must operate within the limits of the Local Government Act 1986 and Code of Recommended Practice on Local Authority Publicity which prohibit the Council from publishing material which appears to be designed to affect public support for a political party.
11.2 Council press releases are drafted by Officers and will often contain quotes (within the limits of the Local Government Act 1986) from the Leader and/or Deputy Leader of the Council, an Executive Member or
May 2016 Page 162 APPENDIX 3
the Chairperson of the committee whose service is involved and from the Mayor about ceremonial events. Such press releases are issued on behalf of the Council and it would not, therefore, be appropriate when repeating quotations from Members to indicate their party political affiliation.
11.3 Special rules apply to local authority publicity during an election period. These rules are contained in the Code of Recommended Practice on Local Authority Publicity. The key provisions relate to the period from the Notice of Election and the election day itself. The Code requires that proactive publicity of candidates and others directly involved in the election should be avoided. Publicity should not deal with controversial issues or report views, proposals or recommendations in such a way as to identify them with individual Members or groups of Members.
11.4 The Code recognises, however, that the work of the Council must continue during the election period, and that it is acceptable for the Council to respond to issues as they arise, provided that the publicity is balanced and not construed as party political. In exceptional circumstances, Members holding key positions and who are seeking re-election should be able to make public comments provided that any such comments are associated with their special responsibilities. Such comments must not be used or perceived to be used as part of their candidature. For this reason, the Code stresses that proactive events arranged during the election period should not involve Members seeking re-election. From the last working day before the publication of the Notice of Election, any meetings which might be regarded as contentious should be avoided. Meetings operating to fixed cycles can continue and Members standing for re-election are free to attend provided that they are not perceived as using such meetings as an opportunity to advance their own campaign.
12. PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS
12.1 The Council recognises that there may be close social or personal relationships between Members and Officers which commenced before, or after a councillor is elected to the Council or before, or after, a person becomes employed by the Council. However in those circumstances the councillor should disclose this relationship to his/her Group Leader and the Monitoring Officer and the employee to his/her Director. In order to maintain the integrity of the individuals concerned and the Council such relationships should never be hidden. To do so can lead to suspicion and mistrust. The Group Leaders and Directors will endeavour to ensure that neither the councillor nor the employee are placed in a position where such relationship between the councillor and the employee will be seen to conflict with the remaining provisions of this protocol.
May 2016 Page 163 APPENDIX 3
13. BREACHES OF THE PROTOCOL
13.1 Allegations of breaches of this Protocol by Members may be referred to the Monitoring Officer for investigation, or to the relevant Group Leader and/or Chief Whip of the political group. However, in certain circumstances a breach of this protocol might constitute a breach of the Members’ Code of Conduct, and would be dealt with under the Standards Framework.
13.2 Allegations of breaches by Officers are to be referred to the relevant Director for consideration of appropriate action including disciplinary investigation under the Council’s Disciplinary Rules.
May 2016 Page 164 APPENDIX 3
ATTENDANCE AT PUBLIC MEETINGS
1 There exists some uncertainty in the minds of some Officers and Members about the circumstances in which employees are expected to attend public meetings which are not hosted or organised by the Council. This is a particular problem for Officers who, on the one hand, recognise their responsibilities to Members but, on the other, are hesitant to be drawn into issues which might be more appropriately settled in the political arena. Understandably, Officers are particularly reluctant to become involved in such meetings immediately prior to an election.
2 Members have expressed the view that they should be able to rely upon the support of Officers in dealing with matters of concern within their wards. Members are often called upon to explain Council decisions about which they have no detailed or technical knowledge and which, in some cases, they do not personally support. In these cases, Members consider that the attendance of Officers at meetings with the public is essential.
3 Members must be able to count on the support of Officers to explain particular proposals and schemes in detail [but not to deal with general issues affecting an area or a ward] at public meetings in the wards subject to the following conditions being met:
[a] the appropriate Director agrees that it would be appropriate for an Officer to attend the meeting in his/her professional capacity and that this is an appropriate use of the relevant Officer's time in all the circumstances;
[b] the venue for the meeting is not in the ownership of, or occupied by, a particular political group;
[c] notices inviting attendance at the meeting do not refer to any political group;
[d] costs involved in meetings called by ward members are not to be met by the Council;
[e] the Director is satisfied that notices inviting attendance at the public meeting have been widely distributed in the area concerned;
[f] all Councillors for the ward[s] affected, together with the Chair and Opposition Spokespersons of the committee[s] concerned, are invited to attend the meeting;
[g] Officers must not be required to attend public meetings during the period preceding European, parliamentary or municipal elections from the notice of election to the day of the poll.
May 2016 Page 165 This page is intentionally left blank APPENDIX 3
M E T R O P O L I T A N B O R O U G H O F K N O W S L E Y
CODE OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
1. INTRODUCTION
Knowsley Council is committed to the principles of good corporate governance, and this Code of Corporate Governance specifies the Council’s intention to have the necessary procedures and practices to enable the highest standards to be maintained. Therefore, the Code is enshrined within the Council’s constitution. The Council is responsible for ensuring that business is conducted in accordance with the law and proper standards, and that public money is safeguarded and properly accounted for, and used economically, efficiently and effectively.
Governance comprises the culture and values, and systems and processes for the direction and control of local government through which they account to, engage with and lead their communities. The function of governance is to ensure that all local government organisations, or connected partnerships fulfil their purpose and achieve their intended outcomes for citizens and service users and operate in an effective, efficient, and ethical manner.
The Code reflects the key components of the guidance issued in the document Delivering Good Governance in Local Government, which was published jointly by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy and the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives in 2007. This guidance built on recent governance work in both the public and private sectors and in particular The Good Governance Standard for Public Services drawn up by the Independent Commission on Good Governance in Public Services.
The Council recognises the six core principles of good governance as:
1. focussing on the purpose of the Council and on outcomes for the community including citizens and service users and creating and implementing a vision for the local area; 2. Members and officers working together to achieve a common purpose with clearly defined functions and roles; 3. promoting the values of the Council and demonstrating the values of good governance through upholding high standards of conduct and behaviour; 4. taking informed and transparent decisions which are subject to effective scrutiny and managing risk; 5. developing the capacity and capability of Members to be effective and ensuring that officers, including the statutory officers, also have the capability and capacity to deliver effectively; and, 6. engaging with local people and other stakeholders to ensure robust local public accountability.
May 2016 Page 167 APPENDIX 3
2. APPLYING THE PRINCIPLES OF GOOD GOVERNANCE
In order to achieve good governance, the Council will seek to apply each of the six core principles, along with their supporting principles, in the following way.
1. Focussing on the purpose of the Council and on outcomes for the community including citizens and service users and creating and implementing a vision for the local area.
Supporting principles:
exercising strategic leadership by developing and clearly communicating the Council’s purpose and vision and its intended outcome for citizens and service users; ensuring that users receive a high quality of service whether directly, or in partnership or by commissioning; and, ensuring that the Council makes best use of resources and that tax payers and service users receive excellent value for money.
The Council will:
develop and promote the Council’s purpose and vision; review on a regular basis the Council’s vision for the local area and its implications for the Council’s governance arrangements; publish annual reports on a timely basis to communicate the Council’s activities and achievements, its financial position and performance; decide how the quality of service for users is to be measured and make sure that the information needed to review service quality effectively and regularly is available; put in place effective arrangements to identify and deal with failure in service delivery; measure the environmental impact of policies, plans and decisions; and, decide how value for money is to be measured and make sure that the Council or partnership has the information needed to review value for money and performance effectively.
2. Members and officers working together to achieve a common purpose with clearly defined functions and roles.
Supporting principles:
ensuring effective leadership throughout the Council and being clear about executive and non executive functions and of the roles and responsibilities of the scrutiny function;
May 2016 Page 168 APPENDIX 3
ensuring that a constructive working relationship exists between Members and officers and that the responsibilities of Members and officers are carried out to a high standard; and, ensuring relationships between the Council and the public are clear so that each know what to expect of the other.
The Council will:
set out a clear statement of the respective roles and responsibilities of the executive and of the executive’s members individually and the Council’s approach towards putting this into practice; set out a clear statement of the respective roles and responsibilities of other Members, Members generally and of senior officers; determine a scheme of delegated and reserved powers within the Constitution, including a formal schedule of those matters specifically reserved for collective decision of the Council taking account of relevant legislation and ensure that it is monitored and updated when required; make the Chief Executive responsible and accountable to the Council for all aspects of operational management; develop protocols to ensure that the Leader and Chief Executive negotiate their respective roles early in the relationship and that a shared understanding of roles and objectives is maintained; make the S151 officer responsible to the Council for ensuring that appropriate advice is given on all financial matters, for keeping proper financial records and accounts, and for maintaining an effective system of internal financial control; make the monitoring officer responsible to the Council for ensuring that agreed procedures are followed and that all applicable statutes, regulations and other relevant statements of good practice are complied with; develop protocols to ensure effective communication between Members and officers in their respective roles; set out the terms and conditions for remuneration of Members and officers and an effective structure for managing the process including an effective Member remuneration panel; ensure that effective mechanisms exist to monitor service delivery; ensure that the Council’s vision, strategic plans, priorities and targets are developed through robust mechanisms, and in consultation with the local community and other key stakeholders, and that they are clearly articulated and disseminated; and, when working in partnership:
ensure that there is clarity about the legal status of the partnership;
May 2016 Page 169 APPENDIX 3
ensure that representatives both understand and make clear to all other partners the extent of their authority to bind the Council to partner decisions; and, ensure that members are clear about their roles and responsibilities both individually and collectively in relation to the partnership and the Council.
3. Promoting the values of the Council and demonstrating the values of good governance through upholding high standards of conduct and behaviour.
Supporting principles:
ensuring Members and officers exercise leadership by behaving in ways that exemplify high standards of conduct and effective governance; and, ensuring that organisational values are put into practice and are effective.
The Council will:
ensure that the Council’s leadership sets a tone for the organisation by creating a climate of openness, support and respect; ensure that standards of conduct and personal behaviour expected of Members and staff, of work between Members and staff and between the Council, its partners and the community are defined and communicated through codes of conduct and protocols; put in place arrangements to ensure that Members and staff of the Council are not influenced by prejudice, bias or conflicts of interest in dealing with different stakeholders and put in place appropriate processes to ensure that they continue to operate in practice; develop and maintain shared values including leadership values both for the organisation and its staff reflecting public expectations and communicate these with Members, staff, the community and partners; put in place arrangements to ensure that systems and processes are designed in conformity with appropriate ethical standards, and monitor their continuing compliance in practice; use the Council’s shared values to act as a guide for decision making and as a basis for developing positive and trusting relationships within the Council; and, in pursuing the vision of a partnership, agree a set of values against which decision making and actions can be judged. Such values must be demonstrated by partners’ behaviour both individually and collectively.
May 2016 Page 170 APPENDIX 3
4. Taking informed and transparent decisions which are subject to effective scrutiny and managing risk.
Supporting principles:
being rigorous and transparent about how decisions are taken and listening and acting on the outcome of constructive scrutiny; having good quality information, advice and support to ensure that services are delivered effectively and are what the community wants or needs; ensuring that an effective risk management system is in place; and, using legal powers to the full benefit of the citizens and communities in the area.
The Council will:
develop and maintain an effective scrutiny function which encourages constructive challenge and enhances the Council’s performance overall and that of any organisation for which it is responsible; develop and maintain open and effective mechanisms for documenting evidence for decisions and recording the criteria, rationale and considerations on which decisions are based; put in place arrangements to safeguard Members and officers against conflicts of interest and put in place appropriate processes to ensure that they continue to operate in practice; develop and maintain an effective Governance Committee which is independent of the executive and the scrutiny function; ensure that effective, transparent and accessible arrangements are in place for dealing with complaints; ensure that those making decisions are provided with information that is fit for the purpose that is relevant, timely and gives clear explanations of technical issues and their implications; ensure that proper professional advice on matters that have legal or financial implications is available and recorded well in advance of decision making and used appropriately; ensure that risk management is embedded into the culture of the Council, with Members and officers at all levels recognising that risk management is part of their job; ensure that effective arrangements for whistle blowing are in place to which officers and all those contracting with or appointed by the Council have access; actively recognise the limits of lawful activity placed on the Council by, for example, the ultra vires doctrine but also strive to utilise the Council’s powers to the full benefit of communities;
May 2016 Page 171 APPENDIX 3
recognise the limits of lawful action and observe both the specific requirements of legislation and the general responsibilities placed on authorities by public law; observe all specific legislative requirements placed upon the Council, as well as the requirements of general law, and in particular to integrate the key principles of administrative law that is rationality, legality and natural justice into the procedures and decision making processes; and, when working in partnership, put in place protocols for working together which include:
a shared understanding of respective roles and responsibilities of each organisation; and, ensure that there are robust procedures for scrutinising decisions and behaviour and that these decisions and behaviour are compliant with any local authority rules/codes or comply with any rules/codes developed for the purpose of the partnership.
5. Developing the capacity and capability of members to be effective and ensuring that officers including the statutory officers also have the capability and capacity to deliver effectively.
Supporting principles:
making sure that Members and officers have the skills, knowledge, experience and resources they need to perform well in their roles; developing the capability of people with governance responsibilities and evaluating their performance, as individuals and as a group; and, encouraging new talent for membership of the Council so that best use can be made of individuals’ skills and resources in balancing continuity and renewal.
The Council will:
provide induction programmes tailored to individual needs and opportunities for Members and officers to update their knowledge on a regular basis; ensure that the statutory officers have the skills, resources and support necessary to perform effectively in their roles and that these roles are properly understood throughout the Council; assess the skills required by Members and officers and make a commitment to develop those skills to enable roles to be carried out effectively; develop skills on a continuing basis to improve performance, including the ability to scrutinise and challenge and to recognise when outside expert advice is needed;
May 2016 Page 172 APPENDIX 3
ensure that effective arrangements are in place for reviewing the performance of the executive as a whole and of individual Members and agreeing an action plan which might, for example, aim to address any training or development needs; ensure that effective arrangements are in place designed to encourage individuals from all sections of the community to engage with, contribute to and participate in the work of the Council; ensure that career structures are in place for Members and officers to encourage participation and development; and, when working in partnership, ensure that partners individually and the partnership collectively share responsibility for appointing people to the partnership who have the required skills. The partnership should:
identify the capacity and capability requirements of the partnership; and, develop an effective plan for addressing any gaps.
6. Engaging with local people and other stakeholders to ensure robust local public accountability.
Supporting principles:
exercising leadership through a robust scrutiny function which effectively engages local people and all local institutional stakeholders including partnerships, and develops constructive accountability relationships; taking an active and planned approach to dialogue with and accountability to the public, to ensure effective and appropriate service delivery whether directly by the Council, in partnership or by commissioning; and, making best use of human resources by taking an active and planned approach to meet responsibility to staff.
The Council will:
make clear to themselves, all staff and the community, to whom they are accountable and for what; consider those institutional stakeholders to whom the Council is accountable and assess the effectiveness of the relationships and any changes required; produce an annual report on the scrutiny function activity; ensure clear channels of communication are in place with all sections of the community and other stakeholders and put in place monitoring arrangements to ensure that they operate effectively; ensure that arrangements are in place to enable the Council to engage with all sections of the community effectively. These
May 2016 Page 173 APPENDIX 3
arrangements should recognise that different sections of the community have different priorities and establish explicit processes for dealing with these competing demands; establish a clear policy on the types of issues the Council will meaningfully consult on or engage with the public and service users about, including a feedback mechanism for those consulted to demonstrate what has changed as a result; on an annual basis, publish a performance plan giving information on the Council’s vision, strategy, plans and financial statements as well as information about its outcomes, achievements and the satisfaction of service users in the previous period; ensure that the Council as a whole is open and accessible to the community, service users and its officers and ensure that there is a commitment to openness and transparency in all its dealings, including partnerships, subject only to the need to preserve confidentiality in those specific circumstances where it is proper and appropriate to do so; and, develop and maintain a clear policy on how staff and their representatives are consulted and involved in decision making.
3. ANNUAL REVIEW & REPORTING
The Council will, at least annually, review its governance arrangements to ensure:
continuing compliance with best practice principles as outlined in this Code; corporate governance arrangements are adequate and operating effectively in practice; or, where reviews of the corporate governance arrangements have revealed gaps, action is planned that will ensure effective governance in future.
The Council has a statutory requirement to produce an Annual Governance Statement in order to report publicly on the effectiveness of the system of internal control and governance arrangements. The Annual Governance Statement, which is submitted to the Governance Committee for review and approval, describes the key elements of the governance and internal control environment in the Council, the outcome of reviews on the effectiveness of the systems, and the actions taken on any significant matters.
May 2016 Page 174 APPENDIX 4
M E T R O P O L I T A N B O R O U G H O F K N O W S L E Y
ANTI-FRAUD AND CORRUPTION POLICY STATEMENT
1. Introduction
Fraud occurs when a person unlawfully obtains the property or money of another person or persons, or attempts to do so, by falsification of records. Fraud is intentional deceit and includes offences such as embezzlement, false pretences, forgery, bribery, corruption, and falsification of accounts. For the purposes of this policy statement, fraud also includes the physical theft of assets. Council officers and Members can be exposed to pressures from contractors and the public to act in a particular way, which may involve preferential treatment in accessing all types of services, benefits, and funds. Such behaviour constitutes corruption.
It is estimated that fraud within the public sector costs taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds each year, and deprives members of the community of valuable resources, which could otherwise be used to provide essential services.
2. Culture and Stance
Knowsley Council is committed to combating fraud and corruption, wherever it may be found. It is determined to eliminate fraud and corruption by those who attempt to obtain assets or services from the Council to which they are not entitled, and by employees or Members of the Council who abuse their positions of trust.
The openness, integrity, and accountability of the Council’s employees and Members form the cornerstone of effective corporate governance. The reputation of the Council depends on the standards of behaviour of all associated with it, whether employee, Member, supplier or contractor. Therefore, the Council requires its Members and employees to demonstrate the highest standard of integrity at all times.
These standards are clearly laid out in the Council’s Code of Conduct for Elected Members and Co-opted Members and Officer Code of Conduct, each of which include the requirement to complete Registers of Interest and Gifts & Hospitality. The Council's disciplinary procedures require that managers take firm and appropriate action, wherever fraud or corruption by employees has been suspected or discovered.
Any individual reasonably believing that a Member’s conduct fails to comply with the Council’s Code of Conduct for Councillors should
May 2016 Page 175 APPENDIX 4
make a written allegation to that effect to the Monitoring Officer as soon as practicable.
The Council has clauses in all of its contracts concerning fraud, bribery, and corruption arising from the offering or giving of gifts, rewards, or any other inducements in relation to the obtaining or performance of a contract. The consequence of such acts is that the Council can cancel the relevant contract and recover from the contractor the amount of any loss resulting from the cancellation. Such actions may also lead to prosecution.
The Council’s commitment to protecting public funds includes those specifically used in the payment of Housing and Council Tax Benefit, the details of which are laid out in the Council’s Housing and Council Tax Benefit Fraud Policy document. The Council will, within available resources, seek to ensure that benefit payments are made to those persons who are genuinely entitled to receive benefit, and not to those who abuse or defraud the system. In such cases, the Council’s Benefit Irregularity Panel will consider the appropriate sanctions, including prosecution, by reference to the Benefit Fraud and Overpayment Prosecution Policy.
The Council will identify, investigate, and pursue fraudulent Housing and/or Council Tax Benefit claims, and will maximise the Council's subsidy and benefit overpayment recovery income, ensuring at all times respect for Benefit claimants’ rights and circumstances.
Any surveillance by the Council’s Counter Fraud and Internal Audit Service, or any other investigatory team is conducted in accordance with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 to ensure that surveillance is properly conducted, and authorised, while protecting the rights of the subject.
As part of the Council’s risk management arrangements, it is the responsibility of all the Council's managers to establish and maintain systems of internal control and to ensure that the Council's resources are not abused. The Counter Fraud and Internal Audit Service works closely with managers to examine, evaluate, and report on the adequacy of internal controls, thereby contributing towards effective prevention and detection of fraud and corruption.
The Council wholeheartedly supports the police and other external agencies in fighting fraud and corruption within the public sector, and has established arrangements for co-operation and joint working with these other bodies. As a matter of routine, public authorities make available employee data, so that they can be matched against records elsewhere, whilst complying with the principles of the Data Protection Act 1998. This process is known as data matching, and is primarily designed to reduce fraud. Any employees found to be acting fraudulently will be subject to disciplinary action.
May 2016 Page 176 APPENDIX 4
The Council recognises the importance of criminal prosecution in deterring fraud and corruption, and to this end it may refer such matters to the police for their consideration where appropriate. In addition, the Council may take forward its own prosecutions in such cases.
3. Raising Concerns
In respect of Members who suspect the existence of a potential irregularity, the Council's procedures for dealing with suspected financial irregularities state that any Member who suspects, with good reason, that a financial irregularity or any other wrong-doing has occurred should immediately inform the Chief Executive or the Executive Director (Resources).
The Council also encourages employees and contractors to report their concerns about suspicious activities. This is commonly known as the whistle blowing procedure. An employee should immediately report concerns to the relevant line manager. If necessary, suspicions can alternatively be reported to:-
the employee’s Director; the Assistant Executive Director (Customers and Employees); the Chief Internal Auditor; any other senior manager, who the employee believes will assist in bringing the employee's concerns to the attention of the appropriate people; or, the Council’s Fraud Hotline (0800 0730 532) or internet site.
Anyone with concerns about possible fraudulent benefit claims or fraudulent insurance claims should contact the Knowsley Council Fraud Hotline (0800 0730 532) or use the Council’s internet site.
Councillors and employees should be aware that, if in doubt, suspicions should be reported, and that the Council would take appropriate action in all cases.
May 2016 Page 177 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 8
LIVERPOOL CITY REGION COMBINED AUTHORITY
To: The Chairman and Members of the Combined Authority
Meeting: 19 August 2016
Authorities Affected: All
EXEMPT/CONFIDENTIAL ITEM: No
REPORT OF THE TREASURER
COMBINED AUTHORITY BUDGET MONITORING STATEMENT April 1st 2016 to June 30th 2016 (Quarter 1)
1. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
1.1 The purpose of this report is to provide members of the Combined Authority with a budget update for the first quarter of 2016/17.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 Liverpool City Region Combined Authority is recommended to:-
(a) note the contents of the Combined Authority Budget Monitoring Statement.
3. BACKGROUND
3.1 The Combined Authority established its budget for 2016/17 at its meeting of 5 February 2016. This budget provided for a range of transport functions associated with Merseytravel but includes more significant non-transport activities than were the case in 2015/16.
3.2 The Combined Authority has delegated detailed financial and performance monitoring with respect to Merseytravel’s activities to the Merseytravel Committee, however all strategic financial decisions remain with the Combined Authority.
3.3 The financial performance of the Combined Authority is shown in Table 1 below. Combined Authority expenditure is largely in the form of pre-determined grants to Merseytravel and capital charges inherited from the Integrated Transport Authority.
Page 179
Table 1 - Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Budget Monitoring Statement Quarter 1 2016/17
Budget Revised Budget Forecast Variance 2016/17 2016/17 2016/17
Expenditure £m £m £m £m Merseytravel Operating Grant 94.4 94.4 94.4 - Mersey Tunnels Operating/capital Grant 27.8 27.8 27.8 - Other Costs 2 2 2 - DFT highways funding to Districts 10.1 10.1 10.1 - ITB Grant to Districts/Merseytravel 15.5 15.5 15.5 - Special Rail grant to Merseytravel 91 91 91 - Capital Financing Costs / Debt Repayment 17.3 17.3 17.3 - Local Growth Deal 71.2 80.2 43.7 -36.5 Total Expenditure 329.3 338.3 301.8 -36.5
Income Transport Levy -105.4 -105.4 -105.4 - Tunnel Tolls -40.5 -40.5 -40.6 -0.1 Other Income -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 - Special Rail grant from DFT -91 -91 -91 - ITB Grant from DFT -10.1 -10.1 -10.1 - DFT highways funding -15.5 -15.5 -15.5 - Local Growth Deal -71.2 -80.2 -80.2 - Total Income -336.2 -345.2 -345.3 -0.1
Transfer to Reserves -6.9 -6.9 -7.0 -0.1 Unallocated LGF and Slippage - - -36.5 -36.5
Note: Other costs are support services recharges and corporate and democratic management
3.4 The Combined Authority is also responsible for delivery of the Local Growth Fund and a summary of LGF1 performance at June 30th 2016 is also shown in this report (Table 2).
Page 180 Table 2: Local Growth Fund Monitoring Update Quarter 1
Revised Actual Planned Planned Planned Total Variance to 2016/17 Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 2016/17 budget LGF Quarter 1 £m £m £m £m £m £m £m Transport Schemes Access and Connectivity Improvements to Knowsley Industrial Park 2.60 0.30 0.65 0.65 0.00 1.60 -1.00 A5300 Knowsley Expressway 1.87 0.73 1.03 0.11 0.00 1.87 0.00 Newton-le-Willows Interchange 8.16 0.50 1.21 2.53 3.93 8.17 0.01 Halton Curve 1.78 0.00 0.19 0.29 1.31 1.79 0.01 Maghull North 2.30 0.00 0.00 1.15 1.15 2.30 0.00 North Liverpool Key Corridors 5.95 0.04 0.03 0.25 3.15 3.47 -2.48 M58 Junction Improvements 0.61 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.60 -0.01
STEP 7.62 0.57 1.38 2.67 3.08 7.70 0.08
Skills capital and low carbon Strand 1 - Specific building projects fund 19.39 1.29 3.42 2.21 1.16 8.08 -11.31 Strand 2 - Conditions Improvement Fund 3.14 0.56 0.70 0.04 0.00 1.30 -1.84 Strand 3 - Capital Equipment Fund 6.83 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.45 0.55 -6.28 Strand 4 - Low Carbon Fund 5.07 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.07 -5.00
IFB 2016 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 Devolved Majors A570 Linkway 0.49 0.00 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.49 0.00 Silver Jubilee Bridge 1.07 0.00 0.13 0.20 0.28 0.61 -0.46 Windle Island 3.08 0.03 1.02 1.02 1.02 3.09 0.01
CA Allocated to Schemes 71.96 4.15 12.17 11.48 15.89 43.69 -28.27
LGF Allocation 16/17 71.20 LGF Slippage brought forward from 15/16 9.02 Total funding available 80.22 43.69 -36.53
3.5 Members of the Combined Authority will be aware that much work is on-going in preparation for devolution and in particular in building City Region capacity and establishing appropriate governance around the Single Investment Fund. The Combined Authority budget for the second half of 2016/17 will need to be revised once the work of the transition team has been completed.
3.6 Any additional costs arising from this work will either be offset by savings in other City Region budgets (notably Merseytravel) or from additional devolved government funding. There will be no additional costs to Council Tax payers.
4. RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS
4.1 Financial
There are no direct financial implications arising from this report, however members will be aware that the Combined Authority budget for 2016/17 will be revised for the second half of 2016/17 as a result of the devolution of powers to the Combined Authority from government.
4.2 Human Resources
None as a direct result of this report.
Page 181 4.3 Physical Assets
None as a direct result of this report.
4.4 Information Technology
None as a direct result of this report.
5. RISKS AND MITIGATION
None as a direct result of this report.
6. EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY IMPLICATIONS
None as a direct result of this report.
7. COMMUNICATION ISSUES
None as a direct result of this report.
8. CONCLUSION
8.1 Both the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority and Merseytravel as its executive body are performing within their respective budgets at the end of the first quarter of 2016/17.
8.2 Merseytravel has made significant progress on delivering its key corporate objectives on behalf of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority.
JOHN FOGARTY Treasurer
Contact Officers:- Jessica Whitley, Acting Accounts Manager Merseytravel (0151 330 1015) Liz Carridge, Corporate Communications Manager, Merseytravel (0151 330 1151)
Page 182 Agenda Item 9
Merseytravel Committee
Merseytravel Committee
30 June 2016
Present: Councillor L Robinson, Chair Councillor G Friel, Deputy Chair
Councillors R Abbey, D Barrington, A Carr, J Dodd, S Foulkes, J Lilly, K McGlashan, N Nicholas, M Rasmussen, K Roberts, L Rowlands, P Thomas, J Williams and J Wolfson
Apologies for absence were submitted by Councillors H Howard, P McKinley, T Shields and J Stockton
1. Appointment of Chair
The Senior Democratic Services Officer opened the meeting and invited nominations for the appointment of Chair of the Merseytravel Committee for the ensuing year. It was moved by Councillor Friel, and seconded by Councillor Abbey, and:-
Resolved that Councillor Liam Robinson be appointed Chair of the Merseytravel Committee.
2. Appointment of Deputy Chair
The Chair invited nominations for the appointment of Deputy Chair of the Merseytravel Committee for the ensuing year. It was moved by Councillor Robinson and seconded by Councillor Abbey, and:-
Resolved that Councillor Gordon Friel be appointed Deputy Chair of the Merseytravel Committee.
3. Declarations of Interest
There were no declarations of interest received.
Page 183 Merseytravel Committee
4. Minutes of the Last Meeting
Resolved that the minutes of the last meeting of the Merseytravel Committee held on 7 April 2016 be approved as a correct record; subject to the amendment to the second line of paragraph 13 of minute 78 to replace the word „sufficient‟ with „improved‟ to read „improved room for buggies‟.
5. Chair's Announcement
The Chair informed the Committee of Merseytravel‟s success at the recent North West Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (CILT) Awards; winning the Best Practice Award for the Training into Employment Scheme for the third successive year. Matt Chamberlain, STEP Employment and Skills Officer, who led the team was congratulated by the Committee and received a round of applause.
The Chair further informed the Committee of a recent incident in which Mike Phillips; Network Performance Officer, had to intervene with a distressed individual threatening to take their own life at Rice Lane Station. The actions were far beyond the call of duty and it was important to acknowledge this effort and also the work of the team out on the network on a daily basis. The Committee thanked Mr Phillips; his actions exemplified what was best about Merseytravel and public service as a whole, and gave a round of applause.
6. Combined Authority Constitution, Committee Terms of Reference and Membership 2016/17
The Committee considered a report of the Treasurer concerning the approved Constitution for the Combined Authority, the Membership of the Committee as appointed by the constituent District Councils and a request for nominations in respect of Members to sit on the Audit Committee of the Combined Authority.
With regard to the changes in Membership of the Committee, Councillor Robinson expressed thanks to retiring Member Councillor Mark Norris and a warm welcome to new member Councillor Nathalie Nicholas. He indicated that he had formally written to Councillor
Page 184
Merseytravel Committee
Norris to relay the gratitude of the Committee for his invaluable work.
Motion by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Friel
That:-
A) the recommendations in paragraph 2 of the report be moved viz:
(i) the membership of the Merseytravel Committee for 2016/17 be noted; (ii) the new Member Councillor Nathalie Nicholas be welcomed to the Committee; (iii) former Member Councillor Mark Norris be thanked for his work on behalf of the Committee and his contribution to taking forward the transport agenda of the City Region; (iv) the responsibility of functions set out in Part 3 of the Combined Authority Constitution and in particular those responsibilities referred to and delegated to the Merseytravel Committee in Section B be noted; (v) the Meeting Procedure Rules set out in Section A of Part 5 of the Constitution of the Combined Authority be noted; (vi) the contents of the Code of Conduct for Members as set out in Part 7 of the Constitution of the Combined Authority be noted; (vii) Councillors Anthony Carr and Pam Thomas be appointed to the Audit Committee of the Combined Authority, with Councillor Keith Roberts as the substitute member.
B) Lead Members be appointed for the following areas:
Bus - Councillor R Abbey
Rail - Councillor G Friel
Tunnels, Ferries and Visitor Economy - Councillor K McGlashan
Strategy and Finance - Councillor S Foulkes
Page 185 Merseytravel Committee
Organisational Development - Councillor M Rasmussen
Customer and Corporate Social Responsibility - Councillor John Stockton
The Motion was then put, carried and Resolved Accordingly.
7. Appointment of Sub-Committees, Cycle of Meetings, Appointment to Outside Bodies and Spokespersons 2016/17
Merseytravel considered a report of the Treasurer concerning the structural requirements in relation to Sub- Committees for the 2016/17 Municipal Year, the proposed cycle of meetings, the appointment of representatives to outside bodies and the nomination of spokespersons to answer questions on the discharge of functions.
Motion by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Friel
That:-
A) Working Group
(i) a Performance and Review/Policy Working Group be established, comprising of 11 Labour and two Opposition Members; Councillors D Barrington, A Carr, H Howard, J Lilly, P McKinley, N Nicholas, K Roberts, T Shields, P Thomas, J Williams, J Wolfson, L Rowlands and J Dodd;
(ii) Councillor T Shields and Councillor J Lilly be appointed Chair and Deputy Chair of the Working Group respectively; and
(iii) the Terms of Reference of the Working Group and cycle of meetings for 2016/17 be agreed in conjunction with the Chair and Deputy Chair.
Page 186
Merseytravel Committee
B) Cycle of Meetings
(i) the cycle of meetings for 2016/17 as set out below for the Merseytravel Committee be approved;
28 July 1 September 6 October 3 November 1 December 5 January 2 February 2 March 6 April
(ii) meetings be held in the Authority Chamber, No.1 Mann Island, Liverpool at 2pm; and
(iii) attendance at the Briefing Sessions for Members on transport related matters be agreed as an approved duty.
C) Outside Bodies
Appointment of Members to Outside Bodies be as follows:
(i) City Regions Transport Special Interest Group Councillors L Robinson, G Friel and L Rowlands
(ii) North West Employers Councillor M Rasmussen
(iii) Mersey Ferries Limited Councillors K McGlashan and L Rowlands
(iv) Beatles Story Board Councillors K McGlashan, J Williams and J Dodd
(v) TravelSafe Board Councillors M Rasmussen (Chair), K McGlashan (Deputy Chair) and J Dodd
Page 187 Merseytravel Committee
(vi) Mersey Dee Alliance Councillors G Friel, R Abbey and J Dodd
(vii) Local Enterprise Partnership Advisory Council Councillor L Robinson
D) District Council Spokespersons
The following Members be appointed to answer questions on the discharge of functions in District Councils:
Halton - Councillor J Stockton
Knowsley - Ken McGlashan
Liverpool - Liam Robinson
Sefton - Gordon Friel
St Helens - Terry Shields
Wirral - Ron Abbey
E) Appointments by Combined Authority
The continuing appointment by the Combined Authority of the Chair of the Merseytravel Committee on the Transport for the North Partnership Board, the Association of Rail North Authorities‟ Leaders and as a Director of Rail North Limited be noted; and
The Motion was then put, carried and it was Resolved Accordingly.
8. InterCity West Coast Franchise Consultation: Merseytravel response
The Committee considered a report of Merseytravel regarding the Liverpool City Region‟s response to the Department for Transport‟s consultation document on the specification for the replacement InterCity West Coast franchise.
Page 188
Merseytravel Committee
Councillor Thomas referred to the Equality and Diversity Implications section of the report, which stated „there are no adverse implications‟. She felt that it was important to include information in this section in order to demonstrate that Merseytravel were paying due regard to their public duty under the Equality Act 2010. For example the independent access for elderly and disabled people mentioned in the response could have been highlighted. She requested that Officers be mindful of this section when writing future reports.
Councillor Friel commended the response; in particular the suggested improvements for the issues created by the late displaying of platform information at London Euston, as it was imperative that customers‟ needs came first. In response to the comments on improved connections for long distance journeys, he commented that significant work was needed on the „joining up‟ of the wider rail network; however this was outside the scope of the consultation and needed to be considered by the industry as a whole.
Officers advised that the platform notification issue at London Euston was a particular concern and high on the list of priorities for resolution. With regard to the connections issue, it would not be easy but the points made were noted and appreciated.
Councillor Robinson also commended the response; there were however some generic references to Liverpool within the response that needed changing to Liverpool City Region. It was important to ensure that the services in the franchise met the needs of the Liverpool City Region such as two trains per hour in both directions between Liverpool Lime Street and London Euston. In his opinion it also made operational sense that, following electrification of the Chat Moss Line, for one or two services a day to stop at St Helens Junction or Lea Green Stations. There was also a great opportunity for services to stop at Liverpool South Parkway in the future.
Resolved that:- a) the Liverpool City Region‟s response to the Department for Transport‟s consultation on the InterCity West Coast franchise be noted; b) the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority be recommended to approve the response; and
Page 189 Merseytravel Committee
c) Officers be instructed to work with the Department for Transport to secure the best possible outcome for the Liverpool City Region in the replacement Intercity West Coast franchise.
9. Merseytravel Internal Audit Annual Report 2015/16
The Committee considered a report of Merseytravel regarding Merseytravel‟s Head of Internal Audit‟s Annual Report for 2015/16, the Annual Audit Opinion, and the Quality Assurance and Improvement Programme Outturn.
Councillor Abbey commended the report, however, requested further detail on the reasoning behind why some departments received a Limited Assurance Opinion following their Internal Audit Review; listed in 3.10 of the report.
The Head of Internal Audit advised that when an internal audit was undertaken the control environment around the service or process was reviewed and an assessment was made on the robustness of the controls. There was a set framework from which the audit opinion was devised; substantial, reasonable limited or none. Limited assurance meant that the level of assurance that Internal Audit could give was limited by the findings from the review. Consideration of the wider sense of materiality is taken into account, which informed the annual opinion. The report presented to the Committee was an overview of the work for 2015/16 and it was the role of Merseytravel‟s Audit Risk and Governance Board to scrutinise the detail and monitor the audit activities.
The Director of Resources added that in terms of materiality there were some areas that were not material to the organisation, such as Foreign Currency and Associated Expense Claims, which was indicated as limited assurance in the Annual Report. It was positive to see that the areas receiving reasonable and substantial assurances were Merseytravel‟s significant areas of expenditure such as concessionary travel and the main accounting system. Striking a balance was important in order to give an overall assessment and whilst it was appreciated that limited assurance for some areas was not ideal, reassurance was given that the issues had been addressed with the relevant service area managers. The Audit, Risk and Governance Board received updates
Page 190
Merseytravel Committee
on the timetables for implementing recommendations and was currently pleased with the updates being provided and keen for follow up audits to take place.
With regard to the significant audit findings, detailed in 3.18 of the report, Councillor Friel requested background information on the Carbon Reduction Commitment calculations and the Merseylink review. Officers reminded Members that the report presented to the Committee was simply a summary and it was the role of the Audit, Risk and Governance Board to interrogate the results; however the specific points raised could be discussed in detail with Councillor Friel outside of the meeting.
Councillor Carr stated that he was pleased that the Audit, Risk and Governance Board were seemingly doing a good job. In light of the Combined Authority starting to mature, as mentioned in 5.3 of the report, he also enquired as to when Merseytravel‟s Accountable Body responsibilities would cease and become the responsibility of the Authority itself.
The Director of Resources advised that a report was to be submitted to the next meeting of the Combined Authority regarding the devolution of powers and resources to the Liverpool City Region and the progress of the Executive capacity. The Authority was aware that matters such as financial management arrangements needed to be considered quickly and they would be included in the scope of this work. Further updates on progress would be provided to the Authority throughout the Municipal Year. As it was a City Region piece of work Merseytravel would be involved but solely as a partner.
Councillor Carr further referred to the significant amount of work that would be involved in implementing the Governance structure of the Combined Authority, which had to be finalised prior to the election of the Metro Mayor in May 2017, and he enquired as to whether there was the capacity to achieve this given the tight timescale.
The Director of Resources responded that the City Region as a whole would need to ensure that the capacity existed. The audit plan for the current financial year was sufficient for the Combined Authority activities for 2016/17. Spending requirements were currently being considered to ascertain whether the current arrangements would need to be scaled up as a result of the Combined Authority expanding its scope and role, or
Page 191 Merseytravel Committee
if the Authority would need its own arrangements. It was vital that a balance be struck between adequate governance arrangements and value for money for tax payers. In his current role as Treasurer for the Combined Authority he was required to provide assurance to the Authority and was confident that the current arrangements provided adequate assurance to the Authority for its activities in the coming year. He was also involved in ensuring that arrangements from May 2017 onwards remained robust and continued to provide assurance.
In response to a question from Councillor Foulkes regarding how the Committee could influence Merseytravel‟s Internal Audit Plan the Head of Internal Audit advised that the report was the annual report to Merseytravel as a legal entity, which she was required to produce to inform Merseytravel‟s Governance Statement. As Merseytravel provided the majority of audit work for the Combined Authority during 2015/16, a similar report would be submitted to the Authority‟s Audit Committee in July. Within the Merseytravel Internal Audit Plan there were a number of internal audit days given to the Combined Authority, for example around tunnels assets which were owned by the Authority but operated by Merseytravel. The report presented at this meeting was for information purposes and to provide assurance to the Committee; it had been approved by the Audit Risk and Governance Board and Merseytravel as the Executive body. Moving forward there would be pieces of work in Merseytravel‟s 2016/17 Internal Audit Plan that would be done for the Combined Authority; however in a more formal arrangement these days would be given as consultancy and allocated to the Authority.
Councillor Foulkes further enquired as to how members of the Committee could raise any audit related issues and was informed to direct these through the Chair of the Combined Authority‟s Audit Committee.
In response to a final question from Councillor Foulkes it was reported that there was no potential for reputational damage to Merseytravel as a result of the report; any such information would have been included.
Councillor Rowlands commended the audit work that had been undertaken. He was pleased to see that where issues had been identified there were plans in place to provide a resolution, in particular debt recovery at the
Page 192
Merseytravel Committee
Beatles Story. With regard to the use of „adequate‟ throughout the report he expressed his dislike of the word in this context and enquired as to whether there was another that could be used instead.
The Head of Internal Audit explained that for comparison purposes terminology such as “adequate” and “reasonable” were commonly used. There were definitions of this terminology contained within the Quality Assurance and Improvement Programme. The use of specific narrative or general terminology was always difficult to debate and had been discussed at the recent Audit, Risk and Governance Board. It was agreed that as long as the approach was consistent and continual improvement was aspired to there was no method better than the other. Councillor Rowlands‟ comments would be taken on board when the Board considered the approach for the following year.
The Director of Resources added that the internal controls and governance arrangements within Merseytravel had been transformed over recent years and it was unfortunate that the terminology used did not provide scope to show this trajectory. The delivery of the audit service had greatly improved and was now aligned to Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) standards, and the Assurance Framework was stronger and more robust than ever. Officers, however, did not “rest on their laurels” and would continue to improve the service offered to Merseytravel and the Combined Authority.
Councillor Rowlands recognised the significant changes and dedication of the officers to the work that had been done.
The Senior Head of Operations reported that when the outcomes of the Internal Audit Reviews were received by the operational areas the recommendations were categorised using a red, amber, green system and a date for completion added. The recommendations were then tracked by himself and the Heads of Services at their individual monthly business reviews.
Following comments from Councillor Abbey regarding the benefit of narrative within reports such as this, Officers once again provided assurance that all the finer detail of this report was considered by the Audit, Risk and Governance Board.
Page 193 Merseytravel Committee
Resolved that:-
a) the contents of the Head of Internal Audit Annual Report 2015/16 and the Annual Audit Opinion be noted; b) the outturn of the Quality Assurance and Improvement Programme detailed within the report be noted; and c) the statement of adherence to the Code of Practice on Managing the Risk of Fraud and Corruption („the Code‟) be submitted for inclusion in the 2015/16 Annual Governance Statement.
10. Istanbul
The Chair raised the issue of the recent terrorist attack at Ataturk Airport, Istanbul. He condemned the atrocity and sent condolences to the families of the victims and thoughts to those who were caught up in the incident. The condolences of the Committee would be relayed to the appropriate authorities.
CHAIR
Page 194 Agenda Item 10
Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Audit Committee
Combined Authority Audit Committee
5 April 2016
Present: Councillor A Carr, Chair Councillor N Killen, Deputy Chair
Councillors R Polhill and P Thomas
Apologies for absence were submitted by Councillors A Moorhead and M Sullivan
19. Declarations of Interest
There were no declarations of interest made.
20. Minutes of the Last Meeting
Resolved that the minutes of the last meeting held on 26 January 2016 be approved as a correct record.
With regard to minute 17; ‘Ethical Standards for Providers of Public Services’, Councillor Carr advised that the Committee’s recommendation to the Combined Authority for the guidance to be referred to the Scrutiny Panel for further work to be undertaken was to be considered at the next meeting of the Combined Authority on 15 April 2016.
21. Liverpool City Region Combined Authority 2015/16 Outturn Report
The Committee considered a report of the Treasurer regarding a summary of the Internal Audit work completed on behalf of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority during 2015/16.
Resolved that:-
a) the overview of work undertaken on behalf of the Combined Authority during 2015/16, presented in the outturn report, be noted ; and
Page 195 Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Audit Committee
b) further updates be provided at future Committee meetings.
22. Annual Report of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Audit Committee 2015/16
The Committee considered a report of the Treasurer regarding the annual report of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Audit Committee for 2015/16.
Resolved that:-
a) the 2015/16 Annual Report of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Audit Committee be noted; and
b) the Report be presented to the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority in accordance with best practice.
23. Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Internal Audit Arrangements & Plan of Work 2016/17
The Committee considered a report of the Treasurer regarding the proposed Internal Audit arrangements for the Combined Authority for 2016/17 and the proposed Internal Audit Plan of Work for 2016/17.
In response to a question from Councillor Killen regarding whether the Head of Internal Audit position should be advertised, the Treasurer advised that the Combined Authority had previously agreed for Merseytravel to fulfil the internal audit role on its behalf and there was now a need to designate an officer to that position. The role would be carried out on the same basis as the existing Statutory Officers of the Combined Authority, whereby there was no remuneration.
Councillor Carr referred to the five days allocated to the Publication Scheme in the Internal Audit Plan; detailed in 3.6 of the report, and questioned if this was sufficient. Officers advised that the work would entail ensuring that the information included in the Publication Scheme was readily available and that only appropriate information was published; similar work had been carried out in the past and five days had been sufficient. Although there
Page 196
Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Audit Committee
was no flexibility on days in the Internal Audit Plan, the grant assurance work could provide it if necessary.
Resolved that:-
a) the proposed Internal Audit arrangements for the Combined Authority for 2016/17 be noted;
b) the proposed Internal Audit Plan of Work for the Combined Authority for 2016/17 be approved; and
c) further updates be provided to the Committee in respect of the Combined Authority’s conformance with the mandatory Public Sector Internal Audit Standards.
24. Liverpool City Region Combined Authority - External Audit Plan 2016/17
The Committee considered a report of the Treasurer regarding the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority’s External Audit Plan of work for 2016/17.
Ian Warwick of External Auditors KPMG highlighted the key points within the External Audit Plan, appended to the report.
As a result of the Combined Authority’s governance arrangements being identified as a significant value for money risk following an increase in roles and responsibilities; Councillor Carr enquired as to whether KPMG’s risk assessment took reputational risk into account. Mr Warwick advised that it would be included; as a public body the Authority’s reputation would be of significant interest to the public.
The Committee were informed that Mr Warwick was shortly due to retire and this meeting was to be the last he attended. Councillor Carr extended his thanks for the work he had carried out for the Committee and also the previous work he had undertaken for the Integrated Transport Authority and wished him well in his retirement.
Resolved that:-
a) the Combined Authority’s External Audit Plan for 2016/17 be noted; and
Page 197 Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Audit Committee
b) further updates be provided to the Committee as appropriate.
25. Audit Committees - Self Assessment of Good Practice and Effectiveness
The Committee considered a report of the Treasurer regarding best practice self-assessments of good practice and effectiveness for Audit Committees produced by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA).
Councillor Carr expressed the importance of completing both assessments, as future training and development of Committee members would be dependent on the findings.
Resolved that:-
a) the CIPFA best practice self-assessments of good practice and effectiveness for Audit Committees be noted;
b) both the Audit Committee Self-Assessment of Good Practice and the Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Audit Committee Self- Assessment be completed by the Committee via a session to be arranged by the Head of Internal Audit; and
c) the findings of the self-assessments be reported to a future meeting of the Committee.
CHAIR
Page 198 Agenda Item 11
Annual Report of the Head of Internal Audit 2015-16
Report Prepared By: Stephanie Donaldson MA (hons) CPFA Head of Internal Audit Liverpool City Region Combined Authority
Page 199 Contents
Page
1. Introduction 3
2. Responsibilities 4
3. Performance Outturn 5
Delivery of the Internal Audit Plan of Work 5
Profile of Work Undertaken 6
4. Overall Opinion 8
5. Future Considerations 9
Annual Report of the Head of Internal Audit 2015-16 | 2 Page 200 1. Introduction
1.1 In accordance with The Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015, the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (“the Authority”) must ensure that it provides for adequate and effective internal audit arrangements in respect of its accounting records and systems of internal control and conduct an annual review of the effectiveness of the systems of internal control. In addition, these internal audit arrangements must be delivered in accordance with the mandatory Public Sector Internal Audit Standards (PSIAS) and Local Government Application Note (LGAN), which superseded the CIPFA Code of Practice 2006, and came into effect in April 2013.
1.2 It is a requirement of the PSIAS that the Head of Internal Audit provides an annual report to those charged with governance, which should include an opinion on the overall adequacy and effectiveness of the organisation’s framework of governance, risk management and control.
1.3 The Constitution of the Authority states that it is the responsibility of the Treasurer to discharge these functions in respect of the Authority and to “effect the proper administration of the Authority’s financial affairs, particularly in relation to financial advice, procedures, records and accounting systems, internal audit and financial control generally” (Part 3: Responsibility for Functions; Section D).
1.4 Section 4 of this Report provides the overall opinion of the Head of Internal Audit on the internal control environment of the Authority. This opinion is drawn from the delivery and outturn of the 2015-16 Internal Audit Plan of Work approved by the Authority’s Audit Committee on 28 July 2015 and incorporated within the Merseytravel 2015/16 Internal Audit Plan approved by the Audit & Governance Sub-Committee (now decommissioned) on 23 March 2015.
1.5 In providing this opinion, consideration is also given to any additional sources of assurance and the Authority’s Assurance Framework. It supports the review of the organisation’s overall governance framework that informs the published Annual Governance Statement.
Annual Report of the Head of Internal Audit 2015-16 | 3 Page 201 2. Responsibilities
2.1 Internal Audit is an independent, objective assurance and consulting activity designed to add value and improve an organisation’s operations and to facilitate the achievement of corporate objectives. It is the responsibility of Internal Audit to examine and report on the systems of internal control and to provide an independent opinion on the effectiveness of the organisation’s financial and operational control framework, and risk management and governance arrangements.
2.2 Internal Audit discharges these responsibilities as follows;
(a) Undertaking risk-based reviews of internal systems, reporting to management on the effectiveness of internal controls and processes and making recommendations for improvement, where appropriate;
(b) Advising on the prevention and detection of fraud and investigating suspected fraud or irregularities that have been identified or alleged;
(c) Advising on the adequacy and effectiveness of controls in new and developing systems and processes, when required; and
(d) Undertaking grant assurance, consultancy and partnership work, where required or requested.
2.3 Since its establishment on 1st April 2014, the Authority’s Audit Committee had agreed to place reliance on the relevant internal audit work being undertaken by Merseytravel in its capacity as its Executive Body.
2.4 The Merseytravel Internal Audit Plan included an allocation of 150 internal audit days, which were utilised on behalf of the Authority to provide appropriate grant assurance work and additional provision for Internal Audit reviews in respect of Authority assets or obligations.
2.5 In placing reliance on Merseytravel to deliver its Internal Audit service, the Authority accepts assurance that Merseytravel delivers an independent and objective internal audit service in compliance with the mandatory requirements of the PSIAS.
2.6 A Merseytravel Annual Report of the Head of Internal Audit (2015/16) has been produced to support the production of Merseytravel’s Annual Governance Statement. It is the opinion of the Head of Internal Audit that the overall control environment of Merseytravel is adequate.
Annual Report of the Head of Internal Audit 2015-16 | 4 Page 202 3. Performance Outturn
Delivery of the Internal Audit Plan
3.1 Delivery of the annual Internal Audit Plan is a fundamental element of the overall control and governance framework. Merseytravel Internal Audit’s planned workload is determined through a detailed, strategic three year risk assessment, in accordance with the approved Merseytravel Internal Audit Strategy (2015-s8).
3.2 2015/16 represented Year 1 of the 2015-18 Strategic Plan, which was determined through a comprehensive strategic risk assessment and consultation process that sought to establish the scope and range of Internal Audit’s planned work, and included consideration of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority. This process ensures that the resultant Plan is responsive to emerging risks and significant organisational changes and ensures that it is fit for purpose.
3.3 The 2015/16 Audit Plan was determined in consultation with Directors and Heads of Service and in accordance with the revised Internal Audit Strategy and Internal Audit Charter, both of which were subject to review and update during 2015/16. Provision was made for 150 Internal Audit days to support the Authority, and to provide assurance in respect of relevant funding streams and specific Internal Audit Reviews emerging from consideration of the risk environment.
3.4 Table 1 below demonstrates the utilisation of these Audit days during 2015/16 and provides a summary of the work undertaken during the year:
Table 1
Audit Activity Days Planned Audit Fast Tag Account Management 34.5 Tunnels Toll Recording Systems 26 Tunnels Police Operations – Application Management 13.5 Members Code of Conduct 6.0 Commissioning 5.0 Programme Management n/a
Partnerships & External Funding Growth Fund (Employment & Skills) 30 Growth Fund (Major Schemes) 3.5 Growth Fund (STEP) 1.5 Growth Hub (LEP) 4.5 Rural Leader 1.0 Skills For Growth 5.5 Total Direct Audit Days 131
Annual Report of the Head of Internal Audit 2015-16 | 5 Page 203 Corporate Governance & Risk Combined Authority - Audit Committee Facilitation 9 Combined Authority - Scrutiny Committee Facilitation 10 Total Indirect Audit Days 19 Total Audit Days 2015/16 150
3.5 At its meeting on 26 January 2016, the Audit Committee agreed to the deferment of the planned Internal Audit review of Programme Management, which has been carried forward into the proposed Plan of Work for 2016/17.
Profile of Work Undertaken
3.6 Planned Internal Audit Reviews were carried out in accordance with the agreed Internal Audit Plan of work. Internal Audit Reports were issued and agreed with Management, and include an Action Plan indicating recommendations to improve or enhance the control environment, where appropriate.
3.7 Each Internal Audit Report includes an Assurance Statement and Audit Opinion, which is drawn from the audit work undertaken and is based on the following agreed matrix;
Substantial Assurance - A sound system of internal control. Controls are in place and operating effectively. Substantial, but not absolute assurance can be given that the system/process/activity will achieve its objectives safely and effectively Reasonable Assurance - An adequate system of internal control. While there is basically a sound system of internal control, there are weaknesses which may put some of the system objectives at risk. Reasonable assurance can be given that the system/process/ activity will achieve its objectives safely and effectively. Limited Assurance - A system of internal control that requires corrective action to improve control. Whilst there is basically an adequate system of internal control, a fundamental control is either absent, inadequate or in place but not being operated satisfactorily. Only limited assurance can be given that the system/process/ activity will achieve its objectives safely and effectively. No Assurance - A poor system of internal control. Significant non- compliance with basic control processes in a number of key areas leaves the system open to error or abuse. No assurance can be given that the system/process/activity will achieve its objectives safely and effectively.
3.8 A summary of planned audit reviews undertaken and Assurance Opinions issued is documented in Table 2 below:
Annual Report of the Head of Internal Audit 2015-16 | 6 Page 204 Table 2
Department Audit Status Assurance Opinion Customer Delivery Fast Tag Account Management - CA Published Reasonable Police Ops (Tunnels) Application Management (STORM) Published Reasonable Democratic Services Members Code of Conduct - CA Published Reasonable Procurement Commissioning - CA Draft Reasonable Tunnels Toll Recording Systems (inc Customer Delivery Draft Reasonable Toll Reconciliation) - CA
3.9 In respect of external funding, Internal Audit have reviewed and provided assurance during the year on grant claims with a total expenditure of £11.685m.
3.10 Table 3 below shows the total value of claims submitted and the total amount of payments made following the audit process:
Table 3
Programme Grant Claim Value (£) Growth Fund Major - Newton-le-Willows 2,047,510 Growth Fund Skills Capital - Strand 1 4,456,962 Growth Fund Skills Capital - Strand 2 852,259 Growth Fund Skills Capital - Strand 3 257,675 Growth Fund Skills Capital – Strand 4 1,427,063 Growth Fund STEP 1,390,454 Skills for Growth Provider Co-ordinator 526,674 Skills for Growth Growth Hub Capacity Building 60,890 Skills for Growth World Host 9,150 Growth Hub Growth Hub 638,509 EU Project Atlantis 8,357 EU Project Careers and Enterprise 1,172 11,684,675
3.11 Internal Audit operates to a performance target that each claim is reviewed and passed for payment within 10 working days. Of the 76 grant claims reviewed, 74 (97%) were completed within this target.
3.12 The claims reviewed by Internal Audit have been submitted by colleges, training providers, Liverpool Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) and Merseytravel. Individual claims submitted by district Councils are subject to assurance checks from the claimant’s own Internal Audit service and reliance is placed on this review, subject to sign off by the relevant Head of Audit and s.151 Officer. An annual assurance exercise will be undertaken during the first quarter of 2016/17 to provide an additional level of assurance.
3.13 The Head of Internal Audit will complete and submit an Independent Accountant’s letter to Central Government in relation to the eligibility of the Growth Hub claim (due May 2016). An Internal Audit representative also regularly attends Working Group Meetings with the Authority’s Employment and Skills team, to monitor the progress of each scheme and any lessons learned.
Annual Report of the Head of Internal Audit 2015-16 | 7 Page 205 4. Overall Opinion
4.1 On the basis of audit work undertaken on behalf of the Authority during the financial year 2015/16 and taking into consideration the Authority’s evolving corporate governance and risk management arrangements, I am satisfied that the organisation maintains an adequate and effective framework of internal control, governance and risk management which supports the achievement of its strategic objectives.
4.2 It is the opinion of the Head of Internal Audit that the overall control environment of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority is adequate.
Annual Report of the Head of Internal Audit 2015-16 | 8 Page 206 5. Future Considerations
5.1 The remit and scope of the Combined Authority has evolved significantly since its establishment in 2014. During 2015/16, it was appropriate for the Treasurer to consider whether the internal audit arrangements in place will, going forwards, continue to provide sufficient assurance to the Combined Authority that its statutory obligations are being met.
5.2 Thus, in April 2016, the Authority’s Audit Committee approved the appointment of a Head of Internal Audit designate, charged with delivery of a clearly defined and specific Internal Audit Plan for the Combined Authority. This service, whilst still provided by Merseytravel, will demonstrate a more formal approach through an agreed (nil cost) consultancy arrangement. A specific allocation of 220 Internal Audit (consultancy) days has been provided for in the Merseytravel Internal Audit Plan to deliver the additional internal audit reviews and assurance work for the Combined Authority.
5.3 The Authority’s Plan of work for 2016/17 has been determined taking into consideration the internal audit work provided to the Combined Authority during 2015/16, the increased responsibilities and requirements expected in respect of Growth Fund, European and other funding streams and the Constitutional responsibility placed on the Treasurer to ensure that there are appropriate arrangements in place “for the custody and safeguarding of the Authority’s assets”. It will be delivered within a context of further organisational and strategic change, borne from the Devolution Deal.
5.4 The Authority Constitution (Part 3; C) delegates the operation and maintenance of the Mersey Tunnels to Merseytravel. Therefore, provision has been made in the Merseytravel Internal Audit Plan to undertake an appropriate level of internal audit work to provide assurance that these obligations are being met. It is proposed that the Authority can continue to place reliance on this work and recognition of this is made in the Authority’s Internal Audit Plan.
5.5 In order to ensure the Authority’s compliance with the PSIAS, the Head of Internal Audit will undertake a self-assessment on the Combined Authority’s conformance with the PSIAS and LGAN and further updates and required actions (where appropriate) will be reported to the Authority’s Audit Committee.
Annual Report of the Head of Internal Audit 2015-16 | 9 Page 207 This page is intentionally left blank