Agenda item

One matter has been referred to Cabinet from Overview and Scrutiny Management Board which met on 20 October 2017

Formal response from the Mayor

I don’t accept there was any undue delay in appointing a head of paid service. In fact, the fuss that was made in the papers and our local broadcaster sat comfortably in the tradition of hyperbolic descriptions of mythical failure more than it spoke to the realities.

The challenge was real, and if we could have scripted the council’s journey, we wouldn’t start from here. But we would have needed to avoid inheriting the organisation described by Bundred.

Bundred set out challenges, and there were even more in the last decades.

But what you’re addressing, this focus on a failed structure, is one of the reason for failure. You’re in the weeds of the organisation, we are focused on delivery and a structure that delivers.

Within 48 hours of the last day of employment of the former Chief Exec my team brought forward a draft senior management restructure for consultation within the organisation.

The draft restructure will make the organisation:

•          more responsive to political leadership,

•          better able to deliver our vision for the city and

•          saves three quarters of a million pounds year on year, just from the senior

             two grades.

On the issues of vacancies and interims,  it is surely self-evident that in an organisation that has historically failed to deliver, facing cuts imposed by the national government’s philosophy of austerity and was described as having suffered from a collective failure of leadership (both officers and political), and needing to save money, there would be departures. Interim appointments have protected the council from long and expensive contracts, severance payments and brought in urgently needed expertise while we have been working on the future shape of the council.

I would add given the Bundred report, scrutiny should be more self-aware of the errors of the past. We’re dealing with the errors of the past.

On the concerns around the Cabinet forward plan, these are mis-directed. To list a raft of officer ambitions that may never come to fruition would be a mistake simply to populate a forward plan. My policy has been that no item is added to the mayor’s forward plan until I am completely sure the policy has been appraised, costed, risk assessed and examined by my cabinet. This policy will continue.

However the addition of non-urgent late items is unacceptable, and I sympathise with the view of OSM. I have told council officers we can’t work like this.

I would add that some councillors have appeared in the press complaining that they are not being told everything that we are doing to sort out the council, appraise and secure investment for our major infrastructure projects. This while sharing confidential information that harms the council. In the last 2 weeks senior Representatives, of two opposition parties have openly shared confidential information from HR committee to the press. This doesn’t make an atmosphere where we can share information that could harm the council if councillors have proven themselves untrustworthy or irresponsible. We have shown our desire to be open, from the Bundred review to the Green capital receipts to the cross party cabinet and the city plan. But we also have a duty to be wise in who we choose to trust.