Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
26 Our Cambridge – Group Design Programme and Alignment with BSR PDF 322 KB
Minutes:
Matter for Decision
The report referred to
draft proposals developed through the Our Cambridge programme, which would enable
the Council to achieve £6million net savings and requested the necessary
permissions and delegations to progress.
Decision of Executive
Councillor for the Leader of the Council
i.
Agreed design principles for Communities Group and
the Economy and Place Group, and delegated authority to the relevant
Director/CEO to develop and implement internal organisation in line with
Council policy.
ii.
Recommended to the Executive the inclusion of
proposals in the public consultation that would impact service delivery on the
strategic outline budget. Following consultation final decisions would go
through the budget setting process.
iii.
Noted the overall approach to achieving £6m savings
over the 25/26 and 26/27 budget cycle as recommended in the MTFS.
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s
report.
Any Alternative Options
Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny Considerations
The Committee received a report from the Chief Operating Officer.
The Chief Operating Officer, Director of
Communities, Chief Finance Officer and the Leader said the following in
response to Members’ questions:
i.
A neighbourhood-based approach would allow services
such as housing, environmental health, estates, sport and leisure and community
development, as example, to be delivered collectively and collaboratively,
which would look at services from a resident’s perspective in the different
neighbourhoods throughout the city with inclusion from Ward Councillors.
ii.
There were also other key public services that
worked on a neighbourhood-based approach, particularly in health. Worked had been undertaken to determine how
the Council was better aligned with external health colleagues and integrated
neighbourhoods to improve the working relationship.
iii.
The neighbourhood approach would also benefit the
Council’s external organisations such as the Police and health groups.
iv.
Savings referenced would be made across all groups
in the Council.
v.
The report had been set out to establish the
principles that could be taken out to consultation with staff and the
community. The details would come back for full scrutiny at a future meeting.
It was important to highlight that Officers were working behind the scenes to
look at that detail.
vi.
The process was not just about savings, the
transformation programme was also about making a Council fit for purpose for
the future, working more effectively and efficiently and better for residents.
vii.
Was looking at the Council’s internal staffing
structure to enhance resilience, reduce cost and become more effective. The Council had in place traditional
structures for a long time, it was right to question whether they were still
the correct structures to meet the needs of how the Council would operate
moving forward.
viii.
Part of the Our Cambridge programme was to look at
performance, how well were officers carrying out their roles and
responsibilities.
ix.
Disputed that the Our Cambridge programme was
taking too long; already significant changes had taken place.
x.
The way the Our Cambridge programme had outlined
the purpose, was to talk more about the impact and outcome of what was trying
to be achieved as a Council and not necessarily focused on the individual
services.
xi.
Looking across the work that Officers undertook,
the Council was a fundamental partner to public safety; shared the community
safety partnership, provided environmental health services across the city,
employed antisocial behaviour teams and enforcement teams.
xii.
While the Council were not the primary / lead
contributor to public safety had contributed £14 million of health and
wellbeing services
xiii.
The Council was also a housing provider in the City
which was probably the most fundamental role for providing a safety net for
residents.
xiv.
The Council were investing £100million in Abbey
Ward which would take some of the health inequalities that currently existed
with the current housing properties.
xv.
The 2.5% inflation figure was a baseline assumption
that was used to calculate the budget gap. The Council’s budget for 2024/25
included £23 million income from fees and charges, although this did not include
income from commercial property, of which there was an additional £10 million
of income. There was also an additional £3.5 million in income from other
commercial sources.
xvi.
The public budget consultation would ask high level
questions, however there would still be opportunity to scrutinise those fees
and charges that are proposed to change through the budget setting process.
The Committee resolved by 5 votes to 0 with 2 abstentions to
endorse the recommendations.
The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of
interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.