Technical Advisers Group

BEST VALUE

NOTES OF THE LOTAG STRATEGY BEST VALUE GROUP

 

MEETING OF 14 DECEMBER 2000

Present:

Brynn Hodgson

LB Harrow

Jim Mack

LB Barking & Dagenham

Andrew Darvite

LB Richmond Upon Thames

Martin Low

LB Bexley

Keith Manaton

LB Hackney

David Richekonw

LB Waltham Forest

Kath Akoslovski

LB Southwark

Mick Stone

LB Hammersmith & Fulham

Geoff Buckley

LB Newham

Alan Legg

LB Tower Hamlets

Keith Weir

LB Waltham Forest

Apologies:

Edwin Doyle

Consultant

Tony Davies

LB Enfield

Jeff Lemon

LB Haringey

David Mutley

LB Redbridge

Suresh Kamath

LB Brent

Mike O’Callohan

LB

Item

Minutes

Action

1.0

MINUTES OF 14TH SEPTEMBER 2000

  • Agreed.

  

2.0

MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES

- None

  

3.0

WORKSHOP ON BEST VALUE INSPECTION OF REFUSE COLLECTION LED BY BRYNN HODGSON

  • The recent review of the refuse service in Harrow was used to illustrate the inspection process and stimulate discussion.

The stages of inspection begin with a request for an extensive list of information including many corporate documents. The inspection started with a presentation by the inspection team to a wide range of Council Officers and Members. This set out their view of the authority based upon the review and the other written material. The presentation set out the steps they would follow during the inspection and the areas to which they would give particular attention. The inspection would centre around 2 judgements – was it a good service and was it likely to improve. The judgements were informed by 3 key questions in each of the two areas.

- Are the authorities aims clear and challenging?

- Does the service meet those aims?

- How does its performance compare?

- Does the Best Value Review drive improvement?

- How good is the improvement plan?

- Will the authority deliver the improvements?

 

Following the presentation formal interviews were held individually with the review team, supervisors, Directors, Chief Executive, Lead Members from all parties, and the Leader of the Council. Reality tests were carried out by telephoning the office and an inspector followed a refuse crew to observe how the service was delivered. The inspection team set up an interim challenge meeting for the interviewees and a number of other staff, 2 weeks after the initial inspection. This delivered their first draft and allowed comments to be made. The authority then had 7 days to respond and make any points and to correct any errors before publication of the final report.

The authority challenged the findings and correspondence has been exchanged and the final report has not yet been published. A number of authorities have similarly challenged the views of the inspection team. Part of the Inspection report is attached.

  

4.0

REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION

  • Geoff Buckley is seeking Bench Mark Club partners for white collar services. It was noted that the I.A.G. were proposing to update some works on costs carried out 2 years ago. If authorities were interested in participating contact Jim Mack.

Martin Low was seeking data and authorities interested in Transport Planning Best Value

 		 

5.0

INFORMATION SHARE

- The next Best Value network was to be held on 15 December 2000. It was agreed to update the list of reviews being carried out by authorities (NB: this would be best done after publication of revised 5 year plans in April 2001)

  

6.0

A.O.B.

  • Keith Weir outlined work he was carrying out on refuse collection costs and sought information to return to Keith at LB Waltham Forest

  

 

Next meeting: is at the Road Safety Centre, Basinghall Street, Guildhall, London 2.00pm – 4.00pm on 1st March 2001

Dates of future meeting:

7 June 2001; 4 October 2001 – date may change as there is a problem with the venue

Note:

The Road Safety Centre remains the venue for our future meetings, although Road Safety Staff have now been relocated