Agenda item

To accept and note the information in the report and to reduce the savings target for travel savings from £390,000 to £240,000 and move the delivery year from 2018/19 to 2019/20, however, requesting for the scheme to be implemented before 1 April 2019 if it is ready.

The item was submitted by Cllr Dafydd Meurig

RESOLVED

To accept and note the information in the report and to reduce the savings target for travelling savings from £390,000 to £240,000 and to move the delivery year from 2018/19 to 2019/20, however, requesting for the scheme to be implemented before 1 April 2019 if it is ready.

DISCUSSION

The report was submitted, noting that it was a report that noted the latest information about the Department. It was emphasised that, when looking at the financial situation, the Department had now realised, or was on track with, 97% of the existing Savings Plans. Nevertheless, it was explained that there would possibly be a slight slippage in two schemes, namely the Review of Smallholding Rents and Public Protection - Charging a Fee for Offering Advice but it was anticipated that the savings would be realised in full by 2018/19.

In addition to discovering the department's savings, the Environment Department was responsible for leading a project across the Council to reduce travelling costs in future. Having received an External Audit of the costs, an external company had suggested that there was a potential saving of £390,000 to be made. Additional work carried out internally showed that this sum had been overestimated and that the sum therefore needed to be reduced to £240,000, and it was noted that further work needed to be undertaken before it could be realised and, therefore, there was a need to re-profile the saving.

By looking at the Department's performance, it was noted that work had been carried out to develop graphs when looking at performance. Specifically, the 'Percentage of customers who stated that they were satisfied or very satisfied with the level of the Planning service' graph was examined. It was expressed that there had been a fall during the period but, on the whole, the accumulative response showed a better picture of how the department was performing. It was explained that when there were major changes in the graphs, it would be possible to ask why and to look at the data in more detail.

Observations arising from the discussion

-    Customer satisfaction and the level of planning service was discussed, in particular why some applications had taken years. It was emphasised that these applications were quite large and the Redrow estate in Bangor was used as an example. It was emphasised that these applications were quite large and the Redrow estate in Bangor was used as an example.

-    It was asked where Gwynedd was in terms of staff and time compared to other counties in regard to food hygiene inspections. It was noted that the Cabinet Member would follow this up with the service.

-    It was asked whether there was a decline in performance as a result of the cuts the Department had made during recent years, and it was asked whether this was a matter we should be more concerned about in general. It was noted that the service was only slightly behind schedule in this example, and we would not be able to see the true impact until we would have reached the end of the year.  If we would see performance failing to keep up, then there may be a need to ask whether we had gone too far, but if we could cope by the end of the year or if we were very close to the previous performance, we must accept that reducing resources would hinder performance.  The question to ask, however, was what were the implications of this.

-    Attention was drawn to the fact that many of the targets were lower than expected as a result of sickness absence. It was asked whether there was a need to look further into this as it was something that was brought up more often now, looking specifically at staff workload. It was noted that the Council's general sickness levels stayed quite consistent (as could be seen in the report of the Deputy Leader) but, following the savings, a number of Departments had had to get rid of staff and therefore, when a member of staff who did something essential was sick from work, there was not as much resilience in order to be able to move someone to do the work. It was expressed that there was a need to keep an eye on this.