Agenda item

Agreed to adopt an alternative travel scheme for staff, and reduce the departmental budgets as follows to reflect the agreed levels of the relevant savings (total £117,998) -

Education £9,775

Environment £8,772

Corporate Support £7,064

Finance £2,379

Economy and Community £6,526

Adults £33,183

Children £31,463

Highways and Municipal £3,463

Leadership Team £1,159

Consultancy £13,130

Housing and Property £1,084

The report was submitted by Cllr  Gareth Griffith

DECISION

It was agreed to adopt an alternative travel scheme for staff, and reduce the departmental budgets as follows to reflect the agreed levels of the relevant savings (total £117,998) -

Education £9,775

Environment £8,772

Corporate Support £7,064

Finance £2,379

Economy and Community £6,526

Adults £33,183

Children £31,463

Highways and Municipal £3,463

Leadership Team £1,159

Consultancy £13,130

Housing and Property £1,084

DISCUSSION

The report was presented and it was noted that this scheme would be led by the Environment Department but that it affected the work of the entire Council. The background of the item was noted, explaining that it derived from a consultation with specialist consultants called Edge Public Solution in 2014. It was reiterated that the report in 2014 expressed that the 15% saving was possible on the staff travel budget and that the Council had started to plan on this basis.

It was emphasised that the Report in 2014 had not been based on thorough work and consequently that further work had been done by the Council. It was expressed that the department had been looking at different ways of communicating and to emphasise that the most obvious way to make a saving was for staff not to make the journey at all. The various different ways of travelling to different meetings was highlighted, including public transport and pool cars.

It was noted that work had been done to communicate with the departments and there were examples where departments had managed journeys better and had ensured a cost of 35p per mile through pool cars. Attention was drawn to the table in the report which noted the departments' targets. It was explained that some jobs were exempt, such as Home Carers, and that these had been considered in the equation. Therefore, it was expressed that the saving would be approximately £120,000, which was lower than the figure seen in the report in 2014.

Observations arising from the discussion

¾    It was noted that it was important for some jobs to be exempt, such as home carers, as they were the backbone of the Council and were jobs that could not be done through technological means.

¾     The members expressed their thanks for the report and it was accepted that the saving was much lower than the original amount. It was asked why the Council had used external consultants. It was noted that experiences with external consultants were mixed as they sometimes came from a financial approach and thus they provided a more mathematical result which was not a reality in Gwynedd due to its geography. It was added in other cases that external consultants had made the Council think in a different way and had provided new ideas. There was a need to consider the balance between the likely benefit and the cost when considering commissioning consultants as using someone external could, at times, reap benefits, but this was not always the case. 

¾     It was expressed that the Council had planned these savings, but that they would not be achieved, therefore, it was asked whether there would be a need to plan for this. It was noted that reducing the value of this saving would add to the Council's financial deficit by 2020/21; however, it was healthy to plan on a sound financial basis. Furthermore, it was noted that reports were in the pipeline for submission to scrutiny committees with the departments' proposals for potential savings to be realised in 2020/21; however, if the Welsh Government settlement passed on the resources received from the Westminster Government, it was possible that not all of the savings would be required. It was added that the amended savings targets were reasonable and that there would be an actual saving from staff travelling costs, once the correct steps would be in place.