Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the Call-In meeting.

To declare any personal / prejudicial interests for the purpose of Section 81 (3) of the Local Government Act 2000 and paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members Code of Conduct.

The following personal interests were declared:-

• Councillor G Driver in his capacity as a Member on the Aire Valley Homes ALMO (Agenda Item 7) (Minute 108 refers)
• Councillor P Wadsworth in his capacity as Deputy Executive Member for Environmental Services and as a Director of East North East Homes ALMO (Agenda Item 7) (Minute 108 refers)
• Councillor A Lowe in her capacity as a Director of West North West ALMO (Agenda Item 7) (Minute 108 refers)

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor Atha, Councillor Bale, Councillor Bentley, Councillor Dowson and Councillor Selby.

The Board were informed that Councillor Murray was a substitute for Councillor Atha, Councillor Fox for Councillor Bale, Councillor Monaghan for Councillor Bentley, Councillor Grahame for Councillor Dowson, and Councillor Hanley for Councillor Selby.

To receive and consider a report of the Head of Scrutiny and Member Development.

The Head of Scrutiny and Member Development submitted a report regarding the procedural aspects of the Call-In process.

Members were advised that the options available to the Board in respect of this particular called-in decision were:-

Option 1 – Release the decision for implementation.  Having reviewed the decision, the Scrutiny Board (Central and Corporate) could decide to release it for implementation.  If this decision was chosen, the decision would be released for immediate implementation and the decision could not be called-in again.

Option 2 – Recommend that the decision be reconsidered.  Having reviewed the decision, the Scrutiny Board (Central and Corporate) could recommend to the Assistant Chief Executive (Planning, Policy and Improvement), that the decision be reconsidered.  If the Scrutiny Board (Central and Corporate) chose this option, a report would be submitted to the Assistant Chief Executive (Planning, Policy and Improvement) within three working days of this meeting.  The Assistant Chief Executive Assistant Chief Executive (Planning, Policy and Improvement) would reconsider the decision and would publish the outcome of their deliberations on the delegated decision system.  The decision could not be called-in again whether or not it was varied.

RESOLVED – That the report outlining the Call-in procedures be noted.

In accordance with the Scrutiny Procedure Rules, to review the attached delegated decision of the Assistant Chief Executive (Planning, Policy and Improvement) in relation to the Corporate Interactive Voice Recognition Solution.

The Head of Scrutiny and Member Development submitted a report, together with relevant background papers, relating to an Officer Delegated Decision D35273 of the Assistant Chief Executive (Planning, Policy and Improvement) as follows:-

Procurement of a Corporate Interactive Voice Recognition (IVR) Package

‘The project will deliver an Integrated Voice Recognition infrastructure within the Corporate Contact Centre that is adaptable and able to provide various levels of automated telephony to services across the Council’.

The decision had been called-in for review by Councillors J Lewis, A Ogilvie, M Rafique, S Armitage and G Driver on the following grounds:-

‘We the undersigned would like greater clarification regarding the practical issues associated with the implementation of an IVR system.  Further information is needed with regard to the cost-benefit analysis of the various options considered and any public consultation informing the decision.  We would also like more information as to how this system would deliver real savings without compromising service delivery’.

Councillor J Lewis, Councillor G Driver and Councillor A Ogilvie attended the meeting to present evidence to the Board and respond to Members’ questions and comments.

The following officers were also in attendance:-

-  James Rogers, Assistant Chief Executive (Planning, Policy and Improvement)

-  Paddy Clarke, Chief Customer Services Officer

-  Anthony Derbyshire, Project Manager

The Board then questioned Councillor Lewis, Councillor Driver and Councillor Ogilvie and officers at length on the evidence submitted.

Some of the main concerns highlighted by Councillor Lewis, Councillor Driver and Councillor Ogilvie were:-

·  the need for consultation to be undertaken with members of the public/ residents on the merits of the IVR system prior to implementation at the Corporate Contact Centre

·  the need for greater clarification regarding the practical issues associated with the implementation of the IVR system

·  the need for further information with regard to the cost benefit analysis in relation to developing an IVR application for dealing with Choice Based Letting bids and bulky waste enquiries, and on it’s suitability of delivering real savings without compromising service delivery

·  the need to retain staff at the Corporate Contact Centre in view of the current economic climate

·  the lack of evidence available which demonstrated that the IVR system would reduce the number of complaints and the difficulties envisaged by BME/elderly residents when accessing an automated system

·  the need for ALMOs to be consulted on the installation of the IVR system on Choice Based Letting bids

In explaining the reasons for the decision, officers made the following comments:-

·  the need to deliver a corporate IVR package within the Contact Centre in accordance with a recent Executive Board decision taken on 14^th January 2009

·  the need to recognise the fact that IVR had become more sophisticated and that this would not replace people speaking to a Council representative

·  the benefits of developing an IVR application which could achieve significant savings, as well as providing the customer with access to Council services outside of normal office hours

·  confirmation that there would be no redundancies  ...  view the full minutes text for item 108.

In accordance with Scrutiny Board Procedure Rules, to consider the Board’s formal conclusions and recommendations arising from the conclusion of the called-in decision.

Following consideration of the evidence presented to them, and the questioning of witnesses, the Board passed the following resolution:-

RESOLVED –

(a)  That the decision be referred back to the decision maker for reconsideration.

(b)  That the decision maker be requested to reconsider the following specific areas:-

·  the levels of consultation and whether these had been sufficient to date

·  whether the initial areas/themes to be piloted under the IVR scheme were the appropriate ones

·  whether there was sufficient knowledge of the systems usage elsewhere in the country and particularly other local authorities

·  whether equality impact assessments had been undertaken and considered as part of the project initiation

(The meeting concluded at 12.10pm)