46
Minutes of the Meeting of the SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
held on 21 November 2007
__________________
PRESENTCouncillor Graham Dudley (Chairman);
Clive Smitheram and Colin Taylor
Councillors
David
Morgan,
Ruby
Smith,
In attendance: Councillor Jean Smith; Bruce Winton (Head of Venues) and John Turnbull
(Director of Finance)
Officers present: Fiona Cotter and Maggie Jones
__________________
20
MINUTES. The Minutes of the Meeting of the Scrutiny Committee held on 10 July 2007
were agreed as a true record and signed by the Chairman.
Following signature of the Minutes, the Chairman suspended the meeting to allow a
member of the public, Mr Barrie Taylor, to address the Committee on the topic of council
communication with the public and sparse coverage of events in the local press, in
particular publicity of the ability of the public to speak at certain committee meetings.
Whilst the Chairman acknowledged that there may be opportunities to give greater
publicity to the facility to speak at meetings of this and the four policy committees, he
understood that the council was proactive in trying to secure greater press coverage.
21
CONSIDERATION OF ANY MATTERS CALLED IN BY MEMBERS OF THE SCRUTINY
COMMITTEE ARISING FROM DECISIONS OF THE POLICY COMMITTEES. With the
agreement of the Committee, consideration of this matter was deferred until all other
business had been dealt with.
22
INTERNAL AUDIT – MONITORING REPORT. The Committee received a report which
summarised progress against the audit plan for 2007/08.
The Committee noted that there were insufficient reports finalised by the date of the
previous meeting of the Committee in July to justify a separate report and all reports
issued had substantial assurance. This report therefore comprised the first monitoring
report for 2007/08.
The Committee noted that of the reports issued to date, six had been issued with
substantial assurance, three with satisfactory and none with limited assurance.
However, internal audit had made three significant recommendations which might
impact on their annual opinion. Two of these were in relation to their review of parking
and the other in relation to their review of debtors. The Committee was assured that
clear action plans allocating responsibility for addressing these issues within agreed
timescales had been put in place to address the internal control issues identified.
Epsom and Ewell Borough Council
Meeting of the Scrutiny Committee, 21 November 2007
23
47
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT 2007/08: QUARTER 1: The Committee received its
first report in line with the new procedure agreed at its previous meeting regarding
monitoring progress against the policy committee’s Key Service Priorities.
The Committee was informed that at the end of Quarter 1 there was only one policy
committee Key Service Priority with red traffic light status. This related to a Key Service
Priority of the Strategy and Resources Committee carried over from 2006/07, namely: “To
develop an Energy Management Plan across all Council owned buildings by the end of
October 2006”.
The Committee noted that responsibility for this Key Service Priority had originally been
allocated to the Corporate Property Officer. This post had been vacant for over a year
despite two recruitment processes and this reflected the current employment market for
estate surveyors. The Committee was pleased to note that a better solution had
presented itself in respect of this particular area of work with the opportunity to appoint a
Sustainable Energy Manager and the Committee was satisfied that progress against this
Key Service Priority would now be made. As a result of recruitment difficulties, the
Council still had a skills and capacity difficulty in the area of corporate estates
management and the Council was buying in professional services in the short term.
Accordingly, the Committee considered that no further action needed to be taken and
that there was no need to receive an update in six months time unless this target
remained at red.
24
OUTSTANDING REFERENCES.
The Committee noted references to officers
outstanding at the date of the meeting.
25
CALL-IN OF THE DECISION OF THE LEISURE COMMITTEE MADE ON 29
OCTOBER 2007 IN RELATION TO RECOMMENDATION 2, ITEM 05. The Chairman
opened consideration of the matter by explaining how he proposed to deal with the item.
He briefly outlined the purpose of, and procedure for, call-in and then went on to outline
the procedures he intended to follow in conducting this part of the meeting.
The reason given for the call-in was that there was evidence to suggest that the first
principle of decision making set out in Article 12 of the Council’s Constitution had not been
met, namely ‘clarity of aims and desired outcomes’. More specifically, that:

In stating in paragraph 3 of the officer’s Report that the Best Value Review of
Venues in 2003 set out assumptions on income, expenditure and investment
for e.g. Bourne Hall the officer’s report did not restate those assumptions even
in summary form. Scrutiny Committee therefore questioned the degree to
which members of the Leisure Committee were able to determine whether the
proposed changes accorded with the previously agreed assumptions.

The Financial and Manpower section of the Report dealt almost entirely with
expenditure and did not fully address the expected effect on income other than
the possible effect of one of the options on income from the Rose Room.

There was no evidence in the report that members had been taken to Bourne
Hall and shown the proposed changes in situ. Instead it appeared that
members were invited to determine the best layout based solely on a series of
slides. Members of the Scrutiny Committee questioned whether this provided
sufficient clarity of the proposed layout.
Epsom & Ewell Borough Council
48
Meeting of the Scrutiny Committee, 21 November 2007
The following papers had been submitted to assist members in their consideration of the
matter:
Report to the Leisure Committee dated 29 October 2007 (“Venues 4 Year
Draft Strategy”) and associated annexes (Annexe 1: a copy of four colour
slides from the presentation showing the possible layouts at Bourne Hall;
Annexe 2: Summary of Feedback from Bourne Hall Users and Annexe 3:
Summary of costs associated with options)

A copy of the full presentation made to the Leisure Committee.
Councillor Jean Smith was afforded the opportunity to outline her reasons for requesting
that the decision be called-in. She questioned the validity of many statements made in the
report, the interpretation of the consultation responses, considered that the report did not
put enough emphasis on the option for retaining the status quo and that a site visit should
have been undertaken.
The Chairman of the Leisure Committee, Councillor Alan Winkworth, the Head of Venues,
Bruce Winton, and the Director of Finance, John Turnbull were present at the meeting to
assist the Committee in deciding whether or not there was sufficient evidence to refer the
matter back to the Leisure Committee or to Council.
In response to questions, the following points were made:

Councillor Winkworth was of the opinion that most members knew the site very
well. Four newly elected members had availed themselves of an invitation to
visit the venue with Mr. Winton. Only one member of the Committee could not
visualise the existing layout of the venue at the meeting but was satisfied with
the explanation as illustrated in the presentation provided.

Mr. Winton stated that the calling letter for the meeting clearly invited members
to seek clarification on any items to be discussed at the meeting prior to the
meeting and that no requests for further information or a site visit (in addition to
the site visit referred to above) were received. Site visits were not normal
procedure in relation to items to be considered by Leisure Committee. No site
visits, for example, had been undertaken prior to decisions made in January
2005 on the future of the venue or January 2007 when the funding for the
works currently under discussion was approved.

With respect to a cost benefit/analysis for the venue as a whole, Mr. Winton
stated that the proposals in the current report were consistent with the sum of
£200,000 included within the 2007/08 capital programme for improvements to
the venue. The capital bid, agreed by the Leisure Committee in January 2007
and eventually incorporated into the capital programme, was intended to
protect current income streams. Paragraph 4.2 of the current report made
reference to this bid and restated the reasons for it.

Mr. Turnbull concurred that the report to the Leisure Committee in January
2007 clearly stated that the £200,000 capital bid was to protect existing income
streams so he had not been expecting to see any projections of increased
income from the proposals in the current report. Mr. Turnbull referred the
Committee to paragraph 4.2.4 of the current report, also echoed in the
appraisal in the January Committee report, which made it clear that the
proposed works were “to safeguard current revenue streams”. Potential
increases in future income streams were not considered relevant at this stage
Epsom & Ewell Borough Council
Meeting of the Scrutiny Committee, 21 November 2007
49
although the Head of Venues had made it clear that this expenditure was seen
as a basis for investment in the future.

Mr. Winton stated that he had explained to members at the Leisure Committee
meeting in October that the whole point of the proposed works at the venue
were to create a neutral setting to set the basic framework for the layout of the
building in order not prejudice future bids.

Mr. Winton further stated that references in the Best Value Review of Venues
were to the backlog maintenance programme and should not be confused with
the sum of money currently under discussion. The Best Value Review was
referred to in the background to the current report which also contained a
genealogy for the Committee but these were not listed as background papers.
The Committee withdrew from Committee Room 1 to consider its findings at 8.50 p.m. and
returned to announce its decision at 9.26 p.m.
The Scrutiny Committee's decision was unanimous. The Committee wished to make it
clear that its findings did not imply any criticism of the Chairman of the Leisure Committee,
Leisure Committee members or Officers. The Committee’s decision was as follows:(1)
The Committee agreed that it would have been helpful if more
background information had been included in the report to the Leisure
Committee dated 29 October 2007.
(2)
The Committee believed that a site visit would have been helpful and
accordingly recommended that the Leisure Committee consider
undertaking site visits in future when considering changes to the layout of
venues within its remit.
(3)
The Committee considered that there was some lack of clarity regarding
the aims/objectives of the report and hence the Committee had been right
to call-in the decision. However, following further scrutiny, the Committee
concluded that overall, the decision had been made in accordance with
the principles of decision-making set out in Article 12 of the Constitution
and therefore the decision could take effect.
The Committee wished to thank Councillors Winkworth and Smith and Officers for
attending the meeting.
The meeting ended at 9.30 p.m.
GRAHAM DUDLEY
Chairman
Epsom & Ewell Borough Council