Agenda and minutes

To agree the Council’s procedure rules for remote meetings.

RESOLVED –

THAT the remote meeting procedures set out in the agenda be agreed.

No apologies were received.

No declarations were made.

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair announced that the meeting was being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and could be viewed on the website for six months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts were archived and could be made available upon request. Those who had asked to address the meeting were deemed to be consenting to having their contributions recorded and broadcast and to the use of those sound recordings and images for webcasting and/or training purposes.

Order of business

It was agreed by the Committee that they would consider Item 10. Community Investment Programme – update on market conditions and the

decision to pause redevelopment of Cockpit Yard and Holborn Library, first. This was to allow the Cabinet Member for Investing in Communities, Culture and an Inclusive Economy to answer questions from the Committee.

No deputations were received.

There was no such business.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 14 September 2020.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 14^th  September 2020.

RESOLVED –

THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 14^th September 2020 be approved as a correct record.

Report of the Director of People and Inclusion.

This report has been prepared at the request of the Committee to provide an update on developments regarding the Council’s workforce. This annual report provides analysis of the Council’s workforce profile and an overview of work undertaken during 2019/20. Key areas covered include: workforce inclusion, resourcing, future talent, pay and reward, organisational development, health and safety, and an update on our resident workforce in Appendix A. The report also includes an overview of the impact of Covid-19 in each area, the steps taken as part of our organisational response.

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of People and Inclusion.

In response to questions from the Committee, the Director of People and Inclusion made the following comments:

·       Work was being carried out that focused on staff wellbeing.

·       Normal absence rates were lower; this was in part, because people could work from home.

·       Work was being carried out in relation to Camden’s approach to sickness management. Benchmarking exercises against other organisations to help develop best practice.

·       Camden currently offered its staff resources to help maintain wellbeing including mindfulness, yoga, and access to counselling via the Employee Assistance Programme

·       The Council had started to map in a more detailed way, where staff live. 60% of staff lived within 10km of 5 Pancras Square.

·       More senior roles more required a specialist skillset, this could explain why the Council had to look further afield for candidates.

·       The organisation provided staff with opportunities to connect with the local community. An additional day’s leave for volunteering, with a focus on Camden, was an example of this.

·       Using agency staff is not bad in itself; however, it must be the correct resourcing decision. In a team, agency staff might be used if there is not the internal expertise and in some areas, there are statutory minimum staffing numbers.

·       Keeping a vacancy rate of 5% was not the same as a recruitment freeze. It meant the organisation would hold 5% vacancy across the organisation and think carefully where there was a need to recruit.

·       Ongoing monitoring of all protected characteristics would happen to make sure there was not a disproportionate impact.

·       There was no cutting of services; instead, Camden was looking at how to deliver services more efficiently.

·       The organisation had focused on increasing Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic representation at senior levels. Camden were gradually shifting the profile of senior leadership. Taking action with recruitment processes, how job descriptions are written and what applicants are asked to do as part of the interview process.

·       The Task and finish group, chaired by the Director of Equalities and Disproportionality was a way for Camden to hold themselves to account.

·       The Council had undertaken a drive to ask staff to update their personal information the organisation holds.

·       In relation to staff demographics, it was better to compare with the local community than it would be to outer London. Benchmarking against different communities may have less relevance.

·       Camden was contributing to the collection of data on race representation of senior leadership at an inner London and outer London level.

·       Coming 249^th on Stonewall’s UK Workplace Equality Index was positive as it was unusual for an organisation to score so highly on its first submission.

·       Ongoing work and training was being done to ensure Camden was inclusive of LGBT+ people.

·       Camden’s gender pay gap is within the bands that the organisation see as acceptable but it was something that would continue to be monitored.

·       There was an ethnicity pay gap, not because there was an equal pay issue  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Report of Cabinet Member for Investing in Communities, Culture and an Inclusive Economy.

This report sets out the changing context of worklessness and underemployment in Camden in light of the impact of COVID-19.  It provides an update on the Council’s pre-existing employment support programme, Good Work Camden, and adaptions to it in response to the changing context. It also sets out new work underway in direct response to the crisis and its disproportionate effect on young people and those from ethnic minority backgrounds. 

Consideration was given to the report of the Cabinet Member for Investing in Communities, Culture and an Inclusive Economy.

In response to Member questions, the Head of Inclusive Economy commented:

·       The aim of the Good Work Camden programme was to reduce barriers for people accessing services.

·       The service was designed to be accessible to those who needed it most; the statistics showed that it was successfully reaching the target groups.

·       The Council was making a significant investment in an area that was not a mandatory service.

·       With regard to the Government’s Kickstart scheme, the Council had committed to 36 Kickstart placements in its own workforce, and to top up difference of national minimum wage to London living wage for those placements.

·       Camden was also acting as an intermediary organisation to support firms. If firms were bidding for fewer than 30 Kickstart placements, the process required another organisation to support them.

·       Camden had used investment in placements to role model how to use the government’s Kickstart Scheme, both in training and wage rates.

·       There had been 130 expressions of interest.

·       Good Work Camden is a universal service  and did not solely focus on young people; more information would be circulated to the Committee about what the scheme was doing to support people in older age groups.

Action by: the Head of Inclusive Economy

Members asked whether, in future reports, more information could be included on the work being carried out by the neighbourhood job hubs.

The Head of Inclusive Economy said that he would provide responses to the following member comments outside of the meeting:

·       Whether the investment of £5 million through the current medium-term financial plan for employment transformation for financial years 19-20 through to 21-22 was sufficient to deliver the scheme.

·       How many voluntary and community sector partners were members of the Employment and Skills Network and whether they would be expanded?

Action By: The Head of Inclusive Economy

RESOLVED –

THAT the report be noted.

Report of the Director of Development.

This report provides an update on current housing, land and construction market conditions in light of COVID-19 and summarises the decision taken on 11^th August to pause the redevelopment of Cockpit Yard and Holborn Library and end negotiations with the preferred bidder.

The next Community Investment Annual Report will be published in January of 2021 and will provide a fuller update on the progress of the programme.   

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Development.

The Director of Development introduced the report and gave the following responses to key Member questions:

·       The procurement process that Camden went through for the development was to select a partner to deliver the project on their behalf. U&I PLC was selected as the preferred bidder.

·       The main reason U&I PLC could not deliver their tender bid was due to the impact that the result of the Brexit referendum had on the housing market.

·       The project was mainly being funded through the sale of private properties on the site.

·       A point was reached where U&I PLC could not deliver the outcomes the Council wanted from the project, their offer had moved so far from the original procurement position that the Council could not agree a way forward.

·       Camden always sought to learn from CIP schemes and it was important not to view the project as a complete loss. Camden now had a detailed plan for the site, elements of which, could be used in the future. Camden also had an understanding of what the planners would see as acceptable for the site moving forward.

·       Camden did not enter into a legally binding contract with U&I PLC.

·       On reflection, it would have been beneficial to move to contract position as quickly as possible. Whilst in a preferred bidder position but not in a legally binding contract, there is a certain amount of flexibility that U&I PLC had to change what were viable projections for the scheme.

·       Camden were currently relooking at the original specification, engaging with the Library and Street Cleaning services to understand what would be their requirements from the site.

·       For CIP projects, Camden preferred direct delivery. Only a couple of other projects shared the delivery partner model employed in Cockpit Yard and Holborn Library.

·       Camden had received no indication that the stamp duty exemption would be extended beyond the 31 March 2021.

·       If too much contingency was put on projects, there was a danger that they  would never go ahead as the balance between risk and delivery would be too skewed.

·       The Development team worked with the Finance team to plan contingencies.

·       The standard contingency model for projects was to start with a 20% project total contingency. As the scheme developed and the risks were nullified the contingency amount would be reduced.

·       Camden took a prudent approach to the estimation of sales income and only ever projected 95% of Red Book valuations.

·       The pandemic was not originally a factor in the decision to pause the development of Cockpit Yard and Holborn Library, the decision was largely due to the Brexit referendum result.

·       Officers would represent the brief with specifics about each area requirement. The Council could make a decision about how to proceed.

·       The question was about how the library service would operate, there was, currently, no discussion about closing the library.

RESOLVED –

THAT the report be noted

Report of the Executive Director Corporate Services.

This report provides an update on the Town Hall Refurbishment and the decision to proceed with the main contract works.

Consideration was given to the report of the Executive Director Corporate Services. In response to key Member questions, the Project Director Town Hall, the Interim Director of Finance and the Executive Director Corporate Services made the following remarks:

·       Receipts, Moving services back into Town Hall when the works were completed would free up other accommodation to secure receipts and/or income. Camden were confident that they would receive the projected receipts.

·       The chair told the Interim Director of Finance that he would follow up some questions with him outside of the meeting and circulate the response to the Committee. These were in relation to interest payments and contingencies.

·       Camden were required, by statute, to charge Minimum Revenue Provision. This was a real cost that needed to be offset.

RESOLVED –

THAT the report be noted.

There was no such business.