Scrutiny Steering Group, 9 January 2012

A4

The Key Decision process and Scrutiny

1 Introduction

1.1 Scrutiny Councillors have expressed concerns about the Key Decision (KD) process, in particular the notification system and the ease by which Members can make their views known.

1.2 The following report draws together some background information on the current KD process and Scrutiny Member interactions with that process, as well as highlighting a number of concerns raised by various Scrutiny Councillors and proposing some possible solutions.

1.3 In addition to this report, a survey of all Members has been undertaken to seek views on the KD process. Due to the timings involved in seeking responses during the Christmas period, the results and analysis of this survey will be circulated to SSG Members separately before the 9 January SSG meeting. It is hoped that the survey results will provide a useful background to the discussion relating to this report.

2 Key Decisions as defined by the Local Government Act 2000

2.1 The Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2000 defines a key decision as an executive decision which, is likely -

(a) to result in the local authority incurring expenditure which is, or the making of savings which are, significant having regard to the local authority's budget for the service or function to which the decision relates; or

(b) to be significant in terms of its effect on communities living or working in an area comprising two or more wards or electoral divisions in the area of the local authority.

3 Key Decisions as defined in the Royal Borough

3.1 In the Royal Borough a KD is defined as:

" ... any executive side matter that is not already delegated to officers which:

(i) involves income or expenditure of £100,000 of more; and/or

1

RBK00030119_0001 RBK00030119/1

(ii) is likely to have a significant impact on the community in one or more electoral wards."

3.2 Compared to other London local authorities, this is a relatively low financial threshold.

4. Individual Key Decisions as prescribed by the Local Government Act 2000

4.1 Where an executive member or officer receives a report which is to be taken into consideration when making a key decision, that report must first be made available for public inspection for at least three clear days. As soon as is reasonable practicable, that report shall be supplied to the chairman of every relevant overview and scrutiny committee or where there is no chairman, to every member of the relevant overview and scrutiny committee. The proper officer shall include a list of background papers in the report and ensure that sufficient copies are available or that facilities exist for the production of sufficient copies of those papers, to meet every reasonable request from members of the public for them.

4.2 Each authority must publish a forward plan on a monthly basis, with a new forward plan produced at least 14 days prior to the first day upon which it will come into effect, with any outstanding matters contained in the previous forward plan being included in the latest forward plan. The most recent plan shall be taken to have superseded any earlier plan or, as the case may be, each earlier plan. The plan shall contain details of all matters likely to be the subject of key decisions for a period of four months, and the first such plan shall have effect from the first working day of any month.

3 The current KD process and timelines

3.1 The Key Decision should be displayed on the Forward Plan as early as possible and must be scheduled for at least five clear days before any decision can be taken on it by the relevant Cabinet Member. At the time of scheduling, Scrutiny Members who have signed up for the daily email will receive notification of any new item added to the Forward Plan, together with any updates. This email contains brief details of the key decision, diamond rating, decision taker and officer contact. This is an opt-in service and the email is circulated around midnight daily.

2

RBK00030119_0002 RBK00030119/2

3.2 All key decisions are given a diamond rating by the relevant officer at the time of scheduling on the Forward Plan. The classification is set out below:

Classification of Key Decisions Criteria

+++High impact/high public interest: A key decision that is likely to have a major

impact on service users, residents or businesses and where there is prospect of

significant public interest. This decision would be expected to feature planned

consultation with the Scrutiny Committee and the public.

++High impact/low public interest: Such a key decision would meet all the above

criteria on impact, but would not be expected to be of particularly public interest.

This decision would be expected to feature planned consultation with the Scrutiny

Committee and the public.

+Routine/low public interest: A key decision that is of a relatively routine nature

where the Scrutiny Committee would not wish to get involved.

3.3 Where the report author feels that the proposed key decision should receive either a two or three diamond classification, the officer is required to contact the relevant Scrutiny Committee Chairman at the time of scheduling on the Forward Plan, to get their agreement on how the Scrutiny Committee should be consulted. This would most probably be by means of a Scrutiny Committee discussion, but if the timescale is short comments could be sought from Scrutiny Committee members by email. This pre-decision scrutiny is designed to give them the opportunity to have early input into the development of appropriate policies, plans and decisions in advance of the Cabinet Member taking the decision. Each Scrutiny Committee meeting will consider an extract of the Forward Plan relating to their Scrutiny Committee and at this point will have an opportunity to change the rating if they feel it has been classified incorrectly.

3.2 The report author would then proceed to draft the key decision report. The report is signed by the Cabinet Member, published and circulated as the proposed key decision. At this point, Members of the relevant Scrutiny Committee automatically receive an email with all the relevant documentation attached, as will any other member who has asked to be notified. This is published on the Council's website and circulated to libraries, together with a number of external subscribers.

3.3 After the decision has been so proposed, the Scrutiny Committee and members of the public have five clear days to submit comments or suggest amendments to the Cabinet Member.

3.4 Subject to comments received from Scrutiny Members or members of the public, the report is signed by the Cabinet Member, published

3

RBK00030119_0003 RBK00030119/3

and circulated by email (and hard copy if so requested) as the confirmed key decision. The relevant Scrutiny Members receive a further email with the relevant documentation. Any revisions to the proposed key decision which are accepted by the Cabinet Member, taking into account comments received by Scrutiny Members are reflected in a revised confirmed key decision. If the view of the Cabinet Member is that the comments are substantial and materially change the nature of the report, a new key decision would need to be generated.

3.5 After the decision has been confirmed, the relevant Scrutiny Committee has five clear days within which to request a call-in.

3.6 If no call-in request is made, the decision is then implemented.

3. 7 If the decision is called-in, the Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee has five clear days within which to call a meeting of the Scrutiny Committee.

3.8 In the case of an urgent matter, the report author is expected to schedule the item on the Forward Plan for five clear days as a first step and contact the relevant Scrutiny Chairman requesting their agreement to treat the matter as urgent. If this is granted and once the five clear days have elapsed, the Cabinet Member would sign the confirmed key decision, which is then implemented, without recourse to call-in. The documentation is emailed to the relevant Scrutiny Committee members. All urgent key decisions are reported to Council quarterly.

Over the period January-December 2011, out of a total of 93 individual key decisions, four were taken as urgent (by Cllr Coleridge on 17 February - HRA Rent report •••; Cllr Feilding-Mellen on 19 May - Joint Procurement of IDVA Services +; Cllr Feilding­Mellen on 28 November - Jobcentre Plus Flexible Support Fund +; and Cllr E Campbell on 30 November - Demographic Growth Capital Funding+)

A flow chart showing the key decision process is attached overleaf.

4

RBK00030119_0004 RBK00030119/4

Key Decisions Process Flowchart

DECISION IS PLACED ON THE FORWARD PLAN

2

3 4 5

The Key Decision should be displayed on the Forward Plan as early as possible and must be scheduled for five clear days before it is proposed. Email notification to Cabinet.Coordinator@rbkc.gov.uk

REPORT IS DRAFTED The draft should be cleared by the Exec Dir and informally by the Cabinet Member at Digest/Policy Board. The final version is sent to Cabinet Coordinator for signature by the Cabinet Member.

DECISION IS PROPOSED

2

3 4 5

After the decision has been proposed, the se has five clear days to submit comments or suggest amendments to the Cabinet Member.

DECISION IS CONFIRMED

2

3 4 5

After the decision has been confirmed, the se has five clear days within which to request a call-in.

No call-in 1 The decision is called in

2

3 4 5

se does not meet

The Chairman of the se has five clear days within which to call a meeting of the se

SC MEETING The SC decides:

No Reconsider KD KD is against policy further action

2 1 tr · df d mp emen a 1on 1s e erre 3 for 10 clear working days 4 5 to organise a meeting of

6 full Council 7

~ 8 9

10

COUNCIL MEETING Council decides:

Policy should change I Policy stands

• CABINET MEETING (the SC gives a presentation) Cabinet decides:

KD stands, or KD is abandoned Policy will change Policy stands

• • I THE DECISION IS IMPLEMENTED I THE DECISION IS DISALLOWED

5

RBK00030119_0005 RBK00030119/5

3.9 It therefore takes a mm1mum of three weeks to process a routine key decision. This period increases while comments made by Scrutiny members or members of the public are being responded to, or if the key decision is subject to pre-decision scrutiny by the relevant Scrutiny Committee. In the case of pre-decision scrutiny, the views of the Scrutiny Committee are reflected in the report which the Cabinet Member will consider.

3.10 The Local Government Act 2000 prescribes that where key decisions are taken by an individual executive member, the report to be considered when making the key decision must be made available and supplied to the relevant scrutiny committee members at least three clear days before the decision is taken.

3.11 The three-step approach to approving key decisions in the Royal Borough is designed to mirror the process as closely as possible as if the decision was taken at a meeting, and to give maximum opportunity to members of the public and the relevant Scrutiny Committee Members to comment. Therefore the proposed stage is equivalent to the agenda despatch; the confirmed stage is equivalent to the actual meeting, following which five days are available for call-in.

3.12 It is necessary for all local authorities to find a balance between providing an appropriate KD consultation window and ensuring a streamlined and efficient decision-making process. Low KD thresholds increase the number of overall decisions that are designated as KDs, and make the need for efficiency all the greater. Councils with low KD thresholds and long KD consultation periods may find that the number of Urgency KDs will increase.

4 KD notification services

4.1 A number of notification services are available to Members who wish to keep track of KDs. These include:

• Daily and weekly information bulletins (covering all KDs) • Formal email notifications (KDs by Scrutiny Committee remit,

sent only to Members of relevant Scrutiny Committees) • Scrutiny Committee updates (a report to each Scrutiny

Committee containing details of KDs relevant to that committee)

4.2 In addition to the above, KDs are ranked by diamond rating. This is intended to provide an at-a-glance guide as to the most important

6

RBK00030119_0006 RBK00030119/6

KDs, as well as flagging up Scrutiny consultation responsibilities to KD report authors.

4.3 A draft guide to scrutinising KDs, which sets out notification services in detail, is attached in Appendix A.

5 Statistics detailing Member responses to Key Decisions

5.1 The table in Appendix B sets out the statistics relating to key decisions processed over the period January - December 2011.

6 Concerns raised by Scrutiny Members and possible solutions

6.1 The automated daily email bulletin contains all new information relating to the Forward Plan (new additions and changes in status). The weekly email bulletin, which is manually prepared by the Governance Services Executive Team, summarises the week's daily bulletins in terms of KDs which have changed status. However, it does not include new additions to the Forward Plan. It is suggested that:

a) The weekly bulletin should contain a summary of ALL information contained within that week's daily email bulletins (i.e. all changes to the Forward Plan that week, including new additions).

b) IT options should be considered to automate the weekly email bulletin.

6.2 The daily email bulletin and weekly email bulletin are opt-in services. Members choose whether or not to sign up to receive these updates. It is suggested that Members be reminded about these services and asked again if they wish to opt in.

6.3 In addition to the daily and weekly email bulletins, all Members of Scrutiny Committees are sent formal notifications by email when certain KDs reach the "proposed" (minded to) and "confirmed" stages. Councillors receive emails only for KDs that relate to Scrutiny Committee of which they are members.

It has been reported that some Councillors are experiencing email overload and there appears to be confusion about the difference between the email bulletins (covering all KDs) and the formal email notifications (scrutiny-committee specific KDs only). Additionally, Members relying solely on the formal email notifications may miss other important KDs that fall under other Scrutiny Committee remits. The following suggestions are proposed:

7

RBK00030119_0007 RBK00030119/7

a) That officers investigate IT options to see if it is possible to add a tracker function to KDs listed on the daily and weekly bulletins. Each KD notification email would then come with the option for Members to register to track a particular KD throughout the whole process.

b) If a Member registered to track a KD, they would then receive the formal notifications relating to that KD. All Members would automatically default to tracking KDs that relate to their Scrutiny Committees, so all Members would at minimum continue to receive the "safety net" formal email notifications as they do at present.

6.4 Concerns were raised that some Members are not sufficiently engaged with scrutinising KDs. It is suggested that Officers investigate ways of making the format of KD reports more engaging. One option might be to put recommendations alongside the summary on the front page, in order to allow Members to see the main points at a glance.

6.5 It is noted that providing feedback is time-consuming. Furthermore, if Members are happy with a KD they are unlikely to respond with feedback, making it impossible to tell if their silence represents a lack of engagement. IT solutions could be investigated. For example, each KD formal notification email could include an option for recipients to select one of the following automated response options: a) I am happy with the content of this KD, b) I wish to make the following comments (space provided).

6.6 A number of Members had experienced difficulties with the format of emails notifications. Specific concerns and suggested solutions are as follows:

a) Sometimes the KD formal notification email will arrive with four or five attachments. These are not labelled clearly, so it is necessary for Members to download them all to find the document they want. This is bad enough when using a computer, but on a smart phone it can be very frustrating. It is suggested that attachments be clearly labelled to say which documents are which.

b) KD updates are sent out with large amounts of standard text, which must be scrolled through before reaching the substance of the email. This may be necessary, but - again - on a smart phone it is frustrating and can often result in the message being truncated before the key information is revealed. Some improvements have been made with the inclusion of the summary at the top of the email, but Members feel more could be done to make it user friendly. A solution might be to have a

8

RBK00030119_0008 RBK00030119/8

version of the notification email specifically designed for smart phones, which would contain only the essential information (or at least puts the essential information at the top of the email). It could be labelled to make it clear it was a condensed version for smart phone users, if necessary.

c) There is confusion about the difference between formal notifications of "proposed" (also known as "minded to") stage and "confirmed" stage. This should be made clearer on the email. A guide explaining the difference could also be issued to all Scrutiny Members (See Appendix A).

d) The automated daily email bulletin appears to be sent out at midnight. It is suggested that this be brought forward to a more helpful time.

6.6 The Forward Plan is published monthly. It is also updated on a rolling basis and this version is available to be viewed on the internet. Members report frustration with the dates given for KDs on the forward plan. Items are regularly delayed, some items seem to be out of date and some items remain on the Forward Plan even when it is clear the KD is no longer going ahead. Is suggested that:

a) Officers investigate IT options to force lead officers to take greater ownership of the key decisions. For example, if the date given for a KD is about to expire, the lead officer should receive an automatic email requesting an update on the position.

b) Members should be encouraged to primarily engage with KDs through the email notifications above rather than relying on the Forward Plan document.

6. 7 Diamond ratings are intended to make it easier for Members to see which the important KDs are. All 2 or 3 diamond rated KDs should be discussed with Scrutiny Chairmen to agree a consultation plan for the committee. Members feel this is not working as well as it could be. It is suggested that:

a) All Scrutiny Chairman be reminded that they own the diamond ratings process and can change any rating as necessary. This should form part of the information given to any new Scrutiny Chairman.

b) The Governance Services Executive Team take a stronger role in monitoring diamond ratings and flagging up any ambiguous or underrated KDs for the report author to discuss with the Scrutiny Chairman.

9

RBK00030119_0009 RBK00030119/9

c) Officers take a pro-active approach to reminding Scrutiny Chairmen about the diamond rating.

7 Recommendations

7.1 Members are asked to comment on the following points:

• Which, if any, of the above suggestions I possible solutions set out in Section 6 they would like officers to pursue.

• Whether the draft guide (Appendix A) should be circulated to all Scrutiny Members for reference, subject to any amendments. Please note the guide has been written to reflect current notification arrangements. If there substantial changes are to be made, Members may prefer to wait until these are implemented before sending out an updated guide reflecting those changes.

COUNCILLOR JOANNA GARDNER

CHAIRMAN, SCRUTINY STEERING GROUP

10

RBK00030119_0010 RBK00030119/10

Appendix A: Guide to scrutinising Key Decisions

1 Introduction

1.1 The following information is intended for all Councillors who have a role in scrutinising Key Decisions (KDs). In the Royal Borough a KD is defined as:

" ... any executive side matter that is not already delegated to officers which:

(iii) involves income or expenditure of £100,000 of more; and I or (iv) is likely to have a significant impact on the community in one

or more electoral wards."

1.2 This guide sets out the assistance available to Councillors responsible for KD scrutiny.

2 Diamond ratings

2.1 A diamond rating is attached to each KD, as follows:

• One diamond: routine I low public interest (a KD that is of a relatively routine nature where the Scrutiny Committee would not wish to get involved.)

• Two diamonds: high impact I low public interest (a KD that would have a significant impact, but would not be expected to generate much public interest. This KD would be expected to feature planned consultation with the relevant Scrutiny Committee)

• Three diamonds: high impact I high public interest (a KD that is likely to have a major impact on service users, residents or business and where there is a likelihood of significant public interest. This KD would be expected to feature planned consultation with the relevant Scrutiny Committee and the public).

2.2 The officer compiling the report is expected to give the KD an initial diamond rating. Ratings of two or three diamonds require the officer to liaise with the relevant Scrutiny Chairman to determine how the Scrutiny Committee will undertake pre-decision scrutiny of the KD.

11

RBK00030119_0011 RBK00030119/11

At this point the Scrutiny Chairman can decide to change the rating of the KD, if necessary.

2.3 Key decisions with a one diamond rating can be placed on the Forward Plan without Scrutiny consultation. However, the Governance Services Executive Team review the rating of all new key decisions and, if a rating is too low or ambiguous, the officer will be advised to check with the Scrutiny Chairman. If the rating is increased to two or three diamonds as a result, the officer will seek guidance on pre-decision scrutiny, as outlined in the paragraph above.

2.4 The key decision will then be placed on the Forward Plan. Reports for KDs with a two or three diamond rating are expected to contain details of any consultation that has taken place with Scrutiny.

3 Daily and weekly information bulletins

3.1 All Councillors are eligible to sign up for a daily information email bulletin providing updates on the Forward Plan. This is the best way for Councillors to keep up to date with KDs, and ensure they receive information at the earliest possible opportunity.

3.2 The daily bulletin provides information on the following:

• New additions: KDs that have just been added to the Forward Plan. There will be a heading, brief description, diamond rating and officer contact, but no paperwork at this stage.

• Newly proposed decisions: KDs advising that the Cabinet Member is minded to take a certain decision. A link will be included to the KD report and the formal KD sheet that the Cabinet Member will sign, and comments are invited on the proposed decision. If no comments are received within 5 clear working days, the Cabinet Member can confirm the KD.

• Newly confirmed decisions: This is the notification of the Cabinet Member's decision. A link will be included to the KD report, and the formal KD sheet that the Cabinet Member will sign. This sheet will include details of any amendments to the recommendations made as a result of comments received at the proposed stage. The decision cannot be acted upon for a further five clear working days, during which time it can be 'called-in'

12

RBK00030119_0012 RBK00030119/12

(reviewed) by one of the Council's Scrutiny Committees (see section 6).

• Newly implemented decisions: These are the KDs that have been implemented. The call-in period will have expired by this point.

The daily bulletin does not provide details of KDs that have been newly withdrawn from the Forward Plan.

3.3 There is also a weekly email bulletin which contains much of this information, although it does not currently include new additions to the Forward Plan.

3.4 The daily and weekly bulletins cover all KDs, rather than just those relevant to a specific Scrutiny Committee. Any Councillor wishing to receive one or both of these email bulletin should contact Kathy Howard I Kathy.howard@rbkc.gov.uk).

4 Formal notification of Key Decisions

4.1 When a KD is proposed, and again when it is confirmed, both the formal KD decision sheet signed by the Cabinet Member and the report are emailed to Scrutiny Councillors by the Governance Services Executive Team. Councillors receive emails only for KDs that relate to Scrutiny Committee of which they are members.

4.2 This notification ensures that all members of the relevant Scrutiny Committee, including those who have chosen not to sign up for the daily bulletin, are aware of KDs within their Scrutiny remit. This is the formal notification stage and gives Members an opportunity to comment on the proposals and influence the decision. Members are encouraged to respond promptly should they have queries or comments on the proposals.

5 Scrutiny committee agenda updates

5.1 All Scrutiny committees include a standing item on their agenda giving details of upcoming KDs falling within their remit. Councillors should already be aware of these KDs through the methods outlined in sections 3 and 4, above.

13

RBK00030119_0013 RBK00030119/13

5.2 The Forward Plan is evolving document. KD reports for Scrutiny committee agendas can be seen as capturing a snapshot of relevant KDs at the time of publication. Unfortunately, due to the changing nature of the Forward Plan, it is possible that this snapshot will be out of date by the time the Scrutiny committee meets. If so, verbal updates can be provided at the meeting.

5.3 Scrutiny committee meet roughly every six to eight weeks. For this reason, and for the reasons outlined under section 5.2, it is recommended that Councillors do not use these reports as their primary method of keeping track of KDs.

5.4 An up to date version of the Forward Plan is available for Councillors to view online.

6 Call-in and urgency provisions

6.1 Although pre-decision Scrutiny is the preferred approach, in the last resort Scrutiny Councillors may wish to call-in a KD that has been confirmed but not yet implemented. This means that the relevant Scrutiny Committee will hear evidence from the Cabinet Member and will then decide whether to ask that Cabinet Member to reconsider the decision. Should the proposed decision be contrary to the Council's budgetary or policy framework, the matter may be referred to full Council.

6.2 One reason for a call-in may be if Councillors feel that there has not been sufficient time for pre-decision Scrutiny. Alternatively, Scrutiny Councillors may feel that a KD has been taken without following the appropriate process, or without sufficient regard to consultation or proposed alternatives.

6.3 Call-ins can be requested at any point during the five clear working days between a KD being confirmed and implemented. They are triggered when at least one third of the voting members of the relevant Scrutiny committee make a written request to the Director of Strategy and Service Improvement.

6.4 In exceptional circumstances it may be necessary to bypass the normal process to implement a KD quickly. In such cases, the officer must seek agreement from the Scrutiny Chairman to apply the urgency rules. Once agreement has been obtained, the KD can

14

RBK00030119_0014 RBK00030119/14

be confirmed immediately (there is no proposed stage) and can then be implemented the following day. In effect, this denies Scrutiny Committee members the opportunity to call-in the decision. It is important, therefore, that Councillors keep abreast of the Forward Plan and raise any queries or comments with the Scrutiny Chairman before agreement to the urgent KD is given. All urgent KDs are reported to Council.

7 Contact officers:

Clair Bantin Scrutiny Manager

Clair.bantin@rbkc.gov.uk

Kathy Howard Principal Governance Manager -Executive

Kathy.howard@rbkc.gov.uk

15

RBK00030119_0015 RBK00030119/15

Scrutiny Steering Group, 9 January 2012

Appendix B: Key Decisions between January and December 2011 Cabinet Scrutiny Number Number where Number Number Number Number of Member Committee of Key individual where subject of urgent •••

Decisions Scrutiny Scrutiny to pre- key and ++key Member Committee decision decisions decisions comments comments scrutiny made made

Cllr Cockell Cabinet and 1 0 0 0 0 0 Corporate Services

Cllr Lightfoot Cabinet and 8 1 (request for call- 0 0 1 (release 0 Corporate in from 2 members of funding Services on the grounds of from

the effect proposed severance job losses) fund)

Cllr Feilding- Cabinet and 12 1 (seeking 0 0 2 3 Mellen Corporate clarification on a

Services funding decision) !(commenting on proposal to award contract for domestic violence advocacy services)

Cllr Ritchie Family and 8 0 2 (FCS 0 0 1 Children's Charges and Services Catholic

Children's Adoption Agency)

Cllr E Campbell Family and 8 0 0 1 1 0 Children's Services

16

RBK00030119_0016

RB

K00030119/16

Cllr Moylan Public Realm 1 0 0 0 0 1 (Jan - Apr)

Cllr Ahern Public Realm 11 0 0 2 0 2 (May- Dec)

Cllr Paget- Public Realm 15 0 0 1 0 1 Brown Cllr Coleridge Housing and 20 1 (Private Rented 1 (Private 1 0 8

Property Access Scheme) Rented Access Scheme)

Cllr Mills Health, 3 1 (Epics KD) 1 (Call-in of 1 0 1 (Jan - Apr) Environmenta Epics KD)

I Health and Adult Social Care

Cllr F Buxton Health, 6 0 1 (Tri- 0 0 1 (May- Dec) Environmenta Borough)

I Health and Adult Social Care

Cabinet as a Cabinet and 28 0 17 0 0 5 whole Corporate

Services

This information does not include occasions where direct approaches were made by members to the Cabinet

Member or officers

17

RBK00030119_0017

RB

K00030119/17

Comments received in the period November- December 2011 from the Cabinet Coordinator mailbox:

Regarding the Daily Email Bulletin:

• 6 September - Cllr Campion reporting that the links to documents are not working (This IT was issue resolved. There was a time delay of publication of the daily email bulletin and of documents being published to the website)

• 9 September - Cllr Blakeman requesting more information about a new KDR. • 15 September- Cllr Blakeman requesting more information on a new KD that has just been added to the FP.

Request forwarded to the Report Author. • 9 November - Cllr Blakeman, on behalf of Notting Barns ward Councillors requesting information about a

recently proposed KDR. Copy of Report sent to the Ward Councillors. • 11 November- Cllr Dent-Coad requesting a copy of a Cabinet report which was published but was not linked

to the Forward Plan. Report sent via email.

Regarding the Weekly Bulletin:

There have been no queries in this period.

Regarding the Forward Plan

There have been no requests for information from the Forward Plan in this period, other than one request for a hard copy of the Plan.

18

RBK00030119_0018

RB

K00030119/18

Comments received in the period November- December 2011 from the Decision Comments mailbox (following receipt of the Proposed or Confirmed Key Decision)

4 October - Michael Bach's comments on the Proposed KD on the Government's Draft National Planning Policy Framework 10 October - Cllr Dent-Coad asking a number of additional questions in relation to the KD on Heating and hot water charges in the housing revenue account. 1 November - Cllrs Dent-Coad and Mingay's response to the Proposed KD on Pilot of a Private Rented Access Scheme 1 November - Cllr Marshal! advising that the Proposed KD on Pilot of a Private Rented Access Scheme will be discussed at the next Scrutiny Committee meeting. 1 November - Cllr Dent-Coad asking Cllr Marshal! why we have been asked to comment by the KD today when we are discussing the report at the Scrutiny Committee 1 November - Cllr Marshal! responding to Cllr Dent-Coad explaining that the KD cycle does not necessarily match up with the Scrutiny cycle and that in this instance it makes sense for discussion to take place at the Scrutiny meeting rather than a response from officers via email. 1 November - Cllr Dent-Coad thanking Cllr Marshal!. 1 November - Cllr Blakeman asking why the KD on the Allocations Scheme for The Stable Way Traveller Site is being taken before the Stable Way Advisory Group meeting in a few days time. 1 November - Cllr Holt supporting the decision on the Allocations Scheme for The Stable Way Traveller Site and how it has been reached. 1 November - Cllr Holt pointing out errors in the report on Implementation of Criteria Regarding Extra Care Housing Proposals and also giving his support to the Decision. 1 November - Cllr Holt commenting that the savings from the KD on the Procurement of a Site Management Provider for The Stable Way Traveller Site are surprising little and also expressing his support for the decision. 1 November - Cllr Mingay expressing support for the KD on the Procurement of a Site Management Provider for The Stable Way Traveller Site

19

RBK00030119_0019

RB

K00030119/19

7 November - Roger Keane responding to Cllr Halt's comments on the KD on the Procurement of a Site Management Provider for The Stable Way Traveller Site. 7 November - Cllr Holt supporting the KD on Contract Variation and Contract Extension to provide Outreach Services to Rough Sleepers in The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea 8 November - Cllr Holt supporting the KD on Kensington Academy and Leisure Centre-Appointment of Design team. 8 November - Laura Johnson responding to Cllr Dent-Coad's comments on the KD on Pilot of a Private Rented Access Scheme 10 November- Cllr Holt supporting the KD on Central Library: award of contract for building work to prepare for self-service 11 November - Michael Bach's comments on the KD on Shopfronts SPD 14 November- Cllr Campion stating that the drawings have not been attached to the email notification on Portobello road safety scheme 16 November- Cllr Gardner requesting a hard copy of the report and drawings on the KD on Portobello road safety scheme 18 November- Cllr Holt supporting the KD on Marlborough Primary School Expansion: Appointment of Design and Build Contractor 22 November- John O'Donnell declaring a prejudicial interest in the KD on Marlborough Primary School Expansion: Appointment of Design and Build Contractor 20 December - Cllr Holt raising three comments on the KD on A Contract Variation to the Supporting People Steady State Contract

20

RBK00030119_0020

RB

K00030119/20