Agenda item - Update on options programme for future delivery of housing repairs and maintenance

Report of Executive Director for Neighbourhoods, Communities & Housing (copy attached).

(1) That committee notes progress with the options programme for the future delivery of repairs, planned maintenance and capital works for the Council’s housing stock, as detailed in the body of this report.

12.1   The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director, Neighbourhoods, Communities & Housing which updated members on progress with the options programme for delivering housing repairs, maintenance, improvements and capital works post April 2010 when the current contractual arrangements expired. Trowers and Hamlins & Savills were commissioned to jointly produce an initial options report. This was attached as appendix 3. The report was supported by a Matrix which set out the options available for the future delivery of the service (appendix 1) and an executive summary was attached as appendix 2. The four options set out in the report were:

·                 Direct delivery of the service

·                 Outsourcing

·                 Wholly-Owned Subsidiary/Managed model

·                 Joint Venture Company

12.2       The report was presented by the Business & Performance Manager and the Partnering Project Manager.

12.3   Councillor Atkinson thanked officers and stated that the report was a good basis for future discussion; however whatever option was chosen he was wary of sub-contracting.

12.4   Councillor Bell mentioned that there were a lot of negatives with regard to EU compliance. However after 29 March 2019 this would not be an issue. Councillor Bell’s main concern was the future of the Housing Centre in Moulsecoomb. The Business and Performance Manager explained that there would be a short briefing for members with regard to the Housing Centre. It was explained that the council held a 20 year lease for the Housing Centre with 12-13 years still to run. All contractors who worked for the council occupied the building under licence.   

12.5   Councillor Hill found the report very useful and detailed. She stressed that the committee might need to come to terms with the fact that its preferred options were too expensive, compared with what had been done to date. The committee may feel that it was worth paying more to do things differently and it might not be in a position to do things better and also pay less.  Councillor Hill referred to paragraph 12.1.3 of the options report which set out a different approach to sub-contracting.  Instead of trying to avoid it altogether the council might want to embrace it as something that is inevitable and try and bring in sub-contractors.  It would be useful to gain the views of tenants and residents. The report was a useful step forward.

12.6   Councillor Druitt stated that it would be interesting to see if there could be more than one provider of services. Things could be done in a more efficient way and the council could look at creating a system of looking at properties holistically. There were ways of saving more long term. Some of the disadvantages set out for different options did not seem to be massive obstacles.

12.7   The Business and Performance Manager referred to the matrix on page 127. The current contract with Mears was broad in scale. Officers were looking at opportunities to split the contract. He stressed that there was a risk of costs increasing in most circumstances.

12.8   Councillor Gibson agreed that the report was comprehensive and the executive summary and matrix were very helpful. He considered that Councillor Hill had made an important point and that there might be a need for considering if there was a need to be paying more. It would be interesting to explore splitting functions. Direct delivery was attractive as it would not involve making a profit and there was no risk of contract insolvency. It could lead to positive relations with tenants. Councillor Gibson referred to the matrix – service objectives and asked about communal areas. Another objective was that the contract was more responsive to tenant’s aspirations. He mentioned the option of residents having work carried out as required. This was more in tune with what tenants would like to see. It was a massive project ahead and he would welcome a workshop.   Councillor Gibson was interested in the service objective – maximise social value. There was need for more detail and more options for achieving that objective. 

12.9 The Business and Performance Manager agreed that external areas needed to be included and tenants and leaseholders consulted. With regard to tenants’ aspirations, the Partnering Project Manager had carried out a lot of work, with visits to other local authorities to see a different approach. This would be included in the September report, along with advice on social value.

12.10  Councillor Janio agreed with Councillor Gibson’s comments.  He considered the report to be well written and easy to understand. He made a point with regard to resident engagement activity. If officers only listened to views of residents who attended meetings they might not get a full range of views.  He encouraged officers to go out and engage as much as possible. Councillors would support what residents wanted. The Business and Performance Manager replied that officers were carrying out a great deal of work on how to engage with tenants and leaseholders. He was happy to brief members on that issue.

12.11  The Chair stated that the report was well written.  She explained that she along with Councillors Gibson and Councillor Mears were looking at all aspects of the contract at the Members Procurement Advisory Board.      

12.12  Councillor Moonan remarked that the council had improved the contract considerably since it was first set up. She liked the report which provided early scoping. She stressed that it was very important to support tenants to be involved in the process. 

12.13  Councillor Bell stated that when the contract was awarded it was confirmed it was the right decision and had saved the council about £100 million.  The management of the contract at that time was flawed.

12.14  RESOLVED:-

(1) That committee notes progress with the options programme for the future delivery of repairs, planned maintenance and capital works for the Council’s housing stock, as detailed in the body of this report.