Annual Conference report & Performance Awards winners · and Performance Awards gala dinner at Telford have no doubt by now had ... overall sponsorship of our flagship event

Annual Conference report & Performance Awards winners

Managing Editor John Roberts

Editorial Director Lester Dinnie

Art Director Don Tregartha

Designers Clare Barker Roddy Clenaghan

Copy Editor Vicki Chastney

Publisher Tregartha Dinnie Ltd 2

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

Those of you who weren’t able to attend the IRRV Annual Conference and Performance Awards gala dinner at Telford have no doubt by now had the opportunity to catch up and view the events on the Institute’s website. Any fears surrounding the ability of the IRRV to ‘buck the economic trend’ by continuing to offer a thriving exhibition and high delegate numbers proved totally unfounded, as the event was once again hailed as a great success. This month’s issue builds on the website coverage, and we once again include a pictorial souvenir of the Performance Awards night, featuring the successful organisations, together with highlights from the conference presentations. May I also take this opportunity to offer thanks to the many exhibitors and sponsors, old and new, who value their partnership with the Institute and offer their support. Particular thanks go to Gandlake for their continued support by way of overall sponsorship of our flagship event. In spite of the Annual Conference focus of this extended 44 page edition of Insight, we still include many of our regular contributors, in particular welcoming back Dominic Macdonald-Wallace’s topical ‘shared service’ column, and our very own ‘agony uncle’, Professor Cleverley, who tackles more technical queries. We also bring you news of the recent elections to the Institute’s national Council, together with Gary Watson’s quarterly analysis of the latest round of Council meetings, keeping you up to speed on the governance issues facing your Institute. A good read all round!

John Roberts IRRV (Hons) is Managing Editor of IRRV magazines

NO

VEM

BER

2011

3

We are told that the delivery model for Universal Credit is not going to be finalised until 2015. If this is the case, there is an ideal opportunity for local and central government to make a radical decision that will help the people who really matter in the plans for welfare reform. I am, of course referring to the customer.

If the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) are serious about working with local government, now is the time to act. Let’s not beat about the bush – the DWP has to make significant savings over the next three years, with key personnel not being replaced, redeployed or made redundant. The only way the Department will reduce costs and achieve the savings target on administration is to develop a closer working relationship with local government. Local authorities are the experts in delivering customer facing services. Now is the time to go for the radical solution.

The starting point is to merge Jobcentre Plus offices with customer facing hubs in local authorities. The whole estate concerned with Jobcentre Plus and local authority customer facing services should be reviewed. All their staff should be integrated into a ‘single customer interface’ (SCI) – a true shared service. This should be built around the best of both functions. The SCI should then be developed to rationalise government and sub-national government customer facing services. The challenge would be the management of such a service and where that responsibility should lie. Once that

Now is the time for action!Time for a radical decision, says David Magor, as the window of opportunity to influence the Universal Credit delivery model opens up

is resolved, the financing of the service would be carefully modelled. I have no doubt the final product would deliver a quality service at a much reduced price.

If these changes were carefully planned, the merger of the two services could be delivered with minimum pain. HR resources should be profiled, and any merger could be phased in over three years. This merger should be designed to avoid redundancies and to protect pension entitlement.

The same logic could be applied to the development of computer systems – local authority software suppliers should be encouraged to developed calculation engines for Universal Credit. This approach would then give assurance to DWP if the development of their systems falters. There is no doubt in my mind that this approach would give the public every opportunity to utilise channel shift to make their application for Universal Credit and other public services.

Now is the time for action, before it ’s too late.

NO

VEM

BER

2011

5David Magor OBE IRRV (Hons) is Chief Executive of the IRRV

6

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

The President’s new team!Newly installed Institute President Roger Messenger is pictured with Senior Vice President Dave Chapman (right) and Junior Vice President Richard Harbord (left), who were also elected to office during the round of Council meetings held at Telford in September.

More Scottish successPhotographed at the September IRRV Scottish Conference in Crieff is Scottish Association President Jim McCafferty with the successful Scottish IRRV students.For more on the event, read David Scott’s report on

pages 30/31 of this month’s Insight.

Institute Council election resultsInsight offers its congratulations to the following successful candidates (presented in alphabetical order), elected on to the Institute national Council in the 2011 election:

Carol Cutler, Tom Dixon, Geoff FisherRichard Guy, Nick Rowe, Allan Traynor

This year’s election sees the installation of a new Council member, Nick Rowe, (right). Nick has worked in local government for over 25 years, and is currently Head of Revenues and Benefits with the London Borough of Hounslow. He has also worked in the private sector on several revenues and benefits sites. He is Secretary and Vice-Chair of the London Revenues Group, and a member of the London Councils Benefit Managers group, and has represented local authorities on a number of central government working parties, in addition to his role of LGA advisor for revenues.

His IRRV duties include Vice-Secretary of the London and Home Counties Association, having been President last year (a year which included running the London Marathon, raising over £10,000 for his charities). He is also a member of the IRRV Revenues Faculty Board and Vice-Chair of the IRRV Association Representatives’ Group, and has spoken at all of the major IRRV conferences and has presented training days for the IRRV.

London and Home Counties AssociationThe London and Home Counties Association recently held its annual golf day in the beautiful settings of the South Herts Golf Course.

On a sunny but very windy day some excellent golf was played, with Jake Seabourne of Dacorum Borough Council winning the competition with a great score of 40 points. The shield for top London and Home Counties member was won by tournament organiser Andy Cummins of Phoenix. Andy is pictured (far left) with sponsors’ representatives John Clark (Newlyns), Phil Chadwick of KPMG, and Paul Sharpe of Equita, together with Association President Phil Black (centre). Paul’s Equita team also won the sponsors’ team prize.

Gary L Watson IRRV (Hons) is Deputy Chief Executive of the Institute

1. As reported previously, membership had dropped to 887 by 1929. Those members who remained were largely no longer principal officers - in many cases, the senior positions in rating had been taken into the finance department, and the posts of valuation officer, where these too had been similarly absorbed, were attracting applications from members of the Surveyors’ or Auctioneers’ Institute, who had not previously been interested in such roles.

2. The Institute needed to build membership, to persuade members to

sit the examinations, and at the same time raise standards. The status of examinations had to be looked at so rating authorities could be persuaded they were the proper qualification for anyone engaged in a rating or valuation capacity. Results were immediate - by 1937 membership had reached 1,390, and even though there was a slight fall in 1946, when local authorities shed some of their temporary war time staff, it had reached 1,925 by 1948.

3. A further and much greater challenge was then presented by the Local

Government Act 1948, which resulted in the rating valuation functions of local authorities being transferred (and as a consequence many members) to the Valuation Office of the Board of Inland Revenue. A further blow was that the Valuation Office refused to accept the Association’s final examination as an appropriate qualification for future entrants to its service.

4. Until the act, membership had been almost entirely made up of local

government officers. Now, whilst local authorities retained responsibility for the levy, collection and recovery of rates, other functions were transferred to the Valuation Office and the new Local Valuation Panels. Understandably, this was an anxious time for members, and the Institute had a key role to play in representing not only the membership, but the profession as a whole. These responsibilities remain today, as the Institute faces up to addressing the policies being proposed by the coalition government and the impact they have on the membership and their profession.

5. Impact on membership levels after the Act was immediate, and by the end of 1949 membership had dropped back to 1,802. The Institute met this dual threat to membership (and to its examinations) by the appointment of a full-time Secretary, opening its doors to appropriately qualified people from outside local government, and by extending its activities to other parts of the world. Today, the Institute is again facing up to similar challenges, and decisions taken at the Annual General Meeting in September are intended to grow membership by recruiting ‘key’ people from outside local government and across the world, where the Institute’s profile continues to grow.

Getting to know your Institute

LATEST NEWS

7

Childcare support boost announcedChildcare support will be paid to around 80,000 more households, the Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg and Welfare Secretary Iain Duncan Smith have announced.

Reaffirming their commitment to helping parents with the costs of childcare, the government will invest an additional £300 million into childcare support under Universal Credit, on top of the £2bn already spent under the current system.

Currently, childcare support is only available for those working 16 hours or more, but the government is removing the minimum hours rule so that all families receiving Universal Credit will be eligible for financial help. This means that families on low incomes will receive more support to keep them in work.

NO

VEM

BER

2011

Concern over public sector job lossesSince April, the public sector shed jobs at five times the rate predicted by the Office for Budget Responsibility, the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) said. The body called on the government to halt public sector job cuts.

The body also questioned whether the private sector was capable of compensating for public sector losses, as the government is hoping.

In a separate statement, Unison has warned that Universal Credit could mean up to 20,000 housing benefit jobs are at risk. The union fears the move will see local staff “replaced by call centres and online forms”. It estimates that the axe of local staff could see councils saddled with a £150m redundancy bill.

8

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

Commercial Services CommitteeThe meeting was chaired by Carol Cutler – key reports considered included:

sales and sponsorship (including advertising)Annual Conference (including Performance Awards) miscellaneous conference programme Forum (and Benefit Advisory) Servicesupdate on activities in Scotland and Northern IrelandCommunications Working Group (magazines, website and publications).

Committee focussed their attention on Annual Conference (including Performance Awards) and undertook a tour of all the facilities to be used during the week. The efforts to attract delegates to the conference had proved very successful, although the exhibition was smaller than in previous years. The feedback from the conference was vital in deciding on the programme of events for the remainder of 2011 and 2012. A further meeting would be held in October when the feedback would be reviewed and the programme agreed.

Education & Membership CommitteeThe meeting was chaired by Kevin Stewart – key reports considered included:

qualificationsexaminations (June 2011)courses membership (including accreditation and categories).

It was considered important that the Institute had qualifications that were ‘fit for purpose’ and addressed the needs of employers and their staff. New qualifications for those involved in enforcement and business rates were shortly to be rolled out. Membership levels continue to be of concern, although the new membership category that sought to attract ‘key’ people from outside of local government would hopefully see an increase in membership. It was important for the Institute to try and work to a more stable membership, where members retained their membership after they had secured qualifications.

The Telford International Centre was the venue for the final cycle of council meetings in 2011. With Annual Conference starting the following day, meetings were shorter in order that preparations could be made for the week ahead. A summary of what was discussed is detailed below:

CouncilThe meeting was chaired by the President, Kerry Macdermott – key reports included:

reports of Standing Committeesarrangements for the Annual General Meeting co-options to CouncilChief Executive’s reportPresident’s report.

Policy & Resources Committee The meeting was chaired by Roger Messenger – key reports considered included:

statutory accounts 2010management accounts to 31st July 2011marketing consultantsadministrationprofessional fees and expenses 2012.

Committee was reminded that the Institute would be reporting a surplus for 2010 to the Annual General Meeting on the Tuesday, and that following the audit, no qualifications had been made by the auditors. The challenges for 2011 were even greater than in 2010, and as always the final outturn was very much dependent on the success of Annual Conference. In advance of the next cycle of meetings in January, there would be a need for committee to meet and agree the budget for 2012. The professional fees and expenses that were to be considered by the standing committees later in the day were to be held at 2011 levels.

Gary L Watson IRRV (Hons) is Deputy Chief Executive of the Institute

Law & Research CommitteeThe meeting was chaired by Dave Chapman – key reports considered included:

reports of the three Faculty Boardsmeetings with government bodiesresponses to consultation documentsresearch into green taxation and European funding opportunities.

Since the last meeting, the Institute (through the Faculty Boards) has been actively involved in putting together responses to the following two consultation documents:

Localising Council Tax Support in EnglandLocal Government Resource Review: Business Rates Retention (England).

Strategy Meeting It was agreed that the discussions from the Strategy Day in July 2011 would now be developed further at a strategy meeting to be held in November. Council needed to establish where the Institute is now, where it would like to be next year (and in subsequent years) and what it will take to get there. A full report on the Strategy Day will be covered in the January/February edition of Insight.

Although a number of reports are deemed to be ‘commercially sensitive’ (particularly those considered by Commercial Services Committee where a number of papers are only circulated to those that sit on this committee), National Council remains keen for the membership to be made aware of matters discussed at the quarterly cycle of meetings. Should any member require further information on any of the reports considered by National Council at this cycle of meetings, please contact me on: [email protected].

The Institute’s Council takes time off for a photocall during the Annual Conference

NO

VEM

BER

2011

9

The IRRV Annual Conference in Telford from the 20th to 22nd September provided a fine opportunity for the dissemination of information about the Institute’s current courses and qualifications, and forthcoming additions to its educational products. Face to face meetings between staff, local authority representatives, private sector employers and actual and potential students, helped the flow of information at the Institute’s education stand.

It was important on that occasion, particularly, to celebrate success, and the Institute was pleased to welcome a number of students who had recently obtained their qualifications. Their achievement was celebrated at the Awards Dinner, and a presentation was made during the dinner to the three June 2011 examination prizewinners – Jonathan Ball, Andrew Bates and Sandeep Shoker. In fact a fourth ‘prizewinner’ was also called to the stage, but it turned out that her talents were musical, rather than in an IRRV discipline. She was part of the entertainment, in other words, and, assisted by two male colleagues, gave a further lift to an already enjoyable occasion!

The next examinations round will take place between the 5th and the 7th December 2011, at

the usual variety of locations. Candidates should by now have received confirmation of entry, and should contact the examinations department for any further assistance.

The 2012 summer examinations round will take place between 11th and 13th June – a week later than is normal. This is because Monday and Tuesday, 4th and 5th June, will be public holidays on the occasion of the Queen’s diamond jubilee.

Approved Training Organisation (ATO) statusThe Institute now offers accreditation to any organisation that can demonstrate effectiveness as a training organisation. The accreditation service we offer will recognise existing good practice, encourage continuing high standards, and foster a culture of continuing improvement in all aspects of the training processes.

Once an organisation and trainers have been approved, the organisation will be able to market its recognised status and use the IRRV Accreditation logo on all its promotional literature. Approved trainers within an ATO must only deliver courses within that ATO, and cannot act as an independent trainer.

IRRV Accreditation is given to organisations and trainers. Trainees who offer ATO courses will in turn receive certification. The IRRV logo will provide assurance that the best is being delivered to clients and trainees. Please email [email protected] or call Lindsay Frankland (020 7691 8981) for more information and an application form.

Centre forums There have been six centre forums throughout 2011 where we discussed the new format of IRRV qualifications. These are referred to as QCF qualifications (Qualification and Credit Framework) which became live in June 2011. Students have already signed up to these qualifications across 12 local authorities. In 2012 there will be a further round of these free forums, which give an opportunity to meet colleagues who are delivering vocational qualifications – all training material issued is free. Please contact [email protected] (0207 691 8981) if you wish to host a forum in 2012.

Further information on any education issue is available from Lindsay Frankland (as above) or [email protected] (020 7691 8978).

Most Local Authorities use

JBW Group for theirdebt recovery and

enforcement,do you?

jbwgroup.co.ukt: 0132 446 9179

NAME EMPLOYERLynn Bentley Valuation Tribunal ServiceGurmer Bhaker Tower Hamlets London Borough CouncilParminder Brar London Borough of HarrowGareth Colechin Tower Hamlets London Borough CouncilSharon Davies Liberata Uk LtdJoanne Dicks Chelmsford Borough CouncilKaren Hennessy Tower Hamlets London Borough CouncilJennifer Lavery Tower Hamlets London Borough CouncilJoanne Stockley Chelmsford Borough Council

Sarah Phillips Breckland District CouncilSuzanne Berry Kettering Borough CouncilSusie Bowler Oadby & Wigston Borough CouncilLisa Brabbins South Northamptonshire CouncilAlison Holmes Charnwood Borough CouncilJane Knights West Lindsey District CouncilPaul Mason Rushcliffe Borough CouncilRita Patel Oadby & Wigston Borough CouncilShirley Taylor North East Derbyshire District CouncilMargaret Linda Warman Leicester City CouncilGemma Wiltshire Leicester City CouncilIan Barlow Manchester City CouncilAdrienne Fisher Bolton Metropolitan Borough CouncilLeanne Foster Manchester City CouncilYvonne Huchinson Rochdale Metropolitan Borough CouncilSuzanne Leach Rochdale Metropolitan Borough CouncilAndrew McMenemy Manchester City CouncilHolly Moreland Wigan Metropolitan Borough CouncilFelicity Parkinson Exacta PLCPaul Pilkington Preston City CouncilNicola Smith Manchester City CouncilLiam Wallace Manchester City CouncilMichelle West Ribble Valley Borough CouncilGeorgina Andreou Enfield London Borough CouncilJonathan Ball Chelmsford Borough CouncilSonja Binns Brent London Borough CouncilEmma Bouglas Capita Matthew Edmunds Barnet London Borough CouncilLaura Ellen Chelmsford Borough CouncilAnthony Fletcher Thurrock CouncilJames Gardner Dacorum Borough CouncilRaz Gurung Sutton London Borough CouncilAndrew Markham Southwark London Borough CouncilCarol Neiland Enfield London Borough CouncilTammy Norcott Dacorum Borough CouncilHeena Pandit Hackney London Borough CouncilHelen Parry Barnet London Borough CouncilKay Perdikou Barnet London Borough CouncilKevin Strong Hounslow London Borough CouncilSimon Turner Lewisham London Borough CouncilSuzanne Van Praag Wandsworth London Borough CouncilDavid Warrilow Rochford District CouncilKhema Williams Wandsworth London Borough CouncilGillian Kind Valution Tribunal for Wales - North RegionSteven Wilcock Wrexham County Borough CouncilMichelle Birkett Durham County CouncilJulie Dowson Durham County CouncilMark Ellison Durham County CouncilEmma Allan Midlothian CouncilLynne Anderson Dundee City CouncilLaura Bailey Glasgow City CouncilNikki Currie Fife CouncilNina Ferguson Midlothian CouncilKatie Lindsay Fife CouncilJames Little Dumfries & Galloway CouncilLaura MacDonald Glasgow City CouncilFiona MacKinnon City of Edinburgh CouncilGraham McGill City of Edinburgh Council

10

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

Amanda Mitchell Midlothian CouncilSharaz Rasul Dumfries & Galloway CouncilSheryll Sinclair Renfrewshire CouncilHeather Sylvester Glasgow City CouncilCharmaine Wanless Dundee City CouncilAdam Simmonds Ashford Borough CouncilDebra Perry Plymouth City CouncilStuart John Wilkins Spelthorne Borough CouncilRachael Houston Reading Borough CouncilLucie Mullery West Berkshire CouncilGraham Moore Isle Of Wight CouncilMark Somerset Portsmouth City CouncilAdele Barrington Walsall Metropolitan Borough CouncilAndrew Bates Newcastle Under Lyme Borough CouncilHelen Chidgey Coventry City CouncilEmily Davies Herefordshire CouncilAndrea Flannagan Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough CouncilNeil Harrison Stratford On Avon District CouncilGemma Henderson Shropshire CouncilAdele Horton Walsall Metropolitan Borough CouncilLorraine Johnson Shropshire CouncilKerry Mornington North Warwickshire Borough CouncilNita Patel Walsall Metropolitan Borough CouncilSandeep Shoker Coventry City CouncilPaula Stafford Coventry City CouncilChristine Stevenson Birmingham City CouncilDeborah Tolley Wolverhampton City CouncilSarah Wilson Coventry City CouncilKelly Gordon Wakefield Metropolitan District CouncilHazel Carroll Pinkney North Lincolnshire CouncilJames Tilburn Harrogate Borough Council

Michael Hingley Valuation Office Agency Assessment CentreRyan Mason Wandsworth London Borough CouncilAndrew Lawson Telford & Wrekin CouncilKathryn Mackinnon Valuation Office Agency Assessment CentreDawn Graham South Cambridgeshire District CouncilSimon Edwards McCartneysGareth Gibson Huston Estate AgentsSandra Clark Edwards Symmons LLP

Louis Magill Marston Group Limited

Amanda Evans Welwyn Hatfield District CouncilCarly Payler Harrow London Borough CouncilRobert Cook Cotswold District CouncilJuzer Esmailji Cotswold District CouncilChristopher Slater-Brooks South Gloucestershire CouncilTina Bloomfield Isle Of Wight CouncilLucy Gallyer Basingstoke & Deane Borough CouncilOliver Williams Isle Of Wight Council

Andrew Birch North Lincolnshire CouncilMartin Harding Wandsworth London Borough CouncilLynne Whitmore Havering London Borough CouncilNicola Gemmell South Ayrshire CouncilAdam Lenton Rugby Borough CouncilSteven Duckenfield Harrogate Borough Council

AddendumInsight apologises to all successful June examination students. The heading on page 12 of the October edition should have read ‘June 2011 Examination Pass List’.

Congratulations go to Joanne Colman of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Council

NO

VEM

BER

2011

11

Bob Trahern IRRV (Hons) is a Past President of the Institute, member of the IRRV Council, and Chairman of the Local Taxation and Revenues Faculty Board

central government’s reluctance to provide greater autonomy around the UC delivery mechanisms. And without true localism coming into play, local authority provision of council tax support will not help to reinforce local control over council tax, nor will it give authorities sufficient control over how a 10% reduction in expenditure is achieved, nor yet will it provide opportunities for local authorities to reform the system of support for working age claimants.

Localism has been at the heart of many of this government’s initiatives, and yet this report reveals that there are some very big issues to be addressed in identifying what the concept means in practice. The CLG Committee were assured during its inquiry that the role of the Minister for Decentralisation promises to bring coherence, rigour and a sense of priorities to the government’s programme for localism. The Committee has recently highlighted, however, that some four months after their report was published, there has been no further reference to the progress report the Committee understood the Minister for Decentralisation would be preparing over the summer. If that forthcoming report sets out more clearly government policies and priorities on localism, or codifies the relationship between central and local government (as the CLG Committee has recommended), it will be a report well worth reading. If these basic elements cannot be satisfactorily addressed, however, my fear is that localism could well fall out of favour, and sooner rather than later.

more tailored services will immediately offset losses in efficiencies of scale. Stimulating greater democratic participation and civic activism will carry its own costs if it is to be successful and sustainable.

The infusion of the government’s pronouncements on localism with ‘Big Society’ rhetoric implies a diminished, not greater, role for local authorities, the report states. There are differences across government in the level of trust departments appear willing to place in councils. Lacking is any coherent vision for the future role of local authorities. The impact that the general power of competence and the review of what local government resources will have are as yet unknown. Without room for local authorities to flex new muscles, little in the government’s agenda would take local authorities much further forward in their ability to influence and shape their areas.

The local government sector has consistently sought decentralisation in such a way as to allow the joining up of services at local level — not just council services, but those delivered by other agents such as Jobcentre Plus, health and the police. The report recommends that local authorities should be given a power analogous to the ‘community right to bid’ in the Localism Bill– a right to challenge central government for the opportunity to deliver services.

It is suggested that the government will have to resist temptation to intervene in local affairs – a measure of restraint for which ministers have shown worryingly little appetite thus far. The litmus test of localism will be the government’s reaction to local decisions with which it disagrees. A more explicit statement is needed about where the dividing line between a central, light-touch framework and unwarranted interference will be drawn. Universal Credit (UC) is a case in point – I think we are looking at a missed opportunity for true localism to be demonstrated, through

The CLG Parliamentary Committee Report into Localism (HC 547) was issued over the summer. Whilst the title may sound somewhat dull, the report does make interesting reading. It highlights the lack of clarity in the intentions and principles regarding localism – which, in case you’d forgotten, is the ‘radical devolution of power to local level, giving new powers and opportunities to councils, communities, neighbourhoods and individuals’. The inquiry set out to examine the interpretation and implementation of this policy throughout government, whether the government’s idea of localism is shared by other stakeholders, how local democracy and public service delivery might change in response to this agenda, and what obstacles might exist to those changes.

It would appear that the government’s first term report card on the subject of localism is not an A* affair! Its approach in practice has been judged as marked by inconsistency and incoherence, and not helped by a definition of localism that is extremely elastic. This has allowed individual departments to adopt definitions of localism that suit their other policy aims, rather than definitions that are internally consistent or developed in consultation with other stakeholders. Some policy areas remain notably more centralised than others – I will leave readers to devise their own ‘top ten’ lists on this particular subject. The report identifies that the government has not produced a compelling vision of what its imagined localist future will look like, and the functions and responsibilities of the players within it. Greater clarity and certainty is needed, particularly about which tier of government will hold which responsibilities, and on what grounds it will intervene at the local level. It states that localism should not be adopted purely as a way to achieve reductions in public sector costs, for it is unclear whether it will be able to deliver this in the short term. It is not certain that the financial benefits of

12

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

Alistair Townsend IRRV (Hons) MCMI is Revenues and Benefits Service Delivery Manager with Mouchel Government and Business Services, and a member of the IRRV’s Local Taxation and Revenues Faculty Board and Law and Research Committee

Further, some councils have rather surprisingly gone as far as openly requiring a share of any bailiff fees. Whilst it is difficult to avoid addressing the legal and moral issues with this, I am going to try. What I am going to do is discuss how this also encourages aggressive bailiff action. It seems to me that such an arrangement is likely to simply result in escalating fees to debtors as bailiffs attempt to deal with the shortfall. This is particularly likely if councils are talking about gross fees, not net profits, which are obviously very different things. Escalating fees are perceived as a continuous problem to many advice organisations, but some councils seem to be encouraging this in some form of profit sharing exercise.

Another area is councils limiting the time for which bailiffs can hold cases. It stands to reason that councils do not want bailiffs sitting on cases without taking action, but arbitrarily limiting the time a bailiff may keep a case is sure to encourage more aggressive tactics to obtain payment. If you combine this with the last scenario, councils are subjecting debtors to almost pointlessly short repayment periods, to the extent where they simply won’t be able to pay and goods will be removed.

Distress is used in many different debt recovery environments, and there may well be other action that can be taken in these areas that reduce aggressive bailiffs. However, in terms of local taxation and decriminalised parking, perhaps there is an answer to the dichotomy between providing protection and not increasing regulation of small businesses. This would be to direct efforts towards finding ways to ensure that councils aren’t using practices that encourage bailiffs to act more aggressively. Attack the cause of the problem, not the symptom.

We are really only left with the more subjective issue of bailiffs that ‘use sledgehammers to crack nuts’. For example, using maximum powers available such as removal of goods when less draconian measures such as walking possession agreements would have been likely to result in payment in a reasonable period. Another example would be cases where ‘reasonable charges’ are not so reasonable, meaning that a debtor is less likely to be able to pay and avoid subsequent action.

So if these two issues could constitute ‘aggressive action’, it begs the question whether councils themselves have a part to play in either encouraging, or at the least not discouraging, activities that could be seen as aggressive. I have tried to demonstrate this through some examples where the actions of councils can in my opinion encourage aggressive bailiff action.

Regulation 52(4) states:“Where a step is taken for the recovery of an outstanding sum which is or forms part of an amount in respect of which a liability order has been made and under which additional costs or charges with respect to the step are also recoverable in accordance with this Part, any sum recovered thereby which is less than the aggregate of the amount outstanding and such additional costs and charges shall be treated as discharging first the costs and charges, the balance (if any) being applied towards the discharge of the outstanding sum.“

Despite the absolute clarity afforded by this subsection, many councils are contracting with their bailiffs to take the bailiff fees last, ignoring the obvious breach of the legislation. There is an argument to say that this is also bound to encourage more aggressive bailiff action. If the bailiff doesn’t get paid until the end of the arrangement, it is understandable that he is likely to require arrangements only over short periods or not at all.

Not one to miss an opportunity to celebrate a milestone, I thought that the passing of a full decade since the DCA issued the Green Paper, ‘Effective Enforcement’, was an occurrence that should not just slip past unnoticed. I thought it might be useful to review where we actually are and whether there is any likely outcome to bailiff reform before we all retire!

Rather than rake over old ground, I am sure you won’t mind me fast-forwarding all the way to the coalition statement released in May 2010, which had one small mention of bailiff reform, as follows:

“We will provide more protection against aggressive bailiffs...”

The Ministry of Justice Business Plan included public consultation on transforming bailiff action in July. Unfortunately, this did not occur, due to concerns that the proposals could impose additional burdens on micro business and start-ups, the avoidance of which is also a key aim of the government.

This has simply left us with the one line regarding aggressive bailiffs. So I thought I would attempt to apply myself firstly to what is an aggressive bailiff, and secondly, what could be done to provide protection against one.

So, what is an aggressive bailiff? Physically or mentally threatening behaviour is already illegal and obviously unacceptable, as is misrepresentation or lying. If a bailiff is already acting in this way, he isn’t doing so due to a loophole in the law, and further regulation is unlikely to stop it. Therefore, the expression aggressive bailiffs must mean more than simply acting illegally.

NO

VEM

BER

2011

13

Copy

Professor Cleverley is a pseudonym. He is a qualified corporate member of the IRRV with over 40 years’ experience of revenues in administration and teaching. The problems published have all been submitted by members of the profession. The Professor’s replies are simply his opinion and should be treated as such. Questions are invited, but it is only possible to answer those that are selected for publication. Insight regrets that it is unable to enter into private correspondence.

If you want to get more expert advice from the Institute, make sure you and your employer are members of the IRRV Forum ‘Technical Enquiry’ Service. For more information go to www.irrv.net

Dear Nessa,The main home being out of England makes no difference. If the home in your area is furnished but is no-one’s main home, the second home discount applies. Nothing in the legislation requires a main home to be in the UK, and the sole or main residence

case of Parry v Derbyshire Dales DC (High Court 2006) confirmed that where a person has their main home overseas, a dwelling they have in the UK is not automatically the main home. A main home is where a person actually lives, wherever that may be. Sincerely, The Prof

Dear Jenny,Each person can only have one main

residence on any day. A person can live in more than one property by spending a little time at each, but one dwelling must be a person’s main home, and any other would be a second home.

Where a property is not being used as a person’s main home, the person liable is the owner, and a person can have any number of liabilities as owner. In normal language we would call the person who holds the freehold the owner, but for council tax the term ‘owner’ covers a wider group of people. Leaseholders are also council tax ‘owners’, and because of the definition of ‘owner’ in section 6 of the 1992 Act, a tenant can be the ‘owner’ of a vacant property if they have a lease (or tenancy agreement) that was originally granted for a term of six months or more. Most tenants do have this, as the majority of tenancies are for a fixed six or 12 month term to begin with. It follows that where a tenant is liable to pay rent on a rented property that is empty, it is the tenant who is the ‘owner’ for council tax purposes and is liable for any council tax.

Any Class C exemption on an existing

property runs from the date that a dwelling becomes substantially unfurnished, so a change of owner or tenant cannot start a Class C period – only the date the furniture is removed being able to do that. If a new owner (or tenant) takes over a property that is already exempt, they simply inherit any of the six month period that is left. If the Class C period has already passed when a new owner or tenant takes over, they are immediately liable.

Your taxpayer is liable as the resident at his old dwelling until he vacates, and will be liable as the resident at the new dwelling from the day he moves in. As the new property is unoccupied and unfurnished, whether there is any Class C exemption depends on how long this condition has existed. You must calculate the six month period from the date that the property last contained furniture. If that leaves you with a chargeable period before the tenant moves in, the tenant will be liable as owner from the start date of the tenancy, subject to an empty property discount. This can produce two liabilities for the tenant, one as resident at one dwelling and one as ‘owner’ at the other if the Class C period has already expired.Sincerely, The Prof

Dear Professor Cleverley,A council tax payer has told us that he and his wife live in France. He works in our area, and they have a house here that he uses when he is working, and which they both use when

they are visiting family and friends in England. Normally we would allow a 10% second home discount, but as this is their only home in the UK, should we charge full council tax? Sincerely, Nessa B

Dear Professor Cleverley,A taxpayer who has been living in a property in our council area has told us that he will soon be vacating his old address and moving to a new property in another part of the borough. The new tenancy has already started, but he has not yet moved in.

Can a person be liable at two separate addresses at the same time, or should he be granted a Class C exemption until he moves in, as the new house will not be furnished until

then? I am thinking of treating the man as being responsible for the council tax at both the old address and his new address from the start date of his new tenancy, but then allowing Class C exemption until he takes up occupation at his new address. Is another option to make the landlord liable instead for the interim period until the taxpayer takes up occupation?

I would appreciate your view, please. Jenny H

Main home outside England

Tenant liable for council tax as owner

14

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

This month’s Benefits Bulletin is produced by Dave Hendy IRRV (Hons)

happens. But if unemployed surely they have nothing better to do, I hear you thinking – well truthfully, believe me, even us unemployed people do have other more useful things to do to! A simple on time promised call back to explain that this may take a little longer than first anticipated is the best way to go. This also shows a degree of ownership of the problem. “Simples”, as our loveable animal friends would have it!

This all may sound blatantly obvious, but it seems to me if we don’t get the basics right, then dealing with customer contact is costing us all a lot more than it should.

And finally some good news this week, for those of you following my own HB saga. Following my rent restriction after 13 weeks to the new 30th percentile value, you will recall that I needed to put in a DHP claim to help the difference. Well I’m pleased to advise that my local council have awarded another 13 week period, so it ’s given more breathing space to hopefully find that elusive new job!

idea of queue length or the likely duration of your wait, is so frustrating. When I rang Comet aftersales this week, at least their phone line warned me that I was likely to be waiting approximately nine minutes before I was dealt with. I then had the choice to hang on in there and wait, or ring back at a quieter time. But without the information, you just have no idea what it ’s best to do!

Then comes an old favourite of mine, having been a trainer and consultant – why use resources to answer the phone, who repeatedly say, ”I’m sorry I don’t know” ! This means they have to disturb another officer to help – and hence we start actually doubling the level of resources and cost to answer each call. Is this down to inadequate training, a lack of forward thinking by managers about the skillset necessary to handle the calls effectively, poor systems... or that old chestnut of believing it ’s the best use of resources to put the newest and least skilled officers on the phones to deal with customers!

When finally you do speak to a knowledgeable person who can help, it is very likely that they will need to carry out some degree of further investigation before they can give you a final answer. When a promise of a ring back is made, and the customer waits in all that day to receive it, again you can understand their frustration when nothing

One aspect of unemployment that tends to creep up on you without you realising it is the way that weekdays and weekends tend to merge together. No longer do you have that hunger for the Friday finish knowing that you have two whole days to plan out. As you will gather from this my search for the next ‘big thing’, i.e. a job, continues, despite a recent trip to London and yet more tests and interviews.

The monotony of the search was however broken last week with some interesting correspondence from my local DWP office. Little was I to know when I opened the envelope that this letter was about to give me the customer experience from hell. This is what got me to thinking whether we have really learned any lessons about dealing with large volumes of customers in complex areas, and are there any real alternatives that will deliver better value for money for the future?

The first lesson surely has to be why don’t we get somebody with no technical skill to read our standard letters before we send them out. Surely if they make sense and, for example, properly explain why something has changed or an overpayment has occurred, then we can avoid large volumes of unnecessary contact. Maybe it ’s time we thought about each contact as a tangible cost – just imagine reaching for your own purse/wallet each time you picked up the phone, and taking the pounds out. Would you not be far keener to avoid it if you could?

Secondly I think that there will always be an acceptance that when you are contacting a large organisation such as the tax credit office, you will probably need to wait to speak to someone. But simply being told constantly that all their officers are busy, without any

NO

VEM

BER

2011

15

Colin Holden IRRV (Hons) is General Manager of East Sussex Credit Union. Contact him on: [email protected]

as payday loans. This is a specific, so we can show that for every pound in grant funding we receive, we put back seven pounds into the economy. However, for other third sector organisations it is not so easy. Generally, the outcome from their work is a ‘feel good factor’, either for groups or individuals. How can commissioners measure this so that they can make more informed decisions which take into account these non financial outcomes?

There are several ways of doing this, but one which has gained a lot of credibility has been developed by the New Economics Foundation – it ’s called ‘Social Return on Investment’ (SROI). This is an analytical tool that costs how much non financial value is created or lost by an organisation’s activities, and gives it a monetary value so that, for instance, it can say that for every pound invested in a project the overall outcome is ‘x’ pounds, including a cost for the ‘feel good’ factor.

The great advantage of this type of method is that it allows decisions to be taken based on the outcomes rather than inputs, so that it can be seen that the cheapest option financially may not be the cheapest when the SROI costs are considered. It is not surprising the process is therefore gaining increasing recognition in the sector, because it introduces a fair ‘like for like’ comparison. It also allows councils to ensure they get maximum value for money, so it ’s a ‘win win’ situation for all.

the area, and to stimulate funding from other external sources. It also enables the group to develop to achieve its objectives and allows a marketplace to develop for the future, including sustainability for the organisations concerned so that the grants will eventually not be required.

A contract is when goods and services are to be provided externally. However ‘intelligent commissioning’ is not really about spot purchases, like buying a can of beans, but about moving to an outcome based contract, where providers are encouraged to perform through the incentive of ‘payment by results’. The great advantage of this type of contract for the contractor is that if it is cancelled there would be recourse to law, and compensation could be expected, as opposed to grants, where there is no compensation if a grant is withdrawn. But how do you measure results, because dealing with the financially excluded is hard to measure, as it is not only about getting people out of debt, but also about keeping them out of debt.

So how might we measure the outcomes in this situation? In a credit union, we use the difference in interest payments between credit union loan and high cost lender, such

Whilst beginning to write this I am listening to the latest economic forecasts and how we now have a one in six chance of slipping back into recession. Not cheery news, but for an increasing percentage of the population it is important that they are given the support they need – not to slip into financial exclusion as a result of the national situation. The government is promoting the Money Advice Service, which is about helping people manage their money, and ensuring they are aware of benefits that are available, budgeting advice, investment options, and so on. This is aimed at people like you! That is, those who have seen and are still seeing their disposable income fall – google their website for more information. However they don’t deal with debt issues, or casework, once things have gone wrong, which is where the third sector comes in.

The problem the third sector has is that most organisations dealing with financial inclusion are grant dependant in one way or another. With little money around, the funders are casting around for ways of ensuring that the money available is spent wisely. Also, due to the past relatively generous funding regime, without a huge amount of accountability, the third sector does not have a huge amount of experience in identifying the cost and other benefits of what they do. It ’s therefore time for a step change and a new way of thinking about ‘what actually is the best way of showing what we get from funding third sector organisations’.

One of the most interesting methods is ‘intelligent commissioning’. It could be commonly thought this is just about awarding contracts, but in reality it is a combination of contracts and grants. To make this work the basis of such a programme is about innovation and stimulating community voices and action, and then using a combination of grants and contracts to achieve the right result. Grants should be used for core funding for groups that are strategically important for

Reports compiled by the Institute’s European consultant, Richard Taylor

Jerry Schurder (Gerald Eve LLP)Jerry’s paper was designed as a response to the first speaker, and underlined the concern that the system of fairness which has existed until 2005 is now under threat. What the review has failed to address is what constitutes best practice in the world of tribunals. What is at issue is not that appellants object to making Statements of Case, but that there are now fewer opportunities for negotiation in genuine cases.

The key concern is that the result of the changes will be the perverse consequence that non-disclosure of evidence by the VOA after the appellant has made his proposal will result in more, rather than less, cases having to go to the VT.

From an appellant’s point of view, the VOA is using the procedural changes as a negotiating tactic. The time and costs involved in preparing cases has never been higher. Emphasis on the defence of the list and amount of time involved in following proper procedure has changed the attitude of the Agency. There is evidence that there is ‘cherry picking’ of rental evidence, and that such short timescales stipulated under the regulations militate against fairness in the system.

No sea change is required in procedure. The VOA should automatically revert to ‘open book’ once a representation has been made that the Valuation Officer might be wrong. Evidence to the Valuation Tribunal Users’ Group (VTUG) indicated that 115,000 appeals are received in a year, of which only 1000 proceed to Tribunal. The professional bodies involved are concerned that such large numbers of Statements of Case have to be prepared with such a low rate of hearings. The chair of the VTE himself has stated that, in view of fairness, the VO should produce appropriate evidence at an early stage – as matters stand, there is no compulsion on the VO to undertake these.

Paul Sanderson The VOA’s Paul Sanderson opened the pro-ceedings by reviewing the recent changes at the Valuation Tribunal in England (VTE), and outlining the process. The Appeal Regu-lation 2009/2268 reflects the creation of the VTE, which first became operative on 1st October 2009. There are two key parts to this regulation – Regulation 4, which concerns the grounds on which the proposal is being made, and Regulation 6, which stipulates that an applicant must make a statement of reasons for believing that there are grounds for the proposal.

The presentation provided a detailed account of how the VTE expects the procedure to work. The two key features about the procedure, however, are:

that a time limit is set for dealing with proposals The expected procedure is expected to take no more than two months for a normal proposal, and four months for a more complicated proposalthat the onus is on the appellant to sort out the facts and the issues and to provide the evidence. It is the Agency’s view that if the appellant does not produce any evidence, the VO is not obliged to justify the assessment. In short, the Agency no longer has an obligation to deal with ‘fishing’ proposals.

The system has been changed to ensure that appeals which can be settled by the target date should be dealt with, so that genuine evidence-based cases can then proceed to the VT. The procedure need not be onerous, enabling appeals to be heard in a more timely and objective fashion.

The VO have the right to serve a late Regulation 17 notice in circumstances where it is felt that specific rental information would be material to the case brought by the appellant. However, it should not arise if all parties comply with the expected procedure.

The first joint meeting held by the IRRV and the RICS Rating Diploma Holders’ section got off to a flying start with a ‘tripartite’ session based around the theme of the day, ‘Rating in Sharp Focus’. Insight is pleased to be able to report on proceedings with some of the highlights.

16

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

Tony MasellaThe Valuation Tribunal Service’s Tony Masella looked at the Tribunal process. A total of 19 practice statements have been produced at the time of the event, which illustrate what is in the Regulations. These include:

nine pre-hearing five hearingfour post-hearingone miscellanous.

Appellants should be aware that appeals are listed according to target dates, unless:

an appeal is ranked as a ‘lead’ in a number of casesa direction has been given to stay proceedingsthe Tribunal has decided to work to a deferred target date.

It is vital that appellants maintain communication with the Clerk. The result of unexplained non-attendance is normally indicated as a standard direction which accompanies the Notice of Hearing, and if nothing is heard, there is an automatic ‘strike out’. It may seem an obvious point, but the appellant must either appear, be represented, or give written consent to the matter being heard in absentia.

A senior member of the Tribunal will, in relation to the hearing, decide whether:

it is a complex case which warrants separate reviewto issue direction to conclude or initiate further actionit should be classified as a ‘case management hearing’, because of special situations, such as masts or power stations.

The VTE may decide that it is desirable to consolidate or hear together common issues or features in appeals (Regulations 6 and 7). Where appropriate and relevant material is

received, the Tribunal will normally agree to postpone, but the case must be backed up by strong evidence.

Agreement prior to hearing will result in the appropriate paperwork being stamped ‘agreed’. Where verbal agreement has been reached pending client instructions, the Tribunal will postpone the hearing pending completion of paperwork.

A Statement of Case is expected to include the following:

a statement of the issues in disputean explanation of the decision sought from the Tribunala clear, succinct summary of the arguments, including legal arguments (citing relevant provisions or authorities with references)a clear, succinct summary of the supporting evidencecopies of basic documents essential for the argument.

The conclusion is that: in a majority of cases, negotiations are still being held post target date, so appellants should ensure that there is timely communication Statement of Cases are being made as a protective measure against ‘strike outs’parties are wasting a lot of time and resources producing Statements of Case which never see the light of daythe VT system is not wrong – it is going wrong beforehand! Independent opinion seems to be that the organisation is making a genuine effort to fix the problems.

NO

VEM

BER

2011

17

What’s in December’s edition of Valuer magazine?

Valuation in Europe, featuring Roger Messenger on harmonising property valuation in Europe through the role of TEGoVARating Diploma Holder Focus – more detailed analysis from the RICS Diploma HoldersThe Valuation Office Agency and the Valuation Tribunal Service put their side of the story with their regular columnsMore reports from the Annual Conference Valuer Day Critical analysis of the world of valuation from Tom Dixon... ...and much more!

If you don’t already receive Valuer, go to www.irrv.net and click on publications to subscribe.

18

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

Insight is pleased to bring you a pictorial summary of the ‘big event’ of 2011, the Institute’s Performance Awards gala dinner, together with highlights of the Annual Conference presentations.

Once again the event witnessed record numbers of entries in some award categories, with 900 participants and over fifty exhibitors combining to showcase the work of the IRRV.

Annual Conference report & Performance Awards winners

NO

VEM

BER

2011

19

20

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

Award Sponsors:

GOLD AWARD WINNERS!

SILVER AWARD WINNERS!

BRONZE AWARD WINNERS!

Shepway District Council

North Warwickshire Borough Council

Sutton London Borough Council

REV

ENU

ES T

eam

of t

he Y

ear

IRRVPerformanceAwards 2011

“Bearing the torch of excellence”

The 2011 IRRV Annual Conference was opened by Telford and Wrekin BC Mayor, Councillor Malcolm Smith, who welcomed delegates with a summary of the attributes of the Institute’s latest venue for its flagship event. Councillor Smith described Telford as the new ‘green city’, encouraging delegates to spend some time out exploring the leafy walkways around the centre of his borough, not forgetting the picturesque and world famous neighbouring town of Ironbridge.

The formal proceedings were soon under way, as President Kerry Macdermott warned a packed conference hall of the difficult times ahead. Kerry went on to urge attendees to visit the exhibition stands as well as the conference halls, pointing to the diversity once again demonstrated at the event. He detailed the ‘professional challenge’ awaiting Institute members and their colleagues as including:

the Comprehensive Spending Reviewcouncil taxbusiness ratesthe Big Society localismUniversal Creditlocalised support for council taxthe single fraud investigation service.

A list to grapple with, and a busy time for all! And as if that’s not enough, Kerry identified some challenges for the IRRV too:

consumer demandprofessional qualificationsopportunitiesprofessional standing.

Bob Neill MPCommunities Minister, Bob Neill MP, addressed delegates from the comfort of a distant office – sadly once again Ministerial presence in person was lacking, and the awaiting throng had to make do with a video message. Whilst the address can be viewed in full by logging on to the Institute’s website (www.irrv.net), the overriding message that was forthcoming, but yet to bear fruit, was “local control will be the norm, not the exception”. The room agreed to wait with bated breath!

Julia SweeneyThe ‘conference proper‘ was off to a flying start, courtesy of DWP Deputy Director,

BEN

EFIT

S Te

am o

f the

Yea

r N

OVE

MBE

R 20

11

21

Award Sponsors:

GOLD AWARD WINNERS!



Sutton London Borough Council

Telford & Wrekin Council

Croydon London Borough Council



Julia Sweeney, who faced a gaggle of questions from the audience at the end of her presentation detailing the impending introduction of Universal Credit. The need for face to face contact for customers in local authorities, serious question marks over proposals for a single anti-fraud service, and a concern over accountability for the project, were but some of the unanswered ones concerning those present.

Amongst some familiar slides illustrating the Universal Credit timeline, Julia’s presentation included some telling statements in her final offering:

radical changes to the benefit systema new experience for claimants: on-line aims and real-time processinga dynamic benefit designed to increase employment and reduce povertya major transformation alongside restructures and other changesa framework approaching completion……but some decisions are still needed before serious planning begins.

John SeddonJohn Seddon, founder of consulting firm Vanguard, stressed that it is expertise which keeps costs down. If an expert is not immediately available, then the required knowledge should be pooled from elsewhere, and should be learnt. “If you drive out time and drive up quality, you will drive down costs”, he asserted.

There are two arguments for economies of scale, he added. They are not always easy to deliver (for example three authorities ‘save’ with the introduction of a new IT system, when in fact one didn’t actually need it), and that bigger savings can be achieved through lower transaction costs. He stressed that you don’t need plans, you need knowledge, and that by simply focusing on transaction costs, the costs will actually go up.

John went on to state that he had written to Iain Duncan Smith, and “received a ‘bxxxxx off’ letter” (!), and that although he had secured a meeting with Terry Moran, “he simply wasn’t listening! ” As far as IT goes, you should first understand the service as a system, redesign the service, and then bring it in, he continued.

In relation to Universal Credit, John stressed that government is already aware that you cannot use computers for high variety demand – he concluded that “only people can do this”.

Award Sponsors:

GOLD AWARD WINNERS!



Milton Keynes Council in partnership with Mouchel PLC

Unity Partnership

Hounslow London Borough Council

MO

ST I

MP

RO

VED

Tea

m o

f the

Yea

r



Peter FlemingLeader of Conservative led Sevenoaks Council, Peter Fleming, began his address by providing examples of failed government IT systems, exemplified by the CSA and the NHS. He went on to state that whilst the DWP estimated that 20% of benefit claimants required face to face help, in reality it would be more like 66% – the current figure in his own local authority.

The direct payment method proposed under Universal Credit, whilst admirable in its attempt to treat benefits more like a wage, was likely only to cause an increase in the number of cases of homelessness, and more court cases for small debts. Budgeting is a key skill, and unfortunately many in receipt of benefits do not possess the necessary qualities required to allow them to achieve this.

He urged revenues and benefit practitioners to engage with their MPs, and to encourage their elected members to do this too. The reasoning being his plea was that “most MP’s are lazy, and their mail bags contain more benefit queries than any other matter!” As MPs will no longer be able to write to the local authority for assistance with the constituent’s concerns, they may be willing to look at the down side of the DWP administering Universal Credit, and they already know that dealing with the Department “brings no joy”.

With only 9% of claimants being outside of protected groups, he was also concerned over how many local authorities will actively encourage take-up of the new localised council tax support scheme.

Peter’s most welcome message, however, was his view on the localism agenda – “when talk is about localism, bringing things into the centre makes no sense”, he concluded.

Developing social enterprisesDiversifying from the ‘bread and butter’ of revenues, benefits and valuation issues, the first day’s programme featured separate presentations from Robert Foster, trainer and senior consultant with Red Ochre, and Gary Bell of Civica, throwing light on the emerging prospect of social enterprises. Public service social enterprises are already evident in housing, social care, rehabilitation, waste collection, transport provision and leisure services, they explained.

Problems facing the new initiative included attracting and then managing multiple providers, reconciling diverse stakeholders and encouraging co-operation. If success is going to be forthcoming, the speakers emphasised, it 22

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

EXCE

LLEN

CE in

Soc

ial I

nclu

sion

Award Sponsors:

GOLD AWARD WINNERS!



Gloucester City Council

Cheshire West and Chester Council

Liverpool Direct Ltd



would be necessary to encourage multi-sector ‘consortia’ discussions, explore intelligent intervention, and target the conflicting issues of savings versus participation goals.

The resource review and localismStephen Fitzgerald of Hounslow London Borough was on hand to kick off the afternoon sessions, outlining the historical context of the Resource Review, citing the financial position for local government, the centralisation and decentralisation arguments, and the opportunities and threats. Issues emerging include the encouragement to grow the business rate base, the potential for releasing authorities from dependency on central funding, the localisation of council tax benefit, the power to introduce tax incremental financing, neighbourhood level community budgets, and the single budget for ‘place’. Stephen went on to highlight the risks, and in particular those that would affect revenue and benefits practitioners, encouraging the audience to respond to consultation, engage with central government, brief local politicians, and to work towards the best system possible.

The localism agenda was explored further by Don McClure of the new unitary Durham Council. Using his own authority as a reference point, he illustrated effectively the challenge faced by the localism plans involving business rates and council tax support. The jury was out, though, on his final slide... a Cameron/Clegg quote: “we will ensure that fairness is at the heart of decisions so that all those most in need are protected.”

This year’s Annual Conference witnessed the first ever combined valuer day hosted jointly by the IRRV and the RICS Rating Diploma Holders’ section. The event is reported separately in this month’s ‘Valuation matters’, on pages 16/17, and in the December edition of the Institute’s Valuer magazine.

Benefits streamDr.Phil Agulnik was first to present to a packed Wednesday morning benefit stream, where standing room only was literally the order of the day. Using a series of attractive slides, Phil charted the history of Local Housing Allowance, gazing ahead to predict the effect of the latest changes. Whilst he acknowledged it was too early to make substantive judgments, he cited some evidence of people moving away

NO

VEM

BER

2011

23

Award Sponsors:

GOLD AWARD WINNERS!



Preston City Council and Fylde Borough Council

Fraud Partnership

Dartford Borough Council and Sevenoaks District Council

South Dorset Revenues and

Benefits Partnership

B A I L I F F S L I M I T E D

EXCE

LLEN

CE in

Par

tner

ship

Wor

king



from inner London, with no data yet available on homelessness, and only new claims being affected by the main changes – the only change affecting some existing claimants being the withdrawal of the £15 excess.

The morning continued courtesy of Louise Freeth, who tackled the options for the customer-facing elements of Universal Credit. Louise pointed to the ideal of one place to go for advice, with the ability to claim benefits and get help with jobs. The requirement was for simple consistent rules, with the ability to identify vulnerable claimants, advise of the migration process, and to develop and test the communication strategy. And Louise’s conclusion – there is a role for local authorities – local support tailored for local needs!

Next on the platform was Debbie Gibbons, who was on hand to tackle the thorny issue of the single fraud investigation service. Debbie outlined the view of the Local Authority Investigation Officers’ Group (LAIOG), and warmed to delegates when she gave her personal viewpoint on the proposals – “Whilst I support the principles of Universal Credit”, she said, “I do not support centralisation, nor the administration by DWP of Universal Credit or the single investigation service.”

Jane Todorovic of the Department for Communities and Local Government truly drew the short straw. Not only did Jane have to outline the government’s ideas for the council tax support scheme, but she also had the dubious pleasure of presenting her department’s thoughts to both the revenue and benefit streams! Jane illustrated the already well-publicised timescales for this major change, and set out the key criteria:

the support will take the form of discounts within the council tax systemgovernment will set broad parameters in which local schemes are to be designed, including the framework for support for eligible pensioners and the importance of supporting incentives to worka new government grant to local authorities (at the moment council tax benefit spend is just under £5 billion across Great Britain)local authorities would be free to collaborate to reduce costs and develop schemes that support shared prioritiesdata sharing to reduce administrative costs and complexitymechanisms to manage financial pressures through the council tax.

The Citizens Advice view of Universal Credit was 24

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

EXCE

LLEN

CE in

Inno

vatio

nAward Sponsors:

GOLD AWARD WINNERS!



Liberata

Valuation Office Agency

Broadland District Council

Jacobs Certificated Bailiffs



put by Katie Lane, who first acknowledged that the current system is complex and susceptible to errors, low take-up, lack of transparency and poor work incentives. With 2.2m benefits and tax credit issues a year to deal with, her organisation welcomed the overall aims of Universal Credit, but there were big issues ahead, not least in relation to childcare, with big cuts anticipated for some families – “It couldn’t make work pay for all”, she said. In addition, Katie cited the issue of the exclusion of council tax support, passported benefits (particularly free school meals), disabled children (halving of support in UC, and a small increase for children with severe disabilities), the treatment of disabled adults, a cut in the severe disability premium, the disability element of working tax credit, and the potential complexity of savings rules, as real concerns.

The morning closed with Allen Graham, whose task was to examine the wider issues of welfare reform. Allen’s presentation started with an astute analysis of the main change between the current and proposed systems. “Benefits were previously delivered with emphasis upon caseload, process and control”, he asserted, whereas the future will mean that “Benefits will now be delivered with emphasis upon access, accuracy, compliance and outcomes.” Public perception will be key to success, he concluded, with responsiveness, capacity, reputation, past experience, knowledge/skill… and again outcomes being keys to success.

Linda Price introduced the afternoon sessions with a presentation aimed at giving delegates the opportunity to develop an ‘exit strategy’ for housing benefit. The manager’s challenge, she outlined, was to maintain or increase productivity whilst moving staff in a new direction, to direct energy away from feelings of powerlessness, to move away from the security of the past, to articulate the vision of the future, and to draw attention to the ways in which the team can make a difference. The ‘easy bits’, Linda suggested, included accommodation (offices, one stop shops, call centres, equipment and licences), whereas there were plenty of other ‘difficult bits’!

The potential delivery models for Universal Credit received another necessary airing at the hands of Ian Savigar, who suggested the bringing together of the best people from all three organisations involved, the possibility of different localities with different capabilities, and an acknowledgement of the fact that local authorities should have responsibility for growth, and a role for multi-agency support,

NO

VEM

BER

2011

25

26

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

Award Sponsors:

GOLD AWARD WINNERS!



Southend On Sea Borough Council

Great Yarmouth Borough Council

Milton Keynes Council

in partnership with Mouchel PLC

EXCE

LLEN

CE in

Cus

tom

er S

ervi

ce



were all critical factors. Ian concluded that the customer’s aspirations would be the “right award at the right time”, a feeling of support allowing their focus to be on finding work, and a holistic approach (localism?). His thoughts were that the new system would be cheaper, but welfare reforms impact all of us, and “the impact of getting this wrong would be huge!”

Ian Kirby and Carol Cutler were also called into action twice – at both revenue and benefit streams – to explain the work carried out in Harrow to automate process and improve the customer interface. Their initiatives had already registered a demonstrative shift to online channels, delivering:

revenues and benefits: a 5 fte saving @ £175k pahousing rents: a 0.5 fte saving @ £17.5k pathe public realm: a 3 fte saving @ £105k paelectoral registration: a 0.5 fte saving @ £17.5k pa.

The future would include the operation of a 24 hour service, with improved customer satisfaction (evidence already shows a 30% increase in residents happy with the way their enquiry was dealt with), and the enabling of new infrastructure for back office integration... and above all of course, cost avoidance.

The benefits stream concluded with the thoughts of Maureen Neave on how local authority managers would manage the transition to Universal Credit. Maureen’s blueprint for success involved informing members, speaking to staff about the effect of the proposals on their jobs, giving training if they are on the ‘front line’, meeting with internal/external stakeholders (homelessness, supporting people, social services, CAB, Age UK, support providers, etc), meeting with all landlords, keeping internet based dialogue up to date, and preparing newsletters. “There is going to be duplication”, Maureen continued, with confusion for customers – not so simplified now that CTB will be localised – and problems as a result of the large number of local authorities that have moved away from the front office/back office split. “Funding is key as we start to shut down our services”, Maureen added ominously, “Once services are closed we will not be in a position to re-open them.” The parallel revenues stream of the conference began with what may be the first example of a husband and wife team presenting back to back sessions at an IRRV event! Gordon and Carla-Maria Heath tackled the latest case law and empty rate avoidance and evasion 26

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

MO

NTH

201

1

27

EXCE

LLEN

CE in

Ant

i-Fra

ud

Award Sponsors:

GOLD AWARD WINNERS!



Newham London Borough Council

Gloucester City Council

Ealing London Borough Council



respectively. Gordon’s analysis included the following cases, which, he added, all needed careful examination:

Secerno Ltd, Sportsworld Ltd & Xou Solutions Ltd v Oxford Magistrates Court and Vale of White Horse District Council 2011 (duty to notify VO)R (on the application of Feller) v Cambridge City Council 2011 (student status)Porter (VO) v Trustees of Gladman Sipps (office units – completion notices)RGM Properties Ltd v Speight (VO) 2011 (council tax)Yiannis Voyias v Information Commissioner and LB Camden 2011 (empty properties).

Carla-Maria identified the difference between evasion and avoidance, pointing out that “a person is entitled to arrange their affairs so that their tax liability is minimised” (IRC v Duke of Westminster 1936 (H. of Lords), and that tax avoidance is perfectly legal, but tax evasion is illegal, and “a deliberate attempt to evade payment of a tax which is legally due”. The need for continual vigilance was critical, as increasingly creative schemes are emerging which means more work at a time of cuts. Could there be a greater incentive to collect with localism and rates retention, she questioned.

Bob Trahern’s task was to offer advice on collecting taxes in difficult times, a difficult task in itself. Starting off with the current position of a world class collection service, Bob warned that local authorities were now facing the challenges of the impact of the Resource Review, spending cuts, the welfare benefit changes, the economy, the localisation of CTB and NDR, and the widening poverty gap, as he warned that “the desperate will get more desperate”. Solutions that must be available included helping people know where to turn for help, delivering more with less, balancing competing pressures, addressing the conundrum of cash flow versus ability to pay, and paying attention to the “can’t pays and won’t pays”. Greater use of data sharing, and more corporate and multi-agency approaches, were critical, he concluded, as “Debt is a growth industry!”

An example of genuine shared services was illustrated by Andrew Stevens of East Kent Services. Guiding the assembled delegates through his experience, Andrew identified the issues brought about by structural review, recruitment freezes, with the need for workshops, attention to contractual, policy and process issues, and with communication critical at all times. “Further savings will have

NO

VEM

BER

2011

27

28

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

Award Sponsors:

GOLD AWARD WINNERS!



Croydon London Borough Council

Jacobs Certificated Bailiffs

International Association of

Assessing Officers

EXCE

LLEN

CE in

Edu

catio

n, T

rain

ing

& D

evel

opm

ent



to be made”, he continued, and the prospects of other services joining, the dangers of future government agendas, and commercial opportunities, were all on the radar.

Jessie Hamshar of the Department for Communities and Local Government had truly drawn a short straw when taking the stand to put the government view on proposals for business rate retention. Jessie’s presentation aimed to throw a little light on this increasingly complex area, made even more complex by the addition of the concept of Tax Increment Financing and the resurrection of enterprise zones. Acknowledging the difficulties of explaining the story so far, Jessie concluded by urging delegates to make contact with the Department for further advice and information.

The first session after lunch brought about another ‘double header’, with Pat Knight combining with IRRV President Kerry Macdermott to convince the audience of the importance of paying attention to miscellaneous income. Opportunities for service development in this critical area included fairer charging, charging for residential care, school meals, supported accommodation and other non-residential social services. “We must modernise services”, Pat exclaimed, indicating that the mantra is “more for less… or at least more of the same!” Increased activity in this area will reduce unit costs, and this once ‘cinderella’ service must attract more attention.

Ben Marshall followed, with a stark reminder that fraud isn’t confined to the province of benefits. He outlined the difficulties of tackling tax fraud, stating, “Interestingly the impact of a prosecution – and the subsequent criminal conviction – seems somewhat higher than that of many of the benefit fraud cases undertaken. In times of austerity, it becomes more tempting for inherently honest people to make savings wherever they can – and justify their actions.” Ben reminded delegates that this type of fraud was a direct attack on local finances, and needed to be tackled. He illustrated his case through a series of ‘real life’ examples, adding value to the Audit Commission’s ‘Protecting the Public Purse’ series.

The final session of the afternoon was saved for Kevin Stewart, who identified the importance of service standards in a revenues environment. Kevin reminded delegates that they shouldn’t overlook the need for consistent and transparent standards, particularly in the current climate. He identified several key aspects of standards that were of great 28

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

MO

NTH

201

1

29

RA

CE O

NLI

NEAward Sponsors:

GOLD AWARD WINNERS!



Broadland District Council

Lambeth London Borough Council

West Lothian Council

Tower Hamlets London Borough Council



importance to the customer:an expectation of the level of servicean open/available organisationthe expectation of higher standardsthe need to measure performance, including qualitythe length of time taken to deal with enquiriesthe opportunity for customer feedback and complaintsthe need to be approachable/accessible.

As he closed the day, Kevin urged all attendees to go back to their organisations and go through his checklist, ensuring that service standards were in place.

The graveyard slot?Traditionally, the final sessions of the IRRV’s Annual Conference are held fairly early in the morning which follows the celebrations associated with the Performance Awards gala event. This year was no exception, and in spite of a few inevitable headaches, over fifty delegates turned up to witness a full morning’s presentations. First off was Richard Tomlinson of Experian, introducing his topic, ‘harnessing the power of insight to maximise revenues’. Richard’s paper addressed the needs of local authorities in terms of collecting more revenue, service improvement and efficiency, and social responsibility. Balancing the three issues was key, he stressed, as he led delegates through a series of attractive slides illustrating how objectives could be met, particularly noting the use of ‘profiling’ technology designed to enhance opportunitites to reduce debt. The remainder of the morning was handled ably by David Airey, who over the years has attracted ‘cult’ status in his role of facilitating the Institute’s Forum meetings around the UK. Punctuated by his usual humour and aimiable and interactive style, David provided a whistle-stop tour of all the current issues facing revenues and benefit practitioners, sending delegates back to base with plenty of thought-provoking problems… and solutions as well, of course… as they set off home to settle back into the daily routine. A fitting end to another fine event!

NO

VEM

BER

2011

29

These conference reports are brought to you courtesy of IRRV Magazines Editor John Roberts, and Karen Clewer, a Revenues Officer with North Norfolk District Council. Photography by Andrew Mardell of ARM Photography.

30

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

The minister listed four main themes the government intended to take forward:

collaborative work at local level to encourage the co-operation and breaking down of barriers between different public sector bodiesa decisive shift towards preventative spendingthe achievement of outcomes, andthe importance of workforce development at a time when employees were facing uncertainty over issues like job numbers, wage restraint and public sector pension reform.

Mr Swinney stressed the government’s intention to seize upon the Christie Commission’s fundamental point that the public services on which people depend are not neatly delivered in a compartment by one individual public sector body. They had to be delivered by collaboration and co-operation across different public sector bodies.

During questions after his speech, Mr Swinney was asked whether there would be a ‘hammer down’ approach from the top if councils failed to deliver on efficiencies and shared services. He was told that plans by eight councils for the sharing of service in the west of Scotland had already ‘fallen apart.’

The minister said the government’s approach to public sector reform was not to be prescriptive, since a model that might suit one area might not be appropriate for every other part of the country. However, he added, “That should not be taken as an indication that nothing needs to happen...”.

Former West Lothian chief executive Alex Linkston, a leading member of the Christie Commission, highlighted the commission’s conclusion that there is a need to look at different ways of providing public services.

Around the country there were already many good examples of innovative ways of delivering services, and if these could be built upon a route map on the way forward would be provided. Services had to be built around

The Scottish Government’s latest thinking on public sector reform, the future of local taxation, and the many uncertainties facing the profession over benefit reform were among the topical issues debated by delegates at the IRRV Scottish annual conference in September.

It was the tenth successive Scottish Association conference to be held at the popular venue of Crieff, and the theme, ‘Service Delivery: opportunities ahead? ’ provided an abundance of material for discussion during the two day event.

While members made clear their readiness to grasp the opportunities for change, the word ‘uncertainty’ featured in many of the speeches and debates – uncertainty over the future shape of public sector reform, uncertainty about the economy and its impact on services, uncertainty about the future of local taxation, and uncertainty about benefit reform.

The latter was a subject of particular concern, with speakers and contributors warning that the priority seemed to be one of saving money, and that the change would result in more people sliding into poverty. IRRV Chief Executive David Magor believed the plans for the new Universal Credit and abolition of council tax benefit were a ‘recipe for disaster.’

Scottish Finance Secretary John Swinney, in a keynote address, set out his latest thinking on public sector reform following the submission of a report by a Commission chaired by Campbell Christie, a former secretary of the Scottish Trades Union Congress (STUC). The Commission was appointed by the Scottish Government to carry out an inquiry into the delivery of public services.

David Scott is a freelance journalist specialising in Scottish governance issues

people and communities and public bodies had to work together to achieve outcomes.

He advised councils to ‘think big’. More emphasis had to be placed on better outcomes, on preventative spending and improving performance. A culture change was needed if good quality, sustainable services were to be delivered to communities. ‘Tinkering at the edges’ would not be enough.

The question “Where are we going? ” was raised during a panel discussion. According to Allen Graham, Chief Executive of Rushcliffe Borough Council, no-one knows the answer, but no-one could deny there was a financial crisis, and by 2013 the way services were financed would be entirely different.

The reform of local taxation was raised by Mr Swinney during his speech, and in the question time that followed. He pointed out that the government was elected on a manifesto commitment that it would consult on the identification of a fairer local tax based on ability to pay. The government had made it clear it would not legislate in this session of parliament but consult to work to achieve some consensus.

The minister was specifically asked about his position on local income tax (LIT). He acknowledged that the SNP government at Holyrood now had an overall majority that would allow it to proceed, but added, “We are determined to seek wider agreement within Scotland on an approach to local taxation which is related to the ability to pay. That is the core concern that motivates our support for local income tax. But we are willing to discuss with others an approach based on ability to pay.”

The IRRV’s Scottish Association President, Jim McCafferty, welcomed the minister’s promise to consult. He told Insight, “The minister’s assurance about a consensus is heartening. It seems the Scottish Government is prepared to really have a discussion and see what comes out of it. The problem is that

NO

VEM

BER

2011

31

local taxation is not popular so it will be a difficult choice ahead. We will wait and see.”

Benefits reform figured highly in this year’s conference. In his address, IRRV national President Kerry Macdermott said there were so many questions that remained unanswered.

He referred to a multitude of concerns over the plans for Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) contact centres, the way Universal Credit was being tested, and a reduction in the funding available for non-protected groups under the local rebate scheme. This, he believed, would lead to higher debts and extra problems with debt recovery.

Professor Steve Wilcox, of the Centre for Housing Policy at York University, discussed the welfare reform agenda and its practical implications. To suggest that the changes were “administratively challenging” was a considerable understatement, he said.

He spoke of the problems of having to go online by the end of 2013. At present, the full specification of the system was not yet available. This would send ‘shivers down the spine’ of anyone who had been involved in complex IT projects. “It’s very high profile and has real potential for going pear-shaped,” Professor Wilcox warned.

After giving his own assessment of the

practical implications facing councils, Peter Meehan, benefits adviser to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, said he did not share the confident approach of the DWP, which believed it would have its systems up and running in time.

Highlighting all the questions yet to be answered, Mr Meehan said all he could offer was uncertainty. He admitted that the only conclusion he could come to after assessing the situation was that “there are no answers I can give you.”

In a wide-ranging analysis of the economy, both internationally and at home, David Bell, Professor of Economics at Stirling University, said the figures showed that Scotland had taken a less hard hit on revenue spending compared with the rest of the UK, but a harder hit on capital expenditure. He also noted a reallocation of the Scottish budget away from local government and into other areas of Scottish government spending.

In this climate of spending restraint it was appropriate that conference sessions looked at the experiences of other councils. Dean Thomas, Head of Benefits and Acting Head of ICT at the Welsh borough council of Blaenau Gwent, explained ways in which his council had saved money, and how it improved staff morale and efficiency by introducing a working

at home policy. Other sessions focused on Lewisham’s self-service strategy, and on how councils needed to improve their internet services to allow better access by customers.

The varied programme included the problems of debt collection in difficult times and, at a well-attended session, the valuation implications of construction and utilities work in connection with the troubled Edinburgh trams project. A progress report was given on work for the Commonwealth Games, due to be held in Glasgow in 2014, including some fascinating details about the innovative athletes’ village project.

There was certainly no shortage of topical subjects during the two days at Crieff. The gathering of practitioners and councillors again highlighted the value of such conferences in providing the chance to be less insular in approach, and the chance to ask questions of politicians and expert speakers on present day issues.

As IRRV Scottish Association Vice President Les Robertson remarked in his vote of thanks it had been a stimulating programme which fully addressed the key issues facing the profession at a time of great change and unprecedented challenges.

32

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

“As is often the case, however, identifying a problem and producing the solution proved a demanding task, even for our group of directors, which has decades of combined experience in the sector,” he continues.

The continuing need for improvement in management processes as a contributor to cost efficiencies is accepted throughout the public sector, particularly in areas of activity where volume of cases is high and there is a tendency to regard service providers as suppliers of commodity rather than quality. “We laid down obvious parameters such as ease of navigation, clear action menus and the holy grail – a “day-one start” from the software”, adds Paul.

The company used an associate business which is a medium sized debt collection agency to field test the system, on the basis that nothing was better than first hand evidence. Over a period of eighteen months, key performance indicators such as time spent on management of work flows, cost analysis of accounts handled, management information relating to the inventory held, and the ability to manipulate data for customer reporting

purposes, were measured. In the last twelve months the business has saved around £55k, some 15% of its operating costs, primarily relating to processing and staff costs.

Customer accounts were primarily in the educational, medical and local government sectors, which presented specific scenarios not normally encountered with the mainstream collection cycle associated with ‘B2B’ debt or personal finance. There were also issues arising from a client that was, in effect, an ‘importer’ for other clients, which involved import tax, VAT collection, and other compliance issues, which most DCA’s do not have to encounter. These too were successfully negotiated.

“There are a number of areas in the whole of the collection and enforcement market where suppliers are looking to provide a broader service that is still bespoke and customer-centric. In the present economic conditions there is also a stronger drive than ever to reduce unit costs and yet increase recovery rates”, Paul Husband concludes, “and this is where we feel that our product has a really important contribution to make.”

Integration of collection and litigation casemanagement is the future

“With 15% cost savings in prospect, it’s time for collection and litigation management to become a seamless operation”. This is the view of Paul Husband, Managing Director of Cogenda, Insight discovered recently, catching up with him as the company launches its latest product.

The Surrey based business has recently launched a software system which it believes is the first fully comprehensive software package that deals with case management for collection and litigation. For credit managers in both the private and public sector this will be good news if the prospect of reducing time and costs can be attained.

“The logic behind the development, which has taken more than a decade to come to fruition, was that the separation of the collection and litigation elements of debt collection is time-consuming, relatively heavy on cost, and almost certainly unnecessary”, says Paul.

“The continuing need for improvement in management processes as a contributor to cost efficiencies is accepted throughout the public sector.”

Paul Husband MICM is Managing Director of Cogenda. Contact him on 07989 095675 or [email protected] www.cogendaworks.com

CampaignManager

TaskManager

ReportsManager

WorkflowManager

DebtManager

CourtAction

Automatedpayments

Externalconnections

Clientweb

Clientbilling

Dataimport

Dataexport

Commsmanager

CogendaWorks is the first fully comprehensive software package that deals with case management for collection and litigation

NO

VEM

BER

2011

33

“ My Way” is not a shared services song

I sit in bed late at night reading through documents like the LGA’s ‘Shared Services and Management’ paper, or the New Local Government Network’s paper, ‘The next generation of shared services’.

As an aside, the LGA paper reveals that 60% of local authorities are yet to land their first shared service, and the NLGN paper suggests that back office shared services will yield less than 10% savings across a council – in an Eric Pickles world that craves 26% plus!

So, if you think I am crazy for caring about all that stuff, meet my colleague Alasdair Robertson – co-lecturer in shared services at Canterbury Christ Church University and a shared service analyst, especially in relation to the statistical analysis and mathematical modelling of success in shared services.

Alasdair sees numbers where you and I see shopping or sport. Driving home from a taught seminar together he talks statistics and numbers, when you and I would sing along to Iron Maiden or Frank Sinatra (just remember ‘My way’ is not a shared service song!).

Currently, the number four is on Alasdair’s mind. For example, he muses about the number of ‘trust fracture points’ in building a shared service across a number of partners. In other words, as the number of partners grows, so does the number of times where trust between any one of them could break down.

For example, how many fracture points could there be between two partners? The answer is one. If there are three partners, there are three trust fracture points. For four partners it’s six fracture points. If you map the potential for five partners, six partners, etc., you begin to see that

the trust fracture points grow by what Alasdair calls a “factorial function”. That’s ‘really fast’ to you and me!

So what is the most manageable number of partners in a shared service activity? It seems that when you go beyond four, the potential to sustain the trust between partners diminishes rapidly. Spookily enough, Alasdair has been seeing the number four again when applying mathematical modelling to the contingency cycles of a number of shared council partnerships. You will know that in benefits activity, sometimes you get a lot of demand and sometimes less. These random variations matter, and quickly lead to peaks and troughs in both demand and output levels. So, as a result, the size of the queue varies and performance varies with it. To get round this, queues need contingency to allow for the peaks to be manageable. So, in any service where transactions are processed from a work queue, some staff will not be fully employed to 100% capacity for 100% of the time.

It doesn’t matter if these are client facing staff, data processors, phone handling staff or anyone else. The question is how much contingency are you prepared to add to your resources to cope with peaks, accepting that they will be under-used during troughs?

To the background of a low volume Iron Maiden track, Alasdair patiently explained to me in the car that the trade off is always between cost on one hand and performance levels on the other. This is because, in a shared service, teams are larger (by merging them into a single shared team) and the total workload of the team increases.

His statistical news is that as shared service teams get larger, the amount of contingency you need increases more slowly than the workload. Effectively, he says, you can pool some of the contingency. The result is that the same work output and the same performance can be achieved by a smaller team.

The exact amount of the benefit of sharing depends on various numbers. But Alasdair’s computer modelling has evidenced that, in a fairly typical scenario, when two partners come together, there can be up to a 9% efficiency gain. The formula goes on to illustrate that when merging three teams the efficiency was increased to 12%, and with a fourth team it increases to around 15%. But his model then predicts negligible additional gains if you add in any more than four partners. Predicted efficiency tails off after four teams are merged.

So whilst he is not emphatically suggesting that you should not have partnerships larger than four, his mathematical modelling, which applies maths similar to the stuff in your sat nav, is indicating that beyond four in a partnership, you should be more careful of the savings and outcomes you are predicting from a shared service project.

So what do you do when genius is sitting beside you on a long car journey? I turned up Iron Maiden on the CD player, and began to sing even louder!

Dominic Macdonald-Wallace is Director, Learning and Development at Shared Service Architecture Ltd., and lectures, with Alasdair Robertson, on shared services at Canterbury Christ Church University. Contact him on [email protected]

opportunitiesthe public sector media

www.opportunities.co.uk

onlinejob listings & bannersplus weekly email for people actively looking for a new role

Specialist recruitment media for Revenues and Bene!ts people

on their deskopportunities magazine withadverts and features appealing directlyto people who could be tempted by a new career opportunity

The IRRV

FORUMSERVICE

2011 Topics to be covered include:

+ Counci l Tax Rebate progress

+ From ‘A’bandoned Vehicles to ‘Z ’oos - an A -Z Guide to Miscel laneous Income

+ Latest Developments in Enforcement

+ Local isat ion of Business Rates

+ Local isat ion of suppor t for Counci l Tax

+ P+ Progress on the Welfare Reform Bi l l

+ Single Fraud Invest igat ion Service

+ The Big Society

Autumn schedule of Forum Service Webinars Released

Free for IRRV Forum Members

ANNOUNCEMENT

NO

VEM

BER

2011

35

Unleashyour workforceFootball fans amongst you may share with me a smile when managers say, “My players were brave.” I smile because I feel that it is stretching a point to use the term ‘brave’ when it comes to mere football. There are many other professions that come to mind when talking of bravery. I write just days after the tenth anniversary of 9/11, and there were plentiful examples of real bravery on that day... and I am not including the terrorists!

I have been watching the documentary on TV about the mission that led to the death of Osama Bin Laden, screened as part of the commemoration of the anniversary. The US Navy Seals who undertook that mission displayed immense bravery to secure the outcome demanded by their senior officers. The US military, in particular their marines, are advocates of the style of leadership that I want to discuss this time.

In the February, May and August editions of Insight, I considered three other styles of leadership that can be adopted. Those in turn looked at ‘harnessing, developing and nurturing’ your workforce. In the final article in this series I look at one other style – unleashing your workforce. One, or a combination, of these four is likely to be present in your approach to any set of circumstances that you are faced with.

So, what exactly do I mean by ‘unleashing’? Well, in order to get more for less, you need your staff resource to not only perform optimally, but assist you in being creative. To do this, you need to encourage their ideas and involve them in the decision-making process. Innovation connects and drives quality and productivity. Unleashing your workforce through rounded leadership is all about using a democratic and balanced approach, to

inspire your team to go that extra mile. I guess one might observe that the military

do not tend to be particularly democratic. Now, whilst that might generally be the case, a ‘democrat’ in a leadership sense is merely someone who consults their team before making a decision. I am pretty certain that in many field missions – in whatever military scenario you can think of – those with the responsibility of making key decisions are unlikely to do so in isolation, even though the final decision may indeed rest with that leading officer.

The basis of this style of leadership is fourfold:

decisiveness – in a military scenario any decision is better than none. It does not have to be quick, but don’t delay or prevaricate by undertaking unnecessary dialogue preparation – have a plan and prepare all to lead. Having a plan is self-explanatory, but preparing all to lead is a reference to ensuring that you develop your workforce accordingly, and in any given set of circumstances, one of your team might actually have a better skill set to take the lead objectivity – let the ‘experts’ work the detail. Whilst your plan might have goals and objectives, the detail might be better left to those ‘out in the field’. This is a prime example of, even in the military, democracy allowing those best placed to make decisions toleration – encourage mistakes and learn from experiences. This is crucial to a workforce being unleashed – allowing them to make their mistakes but ensuring that they and the organisation learn from them.

That last point will underline why the value of deploying this style of leadership will have

greatest impact in organisations found to have either a hesitant workforce used to a blame culture or, a recently (re)trained workforce. For it to work properly, it is essential that there is no blame culture, otherwise innovation will be stifled by fear.

A rounded leader is therefore characterised by inspiring a vision, establishing shared values, enabling others to act, modelling the way forward and encouraging the heart, whilst all the time challenging the status quo. This all might sound a little utopian, although personally I don’t think it is.

However, you might prefer to think about it in these terms instead. To get your team to respond in the way that you wish, you must:

manage with your head – be wise and not recklesslead with your heart – have passion for what you dosupport with your spine – have the backbone to recognise when you’re wrong, and for determination when right embrace with your soul – model ethics and integrity.

Alexander the Great once said to his ‘generals’, anxious about their army’s uncharted progress, “Mediocre armies always stay with the known areas. The great armies march off the map.”

The challenges to be faced right now, across revenues and benefits, are immense. If you want to ‘march off the map’ you will struggle to do so unless you have the courage to unleash your workforce. Be brave!

“The US military, in particular their marines, are advocates of the style of leadership that I want to discuss this time.”

Sean Langley IRRV (Hons) is a benefits and revenues consultant, and author of ©The phat Controller (A Leadership Handbook). Go to www.seanlangley.co.uk

36

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

going to require an access channel with human interaction.

When we interact with our customers, we are having an exchange with them. It is what is being offered in that exchange that will influence their behaviour, and perhaps even change that behaviour. A paper by Westminster City Council on harnessing the best behavioural intervention and social marketing approaches outlined that there are three types of exchange that may occur when communicating with customers.

These are: positive exchangesnegative exchangespassive exchanges.

Positive exchanges are where encouragement and incentives are used and efforts are made to remove any barriers. The incentive should be something that the users will value, and not what the provider values.

Examples may be to allow a discount for payment online or entry into a free draw for a new car (See DVLA web site for such a competition). The promise to pay benefit claims quicker if claims are

You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink!

“You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink”. This is one of those phrases that epitomises human nature – people, like horses, will only do what they have a mind to.

This is so true when you start to look at channel shift in relation to online or telephone services. People will always do what they want to do, and probably not what you want them to do. People will always look for the easiest option and take this as their access channel of choice. The task is then to make their access channel of choice your channel of choice.

Even the coalition government identified that there had been the assumption that central government can only change people’s behaviour through rules and regulations. The new government stated that it would be much smarter, shunning the bureaucratic levers of the past, and finding intelligent ways to encourage, support and enable people to make better choices for themselves.

Put simply, channel shift is when somebody stops using one channel, for example telephone, in preference of another, such as email. It should be remembered that people contact and interact with local authorities for various reasons and use different channels to do so. It is important to recognise that it is not necessarily always the case of encouraging people to use the web channel, as other channels may be more appropriate. Web pages cannot give reassurance that bailiff action will be cancelled if payment has been made, and something like this is probably always

Simon Bailey IRRV (Hons) is a Director of ISCAS – contact him on simon@ iscas.co.uk (www.iscas.co.uk)

completed and submitted online may well induce people to move from a personal visit or completion of a paper form to using a web based form. Or it may just be a much easier way for the customer to do business, and hence they choose that access channel to save themselves time. Negative exchanges are just the opposite. Making things harder to do can make customers change their behaviour to the organisation’s favoured access channel. Organisations could even charge for an access channel, such as using a premium rate telephone number, to deter usage. We have already seen many authorities closing their cashiering facilities. This is a negative exchange, but will hopefully have the desired effect to move people to online payments or other electronic payments such as direct debit.

There is always a danger in trying to change behaviour by negative exchanges – there are social and cultural issues that should be taken into account, such as the political nature of local government, or the demographics of an area. That said, it is being undertaken by central government for VAT returns and VAT payments which can now only be done electronically. I suppose we can all understand why some individuals are not digitally engaged, but there is no reason why businesses in 2011 should not be forced to do their business and administration online.

Passive exchanges are where little or no action is taken, but it is hoped that customers will adopt a new access channel merely by natural progression. An example would be to put all new payers on direct debit, but no action would be taken if they cancelled their mandate and moved to another payment method.

NO

VEM

BER

2011

37

To make behavioural changes happen, there are six trigger actions an organisation can undertake within exchanges to influence customers’ behaviour. The actions are:

askhope influence persuadeincentiviseforce.

Each of these actions will fall into the three types of exchange identified earlier.

Asking is a passive exchange, but an important one. Do your cashiers ask every visitor who pays by cheque whether they know that they could have paid online? They could ask whilst giving out an information leaflet informing the customer of the facility to make online payments. Do benefit staff, when dealing with customers notifying of changes in circumstances, direct customers to the website for the next time they want to report a change of circumstance? Using texts or email to remind people that their council tax or NNDR is due can change behaviour, so that customers start to use the online payment methods.

Hoping is just that, and is a passive exchange. The giving of leaflets or the printing of receipts publicising the availability of online payments is an example. Influencing is also passive, and they could entail using external groups to influence the customers. Organisations like Citizens Advice are a perfect example. By making this group aware of the alternative channels available, the organisation can inform their entire customer base with little or no further intervention from the authority. Private landlords and Registered Social Landlords are other groups who should be using online services, as well as promoting them to their tenants.

Persuasion is a positive exchange and is something of a selling skill that not all officers will have. But many will, and it can soon become the ethos of an organisation. Why not incentivise staff in using their skills of persuasion by rewarding them if the number of online transactions increases? Often the ethos of the organisation will determine how staff sell the access channels appropriate for the customer.

Incentivising is, as discussed earlier, a true positive exchange. It doesn’t have to be money, though. I mentioned websites, and here lies a problem. The Society of IT Managers (SOCITM) undertakes surveys of customers visiting local authority websites. They have found that 40% of visits to these websites ended in complete or partial failure for the person visiting. That in effect means that the customer is unable to find information or transact with the council. One of the easiest ways to incentivise is to make the journey for the customer as easy as possible. In 40% of visits this is obviously not happening. I recently reviewed an authority’s website – I clicked on the link to report a change in circumstances for housing benefit and was surprised to be provided with a PDF document for notifying a change in council tax. I had become part of the 40% failure rate!

Forcing people down an access channel is a negative exchange. There are examples of authorities placing phones

in their reception so customers can call their contact centre. Actually, that’s not a bad idea. The telephone is a good access channel, and once the customer is happy with it, they will use that channel without having to visit the offices again.

When using these actions and exchanges, no one way is the right way. In fact a mix of them is probably best. I’m no psychologist, and don’t profess to understand human behaviour, however, I do know that as a customer I want the easiest and quickest route to make enquiries or deal with organisations. I’m doing this more and more on the web. So is somebody changing my behaviour? They probably are.

Just providing alternative access channels is not enough. Authorities need to be preparing their access strategies and business cases, and then having done so using behaviour change techniques to drive people to those access channels. It’s not just a question of “build it and they will come” – because they won’t.

38

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

in applications between 2000 and 2007, before the recession.

Viewed in terms of non-payment levels, council tax is becoming a disaster area, and with rising unemployment there is every reason for thinking that levels of non-payment in 2010-2011 will be their highest in 18 years. The liability order for non-payment of local tax has become the most common judgment or order issued by the courts in England and Wales. In Scotland, non-payment figures are not known, as the nature of the Scottish summary warrant process makes it much harder to ascertain the level of default. However, informed opinion suggests it is occurring on a proportionately similar scale.

When introduced in 1992, the council tax was promised as a simpler, fairer and more efficient system than its predecessor the poll tax, which collapsed between 1990 and 1993, ending the Premiership of Margaret Thatcher. To remedy the iniquities of poll tax, the government promised council tax would have 100% benefits to protect those on low incomes and save them from enforcement action in the courts.

It would be impossible to repeat such a claim today. But although 2010/2011 is set to enter the record books for levels of council tax default, there is an almost eerie silence across the political spectrum and from the media. It is in marked contrast to 20 years ago, when similar levels of non-payment were a subject of huge political controversy and continual media interest. Is there a conspiracy to cover levels of non-payment on the part of both the government and the media? The answer is almost certainly ‘no’ – or at least one hopes so! Rather, it seems more likely that there are a number of influences at work which operate to prevent the true picture from entering into consciousness.

Certainly, government may choose to focus on the £21 billion in council tax which is

Time for smart thinking on collection

The announcement by the Chancellor on October 3rd 2011 that council tax levels will be frozen again in 2012 was widely welcomed in the national press. Leaving aside questions as to whether the statement was timed solely to make headlines during the Conservative Party conference, it appears this decision reflects a dim but growing realisation at the centre of the coalition that all is not well with the council tax. In fact, millions of taxpayers and households are failing to pay up, although as yet neither the press nor politicians are openly acknowledging this fact.

Certainly, reviewing official statistics on council tax default – such as they are – is a depressing business. Though it is estimated that local authorities succeed in collecting £21 billion out of £22 billion payable as council tax, the collection rate has only improved by 0.3 % during the last four years, set against a 0.6% decrease in business rate collection for 2009/2010. But more significant is the fact that over three million liability orders are now being sought annually by local authorities through the courts, following a 37% increase

Alan Murdie LL.B is a Barrister working with the Zacchaeus 2000 Trust

successfully gathered in, rather than the cost of the £1 billion which is not – the fact that a corresponding £21 billion is simultaneously paid out in housing benefit needs also to be ignored for these purposes. Naturally, there is no incentive to upset the resulting feelings of comfort and complacency by enquiring more deeply into positive collection figures – as it is, the huge level of default is being successfully disguised on paper by statistical practices operated in the Ministry of Justice. Although the Ministry of Justice publishes both annual and quarterly statistics, proceedings for local taxes do not feature within them, since recovery is in the anomalous position of being a civil action conducted in a criminal court. Non-payment of council tax is not a crime, nor is it an order in the context of the CPR Rules. More pertinently, failure to pay has no initial perceivable effect, since there is no immediate impact on an individual victim or creditor claiming a personal stake in the matter. As a result, there is no immediate consequence flowing from non-payment, and nothing of human interest for a journalist. If there is no media concern, the Ministry of Justice understandably has no motive for collecting detailed statistics in regard to what may seem an essentially local problem for authorities to solve in their own way.

Media interest is also deterred by the technicality of both the council tax and welfare systems. Complexity undoubtedly contributes to current high levels of non-payment. From 2000 onwards there have been successive attempts to reform welfare by both by primary and secondary legislation, often seeking to achieve quick fixes or even make headlines. An example was the plan to take urine specimens from drug-addicted claimants under the Welfare Reform Bill 2009 – just how was the Secretary of State really going to deal with 20,000 samples? The net effect has been to make social security legislation exceedingly

nono

yes

?

?

?THE COMPUTER SAYS....THE COMPUTER SAYS....THE COMPUTER SAYS....

NO

VEM

BER

2011

39

complicated – certainly too complicated for most in politics and the media to grasp – and difficult for even lawyers to understand.

The effects are then exacerbated by the fragmented decision-making within local authorities. Naturally enough each officer seeks to do his/her job as effectively as possible, but an individual revenue officer is likely only to have access to limited information, and be unable to influence events directly in the benefits section, let alone over at the Job Centre.

Computerised recovery and bulk summonsing swell the numbers facing court action. Any recorded failure to pay council tax – even a few pence – can trigger the issue of reminder notices and a summons. Rather like a scenario from a science fiction story, the billing and recovery of council tax is controlled by computers, with human involvement reduced to a minimum. The issue of a summons by magistrates’ courts – again from a computer with a mass-produced facsimile signature – becomes the almost inevitable follow up. If a taxpayer is particularly lucky, s/he may avert the issue of proceedings or have them withdrawn by communicating with the local authority or the court. However, again fragmentation of decision making often prevents this, with an understanding and sympathetic local authority officer who learns of a vulnerable situation. It is a frequent complaint from advisers that communicating with a local authority is often easier in theory than in practice. Nor can contacting the magistrates’ court be certain to avert error, since the courts are no longer functioning anywhere near as efficiently as when the council tax was introduced back in 1993.

Problems arise with magistrates’ courts operating within a court service which is suffering a financial and physical squeeze, following decisions by central government to cut budgets and to close and sell off

magistrates’ courts at choice locations around England and Wales (typically so developers may turn them into flats). This short-sighted policy amounts to physically dismantling a key structure of the state established since 1361, and brings with it a raft of administrative problems for the remaining courts, who are faced with ever greater burdens of cases. Only the corresponding high levels of non-attendance at hearings prevents the system blocking up.

Unfortunately, costs added at the liability order stage and on enforcement provide tempting short-term incentives for local authorities to maximise numbers summonsed, also enriching bailiffs and a small number of other enforcement professionals, such as insolvency practitioners. Costs help cover up levels of default, with paying debtors subsidising those who do not. But in the long run, enforcement may result in greater costs for authorities, in the fallout of struggling and broken families, mental illness and home loss, the effects of which will often fall upon the same local authority to ameliorate. Lack of joined-up thinking is illustrated when bankruptcy is used against elderly or disabled taxpayers who are home owners. Inevitably, if the taxpayer loses his/her home over a few thousand pounds of unpaid council tax, it will be the same council picking up the long-term care bill. Unfortunately, delays in cause and effect disguise the situation.

Two broader factors also contribute to the failure to perceive rising non-payment levels. Firstly, there is a widespread lack of awareness amongst many MPs, civil servants and key decision makers as to the problems faced by low income council taxpayers. Partly this is an effect of depending too much on screens and computers for information, but whereas failures in health and education will be noticed by middle-class administrators using these services, few have personal experience of

the welfare system as claimants. Nor are they likely to know personally many people on means tested benefits. Fragmentation of experience, misunderstanding and prejudice further undermine any urge to bring about reform. On the part of politicians, any acknowledgment of failures with council tax will inevitably lead to an expectation to do something about them – including the continually postponed revaluation of domestic dwellings in England.

Secondly, there is the attitude of many non-payers themselves, many of whom fall into vulnerable categories. The most vulnerable are pathetically law-abiding, but find themselves caught up in a system they cannot deal with or comprehend. Unfortunately, they do not fall into any identifiable minority group who may be championed – their only common characteristic is simply being poor. Few can use appeal mechanisms unaided. With rare exceptions, council tax debtors on benefits are not politicised, and do not (and in many cases can not) communicate effectively with representatives or authorities. For many, a sense of hopelessness takes over which leads to inaction. As Lord Wall remarked in the Court of Appeal decision in the case of Gargett v Lambeth London Borough Council [2008]:

“In my view it remains an apparently non-eradicable blemish on our operation of the rule of law that the poorest and most disadvantaged in our society remain subject to regulations which are complex, obscure and, to many, simply incomprehensible.”

However, such a situation cannot be expected to endure indefinitely. Eventually the tension gap between official, perceived reality and what is actually happening will become too great to be sustainable. Complaint, dissatisfaction and reaction will grow and inevitably express themselves. I do not expect it take the form of the riots of August, but so foul a sky will not clear without a storm.

“ Rather like a scenario from a science fiction story, the billing and recovery of council tax is controlled by computers, with human involvement reduced to a minimum.”

40

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

Conservative MPs were also pessimistic about jobs – 44 per cent of the MPs expect that unemployment will rise over the next 12 months, while only 29 per cent believe it will fall, and 28 per cent said it would stay at current levels.

If the press leaks are correct – and we will know by the time this article appears in print – Iain Duncan Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, will also promise moves to cut tax for married couples by the next general election and warn the unemployed of tough new penalties if they fail to look for work.

The money for the tax freeze for 2012-13 had been found from under-spending across Whitehall departments, a Treasury source claimed.

Under the proposal, local authorities that promise to peg – or even cut – council tax levels, will receive a 2.5 per cent increase in Whitehall funding. Effectively this is an extension of the council tax freeze this year.

Weekly waste collectionIt never ceases to amaze me how the government can find money when it wants to – especially at conference time! The government announced a £250m fund to encourage councils to collect waste on a weekly basis for food and recyclable waste, with alternate weekly collections for residual waste (so not quite back to weekly collections), but it no doubt means we will all have to have more bins outside our front doors. There should be a prize for the council that issues the most bins for an individual property!

Although I agree with the concept of weekly collection, it seems to me that calling for a return to weekly waste collections for those councils that have moved away from them runs contrary to the government’s stated desire to delegate power to local authorities and give them the ability to select the most appropriate services for their area.

...and pigs might fly!

Council tax frozen until 2013 As I started to write this article, it was announced that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is promising a second year’s freeze on council tax today. The move – announced in his speech to the Conservative Party conference – will save the average family £72 a year, the Chancellor claims. I cannot imagine such a relatively small amount will appease voters hit by spiralling food and energy prices. The move comes as a poll of Conservative MPs for The Independent reveals a growing pessimism among backbenchers about the coalition government’s ability to achieve sustained growth over the next 12 months. Only half of the party’s MPs expected growth to improve next year, the ComRes survey found, while one in six (16 per cent) predicted it would decline and 32 per cent that it would stay at its current level.

“ There has been some confusion as to whether personal emails are subject to FOI legislation, but legal advice seems to confirm they would be...”

Pat Doherty IRRV (Hons) CPFA is an independent consultant and a Past President of the IRRV. If you wish to comment on anything in the article, please email him at [email protected]

FOI law applies to personal email accounts used for official businessFor those who missed it, there was an interesting article in the Local Government Chronicle at the end of September that indicates if an officer tries to use personal email accounts for official business then they are not immune from disclosure under the provisions of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests.

This means that any official business written using private email accounts by council officers or members would be subject to the Freedom of Information Act in exactly the same way as official emails sent from council accounts.

The basis for this view is that, “It is the substance of the information that is being recorded which is important, not where it is recorded.”

This view follows on from the fact that the Information Commissioner is currently investigating a complaint from the Financial Times that the Education Secretary used a private email account to discuss issues, which included the Building Schools for the Future project, with a special adviser.

There has been some confusion as to whether personal emails are subject to FOI legislation, but legal advice seems to confirm they would be, in the unusual event of someone conducting official business via personal email.

I cannot see this really happening with council officers, as standing orders and staff codes of conduct would require official email accounts be used for all official business for security reasons. However, it seems that instances where officers have been advised to use personal email accounts, such as for contacting unions in relation to disciplinary matters, would not be subject to FOI law, because the subject of the emails was a personal matter.

NO

VEM

BER

2011

41

I suppose that it is elected members who might be more likely to use personal email accounts, but information managers would be within their legal rights to access the information if the subject of the emails was council business, rather than party political matters.

So the message is clear – do not use personal emails for council business!

Localism – new reportCutbacks in less well off areas will leave many councils struggling to protect vulnerable residents, according to the New Local Government Network think tank. The warning emerged in a report looking at how councils might develop over the next ten years.

The report also warned that localism could end up being seen as a “driver of growing inequality”, because councils in relatively affluent areas would be able to raise more money through business rates and higher council tax.

The NLGN director said, “You could see parts of the north, and other parts of the country as well, suffering a continuing economic recession.

“It’s absolutely clear that in some of these scenarios localism becomes pretty problematic. It’s not very difficult to imagine a future in which you get quite a big public backlash against localism, if they see services getting a lot worse.

“On the other hand, localism is a chance for councils to grab the agenda themselves. It provides them with the ability to be more flexible, to try new things.”

Final transparency code publishedFollowing the consultation period earlier this year, the Department for Communities and Local Government has now published the

final version of the voluntary code of practice on data transparency. It clearly specifies that councils should regularly publish senior staff salaries, spending over £500, and audits.The Local Government Secretary said, “Central government has a role in ensuring that local people can exercise their right to know how their money is being spent and have the information they need to question that spending.” He also said members of the public, “shouldn’t have to be data experts to see and understand” information published.

Ministers also repeated that they were, “minded to make the code a legally binding requirement”, which could open local authorities to legal action if they failed to comply. However, this step would require further consultation.

The provisions in the code apply to all councils, including parishes, with a gross annual income or expenditure of £200,000 or more. National park, fire and rescue, integrated transport and police authorities will also be covered, as well as joint authorities of any kind.

Publication requirements include:items of spending worth more than £500the salaries, job descriptions and budgets of employees paid more than £58,200, together with the total salary cost of all staff who report to themproviding information on the ratio between the highest salary and the average of the whole workforce, as well as councillors’ allowances and expenses

publishing inspection and audit reportsthe location of publicly owned buildings.

To reduce the risk of fraud arising from data publication, the code says authorities should use the CIPFA publication “Managing the risk of fraud – actions to counter fraud and corruption”.

Releasing information, “could provide a wealth of local knowledge and spark more improvements in the way services are delivered”, the DCLG said. It will also, “open up new possibilities for real-time analysis and response and opportunities for small businesses to enter new markets”.

The code is built around the idea of ‘armchair auditors’. It was first mooted by the Communities Secretary last year, based on the belief that encouraging members of the public to comb through information will provide an effective check on waste... and pigs might fly – my words!

The future of auditAnd finally, The Financial Times reports that district audit staff have teamed up with Mazars, an international accountancy firm, in order to form a mutual to bid for local government and NHS work as the Audit Commission is abolished. The newspaper says Mazars, which has experience of public sector audit in the UK, will provide the initial funding for the mutual, which is to be called DA Partnership – imaginative name or what?

“ The provisions in the code apply to all councils, including parishes, with a gross annual income or expenditure of £200,000 or more.”

42

ww

w.ir

rv.n

et

against the current economic background. I have just returned from the Institute’s

Annual Conference, and although you could hardly describe the mood as upbeat, there is a real determination to make things work. We need to remind ourselves that we have been around for a long while, and a lot longer than many government agencies that have come and gone.

I think it is also interesting that central government look to local authorities to provide a large number of senior civil servants in a way that was quite unheard of in the past. That means we must be doing something right.

There are some interesting mixed messages appearing. This week the Institute of Fiscal Studies has published the results of a five year review of taxation. One of their recommendations is the abolition of council tax. It would be replaced with a housing services tax which would be a percentage of the value of each property, with the use of current values. Meanwhile, at the political conferences there have been discussions about adding bands to the current structure, still using 1991 values. I don’t really see any political party going for such major changes to council tax at present. It would be a very brave move to implement them at any time other than in a period of stability and growth.

Amidst all this gloom comes a 2012 full of excitement and promise. We have at least two events to inspire and excite our communities – the Olympics and Paralympics, with the planned associated nationwide events and cultural Olympics, and the Queen’s Jubilee.

It has been difficult working in local government for some time, but what is different at the moment is the uncertainty as to where we are going to end up. The world economic position means that to some extent we can only be onlookers as the crisis unfolds, and how that is actually going to impact on us all is impossible to foretell. There is no alternative but to fight on a day to day basis.

Enjoy!!

We must be doingsomething right!

Is there no end to the doom and gloom of the current economic position? I think not. Every day seems to produce another difficulty somewhere in the world. The thought that there would be a decline in the finance available to local authorities only for the life of the current comprehensive spending review is obviously misplaced. It looks as if it will be at least two spending reviews before a stable growing position is reached.

Local government must play its part in the quest for growth. Obviously the change to the planning laws are a medium term effort to allow more growth, with the incentive of the finance for local government coming from NNDR, and the only addition to finances coming from additional NNDR.

The difficulty is that not all authorities are able to grow at a rate which will keep pace with residents’ needs or expectations. Also, demand for services grows at a time of financial difficulty.

It is true that most local authorities will meet their financial targets for this spending review period, and this has meant that a very large number of local authority jobs have gone and will not be replaced. There is bound to be a comparatively heavy toll on discretionary services such as leisure, and much argument as to whether this is all to the common good.

At the time of writing, over the last few days there have been announcements about the abandonment of at least parts of two major central government IT systems – in fire and health. It is absolutely right that we need welfare reform, but the pace and scope of the current proposals look to be unaffordable in the climate we find ourselves in now.

There is also a problem of the long term sustainability of small districts and small unitary authorities, and whether there will have to be some special arrangements to help them cope. This is, I think, not the time to be embarking of any sort of structural reform – they are always costly and difficult to control

“It is absolutely right that we need welfare reform, but the pace and scope of the current proposals look to be unaffordable in the climate we find ourselves in now.”

Richard Harbord MPhil CPFA FCCA IRRV (Hons) FIDP FBIM FRSA is a member of the IRRV and CIPFA Councils and Junior Vice President of the IRRV

NO

VEM

BER

2011

43

Rating Law and Practice 2011

Rating Law and Practice is the authoritative

guide to non-domestic rating legislation and

its operation.

An essential reference for anyone working in the field, it is designed to make the legislation easier to understand.

The book includes comprehensive footnotes to assist in the cross-referencing and location of the legislation itself.

Rating Law and Practice is supplied in hard copy format together with a fully bookmarked and hyperlinked electronic PDF version, with a multi-user licence for users within your organisation.

New Subscription Price: £275.00*

Update Price: £95.00*

* Prices exclusive of VAT plus £3.00 p&p per copy.

Please order online via the IRRV�’s website: www.irrv.org.uk

Annotated Council Tax Legislation 2011

Annotated Council Tax Legislation is a

comprehensive 3 volume set, containing all the

relevant parts of the Local Government Finance

Act 1992 as well as appropriate sections and

schedules from the Local Government Acts of

1999 and 2003, the Human Rights Act 1998 and

the Greater London Authority Act 1999.

All statutory instruments from 1992 to the publication date are included, and all amendments brought about by these regulations and orders have been made to the originating text.

It is supplied in hard copy format together with an electronic PDF version, with a multi-user licence for users within your organisation.

New Subscription Price: £495.00*

Update Price: £95.00*

* Prices exclusive of VAT plus £7.50 p&p per copy.

Please order online via the IRRV�’s website: www.irrv.org.uk

OUT

NOW

great & good

doesn’t mean

big & bad

DUKESB A I L I F F S L I M I T E D

E [email protected] T 0844 844 1345W www.dukeslimited.co.uk

Dukes Bailiffs get great results through good practice & high standards.

That’s why local authorities trust us to help preserve their finances & their reputation

in Council Tax, NDR & RTA Collection.

Documents

Annual Conference report & Performance Awards winners · and Performance Awards gala dinner at Telford have no doubt by now had ... overall sponsorship of our flagship event