Hampshire County Council

Environment and Transportation Policy and Review Committee

Item 8

15 January 2007

Scrutiny Workshops Feedback

Report of the Chief Executive

Contact: Philippa Smart e mail:philippa.smart@hants.gov.uk, ext 7336

1. Summary

1.1 At the Policy and Resources Policy and Review Committee meeting held in October 2006 the following scrutiny topics were endorsed, as proposed by the Environment and Transportation Policy and Review Committee:

1.2 Scrutiny workshops for each of the above topics took place on the 12 and 13 December 2006 respectively. The workshops were open to all non executive elected members, and attracted minority as well as majority group attendance. Write ups of the workshops, including outcomes arrived at, are attached as Appendices to this report.

1.3 As outlined in Hampshire County Council Policy Review Committees Operating Protocols, the results from scrutiny reviews are reported back to the parent Policy and Review Committee; when considering the report of a working group a Policy and Review Committee will review how any recommendations they ratify should be pursued. Recommendations can be made to an individual Executive Member, to Cabinet or Full Council, as the committee deems appropriate.

2. Recommendations

2.1 Recommendations arising from the scrutiny workshops are as follows:

2.2 Additional comments, at variance with the consensus, have been contributed by individual workshop participants in response to the workshop write up and are as follows:

2.3 In receiving the results of the two scrutinies, members of the Environment and Transportation Policy and Review committee are now in a position to ratify the recommendations, to decide any response in relation to the additional comments, and to decide how recommendations endorsed will be put to the Executive.

3. Financial implications

3.1 None as a direct result of this report

4. Impact Assessment

4.1 None as a result of this report

5. Crime Prevention

5.1 None as a result of this report

6. Section 100 - Local Government Act 1972 - background documents

Appendix One

ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORTATION POLICY AND REVIEW COMMITTEE

SCRUTINY WORKSHOP - 12 DECEMBER 2006

Chute Room, Elizabeth 11 Court, The Castle, Winchester

SUBJECT: MOTORWAY DIVERSION ROUTES

PRESENT

Chairman

p Councillor P.R.C.Hutcheson

Councillors:

p Mrs.C.A.Bailey p E.J.Neal

p A.P.Collett p P. Mason

P.R.Edgar p Roger.H.Price J.P.

p Mrs.C.A.Leversha p S.A.Wheale

Officers:

Peter Bayless

Graham Carter

Philippa Smart

Also in attendance: Guy Berresford, Highways Agency

1. Introduction

1.1 Councillor. Hutcheson welcomed everyone present and handed over to Peter Bayless, who outlined the background to the workshop, sanctioned by the Policy and Resources Policy and Review Committee in October 2006. Peter introduced Guy Beresford, from the Highways Agency, who began the presentation by setting the scene in broad terms.

2. Presentation - scene setting

2.1 Guy Beresford explained that the Highways Agency (HA) is continually seeking to find ways to reduce congestion on the roads that it is responsible for, namely Motorways and trunk roads. The National Guidance Framework (2005) established the basis on which collaboration between the HA and Local Highways Authorities (LHAs) involves the agencies in working together to ensure the least disruption to the travelling public, particularly where accidents and congestion are concerned. A partnership approach with Hampshire County Council to the matter under consideration at the workshop is proposed.

2.2 In response to a question regarding likely frequency of diversions needing to

2.3 It was acknowledged that in an emergency, traffic re-routes itself of its own

3 Presentation - proposals

3.1 Peter Bayless talked the meeting through a series of proposed diversion routes

3.2 Proposals that were supported were those relating to road closures on:

3.3 Those where members identified the need for further attention were as

follows:

4 Outcome

ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORTATION POLICY AND REVIEW COMMITTEE

SCRUTINY WORKSHOP - 13 DECEMBER 2006

Wessex Room, Ashburton Court East, The Castle, Winchester

SUBJECT: RANKING MECHANISMS FOR LOCAL BUS SERVICE CONTRACTS

PRESENT

Chairman

P Councillor P. Devereux

Councillors:

p Mrs.C.A.Bailey p Mrs.C.A.Lerversha

Mrs.E.M.Byrom p P. Mason

A.P.Collett p E.J.Neal

a P.Edgar p S.A.Wheale

p Keith.House

Officers:

John Mariner

Philippa Smart

Andrew Wilson

1. Welcome and introduction

1.1 Councillor Devereux welcomed the participants to the scrutiny workshop, reminding those present that the Environment and Transportation Policy and Resources Committee, in selecting the topic of a ranking mechanisms for

subsidised bus services as a topic for scrutiny, had decided to open the

scrutiny event to all Members in view of the wide range of potential interest.

The task was to challenge the information presented, to reflect the public

interest and to draw conclusions that could be fed through to the Executive.

2. Background, current situation and reasons for change

2.1 Andrew Wilson from Hampshire County Council's Environment Department

3. Proposals for change

3.1 While services are currently ranked according to a single financial criteria,

namely the subsidy cost per passenger journey, the proposed new mechanism,

as outlined by John Mariner, will be broader.

3.2 Instead of a single criteria, the proposal is that a number of criteria will be used to judge each route. These criteria are:

3.3 Three options, in addition to a baseline, were offered for consideration, the baseline reflecting best practice, as adopted in other authorities. A sample of contracted routes had been selected to evaluate the scoring options; each offered slightly different emphases to the other. The total score would replace cost per passenger journey as the mechanisms for deciding how services are ranked. A sample of services ranked according to current and proposed mechanisms was shared.

4 Discussion

4.1 Members examined the relative merits of the proposed criteria and different

5 Outcome

expressed in the discussion. The changes were in relation to:

The content of such an option was drafted at the meeting, and is included as

Appendix One.

The views of Members taking part in the scrutiny workshop, as expressed in

the fourth option, will be reported back to the Environment and Transportation