REGULATORY SERVICES

Challenge 2002

Summary of Challenge Event held on 13 June 2002 at Hillier's Arboretum

1. Participants

1.1 The challenge event is one of the most important parts of the Best Value Review. Four members were invited and Councillor Bryant was able to attend. A wide range of external organisations were contacted and almost all invitees came (see attendance list given at Appendix 1).

2. Key Outcomes of the Event

2.1 This was a successful event and a copy of the programme is shown at Appendix 2. It was based around three main workshop themes:

· Priorities and new ideas for Trading Standards

· Priorities and new ideas for the Scientific Service - and should it be retained in-house?

· Discretionary Services - finding the right balance.

2.2 Information packs were sent to all participants prior to the event and each workshop was preceded by a 15 minute presentation by the relevant Head of Service. Copies of the presentations are available.

2.3 This report summarises the key issues that emerged from the feedback and from the groups' notes about each of the three themes.

3. Priorities and new ideas for Trading Standards

3.1 There was general consensus that the priorities for Trading Standards were, in the main, set correctly. However, the Policy Officer for the National Farmers Union, admitting it was heresy, questioned why Animal Health was to top priority when there was a variety of other enforcement bodies and assurance schemes covering the industry. It was explained that this was partly due to our rabies prevention work and role in the event of an outbreak. The need to make it a top priority for this reason was doubted by a business representative who had lived in part of Germany where rabies in the fox population was an accepted norm. The DEFRA Divisional Manager considered Hampshire to be more active than most authorities, particularly in taking prosecutions.

3.2 There were also queries over the level of priority for fair trading work, which was seen by some as being too low as it covered key life purchases like home improvements, cars, holidays etc. It was suggested that there may be opportunities to work with businesses to deal with such issues e.g. vehicle manufacturers producing cars that could not be `clocked'; improving promotional offers to avoid deliberately confusing pricing information. Conversely there was a view that we should consider moving further away from food and fair trading to do more on product safety issues. It was questioned if we had assessed safety in the light of the market place and the problems encountered. Another idea for working with businesses in this area was in relation to `smart cards' for proof of age purposes. There was some concern over the implications of having an in-house laboratory and whether the budget arrangements overemphasised the importance of food testing work.

3.3 The process for setting and revising priorities was queried and the drivers behind them e.g. how much is based on BVPIs and does this have a significant impact? The risk assessment process was thought by one or two to be too inward facing rather than outward towards council tax payers. It was questioned whether enough consideration of public opinion was included in the prioritisation process. The outcomes achieved were considered to be of great importance in understanding and setting priorities. Had we got the right approach, should there be projects rather than inspections? How do we assess the effectiveness of each team? There was a need to identify customers and balance their priorities e.g. Government v Public. Are we meeting all the community needs in Hampshire? Another view expressed the need for national co-ordination in order to reduce duplication.

3.4 There was a dislike of the name `Regulatory Services', which was thought to convey no meaning to the public compared to the recognised brand of `Trading Standards'. The participants agreed that public awareness of the breadth of duties and services provided needed to be improved. This would provide a positive message to the public and motivate staff. The need for greater resources was also debated.

3.5 In the field of personnel, a multiple retail representative asked that officers were sensitive in their dealing with businesses, particularly shop staff and under-age sales. Some authorities, not particularly Hampshire, needed to explain their role and give information and facts. However, there was also a contrary view expressed that the public favoured a `hard' approach, especially in relation to under-age sales. The service needed to be flexible and able to respond to change, with specialisation balanced against multi-skilled officers.

3.6 A written view, from the LACORS representative, emphasised the important role that Hampshire played at a national level, which not only influenced legislation but resulted in greater in-house knowledge and expertise. It was stated that Hampshire was a `leading light' and `national expert' in many areas, and that the DTI considered the service as an `exemplar'.

4. Summary of Trading Standards Challenge

4.1 The service's priorities seem to be set about right as there were no strong views that they were wildly inappropriate. However, there is a need for public input and this is being addressed as part of the review. In light of the Challenge event the service ought to review the process for setting and revising priorities, in particular the expected outcomes and the results of previous projects. Animal health is the main priority on the basis of the County Council's own risk assessment process, however, resources have recently been reduced from four to three staff, with a temporary officer (funded by DEFRA) to deal with the new licensing regime. Based on the comments from the NFU and DEFRA this may now be about the right level. Although there was concern expressed at resources and lower priority of product safety work, in particular under-age sales, the recent addition of project leader for alcohol work will assist in this. Hampshire has only a peripheral involvement in establishing a proof of age card in the county but the Government's recent proposals on a proof of identity `smart card' could provide a national answer to this problem.

4.2 Fair Trading deals with the area of key consumer purchases and it is understandable why there was some concern over its priority level, however, it does have a large amount of the resources available. Food enforcement uses a similar level of resources with an additional £300k for analytical work. This was to be reviewed after two full years operation of the food team. In light of the comments received it would be appropriate to review the resources and priorities of both these areas of work. It was recognised that the new TS structure would lead to greater specialisation and less flexibility but it is felt that this is off-set by greater efficiency and effectiveness. Again, this should be reviewed in September after a year of operating with the new arrangements.

5. Priorities and new ideas for the Scientific Service. Should the Laboratory be retained in-house?

5.1. The general consensus was that the Scientific Service's priorities were very much customer-led, so must be about right. The 30% of testing work relating to Hampshire County Council Trading Standards work was challenged by the Chief TSO from Dorset, who felt that this might bias the work of Trading Standards. However, the Food Standards Agency representative applauded Hampshire's high sampling rate, pointing out that, nationally, food sampling rates were decreasing and that Hampshire's reputation for food sampling was excellent.

5.2. External customers were generally happy with the Service, particularly the impartiality, quality of reports and professionalism of scientific advice. There were however several key areas for improvement:

· Delivery times must be improved. Current delivery is not quick enough. Suggestions from participants included: Have different working patterns been considered, e.g. shift working? (24/7). More automation? Co-ordinating the work of different customers? Work with other labs to specialise and then more high throughput samples

· Pricing systems should be more transparent. A clear link between price and quality and turnaround is needed in advance. Price and quality link together - need for clearer pricing so customers are aware of price in advance. It was recognised that faster results may demand a premium price. E.g. Port Health work, particularly as analytical fees can be recovered from the importer. The importance of integrity of evidence was also recognised: " Don't let quality degrade if under pressure. Cheapest is not always the best". Another participant felt that public service gives added value in comparison to private. Prepared to pay more for better all round service, e.g. better communications and service generally.

· Innovation is the most important performance indicator. Public.Analysts are under resourced to match technological changes. Biggest problems are mycotoxins, food supplements, veterinary products and claims on foods and informative labelling. The Hampshire -Kent Scientific Service partnership was praised as "innovative" and "excellent". The national sampling campaigns were also popular with customer s.

5.3. On business expansion there were two conflicting views:

· Existing customers prefer only modest expansion, so that individual customers feel important. The Chief Executive of Lawlabs also felt that Hampshire's current practice of only working in the public sector was commendable since this presented no conflict of interest. (e.g. analysing samples for both prosecution and defence).

· However, the Food Standards Agency representative, strongly recommended expansion into the private sector, because his research data showed a steady decline in Local Authority spending on food sampling.

5.4. On the national Public Analyst scene, the LGC representative felt that:

· There is a need to preserve the role of the Public Analyst but a re-think is required on how the service is provided throughout the UK. Public Analysts should follow the HSS/KSS example. Cannot be all things to all people - need to concentrate on specialisms to ensure that resources are not overstretched and to avoid duplication.

· He also suggested regionalisation of laboratories - don't try to do things that the lab is not expert in. Combine with more labs - beware of danger of ending up on both sides of the court room.

Group 3 did not realise how few Public Analyst labs there were - thought that every County had at least one!

5.5. Other suggestions for improvement included:

· Consider focussing analysis effort at other stages of the food chain. E.g. Should there be more raw material analysis rather than final product?

· Implement electronic systems for reporting and for use by customers.

· Sell test results to others.

· Consider providing factsheets about analysis and sampling.

· Hold seminars for existing customers.

· Review portfolio of tests. There is a market for food irradiation tests - first lab to do this could suck in a lot of work! Is there potential for work relating to farmers markets (organic farming) which hold a lot of public interest? Also big demand fro Nickel tests.

· Implement a marketing Plan to expand customer base. Winchester City Council was unaware of the asbestos service offered by the lab - they direct potential customers elsewhere. Also marketing the service nationally is something to build on.

· Keep the public informed of outcomes and benefits of investing over ₤1m of County resources in the laboratory.

6. Summary of Scientific Service Challenge.

In answer to the fundamental question " should we retain our in-house laboratory?", there was strong support for retention but to improve it and keep up with the times.

The participants felt that we wouldn't be able to develop a such a good service if we did not run it. Once lost, the unique combination of skills and services cannot be regained. The Service should consider building on its strong national position by opening up to the private sector. However, issues of customer focus and avoidance of conflict of interest are important. The FSA feel that we must be aware of the diminishing local authority client base.

The main area for improvement is speeding up delivery times. Although price is important, it was recommended that HSS did not just market test on price because there was a real danger of throwing away what is good.

Overall, it was felt that the Service should focus on providing a focused portfolio of scientific services, rapidly and cost effectively. Introduction of new services was also important. The Hampshire-Kent partnership was endorsed and the possibility of exploring further partnerships, both in the public and private sectors, was encouraged.

7. Discretionary Services

7.1 There was a very strong view from the participants that the Advice, Business Support, Community and Education services were not discretionary but essential elements of a modern, progressive Trading Standards Service. The written comments of the Assistant Director from the DTI who attended illustrate this: `The discretionary services listed are all top priorities in the National Performance Framework which aims to redress the balance between pro-active education and advice to consumers with enforcement of the legislation. DTI does not consider these as discretionary. They are now performance standards and over the next 1-2 years we will have measures for them, which will be limited to the BV166'. There was similar support for discretionary safety campaigns relating to electric blankets and child car seats. These were seen as increasing our profile at low cost, providing a community focus and facilitating joint working between agencies.

7.2 It should also be said that there were some comments regarding the importance of considering alternative sources of advice. What was the impact of the services provided? Do they add to services offered elsewhere? Was there a way of developing services into a `one-stop shop'? The DTI rep stated that at a strategic level the DTI have supported three pilot contact centres in the UK and are keen to streamline Advice Services. They have bid for money to provide some form of contact centre regionally or nationally to deal with common consumer enquiries. The question was also raised as to whether Social Services or Age Concern were better placed to help certain groups or whether we could work in conjunction with such bodies. Some of the discretionary services could possibly be chargeable. Funding across the board seems low for an authority Hampshire's size.

7.3 There was some concern that we were not reaching the 16 to 24 age group and that the main users were in the 40 to 60 year old bracket. (The AA find the same). Again, the view was expressed about the need for greater public awareness of the services available through publicity, possibly through a TV expose approach. However, it was recognised that extra awareness could put additional strain on the service which was already missing 35% of calls. Self-help for consumers was seen as a means of limiting the need to increase resources too much. The website was considered to be good but further development could help cut down on calls for advice and information. Self-help FAQs on the website would be a good means of providing advice. The website address was not shown on letterheads. Information packs and leaflets could be provided. `Buy with Confidence' (BWC) was seen as an extremely good scheme but 300 members was small for a county the size of Hampshire. It needed more resource and publicity to make it bigger and more effective. Should companies pay for membership? Are businesses disinterested because of audit fatigue? Should we allow advertising by BWC members on our website or publications?

7.4 Educating consumers was seen to be very important. Traders want educated, informed customers. Children need to have an understanding of finance and credit. 1.2 FTE for Education was not thought to be adequate. There was a suggestion that retailers would help in funding this service in order to promote their companies. A view was also expressed that consumer education should be set up nationally rather than locally.

7.5 Concern was expressed at the level of calls missed by the Advice Service - 25 to 30% - although this was also thought to be a fairly general level for most organisations. Could we work with other Departments in the authority to cut this down? Analyse the missed calls to identify trends, peak times etc. It was claimed that the public hated automated telephone systems and this was not the ideal answer. However, research in another authority had shown that over 80% of callers were happy with the taped information option. Although they would prefer to speak to an adviser, taped advice was much better than not getting through. Could we restrict calls or have joint call centres with other TS authorities? Views differed over charging for the service i.e. a premium rate phone number as opposed to the current lo-call number.

8. Summary of Discretionary Services Challenge.

8.1 The discretionary services were highly valued and although the Service needs to consider alternative providers these are not readily apparent. There may be some scope for developing closer links with the Citizen's Advice Bureaux. However, it must be noted that the CABx are already overloaded (missing 80% of calls) and that they generally deal with other legal areas rather than consumer law. If the aim of the DTI to provide a national or regional service bears fruit it will have a major impact on local services. Discussions with the unitary authorities in Hampshire on joining up the advice services have taken place in previous years but insufficient funding on their part and political differences have prevented any progress in this area. Officers are already working with Social Services on Community Safety issues and with Age Concern in respect of BWC. The website called certainly be promoted more vigorously with the address included in correspondence, business cards etc. and FAQs added for self-help. The Advice service already uses a wide range of in-house and external literature. The inadequacy of the call management software has been an unresolved issue for many months but an alternative arrangement has now been agreed. This should enable the demand on the service to be analysed properly and improvements made. Premium rate numbers are seen as socially exclusive and unacceptable. There may be scope for sponsorship from major retailers and commerce for future educational programmes.

Regulatory Services

Challenge 2002

List of Attendees

Group 1 led on Trading Standards feedback (Workshop 1)

Group 2 led on Hampshire Scientific Service feedback (Workshop 2)

Group 3 led on Discretionary Services feedback. (Workshop 3)