Agenda item

A report was submitted requesting Scrutiny to review the contents of the report and provide feedback to Cabinet ahead of any decision to implement future phases of the Digital Transformation Programme.

The Cabinet Member for Resources introduced the report and highlighted the fact that Customer experience was the most important element and that in most organisations when customers rang into a customer contact centre at busy times they got left on hold. During the next phases of the Digital Transformation Programme at the City Council, customers would now have the option to be rung back.

It was confirmed that the programme would be looking to save money as the Council now had less staff and needed to find better and smarter ways of providing services. One important area where improvements would be made was by enabling different software programmes to talk to each other.

The Cabinet Member confirmed that the Council was still focused on digital by design which meant that all channels are available still for the public to contact the Council. It was accepted that there would still be customers who wanted to visit or phone the Council but that there would also be an increase in digital functionality for members of the public who wanted to use self-service. The public needed to be brought along with the Council in a trusted way.

Some concerns in relation to staffing had been raised and it was confirmed that any member of staff in customer services who wanted to stay with the Council would be able to stay with the Council and that employees would be used more smartly and effectively.

The Digital Transformation Programme Director provided an overview of the programme which was not new but a continuation of the first phase which had now been delivered. The first phase had included the introduction of technology platforms and created a ‘my account’ to enable people to do self-service online. Services had been taken up over a full 24hour period with almost £2 million in payment transactions carried out outside of normal office hours.

The next phase of the programme would be looking to accelerate and deliver more digital services as there was a big requirement for more payment services to be available online. This will also helpe to bring revenue in quickly for the Council. Other services would also help to enhance the customer experience such as the ability to contact parents in real time when schools are closed in bad weather, or streets are being gritted etc.

Councillors considered the report and queried how many my account registrations would be needed to be advantageous to the Council. Councillors also sought reassurance form Officers that registration would not be compulsory.

It was agreed that the current number of 16000 registrations was relativly low but that the number of available transactions was still quite limited therefore when new services became available take-up would be expected to increase. Officers stated that they would like to see in the region of 50,000 registrations as a minimum. Officers recognised the need to involve the community in the process by getting feedback and involving them in the testing phases of future releases. Communication was key but it also had to be kept in mind that digital was not for everyone.

Councillors queried what translation services the Council used and it was confirmed that the Council currently used Google and that this would be carried forward to all online services.

Councillors appreciated that digital transactions were cheaper but queried whether hardware needed to be maintained and software licenced as well as whether there were any transactional charges.

Officers stated that the Council had recently changed its online payment provider and that previously the transactional fee was 1.46% of the total spend but with the new supplier there was a flat fee of 5p per transaction, officers were anticipating £200 000 worth of savings from this.

Software licensing costs – traditionally hardware and then software has been purchased and installed in the Council’s data centre, with a refresh cycle of every 3 to 5 years in the past. Now services can be obtained over the internet avoiding any hardware or software costs. Licences are purchased to use the service which can be increased or decreased based on demand like a pay as you go service. This presents a greater strain on the revenue expenditure of the Council as the previous investment in hardware and software was capital funded. It was confirmed that financial modelling was being carefully looked at to account for this.

Some concern was expressed by Councillors regarding what would happen if the system went down then everything goes down and the question was raised as to whether people could come in and use the system with a member of staff?

The Digital Transformation Programme Director stated that there was already a bank of terminals in reception and floor walkers there to help members of the public and that this was already very well used.  Officers were also looking as part of the libraries review into training library staff to help the public.

It was also confirmed that the Council was using companies such as Microsoft that had more than one data centre that could act as a backup. The Council would be able to utilise services that were not necessarily dependent on the Civic building.

Councillors considered that the following comments needed to be fed back to Cabinet for consideration:

1)    That the Digital Transformation Programme needed to be carefully monitored and avilable resources prioritised in relation to the programme delivery.

2)    That the transition to agile working needed to be carefully managed and regularly reviewed.

Councillors queried whether areas relating to digital transformation were ringfenced and it was confirmed that the capital budget was under constant review and that there was a high-level capital programme monitoring board chaired by the Deputy Managing Director. It was also confirmed that the recent LGA Peer review had been very complimentary about how the Council was managing the capital programme.

Councillors queried whether work done by the capital budget monitoring groups was something that should be considered by scrutiny but it was stated that the group in question dealt with very technical information and that reports would still go back to Cabinet at the relevant level.  The whole capital programme was already open to scrutiny. There needed to be a proactive management of the capital programme which is what the officer group did.

Councillors queried what just in time development was and it was stated that officers did try to forecast what would needed to be done but that there would always be things we could not predict and that was just in time development.

Councillors were impressed with how the local authority was moving towards digital but that it was the role of Cllrs to monitor that we were within budget and to keep an eye on the implications.

Some concerns were expressed in relation to possible future legal implementations linked with digital transformation considering that the process was now moving at speed. Councillors queried how much extra legal advise would be required and whether there was a plan in relation to the future legal implications for the authority which could be costly. Councillors were keen that the Council did not find itself looking at this area retrospectively. It was agreed that a response be requested from, Kevin O’keefe, Director of Governance in relation to this.

Councillors also queried the security of the digital data that the Council would hold. Officers stated that there was a new piece of legislation due in May 2018 but that this would still apply regardless of whether digital transformation was happening or not. Officers were therefore looking at how the Council could use digital technology to help the data protection process such as the requirement that consent would now need to be given proactively.

Officers stated that people could request their data now and that information would still be redacted accordingly regardless of digital transformation. There would be a portal for people to see what general information is held about them and this would only be accessible to them.

Councillors stated that they were pleased with the responses from officers and that there would need to be some more work with the lawyers. There was however still some concern regarding what guidance and training would be provided for the new legislation especially considering that the local authority was propelled by 60 Cllrs making decisions and acting on behalf of the electorate. All Cllrs had a degree of information that related to individuals/constituents. The concern was that the legal implications of this had perhaps not been fully recognised and that councillors were not protected as much as they could be.

Officers confirmed that a lot of work was being done prior to the introduction of the new GDPR legislation and that this would involve providing training to  councillors and staff.

Recommendations to Cabinet.

1)    That the Digital Transformation Programme will be carefully monitored and avilable resources prioritised in relation to the programme delivery.

2)    That the transition to agile working needs to be carefully managed and regularly reviewed.

3)    That Scrutiny Board to have a presentation from the Director of Governance in relation to the new data protection legislation.

4)    That 6 monthly update reports be provided to scrutiny on the delivery progress of the Digital Transformation Programme.