Return to Agenda

Return to BV11

ITEM BV11 - ANNEX 2

BEST VALUE COMMITTEE – 11 SEPTEMBER 2002

CHARGING POLICIES BEST VALUE REVIEW

CHARGING POLICIES BEST VALUE REVIEW

Feedback from Scrutiny Committees

Committee

Observations / Comments

(Learning & Culture

7 May & 16 July)

  1. Use of Smartcards should be investigated if there is scope for savings and greater efficiency.
  2. Charges should not be increased so much that they impinged on people who could not afford them.
  3. A further detailed feedback requested at the next meeting (16 July) – noted.

Community Safety

(13 May & 8 July)

  1. Requested further information (inc. the Corporate Charging Policy – which had not been circulated at the first meeting).
  2. Consideration by BV Cttee be given to :

  1. inclusion of carers within target groups for concessions;
  2. including the agreed Social Services policy for exclusion of urban/rural differentials in charging for travelling expenses for home support staff.

Corporate Governance

(16 May)

  1. Recognised the important contribution which the Audit Commission publication "The Price is Right" had made to informing this review.

  1. Noted that all services would have freedom to set their own policies and detailed practices regarding the application of concessions under the Corporate Charging Policy.

Environment

(22 May)

  1. That age should not be the only determining factor when applying concessions.
  2. That it was doubtful whether consistency could or should be sought across all services in setting policies and detailed practices either on charges or the application of concessions under the Corporate Charging Policy.

Social & Health Care

(29 May)

  1. Urge the Executive to remove the references to "People outside the normal working age" in order to avoid the possibility of age discrimination.
  2. Draw the Executive’s attention to the need for concessionary factors which take into account rural isolation.

  1. Urge the Executive to ensure that the wording of the preliminary standard letter sent out during the process of debt recovery was viewed to ensure that the Council displayed an awareness to the possible difficulties a client may be having.

DRW 16/7/02

Return to TOP