2015 November 24 - OPAC Minutes.docx
Environment Southland is the brand name of the Southland Regional Council
corner North Road and Price Street, Invercargill, on Tuesday, 24 November 2015
at 9.00 am
____________________________________________ Present: Cr J M Riddell (Chair)
Cr NMG Cook Cr R Currie Cr N G Horrell Cr L McCallum Chairman A M Timms
Mr B Robertson (Morrison Low) In Attendance: Mr R Phillips (Chief Executive)
Mr G A Alsweiler (Director of Corporate Services)
Mr V Smith (Director of Policy, Planning and Regulatory Services)
Mr W Tuckey (Director of Operations & Environmental Information)
Mr P Culling (Finance Manager)
Mr K Swinney (Strategy & Corporate Planning Manager)
Ms A Dawe (Policy & Planning Manager) Miss M Fyffe (Executive Support Secretary)
1 Welcome
Cr Riddell welcomed everyone to the November meeting of the Organisational Performance and Audit Committee. She also extended a warm welcome to Mr Bruce Robertson, remarking the Committee was looking forward to his presence on the committee as an advisor. Cr Riddell advised Mr Robertson to feel free to have input as it suited him, advising the forum was free and open in terms of sharing views and opinions.
2 Apologies
Page 2 3 Public Forum, Petitions and Deputations (He Huinga tuku
korero)
There was no public forum, petitions or deputations presented at the meeting
4 Notification of Extraordinary and Urgent Business (He Panui Autaia hei Totoia Pakihi)
4.1 Supplementary Reports
There were no supplementary reports tabled for inclusion in the agenda.
4.2 Other
There were no other items of business raised for inclusion in the agenda.
5 Questions (Patai)
Cr McCallum questioned if there were some financial “actuals” for the month of October for the Committee. Director of Corporate Services, Mr Alsweiler advised Cr McCallum that these first went to Council. The Chief Executive advised the timing around reporting, the level of detail to this Committee and how it would interact with Council was all part of the discussions to be held later in the meeting. Mr Alsweiler noted as per the terms of reference and structure, the financials went to the Council meeting, and anything that any one on the Council wanted to look into, came to this Committee to look into it. Chairman Timms stated this Committee had the ultimate responsibility regarding the financial over-sight and thought what needed to be looked at was the timing of the meetings in order to have that over-sight.
Mr Robertson added he was not quite as crystal clear on the structure either. He had a small point to raise around the differences between a finance committee and an audit risk committee, and thought this committee was trying to do both which was not wrong but did mean there were two different types of hats.
6 Chairman and Councillors’ Reports (Nga
Purongo-a-Tumuaki me nga Kaunihera)
The Chairman did not have any report to present, other than to mention her telephone conference with Mr Alsweiler and Mr Robertson yesterday. Nor were there any Councillor reports presented to the meeting.
7 Director of Corporate Services Report – 15/OPAC/80
Item 1 – Information Management Strategy
The purpose of this report was to update Council on its progress on implementing an Information Strategy and Roadmap.
Organisational Performance & Audit Committee – 24 November 2015
Page 3
Environment Southland had developed an Information Management Strategy (IMS) and work programme (roadmap), to assist it moving towards open and transparent government, meeting the current and future information requirements of our community.
Directory of Policy, Planning and Regulatory Services spoke to the report and made the following key highlights:
The Information Management Steering Group organised an Information Management Conference on 28 October 2015 with 68 attendees from a range of different councils and organisations around New Zealand and together it identified that significant data management issues existed, such as data collection, management, storage, retrieval, supply, analysis and how they were being managed. The purpose was to see a sector-wide management approach and this was critical in order to decrease costs, improve organisational/sectors efficiency and effectiveness over time. Following the conference, two of the presenters had further discussed the issues with LAWA, before discussing with a further two teams occurring nationally, to develop a collective approach to information and its supply of information with the view to standardise how we store data, extract and analyse data. As a result, there could be significant time and cost savings to be made. The matter has also been raised at the Chief Executive’s Forum and a paper was put forward, resulting in a “think piece” collective approach being developed and shaped. Feedback from the conference, suggested it was one of the most best run one day workshops/conferences that people had attended for some time.
Council had advertised an Information Programme Manager role which would work alongside Environmental Information. In particular around how we collect, store and share data with the rest of the organisation, as well as overseeing and assisting in the information development strategy would see greater progress made.
The Data Audit project summary report was clearly outlined in the Appendices starting on page 2-7. Mr Smith advised this was a stock-take of where Environment Southland was at. It made various key observations when the information from the various data sheets was combined. Environment Southland was in reasonable shape to take active management and steps forward to solving these issues.
A question was asked about the role appointment of the Information Programme Manager and whether it was included within current budgets. Mr Smith advised it was.
Cr Riddell raised a question about the Data Audit project report in which 189 data sources had been identified and asked what proportion of those fitted within the IRIS framework in terms of storage etc. Unfortunately Mr Smith said he was unable to answer this question until after this debrief with the Auditors later in the day. Cr Riddell said her question really led onto were we using the full potential of IRIS as Council had made a huge investment in it. Mr Alsweiler responded that it was the aim that information would either be stored in IRIS or be integrated into
Page 4
IRIS. He acknowledged there was a “tail” of information to be integrated as it came over from people’s “C” and “H” drives, for all to use.
Cr Cook asked were we going to be able to put all resource consents into one basket so they could easily be researched. Mr Alsweiler advised that was the intention of the integrated regional information system. It was about making the information available quicker, more accurately and reliablt by collecting the data, putting it into its place, and having the connections so we spend time doing the work. It was a longer process than just saying let’s join it all together today. Mr Alsweiler advised the foundations were soundly set and it was making gains as it worked through this project.
Mr Smith advised that all resource consents here were directly inputted into the IRIS system and there was significant work around data migration R2D2. All the information that was stored electronically could be searched for far more quickly through IRIS than ever before. There was also a project whereby the Consents Manager and a number of her team had gone to three councils in the north island that were also utilising IRIS and looked at their practises and brought them back to try improve our systems here, adding it was working exceptionally well.
Chairman Timms asked if this was going to lead us into some prioritised actions and a work plan? Mr Smith advised that yes the data audit was designed as the base information for the work programme on which we can build upon. It has huge value for the organisation. Mr Smith advised he would be more than happy to bring the work programme back to the Committee and include this as part of the quarterly updates. Cr Riddell noted this would be worthwhile.
Mr Robertson asked for his benefit, the Information Strategy was clearly broader than IRIS and that Mr Smith was looking at bringing together all the information systems and sources stored within Council. Mr Smith said essentially yes, and also developing systems that were currently absent or need to be re-worked to align or coordinate with systems such as IRIS. When asked if this lead to a strategy, Mr Smith confirmed a strategy was already in place, and that the project started off with a number of staff doing a critical review of all areas of the organisation against various business standards. The organisation as a whole was rated at (1.8) which was consistent with most other councils in New Zealand and that we were on the path, but certainly had some way to go. When asked about the timeframe, Mr Smith said the timeframe was now seen as unrealistic and there were some parts of the process that sat outside of the Information Management Strategy team’s control, such as the regional sector coming together to develop some of the solutions that it was going to need.
Mr Robertson remarked in his experience you needed staff buy-in and it was important to take them on a journey and asked how it was going with staff. Mr Smith advised the Information Management Team was made up of thirteen staff from across the organisation, so the organisation was represented around the table and had held several muffin talks to update staff on projects. All of the team leaders and managers have been fully briefed. There was a continued process to keep staff in the loop.
Organisational Performance & Audit Committee – 24 November 2015
Page 5
Cr McCallum’s asked about the unlimited data and its ability to feed into project and wanted to know if we were ready. Mr Smith believed so, advising the data was there and that we were in good shape.
It was agreed that an additional resolution be added requesting quarterly reports on progress and timeframes around the Information Management Strategy and roadmap projects.
Resolved:
Moved Cr McCallum, seconded Cr Horrell that Council resolved to:
(1) note progress with the Information Management Strategy and roadmap.
(2) provide quarterly reports on progress and give an update on timeframes around the Information Management Strategy and roadmap projects.
Carried
Item 2 – Investment Policy Update
The purpose of this report was for Council to note the update on the proposed Investment Policy review and planned Investment Portfolio tender process.
Finance Manager, Mr Phil Culling spoke to the report advising a number of questions were raised at the meeting on 12 October 2015 that required further research and these related to:
1. portfolio asset allocation; 2. fund manager selection; and
3. estimated balanced portfolio returns compared with Council’s actual portfolio returns.
Mr Culling advised the commitment to complete the Council’s 2014/15 Annual Report within the statutory deadline and other workload issues in the Finance Team had meant that there was insufficient time to gather the required information needed to properly workshop the above questions with Council prior to Christmas.
Moving forward, Mr Culling advised a draft of its investment policy (SIPO) had been developed. The Advisor had recommended an asset allocation of 50/50. The Fund Manager selection that Bancorp gave advice on was that the process was reasonably straightforward. Picking up on Cr Horrell’s points, Mr Culling had done some research and reported that when using the benchmarks that Bancorp had provided splitting the portfolio, we would have been better off. Mr Culling advised he would bring these numbers back to a future meeting.
Page 6
Council’s investment advisor, Bancorp agreed to a revised timeline to workshop the issues in the New Year. Mr Culling was thinking of getting Miles O’Connor of Bancorp down so he could lead this workshop.
Several Councillors raised the issue of Bancorp’s part in this process given they had indicated they wished to participate in the tender process. Mr Culling advised he was in touch with the West Coast Regional Council who had gone through a similar process and reported Bancorp had been professional and upfront, and would step back from the tender process in order to make their bid. It was thought that Council needed to cover itself and be very clear about where the line was drawn and that it required strong recommendations in its minutes stating the process followed, and when Bancorp have stepped aside.
Another discussion issue for the workshop was that of oil investments. Mr Culling added Council needed to be clear that when it selected a fund manager, it was made clear that Council did not want these sorts of investments in its portfolio. Cr McCallum wondered if it was more appropriate if the person giving independent lead advice should in fact step aside when it comes to the management of the portfolio, given the nervousness around the tender process. Cr McCallum advised Standard & Poor’s were clear and from time to time, changed over the lead person because they need to show independence and that there was no favouritism. Mr Alsweiler suggested the topics of objectivity and independence was something to be discussed in the upcoming workshop.
Chairman Timms remarked that she had hoped we might have been a little further along than this and wondered how long from the workshop could this be put in place. Mr Culling advised once the workshop was complete it would take approximately 3-4 weeks.
Resolved:
Moved Chairman Timms, seconded Cr Currie that Council to note the update on the proposed Investment Policy and planned Investment tender process.
Carried
Item 3 – Long-term Plan Progress Report
This was the first progress report on the status of the work programmes set out in the 2015-2025 Long-term Plan. At its meeting on 7 October 2015, the Committee was advised that the quarterly report was to be simplified and cast at a higher level. Mr Swinney spoke to the report and referring to the template asked the Councillors for their feedback. The template was now live and asked if it met their expectations. Mr Swinney said he would not go into the detail as that was more the Directors area of responsibility and expertise, but did note a couple of observations he had had when reviewing the template.
Organisational Performance & Audit Committee – 24 November 2015
Page 7 Page 13, it noted that some divisions had milestones and some did not.
The issue with having a milestone was that it coincided with 30 June and may be an issue as there were no immediate milestones other than the financial ones. Thinking about Consents and Compliance, this may not be an issue.
The Chief Executive advised milestones were something management was looking at so it could get a better picture and provide high level reporting. The main focus was on the levels of service.
Page 9, Mr Swinney explained that the first four columns were the levels of service baseline and were direct extracts from the Long-term Plan. The next two columns were completed by the divisional managers as to whether they were on target, not on target or not applicable/no data available.
Councillors raised issues as to why some areas were marked not on target, yet the comments suggested they were closer to on target than the dot suggested and queried why.
It was suggested maybe a fourth amber dot be introduced, but was mooted as it may not give an accurate picture and that there should be more focus on the comments relating back to the levels of service and that the narrative should be expanded upon.
In response to a point raised by Chairman Timms relating to the Water and Land Plan noting the elections were next year, Mr Smith outlined the submission process, advising any form of Council hearing on the Water and Land Plan would not be until the end of 2016. This process was outside of his control.
Resolved:
Moved Cr Horrell, seconded Cr Currie that Council note the three monthly Long-term Plan activity progress report.
Carried
Item 4 – Ongoing Matters
The purpose of this report was for Council to note the progression items from the schedule of the Organisational Performance and Audit Committee activity plan.
Draft Annual Plan 2016/17
Work was being undertaken on planning for the 2016/17 Annual Plan, including reviewing changes which may have “bubbled up” since the preparation of the Long-term Plan to see if they need to be taken forward and, if so, whether they would trigger the consultation requirements in the new legislative requirements. The upshot would be reported at the Council workshop scheduled for 14 December 2015.
Page 8 Committee Member Requests
At the OPAC meeting on 3 September 2015, Cr McCallum requested that the following matters be added to the schedule:
to have a discussion around debtors for the business;
the cashflow budgeting that we were seeing;
the internal process for billing accounts and the ability to email accounts and the speed of that;
the monthly reporting to OPAC on the normal day-to-day business;
investment transfers from our investment to the day-to-day accounts.
Discussion on these matters had been included on the schedule for March 2016, which would give Finance time to “clear the decks” of the annual rate collection and budgeting now our Accountant complement had been restored.
Resolved:
Moved Chairman Timms, seconded Cr McCallum that Council note the following Ongoing Matters:
Operational Performance and Audit Committee Activity Plan.
Carried 8 Extraordinary and Urgent Business (Panui Autaia hei
Totoia Pakihi)
There was no extraordinary or urgent business.
9 Public Excluded Business Resolved:
Moved Cr Horrell, seconded Cr Currie, that the public be excluded from the following part of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject of the matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to the matter, and the specific grounds under Section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of the resolution are as follows:
Organisational Performance & Audit Committee – 24 November 2015
Page 9
General Subject Matter Reason for Passing the Resolution Grounds Under S. 48(1)
Organisational Performance & Audit Committee
Item 5 – Regional Software Holdings Limited
Item 3 – Independent Committee Advisor High Level Review
To allow Council to carry out commercial activities without prejudice or disadvantage. To allow Council to carry out commercial activities without prejudice or disadvantage.
S.7(2)(h)
S.7(2)(h)
It is further moved that staff present (Rob Phillips, Graham Alsweiler, Warren Tuckey, Vin Smith, Ken Swinney and Maree Fyffe) for item 3 and 4 be permitted to remain at this meeting after the public has been excluded.
Carried Meeting resumed in Open Meeting
Termination
