Cabinet considered the report regarding the proposed introduction of a new transport delivery model.

The Lead Member for Transport, Infrastructure and Digital Connectivity informed Cabinet that in 2017, the Council made the decision to enter into a five-year highways and professional services contract with Project Centre Ltd to provide a range of services on behalf of the Council. This involved transferring some Council employees across to Project Centre under TUPE regulations.

Since then the needs of the service and priorities of the Council had changed and the end of the contract provided the opportunity to review the model for delivery of the service.  We should be open minded when reviewing renewing contracts and that there was no preference for ‘in house’ or ‘out house’ but we needed the ‘right house’.

Cabinet were informed that as part of the contract, nine roles undertaken by Council employees were transferred to Project Centre.  The detail of these roles was provided within the report but he said they were split into five areas; account management, road safety and traffic management, transportation, development control and flood risk management and public transport support.

There had been several changes to the Council structure and its priorities since

the original contract had been agreed almost 5 years ago. In terms of structure, the

Council made the decision to separate the strategic transport and infrastructure

functions from the commissioning service and create a new Infrastructure,

Sustainability and Economic Growth service within the Place Directorate.

With the changes to the Councils structure there was a lack of clear accountability between the roles within RBWM and Project Centre and additional layers of management with officer work often being reviewed within the Project Centre hierarchy prior to being passed to RBWM officers for review again. 

It was proposed to create a new team structure within Transport and Infrastructure with 13 roles. This included four existing roles, five roles with potential for TUPE from Project Centre and four additional roles to build capacity and improve service delivery.  There would also be a contract with Project Centre to provide technical

expertise and consultation roles.  As Project Centre had the capacity and expertise to undertake these roles that were not day to day roles within the Council it was felt that this approach provided value for money and the best service delivery.

The Lead Member informed that the preferred option was to bring the contracted services back into the Council and let a new direct award contract to Project Centre to provide specific technical support. 

He informed that the proposed arrangements would give greater clarity to other

officers and members as well as better accountability for service delivery. Being fully integrated into the service would also provide stronger links to other parts of the Council and its priorities.

The other options considered were to extend the current contract or go out to tender.  It was felt that these would not provide a solution to the problems faced, as detailed within the report.

The Chairman seconded the report and said the administration had been clear that their ideological approach had always been looking at outcomes, looking at value for money, looking at enhanced service delivery and looking at services on a case by case basis. 

The Lead Member for Finance and Ascot said that five years has been a long time for the contract and he assumed at the time we signed it was the right thing to do.  He mentioned that the Project Centre had excellent expertise and their output had been good especially with Ascot and the work with the LEP.  He said the proposed mixture of in house and retaining a consultancy role was the correct way forward. 

The Lead Member for Planning, Environmental Services and Maidenhead there were about 700 planning application each year and with each requiring knowledge of the local area giving advice on things such as traffic flow, he supported the proposals. 

The Deputy Leader of the Council, Corporate & Resident Services, Culture & Heritage and Windsor said that she supported the report and the continued links with the Project Centre who had done excellent work in Windsor.

Cllr L Jones said that she supported the recommendations within the report for all the reasons already given.  She had called in the paper in 2017 due to concerns she had about the outsourcing such as communication.

Cllr Baldwin said he also supported the report and had also expressed his concerns at the O&S meeting.  Although he supported the recommendations he said he did not understand paragraph 2.8 and asked for clarification on this as well as why the service was outsourced in the first place.

The Lead Member said that he was not the Lead Member at the time outsourcing had taken place but it would have been a democratic process and the best solution for the councils needs at the time.

The Head of Infrastructure, Sustainability and Economic Growth said that prior to the recent restructure we were a commissioning model but when knowledge and leadership was brought back into the new structure we had a different model that was client leadership rather than client management.  It became a conflict of who was making decision the Project Centre or client team, this had created conflict and duplication.

Resolved unanimously: that Cabinet notes the report and:

i) Approves the proposed change in delivery model to bring transport and infrastructure services back into the Council, including letting a new direct award contract to Project Centre Ltd to provide specific technical support.