Agenda item

To receive and note the Egmere Project Audit Report.

The Chairman informed Members that he had requested that the report be included on the agenda as it had not yet been provided in full for review by the Committee. The IAM added that both the Egmere and Splash project audits had been completed at the request of the Committee, alongside planned work to review the project management framework. It was noted that the conclusion of both audits suggested that a new project management framework was needed to improve project management at the Council.

Questions and Discussion

Cllr N Dixon stated that it was important to learn lessons from the past and ensure that they were used to develop policy in the future, as had been the case with improvements made to the corporate risk register. He added that he had previously noted the weaknesses in project planning and management, then referred to p54 of the report which included a suggestion for project boards to include officers with the requisite skills from the outset, where appropriate. In order to achieve this, Cllr N Dixon suggested that the Council should consider developing a long-term relationship with an external business consultancy that could provide independent advice on matters of project management, due diligence and project viability.

Cllr C Cushing stated that in relation to revising the project management framework, most frameworks still relied on Prince2 which specified the need for project management boards with sponsors, which could be fulfilled by the relevant Cabinet portfolio holder. It was noted that under new arrangements the project board for Splash had been disbanded, which Cllr C Cushing suggested was extremely alarming. Cllr A Fitch-Tillett noted her agreement with the points raised by Cllr Cushing, and stated that this was the approach used for coastal management projects, which always used projects boards.

The MO stated that previous projects boards had been run on a hybrid basis with no formal minutes and complex decision making processes, which had not provided adequate governance arrangements. As a result, she stated it would be her advice as Monitoring Officer not to return to the previous project board arrangements, but noted that she could be supportive if a different style of project board was sought.

In response to a request from the Chairman, the CE stated that there was some valuable lessons that could be taken from the projects being discussed, and suggested that it might be helpful to discuss proposals with Cabinet and SLT and bring it back to the Committee. He added that at other authorities across the County, business partner arrangements had caused issues. The CE noted that the Bacton Sandscaping Scheme had shown that a project board approach with increased stakeholder engagement and partnering arrangements could work, though in order to achieve this on other projects it would require careful consideration and planning.

Members discussed a potential recommendation to SLT to request that they consider developing improved project board arrangements, which could be reported back to the Committee at a later date. Cllr N Dixon stated that it was crucial to recognize that many business linked projects were often unsuccessful, and this had to be taken into account when considering new arrangements. Cllr P Grove-Jones added that businesses often sought to take advantage of local authorities, and any project board proposals had to ensure the Council was protected against this.

It was proposed by Cllr C Cushing and seconded by Cllr J Stenton that the Committee request SLT consider new project board arrangements, with the exact wording of the recommendation to be agreed subsequent to the meeting.

RESOLVED

1.    To receive and note the Egmere Project Audit Report.

2.    To recommend to SLT/Cabinet that consideration is given to appointing project boards at the initiation of all NNDC projects, to be chaired by a sponsor who should be the Cabinet member whose portfolio is most impacted by the outcomes of the project. Other Project Board members should be key stakeholders impacted by the changes or who have specialist knowledge that will contribute to the governance of the project. For projects with significant risk exposure this should include an independent professional person providing business case and project viability advice.