Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

EEB Dec 08 Minutes

VIEWS: 6 PAGES: 5

									      THE FORESTRY COMMISSION ENGLAND EXECUTIVE BOARD
                 MINUTES OF THE 54th MEETING
                 Room 301, Ergon House, London
                       17 December 2008

Present:            Paul Hill-Tout, Chairman
                    Richard Britton
                    Charlotte Cane
                    Sarah England
                    Simon Hodgson
                    Mark Pritchard
                    Simon Pryor

In attendance:      Helen Townsend (item 5)

                    Karen Simpson (Minute Secretary)



1.    INTRODUCTION

Paul Hill-Tout opened the meeting.


2.    MINUTES AND MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MEETING ON 19 NOVEMBER

The Board approved the minutes from the meeting on 19 November.

Open Habitats

A submission had gone to the Minister about the launch of the consultation, which it was
hoped would take place as soon as possible in January.

Performance Indicators

A meeting was planned to discuss the development of a process for the preparation of
delivery plans by the Programme Group.

IT

Richard Britton reported that for eight working days staff at the Mamhead office had been
unable to access any communications systems and the problems were ongoing. During
this time it had not been possible to make any payments, including farm woodland
payments, and so there was a risk of complaints. David Felstead had been informed and
was involved in discussions with Global Crossing and BT to sort out the problem.

Charlotte Cane noted that there was not a good understanding of the network/
infrastructure in England. However, IT Liaison Officers had started to document
information on all offices. The Board discussed the contract with Global Crossing and
noted that there was no clear corporate understanding of what Global Crossing had
contracted to provide.
Paul Hill-Tout noted that the problem at Mamhead could be symptomatic of the need for a
wider stock-take, and the Board needed a full understanding of the problems and wider
risks. It was agreed that Paul Hill-Tout and Charlotte Cane would discuss this further.

                                             Action 54/1: Charlotte Cane, Paul Hill-Tout


3.    FINANCE REPORT

Charlotte Cane introduced Paper 51/08 which updated the EEB on financial progress as at
the end of November 2008. She confirmed that Defra would cover the shortfall in timber
income.

At the November meeting, the Board had approved in principle the upgrade of the WAN at
the York, South East England Forest District, East Midlands (Market Rasen), Hamsterley
Area and Tangham Area Offices. The Board agreed to proceed with these upgrades.

Annex B of Paper 51/08 provided a summary of the EWGS grant spend and forecast and
the Board agreed that this annex would be included in future finance reports to the EEB
and ENC. It was agreed that Charlotte Cane would consider providing a similar profile of
non-EWGS grants as well.

                                                           Action 55/2: Charlotte Cane

As regards asset sales, Simon Hodgson noted that to date there was £3m of firm
commitments, including £1m of completed sales.

Paul Hill-Tout reported that a first draft of the shared services budget for 2009/10,
including a list of priority areas for each service, had been presented at the GBEB meeting
the previous week. It had been agreed that Tim Rollinson and Keith Gliddon would
discuss this further.


4.    GOVERNANCE OF SHARED SERVICES

Charlotte Cane introduced Paper 52/08 which sought the Board’s views on governance of
the Shared Services routine service costs and the Shared Services’ Business Plan and
bids for 2009/10. The budget for England’s share of the Shared Service costs for 2008/09
was £6.6m and this had increased in the draft Business Plan for 2009/10. Shared
Services were submitting bids for additional money, most of which were for IT. There was
also an additional annual spend on GLOS. Richard Britton explained that there were two
elements to GLOS: maintaining the deliverables and ensuring compliance with European
rules which were subject to change. Charlotte Cane and Paul Hill-Tout would be meeting
with Keith Gliddon to discuss the draft budget.

Charlotte Cane outlined the governance mechanisms for Shared Services. Each Shared
Service had a Board comprising a representative from each country, Forest Research and
the Business Units. Each Service Board operated differently. However, the GBEB was
responsible for agreeing the Shared Services Business Plan. Each Service Board gave a
short presentation to the GBEB each year and provided a written annual report.

The Board discussed options to improve the future governance of routine Shared Services
costs.
Simon Pryor noted that Forest Research and Corporate and Forestry Support (CFS) were
not included in the paper because Forest Research was an agency although it was
managed in a similar way to Shared Services, and CFS was a GB body, not a shared
service. He noted that the PAG process was a step in the right direction.

Paul Hill-Tout noted that the Chairs of the Audit and Risk Committees in all three countries
had expressed growing interest in the operation of Shared Services.

The Board agreed that Charlotte Cane would provide it with a list of FCE Shared Service
Board representatives.

                                                           Action 54/3: Charlotte Cane

It was agreed that in future the EEB would decide who the FCE Shared Service Board
representatives would be. Charlotte Cane would provide a follow-up paper on FCE’s
arrangements for Service Boards and the EEB would discuss England’s role at a future
meeting.

                                                           Action 54/4: Charlotte Cane


5.    DIVERSITY

Helen Townsend introduced Paper 53/08 and presented an update on the roll out of
Equality Impact Assessments (EqIAs) across FCE. She noted that Sharin Masih had
taken up post as the Diversity Co-ordinator for England. EqIAs were required to ensure
that we were complying with the relevant legislation, but more broadly they were also a
way of helping to bring about a cultural change to make the Commission more diverse for
the many benefits that can bring.

The EqIA framework had been agreed and was available on the HR pages of the intranet.
Information notes would be provided. A near final draft of Operational Guidance
Booklet 44 on EqIAs had been prepared, and other OGBs would include diversity so that it
would become a normal part of the planning process. The Board noted the need to ensure
consistent language in all guidance.

Mark Pritchard questioned whether there was duplication between the EqIA framework
and OGB 44. However, Helen Townsend noted that the business had requested the
development of an OGB. It was agreed that in the future the Board should consider
whether an OGB was necessary before it was initiated.

Level 4 training was being rolled out, mainly to cost centre managers and Programme
Group leads. Forest Research had been commissioned to pull together an evidence base
and this information was now available in draft. A series of regional and district workshops
were being organised for January/February 2009. It was agreed that Helen Townsend
would send details of these workshops to EEB members so that they could decide whether
to attend.

                                                          Action 54/5: Helen Townsend

The Board discussed when an EqIA was required. Helen Townsend clarified that an EqIA
should be done on any documentation that set out a decision on why and how our policies,
services and functions were carried out. However most will either be at the screening or
partial level, and very few full EqIAs would be required.
Most of our work would not adversely impact on particular groups and, in fact, would be
mostly positive (new services, infrastructure) or would affect all people indiscriminately.
However we needed to ensure that we followed good practice or existing standards in a
number of areas, e.g. consultation and engagement, design and infrastructure provision.
This would come from training, awareness-raising and capacity building.

The Board noted the need for consistency and to distinguish between good practice and
best practice. Helen Townsend stressed the importance of having an audit trail and noted
that most functions, services and facilities were documented.

The Board agreed that business plans should go through an EqIA. It was agreed that
Charlotte Cane would write to Cost Centre Managers asking them to retrospectively
conduct equality impact assessments on their business plans for 2009/10, where there
might be adverse impacts arising from any proposed changes to our existing services,
functions or processes (e.g. staffing levels, site /facility closures). EqIA would become an
integral part of the business planning cycle for future years.

                                                             Action 54/6: Charlotte Cane

It was agreed that an additional section would be added to the standard template for EEB
papers to show whether an EqIA was necessary or has been considered. If deemed
necessary then the EqIA should be appended to the paper.

                                                             Action 54/7: Secretariat

The Commission would be compliant with EqIA requirements by the end of March. Areas
where further support was required had been identified, and Sharin Masih would continue
to provide advice and support. Further information would be provided, including a matrix
of known adverse impacts (drawn from existing research), and existing good practice and
standards on consulting and engaging with ‘hard to reach’ groups. The Commission would
be working closely, and share resources and ideas, with the ‘Defra family’ under the
auspices of ‘Outdoors for All’.

Helen Townsend noted that at a GB level the Commission had reached its targets on
reporting on race and disability, and there would be regular monitoring reports. It was
agreed that Mark Pritchard would consider obtaining some media coverage on this.

                                                             Action 54/8: Mark Pritchard

The Board noted the contents of Paper 53/08 and gave Helen Townsend a mandate to
continue with her work.


6.    FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

Mark Pritchard introduced Paper 54/08 which updated the Board on the new Model
Publication Scheme issued by the Information Commissioner, the publication of meeting
papers and open information requests received.

The FOI Act required the Commission to create and maintain a publication scheme setting
out the information it held that was published on a routine basis. The existing publication
scheme which the Forestry Commission designed was agreed before the implementation
of the Forestry Devolution Review. In line with section 20 of the FOI Act, the Information
Commissioner had decided to impose a new publication scheme which must be adopted
and effective from 1 January 2009. We were required to adopt the publication scheme in
its entirety and would be in breach of the Act if we did not publish information in
accordance with the scheme. We currently published on the internet most of the
information required. The main difference between the old and new scheme from the
Commission’s point of view was that the new scheme also required many of the
documents currently published on e-Connect to be made publicly available.

In order to meet the requirements of the new scheme, open information representatives in
business areas across the whole FC had been asked to identify information currently
published on e-Connect that could be made available on our public website. This could be
significant and publishing the information on our public website could have implications for
the website’s structure. However the Board noted that publication of the information on
the internet could save staff time in responding to individual requests for information.

As regards the publication of meeting papers, the EEB agendas, papers and minutes from
January 2005 onwards were available via the ‘About Us’ section of the England webpages.
Work was currently underway to publish the ENC papers from January 2005 onwards and
this was scheduled to be completed by May 2009. Work on Regional Advisory Committee
papers was planned to start in spring 2009 in liaison with RAC Secretaries. The
Communications and Secretariat team would continue to monitor how often these papers
were being looked at externally.

As regards open information enquiries, in the period from 1 December 2007 to
1 December 2008, a total of 18 open information requests were received in England and
logged on the tracking system. Mark Pritchard noted that there had been increased
interest in and scrutiny of the Commission, faster moving campaigns, and more and faster
sharing of information.

The Board noted the new Model Publication Scheme, progress with the publication of
meeting papers and the overview of FOI enquiries. It was agreed that the Head of
Secretariat would report performance on open information to the Board annually in
December.

                                                           Action 54/9: Mark Pritchard


7.    ANY OTHER BUSINESS

ETWF Delivery Plan

The ETWF Delivery Plan had been launched on Monday 15 December by press release.
Paul Hill-Tout thanked everyone who had been involved in the development and launch of
the Plan, including the Programme Group and Communications team. He noted the
importance of embedding awareness of the Plan both internally and externally. Following
the launch there had been an article in the Daily Telegraph and Paul Hill-Tout had done an
interview for ConFor. Over the coming weeks and months, there would be further articles
in the forestry media, and the ETWF Delivery Plan would be reflected in the next
Corporate Plan.

								
To top