Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40-59)
MR PETER
HOUSDEN, MR
PETER UNWIN,
MR JOE
MONTGOMERY AND
MS CHRISTINA
BIENKOWSKA
27 NOVEMBER 2006
Q40 Greg Hands: I have a question
about internal visibility of the board. You might recall this
was a criticism made last year by this Committee, to improve the
visibility of the board. Can you tell us a little bit about what
measures you have been taking within the department to improve
that?
Mr Housden: The important thing
is a lead from the top. I think I indicated to you when I first
met you in January that I had spent my first day visiting all
of the sites we have in London and doing a total of 20 floor meetings
with staff. I followed that up with a series of video conferences
and visits to our out-of-London locations and government offices.
With the machinery of government change in May, when the new department
was created, we did a number of meetings around that. In October,
we launched the new department, and again did a series in this
case of 12 floor meetings involving myself and other board colleagues.
We did a range of other, more specifically focused events on particular
issues like equalities around the department. I think it is important.
We have put more time and effort into it. It is not simply about
members of the board; it is about everyone who has leadership
and management responsibilities. If I may say how we have built
that into the system, the performance management system that applies
to all members of staff in Communities and Local Government has
now this year, for the first time, a prime objective. We set people
a number of objectives. We have said that, for everyone who has
a responsibility to lead and manage staff, improving the quality
of people who work for them and their own practices as a leader
and manager should be their prime objective. We hope to see a
straight line between that and performance rewards for senior
civil servants.
Q41 Greg Hands: You talk about meetings
but what about things that are more constant and consistent? I
think you talked about setting up an intranet forum before. What
sort of other means of internal communications are there other
than just doing floor meetings?
Mr Housden: We have done that.
We have used electronic communication much more imaginatively
in the last few weeks. A number of board colleagues have done
web chats online live with staff around that. We have done internet
polling on particular issues and the normal sort of forum debate.
That has been good. That has felt lively and got the conversation
going that we need to have.
Q42 Greg Hands: Can you give us a
flavour of what staff are saying during the internet polling?
Mr Housden: We asked particularly
during the launch how far they felt they understood what the particular
focus of Communities and Local Government was, were we getting
the message of the new department across, and the answer overwhelmingly
was yes. We asked them, apropos your point, what forms of communication
they found most useful. We asked them to express a view about
particular issues. It was the face to face stuff that they valued
the most, the chance to engage with issues. They liked the cascade
of information. They liked the opportunity to see on our new website
and intranet material electronically and to engage and communicate
in that way. What they liked most particularly was the chance
to see face to face their board and to engage with them.
Q43 Anne Main: Can I ask if the staff
will be taking part in a survey in the future to see if they perceive
themselves that there has been an improvement?
Mr Housden: Yes. It is our intention
in 2007—we have not set a precise date but probably not
too far into the New Year—to do that.
Q44 Anne Main: Given that one of
the criticisms was to do with bullying, discrimination and harassment
and it was recommended that there be coaching programmes which
were mandatory, in respect of the programmes a significant number
of team leaders and senior managers are still yet to take part
in them. Could you give us any feedback on when they would be
likely to participate in those programmes?
Mr Housden: There are two programmes
that we developed that speak to those particular issues. The first
was a general coaching programme which we have taken something
over 80% of our people through, 400 or so individuals. The second
was a programme on dignity and respect which particularly went
to the question about diversity within the department because
you will remember in the figures that were cited in the earlier
survey it was staff from ethnic minorities and other under-represented
groups who felt most those considerations. The dignity and respect
programme was for something like over 500 people. About 80% of
the target group attended those. We found that with a variety
of circumstances associated with secondment, absence and other
reasons we did not secure within that time frame 100%. I think
we will run those programmes again because they are now part of
our induction for new colleagues coming into the department. Our
overall sense was that we had a very good take-up on that. What
was interesting was the impact survey that we did with colleagues
on that to ask them: "You have attended the course. Do you
think it has made any difference? Do you feel it was a good one?
Do you think it is going to impact on your practice?" The
numbers on both of those counts we thought were encouraging.
Q45 Anne Main: You keep referring
to staff. In terms of team leaders and senior managers, how many
of the percentage that did not go on those were the senior people
and the team leaders?
Mr Housden: The programme was
targeted at team leaders and above. That is 500 or so within the
department. I do not have the breakdown of the 20% or so who did
not go but I can let you have it.
Mr Unwin: 92% went on the dignity
and respect courses. For the eight% that did not, for whatever
reasons, we are now taking forward work on equality and diversity
and we have a task force on it which has reported to the board.
We will be putting in further measures through that and we will
ensure that they come through that.
Q46 Anne Main: The next survey on
particularly bullying, discrimination and harassment is due to
happen in January 2007?
Mr Housden: We have not made a
decision but I think it will be in the early part of the new year,
yes.
Q47 Anne Main: Has there been any
monitoring of feedback and results up until now that you can give
us any information on?
Mr Housden: We have not surveyed
staff attitudes on that question. What we have done is monitored
our systems because one of the issues that you, in my view rightly,
pointed to in your recommendations on this question before was
the importance of publicising to staff the formal and informal
recourse and support that was available to them. We did do that
through posters, through the intranet and through putting a stall
in our main building to enable people as they pass through to
pick up material and ask questions. We have done more to publicise.
We publicise through the training programmes that I have referred
to. You remember we had a team of volunteers who are not part
of line management. If staff are concerned about issues concerning
their employment, they can talk those through. We listen to their
intelligence and we do of course monitor the operation of our
formal grievance procedures and those which might involve an element
of concern about bullying or harassment. We have kept a close
eye on all of those issues over this period.
Q48 Martin Horwood: You said you
had gone back to the people who had been on these courses to find
out whether they thought their behaviour had changed. Surely the
point of the courses is to change their behaviour towards others
so it should be the others that you are asking.
Mr Housden: I think the survey
will pick up those types of issues when we do a staff survey.
Q49 Martin Horwood: It will specifically
address the people who are at a lower level?
Mr Housden: Yes. It will be for
everybody. The survey that was done in 2005, from memory, was
a full staff survey and that is what we are intending to repeat
during 2007.
Q50 Anne Main: Recent written answers
seem to imply that DCLG cannot easily access fairly routine information
about departmental officials and staff held by its predecessor
department, the ODPM. What arrangements have been made for a transfer
of information to the new department? Has all the information
been transferred over or was some withheld?
Mr Housden: We have followed the
standard machinery of government procedures on all aspects of
the transfers from other departments to the new Communities and
Local Government. If there are particular instances where Members
have outstanding requests for information or would like further
information having received an answer to a parliamentary question,
we of course would be pleased to address them.
Q51 Anne Main: We have several examples.
For example, Caroline Spelman asked about overnight expenses and
the Under-Secretary of State replied that the information was
not held centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate
cost. This seemed to be a regular answer. Are you saying that
there is no problem with the transference of routine information?
Mr Housden: On the specifics of
transfer, I do not think generally there is. All of this is subject
of course to the proportionality test in relation to cost but
again, if there are particular instances where people want to
press further, I am sure they can do and we will respond to them
appropriately.
Q52 Anne Main: The comment was: "Information
prior to the creation of the Department for Communities and Local
Government ... is not readily available ... " so I presume
Members feel that they can't access the information from this
department as it seems to have been log-jammed back in the other
department. I shall move on from that. Where spending programmes
and targets have moved from the ODPM to DCLG, what assurances
will you give the Committee that past performance as well as projected
performance will be fully reported in next year's departmental
annual report, so that you are not really just starting with a
fresh page and we get a carry through?
Mr Housden: It would always be
our intention to do that. This is not year zero for new programmes
and we would seek to enable you to do that.
Q53 Martin Horwood: Unusually, my
colleague is letting you off a bit lightly on this. One of the
examples we were given was my colleague in the Cotswolds who asked
how many redundancies there had been in the department and was
told that that information was not available prior to DCLG's creation
in May 2006. The HR department has not changed, has it?
Mr Housden: No.
Q54 Martin Horwood: They are incapable
of telling how many people were made redundant in their own department
the previous year?
Mr Housden: I would be happy to
look at particular instances where further information would be
helpful.
Martin Horwood: I find that absolutely
breathtaking.
Q55 Sir Paul Beresford: Do you see
the questions and answers before they go out?
Mr Housden: Parliamentary questions
are secured by ministers rather than officials.
Anne Main: Would it be helpful if our
Committee sent over a selection of criticisms on where information
is not readily available?
Q56 Chair: It might be because there
are a number of written questions which other Members—not
this Committee—have put to the department and the answers
have come back all the time that the information is not available
from the previous department. If we ask the clerks to give you
a list of those questions, perhaps you could explain why the answers
were given to ministers. I accept they sign them off but the advice
presumably was also given to ministers that the information could
not be provided.
Mr Unwin: There should not be
any problem in us getting information about the ODPM. There might
be a problem in some cases at the margin and that may have a marginal
impact on the answer if staff have come in from other departments
into the new department. Obviously it is harder to give a picture
across that.
Q57 Greg Hands: The worry obviously
is that what for most of the department was just a change in name
is being used as a smoke screen to prevent Members obtaining perfectly
legitimate information.
Mr Unwin: We have 150 people coming
in from other departments.
Chair: I accept that but you could have
given an incomplete answer. That would have been more helpful
than no answer at all.
Q58 Anne Main: If new people come
in, you have just said that it is difficult to access the information.
I think that is an extremely worrying indication. Is it not centrally
held so that we could tap into it and find it?
Mr Unwin: No. 100 people have
come in from the Home Office, say. If you asked the question how
many redundancies there have been in the Home Office, you cannot
split it down between the mainstream Home Office and the part
of the Home Office that has come to us. I do not deny that we
cannot be helpful in giving answers on the basis of ODPM. That
is something we will take away and look at.
Q59 Mr Betts: The Local Government
White Paper was produced with a fairly favourable reception from
local government. There were quite a few comments to the effect
that we cannot really judge the extent to which it will make a
difference in terms of devolving powers until we see proposals
for local government finance and the Lyons Report. We were expecting
that initially in 2004. We are told now we might get it by the
end of this year. Is it not a little strange that we have had
the White Paper before the Lyons Report has reported?
Mr Housden: I think there are
two things there. As you are aware, the remit of the Lyons Review
was extended after its original commissioning and the timescale
adjusted accordingly. The key focus for us in terms of understanding
the recommendations has always been the spending review, CSR07,
and yet the report is expected towards the end of this year. Phil
Woolas has made that clear in an answer to a parliamentary question.
| 
