Agenda item - Update on Royal Pavilion & Museums Governance

navigation and tools

Find it

Agenda item

Update on Royal Pavilion & Museums Governance

Report of the Executive Director for Economy, Environment & Culture (copy attached).

Decision:

11.1 RESOLVED:

(i) The Committee revokes its decision taken on 25th January 2018 to move the management of the service to a single cultural trust in one stage rather than two stages with a transfer date of 1st July 2018.

(ii) The Committee proposes that the management of RPM is transferred to a single purpose trust as set out in the PWC Report 'Royal Pavilion & Museums, Phase 2' 13th December 2016.

(iii) That a report is brought to this Committee on the 11th October 2018 setting out a plan for the establishment of the single status trust, and that the transfer of the RPM into the management of the trust is completed by the 5th December 2018. The report should include a high level financial plan for the trust and the financial support required from BHCC to support the establishment of the trust, and on-going financial support thereafter.

(iv) That consultation with the workforce and the Trades Unions is

undertaken urgently, so that should the trust be established it would be with full confidence of all stakeholders.

Minutes:

11.1 The Committee considered the report of the Executive Director for Economy, Environment & Resources, which set out the proposed timescale and process for the external review, and content of the ‘ready for change’ programme.

11.2 Councillor Sykes referred to paragraph 3.5 of the report, which said that managers had identified a number of key issues for the service, and asked for more information on what those issues were. The Head of Culture said that those issues did not relate to the governance issues per se, but were more to do with the operational side, for example the outdated IT equipment being used by the service.

11.3 The Chair noted that an amendment had been received from the Conservative Group.

11.4 Councillor Bell formally proposed the following Conservative Group amendment to the recommendations (changes in italics):

2.1 The Committee REVOKES its decision taken on 25th January 2018 to move the management of the service to a single cultural trust in one stage rather than two stages with a transfer date of 1st July 2018.

2.2 The Committee proposes that the management of RPM is transferred to a single purpose trust as set out in the PWC Report 'Royal Pavilion & Museums, Phase 2' 13th December 2016.

2.3 That a report is brought to this Committee on the 11^th October 2018 setting out a plan for the establishment of the single status trust, and that the transfer of the RPM into the management of the trust is completed by the 5^th December 2018. The report should include a high level financial plan for the trust and the financial support required from BHCC to support the establishment of the trust, and on-going financial support thereafter.

2.4 That consultation with the workforce and The Trades Unions is undertaken urgently, so that the trust is established with the full confidence of all stakeholders.

11.5 Councillor Bell said that the most important thing was the workforce, and there had been a lot of uncertainty over their jobs, and whether their employment status would change, and the amendments put forward were trying to bring some stability back to the table to take this forward. There would also be protection for the Pavilion, and allow them to get funding from other areas, such as grants or gift aid etc. The matter was currently in limbo, with no timescales of when it would be resolved. The workforce had wanted to stand alone, and be able to do their own thing. We had a duty of care, not just for the workforce, but for the Pavilion too.

11.6 Councillor Janio seconded the amendment.

11.7 Councillor Mitchell referred to the amendment, and said that there was a process currently in place, with an expert review underway, which had to be completed. The Workforce was expecting all the issues to be discussed, and we needed to abide by that, and therefore the Labour Group could not support the amendment.

11.8 Councillor Janio agreed that there was a process in place, but it was taking too long and the matter needed a resolution. Moving to a trust would enable the Pavilion to access other streams of funding, and it was important that the matter be concluded as soon as possible. In addition, the threat of staff being moved to the Dome had been removed. He said that if the amendments were agreed, there could be a viable stand-alone Trust by the end of the year.

11.9 Councillor Sykes said it was frustrating on long this matter was taking to resolve, there was uncertainty and a resolution was needed. He asked for advice from the Monitoring Officer as the legality of amendment 2.2. The Monitoring Officer said that that amendment asked the Committee to ‘propose’, and in legal terms that meant the same as ‘suggest’. His understanding of the intention of the amendment 2.3 was not to rule out all options, and therefore the work of the experts could be taken into account when the matter came back to the committee later this year. Therefore the amendment was not giving instructions to officers to implement the transfer to a single status trust. To make a decision today on transferring to a trust would be inappropriate without a detailed report, giving full information on the financial and legal issues.

11.10 Councillor Hamilton said he was surprised at the proposed amendments as the Council were still in consultation with staff and union, and he would therefore vote against the amendment.

11.11 The Monitoring Officer suggested that in order to make the report more robust, the proposed amendment 2.4 be removed, as it suggested that a decision had already been taken to move to a trust.

11.12 Councillor Bell accepted the Monitoring Officer’s comments and proposed the following re-wording of amendment 2.4:

2.4. That consultation with the workforce and the Trade Unions is undertaken urgently, so that should the trust be established it would be with the full confidence of all stakeholders.

11.13 Councillor Janio said that creating a Trust would create a lot of opportunities, and would benefit the workforce, the city and the Royal Pavilion and Museum. He said that the current process was taking far too long. Amendment 2.1 made sure that any threats to the workforce of moving to the Dome were removed. Amendment 2.2 was a statement of intention of what we would like to happen, and Amendment 2.3 was how that would be delivered and consultants who were appointed could work on the proposed new plan. For clarity this would provide an end date for the process, not that it was stating that this would bring an end to the process by agreeing to transfer to a trust.

11.14 The Executive Director for Economy, Environment & Resources said that an expert had been appointed to review all of the options, and the report which would come to the Committee in October would set out their analysis of those options.

11.15 Councillor Mitchell confirmed that the options considered by the expert would include a review of a stand-alone trust.

11.16 The Chair said that the Unions had said that if the amendment was passed, it would be a breach of the current arrangements that the Unions had reached with the Chief Executive, and would no doubt bring us back to the same industrial position we were in earlier as the workforce were expecting all options to be explored. Therefore members should consider whether agreeing the amendments would be negative to trade unions relations, and bring us closer to a difficult industrial position. Councillor Bell said that he had spoken to the Unions, and after discussion they understood the implications of what the amendments were intending, and did not feel that what the Chair said would come to fruition.

11.17 The Committee voted on the proposed amendments (Councillor Mac Cafferty did not vote), and they were agreed.

11.18 RESOLVED: