TERMS OF REFERENCE
Responsibilities
The purpose of the Committee is to:
(a) control and review
expenditure across the Auckland Council Group to improve value for money
(b) monitor the overall
financial management and performance of the council parent organisation and
Auckland Council Group
(c) make financial decisions
required outside of the annual budgeting processes
Key responsibilities include:
·
Advising and
supporting the mayor on the development of the Long Term Plan (LTP) and Annual
Plan (AP) for consideration by the Governing Body including:
o
Local Board
agreements
o
Financial policy
related to the LTP and AP
o
Setting of rates
o
Preparation of the
consultation documentation and supporting information, and the consultation
process, for the LTP and AP
·
Monitoring
the operational and capital expenditure of the council parent organisation and
Auckland Council Group, and inquiring into any material discrepancies from
planned expenditure
·
Monitoring the
financial and non-financial performance targets, key performance indicators, and other
measures of the council
parent organisation and each Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) to
inform the Committee’s judgement about the performance of each
organisation
·
Advising the mayor
on the content of the annual Letters of Expectations (LoE) to CCOs
·
Exercising
relevant powers under Schedule 8 of the Local Government Act 2002, which relate
to the Statements of Intent of CCOs
·
Exercising
Auckland Council’s powers as a shareholder or given under a trust deed,
including but not limited to modification of constitutions and/or trust deeds,
granting shareholder approval of major transactions where required, exempting
CCOs, and approving policies relating to CCO and CO governance
·
Approving the
financial policy of the Council parent organisation
·
Overseeing and
making decisions relating to an ongoing programme of service delivery reviews,
as required under section17A of the Local Government Act 2002
·
Establishing and
managing a structured approach to the approval of non-budgeted expenditure
(including grants, loans or guarantees) that reinforces value for money and an
expectation of tight expenditure control
·
Write-offs
·
Acquisition and
disposal of property, in accordance with the long term plan
·
Recommending the
Annual Report to the Governing Body
Powers
(a) All powers necessary to
perform the committee’s responsibilities, including:
a. approval of a
submission to an external body
b. establishment of
working parties or steering groups.
(b) The committee has the powers
to perform the responsibilities of another committee, where it is necessary to
make a decision prior to the next meeting of that other committee.
(c) The committee does not have:
a. the power to
establish subcommittees
b. powers that the
Governing Body cannot delegate or has retained to itself (section 2).
Exclusion of the public – who
needs to leave the meeting
Members of the public
All members of the public must leave the
meeting when the public are excluded unless a resolution is passed permitting a
person to remain because their knowledge will assist the meeting.
Those who are not members of the public
General principles
·
Access to confidential information is managed on a “need to
know” basis where access to the information is required in order for a
person to perform their role.
·
Those who are not members of the meeting (see list below) must
leave unless it is necessary for them to remain and hear the debate in order to
perform their role.
·
Those who need to be present for one confidential item can remain
only for that item and must leave the room for any other confidential items.
·
In any case of doubt, the ruling of the chairperson is final.
Members of the meeting
·
The members of the meeting remain (all Governing Body members if
the meeting is a Governing Body meeting; all members of the committee if the
meeting is a committee meeting).
·
However, standing orders require that a councillor who has a
pecuniary conflict of interest leave the room.
·
All councillors have the right to attend any meeting of a
committee and councillors who are not members of a committee may remain,
subject to any limitations in standing orders.
Independent Māori Statutory Board
·
Members of the Independent Māori
Statutory Board who are appointed members of the committee remain.
·
Independent Māori Statutory Board
members and staff remain if this is necessary in order for them to perform
their role.
Staff
·
All staff supporting the meeting (administrative, senior
management) remain.
·
Other staff who need to because of their role may remain.
Local Board members
·
Local Board members who need to hear the matter being discussed
in order to perform their role may remain. This will usually be if the
matter affects, or is relevant to, a particular Local Board area.
Council Controlled Organisations
·
Representatives of a Council Controlled Organisation can remain
only if required to for discussion of a matter relevant to the Council
Controlled Organisation.
|
Finance and
Performance Committee
06 November
2017
|
|
Value for
Money Section 17A Review Programme
File No.: CP2017/22678
Purpose
1. To
provide an overview of the findings and recommendations
contained in the four completed value for money (s17A) review reports[1] namely the:
· Three waters review
· Domestic
waste review
· Organisational
support: communications & engagement review
· Economic
development: Investment attraction & global partnerships review
2. To
seek approval from the Finance and Performance Committee of the recommendations
contained in each of the four reports.
Executive
summary
3. In
March 2017 (resolution number FIN/2017/23) the Finance & Performance Committee
endorsed a value for money programme for the council group including approval
to undertake the first four value for money (s17A) reviews as part of an
indicative programme of thirty reviews planned to be undertaken over the next
three years.
4. The
programme delivers on the requirement on local government, in s17A of the Local
Government Act 2002, to review the cost-effectiveness (or value) of current
arrangements including a consideration of options for the governance, funding,
and delivery of infrastructure, services.
5. The
reviews take an evidence–based approach. This involves both a qualitative
and quantitative analysis following a consistent value for money methodology
developed specifically for the programme. Each review takes between three
to four months to complete.
6. Views
have been formed on evidence from three primary sources: empirical data,
management interviews and literature. The management responsible for services
under review is extensively involved in the reviews and receives draft reports
at key review stages. For each review, the analytical work is undertaken by an
internal review team within Finance with the assistance of subject matter
experts with specialist industry or sector experience. The review reports are
subject to independent reference panel input on matters of consistency,
drafting, reasoning and content. The independent reference panel comprises Doug
Martin, Miriam Dean Q.C. and John Leuchars.
7. It
is evident particularly in the Three Waters Value for Money (s17A) quantitative
analysis that significant value for money has been delivered since the
establishment of the council by bringing together wholesale and retail water
and wastewater services and consolidating stormwater operations into a single
council department. For domestic waste value has been achieved with
demonstrable cost savings, growing rates of household waste diversion from landfill and high levels of customer satisfaction
with domestic waste services.
8. There
is also a growing trend in cross-group planning and delivery where the group is
actively and successfully working together collaboratively. This is
particularly the case in procurement where collective go-to-market approaches
are being successfully used.
9. The
review has struggled at times to see what money has been spent on a given
outcome or objective and what value has been delivered. Group information is
often comparing “apples with pears”, prepared on different bases
and cannot be readily combined. Good quality information on performance and
spending by outcome is an essential for accountability. There are still areas
of significant expenditure where no performance measures have been published or
where accountability for the measure sits is unclear. For example the community
engagement performance measure and target is yet to be established. Performance
measurement and target –setting for strategic services is an area which
needs to be urgently addressed in developing the long term plan and the levels
of service and associated performance targets.
The four completed reviews all point to
significant further strategic opportunities to achieve value for the council
group within the four strands of social, environmental, cultural and economic
wellbeing and within the three following areas of s17A areas of consideration:
Governance
· Combining
as a group to collectively plan and tackle cross organisational responses
around reducing risk, procuring goods and services and agreeing common
performance measurement frameworks where appropriate.
· Developing
an integrated public policy and strategy for managing water in its many forms
and reviewing the fitness of the current operating model for managing water,
wastewater and stormwater to meet the strategy’s objectives.
· Rebalancing
waste service resources towards influencing zero waste objectives in the
fast-growing non-domestic waste streams to achieve greater waste reduction or
diversion.
Funding
· Improving
business case development, benefit realisation and commercial and economic
disciplines in investment decisions to better prioritise work, measure
performance and link outcomes to funding.
· Integrating
asset, capital and procurement planning for large infrastructure work where the
benefits of scale can be better realised.
· Extending
the use across the council group of supplier panels for shared categories of
expenditure to achieve scale-based efficiencies.
Service delivery
· Achieving
greater engagement with Maori.
· Greater
use of performance or outcome based contracting with outsourced suppliers.
· Combining
service delivery (if the business case justifies it) for three waters
maintenance and operations services.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Finance and
Performance Committee:
a) receive
the Three Waters, Domestic Waste, Communications & Engagement and
Investment Attraction & Global Partnerships Value for Money (s17A)
reports.
b) endorse
and accept the recommendations contained in the following four Value for
Money (s17A) reports:
i) Three
Waters
ii) Domestic
Waste
iii) Communications
& Engagement
iv) Investment
Attraction & Global Partnerships.
c) approve
that the Value for Money political oversight group monitors the progress of
implementation of the recommendations contained in this report.
|
Comments
10. In
March 2017 (resolution number FIN/2017/23) the Finance and Performance
Committee endorsed a value for money programme including the first four
reviews. The programme delivers on the requirement on local government, in s17A
of the Local Government Act 2002, to review the cost-effectiveness of current
arrangements including a consideration of options for the governance, funding,
and delivery of infrastructure, services.
11. Subsequently,
the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Committee approved the terms of reference of
the three waters, domestic waste, communications & engagement (C&E) and
the investment attraction and global partnership reviews in consultation with
the Chair of the Environment and Community Committee, the Chair of the Planning
Committee, the Chair of the Independent Maori Statutory Board, the Deputy Chair
of the Audit and Risk Committee, the Chairs of the affected CCOs and the
Mayoral Office.
12. The
purpose of each review is to identify strategic opportunities to improve value
for money. The value propositions developed in each report provide an
indication of the value that could be developed by undertaking the recommended
actions. The propositions do not include costs, benefits, implementation plans
or timings of benefits. They have been designed to inform council decisions
whether to invest in more detailed investigation including business case
development and consultation on options. The recommendations in each review
have been developed as an integrated package which needs to be actioned collectively.
The independent review panel has been concerned that the recommendations
provide a clear path to action so that implementation progress can be clearly
monitored. It is recommended that the political oversight group monitor
implementation progress.
13. The
following commentary provides a summary of the improvement opportunities and
recommendations for each review and the four full reports attached provide an
evaluation of the current state, the option assessment and the review findings.
Three
Waters Review
Key Improvement Opportunities
14. Developing
a Three Waters vision, policy, strategy and implementation plan. This requires
clarity of accountabilities across the Three Waters value chain including
public policy, strategy, asset management and combined demand management
planning.
15. Review
the alignment of Watercare’s SOI and Healthy Waters performance targets,
particularly around strengthening shared three-water value drivers and
environmental water quality objectives.
16. Examine
the value of having an independent authority monitor and review whether planned
prices or revenues are reasonable, with reference to planned capital and
operating spending, given the growing size of what are two local government
monopolies.
17. Explore
the value of consolidating all Three Waters regulatory functions into a single
and unified accountability.
18. Explore
the opportunities for involvement of both mana whenua and mataawaka in
developing the Three Waters vision, policy and implementation plan guided by
the Mana whenua Sustainable Framework and the council’s Maori
Responsiveness Framework.
19. Evaluate
the potential value in taking a Three Waters approach to strategic growth
planning and providing development approvals for new developments (and
redevelopments) requiring developers to fully exploit integrated Thee Waters
planning to:
· Reduce
potable demand (rainwater tanks – recycling – water efficient
appliances etc.)
· reduce
wastewater discharge from the site
· reduce
stormwater runoff from the site (total and peak flow) and improve water quality
· Enhance
amenity and ecological outcomes through water-sensitive urban design.
20. Assess
the value of using special purpose vehicles for collaborative projects between
the entities, such as the work being done by the Western Isthmus Water Quality
Improvement Programme. Given the combined size of the proposed asset spend
($1.7b), the opportunity is to build delivery capability, enable solutions that
minimise the need to provide better project funding certainty with improved
financial management and risk sharing.
21. Assess
the potential value in creating greater funding certainty for stormwater‘s
asset management plan and greater transparency of service levels and future
funding requirements including whether inter-generational equity is optimised
22. Evaluate
the potential value of achieving further efficiencies from shared procurement
enabled by a joint Three Waters asset management plan, go-to-market approach
and consolidating contracts for suppliers that are shared by Watercare and
Healthy Waters.
23. Explore
the value of stormwater operations and maintenance being managed by Watercare,
using a performance-based contracting approach to achieve further economies of
scale from integrating service delivery
24. Assess
the value of consolidating and increasing the enforcement and compliance
activities, including the rates of inspections across the three networks, the
value of increasing enforcement action, and penalties for non-compliance.
25. Evaluate
the provision of shared capital project management and delivery services
between Watercare and Healthy Waters.
Recommendations
26. Initiate
and produce a Three Waters Policy and Strategy, in conjunction with Watercare
and all other relevant authorities that set out the vision and outcomes for the
Three Waters, and have an associated fully costed asset management and funding
plan. It is noted that Auckland Council has commenced the development of an
Auckland Water strategy encompassing the Three Waters covered in this review
along with marine water, ground water and natural water bodies.
27. In
conjunction with Watercare, identify Three Waters-related projects that will
benefit from a joint approach and prepare a business case to establish the
value of a single center of excellence organisation for joint capital project
planning. Noting that the governance and funding option of a special purpose vehicle
be evaluated to oversee the construction of the Western Isthmus Water Quality
Improvement Programme, and associated detailed planning and delivery of
stormwater and wastewater projects.
28. In
conjunction with Watercare (and Auckland Transport), immediately form a single
procurement center of excellence which may be operated by Watercare or Auckland
Council dependent on what organisation has the appropriate capacity and
capability, to manage procurement for mandatory categories of spend and on the
top ten shared suppliers and report back on progress by June 2018 .
29. In
conjunction with Watercare, prepare a business case evaluating the case for
council performance-based contracting with Watercare to deliver the operation
and maintenance of stormwater services and report back in progress by June
2018.
30. To
assist prepare the necessary reporting transparency and consistency for
pricing reviews:
· Require
both Watercare and Healthy Waters to submit and publish in each
organisation’s next funding plan an explanation of the funding required
delivering on the asset plan, projects and associated service levels, and how
the proposed prices, rates components, and charges are calculated, including
the impact on pricing of cost-efficiencies.
· Require
both Watercare and Healthy Waters to apply a harmonised reporting approach to
asset condition assessments, planning and related data in their next asset
management plans.
· Encourage
both Healthy Waters and Watercare Services to participate in the next and
subsequent Water Services Association of Australia Annual Asset Management
Benchmarking exercises.
31. Working
with Watercare and the relevant council departments evaluate the benefits of
creating a one-stop-shop for Three Waters regulatory and compliance functions
where all the Three Waters regulatory functions co-habit in a single customer
service center environment by June 2018.
Once the Three Waters strategy
has been completed:
32. Assess
the best operating model to plan and deliver Three Waters capital projects
under the recommendation contained in paragraph 41.
33. Have
the procurement centre of excellence prepare an expanded category planning and
shared supplier scope with three-year forecasts that consolidate go-to market
approaches, joint contracting and co-sourcing to support the synergies from
having a Three Waters asset management plan.
34. Review
the options in business operating models to best enable the delivery of the
integrated strategy and the objectives and outcomes being sought and to revisit
design principles, levels of service and key accountabilities.
35. Pilot
for the next asset management planning ((AMP) cycle, an economic regulation
process by contracting an independent economic assessment of whether the asset
management plans, costs and funding plans of the water organisations are
appropriate, reasonable, and efficient. Noting whether the outcome justifies a
regular cycle of pricing reviews and report the result. It is noted that
Watercare are proposing engaging a UK consultancy specialising in utility
operations to review their next Asset Management Plan and we encourage Auckland
Council and Watercare to include Healthy Waters and to jointly agree the scope
of any review.
36. Review
the current regulatory framework and operating model for Three Waters
regulatory services, evaluating the benefits of consolidating the Three Waters
regulatory functions including trade waste, environmental water quality,
overflow standards, consent conditions and building standards
Summary of Potential Value
37. The table below
provides an indication of the value for each of the key improvement
opportunities drawing on the detailed assessment of options and supporting
assumptions detailed in the review report.
Domestic
Waste Review
Key Improvement Opportunities
38. Concentrate
the next Waste Management and Minimisation Plan on the total waste stream. Mana
whenua should be actively involved in developing plan.
39. Strengthen
the range of public policy tactics used by the council, such as greater use of
all tools in the Solid Waste Bylaw and using the resource and building
consenting processes more effectively, to minimise waste and grow the volume of
waste diverted.
40. Explore
the value of re-balancing of domestic waste service resources toward the larger
and growing non-domestic waste stream to achieve waste objectives.
41. Evaluate
greater commercialisation of waste management and minimisation services and
outsourced delivery models, and other operating models, to reallocate risk and
to use private sector initiative and capital to drive value. Improve the
council’s understanding of the quantified value of the wider
environmental (and social, economic and cultural) pay-off from avoiding
landfill disposal, to then use in planning and evaluation of waste services.
42. Advance
the case for central government to adjust the landfill levy to increase the
cost of disposal and encourage diversion, subject to work to understand the
value to ratepayers in terms of wider environmental, health, social and
economic impact.
43. Review
standard resource and building consent conditions with a view to strengthening
requirements that consent holders have a waste management and minimisation plan
that is consistent with the Zero Waste goal. Rigorously test the public’s
and business appetite for further options to divert waste (domestic and
non-domestic), given the increasing cost profile. Explore further opportunities
to use MFE’s contestable Waste Minimisation Fund to fund waste
minimisation services and encourage private sector support.
44. Progress
the opportunities presented when the current collection contracts expire in
2020. There is a plan to align contracts to city areas, and that point there is
an opportunity to contract for consolidated, outcome-focused services.
Recommendations
45. Prepare a plan of actions to advance the Zero
Waste objective in the growing non-domestic waste segments and include it in
the second Management and Minimisation Plan currently being developed for
approval.
46. Review the strategic case for the council owning and operating waste
facilities/services, and prepare a business case which evaluates alternative
options for achieving their domestic waste service and policy objectives,
including selling non- strategic assets or using long-term lease arrangements,
and report back on progress by March 2018.
47. Immediately introduce a funding principle that
no new waste management or minimisation service or trial is approved without it
having:
· First
sought significant co-funding support from the contestable Government‘s
Waste Minimisation Fund
· A
business case that shows benefits exceed costs by a predetermined margin
· Consider
the value of continuing the current community grants for waste initiatives,
based on an evaluation of the impacts of grants, given the size of grants and
compared to the administration costs
48. Develop information and guidance, and
protocols for advisory support to community organisations and businesses to
help them apply to the contestable Government‘s Waste Minimisation Fund.
49. Develop, in collaboration with relevant
business groups, simple easy-to-use site waste management plans to support
businesses to cost-effectively minimise their waste that goes to landfill, and
report back on progress by March 2018.
50. Within the next 12 months:
· Develop,
and then maintain, an economic evidence base that quantifies the wider
environmental and other damages caused by landfill and whether these costs are
already captured in market prices or covered by regulatory requirements, for
use in business cases
· Do
market research to test with households and businesses on what they would be
willing to pay or do to achieve additional reductions in waste going to
landfill, for use in economic assessments
· Rank
all of the council’s existing and planned waste minimisation and
diversion services or initiatives by their cost-effectiveness, to guide
implementation priorities and test value-for-money on an ongoing basis
· Require
independent review of material business cases, to be undertaken by experts with
economic or commercial expertise, as part of building internal economic and
business capability.
· Do
further economic research to ascertain if the introduction of a landfill levy
would result in benefits that justify the increase in household and business
costs of disposing waste in landfill, and once this research has been done,
confirm the council’s position on advocating or not for a higher landfill
levy. Implement outcome-based contracting, to give waste collectors incentives
to also pursue ambitious waste minimisation and diversion targets, such as through
enabling innovative retail and advisory services to households and businesses,
and report back on progress by May 2019, noting that work is underway to
consolidate, bundle, and standardise the waste collection contracts when they
are due to be renewed from 2020.
Summary of Value
51. The
table below provides an indication of the value for each of the key improvement
opportunities drawing on the detailed assessment of options and supporting
assumptions detailed in the review report.
Communications
& Engagement Review
Key Improvement Opportunities
52. There is value in the Group collectively
developing a communications strategy to address common Group reputational and
business continuity risks and issues where communications and channel
coordination play a key role
53. Improving the performance evaluation framework
for major C&E expenditure will strengthen accountability and transparency
for results. This requires better alignment of key performance metrics to
prescribed communications and objectives to provide assurance that resources
are being prioritised and money is being well spent.
54. Introducing formal cost-efficiency plans drawn
from public sector best practices with targets will improve cost effectiveness
and efficiency disciplines and give impetus to delivering value for money
objectives for this largely budget-constrained discretionary area of spend.
Areas for focus include strengthening planning and performance evaluation, a
group internal design studio service developing a shared
‘freelance” resource pool, considering the “lead
agency” concept, growing revenues, developing and negotiating Group
suppliers arrangements and shifting to low cost channels
55. There are opportunities to realise savings
from adopting a single contracting approach to shared suppliers, extending
supplier panels for key advertising and marketing categories of expenditure,
sharing internal design studio resources and creating a Group resource pool for
specialist contractors
56. Addressing the causes of low levels of iwi
satisfaction in the council is of significant value. The engagement process, the
identification of key issues and responses and an understanding of iwi needs is
a first step in improving service effectiveness.
Recommendations
57. Initiate a working party with the CCOs to
develop a formal Group C&E strategy and plan that sets out the
Group’s approach to communications matters of significance including:
· addressing
Group communications risks and mitigation actions where C&E services are
critical to risk management and defining protocols
· agreement
on the shared Group C&E outcomes, objectives and channels and a supporting
work plan
· Group
brand standards and supporting policy
· Group
procurement plan.
58. Require organisations receiving council funding for C&E services
to implement a formal cost-efficiency programme for the service in the next
financial year to achieve a minimum 5 per cent per annum reduction in spend for
the next three years, over and above any existing efficiency targets and based
on the current expenditure funded by council rates.
59. Develop a top down strategic planning process
to drive the allocation of the council parent’s C&E budget with clear
investment logic between the work activity and resources required to achieve
the prescribed outcomes and objectives, and have a fully documented and
integrated strategic plan in place for the new financial year FY18. For those
organisations without an engagement plan, develop an annual Māori
engagement plan to integrate with the communications strategies and plans to
demonstrate the link with the Māori responsiveness framework. For the
council, review the engagement model to ensure iwi liaison has an integrated
and cohesive approach to support the council’s statutory and policy
obligations. Report back on progress by June 2018.
60. For the Group: consider introducing a common
performance measurement and improve the effectiveness of the Māori
engagement process by strengthening accountability for planning and delivery of
strategic engagement, linked to each organisation’s strategic communications
and engagement plan
61. For those organisations without a consistent
performance evaluation framework, develop a consistent performance evaluation
and monitoring methodology and implementation plan for determining the return
on investment for major campaigns and projects. Report back on progress by June
2018.
62. Develop a single procurement centre of
excellence to manage procurement for the Group communications spend category
with a view to deliver increasing, consistent value across the Group while reducing the number of
suppliers. Report back on progress by June 2018.
Summary of Value
63. The table below provides an indication of the
value for each of the key improvement opportunities drawing on the detailed
assessment of options and supporting assumptions detailed in the review report.
Investment
Attraction & Global Partnerships
Key Improvement Opportunities
64. The partnership and investment attraction
landscape is crowded with many local and central government agencies chasing
deals within a complex web of relationships.
65. There is an opportunity to improve clarity
about the Auckland investment story – roles of the agencies and a shared
understanding of investment priorities and sequencing.
66. While it will not be appropriate for all
partnership and investment attraction services, some services may be candidates
for cost recovery or user charges, as they deliver a direct private benefit to
the investor or business opportunity.
67. Big headline measures such as the number of
deals and ‘Foreign Direct Investment attracted' are not sufficient
measures of value for money or successful performance.
68. Potential options to measure impact include
post-implementation project evaluations, and customer and stakeholder
satisfaction measures.
Recommendations
69. Ask
the Auckland Investment Office, ATEED, Panuku, Auckland Transport and any other
Auckland agencies with significant investment attraction roles to develop a
consolidated Auckland investment story to:
· explain
clearly to potential investors the respective roles and how they fit together
· develop
a shared understanding of Auckland’s overarching urban growth and
infrastructure development plan to guide respective investment attraction and
financing projects
70. Investigate
the business case for introducing fees for those investment attraction services
that generate clear private benefits to the investors and businesses receiving
the investment.
71. Develop
better measures of the impact of investment attraction and global partnership
activities, such as:
· results
of project evaluations that compare outcomes against predetermined baselines or
controls
· analysis
and indicators that show which groups and communities benefited
· Tools
like Net Promoter Score (used by NZTE) and in-depth interviews with clients and
other interests to find out what value they think was added.
Consideration
Local
board views and implications
72. The views of
local boards have not been sought in relation to these recommendations.
If approved, engagement with local boards on the recommendations will occur.
Māori
impact statement
73. The context
and recommendations of this report are potentially beneficial to Māori. The Value for Money programme management has engaged with the
Independent Māori Statutory Board on its recommendations. All reports and
recommendations have been reviewed and consulted on with an independent Te Ao Māori
adviser. If the recommendations within the reports are approved,
engagement with Māori on the relevant recommendations will occur
throughout the implementation process.
Implementation
74. Should a
resolution be obtained from the Finance and Performance Committee endorsing and
accepting the reports, it is proposed that the Value for Money political
oversight group will monitor progress with the implementation of the
report’s recommendations.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩ 
|
Three Waters Terms of Reference
|
23
|
|
b⇩
|
Three Waters Value for Money (s17A) Review Report 2017
|
37
|
|
c⇩ 
|
Domestic Waste Terms of Reference
|
97
|
|
d⇩
|
Domestic Waste Value for Money (s17A) Review Report
2017
|
111
|
|
e⇩
|
Communications & Engagement Terms of Reference
|
173
|
|
f⇩
|
Communications & Engagement Value for Money (s17A)
Review Report 2017
|
185
|
|
g⇩
|
Investment Attraction & Global Partnerships Terms
of Reference
|
249
|
|
h⇩
|
Investment Attraction & Global Partnerships Value
for Money (s17A) Review Report 2017
|
261
|
Signatories
|
Author
|
Sally Garrett – Programme Manager, Value for
Money
|
|
Authorisers
|
Christine Watson – Head of Financial Programmes
Kevin Ramsay – Acting Group Chief Financial
Officer
|
