Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and declarations of interest.

There were no apologies for absence received.

To consider the minutes of the previous meeting.

The minutes of the meeting held on 23 November 2021 were approved. 

Councillor Jones proposed and Members agreed that the Lead Member approach for matters of general committee business would no longer be used.

To receive the Scrutiny Work Programme.

The Chair said it had been suggested that the Scrutiny annual report be discussed at the meeting after March to enable the results of that meeting to be included in the report. 

He proposed that in the future if there was evidence that some areas were performing well, the Committee would take a lighter touch.  This meant that Officers did not have to produce long detailed reports and the Committee’s time would be used as efficiently as possible.  The Members agreed and therefore this would be implemented from the next meeting.

To receive a verbal update on the Stansted Airport Appeal Review.

Councillor LeCount gave a verbal update to the meeting.   He said that work had started and documents had been passed to the independent panel members.  He said there would be a draft report later in February that would be presented to the working group.  The main report would be ready by April 2022.

The Chief Executive said that this was a sensitive subject due to the process of fee negotiations that were still on going with the Airport and therefore details could not be discussed more fully.  He said that he appreciated the public interest in the report, which he said would be fully published, debated and lessons learnt. 

He said that necessary documents and evidence had been handed over and that part of the interim report process would be to test with Members of the Working Group that the list of documents was complete.

Councillor LeCount said that he would be asking Members to provide questions to put to the independent group to ensure a robust process with the correct focus.

To consider the Planning Review Progress Report.

The Chair said that this report was an update following the review of the planning function, the subsequent appointment of two interim senior managers and the detailed recommendations provided by this Committee through Councillors Jones and Criscione. 

Councillor Evans presented the report which had been drafted by the Planning Transformation Lead.  He said there were 85 tasks and actions in total shown using a traffic light system: -

·         35 tasks were at green and had been completed.

·         10 were red but these were wish list items.

·         The remaining 40 tasks were amber and were being worked on. 

He said progress was good and there would be a more comprehensive report in March.

The Interim Planning Director said this review was on track to be completed by the end of March, but she said it was an ongoing process that was dependent on other factors. 

She said that there was a national issue around the recruitment of planning staff at a senior level and this would need to be considered in the long-term using other ways to train younger staff members to a senior level through graduate schemes and apprenticeships.   

She said that once there was a Local Plan in place, the Council would be in a much stronger position and Officers would be able to provide more guidance and support to the Planning Committee when making decisions on applications before them. 

She said that the Local Plan was vital as the initial step to ensure that decisions were made more quickly as they would be based on the adopted policies.  She said once this was in place all other supplementary planning documents could then be implemented.

She said the next 18 months would ensure that the Development Management function was structured in a streamlined way in order to provide a better service when the Local Plan was put in place.   A Project Officer had been appointed to check that the commitments in the Planning Performance Agreements (PPA’s) were met.

In response to Members questions the following responses were given: -

Councillor Evans said that there were challenges to recruit within the planning function but the closing date for applications to appoint the Director of Planning had not yet been reached, (the closing date for applications was 16^th February 2022), and therefore he could not comment on what response had been received. 

He said that the improvement of the service for residents and Members could not be quantified by one item or be given a specific date for completion, but he said that by the summer there would be significant changes and improvements.   

The Chief Executive said that where planning staff would be based was part of a bigger issue of getting staff back into the buildings.  He said that there would be drop in facilities for members of the public and the working pattern of all staff would be based on the business need as well as individual preferences.  He said that he hoped this would be clearer by  ...  view the full minutes text for item SC50

To consider the Corporate Plan 2022-2026.

The Chair said that the Corporate Plan stated in paragraph 9 that it would not be substantially altered, he said it was an aspirational document with the detail being in the other reports that fed into it, (the budget, Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) and the corporate plan delivery plan).  He asked the Leader how she would reconcile the reality of the budget and the delivery plan.

The Leader said that all the evidence would be reviewed and any decisions that needed to be made would be addressed, she said the Chief Executive and his team were looking at all the possibilities going forward.

Members agreed that this document related to the Administration’s ambitions and therefore it was not necessary to scrutinise in depth as this would come with the focus on the delivery plan which would be presented at the next meeting.

To consider the Medium Term Financial Strategy and Budget Proposals 2022/23.

The Chair said that although all the budget was important, he thought that given the circumstances of the budget reduction this would be the Committee’s focus in terms of how to proceed with the necessary cost cutting and revenue enhancement. 

Councillor Hargreaves presented the report and said he would concentrate on the General Fund and Council Tax, the MTFS for the next 5 years and matters that were discussed at the Investment Board which took place yesterday.

He said that the Commercial Strategy had been discussed at the Investment Board meeting and had provided an update on the Council’s investments along with the change of rules from the Government in December and how this would be dealt with. One area of risk that had not been included was the possibility of a debt cap from the government, who could mandate that a Council could not borrow over a certain amount.  He said that this risk was low, and the new rules were being followed, but this would be added to the main risk list document.

He said the Local Plan had a budget of £6.8m which had been set aside over a 5-year period.  He said that this budget already existed but had been brought together to make it clearer and to show how it would be spent over the years.

He said there were problems with Uttlesford Norse, this had been identified as a risk but did not present a financial risk.  He said that if money needed to be spent to resolve this problem it would come from the Housing revenue account.

The Chair asked if the 4.9% increase in rent offered value for money for the tenants considering there could be problems with service levels for repairs and maintenance.

Councillor Hargreaves said that he thought the increase did offer good value and had been agreed with the Tenants Forum.  He said that there was also the option of applying for Housing Benefit if residents were not able to afford their rent.

The Chair agreed to take this issue out of the meeting to discuss further.

Councillor Hargreaves continued with his presentation, he said that Council Tax would be rising by £5 a year which equated to an increase of 3.09%.  This would raise an extra £190,000.

He said it was a balanced budget with a small surplus of £346,000.

He highlighted the table on page 144, item 19 which was a comparison table showing the changes from last years Council Tax requirement 2021/22 to this years 2022/23.  He said the inescapable growth figure of £1.9m included costs for Little Canfield, increased agency costs for driver shortages, staff increases and transformation costs. The service growth figure included the S106 IT system for process control and a new system for monitoring IT system vulnerability. 

He said the fair funding and business rates reforms had not been carried out, and there was a further one-year extension of the New Homes Bonus with no legacy payments.

He said the MTFS showed  ...  view the full minutes text for item SC52