Agenda item

The draft new Corporate Strategy, Vision 2036 and Corporate Delivery Plan is to be presented to the Committee, prior to final consideration by Cabinet and Council in February 2024.

The Chief Executive, Edd de Coverly, introduced the report with a presentation.

In relation to the business case being developed with the Integrated Care Board for the GP Practice to be located at Parkside, Members asked where the funding was coming from.  In response, they were advised the total cost is expected to be £150k, with the Council contributing £75k, which is to be funded by the Asset Development Programme which is part funded by the Business Rates Pool.

It was asked why there is no budget allocated for the Town Centre Co-ordinator role. Members were advised it is currently a concept that is being considered so no budget has been allocated at this point.

A comment was made regarding Statement 3 on whether the MMDR should be recognised as an enabler of sustainable homes. It was felt that a reference to this should remain within the Strategy.

The question was asked about the MMDR South and whether if no funding is found is there an alternative plan. Members were informed that if this scheme does not go ahead, then the local plan would have to be redeveloped.

It was asked if the Statement 4 related to Council homes or all home types.  It was confirmed that it does relate to all housing.  

Members wanted to know how the Council are going to measure what has been delivered. The Council has a corporate performance framework that has measurable targets and which will be reported quarterly to Cabinet in 2024/25 and increase over the current 6 monthly reporting.

The query was raised regarding the Right to Buy process, as it was felt the Council sells these properties too cheaply.  It was explained the policy is a National Scheme and the Council have no control over the discounts given however, any receipts from this process are used to purchase more affordable homes.

A comment was made in relation to Statement 8 and the phrase ‘net zero’, and whether it was a phrase that was understood by the public.

Members wanted to know how we are going to engage with young people and what approaches are we making.  It was recognised that this is a challenge and officers are developing a young person’s strategy in partnership with stakeholders. This includes the development of an app called Joinup, allowing young people to view a list of activities within their neighbourhood.

The comment was made that the consultation that was carried out over the Christmas and New Year, was perhaps not the best time. It could be why there was a low engagement rate. A further comment was made in relation to the consultation, in that the questions would lead to people commenting on things they want, as opposed to identifying what activities should be a priority. It was acknowledged that consultations through surveys will always have limitations, and that within the corporate delivery plan, there were commitments to improve engagement and some additional resource allocated in the budget.

The comment was made that there is a mismatch between improving engagement and then a reference to reducing the amount of polling stations. It was explained that the polling station review is a statutory process, against set criteria and that whilst ensuring efficiency is important, access to the democracy process is of paramount importance.  It was confirmed that the reference in the strategy would be updated to reflect this. The comment regarding polling stations is a reference to the upcoming polling station review and boundary changes.

Members would like the Council to campaign for an increase in the uptake of postal votes. In response, Members were informed that the Council already does this but would continue to promote it and welcomed any further suggestions for how this could be done.

A query was raised what the practical implication is of having young people discharged from care as being a protected characteristic. It was explained that the rationale is that people from that background are at a significant disadvantage and by giving them this status, the Council would give due consideration to that group of people when developing a policy or strategy.

Members wanted the Council to ensure consideration of value for money in everything it does and the reference to this in the strategy was welcomed.

The comment was made, even though transport links are important, the Council should not project the impression that it has more power than it does over this area, though it was recognised the Council had an important role in lobbying partners.

The Chair thanked the officers for the reports and presentation.

RESOLVED

That Members’ comments are presented to Cabinet at the next Cabinet meeting.