Agenda item

To consider the report of the Head of Governance and Scrutiny Support which sets out the progress made in responding to the recommendations arising from the Scrutiny Inquiry into Sustainable Development.

The report of the Head of Governance and Scrutiny Support set out the progress made in responding to the recommendations arising from the Inquiry into Sustainable Development.

The Chair informed Members that the CCG had been invited to attend the meeting for this item.  He informed the Board of the response received from the CCG and it was agreed that the Chair writes on behalf of the Board regarding concerns over the response to the invite and non-attendance at the meeting.

The following were in attendance for this item:

-  Cllr Mulherin, Executive Member

-  Nasreen Yunis, Principal Planner

-  Kathryn Moran , Principal Business & Systems Support Officer

-  Martin Dean, Area Leader

-  Tom Knowland, Head of Sustainable Energy and Climate Change

-  Martin Elliott, Head of Strategic Planning

-  Steve Hume, Chief Officer, Resources and Strategy

-  Dayle Lynch, Estates Programme Manager

-  Eve Roodhouse, Chief Officer, Economic Development

The following was discussed:

·  Recommendation 1 – Work had been carried out to add climate emergency information on reports to Executive Board.  Reference was made to the Council’s commitment to meet net zero carbon emissions by 2030.  With regard to procurement work was ongoing to embed climate change in every part of the procurement process.

In response to comments and questions further discussion included reductions in carbon emissions from the different use of Council assets and impact of the current economic situation. Progress was still being made towards current targets.

It was proposed that the tracking status for Recommendation 1 remains at Position Status 4 – Acceptable progress made.  Continue monitoring.

·  Recommendation 2 – Further reference was made to the guidance prepared for Officers and Members in the decision making process though there had been some delays. It was proposed that the tracking status for Recommendation 2 remains at Position Status 4 – Acceptable progress made.  Continue monitoring.

·  Recommendation 3 – There was now a fuller reflection in the Best Council Plan. It was proposed that the tracking status for Recommendation 3 be changed to Position Status 2 – Achieved.

·  Recommendation 4 – Due to the impact of Covid-19 on the economy and the unknown future impacts this would need to be reviewed in the Inclusive Growth Strategy when more was known.  It was proposed that the tracking status for Recommendation 4 remains at Position Status 4 – Acceptable progress made.  Continue monitoring.

·  Recommendation 5 - It was proposed that the tracking status for Recommendation 5 remains at Position Status 4 – Acceptable progress made.  Continue monitoring.

·  Recommendation 6 - It was proposed that the tracking status for Recommendation 6 remains at Position Status 4 – Acceptable progress made.  Continue monitoring.

·  Recommendation 7 - There had been a Health and Planning Workshop which gave an opportunity for each to gain a better understanding of each other’s roles.  There was a need to capture the views of Health colleagues in the planning process and changes to planning documents and reports would reflect this.  Work had included embedding health needs at the pre-application stage of planning. There was an ongoing concern regarding the provision of primary care needs could be met where there were major or cumulative housing developments  It was proposed that the tracking status for Recommendation 7 remains at Position Status 4 – Acceptable progress made.  Continue monitoring.

·  Recommendation 8 – Training for Members had been held and quarterly drop in sessions for Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) had been made available.  There was some concern that Members had not received consistent updates on Section 106 agreements. It was suggested that quarterly updates should be provided on a Ward basis. It was proposed that the tracking status for Recommendation 8 be changed to Position Status 5 – Progress made not acceptable.  Scrutiny Board to determine appropriate action and continue monitoring.

·  Recommendation 9 – There had been minor changes to CIL and further information was awaited on transitional arrangements.  It was proposed that the tracking status for Recommendation 9 remains at Position Status 4 – Acceptable progress made.  Continue monitoring.

·  Recommendation 10 - It was proposed that the tracking status for Recommendation 10 remains at Position Status 4 – Acceptable progress made.  Continue monitoring.

·  Recommendation 11 – There had been training for Community Committee staff and Parish and Town Councils.  Updated guidance on CIL had been provided.  It was proposed that the tracking status for Recommendation 11 remains at Position Status 4 – Acceptable progress made.  Continue monitoring.

·  Recommendation 12 – Community Committees had discussed relevant issues at a local level and given consideration to the use of funding for local infrastructure needs.  The revised Parish Council Charter was ready for launch.  It was proposed that the tracking status for Recommendation 12 remains at Position Status 4 – Acceptable progress made.  Continue monitoring.

RESOLVED –

(1)  That the report and discussion be noted.

(2)  That the proposed status of tracking recommendations be approved.