Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Chandler, Garcia Clamp and Holliday.

There were no declarations of interest. 

Minutes of the meeting held on 25 November 2024.

RESOLVED THAT

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 November 2024 were approved as a true record.

There were none on this occasion, but the Chair said that she looked forward to receiving input from the public and Members at future meetings.

Briefing from Councillor Hay, Leader (if she has an update, or if O&S Members have questions for her)

Objective: An update from the Cabinet on key issues for Cabinet Members which may be of interest to Overview and Scrutiny and may inform the work plan

The Leader said it had been a busy few weeks with publication of the government’s white paper on devolution and its major changes to planning regulations.  She highlighted the following issues:

-       the government is clear that the reorganisation of local government must involve the districts in a meaningful way, with various ideas around Gloucestershire reorganising with one or two unitary councils or one wider and more strategic combined authority.  This is very much work in progress at the moment;

-       we will not know the outcome of the county’s request to the Secretary of State for the May elections to be delayed until early February.  None of Gloucestershire’s district councils apart from Tewkesbury Borough support this proposal, and they have written a joint letter to the Secretary of State to that effect;

It is clear that, with devolution, parishes will have a bigger voice, but much of Cheltenham is unparished.  The Leader will set up a Cabinet working group of 4-5 people, including herself, to look at the options of what a town council might look like; it will be a new council with different powers, and we need to consider what services and income we might want to retain to ensure that we are ready for the future in a local way.

In response to Members’ questions, the Leader confirmed that:

-       she cannot say why Tewkesbury Borough Council is supporting the county’s move to delay the elections in May, but believes it has good reasons;

-       discussions between Gloucestershire councils are underway and ongoing, including the option of having two unitaries and one strategic authority in Gloucestershire.  Some people prefer this option, believing it will keep things local, but others believe a single unitary is the right way to go.  She has been keen to start the conversation for some time, but said it is clear that Gloucestershire County Council is not on the priority list, not yet having started on the journey, but given Cheltenham’s drive around cyber security, we are likely to favour the West of England Combined Authority or Bath and North East Somerset model.

The Chair thanked the Leader for all she has done so far and for providing context about where the council is heading, noting that nothing is likely to change until 2027 at the earliest.  She said she would welcome Overview and Scrutiny inclusion, particularly in terms of what should be prioritised for preserving in the face of any unitary shifts. 

The Leader wanted to give a very clear steer that it is very much ‘business as usual’ for the present – CBC has a huge agenda and some really important projects to drive through.  She also acknowledged that the reorganisation won’t come without significant cost, both financial and capacity-wise, for example additional resource will be needed to consider the options of setting up a town council. 

In response to a further Member question about the Strategic Local Partnership, the Leader confirmed that this is very much going ahead, though  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

There were no issues referred to Overview and Scrutiny.

Gloucestershire Health O&S Committee -  update attached from Councillor Bamford following the meeting on 26 November 2024. The next meeting will take place on 28 January 2025.

Gloucestershire Economic Strategy Scrutiny Committee – the next meeting will take place on 23 January 2025

Gloucestershire Police and Crime Panel – the next meeting will take place on 4 February 2025

Councillor Bamford, CBC representative on Gloucestershire Health Overview and Scrutiny, outlined the main elements of his report circulated and Members had the opportunity to ask questions of him. These included how districts can support the NHS via councillor activities in the community since health services are a significant issue for residents; whether there had been any changes to the survival cancer rates in the county and whether there was any move to reopen midwifery at Cheltenham General Hospital. Members were informed that CBC were already active in the community regarding health issues and would welcome a briefing on these so not to duplicate work.

Objective : Understanding the delivery of social value in the Golden Valley development

Paul Minnis, Director of Major Development and Regeneration

Amy Keates, Head of Construction

The Chair welcomed Paul Minnis, Director of Major Development and Regeneration, Richard King, Head of Construction and Amy Keates, Construction Project Manager,

from the Golden Valley Development (GVD) team, thanking them for their report and their work so far.  Responses to Members’ written questions had been provided and there were no follow-ups.  She said the objective is to increase understanding of the delivery of social value with GVD, and invited Members to ask further questions.

Members welcomed the excellent report, and in response to their questions, GVD officers confirmed that:

-       safety and reducing crime is crucial and is being highlighted and considered as part of the Social Value Strategy.  This is currently a working draft, and a lot of detail will be drawn out over the next 12 months;

-       the team will be working closely with the chosen construction company to ensure that the effects of construction traffic, including its CO2 emissions, are taken into account. Phase  1 of the construction period will include well-lit paths and on-site patrols, with answers to other questions to be drawn out over the next 12-18 months;

-       construction traffic is inevitable with any development but actions can be taken to minimise its impact, such as ensuring the contractor uses pre-defined routes, excludes larger vehicles from suburban areas, agrees a good logistics plan for getting construction vehicles in and out of the site, identifies suitable parking and offloading facilities, and provides on-site facilities for construction workers to minimise to-ing and fro-ing throughout the day;

-       also being drafted into the document is the promotion of local suppliers and workers, with a key performance indicator of a 30-mile radius from the site, although some materials will need to be brought in from further afield;

-       regarding the juxtaposition of a high-security cyber centre with the low-level petty crime and anti-social behaviour of the surrounding area, the vision is very much for the new development to be an extension of West Cheltenham and at the same time to enhance local communities through different initiatives.  These include contractors visiting local schools to talk about opportunities in the construction industry, giving talks to the community and holding drop-in sessions with the opportunity to meet the site and project managers and discuss how the development is progressing.  It will also elevate the area with walkways, sports provision and green space, all available to local communities, and involve initiatives which potentially give local people priority for employment.  Officers are thinking about the bigger picture, and the long-lasting impact and legacy of the development, and has received good feedback so far from the Plexall community engagement project, which is looking at how we can improve and support people in Springbank and Hesters Way;

-       apprenticeships and work experience are a big part of the tender, and officers are already building a relationship and links with the construction college in Cheltenham, and aiming to involve people of all ages and abilities in the development.

-       regarding communications and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Objective – Update from the Chair of the Budget Scrutiny Working Group on the group’s response to the 2025/26 General Fund and HRA interim budget proposals

Councillor Adrian Bamford, Chair of the Budget Scrutiny Working Group

(Extract of the minutes of the meeting to be held on 8 January TO FOLLOW)

As Chair of Budget Scrutiny Working Group (BSWG), Councillor Bamford said he and other working group Members had been considering the specific role of the group, and deduced that this is not to comment on how the reports have been prepared – there are good processes already in place to check for any technical errors - but to consider strategically how the finance team had arrived at certain decisions.  He said it was unfortunate that the Cabinet Member for Finance and Assets was unable to attend the recent BSWG meeting, but thanked the Deputy Chief Executive for standing in to answer questions, which focussed on budget savings and additional income, considering the green, amber and red categories and what the impact on the budget would be if they didn’t come to fruition as planned. 

BSWG also considered interest rates, noting that these can change at any time, and Councillor Day subsequently met with the Director of Finance and Assets to discuss some outstanding concerns which will be reflected in the final report to Council.  Looking at the savings plan and additional income plan, Members noted that there were some uncertainties, but that provision for this was built into the budget.  Councillor Bamford said that in these difficult times, the council’s sound budget and relatively healthy financial position was a great reflection on the Deputy Chief Executive, finance team, and council as a whole.

There were no formal notes from the previous week’s BSWG meeting, but Councillor Bamford read the following summary:

The Budget Scrutiny Working Group met with Paul Jones and Gemma Bell to review the draft HRA and General Fund Budgets on Thursday 9January. We discussed the proposals in detail.

That review and the feedback provided to this Committee forms part of the consultation on the draft budgets. Cabinet will use this feedback to prepare a final budget that will be presented to the Council in February.

Councillor Day will be having a further meeting with Gemma Bell to discuss a number of areas in more detail and will provide feedback to the Working Group and Cabinet.

The Working Group’s discussion identified the following:

-        The difficulty of achieving the savings targets for 2025/26 was highlighted, with shortfalls in achieving targeted savings over the prior two financial years noted. The need was stressed for specifics on how the money will be saved identified and agreed, with detailed implementation plans in place. In particular the £150k listed under a review of discretionary services needs greater clarity from the Cabinet. (it was noted that savings from the decision on the HRC is not included within this total amount);

-        The Working Group discussed whether it was better to set a more realistic target for savings and payment into reserves, from a financial and political perspective;

-        Concern was raised that the proposed contribution to the general reserves may be optimistic due to the external challenges discussed. It was recommended that the draft budget proposals be reviewed before the final report  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

There are currently no active scrutiny task groups.

There were currently no active scrutiny task groups.

In response to a question regarding an expected update to Overview and Scrutiny on the Household Recycling Centre (HRC), the Leader informed that the HRC had closed on Friday and the Cabinet Member Waste, Recycling and Public Realm would be updating all Members on next steps shortly. The Chair added that she acknowledged that time had been taken up with the devolution white paper and the planning reform proposal  but had requested an update to the committee at each meeting. The Leader then advised that she had written to GCC to support the CBC decision but was awaiting a response.

A Member commented that the pitches strategy and sports and activity plan had many interlinkages which improved the provision of facilities to the local community. However, as these were being treated as separate pieces of work it was proving challenging for some community groups.

None.

24 February 2025 (Members to note the cancellation of the scheduled meeting on 3 February)

24 February 2025