Agenda item

To receive and respond to the findings of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee‘s review of the quarter three performance management and recovery information. 

That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s comments on the Council Plan Performance Tracker and COVID-19 Recovery Tracker for Quarter Three of 2020/21 be NOTED. 

107.1        The report of the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, circulated at Pages No. 14-115, asked Members to review and, if appropriate, take action on the observations of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee following its review of the Quarter Three 2020/21 Council Plan performance tracker and COVID-19 recovery tracker information.

107.2        Attention was drawn to the observations made by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, attached at Appendix 1 to the report, and the Council Plan performance tracker, attached to the report at Appendix 2. The COVID-19 corporate recovery plan performance tracker was attached to the report at Appendix 3 and the financial information for the quarter was attached at Appendices 4-7.

107.3        Members were advised that this was the Committee’s third review of the new Council Plan 2020-2024 and the new COVID-19 recovery plan. Similar to the quarter two position, at the time of writing the report, the national picture regarding COVID-19 could change very quickly. At the time of writing the report, the country remained in a lockdown situation, however, at the time of presenting the report the government had announced its roadmap for the lockdown exit and the Head of Corporate Services had briefly explained to the Committee that management team would be focussing the Council’s own recovery in alignment with the government’s roadmap. In terms of Council services, this meant there was still a complex picture of services working across either response, recovery or business as usual mode or a combination of all three. Similar to previous reviews of performance and recovery information, the Overview and Scrutiny Committee recognised that certain pieces of work had to be deferred or were not progressing as expected due to the significant challenges the Council faced. That aside, the Chair advised that he had issued a clear instruction at the Committee pre-brief that this should not stop Members from asking questions irrespective of whether or not they thought COVID-19 was impacting delivery. Some key areas that were discussed included the Tewkesbury 2021 project - the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had felt this project highlighted how the national picture could change things - at the time of writing the report, the 2021 Committee had agreed that many of the planned events would not go ahead as a result of the pandemic. However, the roadmap out of lockdown now provided an opportunity to re-evaluate the programme of events to see what would be possible and it was expected the £25,000, approved by Executive Committee to support the project, would be fully committed. In terms of developing a work programme with landlords, the Committee had been concerned that this action - relating to ensuring residents had a supply of rental properties to meet their needs - had slipped its milestone dates on numerous occasions. The Head of Community Services had assured Members that a report would be brought to Overview and Scrutiny in June to update on this piece of work. In terms of the Community Infrastructure Levy, it was noted from the commentary in the tracker document that a seminar had been held with Parish Councils in October and Members were keen they were also fully updated on the Council’s arrangements - it had therefore been agreed that a session would be organised for all Members. In terms of online licensing, the Committee had been pleased to hear that improving the offering of the licensing service was to be made a priority of the Business Transformation Team for the forthcoming financial year. The Committee had noted the excellent work of the Team to date across various projects and agreed that a session would be held with the Business Transformation Team and Overview and Scrutiny Committee Members to provide more details of the team’s work. In respect of recycling, the Committee was informed that contamination remained problematic and this appeared to be a national trend. Tonnages in waste streams had increased significantly during the period of the pandemic and this inevitably contributed to higher levels of contamination. Information for residents raising awareness on what could and could not be recycled was due to go out shortly with further work to be undertaken to reduce residual waste. There had been a question around planning performance and why it had dipped in quarter two, as quarter three performance figures were far more positive. The Development Manager had explained that there were often fluctuations from quarter to quarter as the different types of applications that came forward during the year, and also the number of appeals at a given time, could have an impact on performance. Capacity within the enforcement team was acknowledged as an ongoing issue and this was something that was being looked at as a priority. The Head of Corporate Services had stated that he expected one member of the Internal Audit team to be back undertaking some form of audit work with effect from April. The High Street project would gather momentum, particularly following the government’s roadmap announcement with non-essential shops re-opening on 12 April. An overview of what was being put in place to meet this date would form part of a briefing for relevant local Members. This would include significant engagement with businesses by the Environmental Health team to ensure COVID safety and compliance. As ever, all actions arising from the discussions were recorded and monitored within an action list to ensure they were followed up. This action list was reported on a regular basis to the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee at their briefing and, when populated, was circulated to all Members of the Committee.

107.4        Referring to the housing needs assessments, a Member questioned why villages like Forthampton, Chaceley and Hasfield had been chosen above others. In response, the Head of Community Services explained that assessments had been undertaken across urban areas and the work was now concentrating on rural Parishes – the work was being done over a period of two years. The north east of the Borough had already been completed and the remaining areas were now being worked through. The north east area work was undertaken in 2019 and had been fed back to the Parishes at that time. There was a link to the report on the Council’s website under housing needs surveys. 

107.5        Accordingly, it was