Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Members are required to notify any substitutions by midday on the day of the meeting.

Late substitutions will not be accepted and Members attending as a substitute without having given the due notice will not be able to take part in the meeting.

There were no apologies for absence from Members.  

Audio recording – 1 minute 36 seconds

There were no apologies for absence.

Councillor Tina Bhartwas was absent.

To take as read and approve as a true record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on the 4 February 2025.

RESOLVED:That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 4 February 2025 be approved as a true record of the proceedings and be signed by the Chair.

Audio Recording – 1 minute 45 seconds

Councillor Matt Barnes, as Chair, proposed and Councillor Tom Tyson seconded, and, following a vote, it was:

RESOLVED:That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 4 February 2025 be approved as a true record of the proceedings and be signed by the Chair.

Members should notify the Chair of other business which they wish to be discussed at the end of either Part I or Part II business set out in the agenda. They must state the circumstances which they consider justify the business being considered as a matter of urgency.

The Chair will decide whether any item(s) raised will be considered.

There was no other business notified.

Audio recording – 2 minutes 21 seconds

There was no other business notified.

Members are reminded that any declarations of interest in respect of any business set out in the agenda, should be declared as either a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest or Declarable Interest and are required to notify the Chair of the nature of any interest declared at the commencement of the relevant item on the agenda.  Members declaring a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest must withdraw from the meeting for the duration of the item. Members declaring a Declarable Interest, wishing to exercise a ‘Councillor Speaking Right’, must declare this at the same time as the interest, move to the public area before speaking to the item and then must leave the room before the debate and vote.

(1)     The Chair advised that, in accordance with Council Policy, the meeting would be recorded.

(2)     The Chair drew attention to the item on the agenda front pages regarding Declarations of Interest and reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question.

(3)     The Chair advised that for the purposes of clarification clause 4.8.23(a) of the Constitution does not apply to this meeting.

(4)     The Chair reminded Members of the adopted North Herts Scrutiny Charter and the need to ensure that the meeting was conducted with independence, initiative and integrity. The full Charter was available to Members via the Scrutiny Intranet pages.

(5)     The Chair advised of a change to the order of the Agenda and Agenda Item 14 would be taken after Agenda Item 7.

Audio recording – 2 minutes 23 seconds

(1)    The Chair advised that, in accordance with Council Policy, the meeting would be recorded.

(2)    The Chair drew attention to the item on the agenda front pages regarding Declarations of Interest and reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question.

(3)    The Chair advised that for the purposes of clarification clause 4.8.23(a) of the Constitution does not apply to this meeting.

(4)    The Chair reminded Members of the adopted North Herts Scrutiny Charter and the need to ensure that the meeting was conducted with independence, initiative and integrity. The full Charter was available to Members via the Scrutiny Intranet pages.

(5)    The Chair advised of a change to the order of the Agenda and Agenda Item 14 would be taken after Agenda Item 7.

To receive petitions, comments and questions from the public.

There was no public participation at this meeting.

Audio recording – 3 minutes 42 seconds

There was no public participation at this meeting.

The Chair to report on any urgent or general exception items which required their agreement. At the time of printing the agenda, the Chair had not agreed any urgent or general exception items.

The Chair noted two urgent items in relation to the Neighbourhood Plan Referendum for Barkway and Nuthampstead and Local Government Reorganisation – Interim Plan Submission. The Chair provided details for their urgency and advised that the full Urgency Notices for both items had been published on the Council website.

Audio recording – 3 minutes 46 seconds

The Chair noted two urgent items in relation to the Neighbourhood Plan Referendum for Barkway and Nuthampstead and Local Government Reorganisation – Interim Plan Submission. The Chair provided details for their urgency and advised that the full Urgency Notices for both items had been published on the Council website.

To receive and respond to any questions from Members either set out in the agenda or tabled at the meeting.

No questions had been submitted by Members.

Audio recording – 6 minutes 20 seconds

No questions had been submitted by Members.

REPORT OF THE LEGAL MANAGER AND DEPUTY MONITORING OFFICER

This Report provides an update on the Council’s current use of RIPA and reports on the annual policy review. The Report also provides an update on the proposed amendments to the Council’s RIPA Policies following its annual review.

RESOLVED: That the Committee noted the content of the report.

RECOMMENDED TO CABINET: The adoption of the amended RIPA Policy (Appendix A).

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION: To comply with the best practice guidance and the Committee’s terms of reference.

Audio recording – 6 minutes 28 seconds

N.B. Councillor Laura Williams entered the Council Chamber at 19:37.

The Deputy Monitoring Officer presented the reported entitled ‘Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (‘RIPA’) Update and Annual Review’ and advised that:

·             The report provided an overview of the compliance with RIPA and highlighted the minor amendments that had been made to the RIPA policy as part of the annual review.

·             The amendments were largely administrative and included the updates to officer titles as part of the staffing restructure which would be further finessed.

·             The amendments also ensured consistency with the Home Office Code of Practice and clarification on the use of social media during investigations.

·             The report was being brought to the committee to maintain transparency and accountability on the use of investigatory powers. 

In response to a question from Councillor Matt Barnes, the Deputy Monitoring Officer advised that all officers were made aware of the updated RIPA policy and designated officers were given proper training to make sure that collaboration with third parties took place appropriately. 

Councillor Matt Barnes proposed and Councillor Jon Clayden seconded and, following a vote, it was:

RESOLVED: That the Committee noted the content of the report.

RECOMMENDED TO CABINET: The adoption of the amended RIPA Policy (Appendix A – include updated titles within the appendix to the Policy).

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION: To comply with the best practice guidance and the Committee’s terms of reference.

To consider any matters referred to the Committee for a decision in relation to a call-in of decision.

At the time of publication, one item had been accepted as a Call-In, under 6.3.11 of the Constitution, regarding the Cabinet decision taken on 11 February 2025 on Proposed Parking Tariffs for 2025/26.

Following agreement from the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee, it was agreed this item would be considered within this scheduled meeting, rather than as an extraordinary meeting.

The Chair advised that one item had been accepted as a Call-In, under 6.3.11 of the Constitution, regarding the Cabinet decision taken on 11 February 2025 on Proposed Parking Tariffs for 2025/26. The decision was called in by Councillors Ralph Muncer, Martin Prescott, Joe Graziano, Steven Patmore and David Barnard.

RECOMMENDED TO CABINET: That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee recommends that:

(1)     Cabinet reconsiders the proposed on-street and off-street charging tariffs in Royston and Knebworth in light of the information received at the meeting.

(2)     Cabinet considers the increase in parking charges based on the updated modelling, specifically around the 4% increase in charges, where this had not been applied to all charges.

(3)     Cabinet notes the importance of Overview & Scrutiny in supporting Cabinet in reaching robust policy decisions and works with the Chair of the Committee to effectively facilitate this.  

Audio recording – 8 minutes 52 seconds

Councillors Ralph Muncer, David Barnard and Martin Prescott presented the Called-In item from the Cabinet meeting on 11 February 2025 entitled ‘Proposed Parking Tariffs for 2025/26’ and advised that:

·             Councillors Joe Graziano and Steven Patmore were unable to attend this meeting.

·             Within the Budget announced in October 2024 by the government, National Insurance for Employers had been increased. This would directly impact local businesses and in turn employees who would be likely to see their wages reduced as a result of cost cutting measures by businesses. Because of this, North Herts residents would have less disposable income to spend in the district and town centres.

·             High streets had only recently recovered from significant economic events in recent times such as the COVID Pandemic and the Ukraine War.

·             The increase to National Insurance for Employers would be yet another significant economic challenge that would further hinder the recovery. 

·             The decision to increase car parking charges would add to the pressures and challenges which independent local businesses already faced from increasing business rates, rents, and inflation.

·             A 10p increase to parking charges in some car parks did not sound like a lot, however, it could mean the difference in people choosing to visit towns in North Herts and this could have a negative impact on local businesses if the parking charges decreased footfall in town centres.

·             Car parking charges across the district should be frozen in the 2025/26 financial year to support businesses who were already faced with multiple challenges as a result of the policies of the current Government.

·             The 30-minute tariff in Knebworth should be abolished to allow free parking for up to 30 minutes in the St Martin’s Road Car Park which would not only support local businesses on this road and in the High Street, but would alleviate current and future congestion pressures in the village ahead of approximately 600 proposed homes being built.

·             The proposed parking tariffs were not discussed by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee before Cabinet took the decision on them, and it was important for Members across North Herts Council to be able to scrutinise the decisions that the minority administration made.

·             The increase in car parking charges and the ongoing possibility of on-street charges would be a tax on rural communities who had limited or no access to public transport.

·             Rural shoppers were a major contributor to town centres and the increase to parking charges would be an unfair financial attack on them.

·             Increasing parking charges may encourage people to shop at bigger greenfield sites with free parking rather than town centres and high streets. 

·             The decision on increasing parking charges should be reconsidered and withdrawn if the right solution could not be found.

The following Members asked questions:

·             Councillor Elizabeth Dennis

·             Councillor Daniel Wright-Mason

·             Councillor Jon Clayden

·             Councillor Matt Barnes

In response to questions, Councillors Ralph Muncer, David Barnard and Martin Prescott advised that:

·             Statistics on the percentage of elderly and disabled residents that would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 93.

REPORT OF THE SERVICE DIRECTOR – REGULATORY

At the February meeting of Overview and Scrutiny it was agreed to trial focusing meetings based on areas of Executive Member responsibility. This report provides the Committee with an update on the Planning and Transport Portfolio, supported by the latest updates on the relevant projects, risks and performance indicators within this area.

RESOLVED: That the Overview & Scrutiny Committee note the report and its appendices.

REASON FOR DECISION: This report was following the request of the Committee for an update on the Planning and Transport portfolio.

Audio recording – 1 hours 4 minutes 48 seconds

The Service Director – Regulatory presented the report entitled ‘Planning & Transport Portfolio Update’ and advised that Building Control was the only area under Planning & Transport that was not covered within the report. He invited Members to ask any questions that they may have.

The following Members asked questions:

·                Councillor Ralph Muncer

·                Councillor Donna Wright

·                Councillor Elizabeth Dennis

·                Councillor Jon Clayden

·                Councillor Martin Prescott

·                Councillor Matt Barnes

·                Councillor Louise Peace

·                Councillor Tom Tyson

In response to questions, Councillor Val Bryant advised that:

·                The Interim Executive Member for Planning & Transport had given their apologies for this meeting.

·                The appointment of a permanent Executive Member for Planning & Transport could be expected to take place around the time of the Annual Council meeting.

·                Discussion around using the Community Safety Budget to upgrade lampposts to smart lampposts had taken place. These would house CCTV cameras and EV charging points and they would try to account for as many lampposts as possible before undertaking this to spread the costs of the project. 

In response to questions, the Strategic Planning & Projects Manager advised that:

·                Consultants had been commissioned to investigate access options to Hitchin Station not just from the eastern side, but under the bridge to the station as well. The options had been presented to Network Rail and they were waiting for them to respond. Once a response had been received, they would be able to provide an update and narrow down the options to take forward.

·                The Senior Transport Policy Officer worked with both the Master Planning Team at North Herts Council and the County Council. When planning applications were received, they would advise the Planning Development Team on recommendations that could be made to facilitate the Local Transport Plan. 

·                The County Council were prioritising some of the more important routes in the Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans (LCWIP) and s106 contributions would be directed to these going forward.

In response to questions, the Service Director – Regulatory advised that:

·                A Project Prioritisation Programme was in place and timelines for projects were led by statutory and grant deadlines. Everything else that was not dictated by one of these deadlines was done in discussion with the portfolio holder.

·                Highways were responsible for pavements across the district, and they had been awarded £6.7 million of Local Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Funding (LEVI) for on-street charging purposes. The Council would be presenting their case for their share of the funding along with the other ten District and Borough Councils across the County.

·                Most lampposts were located at the back of pavements, therefore solutions such as retractable bollards may need to be implemented to facilitate on-street EV charging where this was the case.

·                It would not be financially viable for most EV charging companies to install charging points in rural areas, therefore the Council would allow the installation of EV charging points in their car parks to increase the availability of EV charging points to rural residents when visiting towns  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

To consider passing the following resolution: That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public be excluded from the meeting on the grounds that the following report will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the said Act (as amended).

RESOLVED: That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public be excluded from the meeting on the grounds that the following report will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the said Act (as amended)

Audio recording – 1 hour 47 minutes 59 seconds

Councillor Matt Barnes proposed and Councillor Jon Clayden seconded and, following a vote it was:

RESOLVED: That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the said Act (as amended).

N.B. Following the conclusion of this item, there was a break in proceedings and the meeting reconvened at 21:28. During the break Councillor Martin Prescott left the Chamber and did not return.

REPORT OF THE CULTURE AND FACILITIES SERVICE MANAGER AND PRINCIPAL ESTATES SURVEYOR

To consider the proposed acquisition of Unit 1, City Park, Letchworth Garden City on a long leasehold basis at a peppercorn rent (i.e. zero) for the Museum Storage Facility on the terms set out in the Part 1 and Part 2 reports.

RECOMMENDED TO CABINET: That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee recommends that: Cabinet approve the acquisition of Unit 1 City Park, Letchworth Garden City on the terms set out in the Part 2 report and noting the detailed Budget Cost Plan for adapting, fitting out and upgrading the building for museum storage at Appendix A.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION: Alimited number of modern buildings of this age and size become available to purchase or lease in Letchworth Garden City and surrounding area, particularly one on a long lease at a peppercorn rent for the full term, with an expiry date in 2150. Unit 1 includes land fronting Works Road and to the side of the unit, plus a large part of the car park with the ability to erect a fence to separate the area from the rest of the car park used by adjoining units. In addition, the Council already owns the long leasehold interest in Unit 3 City Park, Letchworth Garden City, having acquired it in June 2016 with that building being used for general archive storage, IT servers, offsite disaster recovery, careline business continuity and legal department storage.

N.B. This item was considered in restricted session and therefore no recordings were available.

Councillor Val Bryant, as Deputy Leader of the Council, presented the report entitled ‘Acquisition of Unit 1 City Park, Letchworth Garden City for the Museum Storage Facility’.

Councillor Matt Barnes proposed and Councillor Jon Clayden seconded and, following a vote it was:

RECOMMENDED TO CABINET: That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee recommends that: Cabinet approve the acquisition of Unit 1 City Park, Letchworth Garden City on the terms set out in the Part 2 report and noting the detailed Budget Cost Plan for adapting, fitting out and upgrading the building for museum storage at Appendix A.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION: Alimited number of modern buildings of this age and size become available to purchase or lease in Letchworth Garden City and surrounding area, particularly one on a long lease at a peppercorn rent for the full term, with an expiry date in 2150. Unit 1 includes land fronting Works Road and to the side of the unit, plus a large part of the car park with the ability to erect a fence to separate the area from the rest of the car park used by adjoining units. In addition, the Council already owns the long leasehold interest in Unit 3 City Park, Letchworth Garden City, having acquired it in June 2016 with that building being used for general archive storage, IT servers, offsite disaster recovery, careline business continuity and legal department storage.

REPORT OF THE CULTURE AND FACILITIES SERVICE MANAGER AND PRINCIPAL ESTATES SURVEYOR

To consider the proposed acquisition of Unit 1, City Park, Letchworth Garden City on a long leasehold basis at a peppercorn rent (i.e. zero) for the Museum Storage Facility on the terms set out in the Part 1 and Part 2 reports.

RECOMMENDED TO CABINET: That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee recommend: That Cabinet approve the acquisition of Unit 1 City Park, Letchworth Garden City on the terms set out in the Part 2 report and noting the detailed Budget Cost Plan for adapting, fitting out and upgrading the building for museum storage.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION: Alimited number of modern buildings of this age and size become available to purchase or lease in Letchworth Garden City and surrounding area, particularly one on a long lease at a peppercorn rent for the full term, with an expiry date in 2150. Unit 1 includes land fronting Works Road and to the side of the unit, plus a large part of the car park with the ability to erect a fence to separate the area from the rest of the car park used by adjoining units. In addition, the Council already owns the long leasehold interest in Unit 3 City Park, Letchworth Garden City, having acquired it in June 2016 with that building being used for general archive storage, IT servers, offsite disaster recovery, careline business continuity and legal department storage.

Audio Recording - 2 hours 22 minutes 13 seconds

Councillor Val Bryant, as Deputy Leader of the Council, presented the report entitled ‘Acquisition of Unit 1 City Park, Letchworth Garden City for the Museum Storage Facility’ and advised that:

·             The storage facility was an open plan, modern warehouse in the main commercial area of Letchworth Garden City.

·             If they acquired the facility, the Council would receive rent from Citysprint (UK) Limited until January 2026 and the tenant would be responsible for repairs, maintenance and business rates, giving officers time to plan the future conversion of the facility.

·             A favourable Pre-Purchase Report from Brown & Lee Property Consultants and a Full Building Survey from Hollis confirming the soundness of the facility had been received. 

·             Significant investment would be required to ensure the environmental sustainability and efficiency of the facility and the preservation of the museum collection.

·             This was an opportunity to acquire a long-term storage space at a decreased cost.

·             The sale of the current storage site at Bury Mead Road in Hitchin would have the potential to raise up to £500,000.

·             The acquisition of Unit 1 would alleviate storage pressures at Broadway Gardens in Letchworth.

Councillor Ian Albert, as Executive Member for Finance and IT, advised that:

·             Due to the nature of the building, extensive fitting would be required to repurpose it for museum storage purposes. However, the total cost of investment would come to £2.5 million which was well within the £4 million earmarked for the acquisition of museum storage space.

·             The leasehold for the facility had 125 years left on it.

·             £64,000 in rent would be received from the existing tenant until January 2026, allowing the Council to collect income until then.

·             Facilities of this size were not on the market very often.

·             The contract procurement rules were followed when investigating alternative options for museum storage.

·             If the purchase did not go through, other options would continue to be explored such as grant funding towards another facility.

·             The time scales for acquiring the building would not allow for the Council to obtain grant funding towards the purchase, however, they would investigate obtaining grants towards project staff and the refitting.

·             A partnership solution was being explored by Letchworth Garden City Heritage Foundation who sought input from the Council towards a feasibility study over Vantage Point in Letchworth. However, the viability of this facility was not guaranteed and the initial cost projections of this were £137,000 higher than the acquisition of Unit 1 over its lifetime.

·             However, if these projections changed, there would be the possibility to re-explore this option. 

The following Members asked questions:

·             Councillor Jon Clayden

·             Councillor Matt Barnes

·             Councillor Ralph Muncer

In response to questions, the Culture and Facilities Service Manager advised that:

·             There was a possibility of exploring income from Unit 1 through the commercialisation of the building, however, this would need further research as the property coming to market was a recent development.

·             Unit 1 came with a great deal of office space and welfare facilities  ...  view the full minutes text for item 97.

REPORT OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

The Council recently undertook a Corporate Peer Challenge (CPC) between 4 and 7 November 2024, where we were visited by a peer team supported by the Local Government Association. The peer team met with a large number of staff and councillors, as well as external stakeholders such as contractual partners, neighbouring authorities and members of our community. The peer team produced a feedback report, attached at Appendix A, which was reported to Cabinet on 14 January 2025. An Action Plan has now been developed, attached at Appendix B.

RESOLVED:

(1)     That the content of the Corporate Peer Challenge report and its recommendations be noted.

(2)     That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee comment on the proposed Action Plan, to be considered by Cabinet on 18 March 2025.

REASON FOR DECISIONS: To ensure that the Council responded to the matters identified within the CPC report, ensuring that the benefits of the CPC process are realised.

Audio recording – 2 hours 44 minutes 40 seconds

N.B. Councillor Laura Williams left the Chamber at 22:15 and did not return.

The Managing Director presented the report entitled ‘Corporate Peer Challenge Report and Action Plan’ and advised that:

·                The Corporate Peer Challenge Review took place at the beginning of November and the final report was received before Christmas. It was noted at the Cabinet meeting in January with a delegation to produce the Action Plan, which would then be presented to Cabinet at a later meeting, following comments from this Committee.

·                Within the report, there were ten recommendations made to the Council. The Action Plan would respond to these alone and any other useful information that had been picked up from the report would be looked at separately.

·                Some of the recommendations from the report were quite narrative and in response, several of the actions within the Action Plan were also narrative.

·                As the response in the Action Plan was refined in more detail, the actions would become more time specified.

·                The first recommendation mentioned the golden thread which was a term used to describe the link between the overarching corporate policies, included in the Council Plan, and how these linked to the operational delivery of services.

The following Members asked questions:

·                Councillor Ralph Muncer

·                Councillor Donna Wright

·                Councillor Matt Barnes

·                Councillor Claire Winchester

In response to questions, the Managing Director advised that:

·                In the medium to long-term, it was not certain that the District Council would exist due to local government reorganisation.

·                The Corporate Peer Review took place before the Devolution White Paper was published.

·                If North Herts did not exist, priorities that were mapped out in the Action Plan would have to be changed. They did not have the funding or staff resources to do everything, therefore they would have to prioritise certain actions, especially with the future proposed structure change of the Council.

·                The process around Regular Performance Reviews and One-to-Ones would be reviewed as part of the Action Plan, and this would involve engagement with senior managers to embed new processes.

·                The Local Government Association required an Action Plan to be published within 3 months of the report being published.

·                The Action Plan had some useful short-term actions for the Council to undertake in addition to other projects that would help the Council for whatever came next such as the Digital Transformation Update.

·                Local Government reorganisation was looking very likely which meant that recommendations that had been made in the report and the Action Plan would not necessarily be relevant in the future.

In response to questions, Councillor Val Bryant advised that:

·                Modernisation was listed as one of the recommendations and in response to this, the Digital Transformation Update had already begun and this could save resources and money for the Council.

·                The narrative on Place within the Action Plan had unfortunately been overtaken since the announcement of the Devolution White Paper.  

The following Members took part in the debate:

·                Councillor Ralph Muncer

·                Councillor Matt  ...  view the full minutes text for item 98.

REPORT OF THE SCRUTINY OFFICER

This report highlights items scheduled in the work programme of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for the 2024-25 civic year. It also includes items that have not yet been assigned to a specific meeting of the Committee.

RESOLVED:

(1)     That the Committee prioritises topics for inclusion in the Work Programme attached as Appendix A and, where appropriate, determines the high-level form and timing of scrutiny input.

(2)     That the Committee, having considered the most recent iteration of the Forward Plan, as attached at Appendix B, suggests a list of items to be considered at its meetings in the coming civic year.

(3)     That the Corporate Peer Challenge Action Plan as attached at Appendix C be considered.

REASONS FOR DECISIONS:

(1)     To allow the Committee to set a work programme which provides focused Member oversight, encourages open debate and seeks to achieve service improvement through effective policy development and meaningful policy and service change.

(2)     The need to observe Constitutional requirements and monitor the Forward Plan for appropriate items to scrutinise remains a key aspect of work programming.

Audio recording – 3 hours 8 minutes 13 seconds

The Scrutiny Officer presented the report entitled ‘Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme 2024-25’ and advised that:

·                Members would be invited to a Work Programme training session on 13 May which would contain training from the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny and a workshop with the Scrutiny Officer and the Committee, Member and Scrutiny Manager to begin looking at items for the 2025/26 Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme.

·                Appointments to the S106 Task and Finish Group had been made and the draft scope had been reviewed by the Chair and sent to both officers and the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny to ensure that it had been well defined. Comments on the draft scope were due back on Tuesday 18 March.

·                The Local Government Association Peer Review actions were included in Appendix C of the report.

·                No referrals had been made to Cabinet from the last Overview and Scrutiny meeting on 4 February, however, the referrals from this meeting would be made to the next Cabinet meeting on 18 March.

·                The Scrutiny Officer and Committee, Scrutiny and Member Manager would be attending a Centre for Governance and Scrutiny Conference on Thursday 20 March. Following this, feedback would be provided to Members on its contents.

Councillor Ralph Muncer thanked the Chair, Members, and officers for their engagement with the formation of the S106 Task and Finish Group so far.

The Chair asked Members for their opinions on two items on the Forward Plan to be discussed at the next Committee meeting. These were the Sustainability Strategy and the Town Centre Strategy.

Councillor Elizabeth Dennis supported the discussion of the Town Centre Strategy at the next meeting, although she recognised the work that would need to be carried out by officers before it could be presented and emphasised that they should not be pressured to present it at the next meeting if it was not ready in time.

Councillor Louise Peace highlighted that a consultation on sustainability was ongoing, and that they should wait to discuss the Sustainability Strategy until after the results from this had been published.

In response to Councillor Louise Peace, the Chair advised that the progress of the consultation would be kept under review.

In response to a question from Councillor Ralph Muncer on seeking the views of the Cabinet Panel on Environment regarding the Sustainability Strategy, the Committee, Member and Scrutiny Manager advised that this could be organised with them, and that all Members were able to attend meetings of the Cabinet Panel on the Environment.

The Chair also mentioned the Council Tax Reduction Scheme as an item for discussion at the Committee meeting in June, however, if more urgent items needed to be discussed, the discussion of this could be delayed to a future Committee meeting.

The Chair noted that the Town Centre Strategy would come to the next Committee meeting, along with potential updates on Museum Storage Options and the Corporate Peer Challenge Action Plan. The Chair  ...  view the full minutes text for item 99.