Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel (Performance and Growth) meetings held on 2nd April 2025 and 15th May 2025.

The Minutes of the meetings held on 2nd April 2025 and 15th May 2025 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To receive from Members declarations as to disclosable pecuniary and other interests in relation to any Agenda item.

Councillor S Corney declared an other registerable interest in minute 25/6 by virtue of submitting planning applications as part of his employment.

a)  The Panel are to receive the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme and the notices of Key Executive decisions 1st June 2025 to 30th September 2025

b)  Members to discuss future planning of items for the Work Programme

With the aid of a report by the Democratic Services Officer (Scrutiny) (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book) the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme was presented to the Panel.

It was noted the items had increased from 4 to 7 since the last work programme was populated and it was a struggle to read the additional pages. Disappointment was expressed that items had been added on last minute with little notice, especially Key Decisions and lack of a Parking update on the Agenda despite the discussions already held about this. In response, the Panel heard that Officers are working on this and an update would be sought with the intention of being added either to the Pending Agenda items  or the immediate Work Programme.

To note the responses outstanding from previous meetings.

The Panel received and noted the responses received in relation to questions arising at previous meetings of the Panel and heard that other outstanding responses would be sought.

The Overview and Scrutiny Panel is invited to comment on officer recommendations contained within the attached Cabinet report.

Executive Councillor: Sam Wakeford

By means of a report by the Economic Development Manager (a copy of which was appended in the Minute Book), The Economic Growth Strategy Report was presented to the Panel.

Councillor Gardener expressed his appreciation for the report and asked for clarification pertaining to page 54, noting the year read 2014 instead of 2024. The Council were asked how they are going to help the businesses in the district that struggle to hire additional staff due to the increase in National Insurance and Business rates as the report did not include this information. The Panel heard that this was a draft document and still had edits, ensuring errors will be corrected. They were advised this document is laying out the strategy of the Economic Growth Plan and not everything the team are currently working on. They cannot work by individual cost line and are focusing on ensuring Huntingdonshire is an attractive option to work and live in.

Councillor Pickering questioned whether the Council should be promoting areas within the district, rather than referencing Huntingdonshire itself due to the Local Government Reorganisation. He suggested maybe the Council should be looking towards their new identity rather than the existing one which isn’t well known to people. The Panel heard that this strategy is designed for the present and that whilst there will be a restructure, the Huntingdonshire area will still exist. The strategy is designed to be entirely compatible and can work in a localised manner. It was reiterated to the Panel that the website for this will go live in July and the idea is to be the leading force in promoting the area and to be the example other Councils follow.

Councillor Martin expressed his disagreement with Councillor Pickering’s point in relation to Huntingdonshire not having a known identity. He drew on the history of the district and advised the Council should be proud of this. He commended the team in their work on the strategy and encouraged the Panel to recognise this. He requested clarification on the use of Huntingdonshire economy being adaptable as he was unsure he agreed with this. The Panel heard that Huntingdonshire has a variety of key sectors, referencing advanced manufacturing, life science and the defence sector. The term adaptable was used as the Council are trying to be adaptable in supporting the right sectors that the data says they should be focusing on. The Economic Development team remain flexible in their dealings with the local businesses for their needs in that moment in time. The Panel were reminded that Huntingdonshire’s work force is not made up of a single business, it spans across different sectors as shown in page 6 of the report. Councillor Martin was appreciative of the confirmation and agreed with the use of adaptability.

Councillor Catmur referenced the Key Risks and that KPI’s will be monitored closely, asking for confirmation of what they are and if these are the ones that should be closely monitored. The Panel heard that examples of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The Overview and Scrutiny Panel is invited to comment on officer recommendations contained within the attached Cabinet report.

Executive Councillor: Tom Sanderson.

By means of a report by the Head of Planning, Infrastructure & Public Protection (a copy of which was appended in the Minute Book), the Discretionary Fees - Planning & Public Protection Report was presented to the Panel.

Councillor Martin requested confirmation as to when this was first discussed. The Panel heard that an exact date could not be provided but matters like this are discussed regularly with the Officers. Councillor Martin continued, referencing the Budget and Policy Framework procedure rules and claimed the procedure had not been followed in this instance, quoting Part 2.1, part A of the Constitution. He reiterated that the Panel should have notified as soon as it came up. It was confirmed to the Panel that the notices had been presented correctly and the procedure has been followed. Councillor Martin confirmed that he fully supports the proposal of charging additional fees but would like to make the Recommendation that this not be delegated to Officers but charges to  remain a decision of Full Council. The Panel heard that the Officers have adopted a new system 2 months ago which highlighted the upturn in Section 106 agreements which must be signed. This must reach the July Council otherwise they will be doing this at cost to the Council. The Panel were informed this had been brought to them in June to allow them time to scrutinise and be fully informed before Full Council in July. The Panel were also asked to consider agility when debating the proffered Recommendation suggested. The report is based on data and guidance that’s been gathered by other Councils. The team are undertaking a viability assessment as part of the development of the Local Plan.  If there are viability recommendations that suggest we need to make changes at pace, is the timescale to bring something to Full Council. Delegation needs to be crafted so there are no unintended consequences that could impact other work streams. Councillor Martin expressed his concerns about setting a dangerous precedent as this would be the only discretionary charge that could be changed outside of a Full Council meeting, if this were approved. It was confirmed that the Panel could make this Recommendation to Council  and that the whole budget process must be separated from variations in-year to the budget which is why the issue is going ahead to Council to be considered. It was confirmed to the Panel that new legislation is coming that will introduce a new process and that Officers would like to be empowered in an appropriate framework to enable making those decisions in the best  interests of the Council.

Councillor Taylor sought clarification as to Options 3:4:2 and 3:4:3 in the report, regarding making recommendations to Council. The Panel heard that, due to the nature of the report, it will go to Full Council in July. It is with the Panel tonight. The Chair requested further clarification from the Officer on the implications of delaying. The Panel heard that there are a number of 106  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

The Overview and Scrutiny panel (Performance & Growth) is invited to consider and comment on progress and performance during Quarter 4

Executive Councillor: S Ferguson

By means of a report by the Business Intelligence and Performance Manager (a copy of which was appended in the Minute Book), the Corporate Performance 2024/25 Quarter 4 Report was presented to the Panel.

Councillor Jennings expressed frustrations regarding P121, particularly the red items which were explained to be an anomaly and that they would be coming back up whereas with each quarterly report, they appear to be getting further away. The Panel heard that this view was respected, and this was a rare off year for the service and may be contributed to the Green Waste subscription as well as other factors. They are looking to fix this next year and that the service’s ambitious targets are something that they are striving to achieve. Councillor Jennings went on to confirm the report advised the Green Waste subscription did not impact this and that missed bins is a big concern for residents. The Panel were advised there was nothing further to be said regarding this issue. The panel were made aware that the target for missed bins was an ambitious stretch target which the service would rather retain to strive for improvement, that performance remains ahead of the APSE comparator Councils.

Councillor Taylor requested clarification in relation to action 34 within the Corporate Plan specifically for more detail regarding the expressions of interest to develop the Local Skills Implementation plan. St Neots was presented as an example of having received 10 under the CPCA skills capital grant funding. Councillor Taylor wanted to understand what this looked like and how much involvement the local community had with this. The Panel heard this would be taken away and responded to by the Officers. Councillor Taylor wanted to see a performance relating to the new funding that will be received to assist in completing projects. The Panel were advised the Officers would not report on funding for projects that had not begun yet as this could prove to be a never-ending task. The Panel also heard that the project for Quarter 4 is now completed, and anything further would need to be discussed with the Portfolio holder and the coming year’s budget setting process would be the time to explore future funding further.

Councillor Gardener conveyed disappointment over the PI18, 9% reduction in household waste recycled and reused since the implementation of the Green Wastes subscription service. PI20 confirms household residual waste has increased and believes this is a bad look for the Council as this is not very ‘green’ since this has resulted in 247,000 tonnes of additional waste to go to landfill. The Panel heard that being unable to collect food waste had been an issue, but this would be resolved next year by introducing the new food waste service from April 2026. They also heard that waste is measured by weight resulting in a disproportion shift in the percentage recycled when considering changes in green waste as food waste is heavier than for example recycled plastic. Huntingdonshire is working at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The Overview and Scrutiny Panel is invited to comment on 2024/25 Finance Performance Report.

Executive Councillor: B Mickelburgh

By means of a report by the Director of Finance and Corporate Resources (a copy of which was appended in the Minute Book), the Finance Performance 2024/25 Quarter 4 Report was presented to the Panel.

Councillor Martin was appreciative that time was made for the report to be run through with him ahead of tonight’s meeting. He wanted members of the public to understand that though this shows an overspending amount of £56,000, they are in fact £4 million better off than first set out in the budget. He reflected on the tough decisions they potentially wouldn’t have had to make if they had known this would be the outcome. The Panel heard that £2 million of that £4.2 million was included within the budget as contributions to the Workforce Strategy to the Future Financial Sustainability earmarked reserves. The additional 2.2 million contributions to earmarked reserves were funded by additional interest receivable on cash investments. The Council has higher cash balances, and the interest has remained high. It was advised that if the interest changed or if they had not been as prudent in budget setting, the result would be very different, and it is impossible to predict when or if interest rates will change.

Councillor Jennings expressed his thanks for the table and its usefulness. He brought attention to the debt owed to the Council over a year old, referencing the £165, 000 owed to HDC for 3CICT services, wanting clarification about what this is and the likelihood of its recoverability. The Panel were informed that this is a primarily debt owed by Cambridge City Council for services. The new Chief Digital and Information Officer is on top of this and leaning heavily to get this debt paid. Councillor Jennings requested a layman’s explanation for the Panel relating to the reduction in minimum revenue provision as he struggled to understand its meaning.  The Panel heard that this is a statutory provision to repay debt. The provision is made up of many assets. This is based on the previous year’s capital programme. It is best practise to review this annually and recalibrate it. If you don’t have to make as much provision, that allows more money for Service provisions.

Councillor Taylor sought clarification on where the funding for the health and wealth building came from that was put aside at full Council. The Panel heard that this was a matter taken to the Overview & Scrutiny (Environment, Communities and Partnerships) Panel. A full discussion and presentation were given by Officers. The next steps are leading towards a small pilot scheme of grant arrangements. This issue falls under the remit of the other Scrutiny Panel and further clarification can be found in those papers and the recording.

Following the discussion, it was

RESOLVED

that the comments of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel be passed to Cabinet for their consideration when making a decision upon the recommendations within the report.

The Overview and Scrutiny Panel is invited to comment on The Treasury Management Outturn Report 2024/25 attached.

Executive Councillor: B Mickelburgh

By means of a report by the Director of Finance and Resources (a copy of which was appended in the Minute Book), the Treasury Management Outturn Report 2024/25 was presented to the Panel.

Councillor Gleadow expressed her appreciation for the new Treasury Management Outturn report format, the graphs made the report a much easier read.

Councillor Martin agreed with Councillor Gleadow in that the report was very detailed and asked for confirmation of any issues that are foreseen that will negatively impact the good financial position (specifically in relation to treasury management) the Council is currently in.  The Panel heard that interest rates are a concern, the forecasts received are from for the Bank of England lending rate rather than general investment interest rates, in addition the Council has a lot of money invested with the DMO and there is little historic evidence, and as a result a risk, in relation to how far and fast the DMO interest rates could fall if general interest rates start to drop (ie DMO could fall faster due to other factors). The DMO is used as there is a guarantee from the Government that they will repay it investments. Another factor to consider is global unrest and how that impacts the economy such as driving inflation or interest rates. The Russia-Ukraine war breaking out was drawn on as an example of this.

Following the discussion, it was

RESOLVED

that the comments of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel be passed to Cabinet for their consideration when making a decision upon the recommendations within the report.

To receive a presentation on Garden Waste Subscription Implementation and Impacts.

Executive Councillor: J Kerr

By means of a presentation by the Head of Operations (a copy of which was appended in the Minute Book), the Garden Waste Finance item was presented to the Panel.

Councillor Martin reiterated that he was still not in agreement with charging for the Green waste service but understands this is the way the Council are moving forward. He asked if the implementation cost was included in the revenue costs. The Panel heard that it was not included but confirmed they implementation costs were £400K than originally predicted as they managed the collections in-house.

In response to further questions from Councillor Martin, the Panel heard Cambridgeshire County Council oversee the recycling centres and that they do not monitor footfall. They do track the amount of waste by tonnage, confirming that green waste increased by 788 tonnes in the last 12 months. It cannot be confirmed if this was due to the introduction of charging for green waste or if it was seasonal. They also heard that ultimately, since introducing the charge for green waste, they collected 2498 less tonnes of waste overall.

The majority of the missed bins was from residual waste, not green waste and that was mainly due to losing 6 fulltime and experienced members of staff to long-term sickness which hits the service hard as much of that role relies on experience which takes time to build.

It was reiterated that the average target for missed bins set by the Council was  75 per 100K collections for Huntingdonshire and 72 by other Local Authorities. In 2023/2024, the final result was 39.8 missed bins per 100K. The service wanted to be ambitious in retaining this target for the 2024/2025 year. It was confirmed that unit costs were well below average when compared to the 16 other Local Authorities and that, whilst it is showing as red, the figures we have are enviable.

Councillor Pickering asked if the organic matter had been recovered from the residual waste. The Panel heard that the Officers do not have access to that information as Huntingdonshire are the collection authority, not the disposal. This is under the remit of Cambridgeshire County Council. It was confirmed that Cambridgeshire County Council are working hard to find the best way to deal with the residual waste.

Councillor Jennings admitted that he had been wrong in his previous stance regarding the estimated take up levels where he felt they were too high an estimation. He congratulated the Officers on the 65% take up achieved in the first year and asked if they think the rest will sign up later in the year. The Panel heard that this was difficult to forecast but some residents have signed up for the service ahead of the renewal date and sometimes doing this multiple times which shows satisfaction with the service. There are currently just under 51K subscriptions with a steady stream of 300-400 per week still coming in.

Councillor Taylor acknowledged that it was a hard decision in her previous  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

The Panel is invited to review the proposed target and tolerances for the key performance indicators 2025/26

Executive Councillor: S Ferguson.

By means of a report by the Head of Policy, Performance & Emergency Planning (a copy of which was appended in the Minute Book), the Corporate Plan - New Performance Indicator Targets and Tolerances Report was presented to the Panel.

Councillor Jennings expressed his pleasure that his previous comments regarding One Leisure targets had been incorporated in the Plan. It demonstrates that Scrutiny does work in practise.

Councillor Martin agreed with Councillor Jennings and expressed his thanks for the adjustments that had been made based on the feedback provided previously. He expressed an interest in receiving further date and statistics from other organisations as this would provide a rounder picture which will aid in the scrutinising process.  The Panel heard that it had been a difficult year for reporting due to people leaving but they now have two new Officers who have agreed to continue assisting with the reporting.

Councillor Taylor expressed her concern and reminded Members that setting  targets is a good thing, but it must be remembered that behind the data is humans and the cost of setting targets that are unattainable could be demoralising. The Panel heard that they have always been cognizant of that and that they are trying to encourage people, drive performances and reward excellent performance. This is carried out with the consent of the Service owners, and they try not to set unattainable targets. They have adjusted 2 on the report for this reasoning.

Following the discussion, it was

RESOLVED

that the comments of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel be passed to Cabinet for their consideration when making a decision upon the recommendations within the report.