Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Monday 1 June 2026, 4:00pm - Cotswold District Council Webcasting

Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Monday, 1st June 2026 at 4:00pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Gina Blomefield
Share this agenda point
  1. Julia Gibson, Officer
  2. Councillor Gina Blomefield
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  2. Councillor Gina Blomefield
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Mike Evemy
  2. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  3. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  4. Councillor Ian Watson
  5. Councillor Mike Evemy
  6. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  7. Councillor David Cunningham
  8. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  9. Councillor Mike Evemy
  10. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  11. Councillor Clare Turner
  12. Councillor Mike Evemy
  13. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  14. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  15. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  16. Councillor David Cunningham
  17. Councillor Mike Evemy
  18. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  19. Councillor Mike Evemy
  20. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  21. Councillor Ian Watson
  22. Councillor Mike Evemy
  23. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  24. Councillor David Cunningham
  25. Councillor Mike Evemy
  26. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  27. Councillor Mike Evemy
  28. Councillor Mike Evemy
  29. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  30. Councillor Ian Watson
  31. Councillor Mike Evemy
  32. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  33. Councillor Tony Slater
  34. Councillor Mike Evemy
  35. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  36. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  37. Councillor Nick Bridges
  38. Councillor Mike Evemy
  39. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  40. Councillor Clare Turner
  41. Councillor Mike Evemy
  42. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  43. Councillor Mike Evemy
  44. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  45. Councillor Mike Evemy
  46. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  47. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  48. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  49. Councillor Mike Evemy
  50. Councillor Gina Blomefield
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Andrea Pellegram
  2. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  3. Officer
  4. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  5. Councillor David Cunningham
  6. Officer
  7. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  8. Councillor Ian Watson
  9. Officer
  10. Councillor Ian Watson
  11. Officer
  12. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  13. Councillor Tony Slater
  14. Officer
  15. Councillor Tony Slater
  16. Councillor Andrea Pellegram
  17. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  18. Councillor Clare Turner
  19. Officer
  20. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  21. Councillor Nick Bridges
  22. Officer
  23. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  24. Councillor David Cunningham
  25. Officer
  26. Officer
  27. Councillor Andrea Pellegram
  28. Councillor David Cunningham
  29. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  30. Councillor Nick Bridges
  31. Officer
  32. Councillor Andrea Pellegram
  33. Councillor Nick Bridges
  34. Officer
  35. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  36. Councillor Jon Wareing
  37. Officer
  38. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  39. Officer
  40. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  41. Officer
  42. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  43. Councillor Tony Slater
  44. Officer
  45. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  46. Officer
  47. Councillor Gina Blomefield
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Clare Turner
  2. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  3. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  4. Councillor Michael Vann
  5. Councillor Gina Blomefield
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Ian Watson
  2. Councillor Gina Blomefield
Share this agenda point
  1. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  2. Councillor Lisa Spivey
  3. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  4. Councillor Gina Blomefield
  5. Webcast Finished

.
ters.
I'm sorry, I'll start again.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:00:49
I totally forgot to tie myself on.
Right.
A warm welcome to everyone present, including any members
of the public, whether in person or watching online.
I also want to acknowledge and welcome the Cabinet members
and officers who will be giving their reports to all the members
of the committee and, in some cases, their substitutes,
and also officers present to support the overview
and scrutiny committee in its functions.
I also want to introduce Simon Harper, sitting to my right.
He has recently joined CDC and is the Head of Democratic
and Electoral Services.
He will be supporting me and the committee today.
If anybody wishes to film the proceedings, this is permitted,
provided it does not disrupt proceedings.
And could we go to apologies?

1 Apologies

We've had apologies from Councillor Angela Jenkinson and Councillor Claire
Julia Gibson, Officer - 0:01:47
Bloomer. We have substitutions. Councillor Nick Bridges is substituting for
Councillor Claire Bloomer and Councillor Claire Turner is substituting as Vice Chair today.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:02:02
Thank you for that. Does any of the people have any declarations of

2 Substitute Members

3 Declarations of Interest

interest on matters in this agenda which they want to declare now.
No declarations of interest, thank you.

4 Minutes

Now we go to the minutes of the meeting on the 13th of April.
Does anybody have any comments on the minutes or any corrections that they see fit?
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:02:30
I think those minutes are wonderful, accurate report. Can we now have somebody to propose
and second those minutes? Proposing Councillor Cunningham, well I don't know, Councillor
Turner seconding and could we go to the vote to accept those minutes?
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:02:57
I think likewise John it wasn't present so but we had enough of the show. Thank you.

5 Matters Arising from Minutes of the Previous Meeting

The matters arising I'm sure everyone who's read through these carefully is
It is really helpful now to have these full answers to questions and queries
raised at the last meeting.
If there are any further, if you need any further clarification,
please follow up with a relevant officer.
And I'm just going to say, in addition, we are still awaiting further information
on the Car -Free Cotswolds Initiative, the use of weed killers by CDC,
as well as the bidding process for SIL funds once this is finalised.
And now I shall go on to the Chair's announcements.

6 Chair's Announcements

It's fairly obvious, we have a very full agenda again,
with an important late edition on LGR.
So can all Cabinet members and all officers highlight the key
details of their reports on the assumption that those on the
committee or their substitutes will have read the detail in advance?
and then questions and answers should be as succinct and purposeful as possible.
There may be some questions which require a subsequent written answer to explain the position fully.
Please note the timings indicated on the agenda for each item.
The asset management item was moved to the end of the meeting as we may have to go into private session
as there will be commercially sensitive information involved.
And I have just talked to my Vice -Chair, Councillor Turner, on reporting to cabinet.
Sadly, I cannot attend the cabinet meeting on Thursday to report back on ONS if we've made some recommendations due to a long -standing engagement.
Councillor Turner is going to do the best she can to attend if possible, but she has got an important commitment in Blockly that night.
So now could I go to the public questions?

7 Public Questions

Do we have any public questions?
No.
Member questions.

8 Member Questions

We received a written question from Councillor Jenkinson as he
was unable to attend today and received a clear written
response to explain why CDC had taken a different route on
spatial development strategy to Stroud.
please see the attached paper. I think that if Councillor Jenkinson when he
comes back wants to ask anything further he is of course very welcome to do so.
Moving on to the report back on recommendations to Cabinet, at our last

9 Report back on recommendations

meeting we did not make any specific recommendations to Cabinet. Now we go on

10 Local Government Reorganisation - Structural Changes Order

to the first of the major topics this afternoon,
local government reorganisation, the structural changes order.
Before I ask our leader Mike Evermy to introduce this item,
I want to remind everyone that CDC's preferred option was
a single unitary.
But of course, we are only one of seven Gloucestershire councils,
some of which have different preferences.
And at the end of the day, while the government will consider
the different representations, they will make the final decision on the shape of the
unitary. So we are being asked to respond to three different options for the new
unitary or maybe unitaries by the 16th of June before their shape has been
decided. On Friday an email from Democratic Services outlined guidance on
what may be regardless of three key matters and whilst members are also
welcome to bring up other issues. I believe it is important that we give
these focus. You will also have received the list of the different officers who
have been seconded across doing 50 -50 with their own councils, from Gloucester
councils to work on the LGR work programmes. As only Annex B was headlined in
the papers, I've asked Democratic Services, which have now supplied you with
reference, page references, for all the annexes for clarity.
And now can I ask Anita and the CEO who's joining us remotely,
Jane Portman, to guide us through this decision -making.
Thank you, Chair.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:07:34
I don't know if we are able to get Jane up on, oh, she's on
screen, I can see her over there.
So maybe if I just briefly introduce and then Jane can add
to what I've got to say.
members who were at the last full council meeting will recall that I told
you about this. It had come as a little bit of a surprise in the sense of the timing
and specifically the timing requiring us to go back to government on it. So that
is determined by government. I think in their defence there I think they're
trying to do 15 of these simultaneously. So I think they're trying to line up
everything in advance of making their decision.
So what it does mean for us is that actually we've got
to consider the three scenarios that have been
put forward as potential structures for the local
government in Gloucestershire from 2028 and
give answers hypothetically to how we
think each of them should be set up and how we should
move to them.
So we're obviously doing that in advance of knowing
which one is going to be chosen by the government,
which as chair as you said ultimately these decisions are made by the
government. So and I think in the report helpfully sort of talks you through that
and in our just draw members attention 3 .1 those are really the 10 questions I
think that they're asking us to give a response to and with the three different
scenarios that's 30 answers that we need to give to the government and I'll just
that in terms of how the decision will be made on behalf of this Council I'm
here today very much in listening mode. Jane will maybe answer any, Jane and I
will answer any technical questions that you have about the process that we're
able to answer but as it stands I don't sit here with a firm set of proposed
answers. I will be discussing those with my cabinet colleagues in advance of
Thursday's meeting and then obviously making them public when we meet on Thursday and explaining
our answers. But I'm very much here to listen and answer your questions, Chair.
Thank you. Before Councillor Watson comes in, may I just ask Jane Fortman would like
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:09:49
to say a word and then Councillor Watson. Thank you.
Thank you, Chair, and good afternoon, members. Thank you for your time this afternoon. Just
Just to add to Councillor Evermy's introductory remarks, whilst we have been posed with the
ten questions about three proposals to be responded to by the 16th of June, it is in
gift as a council to decide which of those questions we wish to respond to and we may
not wish to respond to all of them. So I would just refer back to the key issues that the
chair of the committee has just suggested you focus in on to make best use of your time
this afternoon and then of course Cabinet when they meet on Thursday will consider all
the issues in the round. But as the chair has set out I'm very happy to answer any details,
any detailed questions that you have. Thank you chair, thank you.
Thank you for that. Councillor Watson please.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:11:16
Councillor Ian Watson - 0:11:22
Thank you chair. Again, Mike or Jane, it appears we've got two weeks more or less to the 16th.
I think we've got the first today. I'm slightly concerned about the enormous strain on our
officers and our political leadership and would question if we can do a really good
job in that time. I take Jane's point that maybe we don't look at all of them and maybe
concentrate on two. For one, we'd leave out the doughnut, but the other two we might work
on. Are we thinking in that direction?
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:12:07
If I can answer first. I think ultimately we've been consulted in by the government
on it's not our decision to take. And most of these I think as you go through them will
find that they're pretty uncontroversial. So I think that's why the chair is pointing
towards two or three of them that may be subject to more controversy than who the returning
officer is for the elections for example which I think is probably relatively
uncontroversial and some of the information is already in the proposals
that went in like the number of councillors so I think ideally we would
have more time I think what we when this came forward we have a cabinet meeting
this week we felt that it was appropriate that the decision was made
in public and it was made by the cabinet ultimately I as leader could
potentially have made the decision but I felt it was important it was a public
meeting as the cabinet so that's why we've done it we've not put in an extra
meeting for this because it's only a consultation but I do take your point it
would have been nicer to have a bit more time but that wasn't down to us. Thank
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:13:13
Councillor David Cunningham - 0:13:16
you. Councillor Cunningham. I still think Evermuthonia would be a
fairly good name. Can I just point out that asking the council to put forward
recommendations on something that has not yet been decided seems a little bit of a circular
reference let's say. Because some of the things that they're asking simply wouldn't work in
the two UA, would work in the one UA for instance. I think it's a question that's being
asked about what's the stopping speed of a car? Well how fast is it going?
Ah, we can't tell you that. All we can tell you is we want to know what the stopping
speed should be. I don't think honestly that there is a lot of the answers that
have already been put in as part of the original consultation I think still
stand. I really don't think that we should be spending an awful lot of
officers times reiterating some of the things which we've already answered.
especially when we don't know if the answers we're giving are going to be
relevant or not. That's more of an observation than a question.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:14:31
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:14:33
I don't think, I think Jane and I are trying to avoid spending lots of officer
time on this, I think, but inevitably she as our chief executive is talking to other chief
executives and we're discussing it amongst, we had a meeting last week to
discuss it amongst leaders, so we are having to spend time on it but
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:14:54
hopefully not too many of our other officers are. Does anybody else have any
Councillor Clare Turner - 0:14:59
particular... oh, Councillor Turner. I just wondered if you were in a position to
share a little bit of insight from that meeting last week as to kind of what the
degree of consensus across Gloucestershire. Thank you Claire. I'm conscious that you
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:15:13
know it was a meeting of leaders many of whom including myself hadn't really had
a chance at that point to discuss it with their cabinet
colleagues or their wider group colleagues.
So opinions expressed were often, you know, my opinion
rather than necessarily my group's opinion or my
administration's opinion.
I think broadly there was broad agreement across most
of these answers here.
I think where there may be difference coming forward
will be on the first question about if we are a single
council, whether we're a preparing authority or a
authority. There may be some, there was broad agreement on names but there may
there was reserved positions coming forward on names from certain quarters.
So I think those probably are the two I would say where there may be
differences of opinion but broadly I think there was broad agreement on
things like the equality of the number of councillors coming from Gloucestershire
and the leaders, so six councillors from Gloucestershire, six lead district leaders
in the, get my terminology right, the in before we get the elections, the
implementation executive, so that there's an equality there. But yeah I
think the other councillors will have to go through their process unlike when we
did it last autumn, we were at the end of the process in terms of our council was
the last to make its decision of the seven.
I think we and Cheltenham will be the first because we've both
got meetings on Thursday.
So if things will emerge, and obviously colleagues, other
leaders will have conversations with their cabinet and council
colleagues to formulate their response.
But where we are, we are trying to, you know, come to a view.
And what we have said is that we will sort of essentially pull
together a collective response, which is what the government is
asking for and highlighting where we agree and where we don't agree and the reasons for
that.
Well, thank you for that.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:17:23
I did get a bit of a briefing from Angela Carriage, our monitoring officer who attended
the meeting on Thursday.
I'm just going to try to say that the way people are tackling this, and it does seem
to be, is not on a political basis.
I think that's one of the things we want to get over to you, is, we're trying to avoid
in political, what we're trying to do is get the best outcomes.
So it's not about trying to get cabals of political people together from one view or another.
As I understand it, it is each council and its representations.
Going on to that, does anybody else have any other questions?
I've just had a suggestion that we might just run through these three main points
and have asked for anybody's opinions of that.
Does anybody want to give their own question ahead of that?
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:18:13
Well, you know, I think you've probably got that additional note which was sent around
on Friday. Number one was preparing authority or new shadow authority, and that's what Mike
Evermy has just touched on. There could be two strands of opinion on this. Obviously,
it's one or the other, does anybody have any particular thoughts or ideas on this
that they'd like to share?
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:18:46
That's it, we move on to the next one. Should the political balance...
Councillor David Cunningham - 0:18:55
Sorry, just a technical question. We have to have a shadow if it's a two -unitary
authority, right? We can't have a PA. So again, we're being asked to make a
comment on something which at one point will get kicked out if it's a 2 UA, not
a 1 UA. I don't know what people want us to say. I think it's only a matter for
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:19:13
discussion if there's a single unitary authority. You're right, it doesn't apply
if there's two, whichever of the two you go with. But it's what, therefore I guess
it's 28 because it doesn't apply to the other two rather than 30. Yeah we are
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:19:30
slightly it's either or and a little bit difficult to make a final decision when
we don't know the final shape. The next one is this should the political balance
be applied to the implementation executive joint committee and I again
Mike has already sort of covered this off to a degree that there were going to be six
representatives from the current County Council and then one each from the
different councils in Gloucestershire which seems to be on the face of a
sensible decision. Does anybody want to add to that? A bit more information about
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:20:09
that. So essentially the six, the political balance could only come from
within the six, obviously, because the leaders
of the other six, and the leaders
are four liberal Democrats and two Greens.
So that is really a matter for the county council,
almost, to determine.
And I know Lisa, as the leader of the county council,
is considering that.
And the point was made to her, I think, in discussions
that she's had with her fellow leaders at GCC.
But I think, obviously, the weighing that up
in terms of political balance is obviously
something to consider carefully.
but then obviously the balance would all have to come from her side because we are the leaders of the other authorities.
So it's really something that I think she is looking at and will come to some view on I'm sure.
Councillor Watson.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:21:01
Yeah, just for clarity on this
Councillor Ian Watson - 0:21:05
political group that's coming together.
Is that an advisory capacity or decision -making capacity?
So I think there's two phases.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:21:18
So essentially, Ian, if you look at the page 22 of the hard copy
or on your screen, you've got the diagram there that we're
talking about.
So I think you, what we're talking about is the joint
committee or the implementation executive that will run from
the point that the structural changes order comes into effect
within 14 days of that and until post the elections for the new unitary councils.
So the two different terminologies for the two different approaches whether
it's a shadow or a preparing authority. That window could be incredibly short
because the government have said to us we might not make these until March so
it may only be a meeting or two between of that of those bodies before their
resolved essentially but what they have said is they would like us to
essentially work towards almost adopt those in advance of the formal
structural changes order being made so we already are working collaborative
across Gloucestershire we're working as seven leaders and seven chief executives
I think if we were to do that once the structural changes order is laid we'll be
talking about adding adding some more councillors from the County Council to
those meetings because currently there's six district city borough councillors and
one county councillor as leader as Lisa as the leader of the County Council so
that will essentially be part of that process but essentially yeah they are in
place until the elections happen and then you're either moved to one of the
other two alternatives the shadow council where you've or the preparing
Council.
Councillor Cunningham.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:23:07
So will the County Council seats, the six that come from County, will they be done on a pro -rata basis
Councillor David Cunningham - 0:23:11
per political party?
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:23:20
So I think that's, as I said, it's a matter for the County Council ultimately to take a view on.
I think the challenge of doing that is that
the administration at the county would want to be duly represented and it's a matter for them to consider.
So I'm not here to answer for Lisa as a leader of the County Council.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:23:44
No, thank you for that. No, yes, she is expected but I think obviously she has other duties which take her time.
So was there anything anybody else wanted to say?
I mean, this is a complicated process.
The timing is not perfectly understood yet.
You never know with the government.
They've actually got to get the bill through the House
of Commons and things, and it's a work in progress.
But we can see where they're aiming to get to,
and let's hope we get that clarification in July
as to literally the shape of the unitary or unitaries.
The third item was, I don't know, either more
straightforward or more controversial, naming new
councils.
I mean, I'm not sure we have the total right to name
across the whole glossary.
I know Councillor Cunningham has imaginative
ideas, but does anybody else have any views on this?
It was discussed at that meeting last Thursday, I
think, and I think there are clear preferences.
And I think the understanding, I'm told, is
the government is a bit like, you know, it likes the North, East, South, West generally in these
things and that makes things quite straightforward. It should we have more than one. Obviously it's
one unitary, there's probably a very evident name that you would tend to call it, which probably
Gloucestershire unitary, but I'm very happy to hear anybody else's views on this.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:25:24
Can I then give you a little bit more? So you won't be surprised that
sort of the names that are in the forefront are East and West Gloucestershire
if we have a east -west split, surprisingly enough.
And the pluses of those is
that they do geographically describe the areas.
They are more, they can be seen to be inclusive because it,
by using a geographical term, it's not exclusive
to certain parts of the district.
And the challenge, or the new authority, I should say,
and the challenge in these things is creating a name
which encompasses or is seen to encompass the whole area,
especially when those areas are new.
So, there may be other proposals, as I said,
that come forward.
The sort of the working names that we've used are
East and West.
I wait to hear if any of my colleagues comes forward
with another alternative to that.
But in the absence of anything else, I think that
will be what goes forward to the government.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:26:28
If you want me to answer that, I don't know whether
people heard that at home, they wouldn't have because David didn't press your buzzer, but
your microphone. But essentially, if you look at the map of Gloucestershire and you go with
the Chinksbury plus Cheltenham plus Cotswold, it's broadly on the east side and the other three,
Forest of Dean, Gloucester and Stroud are broadly on the west side. But you can argue different
geographies. But at the end of the day, the precedent that we've had, the only precedent
we've had so far in this round was Surrey where they went with east and west.
Yes, Councillor Watson.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:27:05
Councillor Ian Watson - 0:27:09
My gut feeling is that there will be a two unitary system in Gloucestershire based on
the fact unitary so far have been about 300 ,000 that we've seen coming through. Do you feel
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:27:32
the same? We could all have different gut feels. I think after the initial decisions
were made on the priority areas, I think the odds of the two unitary went up and
the odds of the single unitary went down because for the point that you make that
the government hasn't chosen any single unitary on councils not and particularly
if you look at Suffolk, that's not that much bigger
in terms of population than Gloucestershire,
and they went for three.
And the argument that they gave particularly
was that they were looking for a combined mayoralty
with Norfolk, which also had three,
and they were looking for equality across the two areas.
So I think it's, I think probably, you know,
who knows the odds and how the government
will make a decision.
We have to plan for both of them.
Well, indeed, we are obviously having to plan for the greater
Gloucester model as well.
But I think, you know, I think the odds have went up that we
might get an east -west unitary rather than a single unitary,
rather than down.
But, yeah, who knows?
Ultimately, the government will make its decision.
The key thing is that I think we get a decision and end the
uncertainty, and, you know, we've been promised that.
And Jane's been in meetings with civil servants where there's
still promising we're going to get that decision by the summer recess
because that's what then critical once we get a decision we can get on and you
know plan for the changeover.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:29:07
Councillor Tony Slater - 0:29:11
Councillor Slater. I know I joked about an election just now but is there a
contingency plan in case there's a snap election there's an interesting
by -election happening in a couple of weeks which may prompt such a decision?
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:29:28
Well in terms of should there be a change of Prime Minister at some point
and should the government decide that you know they wanted to either the
current government or they wanted to call an election obviously everything is
possible there could be a new Prime Minister and the new Prime Minister
could decide that they don't want to do local government reorganisation.
Who knows?
I think all we can do practically is follow through in terms of the process.
We have to plan and our officers have to plan that this is going to happen.
The government doesn't seem to be in any way pulling back from their determination to essentially
move to unitaries across the whole of England.
So, you know, unless and until they do, we have to move forward.
The worst thing would be to say, oh, it might not happen,
and then not do anything, and then be rushing.
Because ultimately, the government will make its
decision, and if they make the decision in July, we need to be
ready to get on and do the work after that.
Obviously, if other things take their place, then they will,
but we have to plan.
And I don't know if Jane wants to say anything about that.
It might be worth coming in, Jane, explain your experience
of that and where you've been before, and basically how much
time you don't have once the decision has come before your
Council is going to be abolished and how important it is to basically hit the ground running
from day one.
Chair, I am very happy to come in if that would be helpful.
Yes, please.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:31:03
In the two LGR programmes I have been involved in previously, once the decision is made by
MHCLG, regardless of euphoria or extreme disappointment or any other emotion, it is the time to move
forward positively, to implement the decision and the structural changes order elements
that you're being asked about to comment on this evening are very important. So for example,
the political makeup of the implementation executive or the joint committee,
depending on the decision, is crucial, the names and so on. But once all of those decisions are
made, they are made and they're not made by us as CDC and they're not made by us as Gloucestershire.
They are made by the government. So it's important we have our say. It's important that Cabinet
make a choice about which of these questions they respond to in a timely way by the 16th
of June so that we as a council have representation made about our views. But ultimately when
MHCLG make their decisions and they've given no indication, it will be anything other than
before summer recess, parliamentary summer recess, which starts on the 17th of July.
So, we expect a decision on the 16th of July or earlier. Once that decision is made, it
is absolutely for officers to pick up that mantle and deliver the decision. Now, we are
in a fortunate position, relatively speaking, in that if we get a decision in July or earlier,
which is absolutely what we assume will happen because we've been given no indication otherwise.
We will have from July 2026 until March 2028 to implement that decision.
Now, everybody thinks that's a very short period of time.
It is. But it has been done in less.
It has been done in fewer months than that. We have sufficient time. It will mean a lot
of officer time and energy and effort is put into that. Reporting back and taking members'
views along the way, bringing all our staff with us, bringing all our councillors along
the journey, but it is absolutely possible to do that. And I'm confident we've got a
really good set of arrangements across Gloucestershire, we've got very good working relationships,
we've got an excellent portfolio and programme management team who are supporting us in implementing
whatever decision is made. So I feel really confident, I feel really confident that we
can do this. But I would have to acknowledge that the bringing forward of these decisions
by MHCLG has somewhat surprised us. We weren't expecting to have to make these decisions
that we've put before you this evening and we'll be putting before Cabinet on Thursday.
we were not we were surprised it was so early but nevertheless nevertheless I
feel confident we can we can do this and we can make all the arrangements work
whatever the government's decision is in July. Thank you chair. So thank you very
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:35:20
much for that clear steer and that's really a great help.
Councillor Bridges.
Councillor Nick Bridges - 0:35:30
Question just because I think people would generally be interested. Mike, you said there's
a tranche of 15 councils making decisions at the moment. How many councils have gone
before us and how many councils are behind? This will give me an idea of how much work
is involved in government because obviously if there's, I think there's about 48 counties
in England, so if only 15 are going at the moment that means there's still another 30
to come, is that right?
I think the numbers, and Jane might not have them to hand, Nick, I think the numbers were
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:36:04
21 that were in the programme in total that were still operating on two tier arrangements,
counties and districts. I think all of the other councils had already moved
over so you might say there's 48 but you go nearby here we've got Wiltshire
Single Council, Somerset Single Council, Cornwall in the southwest, Cornwall
Single Council, Dorset split into two unitaries. So there's been a lot of
change incrementally over time to get to that there are now 21 areas left that
still have the two -tier system. Surrey was first and they have their shadow
elections just last month and then there was the priority programme which are the
ones that were essentially had their elections cancelled last year and they
ended up having elections this year so that was Sussex and Hampshire and the
ones in East Anglia. So and then we are the rest which I think is 15 county
So what they have, civil servants have said to me and to Jane and her colleagues, and
it is essentially that they believe they have the staffing to transform local government,
essentially all at the same time, to get rid of all of the two -tier system across England
in March of 2028.
So that's what we're working to.
They say they've staffed up, they've got the people to do it.
Because I think one of the reasons we're getting this quite early is they essentially looked at it
and they've got to draught the legislation for the structural changes order and they've got 15 lots
of that to do on top of the ones they've already done.
So I think that's why potentially why we're a little bit, this has come a bit earlier than we thought
and it has earlier than it's been in other processes.
But everything they tell us is that they are looking to essentially get rid
of the two -tier system in this Parliament.
And when challenged, when I was on a call with MHCLG
several months ago now, maybe last year sometime,
I did challenge them, did they want any wiggle room to 2029?
Because essentially March 2029 is still in this Parliament,
because it's five years.
But no, they weren't taking that.
They've been stuck to the March 2028 date for changeover.
So, yeah, it's a big undertaking, you're right,
that the government is putting itself through and putting all of us through.
But that's what their intention is.
Oh, Councillor Turner.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:38:39
Councillor Clare Turner - 0:38:41
I have a question probably for Jane that follows on from what Jane was talking about.
We've mentioned the slightly unexpected order of commenting on the structural changes order
and there are two more points on the timeline on page 19 that indicate
sort of council involvement, one is around the warding and then the second there's a sort of fact checking exercise with councils.
I just wonder if you can share with us, is there any role for councillors in that or is that really an officer focused job?
Councillor Turner, thank you for your question. Just to, before I get into those two questions, which are
really, really excellent questions, just to follow up on the
Councillor Bridges question
previously. It's really interesting, Councillor Bridges, that we are in the last tranche of
two -tier systems. So Gloucestershire is in the last tranche. So there will be no more
two -tier systems in England of local government after these arrangements are put in place
for 2028. This is the last bit. Now the fortunate bit about that is we've got a
lot of learning that we can draw on from previous arrangements. So whilst I
don't always like to be last, it's quite good for CDC and Gloucestershire that we
are last because we've got a lot of learning to draw from in our work. Going to the next
two questions. Yes, we are last in this and that's okay. We've got a lot of things to
learn. We can look at previous arrangements. If we look at Wiltshire, for example, that
went into a unitary set of arrangements many years ago. And indeed, in that particular
example, like the Dorset example, to name but two, neither were driven by government.
They were local, local government arrangements, as it were, local proposals that were driven
by the political leadership at the time of those arrangements.
arrangements, they were put to government rather than government putting to them. And
that set somewhat of a precedent moving forwards about what we can learn from how this works,
best practise, and so on and so forth. Secondly, the question about warding arrangements. So
So the warding arrangements for any new unitary or unitaries were set out in the three proposals
that were submitted to MHCLG back on the 28th of November.
Unless Councillor Evermeade tells me otherwise, I am not aware that any leader has raised
any questions or differences of opinion about the warding arrangements as set out in the
West Gloucestershire unitary authority proposal. There may be possibly some discussion underway
about the other proposal about the greater Gloucester Council and Gloucestershire Council
proposal regarding warding arrangements. But in terms of our council, Cotswold District
Council, CDC Council considerations, any discussion that may or may not be
happening about that does not affect Cotswold District Council at this
point in time. The last question that was asked about
further comments on the structural changes order, absolutely. So government
draught the structural changes order, i .e. their lawyers do. It's a legal document because
it will become the law once it's passed in Parliament, hopefully early March or earlier,
March 2027 or earlier, to allow the elections in 2027 to proceed. We will, as a council,
be given every opportunity to fact cheque all the matters that go into that government legal
document ahead of it being laid in Parliament. The laying of the document should happen in
November or December. MHCLG like to work in seasons, so they call it winter. I'm going
to assume that's before Christmas, but that would be helpful if it was. So let's say they
lay it in winter, before that winter laying of that structural changes order, we will
have every opportunity to fact cheque it to ensure across Gloucestershire we're all comfortable
with the legal document and then as it's an affirmative order, that means if nobody objects
it becomes law. It goes through a parliamentary process. It's a statutory instrument so it
doesn't have to be debated in the House of Commons. It just goes through a committee
system. It's an affirmative order assuming it's laid in winter 2026 and is made into
law by March 2027. We will then have a legal document that ensures we can then run the
elections for the shadow authority or authorities on 6 May 2027. Thank you, Chair.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:45:55
Just briefly follow up because I know Jane wasn't at the leaders meeting last
last week she was off on leave so just to add up on what she was saying around
the warding information so yeah within the proposals you're a member essentially
we're saying there will be two councillors per County Council Division
and then within the first term of the new council whether it's the single
or the East -West, there will be a boundary review with a view to...
Obviously, that's determined by the new council, but certainly the thinking is that we'd move
to single -member divisions in the new authority at the second election for the authority,
which is scheduled as part of this discussion to be five years after, so the first one.
So it will be in 2032, the second election.
So yeah, that's where we are with the ward.
And on the other matter of the Greater Gloucester,
there has been some discussion
because it's not completely clear
what the wardings might be for that.
So that will be further work,
I think, that will probably need to be done.
And Gloucester City Council took away
that they will need to do that work
because ultimately, obviously, this is their proposal
for the Greater Gloucester model to determine how they would manage the
elections outside of their current boundary. So their proposal is
essentially to use their current wards and create I think one or two new wards
outside of their city boundary. So that's obviously work that they will be doing
not work that we will be doing.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:47:43
Thank you. That leads me to ask a question and then Jane's got the experience of this.
In normal unitaries, is it a single counsellor per ward or division or whatever? Is that
the normal format of how it works?
Chair, I can't necessarily talk about every LGR that's happened before, but I would say
that probably it is the norm for most for it to be one Councillor per County Council
division, yes.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:48:21
I can follow up. So nearby examples, Wiltshire has a single member system and has had that
since 2009 when it was set up.
Somerset, I know, was set up, obviously, more recently
as a unitary council.
There are single -member divisions
and there are double -member divisions in Somerset.
So when we were looking at this,
and given the timing that we were allowed,
what was important is there's electoral equality.
And the County Council divisions have only just, obviously,
been redone for the elections last year,
because they were looked at then.
So we know there's electoral equality
within the County Council divisions,
so that's why they were used.
and essentially when you then can then double up councillors and that's where
we get to the 110 for the single or 58 I think in the West and 52 in the East
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:49:09
councillors. I imagine when you're talking about numerical equality you
mean the number of residents being represented. Yeah electoral
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:49:17
equality I think it's called. You have the number of councillors per elector
being very similar across the whole area,
so there's equality in that sense, yeah.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:49:29
I'm now going to ask Simon Harford,
who's been making good notes,
he's going to sum up what we've discussed.
If there's anything after that anybody wants to add,
I don't, or a recommendation, want to make to cabinet,
we'll come to that after he's given his summing up.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:49:50
So the points I've picked up, there's a general concern amongst members about the time constraints
around this process.
And you have those three questions, whether it should be, first one, whether it should
be a preparing authority or a new shadow authority.
You didn't express a view on that.
The second question was around political balance being applied to the implementation executive
or joint committee.
And I think I'm picking up from members that the leader said that the six districts are
going to pick their leaders.
So there would be political appointments from those councils.
And the issue of political balance would be a matter for the county council amongst its
six members and
Then the final question was around name of the new council or councils, and I didn't pick up anything other than
Gloucestershire Council if it was one and East and West if it was two
Is that a general summary of where you are?
Yeah
Can you give me a cheque for John?
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:51:10
with Jane Portman, working with the other councils to come to a good consensus for the
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:51:40
good of everyone in Gloucestershire. Thank you, Chair, we will endeavour to do
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:51:45
that. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you,
both of you. We move to the next item, which is waste and

11 Waste and Environment - Service Design Options

environment. I've got Andrea Peddergram, I did see her, yes, the cabinet member responsible
of this supported by Peter Johnson. Would you like to come forward? Andrea, no doubt
you would like to go first.
Do you want to see if we can get this to work?
It's okay.
Thank you, Chair. Would you like me to make a quick introduction?
Councillor Andrea Pellegram - 0:52:27
Thank you. Hello, everybody.
Thank you. This is another important paper before you with proposals regarding changes to our waste service.
I'm sure one of the things you're wondering is why we're making changes now before we're going into the unitary and business has to go on for two more years.
we still have to deliver a service to our community.
And we also have very important decisions to make about the
waste vehicles that we've also gone through the scrutiny
committee before to consider.
And the waste vehicles need to be configured for certain types
of service, and that's one of the main points of this paper.
But also, our head of waste, PETA, an incredibly competent,
a skilled officer, has come in and she's found a few sort of anomalies and things that needed
to be tidied up. So before I actually go through the paper, I just want to reassure the committee
that we are, we, PETA and I, are looking at how we're going to move into the new unitary
authority, whatever that might be. And I'm very pleased to say that I've been chosen
and is the chair for the Gloucestershire Resource Waste
Partnership, which is a rather unique organisation with all
of the cabinet members and the senior officers where we get
together.
And the terms of reference are actually
to come up with joint services.
So I haven't had my first meeting yet,
but I've been given tremendous support by PETA and Tim Atkins,
who's our interim head.
And we will be putting together, hopefully,
an assessment of all of the different ways
that all of the different authorities are actually
delivering waste, including these things here,
so that we will have recommendations for the new
unitary about where they can look at harmonising.
And one more thing I want to say before we move on is
because we're lucky to have UBICO in place already
delivering services for all of the districts,
we can expect that on day one of the new unitary that
that will just carry over.
So, the main job at the new unitary will be for all of these different services to be
brought together, but they will still be delivered.
So, it's sort of a background thing.
It's not going to be as though there are three different or six different collection services
that have to be reorganised on the first day.
So, we're quite lucky.
Getting back to this paper, these changes proposed are necessary because we have to
actually configure the new vehicles.
We're dealing with some legacy issues, such as the brain banks,
which were introduced when recycling was a new thing, and
they were meant to encourage people to recycle, but now
people get that service brought to their home, and the new
legislation about the plastics and packaging.
So we're asking for the following changes to remove
the brain banks.
We now, as I said, provide that service directly to our homes,
And also, these spring banks can be abused by people from the commercial sector who don't
want to use commercial services and would rather have us dispose of their waste, so
it will deal with that little issue there.
We're also proposing to not supply bags for the new plastic bag and wrapping collections
that's required under new legislation, which comes into place next April, 1st of April.
And PETA is discussing this with other Gloucestershire authorities.
We're all trying something a little bit different, so I think
we can all think of these as pilots, which will then be
finalised in the new unitary.
And also, introducing smaller bins, because if we keep taking
waste out of the waste stream, there will inevitably be less
residual waste in our black bins.
So as we move forward for new households or people who have
broken their bins, they will be given smaller bins, and that
should be absolutely sufficient, and PETA can answer any questions about how that works
in other districts.
So I think the thing that I hope that you think about is what kind of communications
do we need for these big changes, how we're going to achieve alignment through local government
reorganisation, and how we can avoid unwanted consequences.
So thank you very much.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:57:05
Thank you for that introduction. Did you want to add anything at this stage?
Officer - 0:57:10
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:57:12
No thank you, turn out this stage. Who would like to start off with a question?
I want to see some hands waving around please. Oh, Councillor Cunningham, it never fails,
and then Councillor Watson after. Hello Peter, thank you very much for your
Councillor David Cunningham - 0:57:27
answers because I've been asking some questions direct on this. There were a
couple of things I wanted to say. One, I would make a recommendation to cabinet
that we do increase the pickups at these BRING sites once they are decommissioned
because I think we are going to get quite a lot of people who turn up there
realise there's no bring back being and just chuck it on the floor. So I think
that would be a recommendation to look at maybe increasing the amount of visits
that you become made to those sites.
And the second is a question, which is,
what about the bringbacks for things like clothes
that are not run by us, not collected by us?
Is the intention to still leave those there?
Yes, absolutely.
Officer - 0:58:14
So very sensible in terms of that increased oversight
of those bring sites when those banks are removed.
So as we know, there is already misuse of those sites.
And so there is visits that you would go off to make to those sites from you've done rubbish, etc
So those visits would continue to ensure those those sites have the correct usage essentially
So a completely sensible recommendation and the first point and in terms of the second point
Yeah, this paper solely relates to the banks that are provided by ourselves
So it does not impact at all on the ones that are provided by largely the charity sector
And so any of those banks would continue to be provided within the within the district
Thank you. Councillor Watson.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:58:54
Councillor Ian Watson - 0:58:58
Thank you, Chair. Just the first question, just for clarity.
The plastic bags and wrapping, that's the stuff we don't recycle through CDC at the moment.
I take mine back to Tesco and put it in there. In future that will be collected? Yeah.
Yeah, absolutely. So we are required to collect it from the 1st of April next year.
Officer - 0:59:19
So this is part of simpler recycling.
So the first stage of simple recycling,
obligated local authorities to have an expanded
range of material by first of April this year.
But Cotswold was already compliant in that.
So there were no changes from our point of view.
But we will be required to expand those collections.
So that is simpler recycling set by government.
So it'll be required to extend the range of collection
at the curbside to include those flexible packaging.
Yeah, the kind of laundry detergent pouches
and the plastic bags and the bed bags, that kind of thing.
Perfect.
If I can follow up.
Councillor Ian Watson - 0:59:59
In the paper I see there's some cost implications
on various streams.
What is the overall total cost implication
in terms of savings if we do this?
It's a good question.
I'm gonna have to take it point by point
Officer - 1:00:13
so if we can come to that cumulative position.
So when we're talking about the the bring banks what's clear is the service gets taken away and therefore that cost is around
45 ,000 pounds at the minute per annum and so that cost falls away
What becomes slightly more difficult to understand is what the revenue impact is on the recycling because it depends where that recycling ends up
And so you've seen in the paper that there's that the range of scenario
So if we take that midpoint scenario, there could be a loss of revenue of 15 ,000
So the net impacts the council is a benefit of 30 ,000 pounds
Onto the next point then in terms of the plastic bags and wrapping.
Essentially it is broadly unknown in terms of the cost of the service.
Because this material is going to become obligated, it means we are going to be provided with
additional funding.
But we do not know what that additional funding is yet.
But let's say that that funding is designed to pay for the cost of the collection and
therefore that is cost neutral.
What we are saying essentially is by not providing bags to residents, we are not incurring the
additional cost of the bags.
So from our perspective, as we stand today,
we can consider that service to be cost neutral.
So service itself will cost money,
but we'll be given funding for it.
And then in terms of the change to the wheel bin size,
again, cost neutral, we pay for the provision
of a 180 litre bin, we'll be paying for a 140.
They're smaller, it doesn't unfortunately mean
they're cheaper, they are about the same price.
So it's again, a cost neutral point for us.
And then in terms of shifting the paper and cards, so when we're mixing those two materials,
what we're saying is that the paper is of a higher revenue currently.
The estimation in the paper is talking about a negative move of £20 ,000.
So overall we've got a £30 ,000 benefit in one area, a £20 ,000 reduction in revenue in another.
So we've got an overall benefit of £10 ,000.
So cost neutral plus all that?
In the scheme of the overall service it's cost neutral, absolutely.
Thank you very much.
Thank you. I've got Councillor Slater next please.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:02:22
Councillor Tony Slater - 1:02:27
Thank you, Chair. I'm happy that the bring back is being finished.
I didn't even know we still did them to be honest. I had to look up what they were.
So as far as the recycling is concerned, for me, paper and card isn't the issue.
It's the receptacles that they go in.
So at the moment we've put paper in the black bin and the card in the ridiculous blue thing,
two of which I've ordered that still haven't come back after six weeks, but that's another
matter.
So as far as I can see, in the future we will have two blue
sacks to contain paper and card.
Oh, if I can open that.
Officer - 1:03:13
So the initial idea is that there will be no change to the
containerization.
So residents still have a black box and they still have
a blue bag.
They can just put the mixed materials into both
of those containers.
So it's making it easier for them in the short term,
ending the debate of is it paper, is it card.
In the longer term then, so as we get new property growth, for example, the standard set of containers would be different.
So that residents would just have one type of container to present that mixed material in.
What the paper is saying is to harmonise on bags.
Over time, it would be nice for us to move away from the current design of the blue bags.
But we have a lot of those in stock. So there's 15 ,000 already in stock.
So as we issue those 15, I made a note, I promise.
As we made, yeah, as we get through that stock.
So we're meeting with the suppliers to look at improvements.
So that is both in terms of the size
so that hopefully residents can have more capacity,
but also in terms of how those bags seal
to try and prevent wind blowing litter.
Sorry, if I'm making just another point.
Councillor Tony Slater - 1:04:21
With LGR happening, you're obviously liaising
with other councils.
Can we not have proper wheelie bins like Stroud
for recycling?
Because they have all their recycling in one brown bin
as far as I understand.
Which has got to be easier for the waste operatives
because they just wheel it out and chuck it in.
With these bags, you know, cramming in all your Amazon
purchases and they've got to fish it out.
Certainly in my case with a wife with an Amazon habit.
You know, it must take a while to shake the things out,
whereas if you've got a proper wheelie bin,
it's just on the thing, in you go, and away it goes.
I hope I'm not speaking out of turn.
Peter will correct me if I'm wrong,
Councillor Andrea Pellegram - 1:05:06
but I think that the best we can do is just identify all of the
differences because we've got six or three,
depending on which way it goes, different collection
authorities doing things in different ways.
So if we can actually just understand all of the different
subcontractors and all of the different arrangements that
we've got in play, I think that's the best we can do.
And then it will be up to the new unitary to start actually.
Because to do what you're asking, you have to withdraw
the old bins, replace them, huge capital expense.
Obviously we don't want to do that now.
We want to do that when the harmonisation of all the services
starts to happen.
So I'm afraid I'm just guessing but it's probably two or three years. You're gonna have to wait I suspect
Thank you, I've got cancer tunnel
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:06:06
Thank you
Councillor Clare Turner - 1:06:09
Thank you for the report. It was really helpful and clearly set out the consequences of these choices
and why you would come to these kinds of recommendations.
I've got a couple of questions. The first is around...
I would have liked to have seen some understanding in relation to the commingling of paper and card,
what the environmental impact is of that.
If you're changing the product that's available effectively in the market,
is there a knock -on carbon consequence because you're using virgin material,
because you haven't got the high quality paper product?
So that was the first question and I understand that might not be,
you might not have that information to hand.
And the other question was about the removal of the brain banks.
The three scenarios are very helpful to understand the financial implication
of the product, the extremes and the middle ground.
I just wondered if there's, particularly in relation to the commercial use of the brain
banks, if we have any evidence that's informed that kind of 50 %?
Or is that just best guesses because we don't understand how those are currently being used
by commercial operators?
Yeah, absolutely.
Thank you for this question.
So the, in terms of the first one, the environmental impacts of paper.
Officer - 1:07:27
So you're absolutely right, mixing that material, it does mean that that is therefore then going
into creating new packaging, it's not going
into creating new paper.
And so in that sense it is a reduction in the quality
of the output and so it is downcycling rather than kind
of a more circular approach.
It's weighing the impact of the standcycling against the fact
that that material is diminishing.
And so over time paper is going down and down
as we get more digital services, as we get less use
of paper essentially.
And so it's designing a system that would have a very small amount of tonnage except
as we go on.
So you're absolutely right, there is a potential loss in the quality, but we are planning for
the future, if that makes sense.
I hope that kind of answers that question.
And in terms of the commercial use of the bring banks, yeah, you're right.
Short of sort of standing by the sites and kind of interrogating people as they're using
them, I think anecdotally there's always been a feel that a large portion of the bring banks
our own car parks but others historically have been at places like
pub car parks and they've been highly used by things like pubs but yeah short
of doing a survey and trying to you know understand exactly what's going on it'd
be it'd be quite difficult for us to get to that conclusion.
So there is a bit of an unknown?
There is a bit of an unknown absolutely.
Thank you.
Yes, thank you.
Councillor Bridges.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:08:48
A few points.
Councillor Nick Bridges - 1:08:54
One, it seems really odd that we have different coloured bins all over the country.
Can we just sort of make a point to the government
that they can standardise it?
Number two, there are various things that could be collected
and recycled such as spectacles to go overseas, medical packs,
books, CDs, et cetera, is all we're asking
that charities take away the clothing.
It's probably for ragging, they do that,
but often there's good stuff that doesn't need to be ragged.
energy could go to shops. Seems odd that we're leaving that to the charity shops
rather than being proactive ourselves. And a final point, I don't really want to
have a smaller recycling bin. I'm quite happy with what I've got and I'd be
disappointed if I had a smaller one.
Officer - 1:09:51
So take this point one by one. You're right, the system that we have with
different coloured bins, like it's unfortunate.
I think it's quite linked in some ways to the conversation
we're having around LDR and just the number of authorities
there are, so over time all of these many authorities,
for very good reasons individually, have come up with
a slightly different solution, and so we've got quite
a patchwork of services across the country.
And when we're talking about that service design,
which we touched on earlier, you know, fundamentally
there's kind of three main recycling systems,
so you've got the kerbside sort that we have in place,
you've got the two -stream system that Stroud have,
you've got the commingled system that Shrewsbury have,
and all of those systems have their pros and cons.
For us, Co -Pseud -Sor, it's got exceptionally high standard
of quality of material that generally can be recycled well.
For others, it's around prioritising
that ease of use for residents.
So there is no one right way.
That's kind of how we've entered the situation we are.
And there's all sorts of, Lake District,
a lot of those authorities, when they rolled out
residual bins the first time,
they wanted to be in -keeper in the natural environment,
So they were green, they didn't think about them.
Garden waste would come on later and that would make more sense for
those bins to be green.
So there's all sorts of just decisions over time that,
you know, ends up with patchwork of services that we have.
It's quite difficult to then get, you know,
all of those authorities to work together on what, you know,
that's the standardisation.
Talking about the different types of materials.
So, Taxels is collected at the curbside and
there are the charity sectors that collect from the ring banks.
And there's also a huge amount now that goes into reuse, you know, Vinted, eBay, all of
these things are doing a fantastic job at kind of keeping products in use.
But there are ways still, I suppose, for those materials to be recycled and go for ragging.
And, you know, there are lots of companies, so Wilcox that we use for our textiles that
collect to the curbside, they will do a physical sort and they will take out the material that's
high quality can be reused.
They will then, you know, it'll go down to the very lowest level essentially.
So that sort is happening at that level.
Other materials, you're right, we can go, you know, vape, spectacles.
There are all sorts of other things that we can look at.
There is a waste wizard on the county website.
It's a kind of a way for authorities to engage with all of these different materials.
There are mechanisms for them to kind of engage with the recycling.
But there are always opportunities for us to look at other levels of, you know, where we want to go to.
And I think your final point is around the bin size.
So it's the refuse bin we're talking about.
So one of the main drivers really,
we've got all of these incredible recycling systems
for people to use.
One of the ways we encourage, in a vote of commerce,
residents to engage with these recycling systems
is to make that bin smaller.
And so the refuse bin becomes smaller.
It then encourages them to recycle more,
which is fundamentally what we want.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:12:45
Thank you. Sorry, it wasn't on, my phone was on silent but it was buzzing. So I've
touched on the floor. Mr Pithaving. So could I have Councillor Cunningham, please?
Councillor David Cunningham - 1:12:57
On page 71. One second, Carla, please hold.
It's basically about the communications that you're going to do about this.
I don't see anything in here that says you will be expected to provide your own receptacle
to put the plastic wrap out.
And nine out of the other ten councils, that sounds like a cat advert, doesn't it?
Nine out of the other ten councils did provide a bag for residents to put it in.
How do we intend to communicate that we're going to expect people to go and buy a plastic bag to put the plastic bags in?
Could you help and tell say which paragraph you're looking at?
Officer - 1:13:45
that.
Yeah, it's.
Officer - 1:13:58
Yeah, we're just taking time to reference but I absolutely understand that you say the
yet there needs to be a communications package that goes with this obviously I think one
other things before we get to what container residents are asked to present
the material in is getting that understanding of the materials that
we're actually asking for in the first place. So we've kind of moved on from
you know paper, cardboard, plastic bottles and things now that need to be
recognised by by residents as this is actually what we want and we want that
to be you know not contaminated by food or other material. And so part of that
is then the bag that it goes in. Completely understand your point you know
Initially, people still will have carrier bags around that they'll want to recycle.
And so those carrier bags are used then to present that material.
Over time, you might get to a point where people have less and less bags,
but they still have the plastic to recycle.
At that point, maybe they will have to get to the point of buying bags.
But we do expect them.
We don't expect them.
But there is that.
Many people are doing this already for food waste, et cetera.
So the thought behind it is less about the requirement for
residents to buy the bags and more that the potential
wastage if we were to buy bags and issue them to every
resident who then may not participate.
Councillor Andrea Pellegram - 1:15:24
Dr. Mary Jo Cagle I'd just like to add to that because it is
quite a confusing thing.
We're asking people to do something quite very different
from what they're doing now.
And the first thing I thought when, you know, before I was
told I was wrong by PETA was that, you know, oh, I'll just
use my green bin liner.
That's fine.
But you can't use your green bin liner because it's a different
kind of plastic, and that's only for green bins.
So I think the communications are absolutely critical, and
we're very, very well aware because if people are like me,
then they'll make, they'll do the wrong thing.
And then that will contaminate all of that plastic.
So, you know, and the point is, is that we're trying to get a clean material at the end.
So education of the public is going to be very, very important.
You're absolutely right.
So then I think the only thing that's missing of the one, two, three, four, five, six, seven
Councillor David Cunningham - 1:16:17
points is the thing about people providing their own.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:16:35
I think we'll make a note of that as a recommendation. I've got Councillor
Bridges please. I'm just picking up on that again we're trying to avoid single
Councillor Nick Bridges - 1:16:44
use plastics and earlier on we said it's possible the resident may have to go and
buy a bag just to recycle it.
Now, I mean, I'm just, yeah, hello.
I'm just thinking if we're trying to get rid
of six crisp packets, are we allowed to put five
of those crisp packets inside the sixth?
Officer - 1:17:07
So absolutely, I understand that it's a difficult thing,
isn't it, where we're trying to discourage
the use of single use plastics,
but there may be a requirement to buy them.
The options really are the kind of the universal guidance
that's available at the minute is that residents
should present the plastic bags and wrapping
in a tied plastic bag.
So the choice is we either buy them
or the resident buys them.
And if we buy them, we buy them for every single household
in the districts and we deliver them to their houses
with all the carbon impact that goes with that.
The trials to date have indicated that the participation
may be around 35 percent, and so that would mean 65 percent
of households would receive, we'd be buying for that many
households and delivering them, delivering to them.
Whereas if a resident chooses, because they don't have their
own carry bags, they need to recycle.
If they choose to buy them, then they're buying them specifically
for the service and they get recycled.
So that's the kind of theory behind it.
Councillor Andrea Pellegram - 1:18:12
I also would like to just add that this is one of the things that I keep telling Peter
as a pilot because they're doing it differently in other of the collection authorities in
the district.
So, if this doesn't work, it's no great catastrophe because we are going to be going into a unitary
and we can sort of change our services at that point if something else is better.
At the end of the day, nobody knows how this is gonna work, because it hasn't started yet.
So we're all trying something slightly different.
So this is what we're doing, because we think this is the right thing.
Councillor Nick Bridges - 1:18:49
S1 5 .00 But we're not the first council in the country
to do this, surely.
So can't we just learn from what other people have found successful?
Officer - 1:19:00
S1 6 .00 There is some plastic film collection in the
where it is mixed with combing of material and goes to a materials
recycling facility but it is heavily contaminated and a lot of it doesn't get
recycled. The first authority in England to roll out this is a separate service
is North Somerset. North Somerset do not provide bags to their residents. They
expect residents to self -supply. Thank you. I think I had Councillor Waring.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:19:31
Councillor Jon Wareing - 1:19:34
I'm just a single frame of reference. I put general refuse in a sack in a bin in the kitchen.
Given that I'm now going to be able to put the plastic waste in a separate sack, maybe I need a new bin in the kitchen,
but basically I don't see the big deal about it. You buy a roll of bags and now I put my plastic in one and everything else, which is less, in another.
How complicated is that? Is that, I mean, is that not the point?
Officer - 1:20:04
No, absolutely. And so people that have buy plastic bin liners for their bins around their house,
it is just using one of those to present their plastic film in. Absolutely, yeah.
Thank you. I actually had a question.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:20:17
So I thought there was a difference between this plastic film, this soft plastic and the hard plastic.
So we're not actually putting them in the same one.
And my concern is on this is that this may not be a very large bag or whatever it is,
but you've got to keep it for two weeks and fill it up from time to time when you're opening
up your satsumas or whatever and putting that net into it.
It is quite going to be a little bit more tricky for some residents to manage.
And I did see that the South Gloucester pilot was, it wasn't a resounding success, it was
perhaps a little bit more ambiguous how successful it is,
it is more difficult with that sort of plastic
to have it sort of hanging around.
It's not like the bigger plastic I actually take out
straight away and put into the white bag.
But this would be smaller,
and I'm not quite sure how I'd manage it as well.
So it does, there is a concern.
Absolutely agreed, and I think that is related
Officer - 1:21:20
later to the expected participation rates which has come out of the trials
so the trials that been funded by a packaging industry and their results of
those have indicated 35 % participation that is more to do with the kind of
material we're collecting rather than whether it's going in a self -supplied or
a council supplied bag it is a complicated material it's a new thing
it's another thing for residents to do and so that is where I think it's the
engagement that is going to be there the more critical element to it how do we
communicate with residents to get them to engage with the service.
Thank you.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:21:54
Obviously clearly they have to be the sort of bag you really can tie tightly,
otherwise left outside it could be blown all over the locality.
I also did have, actually I've got, no, I've got my questions.
I was very interested, Councillor Cunningham asked for where all these
bring -banks were.
And I noticed that some of them actually didn't have anything in it,
including the one in Chipping Camden and the one in Waitrose
Sire ancestor and campus of Village Hall.
Is that because there actually are no bins there?
They're on the list, but they don't actually have a bin.
That was one question.
I was also quite curious that Dalesford,
which is a commercial enterprise,
seems to have all three there.
So I was curious to see why that.
Perhaps it was taken as the equivalent
of being in a local pub and a good place to do it.
And going back on with the brain banks,
there was an economic case made for removing them
and it might save money going into the future.
Of course, the money is saving the future, yes, but it may be
for a unitary role as it is now.
But the savings in the first year was especially
about 30 ,000, just less.
It seems quite a lot of money for the removal and the repair to the sites.
I know that also covering comms, but it seems quite a lot of money in the removal of these
things.
Sophie, could you answer those?
Thank you.
Yeah, absolutely.
Officer - 1:23:24
So yes, in terms of, so that question was asked then last week, and the number of sites
on the list is 24, but the number that are showing that you've got bringbacks against
them is 20.
So I think the main thing here is that it's a bit of a moving feast.
What we're doing is conducting a full survey of those sites, and that will be conducted by the end of this week.
And that's looking at the condition, you know, what would happen if you take those sites away?
Are any of them located in car park spaces, for example?
Are they in areas that all need to be made good in any way?
And so having all of that information to then feed into that removal plan.
In terms of the savings themselves, the £45 ,000 is the saving of a full financial year.
So if we're doing that partway through the financial year, then obviously there'll be an impact to it.
So it's looking at there are a lot of variables essentially.
So hopefully it's a worst case scenario to say that those savings will be fully realised in full next financial year,
which will be the last year of the council. So that's kind of the position we've got to.
Yes, and following up, I was interested to see that it's
Charwell who is responsible for this, and this was changed in,
I think it was said September, I haven't got that, 2025.
I actually had no idea that Charwell had any involvement
in this whatsoever.
I just know what our arrangements, what contractual
relationship is with them.
Yes, so the previous provider was Thamesdown who also provided
our transportation and brokerage services.
there was an issue with the vehicle that they had that was providing that service.
So as I understand there was the chair will kind of stepped in to provide
services in the short term. Short term has become slightly longer than short term.
So it's a relatively informal arrangement at the moment which is
something that we would either if those BRING banks were to remain, A those sites
would need investment and B we'd need to consider the contractual arrangements in
more detail. So that is some of the background to what has provoked this
this discussion and decision. Thank you very much. Was there anything else and
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:25:33
anybody want to add? Just really to finish off the debate on film I think
Councillor Tony Slater - 1:25:40
ultimately if there's a demand the market will provide because when we
first started using slot buckets the food went straight in the bucket but
there was, oh that's disgusting, so the market provided compostable bags for use
and which is much more hygienic and I think once people run out of their single
use carrier bags something will appear magically to put them in at a very cheap price.
Officer - 1:26:07
It's a really good point and I remember when we were first rolling out
food waste collections there was a big debate at the time about provision of
bags to residents, about how that would promote participation and engagement
with the service and you fast forward 20 years since these kind of systems been rolled out.
Hopefully it won't take that long this time but those bags are available in the supermarket
for you to buy.
Absolutely.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:26:41
Sorry, we were just having some technical issues with the microphone.
and now Simon Halper is live we hope and is going to sum up some of the debate.
Officer - 1:26:52
Thank you. Yes it's working. Right thank you chair. So what I've picked up from
the discussion will obviously record all of those questions and answers that Julia
will have in the minutes and that you're noting the recommendations. I've picked
up two particular additional recommendations and the first one I
they both actually relate to Councillor Cunningham. Increasing the number of
pick -up visits for the bring back sites following withdrawal of the service to
collect any fly tip waste so that was the first one and
the second one was around the importance of communication, the package of
communication to inform residents about using their own bag for plastic
recyclables.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:27:46
Thank you. Thank you Simon. This is tremendously helpful. Can I, those two recommendations, can I have a
proposal and a seconder that those should go forward to cabinet? Councillor Cunningham,
Councillor Watson and could we have a vote on those please?
I think it's already covered so I don't know if you want to make it.
Okay thank you. Well thank you very much and thank you thank you very much for
both attending the meeting and giving us useful information thank you. The next

12 Overview & Scrutiny Committee Annual Report 2025/26

item is the overview and scrutiny annual report and I am the member responsible
and Julia Gibson here is the officer.
I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this,
but I just want to thank Democratic Services who helped put together this report,
which I believe shows the value of O &S has added to the democratic process,
with 18 recommendations being made to cabinet in the last year,
of which 17 were accepted or partially accepted.
and democratic services have also regularly chased up to
ensure that reports are ready in a timely way and now provide a
much more comprehensive matter arising.
So thank you very much for all of that.
I really does appreciate it.
It's fantastic.
I also want to thank my Vice Chair, Angus Jenkinson,
who is not able to be here today,
for the work and help he has provided.
and all the committee who have on occasions been asked to attend additional O &S meetings
as the volume of the workload exceeded what could be covered in a single meeting.
And finally, as CDC winds down gradually in preparation of becoming a unit, well, the
Dorset will be a unitary or unitaries, I see the role of O &S being crucial in ensuring
that this process is carried out in an effective way to ensure the services to residents remain
unaffected and the smooth running of the council continues.
I don't know whether we have a proposal or a seconder on that.
Yes, sorry.
It's just a point of clarification.
Councillor Clare Turner - 1:30:06
In section 4 it talks about task and finish groups.
and I wondered did the inheritance tax associated with farming not qualify as a task and finish group?
My understanding was it wasn't in that year.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:30:20
Okay. I think it was
when it was reported on.
Can we cheque on when that...
I think it was last year. We reported on it last year.
We reported on it last year. I think it was covered in last year's, because we haven't actually had a task of Finnish group to my knowledge.
I could do a nod from Angela as well in the last year. They are very useful, these task of Finnish groups.
And we have it in the public conveniences and various other items.
But I don't think we've had a call to either do one recently or indeed have done one. So thank you.
Was there any other comments that anybody would like to make on that?
It goes to Annual Council.
Yes, it does go forward to Annual Council, so I don't think there was anything further we need to add on that.
Sorry, Councillor Baille.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:31:24
Councillor Michael Vann - 1:31:26
Well, just that the chair shouldn't really praise herself, so I'm only too happy to fill in that gap.
It's excellent stuff, it really is. Marvellous. Thanks.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:31:38
My response is well, thank you all. It's not a one man band.
And Councillor Turner, who is my Vice -Chair today, and also what was very helpful,
Vice -Chair for Angus Jenkinson, and has always been a huge support at ONS.
So, now we go forward to, well, we've got updates from Gloucester County Council.
Councillor Neill hasn't given us a HOSC report.
We're not even sure that she perhaps went to a HOSC meeting
since she previously gave us a report.
Councillor Jenkinson has given us one on the Gloucester
Economics or the Scrutiny Growth Committee.
And he did say that it was mostly focused on forest
dean, which I'm sure was very interesting and fascinating
in its way.
But you've got a copy of it.
But there is, I don't think, anything that anybody
particularly needs to add to that, but thank him for his assiduous attendance
at these meetings and reporting back to us. And now we go to the work plan and
forward plan. There have been some changes, there's always a work in progress in the
forward plan for the whole council, for the cabinet. I did have a thing with
little sticky bits sticking out but I'm not sure where they are now, but there are
two things which have been moved forward.
I don't think it has any particular implications
at the moment for ONDS.
We will meet them when, in the timely way,
ahead of the GoTo Cabinet.
There were two both financial reports of some measure.
You've got one for you.
Where's my one?
But never mind.
Oh, there it is.
There it is.
Oh, God, that's going off again.
Right, there were two changes. 15 July, the walls page 11, Treasury Management
Outturn, that is now going to be on the 23 September. And an item on the 25 November,

14 Work Plan and Forward Plan

which is the Treasury Management Mid -Year Report, that is going to be moved to the 20
January. Does anybody have any other comments on the O &S work plan?
You can't make it, I mean as you know we unusually O &S have got a meeting in
August and it's a local plan as a principal. It's also doing climate emergency but
the real thing is this, but I appreciate not normally the month we have
any meetings but this is such an important thing that they but please
anybody and I gotta say this applies to anybody if you've got any comment or
anything you want to add you are free to put in a member question or ask somebody
else to present so please just because you can't be here don't stop adding
your whatever it is you want to add. Thank you.
Councillor Ian Watson - 1:34:46
Councillor Watson. Thank you chair I'm looking at the work plan Monday 3rd of
August 2026. By then I think we'll have the update about LGR, where we stand. I'm
wondering is it worth bringing something to this committee at that point or do we want
to wait a little bit later?
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:35:11
I actually think that is an excellent idea, even if it's just a relatively short sort
thing and say that gives us an opportunity. I mean I think that that would be... I'm looking
at Councillor Efroni, I'm looking at everybody, I'm looking at Councillor Spivey. But I just
think that because as you say, I mean providing the government have done this thing by 17th
July, I won't forget that, it's my birthday, so they've got to perhaps do it before 16th
July, which certainly means that we should have the answer by August.
You might have it as a standard item then.
Yes, I think we might add that as an item to just having an update, receiving an update
on where that decision on the unitaries has come.
Thank you for that suggestion.
The next one is asset management, investment properties.

15 Asset Management - Investment Properties

Can I ask, I think actually Councillor Coleman wasn't able to be here and so Councillor
Evermy is going to cover this and David Stanley. Now as you've probably read in your papers
that some of this is commercially sensitive information so I want to look to see whether
people's agreement whether we should well do you want to make a start or shall
we actually put it into private session ahead of that?
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:36:49
Right, can I have the views of anybody on the committee that we ought
to go straight into the private session because of the sensitive nature? My view
is that we should move into it in case anybody inadvertently mentions any
numbers or names. Thank you so can I have a proposal and a seconder proposal
okay give the counter view that we should remain in public session for as
Councillor Lisa Spivey - 1:37:13
long as possible because good practise would say that you should conduct as
much business as possible in the public domain rather than moving into private
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:37:28
session. I think we call it exempt, yeah, yeah, exempt session. Sorry, sorry, I'm sorry
for that. Yeah, thank you, thank you for your experience and expertise and
directly there. So, exempt session. So, could I have a proposal in a second?
Could we take that? Councillor Cunningham, Councillor Slater and then could we all vote?
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:37:59
Thank you.