Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Monday 29 June 2026, 4:00pm

Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Monday, 29th June 2026 at 4:00pm

Speaking:

Start of webcast

Share this agenda point

Councillor Gina Blomefield

1 Apologies

Share this agenda point

Councillor Gina Blomefield

2 Substitute Members

Share this agenda point

3 Declarations of Interest

Share this agenda point

Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Councillor Ian Watson
Councillor Jon Wareing
Councillor Michael Vann
Councillor David Cunningham
Councillor Clare Turner
Councillor Tony Slater
Councillor Claire Bloomer
Councillor Lisa Spivey
Councillor Gina Blomefield

4 Minutes

Share this agenda point

Minutes , 01/06/2026 Overview and Scrutiny Committee

3 Declarations of Interest

Share this agenda point

4 Minutes

Share this agenda point

Minutes , 01/06/2026 Overview and Scrutiny Committee

5 Matters Arising from Minutes of the Previous Meeting

Share this agenda point

Actions from OS - 29 06 26

6 Chair's Announcements

Share this agenda point

David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield

7 Public Questions

Share this agenda point

8 Member Questions

Share this agenda point

9 Report back on recommendations

Share this agenda point

CDC - Overview and Scrutiny recommendations from 01 June meeting with Cabinet response

10 Financial Performance Report - Q4 2025/26

Share this agenda point

Councillor Patrick Coleman
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor David Cunningham
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor David Cunningham
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor David Cunningham
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor David Cunningham
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Ian Watson
Councillor Patrick Coleman
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Tony Slater
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Tony Slater
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Lisa Spivey
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Lisa Spivey
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Lisa Spivey
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Michael Vann
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Patrick Coleman
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Councillor Patrick Coleman
Councillor Patrick Coleman
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Officer
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Ian Watson
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Simon Harper, Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Mike Evemy

11 Service Performance Report - Q4 2025/26

Share this agenda point

Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor David Cunningham
Councillor Mike Evemy
Officer
Councillor David Cunningham
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Claire Bloomer
Councillor Mike Evemy
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Councillor Mike Evemy
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Tony Slater
Officer
Councillor Tony Slater
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Ian Watson
Councillor Mike Evemy
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor David Cunningham
Councillor Mike Evemy
Councillor David Cunningham
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Claire Bloomer
Councillor Mike Evemy
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Mike Evemy
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Claire Bloomer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Simon Harper, Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield

12 Planning Enforcement Report

Share this agenda point

Councillor Juliet Layton
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Ian Watson
Officer
Councillor Ian Watson
Officer
Councillor Ian Watson
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Juliet Layton
Councillor Gina Blomefield
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Jon Wareing
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Tony Slater
Councillor Juliet Layton
Councillor Tony Slater
Councillor Juliet Layton
Councillor Juliet Layton
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Michael Vann
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Lisa Spivey
Councillor Juliet Layton
Councillor Lisa Spivey
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Lisa Spivey
Councillor Lisa Spivey
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor David Cunningham
Officer
Councillor David Cunningham
Officer
Councillor David Cunningham
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor David Cunningham
Officer
Councillor David Cunningham
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Officer
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Officer
Officer
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Jon Wareing
Officer
Councillor Juliet Layton
Councillor Gina Blomefield
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Mike Evemy
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Juliet Layton
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Officer
Councillor Juliet Layton
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Clare Turner
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Clare Turner
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Michael Vann
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Ian Watson
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Simon Harper, Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Clare Turner
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Claire Bloomer
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Officer
Councillor Claire Bloomer
Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Lisa Spivey
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Lisa Spivey
Simon Harper, Officer
Councillor Jon Wareing
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Lisa Spivey
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Angus Jenkinson
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor David Cunningham
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Simon Harper, Officer
Councillor Gina Blomefield
Webcast Finished

Select an agenda point

Scroll with video

Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:00:44

Thank you.

I will start again because unfortunately my microphone was not on.

Before we go any further, I'll go through the usual housekeeping.

The far exit is on the far left there.

The toilet facilities to the left of the lobby outside the room.

Please turn off or put on silent any mobile device.

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 also the officers present to support the

overview and exclusionary committee in its functions.

If anyone wishes to fill in the proceedings, this is permitted, provided it does not disrupt

proceedings.

1 Apologies

And now could I go on and ask if we have any apologies?

2 Substitute Members

3 Declarations of Interest

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:01:52

Wonderful, it's a full house today, so no apologies and thus no substitute members either.

Before we go into the main body of the meeting, can I ask each member to introduce themselves?

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 0:02:08

Councillor Angus Jenkinson, Moreton East and Tottenham.

Councillor Ian Watson - 0:02:14

Councillor Ian Watson, Tepary Town Ward.

Councillor Jon Wareing - 0:02:19

Councillor John Waring, Borton Village Ward.

Councillor Michael Vann - 0:02:22

Michael Van, Fairford North.

Councillor David Cunningham - 0:02:26

David Cunningham, Fostridge, Potential West Hand Manager.

Councillor Clare Turner - 0:02:31

Councillor Tony Slater - 0:02:35

Councillor Claire Turner, Blocking Ward. Tony Slater, Grumbold's Ashville evening.

Councillor Claire Bloomer - 0:02:39

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 0:02:43

Councillor Claire Bloomer, Councillor for the new Mills Ward. Good afternoon I'm

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:02:50

Councillor Lisa Spivey and I represent the Ampties and Hampton. Thank you for that and I'm Gina

Bloomfield, Chair of Overview and Scrutiny representing Camden and Vale Ward.

4 Minutes

3 Declarations of Interest

Following on from that, do we have any declarations of interest on items due to be discussed at

this meeting?

No declarations of interest.

Wonderful.

4 Minutes

So, we'll now go on to the minutes of the meeting on the 1st of June.

Does anyone have any comments or corrections on these minutes?

I have the benefit of seeing these earlier when they're in the draught format and have

made some comments.

But I have only just noticed that Simon Harper was not included in those present.

So if we could include that into the minutes.

But does anybody else, and I think Councillor Jenkinson might also have something for us.

It was for a previous item. I've discussed it.

Fine. Was there any other errors or amendments that people would like to seek?

In which case, if everyone is satisfied with the minutes, could I have a proposer and seconder for them?

5 Matters Arising from Minutes of the Previous Meeting

Thank you. And could we now vote that they are a correct record? Thank you.

The next item is the matters arising. I want to thank Joseph Walker for giving a clear

response as to how CDC are encouraging more car -free explorations of the Cotswolds for

And whilst this can be clearly be challenging with only two railway stations as travel hubs and limited bus

availability to many of the local attractions

But it's you know I think it's a good thing to be aiming to and to encourage people to arrive by train

I also wanted to thank Peter Johnson for outlining

the care that is put into controlling weeds, following the advice from the WHO and the

EU on the safe use of glyphosate, which in fact involves spraying three times rather

than just twice a year, and that's to prevent any of the weeds from being in a flowering

condition when they might be attracting bees and other insects at the time of spraying.

Thank you for that explanation.

6 Chair's Announcements

The next item, number six, it's me again.

Chairman's announcements or Chair's announcements.

As a heads up, I believe there's been enormous amount

of concern regarding CDC providing an effective

enforcement team.

You have the resources and personnel

to manage their workload.

And so I'm anticipating this item may take longer

than the 40 minutes allocated.

I've also been asked by Peter Johnson to give her good advance notice of any questions

that O &S members may have on the service from UBICO ahead of our meeting in September, so

that the representatives of UBICO can ensure that they are prepared with their answers.

I will actually be sending a reminder near the time, but she said it is really helpful

to have, if you've got detailed questions on something in your ward or whatever, that

they have come equipped with the ability to answer that.

We have an important O &S meeting on the 3rd of August,

where now the local plan will be the only item on the agenda.

And we are going to also encourage as many members

of the public who may be interested in attending to come

so that they can hear this firsthand.

This will be the first time

that the new local plan will be discussed at a meeting at CDC.

Please can any ONS member who knows that they will miss the meeting in August,

and I appreciate it's August, so some of you may have booked holidays long ago,

can they start organising their substitute now? Because it's really important that we do have

as many members possible for overview and scrutiny for the 3rd of August. We'll give them the report

papers on the Friday, which is 10 days ahead of the meeting, but there will be a lot to

read up on. I'd also recommend if you have a detailed question or two to share it with

myself and Democratic Services in advance so that, again, officers can prepare full

answers for the meeting.

I just want to note was that I understand that going forward there are plans to merge

in some way, which I don't fully understand yet, the financial and service performance

reports to provide a more integrated view.

I don't know whether Simon might be able to explain it a bit further,

but it is going to be presented differently.

This is the last time it will come in the format

we're seeing it now.

I don't think there will be any radical changes.

It's just the presentation.

Oh, and before I let in David Stanley, I just want to say that

Jane Portman, our CEO, is joining this meeting for the first hour online before she has to

go off to another meeting. So she is present at this moment, just to let you know that.

And David Stanley, please.

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:08:01

Thank you, Chair. Just on the performance reporting, what we are doing is combining

the service performance, the financial performance and strategic risk register into a single

report. There will be a single covering report that the aim is to be as succinct as possible

that will draw out the key themes that are similar. So the example I would give, and

it's a hypothetical example, the service performance report could say something along the lines

of planning is doing really well, it's generated a million pounds of additional planning fee

income. So big thumbs up looks good on the service performance. Financial performance

might say, well, it's generated that million pounds, but it spent two million pounds on

agency staff to get the million pounds of income. That's a big thumbs down. And the

service risk register may have a risk on there that the performance in terms of the percentage

of planning applications decided upon before the Secretary of State intervenes is only

one percent above that level. So trying to pull those three and giving members the benefit

of here's the performance across the piece in a way that doesn't involve

members having to read good, you know, 30 pages of finance, 60 pages of service and

a few pages on risk. That's the intention. It's not necessary to water down those

individual performance reports but we are taking the opportunity to review the

appropriateness and the length of some of those reports because given pressures

on time and pressures on giving too much information on what that means in terms of committee members'

ability to read that in a short period of time, that's where we're going. So the first

quarter's performance will follow that format and what we were trying to do, but I personally

ran out of time to do it, was to trial run that for this cycle of reports. So the Q4

would have had that covering report. So that is the intention from Q1 and just gives that

broader overview of performance from a corporate perspective. But of course the individual

officers responsible for writing those current financial and service risk reports are still

expected to do that. We're just trying to bring that together.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:10:28

Thank you for that clear explanation.

It's something that everybody will not be surprised when we get the first one for the

next quarter one that it's going to present in a different format.

Thank you.

7 Public Questions

Do we have any public questions?

No.

8 Member Questions

Do we have any member questions?

9 Report back on recommendations

Well, the next item, number nine, is the report back on recommendations to Cabinet.

As you can see, ONS's thoughts and views on the LGR were valued by Cabinet,

although we could not make any strategic recommendations. On the Waste and

Environment item, our two recommendations on the Bring Bank service and the new

arrangement for the collection of soft plaques have both been noted and

actioned. Now we go to the important things like the financial report quarter

10 Financial Performance Report - Q4 2025/26

four. The cabinet member finances here, Patrick Coleman and that's being

supported by Michel Burge or David Stanley. David Stanley, our chief accountant.

So would you please like to come and take your places?

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:12:27

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

I'm sure all of us are conscious, as I am, that as the reorganisation of the local government

gets closer, the work becomes more intensive for our officers and even

though we have 50 % backfill to use the shorthand, it's clear that the demands

are going to be very high. To some extent, in fact to a large extent, the same is

true of local members and you're already doing that now. So amongst other reasons

for keeping the introduction short, I think that's a background reason for me

to try and say as little as possible while also minimising the pointlessness of my remarks.

So in summary, on first view, and it's been a few days since I went through this and made

notes so they all look new to me now, things appear to have gone just that little bit better

than expected, which is what you want. You don't want it to be too much better than expected

because that throws the forecasting into doubt and obviously you don't want to be the worst

and expected at all. Now members may well wish to challenge that in places and that

would be a good idea too. But the sooner I hand over to David the better.

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:13:42

Just in terms of a very short summary of the financial performance, positive out -term position,

it adds an additional 206 ,000 to the surplus that was estimated at Q3, so that surplus

This is 251 ,000 on the revenue account.

Page 7 of the supplementary pack has table ES2,

which is the reconciliation of variations in Q4.

There's probably two or three that are worth highlighting

here.

So in terms of positive variations,

car park fees, permits, and penalty charges,

so we saw significant increase in the level of car

Park fees that our residents and tourists were paying during the course of the year

and that increased the level of additional income and what the council, what's recommended

to cabinet is setting aside 165 ,000 of that additional income to fund the new car park

ticket machines that are being procured as we speak.

Alongside that and about four, five rows down is the development management fees or the

planning fees, they have been extremely positive, so 710 ,000 of planning fee income received

during the course of the financial year over and above the budgeted level. However, in

the quarterly financial performance reports we've been highlighting to members that some

of that income is at risk, so some of those applications would have been made on a speculative

basis and subject to decisions the council takes could be subject to appeal. So the recommendation

initially in the quarterly performance report was to allocate 50 % of that additional income

to a reserve. That was increased to 100 % given the quite expensive nature of any challenge

that there is to council decisions. That 710 ,000 is a considerable sum and that will be reviewed

during the course of the current financial year as the appeal risk either crystallises

or drops away, but we'd also be looking to maximise the amount of resources available

to support both the planning service with the delivery of the local plan, but also the

council more fully in terms of the wider enforcement picture that we're coming on to at a later

agenda item.

On a slightly less positive note is the forecasting on the Yubico contract.

So the Q3 financial performance report that came to Cabinet and to overview and scrutiny

back end of March, beginning of April, was based on the P11 forecast from Yubico.

That indicated a £65 ,000 net overspend on the contract.

When we got the P12 out turn, that had moved to 166 ,000 pounds, and the explanation provided

by UBICO would indicate that some of those reasons behind the additional movement should

have been seen earlier in the year.

So it was hire of vehicles, payment of agency staff, so on and so forth.

So both Michelle and I have had a number of conversations with UBICO around improving

the financial forecast during the course of this year, but also setting out the Council's

position regarding both the current year's budget, which will be under pressure from

fuel price increases, but also the approach to setting a balanced budget across the UBICO

contract in 27 -28. And I suppose by balanced I mean if there are pressures that we would

expect UBICO to come forward to us with ways they can mitigate those pressures. And that's

conversation we started early in June, got a follow -up with them on the 6th of July to

ensure that there can be improvements in the way that that contract is monitored and forecast.

Aside from that, there are some other points in the report, particularly around the proposed

transfers to and from EMR reserves. Annex C has the detail on what is proposed to be

the balances on those EMR reserves at the end of the financial year. That will go before

Cabinet to make that decision and that will feed into the statement of accounts that is

almost near publication. So we've got that audit trail of the decision. And in terms

of the capital programme, there has been some slippage from one year to the next. That's

largely around the acquisition of the waste vehicles that was always planned because it

was the bigger amount that was set aside for the current financial year, the 6 million

that included some roll forward of spend allocated in 25 -26. But happy to take any detailed questions

members may have on the report.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:18:54

Councillor David Cunningham - 0:18:58

For 28 -29 you are increasing the budget for UBICO by 100 % and then in 29 -30 by another

50 % on top of that.

Is that going to be enough given that we think that their accounting has not been as accurate

as it might have been?

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:19:34

I'm not sure I follow the percentages.

Councillor David Cunningham - 0:19:39

In 2728 it would be $526 ,000, in 2829 it would be $1 ,032 ,000 and in 2930 it would be $1 .5

million.

That is the UBICO contract inflation numbers from the MTFS.

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:19:56

So we have a current budget of just over $9 million, and then we've allowed for inflation

on that contract on the basis of assumptions that would have been made around 12 months

ago. Part of the work we're doing is to ensure those assumptions are accurate and reflect

current market conditions. So the assumption that would have been made, particularly on

fuel would have been a pump price of 145 a litre, including VAT. That is not where those

fuel prices are. And there would have been an assumption around the pay award, which

is 3 % on the local government pay award. And then we hold in our contingency budget an additional

amount because of the way in some years that has been calculated. There's been a fixed

lump sum for certain levels and then a percentage applied to higher paid staff.

So we'll be reviewing that as part of the budget -setting process and that no doubt will

update the MTFS that will be considered by Overland Scrutiny and Cabinet in October.

Okay, fine.

Councillor David Cunningham - 0:21:03

So you are going to be keeping a close eye on them.

I'm just concerned that the MTFS, given the uptick we've already seen in quarter three,

quarter four, will this be enough?

Do we need to be upping that uphage, if you like, in order to cover any extra slippage?

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:21:21

So in terms of what we've seen this year so far, the forecast from UBICO is around about

12 ,000 pounds per month is the additional impact from fuel.

That may or may not improve, given peace has broken out

in the Middle East.

But there are other factors that play into that,

including the availability of fuel bunkering.

And some of the decision that was

taken to include a fuel bunker in the capital programme

was around ensuring the ability to avoid

having to go to the pumps every time

When you're forward purchasing quite considerable amounts of fuel that you can get at a discount

or you can use HVO, that's part of that consideration.

In terms of their forecasting, what we have been pressing Yubico for over the last two,

three months is monthly updates on their fuel purchases in terms of volumes, prices and

so on.

We've got regular meetings in with UBCO where we pick up with them as part of our usual

financial reporting cycle, what those forecasts are.

But we're mindful of the risk there is on price.

So within the budget for this council there is a contingency budget.

Within there is an amount set aside for HVO, but there's also an amount which clearly wasn't

sufficient as only allowed for 10 % variation on the fuel price that was used to set aside

some of that upscale risk that there might have been when we thought about it pre -February

Councillor David Cunningham - 0:23:06

the 28th. Perhaps you might include a report that gives

an update on any extra agency staff costs that they might be incurring.

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:23:16

Quarter 1 financial performance report which will be part of this renewed suite will have

focus on the financial performance of the material contracts and the material

spend items and it will include a focus on you because we can get that

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:23:37

information included in that report. Thank you.

Councillor Ian Watson - 0:23:40

Councillor Watson. Thank you chair. I'm on page 7 table E52 the revenue

budget. I see that significant positive variation on vacancy management. First of

all could you explain what vacancy management is? It's not a term I've come

across outside of this meeting. Why would we have such a positive

return on that?

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:24:17

Yes, Chair, if I may. Just because that was a clear decision by cabinet to

authorise chief executive with consultation with senior councillors and

officers to operate what if I go back for 30 -40 years we used to call a sieve

on Woodford County Council when we had three different party leaders. We each had to

sign off any significant extra spending.

This is a way of slowing down spending.

Nowadays, councils are far better run, of course,

I hasten to add.

And the serious point is that by ensuring that only posts are

genuinely essential in more than the shortest term,

this is my summary, not theirs, are filled,

we ensure that where savings can fairly be realised, they are.

But I realise I probably should let the officer say it properly.

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:25:20

In summary, paragraph 4 .11 on page 18 will explain this was something that was put in

place from Q1 of the financial year to ensure there was a consistent oversight of vacancies

as they were coming through and it required corporate leadership teams' authorisation

to fill those vacancies. So every time there is a vacant post, an authority to fill form

is completed, setting out the business case as to why that post should be filled. And

then the corporate leadership team, which is the chief executive, myself, the monitoring

officer, and Helen Martin will review that request and make a decision whether to fill

or not, but also the way in which that post might be filled. So we've been looking at

those posts. In the 25 -26 financial year, there were a number of posts that were vacant

at the start of the year that, given the impact from LGR and the review of the corporate plan,

were no longer considered as essential to deliver on the council's objectives and priorities.

So they were removed from the establishment and those budgets were returned.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:26:30

Thank you. I think I have Councillor Slater now, please.

Councillor Tony Slater - 0:26:35

Thank you, Chair. A couple of quick questions. Going back to

Yubico for a moment, I note that there's a high level of sickness within the waste and

recycling service. This might be one for September, but do we know if that sickness has increased

since the new rotors were introduced.

And as Yubico are an outsourced service, we still seem

to be having all the risk.

So they've not reported too much spending, but we seem

to still have to pick up the tab.

Are there any sanctions or fines that we levy against them?

And I'll just do the other one.

On the section 4 .37, postage and printing,

there were 6 ,374 additional letters sent out as part of the lift project.

Wasn't an allocation made from the lift project to pay for that as part of the project funding?

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:27:42

So dealing with those questions in reverse, because my memory won't hold out that long.

In terms of the lift project, we allocated something like 28 ,000 towards the lift project,

but that didn't include the impact on the council from processing anything that came out of the lift project.

This was purely around the analysis and the software to identify those that could be in receipt of higher levels of benefit.

So the mail -outs were targeted as a result of the lift project, and that were actioned by the revenues and benefits team

during the course of the financial year.

In terms of UBICO's sickness record, I would have to defer

to Peter on that one to get the correct information to you

in terms of how that sickness level has fluctuated

during the course of the contract year.

And in terms of your middle question, which I've forgotten,

could you remind me?

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:28:42

So in terms of the way the partnership agreement, both with Publica and Jupico, is set up, the

arrangements are that the council still bears the price risk. So we agree a contract sum.

If that contract sum varies during the course of the year, if it's an underspend, it comes

no financial sanctions because in order to find them 100 ,000 pounds we'd have to give

them 100 ,000 pounds. The benefit of the partnership arrangement is that as a tech we are a shareholder

in that company but also we are better placed to affect contract change as they're working

in partnership with us than through a traditional contract where any contract change would generally

involve quite a negotiation and quite considerable additional cost. Your right to highlight that

is something that we are aware of in terms of that exposure we've got. So in effect,

if the price of fuel kept going up and up and up, that all comes back to the council.

Councillor Tony Slater - 0:29:53

It's just one assumes it will be reflected in management bonuses at the end of the year.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:30:01

Officer - 0:30:04

I think Michelle felt that she had something she could add to this.

Thank you, I just wanted to add to follow up from David's comment that in terms of working days lost,

in March 25 it was 171, in March 26 it was 149.

From March it went up to a peak in July at 280, it dropped to 180 and it's sort of done that since,

but March was the lowest it's been for probably, well, for the last 12 months.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:30:28

Thank you and apologies for getting your name wrong. That was Helen Martin.

Now Councillor Spivey and please anybody else who might have a question we'll queue up here.

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 0:30:40

Thank you. Thank you chair. I was going to ask about

car parking charges and planning fees just to get a little bit of a context for that

because I just wanted to understand whether the positive increase in the car parking charges

is due to the charge itself or due to the number of people visiting our wonderful, beautiful

market towns? Because I know that there's been some concern from members previously

about raising car parking charges will be the absolute death of everywhere. So just

to understand the new answer there. And then I had another question around the publicer

review because I know that's had an underspend. Just again, just to get a little bit of context

on that and then I have a comment around the LGR reserve which I will reserve for

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:31:33

after your responses. Thank you. On car park fees it's both so we saw quite a

significant increase in the number of car parking events I think it was

referred to in the car parking strategy in the course of last year and if you

assess car park fees on how sensitive they were to a price increase.

They weren't at all sensitive in that same way.

That said, the car park strategy report that went through cabinet earlier in the civic year for last year

indicated some switching between longer term stays and some tourist destinations like Bolton on the water

to some slightly shorter term stays, but overall we saw around about 20 % increase in the car park fees

and so far this financial year that hasn't dropped off.

So when we were budgeting for the current financial year we were prudent, cautious, mindful that that increase in volume

may have been a one -off blip because of the attractiveness of coming to the Cotswolds

but that's been sustained throughout the early part of this financial year.

So it's something we'll review as part of the budget -setting process.

In terms of planning fees, I'm not the best -placed person to answer that,

but we do have a team of individuals sitting behind members,

Harrison, Gerry and Helen, who will no doubt furnish you with plenty of details

as to what's happened to planning fees.

it's the mix between majors, minors, so on and so forth.

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 0:33:11

I didn't ask about planning fees because I took that as read.

It was about the publica, the publica.

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:33:18

My short -term memory is dreadful.

The publica review,

and it's particularly around the phase two change,

so a report was brought to cabinet and council

in March of 2025 which set out the estimated impact of the phase 2 changes

and broadly speaking 300 ,000 was the estimated impact from bringing those

services back in -house and around a similar amount for redundancy costs.

In effect what happened in July 25 when those staff transferred came in

significantly below the 300 ,000.

So when we've looked at the overall change

in the council's staffing bill,

the vacancy management piece,

part of that has been due to the lower cost associated

with bringing staff back to the council.

And that will be a combination both of numbers of staff,

but also where we transferred vacancies

across from Publica.

Some of those vacancies weren't filled

at the time they transferred.

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 0:34:27

Lovely, thank you for that detail.

And then I just wanted to make a comment around the LGR reserve,

and I commend the council, which obviously I'm part of,

for putting that money, I know, two million pounds,

into that reserve.

But I just think it's very important,

as I have been saying in many other places,

that the public note, as well as our councillors,

that that is money that we are having to spend,

taxpayers' money, which we are having to spend and put aside

in order to pay for something that government has forced us

to do and I think it's really really important that we all know that and our

residents note that we know we are asked to do this by government we are doing

the sensible thing we're being the grown -ups and yet it will be you know

us as councillors who are making difficult decisions on what we spend

money on and because we are being forced to do this by government and I think

it's always worth noting that as I set out on my path of lobbying government

who I think should absolutely be paying for this process. Thank you.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:35:30

Does anybody else have any questions?

Councillor Fann.

Councillor Michael Vann - 0:35:40

Very briefly I note number three of the positive variation, vacancy management.

I also note something we're going to be getting to later on.

Page 116 offers a level of capacity in the topic of enforcement and as to whether or

not that saving in quotes of 235 ,000 could have been directed in an improvement of another

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:36:24

service. It's always a difficult thing to judge that

vacancy management may not have been within, certainly wouldn't have been within the planning

service because I know the pressures that have been on the planning service and both

Jerry and Helen have been making strong representations through CLT during the course of the year

to ensure adequate resource is allocated to planning to both deliver the local plan but

also to manage the increased volume of planning applications.

That said, I think there's a responsibility on offices to ensure that where there is reductions

in cost from vacancy management that there's a process for allocating that reduction in

cost or holding that in a reserve until something is known. So I would always advocate a more

prudent approach of taking advantage of that opportunity to improve the council's finances

and then making a separate decision as to whether to allocate some of that to alleviate

pressures within the services. And that's exactly what you're considering, I suppose,

on this agenda and cabinet will consider that the surplus from 2526, that 251 ,000 is going

to the capacity building reserve, that's the recommendation, and the planning enforcement

report is looking for additional support for planning enforcement that would be funded

from the capacity building reserve. So it's treating those two as separate but distinct

decisions rather than writing the report on the finances that says there's 250 ,000 surplus,

let's pass it all over to service X or Y. I think it's important that members make those

two distinct decisions.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:38:11

Thank you for that. I understand the question there. I think attempting to move the money

across easily. Not as straightforward and I think it was a very clear answer. You can't

I can't play with it quite like that.

Mr. Councillor Jenkinson, do you have a question?

Councillor Jenkinson.

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 0:38:30

Thank you, Chair.

David, I note your comment earlier on about your short -term memory.

All I can say is that your financial system memory is phenomenal.

So congratulations on the ability to master so much.

I may find myself following on from Michael in a moment.

I'd like to just cheque first of all.

We've got significant positive out -turns in the figures,

and that has an effect on reserves that have also grown substantially.

To what extent are these seen as a blip, one off, and to what extent do they reflect systemic change that's likely to endure?

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:39:29

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:39:34

I think that's the sort of question that can only be given a truly accurate answer with

hindsight to see how things have turned out.

But certainly it's only human to assume that at least some of the positive effect is due

to sound practises and creative work and intelligent management.

But who can be absolutely certain where it all comes from?

We need a full set of accounts and you're looking perhaps a bit more than a year away,

I don't know, perhaps a bit less.

Perhaps David can provide you with more assurance.

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:40:13

Thank you.

In terms of systemic change, I think we've,

on the car park fees, I think the view we took when we were

setting the budget or advising members on setting the budget

for the current year, that it was uncertain whether the

volume increase we'd seen in the car parks and the level of

additional income was an ongoing change.

So that is a good example where there has been a shift,

And it's, I suppose, the risk that you put into the budget and what you're willing to

accept.

So where we are for the current financial year, you'd have seen the increase we had

in the out -of -turn report.

None of that increase was built into the 26, 27 budget, and we're still running at a level

significantly above budget.

So we could make a decision as a council to increase that income target, that income expectation.

If, however, next year, tourists and visitors say, you know what, there's nothing left to

see in the Cotswolds, they've been there, done that, and they all stay away, then that

puts pressure back on the revenue budgets.

There's always that judgement to make.

Similarly with planning applications, has there been an increase in the number of major

applications because of the position of the local plan, because of the imposition of the

higher numbers of houses the council has been asked to deliver over the next 15 years. Has that led to more speculative development

or applications going in that attract a fee?

But on the other side if we take the vacancy management the ability for the council to continue

to deliver a 700 odd thousand reduction in its staffing bill

each and every year is going to be constrained.

So my expectation in the current year is because we've taken some

of those relatively pain -free changes where the vacancy

management was looking at vacant posts and saying,

do we need this post going forward or not?

And the answer was yes or no.

It is going to be much harder to generate that same level.

I suppose what this comes back to is a more fundamental

question is are we setting budgets at the right level and taking into account

some of the more positive variations and building that in. That's something that

we are looking at as part of the 27 -28 budget setting process and what risk we

might want to accept in the budget but also mindful the MTFS that was published

in February of this year indicates that a 1 .5 million gap for 27 -28 increases of

2 .5 million increase into 7 .2 million in 28 -29.

So I'm always mindful that whilst there might be some

benefits, we've seen some disbenefits in terms of cost

pressures during the course of the current year from fuel

energy prices and some pressure coming from unions

on the pay award.

So we just need to be mindful of that.

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 0:43:26

Thank you for that comprehensive answer.

I noted the term risk several times in the answer,

and not unreasonably under the circumstances,

of course, there's always a matter of risk.

But on that point, you have a risk register,

as you've noted yourself.

And I absolutely agree with the need to be able to look across

the different facets and see how they relate to each other.

The risk register highlights the fact that there are some severe

problems, and that one of those areas is in compliance

planning, but it's a significant problem.

So building on the question that was asked earlier on by Councillor Michael Vann, I am

concerned about this situation.

We're going to be looking at this later on, at the matter of compliance and reviewing

it and I'm not sure whether you'll be staying for that.

But in the light of the fact that they are reporting significant lack of resources, that

this is a systemic problem, that it's been lasting some time, that the replacement with

agency staff is both expensive and inefficient and fails to deliver as good results, may

May I ask what consideration the Section 106 Office and the Cabinet might already have

towards addressing the need for the right level of resource in order to address the

systemic gap in compliance and the accelerating problem, which has only been partly ameliorated

according to the report by simply junking a whole lot of old problems because they're

old.

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:45:15

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:45:17

Yes, Chair, it's difficult to help with this with an answer here because so much of what

is being asked about is in a later paper, I hope, not one that I've been in a position

to study the latest edition of it, I don't think.

But I do think that a positive example where we had to rely

on agency staff and we got excellent value was

in the planning department with at least two

of our senior officers.

In my own mind, I called them the lads from London

since they had significant experience in London boroughs.

And they treated us like adults at planning committee.

And in turn, the planning committee kept its number

of applications per meeting down to two or three on average.

I remember that time.

For some of it, I think I was vice chair of the committee.

At the end of that, we maintained our necessary

performance of agreeing within government targets for which

there is a significant punishment.

As we know, if you don't hit their target,

you lose significant powers. So we avoided that happening and we felt that we were being

well served by experienced people. When you add in the other features in addition to being

a good professional that come with enforcement roles, and only the other day I heard a replay

of the storey of the murder of I think two local government officers back in the 70s

or 80s who were on an enforcement task.

But I remember that day, and those days rather.

There are serious barriers to recruiting people to enforce.

But I think further comment and further comparison

would best await the item you're dealing with later.

Again, clearly I've not consulted the officers

on that reply.

So I'd better just see if some modifications are required.

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:47:25

In terms of resource allocation, that remains a political decision.

So part of the report you've got here tonight, and you will get the regular updates into

the current financial year, will say whether the budget that's been set is in a positive

position or a negative position.

If it's in a positive position, there's an underspend and some

additional surplus that could be allocated.

That remains a decision that the administration will need to make

and whether that aligns with their priorities.

My role as the Section 151 is to provide that advice to members

as to if that is a priority, this is what you could do or

this is the impact of what you are setting out your doing.

and depending on the availability of resources,

that can either be a relatively straightforward

conversation or if you're in a really difficult

financial position as Gloucester City Council is,

that's a really hard set of conversations

you will need to be having as the section 151

with elected members who may be wanting to do

all sorts of things that are absolutely

the right thing to do, but there isn't the resources

to support that ambition.

We're in, as you will have seen from this report

and the level of reserves that are in Annex C in a healthy financial position.

It will come down to a political choice as to whether the administration wants to go in a particular direction or not.

My role and the role of CLT is to provide that strategic advice to members before that decision is made,

but ultimately it is for members to decide.

I think that...

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 0:49:05

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 0:49:09

So, thank you for that answer.

What that does is place my question was directed to the Cabinet,

which is the political, and to the Office, Section 106 Office.

And as such, therefore, your answer is, well, it's down to the Cabinet.

And I would like to, I'm going to propose that we consider, because later on, we can look at this again when we come to the later item.

But I would like to alert you to the fact that this is a very serious issue, and that it does need addressing.

I've been bringing it up consistently for over a year on every single occasion where it was relevant to the topic, and it's still hurting us.

I'd like to just ask one more clarification question that will be relevant to the picture

of the outturn and how it looks.

Recently, we had a case where an applicant called Bloor Homes put forward an application.

And it's in the public domain that they did that, and it's also in the public domain that

we objected to that and that the officer recommended an objection and that

the Council, the committee

also

objected to it and it then went to an appeal and then in due course the situation was changed and

we did not fight the appeal.

What I would like to ascertain is whether

Cabinet and

the section 106

have done due diligence with the planning team on whether the need for a backup finance

still exists in the same level? Does it need increasing, reducing? What assessment have

you done on the level of cover that we are making in order to be able to provide the

kind of support that we need in the light of that particular case?

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:51:20

I am not sure whether we think that Helen Martin would be mis - I mean, this is - it crosses

Officer - 0:51:33

all sorts of things. Who would like to take this answer on or -

Just a first point for clarification. When you referred to Section 106, are you referring

to the - you mean the Section 151, David?

I did.

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:51:50

So in terms of where we are with the finances, the cost of a planning decision is not a material

consideration.

So, officers involved in providing that advice to Planning and Licencing Committee will not

look at the cost of an outcome.

They will look at a number of different aspects to the planning application in relation to

planning policies, national policy, MPPF, position on the local plan.

From the perspective of myself as the Section 151, I have to ensure that given the position there is on the Local Plan,

one, there's enough resources to deliver the Local Plan in the timescale that's been signed up to by the Council.

So that's delivering the Regulation 19 consultation in August and submitting the local plan to

the inspector by the end of the calendar year for adoption the year after.

That is absolutely critical to the corporate plan.

Alongside that, there is obviously the impact on the planning service from business as usual

activities or, as they may argue, business as unusual as it can get, because that's where

the volumes are.

It is important that members are assured that what we don't do as a corporate leadership

team is say to Harrison, how much more extra do you need to do what you're doing?

There is that process we will go through to cheque and challenge and understand could things

be done in a different way that either requires less human power, could be done in a different

way, looking at ways you can improve the system and putting those challenges in before the

answer that you may eventually get to is the only way you can actually resolve the problem

is by spending more money. But that's part of the process that we will go through as

a corporate leadership team that I think members should appreciate that it's not just a blank

cheque. That said, if we got to a position where to get the local plan over the line

by December 2026 required an extra financial push, then that's what the council would need

to do. And part of my role is to ensure that there are adequate resources to support that

because the last thing I would want to be saying to the council is we can't complete

the local plan submission because we've run out of money.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:54:31

Thank you. I don't think we can go into further detail on that one at the moment. One thing

would like to, as O &S said right at the beginning when we were doing the new

local plan, that we wanted to make sure that it was adequately financially

resourced to do it, partly to get it done in the time but also to get it done to

the highest possible standard. So I'm hoping that you are still making sure

that that is that is enabled. I have got some rather more straightforward

questions. I just wondered whether the parking charge notices have gone up or

we're getting more income because we've now got more officers, enforcement

officers on the parking. I also wondered on the electric vehicle charging points

you've got an income of 23 ,000 but I was wondering what the cost has been in

servicing, maintaining and the fees from providers on that and finally I had a

question on Crowd Find Cotswolds. I don't know how that gets transferred across or

when there is a if there's a cut off for when the funding is going to be done or

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:55:47

how Crowd Find Cotswolds is going to be handled in the future. Thank you. Thank

you Chair. Very briefly on fines and penalty charges. Yes there has been an

increase in the amount of income generated from both car park fees, permits and season

tickets and the enforcement side. So that has happened.

In terms of EVCPs, essentially the cost to the council of buying the electricity that

is then sold on is lower. That's why there's a surplus. There has not in the initial year

that we've had most of those EVCPs in place,

as if any material cost in maintaining them.

Essentially we sell that EVCP charging

around 49 pence per kilowatt hour

through our 7 .4 kilowatt charging stations.

It costs the council less than that to buy that electricity.

So that's kind of where we are.

And in terms of Crowdfund,

Cotswolds would have to come back to you

a more thorough answer from Joseph who has oversight of the way the Crowdfund

consoles process is going to work in terms of when the bidding window opens

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:57:07

and what that process for allocation will be. It would be helpful for the

town and parish councils for making allocations to know what they... Yes,

Councillor Ian Watson - 0:57:15

Councillor Watson. Thank you, Chair. Perhaps not pertinent to this meeting but the

The dataset you use for parking, can we go to a put by car park locally?

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:57:32

Yes, so the car park strategy document that was considered in November of last year had quite extensive detail on each car park

and how full it was at a particular given time by looking at the number of spaces available

and the number of tickets sold in a particular window.

That gave some heat maps by each individual car park.

So the car parking team are able to obtain that information on a regular basis.

The car parking strategy was undertaken with a study as well.

So they were observing movement of vehicles at given points in time and also

Using the data available from

Metric who provide our car park ticket machines to understand when tickets were sold the duration and so on but that is available

It does take a little bit of time to pull together and present in a easy to understand way. Yeah

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:58:29

Right, well, thank you very much for that. I'm going to ask Simon Harper to sum up our discussions and

Simon Harper, Officer - 0:58:39

Thank you chair. I'm just picking up two key issues to refer to the cabinet

notwithstanding planning will be picked up later in the report. The concern

regarding the UBICO contract and your support for the more rigorous monitoring

on and forecasting of the costs particularly since the council's

carrying all the risk and the other one is the LGR reserve welcoming that the

council's put funds aside for local government reorganisation and like I

said I'm just I think you raise those issues on planning which will come out

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:59:21

later well I don't think we need to vote on this but we know that that will be

recommended through to cabinet so thank you very much thank you for everybody

who was involved in that. Let me go to the next item, thank you very much, which is the

Service Performance Report, quarter four. I would like to welcome Mike Eberme, the Leader

of the Council.

And also, yeah, me, it's Gemma, I thought, yes,

well I didn't think you were, but it says, I don't know what,

it looks like Gemma, Mooring, that sounds a bit more like it.

So please, thank you.

11 Service Performance Report - Q4 2025/26

Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:00:11

Thank you, Chair, Members. Yeah, obviously we've got the report from the last quarter,

full quarter January to March. I'm not intending to talk through it. If you've had a chance

to have a look at it, I'm really happy to listen to and attempt to answer together with

any questions you have on the service performance.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:00:37

Councillor Cuddings, clicking off again, thank you.

Councillor David Cunningham - 1:00:42

Thank you Madam Chair.

The perception of planning appeals allowed a cumulative 40 .2 % against a target of 30.

Later on it talks about one of their general targets is no more than 30, yada yada yada.

It's important that the 10 % threshold set by the government is not just for those that are appealed.

The council is well below this threshold.

I'm okay, you can give me a number. You don't have to just say well below. What is well below? Is it 8? Is it 5? Is it 1?

Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:01:15

I don't know. The officers who deal with banning a signal are right behind you, so I don't know if they can give you an answer.

But otherwise, we might need to give you a written answer.

Officer - 1:01:26

Thank you, Chair. The percentage of appeals is monitored by the central government and

it is a percentage of the overall decisions made by the Council. They are looking for

10 % success rate, so to speak. No more than that as an overturned, so an allowed appeal.

So that is the category that we are well within. I hope that makes sense.

and what is our number?

Councillor David Cunningham - 1:01:58

I don't have it to hand, I'm afraid.

Thanks.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:02:05

Thank you. Maybe we'll get a written answer on that going forward.

Thank you very much, Dee.

Who else has got a question? I'm sure there may be others.

not I thought all the baby cuts the Jenkinson's got a bush in this our

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:02:30

Councillor Claire Bloomer - 1:02:32

council rumour kind of a question probably the wrong kind of question but

regarding the percentage of council tax collected I had some casework recently

from a resident working family and sadly they failed to pay their direct

debit to one -off they had a letter they had to pay their council tax in full

within seven days and a direct debit would not be an option I just noticed

that you've got a refresh direct debit campaign in here and I just wondered if

I can get any more information on it. Thanks.

Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:03:07

Yeah, thank you

Councillor Loomer. We have, I don't know if David might want to add anything, but I'll just give you an overall answer.

And that is the process. I know the government is

consulting on

changing that. So at the moment if you miss a direct debit payment, you lose your right to instalments.

And I know the government is looking at whether that should change.

so there may be legislation on that but obviously we have to operate within the

legislation that we have but yeah and appreciate that that means it's

potentially can be can be difficult for people obviously the balance is we've

got an obligation to collect council tax because it supports the services that we

and the county and the police provide for residents so yeah it is always a

balancing act. I would just comment I was pleased and you know whilst you look at

the in -year performance and you did that possibly on your in the figures in here

what you can then see when you look back to previous years is that we've been

over 99 % over the last five years that we've got to in terms of the total

collection through the offices of the work of our offices in that but yeah I

accept the point sometimes people miss a payment and the systems aren't very

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 1:04:34

flexible. I don't know if David you can add something to that. Just in terms of

the approach I think Mandy Fathers who's the revenues and benefits business

manager would always encourage individuals in those circumstances to

speak to the council before you get into that position where a letter comes out

because the process that is being followed and it's currently as

that Councillor Eberle has said is enshrined in legislation, missing a payment will trigger

that type of process. The government did consult earlier in 2025 on simplifying the administration

of council tax that they responded to that in April and the intention that they are putting

forward in legislation is to increase the time limit that councils have to do that to

63 days, which would mean you would have to miss three direct debits before that liability

order is applied. And that's essentially what that letter is doing. It's saying your ability

to pay by instalments is being forfeited because you've not made a payment. And following campaigning

from the money savings expert, there has been that proposal to increase that to 63 days,

which the government has accepted. That said, that could still have a negative impact on

individuals because they could miss three instalment payments and then it's much more

difficult for individuals to recover from that position. So Mandy would always advise

those in financial difficulty to make contact with the council and to explore ways in which

we can help with that and that may involve referrals through CAB and other bodies.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:06:17

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 1:06:22

Before I come in, I think Councillor Jenkinson. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Chair. I would be comfortable to accept that the answer is that LGR will

be taking care of it, the questions that I'm going to ask. I'm always more interested in

systemic management of something than the individual

instances of outcomes that happen to be achieved at any

particular month or time or moment.

So my first question is what processes are taking place

across our various performance systems?

What system do we use to improve the systemic performance?

There are a variety of such, like the Toyota management system,

Deming, and so on and so forth for these.

We previously met to discuss outcomes, and I see we're now using,

you know, we've been using for some time now graphics,

which are very helpful for us, for officers no doubt,

but certainly for counsellors to take a look at the situation.

Some of those were tools that are used in such systems.

So the question I'm trying to ask is to what extent is the

Council looking at or deploying any kind of system -wide

improvement?

We are going to hear about problems with trying to improve

systems in compliance, for example, shortly.

So do we have that?

And have you noted that in various government bodies around the world, the use of such systems

have been able to achieve very substantial progress?

We also can note that production of these kinds of reports can now be greatly automated

with the help of AI.

And so I'm just wondering what is being done or what is being planned in order to improve

the systemic management of performance and the systemic reporting of performance, if

anything. And as I say, if you know that it's being covered by LGR, that would be a very

good outcome, perhaps.

Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:08:44

If I could just pick up the LGR point and then let Gemma answer the point about how

The officers are essentially managing this.

Officers are working across all, from all seven councils

on setting up a new operating framework

for the new authority or authorities.

And clearly what they're looking to do in that

is not just import how we do it now,

or not just even take the best of what we do now,

but to think about service design

from the point of view of the service user,

the customer, the resident, the business.

So that work is going on and obviously yourself

and the chair will be coming at our meeting

coming up shortly I think where you'll be representing

representatives from this council on the scrutiny panel

where you'll be able to delve into that work

on behalf of your colleagues across the council

in terms of how that's being done

in terms of planning for the new council.

I'll hand over to Gemma to answer your question

about what we do now.

Officer - 1:09:58

Thank you, Lida.

So at the moment, I wouldn't say it's a one size fits all.

I think there's a different variety of levels

of performance management throughout the councils

and the wider partners as well.

I think we do a lot of business partnering within my team.

So it's highlighting when the data is showing

we're not looking good.

So obviously we're looking at this performance,

which is quarter one, quarter four,

which was January to March,

which was quite a long time ago.

So we'd like to try and highlight

and have more up -to -date information

so that services can actually make decisions

based on what's going on now,

rather than us going,

oh, look what happened three months ago.

That was a bit of a shame, wasn't it?

But yeah, so we do that business partnering kind of work

to make sure that people are aware

of how things are performing.

If they have, I mean,

a lot of the time they are aware of it anyway.

They've got dashboards they can have a look at daily

to see what's going on. It's not the same across all the services. Sometimes

we've got a bit further ahead with stuff and sometimes it's a lot more kind of

qualitative rather than the facts and figures kind of thing that are

coming up on like a standard kind of graphs etc and stuff like that. So it's

not one size fits all. There isn't like a particular systemic management

sorry management process in place that we use when it comes to improvement

plans. A lot of the time we use the double diamond effect so we'd like to start off with

finding out what the actual problems are, so discovering what they are and then going on to

find like, sorry, to actually define what they are and then go put in those improvement stuff

afterwards. So it's not one size fits all. I think if you wanted to know any particular area then I

might be able to expand on that a bit more but it's not as you would want it to be I would say.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:11:39

I have got Councillor Slater please.

Councillor Tony Slater - 1:11:43

Thank you, chair.

Land searches, percentage completed.

I note that we lost a team member in September of last year.

Why has it taken the best part of nine months to replace them?

It says a new starter is coming into the team, but do we know actually when that is?

and just an observation on fly tipping, there was an operation in March where 42 vehicles

were stopped, what was the outcome? And was it a success, was it a failure, how many finds

did we produce etc? Thank you.

Officer - 1:12:25

So fly tipping I'd have to come back to you on that, I'll have to find out, but with regards

the land charges I can help you with that one. So the extra person who's

actually started, so the person who's actually replaced the member who left

was part of the HMLR project which for Forrester Dean which is now finished and

they've moved into working in the actual team overall so that's why that took a

little while for that. The new starter is that they refer to in this is actually

going to be focused purely on the HMLR project so they're not going to be

processing the land charges searches as it were.

It's worth pointing out that we're quite dependent on a lot of the answering teams

to actually come back and give us a response in time.

So we're doing quite a big piece of work which has actually got to broadly

quite a good point at the moment is to show where the issues are

and what changes we can make in the processes to make them better.

So I do think that the performance for land charges might continue to look a bit poor

for a while until those processes have been put in place,

but it is definitely going to be a whole kind of change rather than just

looking at it piecemeal and have those quick wins. It's going to be a big review

Councillor Tony Slater - 1:13:34

basically. Are all those processes in -house or are we relying on external

Officer - 1:13:44

parties like land registry etc? So they're all in -house apart from the

answering team that I counted. We haven't got much control over the land

I'm afraid.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:13:54

Councillor Ian Watson - 1:13:56

Councillor Watson, please.

I'm on page 85 looking at long -term

emptied properties.

It seems like the Coxwells have got an awful lot of

emptied properties and at the same time a lot of people looking for somewhere to live.

I know something like a 30 % rise since 2022 up to about 900, something like that.

Two questions.

One is do we understand why there is this rise in empty properties in the Cotswolds?

and secondly is there anything this council can do to reduce this number?

Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:14:51

I don't know, thanks Ian for the good really good question and we did you might recall a couple of years ago set out a new empty proper strategy as a cabinet.

Claire's from Amundsen, she was on the cabinet at the time, and we had quite a lot of discussion with our officers about what we actually do

proactively to bring properties back into use

and went through quite a lot of discussion about it's quite hard if people don't want to use bring their property in even though we

penalise them now and get more they pay more council tax to actually get them to bring their properties back into use.

I don't know the answer, I don't know if Gemma may know about

why we think we've got an uptick.

We had that uptick and it went back down

and it's sort of come back up again.

Obviously, I know from discussions with Mandy Fathers

that her and her team do whatever they can

to encourage people to make their house habitable, use it.

And there are always reasons, obviously,

to do with bereavement and things like that,

which mean that properties are vacant for a time.

I don't know if Gemma is able to say any more about that.

She says she doesn't think she is, but do you want to?

Officer - 1:16:05

I will find out for you.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:16:09

Councillor David Cunningham - 1:16:12

Thank you.

As part of that, is it possible to get an idea?

I mean, it might breach GDPR or whatever, but is there any way

to get a better idea of why?

So, for instance, if it's waiting, if something's

intestate or whatever. Why is it being held for that long?

Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:16:29

From memory, from those conversations with Mandy, I think they do have a categorisation.

So they would have a reason why somebody is telling us, when they can get contact with somebody,

because sometimes, you know, basically there isn't anybody or they don't actually answer us,

but they do, you know, where there are situations like it's intesta, they, oh sorry,

somebody's died in test day, they normally are aware of that,

Councillor David Cunningham - 1:16:55

so people can pick that.

If it's possible to get some of that data on here in the back

of the pack, that might be quite handy because it is quite

a hot topic.

So I think if we could elaborate on it to the extent that we can

explain to people that, you know, there is so much we can

do where we can, we do charge people extra in terms of their

council tax, but where it's a situation that's out of our

control or out of the current owner's control, I think that's

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:17:21

quite good info. Yes I think Councillor Bloomer wants to come in. As far as I was aware there was also a

problem with some of these retirement homes which have become very unsaleable

and so there's an awful lot of those which are not. I know that Councillor Bloomer is

Councillor Claire Bloomer - 1:17:35

going to make that point. Thank you chair yeah it was a comment about how many of

those what's the percentage that are currently on the market because I know

the market is extremely slow at the moment and I just wondered if that was

having an impact as well. So, similar.

Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:17:49

To your point, Claire, I think when we hopefully get the data

that David has asked for,

it would potentially have a category for a sort of purpose

built retirement accommodation that's never been sold

or this is where someone has passed away in a retirement home

and then it stays vacant

because they can't sell it onto somebody else as well.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:18:09

Well, thank you. I've got a few simple questions.

I've actually, following up with Councillor Slater,

we're in the process of buying a new house in Cotswolds,

and I have to say that the land searches were very slow.

So I don't know whether we're also looking at putting

in an actual AI programme.

There must be something to somehow automate more

of the process.

An awful lot of the searches is a process.

It's providing the things.

So as well as recruitment, bring up the team to full strength.

That was one question.

And then there was another thing.

I understand and totally support CDC's requirements

that new housing takes into account environmental stewardship

through carbon neutral design, biodiversity,

and green infrastructure.

But I also understand that Stratford Council has been asked

by the government to temper similar requirements in order

to reduce the cost of some of their new housing.

I don't know whether the CDC has had any requests on that.

And finally on page 83, processing times for housing benefit, change of circumstances.

This looks poor.

And it is so important to be fleet of foot for families needing this benefit.

What is required to make this service better?

Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:19:30

If I can pick up the last two, maybe Jeremy pick up the first one.

I think reading through the narrative, particularly, housing benefit is now much, most recipients are now on universal credit.

So the cases that are still in housing benefit are more complex, which is why it's taking longer.

There's planning officers, I think, at the back who might be able to answer your second question.

And then I think Gemma might be able to pick up the first one.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:20:02

Officer - 1:20:06

The Planning Officer would like to come in now and then we'll go back to Gemma. Thank

you. Thank you. I'm not aware of the Stratford example but happy to look into it. I think

the answer is it would be tested through the local plan process. We have emerging policies

that will go through that process set examination and again there's testing at an application

stage if there is a viability issues. It may well be that Stratford's policy was aspirational

and ambitious and it may be tested now but I don't know it in any detail. Apologies but

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:20:30

happy to look into it. Thank you. Obviously it's close to my ward and there's a 10 to

12 ,000 houses proposed on the just over the other side and so there are lots of people

who are members of the public forensically looking through things. So I'm not sure about

it either. I'm not saying it's definitely the case but it definitely has been raised

to me. So thank you. Please I look forward to hearing back on that and Gemma, yes. Thank

Officer - 1:20:58

So with regards to the delay in your particular application, I can't speak about it specifically,

but I know that sometimes there are delays from the conveyancer as well, because the

average turn around in days is about 15.

So I'm sorry that that took a long time, but yes, that is part of the process.

And you talked about AI automating some of the processes as well.

At the moment, that is not AI specifically, it's something that we're investigating what

we are looking at is the process of there's a lot of double keying of information into

whether depending on how the applications come in or the search, whether it's coming

through a hub or one of three hubs or whether it's coming via email.

And then that has to be keyed into the system and then we have to get sent off to searching

teams to actually for them to respond and actually and a lot of the time it is them

looking at a particular layer on their mapping system of the GIS layer or it might be that

there's constraints that they need to raise and something like that.

But yes, we can automate as much as we can,

but I'm not sure if AI is the way forward at the moment

or whether there's the investment for that

at the moment either.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:22:03

Well, thank you for that.

I mean, I have to say, having read through the searches,

there's an awful lot of information there.

So I'm fully aware that you're covering,

you have to cover a lot.

So it's a lot of work to put it all together.

So I'm not, you know, thinking,

but I was just wondering whatever could be done to help.

Some of it is just process and other stuff is really detailed.

Officer - 1:22:26

Yeah, just on that so we are aware that the process is one of the one of the big things that's actually impacting stuff

So that's been a big part of our review. So hopefully we should start getting some changes in the next few months

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:22:38

Councillor Claire Bloomer - 1:22:44

Thank you very much as is in video councillor bloomer has a last point I hope

Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to come with a positive actually. Being a former cabinet

member for Cost of Living, I know that one time our new process times for council tax

support were quite low. It's great to see an improvement, so thank you on that. I just

thought it was a real positive to feed back to you. Thanks.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:23:02

Thank you for that. Actually, and it is a good point to raise, there are positives there.

We always go around looking at the things which are on the negative or we feel need

improvement but there are things which really have improved and it's good to

Simon Harper, Officer - 1:23:20

have them knowledge to thank you counsel. Simon would you like to sum up?

Thank you. Yeah thank you chair. So just picking up that point that just was made to

commend the council on the improvement in the council plan support the processing

times and some concern generally around land charges processing time and the

point around empty homes, understanding why they are going up, what the councils doing

and what the constraints are.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:23:48

I think everybody is just happy for those comments to be shared to Cabinet for them

to observe. So thank you very much for coming today. Thank you very much for answering the

questions. And now we move on to a very important topic which has been touched on a few times

12 Planning Enforcement Report

already this afternoon, planning enforcement report.

And while the people who are going to be coming forward,

I see Harrison Bodley, head of planning, is coming forward.

And also, Juliet Layton, who is a cabinet member

for Housing and Planning.

Before they start their introduction, I just want

to thank everyone for this honest and comprehensive report

on an area of CDC responsibilities

which have been a long -term concern of all members

and not just those on ANS.

I'm sure there will be many questions

on how this service can be improved,

even beyond what is outlined in the report.

Can I please remind everyone not to bring up specific cases,

either in their own ward or elsewhere,

as they could be sensitive and instead concentrate on interrogating this report in more general terms.

Councillor Juliet Layton - 1:25:21

So thank you very much. And Judith Layton, please.

Thank you very much. Yes, my first sentence, which I reminded myself, is categorically, please,

no reference to any live cases because we cannot answer those.

We can't be discussing that.

As you've seen in the report that it's, Harry's done a really

good report on this, how we're implementing the PAS planning

advisory service peer review and what progress has been made,

how the capacity pressures remain the same, and how PAS

identified that we've got a rather creaky ICT system.

And we get in nearly a case a day virtually,

so whenever you take something, you know,

there's always more coming up.

And the backlog has gone down a little bit since we had that

review, but because of, you know,

because of the regular cases coming, we've just got always,

always more cases to go.

Officer - 1:26:31

I'm going to hand over to Harry because I'm sure you've read all the report and it's up to you now.

I don't have matters more to add beyond that. The only thing I thought I'd mention is there was a local government ombudsman review

that came out in February about planning enforcement more generally and within that it listed 13 questions of senior leadership

and members should be asking of their enforcement team. Appendix A of your report should go through those questions

and I provided some responses to them.

Obviously, you know, some of them are positive,

some of them are identifying areas

where further work is required.

And yeah, hopefully the report sets out

a reasonably balanced approach.

I think it shows what we've tried to implement

since the PAS action plan in April last year.

It sets out the challenges and hopefully the next steps

we hope to put in place.

Finally, it mentions that towards the end,

a proposal was for a new enforcement team lead role,

which is subject to additional funds that were discussed earlier.

That's obviously going to cabinet later this week,

which does have a bit more detail on the financial finances and business,

but I just provided a summary in this report

and say it is obviously relevant to what we're discussing today,

but otherwise I'm more than happy to answer any questions.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:27:40

I'm actually going to take the privilege of asking the question first.

It's not such a question,

It's the way that enforcement interact with us members.

And this has been, I think, a slight struggle from our side

that we try to bring up cases, we get a response,

and then not any follow -up or whatever.

We were lost in the dark, so we have to go back and ask again.

I would... It would be nice to see a system used just so that we...

Well, I don't keep bothering you in some ways,

because we will still have maybe residents or whatever saying,

oh, what's going on there?

And whatever.

Oh, right, I better try again and see what's going on.

It's not that you will have had a chance to resolve it,

but at least that we know that it's still live

and being looked at.

And also, I know it's been a problem

that we've had quite a lot of turnover of staff

and temporary agency staff and things.

But who's actually looking after that?

Because I write to somebody, and then I

get an email bounced back because that person's

no longer there.

So then I've got to try and find out who it is,

who's looking after it.

So a little bit of way of so that we feel more confident in knowing where in our areas,

specifically where those cases and how they're being handled.

And I just wanted to add one more thing.

I'm actually aware that, you know, doing anything to a listed building

without applying permission is actually can be a criminal offence.

And I'm going to say that in some of those, I haven't had a particularly fast response

on and that is concerned. So before anybody else I want to put those first.

Officer - 1:29:22

Thank you Harry. Your reply. Thank you chair. Yeah on members updates I'm aware that's

something that previously probably you could say historically at this point

somewhere it's been a little while since we were able to provide those updates.

There's a few challenges we've had to that recently. I think one is sheer

staffing. I mean it does take somebody to manage process those reports and share

them against systems in the background. We don't have anything that really automates

that at the minute. That's again something we're working on. We're looking to improve

that but it has limited our ability to do that so it is quite a time consuming and onerous

thing for officers. But equally I generally agree with you, members are often the first

line of defence if you like against with enforcement. The members of the public will often come

to you before they come to us so ensuring you're informed is something we very much

tend to do. There is an element of we have to be careful for a legal and a sort of the integrity of

the investigation perspective that we have to be careful with what information we share and what

gets out there further. So I think it is a balanced report we have to find but it is something I'm

well aware that members are interested in. It's something we're looking to bring back. We've

hopefully we've now got a dedicated administrative resource within the team which we didn't have

previously. So we're doing a bit of work now around the performance reporting and also the

data capture so that we are able to share that and automate that as much as possible. So again,

it's not officers providing detailed written updates on every single case, which is I don't

think realistic, but certainly those high priority ones and ideally on most cases coming forward.

But I think it's a work in progress. I'm well aware members would like to see it. They say I

equally would like to see it, but I think it's just doing that in a managed way.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:31:02

I appreciate it and also I appreciate the confidentiality of a lot of these things so

we have to be careful. I just wondered if you could just answer me on the listed buildings.

Officer - 1:31:12

I mean listed buildings are a top priority. We tend to have a target of getting out to those

within 48 hours wherever possible. I will look into if there are any issues with updates. Again,

I think that's often one of the areas we do struggle is providing the updates and having

proper communication channels. Again we now have this administrative officer that does

monitor our inbox daily and we have an officer that's on duty daily as well so I'm hoping

that you will see some improvement but I can certainly reassure you that we do look to

respond to listed building reports within 48 hours hoping to have somebody on site looking

into those. They do effectively jump to the top of the queue because as you say they are

a criminal offence but also the more damage...

Is there an open prosecution?

Sorry?

Is there an open prosecution?

There's no time at all.

No, there's not.

But the problem is more, the more work that's done,

the more potential irreversible harm that is being done.

So we want to get out there and try and put a stop to that

as quick as possible, effectively.

So it's more so protecting the list of building.

We could wait a week.

We could wait two.

But by that point, they could have ripped out more walls

or done whatever they might be doing.

So it's more for the preservation

of the list of buildings.

You're right, prosecution doesn't have a time limit.

Albeit again, gathering evidence,

moving those along quite quickly is quite keen.

again from a public perception point of view we have 5 ,000 plus listed buildings

and you know given the highest level of protection so we need to be seen I think

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:32:33

to be being active and ensuring that we are enforcing wherever we can.

Councillor Ian Watson - 1:32:39

Right well thank you. I'll open it up. Councillor Watson was in first. Thank you chair.

Harry, just two questions if I may.

This is a really straightforward simple question.

How many enforcement officers have you got, including employees and agency staff, and how many do you need?

So currently the team is a six -person team.

Right this second we have five officers.

Last Friday I had six but I have unfortunately since lost one of our agency contractors.

That consists of an enforcement assistant, which is our administrative role, an assistant enforcement officer, two enforcement officers, a senior and a principal.

So currently we're missing the senior and all other roles are filled.

The principal role is filled by a contractor, which is Madeleine Duddy.

You probably know she's been with us quite a while now.

The senior role is that one that's had quite a high turnover.

So that's currently vacant but has been occupied until last Friday.

And again, prior to that, we've had a bit of a turnover in the last few months.

Officer - 1:33:42

But currently, yeah, it's a six -person establishment team.

And yeah, at the time of that, right this second, we have five officers filling the roles.

Councillor Ian Watson - 1:33:51

Or five members of staff, sorry, not officers.

Yeah, and I know from discussions, these are difficult posts to fill, as I understand.

Yeah.

My second question, Patrick and David educated me earlier about vacancy management.

Are any planning posts within that saving on vacancy management?

Officer - 1:34:16

Not that I'm aware of unless David would like to correct me.

I was slightly shaken ahead there.

Councillor Ian Watson - 1:34:20

Thank you. Thank you very much, Harry.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:34:23

And also David Stanley wants to come in.

Councillor Juliet Layton - 1:34:27

Thank you David, you can come in as well.

But no, planning and enforcement is definitely being funded.

We're not losing staff.

Agents, I did hear earlier somebody said agency staff

are not so good sometimes in their roles,

but I think we've had some really good ones.

It's the fact that they can go like that,

which is not easy to cope with.

Thank you.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:34:54

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 1:34:55

Senator Stanley.

Thank you, Chair.

Just to reiterate, I suppose, there aren't any vacancy savings that have been taken by

reducing the establishment, but there will be periods of time where Harrison may lose

a member of staff on a Friday, but the new member of staff won't turn up on the Monday.

There will be a time delay in Harrison being aware of the vacancy and the replacement coming

in, but I can assure members that the process that we go through at CLT has already identified

that any vacancy that emerges in planning is dealt with really quickly and the answer

is usually yes, fill it, on the basis that that is putting the team under even further

pressure than they're under. That's something that I'm sure will reassure members that we're

looking to build in delays to that recruitment process but finding planners

anyway regardless of whether we're Cotswolds or any other council is a

national issue there is a national shortage of planners and that market is

incredibly hard to tie individuals down because they've usually got three or

four other offers coming at the same time.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:36:12

Thank you for that. I have now got Councillor Waring.

Councillor Jon Wareing - 1:36:19

Thank you, Chair. Will the kind of system suggested by the Chair be in place in the

lifetime of Cotswold District Council? If yes, when? And if not, can you comment on

LGR managing enforcement effectively in the future?

Officer - 1:36:36

The system is in the reporting to members. Will it be in the lifetime of LGR? Yes, we're

certainly working towards that. The system we're currently going through, a lot of the

background back office system work that we're looking to do, and we've already had discussions

with legal in terms of the scope of what that will look like. I can't give you an exact

timeline on when that will be. We've got the enforcement plan which we're hoping to publish

in July. That will to me very much set the tone of what the team is, almost the foundations

of what we're doing moving forward.

So the hope is we will build upon that.

The target will certainly be by the end of the year,

if not by the end of the summer.

But I can't give an exact timeline on that,

because it does depend.

The more we look into our back offices,

the more little problems we find.

We also will have a problem that for new world applications,

i .e. things submitted after the enforcement plan,

hopefully we would have tidied the data collection up

well enough that it would be relatively simple.

That was not necessarily correct,

the 600 -year -old cases we have prior to that,

which have a real problem in terms of their data,

the cleanness of the data.

And so again, there's going to be a question

as to how we deal with that.

So I think there's still a few questions to answer

as to what it looks like,

but the hope is it's very much top priority

from both the internal performance management perspective,

but also say that they're reporting to members,

but I'm going to struggle to give you

an exact timeline on that.

Because if everything goes swimmingly, end of the summer,

if I started other problems, it might take a bit longer.

And I wouldn't want to commit and mislead you

on how long it's realistically going to take.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:37:59

Right. Thank you. Um councillor Slater, please

Councillor Tony Slater - 1:38:04

Thank you. Yeah

I've got a sort of list, but I'll try and be brief and bullet point

the table on page 114 115

from the original

report

It could do with updating. So there's some actions on there but not outcomes. So for example the top page 115

new plan is being, it's nearing the point of adoption expected early summer 26 but

we're sort of mid -summer now so where's that and the one below is an action and

there's a couple of actions but no outcomes on there so are they are they

complete or are they still ongoing is the question. A question on resources it

could if we looked at using other offices in the organisation as backfill

There seems to be plenty available for things like public air and LGR, but something as

important as this, we're just struggling to recruit.

So I don't know whether it's not a shiny enough project for people to be involved in.

3 .8, there's just a minor typo.

It's got financial year 26 -28, so presumably that should be 27.

The backlog base date, I'm assuming that hasn't moved.

I think it should, because I think it was fixed when the report was published, the review

was done, which was a year previously when the backlog was fixed.

But that's got to move forward with time.

So I would argue that anything more than a year old should be in the backlog.

I would argue it should be six months, but let's walk before we can run.

So I'm concerned that new, non -urgent cases, if they've been triaged,

and it might be just somebody's stuck a fence in the wrong place or painted a door the wrong colour or something like that,

they may never be reviewed.

They might just end up in a backlog and sort of fall off the system eventually.

But other than potholes, this is one of the biggest frustrations that my people have.

They're pulling their hair out, they're trying to get something done,

somebody's done something and nobody will do anything for them.

So they come to me and I can't do anything for them either, sadly.

And 3 .16, what did I have in 3 .16?

Oh, yes. I should have put the word when.

So once the team reaches a more stable staffing position, the service, et cetera,

We need an action plan over that because does it,

I know it will start at a certain point when we have

enough resources, but what does that look like?

How long will that plan take, et cetera?

Sorry, there's a long list, but I got quite frustrated

reading this.

Councillor Juliet Layton - 1:41:27

I'll have a go.

I'll leave higher for things like actions.

resources and taking offices from other areas, it's not simply a case of we just

need somebody to do a bit of administrative work, people have got to

know what they're doing and actually they we do have people coming from other

areas so if we've got the validation team we they very often we have grow

your own they move forward but they they do need training up and so if you get a

new people new person sitting there with all the keenness and the you know desire

to help. Somebody has got to train that person because it's really, this is

legal work here. It's got to be right. It takes a long time. The process

has to go right from the beginning to the end. It's got to be absolutely spot

on and it has to go to legal if there is an enforcement, you know, if

there is a case to be found that the case can't be resolved. So they need an

awful lot of knowledge. So just pulling somebody in because you know you

mentioned Publica, I don't know who loose and abounding in Publica that

might fancy a dabble but that isn't an opportunity really it's got to be

done correctly. Absolutely. And we do encourage and we do grow your own. It was

Councillor Tony Slater - 1:42:48

it was more that not some random person from Publica but when the

Publica project was happening there was available backfill from other

officers and I do appreciate any training which is why it would be

better to have an already permanent member of staff to perhaps be

inconded for a year or something to understand that fully get the team up

and running correctly and in that time we can carry on recruiting the backfill

Councillor Juliet Layton - 1:43:19

they can train them up etc. It's ongoing progress

Councillor Juliet Layton - 1:43:28

process so hopefully that will happen yeah. Oh the other one about the small

cases yes gate people will put something in they've painted the fence wrong or

it's two inches too high you just think why are we why are we spending so much

resource on looking at something that probably had they said they were going

to paint the fence green instead of blue on a planning application all would be

well this is very light -hearted here saying that but some of those

applications come in. Planning, what we try and do is get them to do what the

planning wanted or we'd say where's the harm and you just need to say you're

going to paint the fence blue. But there are long memories out there and the

cases don't fall off. They sit there waiting to be sorted out and so people

bring in some very minor things but they are still a case. They still need sorting

out, they don't fall off just because they've been there X number of years.

And you know we all know lots of our residents will remember a long time ago

when you think hasn't that happened yet? It's important to them, yes,

Officer - 1:44:40

and it sits as a case.

I sort of add to that with the backlog clearance we're not just going through

and culling cases each one is being triaged we're looking at the well we are

We've created a bit of a form, just a general guidance in terms of the age of the case,

whether they're being chased, the level of planning harm.

If we're on the fence, they're being kept basically when we triage something, we're

either closing it because it no longer needs investigation or we're labelling it as active

and re -circling it back into the system with targets.

In terms of general updates and trying to keep reporters up to date, that's one of the

things we're quite keen, I think, in the enforcement plan is set out that triage process.

And we're also working on background systems to add in automatic updates.

So the hope is a report's received, we register within five days.

I think we're then targeting within 30 days.

It's then triaged, effectively validated.

The member of the public will receive an update on that.

They'll be advised of the priority level it's been given, which is set out in the enforcement

plan so they can understand that with a bit of a reasoning for it.

And then they can understand the next timescales.

The top of my head is then I think it's a reasonable window because these investigations

do take time.

But it's only about three months.

is the initial investigation process, by the end of which there should be a further update

issued to the member of the public, the reporter, effectively telling them the initial investigation.

If it's not expedient, they'll be told it's being closed and the reason why, if it is

expedient effectively, it will be next steps. That's always the challenging bit because

next steps can be a week, it can be a year. Unfortunately, if you're going for a prosecution,

you're maybe reliant on the courts, if it's something a bit more niche, it might be something

nice and simple and we've actually invited a planning application and we know it's going

come in in a couple of weeks or we've been told about it, but maybe it doesn't. It can

be difficult to put a finger on exactly how long it's going to take, but the hope is we

can at least give people in that initial investigation period some reassurance that it's being looked

at and it's been prioritised. You may have to remind me if I've missed anything.

Times 3 .1c. The backlog.

Backlog. So part of the backlog, well we created what we called the backlog clearance strategy

and within that there was a sort of governance and oversight bit which was effectively a

periodic review of how it's going and is there any need to update and change things. We can

certainly if members felt that we needed to shift that backlog date. I think the intention of using

a fixed date was effectively to classify these cases of the backlog, not to move them to one

side but that in itself is an almost self -contained project which we'll work through,

whilst we're treating new world cases, referring to them trying to do that within the new enforcement plan targets.

So having a sort of old new world, old world system, there's nothing obviously it's just an arbitrary date.

It's not an arbitrary date. We chose this specifically looking at the sort of categorization of those cases.

There's nothing stopping us reviewing that and potentially shifting and moving more into that backlog review.

It to some extent would depend on what's going to be the most efficient way of processing them. If we have a

well -working backlog clearance strategy that's actually getting through the cases, it does

make sense to expand it and move more cases in. If the new world system with the new enforcement

plan is actually working really well with the triaging process, it may well be that

they're best kept in the new world because we can work through those. I think that's

probably something we need to keep under review. We will be periodically reviewing the backlog

clearance strategy as it goes. But I think it's a valid point and it's something we'll

take into consideration when we're reviewing that.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:48:05

Was that everything? You could circle back round if I missed something.

I'm delivered at high speed, very, very impressive.

And yes, I could hear what, which is wonderful. Councillor Vann.

Councillor Michael Vann - 1:48:15

Really good answers to the 13 questions. They are great answers.

Insurance Act before statutory time, Unit 6 bar number 5.

This is so woolly.

Start very firmly, officers will.

Great start.

But then the next sentence, based on current case handling arrangements, there is nothing

to suggest a systemic issue whereby breaches routinely become immune due to avoidable delay.

It's great stuff.

Have any been missed?

Officer - 1:49:18

Not that I'm aware of. There's always a bit of a challenge. Again, this may be as we go

through the backlog clearance exercise, we may come across a few. That's one of the,

you know, there, most of them are a four -year immunity, or most of them are a ten -year immunity,

sorry, but there are some that are a four -year immunity period. The backlog, you know, it's

and the oldest case is currently, so there is a chance.

We haven't come across any yet, which I think is positive.

We may have had one.

They do unfortunately crop up.

We, part of our problem is historically

the performance management has,

we don't have great access to that kind of data,

so it is difficult to manage.

So it is, anecdotal is probably a bit soft,

but we are reliant on when things come up

and we uncover them, it's less of a procedure.

In planning, it's one of the first things you learn,

is the immunity things.

It's drilled into every officer.

So whilst we don't have a system in place that's catching them,

it is something we're very aware of.

And when we go through that review of cases,

there is a chance if we go through the backlog,

we may find some more.

I would sincerely hope it is a minimal amount.

I think the reason I use the word systemic in there

is because if it was something coming up every few weeks,

we have a real problem there.

And it isn't that.

It is more ad hoc where the case has slipped through

or something's gone wrong.

But no, as far as we're aware, there isn't a systemic problem, but I can't promise that we won't find any when we're sifting through the backlog.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:50:40

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 1:50:47

Councillor Spivey, please.

Thanks, Chair.

Oh, God, Planning Enforcement.

It's a tough, tough job.

And, you know, Councillor Stater there, I totally appreciate your frustration.

I know that many of the residents that I represent feel exactly the same way.

However, I do think that what we should be clear about is the amount of cases

that are sitting on a backlog, sitting on a to -do list as it were, and the amount

of times where we would actually proceed with legal action. And I think this is

the dilemma that we all face and I think that us as representatives when we go

out to our parish council meetings and we hear about the backlog and whether it's a

door that's painted the wrong colour or a fence that wasn't put in the right place or

something that's a few centimetres higher than it should be. It is really difficult

because the council and our planning enforcement officers are the only place where people can

go, aren't they? You can't go out and, you know, you could, you could go measure things

and start shouting at your neighbours, but often people don't want to do that because

it creates tension. But I think what we have to be really clear about is where we would,

and out of those cases, and you know, Councillor Stater, you said there's one in your pile

that would have necessitated action, but you know, that's one out of how many? It's a handful

out of, let's face it, hundreds that are sitting there, to be really honest. And I think, you

know, we've got to take some kind of balancing act here when we think about this. So I think

I appreciate that there is a backlog, that you are dealing with it and trying to bring

that down, that it is tricky to recruit people.

As Councillor Layton said, yes, you can't just randomly go and pick people and say,

can you deal with this planning enforcement?

Because actually it does require a skill set.

It's a legal process.

You have to balance everything out.

And so many of the things that we all deal with in planning on behalf of our residents

and those we represent seem really terribly unfair, and they don't really seem to make

sense, but that is part of the beast of local government, and we are here right on the front

line. So many, as the politicians, as the people that go out to the meetings and meet

our residents in the supermarket and in the street and out walking our dogs, we hear it,

don't we? We get it, like, oh, nobody's done anything about that, and they haven't told

me. So I think that actually, well done for trying to get a grip on this, to taking the

action that we heard when we got the past review in. I can totally see how we are trying

to make an indent in that backlog. I think that we should be encouraging officers to

keep going and doing that. And I think that we should all just be calm about where the

real harm is. And of course, we are the custodians of the beautiful Cotswolds. It's an internationally

renowned place and we want to make sure that in the future that it remains that

way and I have faith and I have great confidence that you are doing

everything that you can in order to make sure that those things which are really

going to make an enormous impact so I think our listed buildings absolutely we

have to get on that and I know that you are doing that so I would say thank you

for doing everything you can.

Let's all just remain calm about it.

Let's just try to get everything into perspective.

I do think that it's very, very tricky,

but we should just keep doing what we're doing.

I don't see that the Cotswolds is being, at this point,

certainly not from planning enforcement.

We'll wait till we get to the local plan at our next meeting.

But I don't think that we are, as the custodians here and as the elected members, I don't see

the Cotswolds district being ruined forever because of planning enforcement not quite

being as quick as we would all like it.

So yeah, that's my thoughts on it.

I just want to say thank you and I do appreciate that it's a very difficult job.

And that's not to say that it isn't important.

I do know that you're having to prioritise things, get out there where there is going

to be untold damage done to listed buildings it would be irreversible but I

just hope that you can continue to address those issues because it's about

fairness isn't it and sometimes a lot of the time what we see from our

communities is somebody says that's not right and again we can't come back to

planning being this very unfair system because and also for our residents that

when you get your planning permission we rely on people complying with doing what

they said they would do when they made their planning application.

And I know that it seems crazy that we don't have officers that go out and cheque that you've

built what you said you would build and you put in your plans.

But that's the process.

And so we would then have to make a decision when we get to budget setting time, folks,

whether we want to put more money into that.

And we are in a time where we don't have unlimited resource.

We'd have to take money away from other things.

Do we want to then increase?

and how much more can we increase the planning charges to include that.

And I think that building control and that planning cheque at the end of your build

should absolutely be included as a cost in the planning process to make sure that

we don't just rely on that tacit agreement that you'll build what you said you would.

And maybe we would get rid of some of these issues and some of these frustrations

that all of our residents feel, and I feel the same.

It's very annoying, but I think we do have to take everything on balance, and I think

that whilst the backlog is bigger than we would like, it does cause frustration.

I think we are doing the right thing and you're on the right track.

Councillor Juliet Layton - 1:56:51

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 1:56:54

Lisa, thank you.

It was a comment.

I'm sorry if it was supposed to be a question.

It was a comment to the committee.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:57:01

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 1:57:04

Do you agree with me, Chancellor Layton?

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 1:57:09

I will ask questions. Do we commit comments?

Strongly express comments.

Oh, sorry. I skipped forward to the comments section. Apologies to the committee.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:57:20

Thank you.

I have now got Councillor Cunningham who will now make a question.

Councillor David Cunningham - 1:57:29

I might switch you off. Please do. My wife put a switch in specifically for that.

Actually, mine's quite simple. I will make a comment at the beginning actually that for a lot of residents there are laws here

and if they are broken, they are broken.

It's quite difficult to have a conversation with people along the lines of,

well, I know they broke the law, but they didn't break it by much.

That's a quite difficult conversation to have.

So I think we should keep that in mind when we talk about enforcement,

that people have broken the law, and therefore there should be a consequence.

Whether that consequence in four years' time is,

it is not in the public interest to pursue this any further,

is a different conversation.

But I think it's important to set out at the beginning that it is a break of the law,

and therefore it should be treated as such.

My question is a much more simple one.

I don't know if I heard right.

Maddie's gone.

I've seen you.

I'm Maddie's done.

Oh, okay, fine.

So, fine.

I'm Madeline.

I'm a former manager.

Sorry, Madeline.

Yeah, sorry.

Officer - 1:58:46

So can I just confirm how many people are on the team today?

Councillor David Cunningham - 1:58:49

Okay, so this extra head that you're talking about would take the team to six or are you

looking to replace the senior so that it will go to seven?

Yes, the latter.

Officer - 1:59:05

So we're looking to interview for the senior later this week into early next week.

The new lead role will be on top of that.

So effectively our current establishment is six, which is the team.

The new lead would take us up to an establishment of seven.

Councillor David Cunningham - 1:59:19

Will you consider agency staff for both roles?

Officer - 1:59:23

Yes, so the lead role will be filled on a contract basis for a temporary period through

a contractor.

The contractor, we already, I think they're going through contract details so I can't

necessarily share, but the idea is we'll bring in somebody who has experience, who knows

that they're doing, dealt with playing enforcement,

but specifically service improvement.

So there's sort of a focused role,

looking to drive forward the service improvement function.

It's not just, we're going to go out to the recruiters

and see who we can get.

It's very much more focused than that

in looking to bring in someone who is, you know,

it's a very specific scope in terms of that role.

I don't know if Helen, you wanted to add anything more,

or if you have the, I'm covered to that.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:59:59

Thank you.

Officer - 2:00:00

Helen Martin wants to come in.

Two points if I can, I want to be a bit of a pedant

and go back to the point about unlawful.

So if it's a listed building or if it's a TPO, it is a criminal offence and you can go straight to prosecution.

Otherwise, we take enforcement action if we fail to

regularise it or

negotiate away the breach and only when we've served a formal notice and they have failed to comply does it become unlawful.

But I get your wider point. People have failed to comply with something at the beginning.

In terms of the role that we're looking to bring in, it is a very specific brief.

So we are looking for somebody who has substantial enforcement experience, but also has performance management and planning

generally and can look at service improvements and work

with Harry on the actions that are in the action plan to bring

them forward.

So it's bringing in capacity but also senior level experience.

I can't go into detail because we're still in the middle of

procurement, but we do have a preferred candidate who has that

background and has done this before in other places.

And I think the issue we have is we only have so many months to

be able to do this because of LGR and be able to turn things

around, so we need to be able to move that pace.

And we want to be able to move at pace because this is an issue

that obviously comes up time and time again that we're aware of it's just been

unfortunate we cannot retain consistency of staffing to be able to bring forward

the plans that Harry and the team have already put in place. Thank you.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:01:19

David Stanley's got something to add but hold David Cunningham.

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 2:01:24

This is in the public domain so the council report, the cabinet report

that will be considered on Wednesday, section two of that report has the financial implications

of what's being proposed and that sets out that to recruit on an agency basis is estimated

that the annual cost would be up to 700 pounds per day, not including VAT, which would total

154 ,000 pounds per annum. This was written barely a week ago and the position has moved

in terms of the way in which the council is looking to onboard the individual or an individual.

So that is a moving position and as you will have understood from the financial performance

report the 251 ,000 surplus from 25 -26 is being proposed to be moved into the capacity building

reserve. The capacity building reserve could then be utilised to cover the cost of the

planning enforcement team lead role that's being considered in this report.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:02:28

Councillor David Cunningham - 2:02:32

I would like to ask another question.

My question was going to be is there enough money to fill both roles on an agency basis?

Officer - 2:02:41

We have a senior officer post in establishment.

We unfortunately just had a high turnover in that role.

that will be based, well obviously with an agency it comes as more expensive than a full -time

member of staff but effectively yes and as David said, there's separate funding available

that's being put towards the new lead role.

Councillor David Cunningham - 2:03:05

Not the new lead role, for both.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:03:09

Well thank you for that and I dare say as we go closer to LGR it does become more difficult

to give people permanent posts just by the nature of how long the council's got to run.

I've got Councillor Jenkinson who would like a question.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:03:27

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 2:03:28

It would be a comment.

Thank you, Chair.

Harry and Julia, thank you very much for your report and can I echo the comment that was

made earlier?

Thank you for being frank and clear, not that I would have expected anything else.

I do note that there is an item 3 .20, which is a report that was due in by now, and that

this report is material to this report, so I'm surprised that the content isn't included.

But you could perhaps come back to that.

Where I want to start from is that the report lays out, and it's not me saying it, but I

think you've heard from various councillors, and you can certainly hear from me, that there's

a great deal of frustration about the situation.

I suspect there's a great deal of frustration amongst officers as well about it.

The report indicates that there is a systemic problem, that it is a strategic risk under

of the strategic risk assessment,

that it has been going for some time.

It was certainly the case when I became a counsellor

and it's still the case today and it's not any better.

I remember being told that there was, since there was 500 cases

on the back blog, my complete development would not get

onto it because it was too big for the 500

that was already there.

So my first question is this.

You've got a lot of cases, but zero analysis

on classification or type.

How many of these are tiny little problems?

I mean, however you classify them, whatever tiny means,

how many of them are significant?

How many of them are major?

I mean, I know that there are major whole development issues,

and so do you.

And there are others I know of that I can't even get

onto the list, and I'm aware that there are more

across the whole of the district.

That being the case, it would be very useful

to have some classification as to where,

what this backlog actually looks like in terms

are some classes of type. Where do we stand on that?

Officer - 2:06:05

Just quickly on the first point, 3 .20, the local enforcement plan should have been included

in your papers at appendix B, which is the new draught. I think I put spring slash summer,

probably should be more summer, but that should be included. It was endorsed by planning committee

in June, in your papers, just for reference, for completeness of the report. So hopefully

that you do have that in front of you.

If not, we can circulate that separately.

On the second issue, we went through a categorization process

with the backlog to try and better understand it.

I've alluded to earlier, part of our problem is the data

we currently have available is very limited.

I think that's a problem over an extended period of time

and over turnover of staff and the way we've recorded cases.

Some things are listed as simply as enforcement breach

and we're, you know, it doesn't really give us much information

until we delve a bit more in.

As part of the backlog clearing strategy, which we haven't got in front of me, I did

go through a bit of a case categorization so we could try and better understand that

unfortunately the outcomes were limited because the access to data was limited.

So to some extent we won't know until we have gone through and triaged each case.

We have already as a team gone through, because there are certain cases that would technically

fall within that backlog, but the officers are well aware of their high profile or they've

and ongoing or we're progressing towards potential action and we are therefore already familiar.

We've already gone through, taken them out of the backlog and they are still within the

active cases, the case officers' case loads themselves.

We have at least removed those ones which are a bit more anecdotally but then each officer

knows it's high profile and we don't want to get stuck in this backlog.

Of the other ones, unfortunately the data we had access to was limited and gave us limited

insights so it isn't until we have gone through the triaging process to really

identify what each case is, what each breach is, we will understand. It might

be worth, this is a very small sample pool, but we've currently gone through, I

think in the reports I've mentioned we've cleared 64 cases. Of those, about 30 we've

managed to do whilst we have a new sort of tracking dashboard that I've created.

So of the 30 cases we've gone through in triage, 21 of them have been closed.

There's either no breaches or not expedient. The other nine have been

labelled as active so that any further investigation has been cycled back in. We started with the

oldest and we'll move our way closer. The likelihood is that proportion will increase

towards more being active the later you get because we've done less on them. But equally

it's a useful indicator to show not far off a third have been still active, about two

thirds are being closed at the point of triage. So we'll see how that trend goes. I'm over

you know, I think it's worth reporting that back to members as we go because equally I

the backlog clearances for us just to be sort of shoving them under the rug and we won't

talk about them any longer so there will be an element of reporting and governance of

that.

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 2:08:55

But that's just an indicator from the initial 30 cases.

So that indicates that there's a fundamental issue, we just lack the data and that goes

to, that's a big part of why we have a system problem here.

So, it's a complex issue and there are various factors that are interrelated.

Firstly, I recollect being a director and then running a company in the digital era,

which we still have, but at the time when many, many people were contractors, and we

had to manage a way of managing that because you

cannot run a business on contractors.

It's expensive for one thing and it reduces quality

and that's exactly what your report says.

Therefore, we need a solution and what we've got

is a description that says it's a problem, but we

don't have a description of the solution.

That's number one.

Number two, we've said that there's a systems problem

here, we do not have a system.

Surely, given that these are standard, you know,

compliance and planning processes are legislated for

across the country, surely there are standard

off -the -shelf systems.

And workflow processes existed 25 years ago that

were really good.

So third point, and we talked about expertise,

and clearly the compliance and planning people are

really expert people. They're highly trained. But being an expert in those matters does

not make you an expert in systems and process improvement. Have we considered employing

somebody who is an expert in process systems and even as a contractor to put our systems

right? Is there no one else in the county who's got systems that we could start to use?

How can we deal with this?

And in relation to such questions and the sheer need

to get a sufficiently stable

competent team as we move towards LGR

How much of this solution could be solved by having some more budget?

And if so, could you give some comments about that?

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 2:11:17

Officer - 2:11:23

There are several questions built into there, but that's the point is that these are interrelated

issues.

Yes, yeah.

No, that's fine.

If I miss anything, please call me up on it.

Rely on some contractors, yes.

I think that's one of the biggest challenges.

We've been really lucky with Maddie that whilst the contractor, she stayed for a long time,

but we have gone through, well, I've been in this post 18 months and I will soon be

on to my fifth senior officer in that contracting role.

There's various reasons for that and none of it's been raised to that performance.

circumstances, but the risk with contractors is high turnover because they have their short

notice periods. They're potentially coming from further at quite a long wage, so they

may get more local opportunities. The solution to that is obviously permanent recruitment.

That is what we've challenged with, so we've had a challenge with. We've been out to try

and fill the senior and the principal role four times and have been unsuccessful each

time. We are currently reviewing opportunities which will include a potential market supplement

to other ways to improve the attractiveness of the role,

and we do intend to try again.

But we are unfortunately experienced enforcement

professionals are hard to come across Gloucestershire

and further afield.

So we will see what we can do.

But then that just increases the price.

Yeah, well then that's what.

Then there's a shortage of big demand, low supply,

and the price goes up.

So which is what we'll be trying to do the next time around.

Because so, yeah.

So do you need an increase in budget?

Do you need an increase?

do you need an increase in budget?

The market supplement, well I would need to review,

it will either be within the existing establishment

or will be subject to a growth bid if we require

the additional market supplement.

So I, as Helen might have a better answer to that.

Officer - 2:12:57

Yes, I mean, sorry, it sounds very loud.

One of the reasons why experienced senior staff

and enforcement aren't applying for jobs is because they are effectively contracting,

because contracting allows them to earn significantly more money.

They are probably most of the contractors senior that are experienced will be on the

similar salary to directors within this organisation, if not more.

So I think it's quite difficult for the council to actually pitch a salary or to actually

attract those senior staff for that reason. So as Harry has said, despite four attempts,

we still have been unable to recruit to a permanent post. We will still keep trying,

but I think there is a big differential between what a contractor will earn and what we can

look to pay as part of the establishment.

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 2:13:57

I'm going to make a recommendation later when it comes to that time, please.

Officer - 2:14:03

Thank you. Going back to your earlier point about systems, processes, process redesign.

An element of that has already happened. We have done some process mapping and enforcement,

which I think is referenced in Harry's report. In terms of systems and processes, the individual

we are looking to bring in has done that previously, possibly with different systems and processes,

but it has worked in a number. I think the issue that we have with LGR Lumi is we are

not in a position financially to be able to go and procure a new system.

So it's what can we do within the existing system to use it to best effect.

Now sometimes that's a case of playing catch up on upgrades and

things that we haven't necessarily had the time and capacity and

resource to invest in.

The other thing I will say as a health warning on this is we also need ICT to

be able to be with us on that timetable.

So part of what this role is intended to do is to look at just that.

But we are not entirely in control of our own destiny here, but

we will do everything that we can within those resource constraints to improve

our systems and processes and maximise things like workflow where it's

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:15:07

available to us. Thank you.

Right, first of all, Councillor Drenks, did you want to come back on that?

Well, because Councillor Waring's... Yeah, I'll give a recommendation afterwards.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:15:18

Councillor Jon Wareing - 2:15:21

Councillor Waring.

Thank you, Chair.

Given that for residents, stewardship of social, built and natural environments is seen to fall on planning and enforcement, because they have nowhere else to go.

We've heard that your team should be six, it's currently five and it will be seven,

but should it be eight or should it be nine?

Because I recognise I'm jumping ahead because I don't know that the analysis to the solution

has been done based on what Councillor Jenkinson was just saying, but it's so important.

And I know I'm sure in every community, but certainly in the ward that I represent, there

issues that have been hanging around and have seemed to be impacting not just in

terms of buildings but socially. So I think that there needs to be a

prioritisation that's perhaps greater than than we've given to this topic. So

you know should it be eight or should it be nine? Have you been down

that road? Are you reluctant to push for greater numbers because you think it's

Officer - 2:16:32

So I'll probably go back in time a little bit.

When I first started in the role to January last year,

the team was four.

We went through a review process and a bit of a,

what we call a mini restructure.

The intention was to do it within budget,

effectively looking at the development management

enforcement team as a whole.

We managed to create that head, increase that head count from

four to six because we identified immediate needs of

the administrative role and the officer role.

Those roles we introduced, we went through a restructure with

the team. We recruited to the first role in January and the second role in March. Those

officers are now either onboarded or onboarding. I think in terms of future capacity that does

require further analysis and further review, which is hopefully something we will be able

to do with this new lead officer. They may well have come in, will look and sit down,

will undertake that further analysis based on the new team structure and we will be able

to tell you a bit more on that in terms of if we need it. I think until this new structure

is fully embedded, we've got those offices fully on board.

It is difficult to say.

We can predict what capacity we have,

but I think it does need slightly deeper analysis

than that, because obviously it's not

an insignificant increase in budget we'd be looking at.

It's not to say we're not open to reviewing it,

but I think it has to be evidence -led,

and we will need to look at the data, look at the systems.

Because I think that's the other thing,

is we've looked at increasing the capacity

in the team, which is great.

I think the next thing is also the efficiencies

within the team.

you know, looking at those systems and background processes which can improve our efficiency

and will potentially make things quicker without even increased headcount.

I think we need to explore those options alongside potential staffing.

I think it needs a bit of a deeper analysis than, you know, it may well be that we come

to the conclusion that yes, we need more people and we'll put together a case for that.

But I do think knowing our systems and the opportunities that exist to improve upon them,

I do think there is a lot more we can get out of efficiencies in the processes and behind

scenes that will be our initial focus and then there's the question

over whether or not it is additional capacity but I think that again it needs

to be evidence -led and we need to understand and analyse the data and

the cases we've got before we can commit to anything.

Councillor Juliet Layton - 2:18:40

Can I just say I've been here since 2011. It's a dinosaur. But there were just never enough

enforcement officers ever and we used to say this regularly and now we've got

more. I speak to a unitary authority in a different area, nothing to do with

Gloucestershire, it's a large unitary authority, they have two enforcement

officers. It is just not easy to get them so even if we said, even if David said

yeah go out and buy, buy. That sounds like slavery, I don't mean that, but go out and get, you know, you've got a free

range go and get what you need I don't think we could fill the need because

they're not there to do it with.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:19:29

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 2:19:38

I did skip over Councillor... David is... David Stanley please.

Thank you chair. So I was just going to draw members attention to the value for

money aspect that the external auditors look at that is around improving

economy efficiency and effectiveness. So how does the council assess the performance of

key areas for improvement? So this is a really important point when you're discussing allocating

limited resources to supporting the council's priorities. I will give you an anecdotal view,

which is not based on anything in particular to illustrate the point. So the view is a

system isn't doing what it needs to do so we can either buy a new system at ten

million pounds or we can improve the new system for a hundred thousand pounds.

The amount of money is irrelevant. Making those changes in itself wherever the

cost is is not guaranteed to improve anything unless there is a change in the

way that system is used by the individuals that are using the system. So

I suppose my point here is rather than looking at how much extra is needed is

look at what is the outcome the council is looking for and what that will cost

and is that affordable today and over the next 22 months until the point of

which this council ceases to exist. So it's the outcome that's important to

consider not the amount of money it might cost to get there.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:21:10

Yes, you can take it.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:21:24

Our leader Mike Efney would like to come in and make a comment here too.

Councillor Mike Evemy - 2:21:46

Yeah, I just wanted to, obviously, listen quite carefully to what people have said,

and obviously you're going to come make your conclusions.

But I think what I wanted to just observe was, I guess to slightly disagree

with what David has just said is actually, and agree with what David Stanley has just said,

it's about the outcome here.

It's about, it's not, because you'll never get a zero backlog.

There will always be cases that are going, I think monitoring that, if we have a capability

to monitor will be much better so that we can see how many cases have been running for

how long and monitor that.

And you as ONS can do that and we can do that as the Cabinet.

I think what's important for me is to recognise that we, and the value for money point that

David just makes is, you know, we have invested more in the planning enforcement service.

We do have an action plan, but we're not seeing radical improvement in that.

And what we are in discussion with the chief executive, what the chief executive has agreed

is to bring somebody in to help us who's an expert in planning enforcement to help us

make it the best we can with the current systems and constraints that we have.

And that's what we'll be endorsing at the cabinet on Wednesday, the action that she

has taken.

And I would welcome obviously when that hopefully that all takes place.

And when you subsequently review performance and planning enforcement, we will see an improvement

off the back of that.

But this is a yeah, I think as the cabinet member has said, and the officer said, this

is a challenging service that lots of authorities struggle to deliver to meet the expectations

essentially of the residents. And I think there's something that when we have that new

role in place, we can hopefully look with the offices and Juliette, I'm sure, together

with the offices about what is a realistic expectation that a member might have, that

deal with planning enforcement cases because yeah as we know they are

complicated they take a long time often and you know we are in a situation

whereby we have many more of them we would like to have but I think what I

want to say you know in terms of backing up what Juliet and Harry have said is

yeah we do get it we do understand that the service is not at the where it

should be and that's why essentially that we've agreed to bring in an expert

essentially to help us to get it better. But it's never going to be perfect and

we need to think about what expectations are realistic for us to

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:24:37

be able to deliver. Thank you Chair. Thank you it's been very helpful to have you

present at this meeting to add that sort of comment it's very very helpful.

Councillor Juliet Layton - 2:24:47

The other element of course of enforcement is it might come to our enforcement team and

then has to go to legal. So if we had eight more, not eight more, but we had eight or

ten enforcement officers processing, what do we do with the legal team that if they

have to go that way or the planning team because we're looking for more

applications because if we're going to say put in an application and that would

be fine it's likely to go through. You've got to extend it then the need is

greater in these other places it takes a long time to get the whole process

through and legal is I don't know what the numbers are I don't almost think I

want to ask actually what's sitting in a legal backlog of work that's going

through the process.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:25:49

That is actually yes I mean the implications go beyond just

enforcement itself. I before ask as the turner thing, one suggestion I'm not

sure it's going to be helpful but in going through this backlog would it not

or could it not be helpful if each of the ward members,

not just the people on this committee,

but every ward member, were given the backlog of things

and just given their views on how important they felt they

were, just because some of them, I mean,

I know some things got confidential elements,

but there are an awful lot there we get on the list,

and we probably might be able to help give some guidance

on which we felt were the more egregious sort of offences.

Officer - 2:26:37

Do you want to answer that now, Harry? And then it will be Councillor Turner at last.

The challenge with that is any recommendation made by an enforcement officer has to be their

professional judgement and view. It's not necessarily based on the strength of public

feeling, it's got to be based on the material planning harm, to ensure the integrity of

that decision and that their, you know, their own professional standards, but effectively

that they're making a recommendation that they believe in based on the planning harm.

So whilst understanding members' concerns maybe or benefits, I think I'd have concern

if that was driving the decision -making in the backlog clearance process because it would

be taking it away from the professional judgement of the officers.

Councillor Juliet Layton - 2:27:15

Just further to that, I think we did try that, possibly in the days of David Maren when he

was here in that time.

A lot of things came forward,

the fence that was a centimetre too much or whatever,

but I think there were some things that they thought

they'd been able to close down

and then they had to reopen them.

So actually it didn't help at all.

Although I think it might have been an interesting thing

because it might categorise that Angus was saying,

we might have seen what was,

people thought was more important but actually it didn't it didn't help doing

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:27:56

that. Thank you I mean I think we're having a very useful and open discussion

on looking at all exploring all different possibilities of trying to

Councillor Clare Turner - 2:28:07

make this service more effective. Councillor Turner. Thank you very much. I

don't want to repeat things I've already been said so I'm gonna slightly tweak my

comments and questions but I did want to revisit this that was alluded to just

now about the residents experience of this process and Councillors experience

too and you mentioned a couple of things I just want to sort of pick up in

particular. So the first part is I don't know if this is part of your

enforcement plan at all I think it would be incredibly helpful to have a published

document that is effectively a guide for residents on how this process works and

so that they understand the expectations.

You made reference earlier to a sort of communication structure

and response when somebody reports an issue.

It would be very helpful if that were shared with councillors.

So again, if somebody's coming to us

and it's only been two weeks since they reported it,

we can be clear about this is roughly where you are in the process.

And I absolutely understand.

I think it's maybe analogous to being an A &E

where they can't give you a specific wait time

because you don't know what else is going to crop up.

But it would be incredibly helpful to understand,

to a degree, where you are in the system,

how soon you're likely to be triaged,

how and at that point when you're triaged,

to understand that actually it's unlikely to progress further

because there are bigger and more important issues.

Even though that would be incredibly disappointing,

and I want to go back to the point I think someone said earlier

that even though we're describing them

smaller, less significant issues, it is still important to the resident, but it would be

better to know and understand this is unlikely to go down an enforcement route. You also

mentioned earlier one of the things that you are looking at is when you are reviewing the

backlog is whether something is being chased, and I think you meant that as a proxy to is

Is this still relevant and cared about?

But it raises that issue of we face a dilemma as councillors.

We don't want to waste officers' time by continually coming back to you and asking about things.

Particularly, we're not always aware of a turnover of staff where something was being

looked at and then maybe it's been parked and somebody else has to get up to speed.

So all of those kind of processy things could be improved without needing a huge amount

of additional resource in the team, I think.

and it's not necessarily those, I think Angus suggested earlier, having somebody with a

skill set around processes contributing might address some of that. So yes, it's kind of

about transparency and so on. And then my final comment really is that I wonder if there's

also a skill set that we haven't talked about yet, which is for those cases where it's not

going to go down a legal route and there's not going to be an enforcement notice and

so on, but where there is potential to have a conversation about you did say you were

going to do something in this way, can we come to some agreement that is satisfactory

to the residents and the wider community and so on? Is there a role for somebody who has

negotiation skills or who is not necessarily, so the case would have been triaged and put

in a particular, it's not progressing, but actually is there a role for somebody who

can then take that forward in terms of a negotiation with the community or the residents who are

concerned about an issue and the developer or whoever is the subject of the breach or

potential breach. So that's all I wanted to say really, I think. It's not so much questions

but just comments. And just is there any intention to kind of create a consumer guide or will

Officer - 2:31:55

the enforcement plan cover any of those elements that will set out the process so that they

understand better. Yeah, I'll add a couple of points on those if that's all right.

Negotiation of cases to me that is the key skill of an enforcement officer. It's

the thing when you're interviewing you're looking for in somebody. We always

have a negotiation first approach that because you know if you can the

intention is to resolve planning harm not to punish planning breaches. So the

general process will always be when we receive a breach if we are to confirm it

is a breach will be to negotiate and try and find a way of either inviting a

planning application where we can then condition it or trying to persuade them to mitigate

or remove whatever the breach is. The hope is that we will report that back to complainants.

Obviously, that's an area we need to work on. But the hope is that, yes, it is very

negotiation first. And also in cases where it maybe is a non -expedient breach, that doesn't

stop us, again, trying to invite a planning application or, indeed, trying to persuade

some form of improvement to address the issue. Because I agree, negotiation is the key skill.

One of the officers we just hired's background is a police officer where they're used to that day to day, working with the public.

It's the one, it's the top of the list of things that I'm interviewing, enforcement officers that you're looking for.

On the case being chased back, I think when we're looking at it, we're looking at,

basically it isn't the public interest to continue with that case, just trying to understand the level of public interest.

It isn't in itself determinacy because it's non -material, but it's just trying to understand the nature of the case and the pressures.

but no, I do take the point.

On the public register, it might be quite useful,

I appreciate members had a lot of paper in front of them today.

In the enforcement plan that we've drafted,

it has that flow chart, which might look a bit of a mess,

I'm more than happy to take any comments on it.

It also had a table in section, in section five,

which was the prioritisation criteria we're going to use,

and so what a different prioritisation category might be,

and why we might assign that,

and again that should link to the post -triage outcomes.

We have, it goes through sort of what the council

can and cannot do, matters we don't investigate,

how you report a breach, and then effectively

what we do afterwards, what we're assessing,

and the tools we have available.

It includes an appendix of all of the different tools

that are disposed in terms of the more formal

and informal, like enforcement,

prosecutions and things like that,

what that all means, Section 215s and those sorts of things.

I'm more than happy to take any feedback on that.

I'd say it was endorsed by the planning committee a couple of weeks ago.

Five weeks are disappearing.

So I'm hoping that it's relatively, well, got everything in it that we would want it to have.

But the idea is then that that will be on the website.

I'd like to update the website as well to have a bit more.

You don't have to go digging through the report to find things.

The key information is there and accessible to members of the public so they can find it.

and we're exploring other options which I think are more long term, but again if there's any

more digital things we can do to the websites to make it a bit more user friendly and accessible,

because I think that was one of the key things we wanted to do with the planning website is make it

as that information as accessible as possible. Again it saves us time, it's better for members

of the public, I think there's all -round benefits, so hopefully the enforcement plan does cover all

of those points, but if there isn't anything it covers just ping me an email, I'm more than

happy to review, we're hoping to publish next month so then it will be accessible to members

of the public.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:35:14

Councillor Clare Turner - 2:35:16

That wasn't included in our paper, so can I double cheque that we can see that draught

in some planning committee papers, is that right?

Could you issue it out?

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:35:29

Yeah, could we have a look at it?

Officer - 2:35:31

We didn't get any of those papers.

Oh, okay.

Can we double cheque?

You should have had Appendix A, which would have been the response to the Ombudsman, and

then Appendix B, which would have been the enforcement plan.

If you haven't got that, we can, yeah, we'll double cheque

it's published on the website as well.

But yeah, no, sorry, that should have been included

on all your pages.

Yeah, yeah, that explains the, yeah, the stares at me.

Yeah, that's fine.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:35:53

No, thank you.

I was about to say, yes, we didn't get all that information.

So that's it.

I've just got the sort of follow -up question.

It's, first of all, to find out what were the most serious

things that we've got.

obviously anything to historic buildings, TPOs, and then

currently I'm having a lot of problems with

planning permission being given,

conditions put on that planning commission, and

lo and behold a week later a whole lot of trees, hedges, and things which were all part of the conditions to be kept have disappeared.

I don't know whether it's just a suggestion that's just come to me now. I mean whether

automatically there are TPOs on those trees with the planning permission to

prevent this but to give a much stronger because at the moment I'm afraid I and I

know this is not just in my ward this is happening elsewhere and it's really a

deep concern to residents I mean it's changing the landscape and things so I

just wanted to sort of put that in there and I don't know what other ones are the

But that seems to be the one where we might be able to use something to give a bit more

strength in the conditions.

Officer - 2:37:11

Yeah, with trees in particular, there's various options.

Throughout the development management process when we grant planning permission, we would

generally for larger scale schemes, it's not, we don't do it for everything necessarily,

but we're a common condition, it's a landscaping condition that requires the development carried

out in accordance with the landscaping plan and then normally a five or 10 year management

plan that anything that dies or is removed should be replaced.

If they fail to do that, if they remove something that should be shown, that is a breach of condition.

And we can, in theory, serve a breach of condition notice.

There's another option that is in the case of trees that aren't necessarily proposed for any changes or alterations.

We can issue TPOs on those trees.

And it's not something we like to do too often because we, you know, if you can find a more amicable way of doing it, you will.

But we have in the past issued TPOs on development sites where development has been put forward.

They've shown the trees have stayed retained or an important tree belt somewhere.

and just to add that bit of protection we will issue that because it's illegal then to develop a tree.

It depends, there's two different routes, I will be here for a while if I go through,

but yeah there's two different routes you can go through, but yeah certain TPA's, if you serve an emergency one you have six months,

and within that six months to make the TPA you have to bring it to committee, or you go through the process to begin with,

which is a consultation process, it depends on the urgency.

But yeah so there are those options, but a breach of condition notice is a fairly,

obviously we need to become more active in serving them and more efficient in

serving them but it is an effective way of enforcing against

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:38:39

failure to comply with conditions. I fully appreciate that but we have had

serious and residents are watching every site with a sort of hawk -like sort of

thing to see and we have had TPOs put on some which have worked so I just feel

it's I know whatever but it's better than trying to fight. I mean once the

trees are down and the hedges aren't there anymore we have a problem and that

is something. They don't come back. So but thank you. That's another thing to just look at.

I think Councillor Jackson, oh no we've got some more people, the list keeps

That's great. Councillor Fann?

Yes?

Councillor Michael Vann - 2:39:24

Really a comment that I am concerned at the thought that Councillors should get involved with reviewing lists

to work out priorities of the professionals.

If I were a resident, I would go for that Councillor.

And by go for that Councillor, I mean in a way that is meaningful and to his pocket.

So it is a serious concern that we are not the council, we're council laws.

It's Harry's people that look at the detail.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:40:21

I take that on board, but it's sometimes, as we all do, speak with officers and inform

about things in our locality often confidentially, but it is part of our role to be there

to be the eyes and representatives of our residents. So

did you

Councillor Ian Watson - 2:40:46

Yeah, thanks. I just again a comment rather question

to summarise for myself

As councillors we don't like this because it fills our email

every day. It's like potholes. However, I think that over the past few years this Council

and Cabinet have recognised we do have an issue. We've increased the size of the team.

We're going up from I think four to five to six to seven. So I see resource being put

there. I would go to a very good point that Angus made earlier when you're

implementing potentially new processes, new ways of working, new systems. I would

urge officers to think of how you measure the improvement in the service

that we're getting. That may already be in place and it may be a metric we're

today but something that we can track to show that we are improving because we're

investing money in this and I'd like to see this committed to see that

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:42:06

improvement tracked over time. Thank you chair. Thank you I think Councillor

Mr. Jenkinson, did you want to...

And I have a recommendation as well.

It's got a recommendation.

I don't know if you want to share it.

You go ahead, Councillor Jenkins.

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 2:42:22

I just want to respond to Councillor Vann.

You obviously had some specific issue in mind and I don't know exactly what it is, but I

I think it's worth offering back as a counter picture

that since I became a councillor,

the single largest amount of my time as a councillor,

apart from sitting on committees,

has been trying to get issues addressed, major issues.

And the amount, number of hours that I've taken

analysing old development approvals, conditions, briefing officers, briefing

new officers that replaced old officers, briefing new officers replacing the

ones who'd replaced, and the backlog of major cases that are still waiting to

even be put into the process, it's quite considerable. And I do not think that I

I am the only member who has been elected, who has put in time, trying to get this Council

with its scarce resources.

And the point I want to make is, I know that there are sincere officers with sincere workloads.

They wish to do a good job, but we have not always provided them with the resource that

they need to do the job they want.

And sometimes if we do not make an effort to put the most important issues in front of them,

just because of the change of people, it just disappears.

It just vanishes off the caseload.

It's a very serious issue.

So that is why, in the light of all of the conversation we've heard,

and in particular the report that's come from the officers themselves,

They are saying, as a result of the PAS review and their

experience, we have an issue.

It's an acknowledged issue, and it's acknowledged in the

strategic risk analysis.

It is of significant value to our residents.

We are moving into LGR, and we want to try and make sure that

we are in a good position to do that.

I do not want to waste money on developing things that are being

better done or already well done across the county that we could take advantage

of and that will be thrown away with something else. But I do want to make

sure, as I have been consistently, that we put adequate resources including

adequate intelligence into trying to solve this problem. So here is my

suggestion and I'm open to improvement for how it's put including from the

But it's this, there is an agreed issue.

An individual with expertise is being employed.

Can cabinet ensure that council commits to all reasonable steps,

including rethinking how we tackle it and what resources we allocate?

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:45:49

Before we discuss that further, that's from Angus, a recommendation. We have got from

Simon who's been busily writing up notes all the way along to bring it together. So I think

that when we want to consider this, we want to consider it in the whole. So thank you

for that Angus. Simon is going about ten pages back. We look forward to hearing from you.

Simon Harper, Officer - 2:46:19

This could be quite a challenge but I'll try and summarise. So first of all concern around

the way the Enforcement Service communicates with members. That was an early point raised

by you, Chair. A number of members have raised the issue around having a system to see where

progress is and therefore you could look at that, you wouldn't necessarily need to bother

an officer. And an issue around the ownership of enforcement cases because of the throughput

of officers. The need for an action plan around the planning advisory service

peer review providing an update because it's identified in the report

but I think members are quite keen to see an update on that. And then there

were some concerns raised around categorisation of issues of cases in the

backlog, how many realistically can we look at, where's the real harm being caused. That

was raised by a couple of members. Some different views on member involvement in terms of the

local member knowledge around particular cases. And then I think quite an improvement, quite

an important one at the end was if there's extra resource which I think is

generally supported how will the improvements in the service be tracked

once those additional resources have been put in place so that it can be

reported back to members in a meaningful way and that's ahead of your

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:48:20

recommendation vice -chair. Thank you. Simon, thank you for putting that together. Now I'd

just like to have a few comments from the committee because I want you all to be, this

is an incredibly important issue. We all feel very strongly about it. We actually want it

to work well. We want to support the officers in this. But we obviously, we have David Sander,

we have to be conscious of the budgets that we've got available and the number of staff.

And in fact, even with the best will in the world, it's not easy to recruit more of these

very valuable officers. So I would like to have some views back on how we can best put

together a recommendation to Cabinet, building on what Angus has already suggested.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:49:10

Councillor Clare Turner - 2:49:12

Would it be possible just to hear Anderson's recommendation again?

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 2:49:18

Yes, so just the context for it is I had earlier versions like we know there's a problem when

we don't have a solution.

I didn't have, I don't have the appendix, never received it, so maybe the appendix does

include it.

You're employing somebody, maybe this person is the solution, I don't know.

So given that I don't know, and given that there's a complex issue, what I'm trying to

put is a fairly open issue, and it's asking Cabinet to consider, all right, well, we need

to allocate more money, we need to allocate more resources, we need to do something different,

we need to rethink this, we need – I've tackled other people know that you look at

a problem, you understand the problem, and you come up with what's the best solution

possible and you commit resources to making that happen.

And so far, I don't think CDC has gone far enough.

So I'm just asking Cabinet to try and do that now

to make sure it happens.

So I try to put it in quite agreeable, simple language.

I hope you understand it.

So there is an agreed issue.

An individual with expertise is being employed.

That's technology.

Two things.

Can cabinet ensure that council commits to all reasonable steps?

All reasonable steps, well, they have to look into that, but it could include money,

could include more resources, could include doing something different,

could include recruiting something, could include working with some of the council.

Who knows?

All reasonable steps, and obviously officers would be key to giving that from their expertise,

but maybe there's some other systems expertise that's needed to all reasonable steps including

Rethinking how we tackle it because obviously we haven't so far succeeded, but maybe you've got it. I don't know including Reese

Rethinking how we tackle it and what resources we allocate

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:51:24

And read it in without break if you wish

Councillor Claire Bloomer - 2:51:27

I think what I've got from this and what I think is really important is getting the processes

right and I think from what I've heard around the table today is members don't necessarily

want to be directly involved with any of this enforcement but they would like to be informed

of what enforcement is going on within their ward so they are able to put that forward

to their residents and currently I don't think we get that but I know with the planning side

And I know this was brought in quite a while ago, that all members are notified when a

planning application is submitted into their wards.

I think it should be very similar set up.

That's just my thoughts.

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 2:52:10

If that was my problem, I'd be a happy man.

Seriously, if that would solve it.

This is my problem.

It's not even in the list.

I have to do a lot of work over a year sometimes before it's picked up as an issue.

Here's a problem.

It's not being met.

Here are the issues.

Could you please look at it?

Can you share my photo?

Yeah, I mean, it's an issue.

And I'm not criticising the people.

They come back and go, I've got a whole lot of issues on my plate.

and when you contact legal it's the same problem.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:52:53

I think Geraldine will come in.

I just want to make a thing that when we're going forward,

and we will make a recommendation,

I think to me it's communications,

which is understanding the process and having a good plan.

We didn't see your play chart, I'm sorry, that was not the sort of thing.

The way that the updates are how we are informed about those

and the progress of whatever it is.

It would also have this ownership of the enforcement

cases because officers change inevitably.

That is always helpful.

The update from the past report which has been touching

and tracking improvements in addition to what to make sure

I think, whilst I think Angus has made it very clear, the main thing is to recommend

that a Cabinet looks at this and make sure that enforcement has got the resources that

it believes it requires and that it is possible within its financial envelope or whatever

you want to do, with the lead on to the legals too.

So, but anyway, that was my sort of summarising.

Officer - 2:54:06

but Geraldine your turn. Thank you just a very brief comment on

Councillor Bloomers description of us sharing enforcement cases in your ward

and then you discussing it with local residents that's where we run into

difficulties because each case is confidential so anything that we would

be sharing with you as a ward member would be on a purely confidential basis

so that yes you're aware of it when people approach you but it it it would

be difficult to suggest that you could sort of go out and which I'm sure your

residents would want you to do to say that we are the council is doing

Councillor Claire Bloomer - 2:54:47

something but it is that fine balance between confidentiality. Just because I

probably put myself across wrong it's more about the time scale I think that's

the issue that residents got is how long this has been going on I'm not about

sharing any important data but I don't know if you're allowed to like update

them and give them like time, you know, because I think that's the issue is where some cases

have probably gone on for a long period of time, I think it's knowing the end date, but

maybe sometimes that's very difficult to get.

Officer - 2:55:13

Final point is as well just being touched on systems earlier, but the system that Harry

has inherited is one which doesn't even allow us to draw information out into a list for

you. That's how poor the level of information that we have is. And as you mentioned earlier,

That's why his attempt to categorise the backlog

was impossible to do without looking

at each case individually.

So we will get there.

We will share that information.

But I think it hopefully shows how poor the system is

that we have at the present time.

And a lot of that is to do with turnover of staff,

people not filling out fields within the screens properly.

But that's where we are.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:56:03

But we are, as Harry said, working our way to making sure that we are in a position to share with you.

Well, thank you.

And actually, when I said about us members maybe helping, it was not by sharing that

information with any residents or anything like that.

It was purely from our local knowledge and things.

We are nearing the witching hour of seven o 'clock.

I'm very conscious of this.

It's very handy having a clock there, as well as you can see the clock behind me, which

has been corrected earlier. David Stanley.

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 2:56:36

Just very quickly on that member involvement in understanding what active cases are being

worked on with planning enforcement. There was a member session arranged on the 29th

September of last year where some advice would have been provided to you by both Jerry, the

planning team, and Emma Cathcart, the head of service of the Counter -Ford Enforcement

I am reminding myself what that advice was and we will provide that back to members because

there was quite a clear steer given to members around what was available to be shared and

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:57:12

what wasn't available to be shared that may prejudice any enforcement action being undertaken.

Thank you for your clever finding your way back through recalling which date and then

finding the information.

So that would be useful to have it shared.

I think that's the one thing, communication,

comms is crucial in this.

I'm...

Do you want to try and start this before seven?

We can, probably not, because if you want to do a vote

on a recommendation it's going to be tight.

Angus is asking the update from the Gloucester County...

No, no, this one, work plan.

Oh, work plan.

It's going to be tricky.

We'll see what we can do.

Or we can take a vote on just extending a little longer than seven.

Do you want to go to that vote before we actually wind up this and do the recommendation?

Right. Could I have a proposer and a seconder for extending the meeting so that Councillor Cunningham,

with a great deal of enthusiasm, and who with even more enthusiasm are Claire and Tana,

Councillor Turner, can we take a vote on extending the meeting past seven o 'clock so that we

can finish the business on the agenda?

Ten minutes or so.

Oh, gosh.

Okay, well, more or less, grudgingly, we're there.

Okay, thank you.

Right, going back to the recommendation, I do want to actually see what Angus has written

here.

Do you need – I can help, Birkley, not quite so much.

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 2:58:46

Sorry to interrupt. Could we just have one final without any interruptions what the

recommendation is and then can we vote on it because my dog needs feeding and

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 2:59:00

so do I. I'll get angry in a minute. We do need to add into it more than just

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 2:59:06

Simon Harper, Officer - 2:59:09

what Angus has got. Yeah. Okay, yeah sorry. Thank you, thank you. Go for it.

I can we can build a recommendation on the committee on so we've got I think

Angus is bit in terms of yeah so Angus is recommendation there is an agreed

issue. Let's have a look. And can cabinet, oh there is an agreed issue, an

individual with expertise is being employed. Can cabinet ensure that council

commits to all reasonable steps including rethinking on how we tackle it

and what resources we allocate.

And I guess in addition to that, you've got the issues around

member communications, haven't you, to add?

Well, that would then be included.

So I'm not defining what the issues are.

You've listed a whole series of issues people have.

I think we do know that we do want to have the communication

things and then progress updates,

and that would be ideal.

And then there was a bit, and I haven't quite written it down,

but the update in the past report.

In terms of progress against that peer review report.

So we've done this before. We haven't got the perfect wording at this meeting.

But in principle, if Simon goes away and makes it tidier and nicer and lovely,

that will go forward to cabinet, which will include everything.

And they said, would you be happy to?

So that makes it, oh, sorry.

Councillor Jon Wareing - 3:01:01

I would like to see something that says to ensure that officers are adequately equipped

to meet the expectations of residents, members and the officers.

Because when I hear about the system that was just described, this council has not been

adequately equipping officers to do the job they need to do.

Office of the Office of Chief.

So something along those lines, because that's really important.

How does a cabinet meeting look around?

It's going to be a long house, right?

It's not a big stretch, come on then.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 3:01:37

I think we can rely on Simon to get this right, but what I will ask him to do is to circulate it ahead of the cabinet meeting, so anybody...

But on the basis of it's not completely...

It's very difficult to do it as a live document, to get it absolutely spot on.

I think it's much better if you go away.

Are we happy to have a proposal?

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 3:01:55

I mean, I just think that we need to be really careful

about what we're asking cabinet to do,

because I think there's something,

there's a difference between asking cabinet

to look at the process and how it is managed and do it,

and then something else which is about public expectation,

because I would argue that in some cases,

you know, as the leader of the county council,

gets a lot of correspondence about potholes, I would say that the public expectation is

that potholes, as they appear, are magically filled in and that that is just simply not

going to happen. So I think that we need to be really careful about how we as councillors

also manage public expectation and I wouldn't like to...

And staffing.

Yeah, and the public purse, et cetera, and value for money because there's an argument

that you could go out and employ only people to deal with the planning enforcement backlog

and not do any of the other services, which might meet public expectation on that.

So I just think, and perhaps that's a nuance and a variation the cabinet will consider,

but I think that we should not be predetermining what that is.

And I would like to see...

I think I need to see the recommendation in writing,

because I think that there's, before I approve it,

well, I'm happy in principle,

but I don't think I'm happy just saying yes, that's fine.

And if there are going to be additions,

I think that might need to be an email correspondence

between us.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 3:03:31

I definitely think that probably the worst

public expectations is strong.

I think that what we've got,

I'm hopeful that the people here is basically to ensure that the enforcement have got the

resources to carry out their job in a professional manner or whatever you'd like, something of

that sort. I'm sorry that it's so difficult. It is difficult to put... I knew this was

going to be a tricky one, but to put it all together in a correct way, if you are happy

that you are going to rely on myself, Angus and Simon to put it together and put it together

and any other advice from officers to make sure that we don't we get it right

and then

Would I would you be happy with that?

Thank you. Well could somebody

propose and second the motion that we are the

recommendation

They've got council coming on the council Jenkinson. Yeah, and could we vote on that?

And thank you very much for all your patience and things.

It's just difficult to do for me simultaneously.

We've only got two more, I think.

The first one is the update from the Gloucester County Cancer

Scrutiny Committee and HOSC.

We haven't had one from Dylis Neil, so we haven't got any HOSC.

I don't know whether, Angus, your one, it did come before us,

which you weren't here at the last meeting.

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 3:05:05

We sent an update to it, which was just a list of recommendations.

That was all.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 3:05:11

Right. Going on to the work plan, I understand that the next meeting

in August is purely going to be on the local plan.

And we will say the asset management strategy and climate emergency update,

I believe, and now move both of them to September.

That is all I was going to say on the work plan.

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 3:05:42

I think Councillor Dickson's also got something he wanted to mention on the work plan.

No, Chair, I just wanted to make sure that if we had a chance to finish, you know, to complete it,

especially in case there was anything important that needed to be addressed, that was all.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 3:05:56

Councillor David Cunningham - 3:06:00

We always run into this problem about the work plan at the end of the meeting. There's

never enough time. Isn't this something we could do via round robin on an email? Send

it out and say, what do we all think about moving this here? And then we could answer

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 3:06:17

it all together? If we've gone out of time, I mean, if we've got time, fine, I'll do it,

but if not, I'm sure we could.

The last meeting, the last meeting we actually finished well ahead of time, which was rather

I do agree with that.

I have asked at the Chairman's beginning that your questions,

if you have them on the local plan, can be submitted in advance,

as can your ones for UBICO.

They would welcome those in advance.

I think it's very helpful to do that.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 3:06:43

What, the reports?

The reports, I know, on this occasion came in and were.

There is a deadline for publishing, the soonest point it can be published is the Friday before,

so it's about ten days.

Simon Harper, Officer - 3:07:08

So we're working to that.

Is it worth saying as well that there's going to be a member briefing?

On the 23rd?

Yeah, before the ghost, yeah before a ghost.

The agenda will be published on the Friday.

So you'll have it for a week. You'll have it for a week beforehand.

But it's not that it's more organised. No.

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 3:07:28

Well, thank you everyone. I hope that concludes the meeting.

Webcast Finished - 3:07:36

Thank you very much.

Please provide any feedback/comments relating to the live webcast here. Any feedback submitted will be received to the Democratic Services team.

Required field

Name

Comments

Need an accessible hCaptcha?
Check available options.
Sign up to hCaptcha or Log in to hCaptcha.

By clicking Send feedback, you agree that Cotswold District Council and Public-i can use the information above to review your feedback and contact you about it. See our Privacy Policy for more details.

Interactive webcast player

Overview and Scrutiny CommitteeMonday, 29th June 2026 at 4:00pm

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:00:44

1 Apologies

2 Substitute Members

3 Declarations of Interest

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:01:52

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 0:02:08

Councillor Ian Watson - 0:02:14

Councillor Jon Wareing - 0:02:19

Councillor Michael Vann - 0:02:22

Councillor David Cunningham - 0:02:26

Councillor Clare Turner - 0:02:31

Councillor Tony Slater - 0:02:35

Councillor Claire Bloomer - 0:02:39

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 0:02:43

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:02:50

4 Minutes

3 Declarations of Interest

4 Minutes

5 Matters Arising from Minutes of the Previous Meeting

6 Chair's Announcements

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:08:01

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:10:28

7 Public Questions

8 Member Questions

9 Report back on recommendations

10 Financial Performance Report - Q4 2025/26

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:12:27

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:13:42

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:18:54

Councillor David Cunningham - 0:18:58

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:19:34

Councillor David Cunningham - 0:19:39

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:19:56

Councillor David Cunningham - 0:21:03

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:21:21

Councillor David Cunningham - 0:23:06

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:23:16

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:23:37

Councillor Ian Watson - 0:23:40

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:24:17

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:25:20

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:26:30

Councillor Tony Slater - 0:26:35

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:27:42

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:28:42

Councillor Tony Slater - 0:29:53

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:30:01

Officer - 0:30:04

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:30:28

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 0:30:40

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:31:33

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 0:33:11

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:33:18

Councillor Lisa Spivey - 0:34:27

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:35:30

Councillor Michael Vann - 0:35:40

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:36:24

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:38:11

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 0:38:30

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:39:29

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:39:34

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:40:13

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 0:43:26

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:45:15

Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:45:17

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:47:25

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 0:49:05

Councillor Angus Jenkinson - 0:49:09

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:51:20

Officer - 0:51:33

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:51:50

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:54:31

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:55:47

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:57:07

Councillor Ian Watson - 0:57:15

David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 0:57:32

Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:58:29

Simon Harper, Officer - 0:58:39

Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Monday, 29th June 2026 at 4:00pm