Agenda item

To review the list of plans and strategies listed at sub paragraph 1 (c) of Article 4 of the Constitution (see report attached).

N Boateng informed members that this review had occurred as a result of questions from members on a Constitution training course in May 2021 on whether the plans and strategies listed in sub-paragraph 1(c) of Article 4 (Appendix 1 of the agenda report) needed to be updated. These plans, policies and strategies made up the Council’s strategy framework and were agreed by Full Council. It was noted that some strategies did not necessarily need to go to Council as it depended on their degree of influence and it would be sufficient for some to go to a scrutiny committee and then to Cabinet, as with the recent amendment to the Constitution on the Annual Statement of Accounts that now went yearly to Audit and Governance Committee and not afterwards to Council to be rubber stamped.

The Working Group took each plan or strategy in the order listed in Appendix 1 of the agenda report, as detailed below.

(a)          Terms of Reference – (c) Adoption of the following

(i)            Asset Management Plan (Strategy)

The Working Group supported the need for more participation by going to scrutiny with a review being undertaken by the Stronger Council Select Committee and then to Cabinet. Regarding a timeline, Councillor J Philip advised that, as the Portfolio Holder (Finance, Qualis Client and Economic Development), this would be coming forward in a year because members were aware the Asset Management Team was seconded to Qualis, so it should undergo scrutiny by the select committee followed by Cabinet. The recommendation was to remove this from the list.

(ii)          Capital Strategy

The Working Group recommended that as this was a key part of the budget it should go to Council following scrutiny by the Audit and Governance Committee.

(iii)         Community Plan / Strategy

The Working Group was of the opinion that because of the long timeframe it was unsure if in 21 years’ time it would have much bearing on the Council and that a significant number of councillors would not remember it if they were still councillors, so concluded that it should usefully be removed from this list.

(iv)         Corporate Plan

The Working Group firmly recommended this was a key document that should continue to go to Council.

(v)          Crime & Disorder Reduction Strategy

It was noted this was known as the Epping Forest Community Safety Partnership Plan. The Working Group recommended its reporting should continue with the Stronger Communities Select Committee and then go to Council.

(vi)         Leisure & Cultural Strategy

The Working Group was not convinced it was useful for this strategy to go to Council, as it was in a very different position now to that in 2014. The equivalent could go to a scrutiny committee when there was an update available. It was noted that two select committees currently scrutinised the reach of the strategy – Stronger Communities (cultural / museum) and Stronger Place (leisure). Therefore, the relevant Portfolio Holder should ensure the title of the strategy adequately reflected what was in the strategy. The recommendation was that this should be removed from the list.

(vii)        Local Plan, plus plans / strategies which comprise the Plan

The Working Group recommended that as this was a key strategy and it was a legal requirement that it went to Council, it must remain on the list.

(viii)      Economic Development Strategy

Councillor J Phillip, the Portfolio Holder, advised that the strategy had now been superseded and was a quickly moving sector. The town centre regeneration reports and gone to Overview and Scrutiny Committee [8 June 2021] and then to Cabinet [21 June 2021], which was a better process. The Council had funded a Town Centre Manager and local councillors had contributed input. The Portfolio Holder said he would not commit to a strategy at this stage but when appropriate, scrutiny would be undertaken and then it would be brought before Cabinet. The Working Group recommended this be removed from the list.

(ix)         Housing Investment Programme

It was noted this was a long-lasting business plan for the Housing Revenue Account (HRA). The Working Group recommended it should pass through scrutiny, via Audit and Governance Committee, followed by Cabinet and continue to go to Council given the monetary size of the HRA. It also recommended changing the name to “30-year Housing Revenue Business Plan”. Therefore, it should stay on the list.

(x)          Local Transport Plan

The Working Group was not aware of the Council ever having a local transport plan in any shape or form but, as a Sustainable Transport Officer had been appointed, there might be a policy in future that should go through the scrutiny process first. The Working Group was of the opinion there were no plans to produce a different transport strategy as currently, local transport plans came under relevant policies within the Local Plan. It was noted that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had scrutinised the Harlow and Gilston Garden Town Transport Strategy on 18 November 2021, which extended into Epping Forest District on some borders. The Working Group recommended this plan was removed from the list.

(xi)         Social Inclusion Strategy

The Working Group recommended this strategy be removed from the list as it had gone into abeyance since 2008. It tied in with the Council’s Housing scheme ‘More than bricks and mortar’ that helped achieve this mission by creating great places where people wanted to live, so was now superfluous.

(xii)        Statutory Statement of Accounts

The Working Group noted it had recommended on 2 September 2021 a change to the delegated authority for approving the Statutory Statement of Accounts to Audit and Governance Committee, which Council had ratified on 28 October 2021. This was incorporated in the Constitution update of 12 November 2021. Therefore, this should be removed from the list.

(b)       Terms of Reference – 2(b) Ordinary meetings, (ix) receive reports about and receive questions and answers on the business of joint arrangements and external organisations

Councillor J H Whitehouse was concerned that little feedback was given to Council by its representatives on outside bodies and wanted to know what their role was. There seemed little point in the representatives attending these outside organisations if few reports were being provided to other councillors. A former Democratic Services manager used to write an annual report on this. Councillor S Heap agreed members needed to know the purpose of the role and better feedback was required.

Councillor J Philip replied that many of the Executive appointees’ feedback was given in the Portfolio Holder reports that went to each Council meeting and suggested a report should come before the Working Group.

The Working Group agreed to add this item to its work programme, so it could be considered properly and that a report be submitted to a future meeting.

RESOLVED:

(1)          That the Working Group reviewed and updated the list of plans and strategies listed at sub-paragraph 1(c) of Article 4 of the Constitution;

(2)          That the Working Group recommended to Council the following updates to Article 4, sub-paragraph 1(c), as listed in Appendix 1 below; and

(3)          That the Working Group review the role of representatives appointed by Council to outside bodies, which was added to its work programme.