Agenda item

Cllr T Adams introduced the report and thanked Members and officers for their contribution to the workshops that had taken place over the preceding weeks. He added that he was pleased with the range of topics and issues that had been raised, and hoped that it had deepened Members’ understanding of the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. It was noted that the Annual Action Plan would need to be agreed in November to inform the budget setting process, and Members were free to make comment on any items contained within the Plan.

Questions and Discussion

       i.          It was confirmed following a question from the Chairman that the actions and Corporate Plan themes were derived primarily from the Administration’s election manifesto, though there was nothing to stop any Member’s suggestion from being added to the Plan if it was a positive contribution. The Chairman asked what evidence base would be used to inform the appropriateness and delivery of the actions identified. The Leader replied that this would vary for each action, and would be considered in greater detail once the actions had been agreed, with the affordability and practicality of actions also taken into account as part of that process, as not all suggestions would be achievable. The Chairman referred to actions to invest in the local economy and infrastructure, and suggested that this may require looking at the barriers impacting businesses and growth, and asked what evidence had been used to determine the direction and focus of this action. Cllr T Adams replied that suggestions of increased dialogue with businesses and the potential creation of a business forum would help to make these issues clearer, but it was a changing landscape with the loss of the Local Enterprise Partnership. The Chairman noted that it would be helpful to see a link between actions and an evidence base used to inform them.

      ii.          Cllr V Holliday referred to previous comments on financial sustainability and whether this should form a key theme of the Corporate Plan, in addition to comments on the ambitiousness of the Plan and concerns regarding rurality, and asked whether these matters had been addressed adequately within the Plan. She added that it would be helpful to see more specificity within the objectives, such as the action to protect the environment and biodiversity of North Norfolk, which she suggested was a very loose statement that would be difficult to evidence. It was suggested that more SMART objectives would also allow for better performance monitoring of the Plan.

     iii.          The CE noted that many actions outlined in the Action Plan would be derived from the Administration’s political manifesto, however it was important to note that many of the themes and priorities including housing, the economy, net zero and communities were unlikely to vary considerably between each political party. He added that there had already been a debate on whether financial sustainability should feature more prominently within the Corporate Plan, and Members were encouraged to move on from the issue to ensure that officers did not feel challenged when undertaking their duties. It was noted that there had been a very positive level of engagement on the Action Plan, with open debate between Members and officers. The CE stated that there was a range of evidence to support actions outlined, such as an increasing number of people in temporary accommodation and rising levels of homelessness, which presented a significant challenge to the Authority. He added that Members should therefore seek to focus on the prioritisation of actions, in order to determine where the Council’s focus and resources should be placed. It was noted that the decision had been taken to move to an action plan over a delivery plan, to take a more agile approach year to year, that would also allow more discipline to be focused onto actions.

    iv.          Cllr C Cushing stated that he expected to see a link between the Administration’s manifesto and the key themes of the Corporate Plan, and also expected to see common themes regardless of political party. He added that given that the actions listed were very early proposals, there was very little to scrutinise at the present time, but he encouraged the administration to focus on and prioritise matters related to financial sustainability and efficiencies. It was noted that language was also important and efforts should be made to improve upon process driven terms such as identify, analyse, investigate, monitor and engage. Cllr C Cushing stated that overall these type of actions didn’t relate to SMART objectives that could be measured and proven, which would help the Administration to prove what they had achieved.

      v.          Cllr L Shires stated that this was an opportunity for Members to challenge aspects of the Action Plan and put forward proposals. She added that it would be helpful for the Committee to provide any input on the priority and range of actions, to ensure that wider Members were satisfied with the direction of the Administration and confident that residents were getting a good service. The Chairman noted that some answers had already been provided as Cllr Cushing had sought the prioritisation of financial sustainability and efficiency. He added that comments had also been made to ensure that the Action Plan was outcome focused, with less process terminology used. Cllr L Shires suggested that it would be more helpful to discuss specific actions within the Plan, or raise further actions that were not currently listed.

    vi.          Cllr L Vickers noted that the draft actions had come as a ‘brain dump’ and it was difficult to comment on actions at such an early undeveloped stage, with more detail required to be able to properly scrutinise the actions.

   vii.          Cllr V Holiday stated that the Committee had not had enough time to properly review the actions listed within the draft Plan, and could not comment effectively in the timeframe provided.

  viii.          The CE accepted that Members couldn’t comment on every proposal, but encouraged Members to take the opportunity to raise any final actions or raise priorities so that resource could be appropriately placed. He added that officers were working to a tight timeframe to ensure that the necessary information could be provided to set a balanced budget by February, so this was the final opportunity for Members to raise any further actions or priorities. It was noted that Cabinet would be ultimately be required to make decisions on which actions to prioritise, in order to develop costings to properly inform the budget.

    ix.          Cllr L Vickers asked whether there was any opportunity for a further workshop to focus on the actions, taking into consideration the limited timeframe available. The CE replied that officers may be able to facilitate this, though this would have to take place in advance of the pre-Cabinet meeting on 23^rd October.

      x.          Cllr P Heinrich stated that final workshop only took place on Thursday, and it would take time to properly develop and filter feasible actions, but there were also a number of suggestions that the Council would not be able to pursue as they did not fall within the remit of the Council. He added that some actions such as tackling water scarcity with Anglian Water may be a worthwhile use of resource, but many things related to highways and were not the responsibility of NNDC.

    xi.          Cllr C Cushing stated that he had ensured that Members of his Group had attended every workshop, and said that he now expected the Administration to prioritise and further develop the proposals. The CE replied that the earlier Scrutiny Members could be involved to contribute to the process the better, with an aim to involve as many Members as possible to work more collaboratively as a Council.

   xii.          Cllr L Shires stated that financial stability and sustainability of the Council was of equal importance to all political parties, and she would therefore be happy to meet with opposition Members to discuss any further concerns and address matters of sustainability and efficiency. She added that it was important to include everyone so that it was North Norfolk’s Action Plan, rather than just the Administration’s.

  xiii.          Cllr J Boyle stated that she had attended most workshop sessions and had found them very useful, with the existing draft Action Plan a positive first step in the process of a collaborative project between officers and Members.

 xiv.          Cllr A Brown noted that the Peer Review had recently been completed and the Administration was making efforts to be more collaborative with all political groups and build greater consensus on the Corporate Plan.

   xv.          Cllr V Holliday welcome Cllr Shire’s suggestions of further discussions, and asked whether a further workshop would be possible to collaboratively determine the Council’s priorities. Cllr T Adams replied that Members had been given ample opportunity to engage with the Plan, and it was now time for Cabinet and officers to agree actions and priorities, as holding another workshop would only further delay this process.

 xvi.          The Chairman noted that he was impressed by the way in which all Members had engaged with the workshops, and said that it had shown great collaborative efforts between Members and officers which should be commended. He added that there was a challenge ahead to take raw ideas and develop them into appropriate actions.  

xvii.          The CE stated that a number of actions relating to the A47 and other traffic related issues would not form priority actions due to the Council’s limited ability to influence outcomes on these matters. He added that manifesto pledges could be expected to be given priority, but asked whether there was any clear priorities from other parties that should be given greater emphasis within the Plan. It was noted that despite political differences, actions that sought to help the District may not drastically differ between parties, such as efforts to help maintain and grow economic activity in towns across the District.

xviii.          Cllr L Vickers stated that she did not see any controversy in the Administration forming a Corporate Plan and Action Plan around its own political objectives, and whilst she was grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this process, it was premature to comment, given the current state of the actions listed. 

 xix.          Cllr T Adams stated that if there was anything further that Members wished to contribute, he would be happy to receive proposals via email prior to approval of the Plan. Both the Chairman and Cllr Adams noted that it was difficult to provide input as part of the pre-scrutiny process when actions were at such an early stage of development. It was noted that despite this, all Members had been given the opportunity to engage with the process, and efforts would be made to improve the process in the years ahead.

   xx.          The CE suggested that in order to seek a positive outcome from discussions,  Members may want to agree a resolution that recognised the opportunity to provide a positive contribution to workshop discussions, but note that it was premature to comment on proposals at this stage, though the opportunity to submit further proposals was still open until the Action Plan was agreed.

 xxi.          *The meeting returned to public session*

xxii.          The suggested recommendation was proposed by Cllr P Fisher and seconded by Cllr J Boyle.

RESOLVED

1.     That the Overview & Scrutiny Committee positively commented on the workshop process and its inclusivity, but felt that it was premature to comment on the proposals at this stage and therefore took note of the Council Leader’s offer to consider further proposals and comments up to the point of approval in November.