Agenda item

To receive an update from the Director of Resources on the progress being made in implementing the Corporate Plan 2023-27 against the Action Plan 2024-25 and Action Plan 2025-26 – to end of Quarter 1 – 30 June 2025.

Cllr Fredericks, Portfolio Holder for Housing and People’s Services, introduced the report to the Committee.

Cllr Fletcher asked why household waste collection was rated green and not amber when there appeared to be issues in financing the strategy. The Chief Executive (CE) explained legislation required the Council to introduce green domestic food waste collections from April 2026. The Council had ordered the refuse freighters that would fulfil those collections and were moving forward, notwithstanding the uncertainty of the true and actual cost, for the introduction of domestic collections.

The CE assured the Committee the issue would be reported through Cabinet moving forward. Cllr Ringer, the Portfolio Holder for Waste Services, was working with Officers and explained that Cllr Shires, Portfolio Holder for Finance, and the DR and S151 Officer would be monitoring for any shortfalls in funding the scheme that the Council needed to make up beyond the ‘New Burdens’ funding that the Government had awarded to the Council. 

Cllr Fletcher asked for assurances the scheme would be introduced on schedule. The CE said that approximately 160 Councils were having to introduce food waste collections at the same time so there was pressure on the supply chain of food caddies and the refuse freighters but orders for those had been made. The scheduling of those domestic collections and when they would start would depend on when the Council had been given notice those orders were to be delivered.

Cllr Housden asked about energy infrastructure as his local parish had been experiencing frequent power cuts and wondered if the Council was addressing the issue. The CE was not aware of the incidents but the Council did work with partners to continue to highlight the deficiencies within the UK Power Networks infrastructure within the District. The Council and partners did have an energy plan for the District, and with Anglian Water with regards to water resilience, moving forward. Cllr Fredericks asked Cllr Housden if he could email her the details as she was meeting with some of the energy companies that week.

The CE responded to a question from Cllr Cushing in relation to an Organisational Development Plan that was due in June 2024, but the Committee was no closer to seeing that and he wondered what success would look like and when would that plan be available to view. The CE explained work was undertaken in terms of recommendations from the Corporate Peer Review, LGR then came into effect so amended the draft document and he believed this would be presented to the Committee in November as the People Strategy and Learning Development (Workforce) Strategy.

Cllr Cushing also asked about the Rural Position Statement which should have been completed by August 2025 and wondered had this been done and why it was rated amber. The CE said following the English Devolution White Paper being published in December 2024 that outlined LGR the Council had to look at Organisational Capacity, both at an Officer and Member level, therefore the Corporate Plan had reduced its actions down from 46 to 30 for the year 2025/26. Some base line data had been collected in terms of rural community services across the District but that position was changing frequently. The Council was working closely with Banking Hubs. Blakeney had lost its doctor’s surgery and the District had lost a number of post offices and village shops. The position was dynamic and, in some respects, gathering pace. The Council had tried to reflect those issues in their proposal for LGR but have not moved that forward to an actual strategy for North Norfolk. The CE explained they would most likely move that base line data into any emerging unitary authority as sanctioned by Government in due course.

Cllr Hankins wondered what the Committee would do with the data that had been collected in regards to mobile connectivity going forward, especially in regard to health and business. The Chair did explain this would be looked at as part of the Work Programme later in the meeting; however the Chair did question that it was listed as an action for 24/25 to develop a deeper insight into mobile and fast internet coverage but could not see that carried forward for 25/26. The CE confirmed that data had been gathered and Members’ experiences and beyond had fed into that piece of work in terms of mobile and digital infrastructure but that it had not yet been developed into a Strategy or Action Plan.

Cllr Fredericks responded to a question by Cllr Bayes who felt that Action No.33 had a very vague outcome detailed by the Officer as it did not cover the action or objectives. Cllr Fredericks explained they may need a written response to that question. The Council had engaged with a taskforce with the East of England Energy Group, colleges and training providers and that would all come together and feed into that piece of work. The Economic Growth Manager and Cllr J. Toye, Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth would need to answer the query more fully and she would get them to do that report as soon as possible.

Cllr Cushing highlighted the LGA Corporate Peer Challenge Plan and wished to know what had slipped and what the outcome of that would be. The CE referred to previous answer in relation to the Workforce Strategy that was outstanding.

The Chair asked the CE if the Actions could have some consistency in how they are numbered to allow the Committee to follow them more easily across both years. The CE said they couldn’t do that easily as they reduced from 46 to 30 Actions and they had to be transparent and show the significant organisational capacity pressures that LGR had put onto the Council. The Corporate Leadership Team (CLT) and Cabinet had to make difficult decisions to decide what Actions they would keep for 25/26, whilst still maintaining a business-as-usual model.

Cllr Fredericks asked Cllr Brown for an update on the new Local Plan in response to a query by Cllr Boyle. Cllr Brown said they were concluding the last part of the public consultation, and those responses would be analysed and reported to the inspector. The inspector would then look at the modifications those responses fed into and hopefully be satisfied with the Council’s updated expert reports with the hope being the Council could adopt the local plan by the end of 2025.

Cllr Cushing referred to item 24 regarding the development of pipeline project proposals for serviced employment land but wondered if the Council had a deadline. The CE agreed to take that away and provide a written response to the Committee as there were ongoing discussions with Cabinet on this matter.

In response to a query from Cllr Boyle regarding health, wellbeing and financial inclusivity initiatives. Cllr Fredericks said it was a moving target as the ICB were going through a huge restructure as was the NHS. The Council prided itself on having the Health and Wellbeing Partnership which brought those organisations together and discussed those topics and lobbied for them. The Council was in discussions with the North Norfolk Health and Wellbeing Board and its partners.

The Chair highlighted the capacity issues with LGR; in 24/25 there were the 31 actions that had been updated or cancelled due to changed circumstances and queried if they were sufficiently recorded within the Corporate Risk Register where there was an inherent risk of 12 and residual and target risks of 8 for Corporate Risk 41. The CE explained that the Corporate Plan was a statement of the Administration’s programme of work which was translated into a plan with the staff and financial resources the Council had at the time. When advising the Administration in 2023, it was agreed the Corporate Plan, and its actions would be shared over the 4 years but with an annual delivery plan to reflect changing positions. A number of the objectives were not in control of the Authority. The Corporate Risk Register (CRR) was reviewed quarterly by CLT and the Governance, Risk and Audit Committee and even though it was important to be mindful of those issues, as with the LGR process, the CRR was there to inform but it was also a living document that could change at any time. Cllr Fredericks added that the Council’s main priority was to serve the public and keep the Council financially stable.

Cllr Boyle wished to recognise the Empty Homes Team for being highly commended for best use of media award. She noted also they had been having software issues for managing empty homes. Cllr Fredericks reassured the Committee that it was only for the most complex of cases where there had been a problem, and those were being dealt with by hand but, as a result, they were just taking a little longer.

The Committee AGREED they had seen the report and made comments.