Overview & Scrutiny Committee - Tuesday 9 June 2026, 7:00pm - Epping Forest District Council webcasts

Overview & Scrutiny Committee
Tuesday, 9th June 2026 at 7:00pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Laura Kirman
  2. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Laura Kirman
  2. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Richard Bassett
  2. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  3. Cllr Jodie Lucas
  4. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  5. Cllr Howard Kauffman
  6. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Laura Kirman
  2. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Jennifer Gould
  2. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  3. Cllr Mandy George
  4. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  5. Cllr Lisa Morgan
  6. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  7. Laura Kirman
  8. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  9. Cllr Lisa Morgan
  10. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  11. Laura Kirman
  12. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  13. Cllr Smruti Patel
  14. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  15. Cllr Martin Morris
  16. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  17. Cllr Stephen Murray
  18. Cllr Smruti Patel
  19. Cllr Stephen Murray
  20. Cllr Smruti Patel
  21. Cllr Stephen Murray
  22. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  23. Andrew Small
  24. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  25. Cllr Jeane Lea
  26. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  27. Cllr Smruti Patel
  28. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  29. Cllr Mandy George
  30. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  31. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  32. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  33. Cllr Jon Whitehouse
  34. Jennifer Gould
  35. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  36. Jennifer Gould
  37. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  38. Cllr Rose Brookes
  39. Cllr Smruti Patel
  40. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  41. Cllr Smruti Patel
  42. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  43. Cllr Stephen Murray
  44. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  45. Andrew Small
  46. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  47. Cllr Jamie Braha
  48. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  49. Cllr Mary Dadd
  50. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  51. Cllr Mandy George
  52. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  53. Cllr Jodie Lucas
  54. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  55. Cllr Smruti Patel
  56. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  57. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Richard Bassett
  2. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  3. Cllr Jon Whitehouse
  4. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  5. Matt Winslow
  6. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  7. Cllr Jon Whitehouse
  8. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  9. Cllr Mary Dadd
  10. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  11. Cllr Jeane Lea
  12. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  13. Cllr Craig McCann
  14. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  15. Cllr Jodie Lucas
  16. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Mary Dadd
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  2. Cllr Mary Dadd
  3. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  2. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  3. Cllr Stephen Murray
  4. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  5. Cllr Stephen Murray
  6. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  7. Cllr Stephen Murray
  8. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  9. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  10. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  11. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  12. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  13. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  14. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  15. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  16. Cllr Smruti Patel
  17. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  18. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  19. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Paula Maginnis
  2. James Warwick
  3. Nuala Donnelly
  4. Dawn Harrisson
  5. Ben Johnson
  6. Mandy Thompson
  7. Fabrizio Ferrari
  8. Tracy Scott
  9. Matt Winslow
  10. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  11. Paula Maginnis
  12. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  13. Cllr Jon Whitehouse
  14. Paula Maginnis
  15. Tracy Scott
  16. Matt Winslow
  17. Cllr Jon Whitehouse
  18. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  19. Cllr Stephen Murray
  20. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  21. James Warwick
  22. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  23. Matt Winslow
  24. Cllr Martin Morris
  25. Matt Winslow
  26. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  27. Cllr Jeane Lea
  28. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  29. Tracy Scott
  30. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  31. Cllr Craig McCann
  32. Mandy Thompson
  33. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  34. Cllr Jodie Lucas
  35. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  36. Cllr Stephen Murray
  37. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  38. Cllr Lisa Morgan
  39. Mandy Thompson
  40. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  41. Cllr Lisa Morgan
  42. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  43. Cllr Richard Bassett
  44. Mandy Thompson
  45. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  46. Paula Maginnis
  47. James Warwick
  48. Nuala Donnelly
  49. Dawn Harrisson
  50. Ben Johnson
  51. Mandy Thompson
  52. Fabrizio Ferrari
  53. Tracy Scott
  54. Matt Winslow
  55. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  56. Andrew Small
  57. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  58. Cllr Stephen Murray
  59. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Owen Sparks
  2. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  3. Cllr Stephen Murray
  4. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Raymond Balcombe
  2. James Warwick
  3. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  4. Cllr Stephen Murray
  5. James Warwick
  6. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  7. James Warwick
  8. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  9. Cllr Rose Brookes
  10. James Warwick
  11. Cllr Rose Brookes
  12. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  13. Cllr Mandy George
  14. Owen Sparks
  15. Cllr Mandy George
  16. Owen Sparks
  17. Cllr Mandy George
  18. James Warwick
  19. Owen Sparks
  20. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  21. Andrew Small
  22. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  23. Cllr Mandy George
  24. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  25. Cllr Geoff Shaw
  26. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  27. Cllr Lisa Morgan
  28. James Warwick
  29. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  30. Cllr Lisa Morgan
  31. James Warwick
  32. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  33. Cllr Jon Whitehouse
  34. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Raymond Balcombe
  2. Owen Sparks
  3. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  4. Owen Sparks
  5. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  6. Owen Sparks
  7. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  8. Owen Sparks
  9. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  10. Owen Sparks
  11. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  12. Cllr Stephen Murray
  13. Cllr Mandy George
  14. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  15. Cllr Martin Morris
  16. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  17. Cllr Jon Whitehouse
  18. Owen Sparks
  19. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  20. Cllr Geoff Shaw
  21. Owen Sparks
  22. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  23. Cllr Richard Bassett
  24. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  25. Cllr Jodie Lucas
  26. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
  27. Cllr Howard Kauffman
  28. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Stephen Murray
  2. Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

1 Webcasting Introduction

I'll listen.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:00:03
Good evening members, officers, members of the public.
Welcome to this evening's overview and scrutiny meeting
on Tuesday the 9th of June.
I'd like to remind everyone that this meeting
will be filmed live or recorded and uploaded to the internet
and will be capable of repeated viewing.
Therefore, by participating in this meeting,
you are consenting to being filmed
and to the possible use of those images
and sound recordings.
Members are reminded to turn on their microphones
before speaking and then turn them off
when they have finished.
And as I said, welcome to the overview
and scrutiny meeting this evening.
I'm Councillor Jamie McIvor, I'll be chairing this meeting
and my vice chair to my right is Councillor Craig McCann.
To my left is Andrew Small, the chief executive,
Jen Gould, deputy chief executive and Owen Sparks,
strategic head of finance and our section 151 officer.
And to my right is Laura Kerman from Democratic Services,
Natalie Cole who is kindly webcasting the meeting.
We also have a number of officers with us this evening
in the chamber and online if needed.
Thank you for those of you that are here in person.
So first of all I'll pass to apologies for absence.

2 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Do we have any apologies for absence please?
Laura Kirman - 0:01:23
Yes Chairman, there's three apologies been received.
We have Councillor Parsons, Councillor Sharif and Councillor Whiskin.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:01:32
Any substitute members?

3 SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS

Laura Kirman - 0:01:39
Substitute members are Councillor Brahe for Councillor Parsons, Councillor John Whitehouse
for Councillor Sharif and Councillor Wiskin.
Thank you very much.

4 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:01:49
Do any members have any declarations of interest?
Councillor Bassett.
Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Richard Bassett - 0:01:56
Obviously I better declare for item 19 being Chairman of Qualis and anywhere else it might mention them.
Thank you that may happen once or twice
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:02:06
I'd like to just to... Oh, Councillor Lucas.
Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Jodie Lucas - 0:02:10
Similarly, I'm chairman of TVS which is going to be mentioned throughout this evening.
So any items regarding TVS? I'd just like to just declare a non -pecuniary interest. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Lucas.
Councillor Coughlin.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:02:25
Cllr Howard Kauffman - 0:02:27
Thank you, Chair, also as a non -exec of Qolis in case that comes up.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:02:34
Thank you. Any other members? I will just declare that I have visited the site that
is up for discussion in one of the agenda items. I simply visited to see the finished
product and it's widely known, but I just wanted to make that declaration.

5 MINUTES

Okay, are you happy to move on? Thank you. So we will now agree the minutes of the previous
meeting. Those are on pages 5 to 9 of your Agenda Report Pact. Can we confirm the minutes
from the 14th of April, 2026? Agreed, members? Thank you. Item 6, Matters Arising and Outstanding

6 Matters Arising and Outstanding Actions

Actions. Members, are there any other matters arising or outstanding actions you wish to

7 Public Questions & Requests to Address the Overview and Scrutiny Committee

at this point of the meeting. In that case I'll move on to public questions and requests
to address the overview and scrutiny committee. Laura are there any questions or requests
Laura Kirman - 0:03:27
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:03:30
from the public? None have been received chairman. Thank you Laura. Item 8 is executive decisions

8 Executive Decisions - Call-In

call in. Members are advised at the last meeting that a call had been received on the cabinet
decision relating to the Council Housing Development S106 purchase of nine affordable units at
the Hawthorn's Fivefield, CM50RB. This request has been progressed in line with the Constitution.
The report is on pages 10 to 28 of your agenda. And the protocol on how the call -in should
be considered at this meeting is detailed in paragraph 6 on page 25 of this agenda.
We will be following that protocol and members of the committee should note that the only
options available to the committee this evening are laid out in the report.
This is either to confirm the decision made or refer the decision back to cabinet for
further consideration.
The governance and legal reasons for this are set out in the report.
And Jen, can I ask you please now to outline the report before I ask the lead signatories
to speak?
Thank you, Chairman.
Jennifer Gould - 0:04:36
This call in request has been progressed in line with the Constitution and in accordance
with the provisions of section 100B4 of the Local Government Act 1972. The report on pages
10 to 28 of the agenda provides the context for the decisions on the acquisition of nine
affordable housing units approved by cabinet on the 30th of March 2026. Members will note
that there was an informal meeting on the 14th of April 2026. The briefing note for
that meeting provides detail on the decision
and the notes of that meeting are attached to the report.
A way forward could not be agreed at that meeting
and as such, this call -in is being presented
at the first available overview and scrutiny meeting.
Members should note that the view of the council solicitor,
monitoring officer and strategic legal advisor
is that the decision made by cabinet
is in line with the budget and policy framework
and if the committee determined
to exercise its call -in powers,
The option open to the committee is to refer the decision back to cabinet for further consideration
Setting out in writing the nature of its concerns
The recommendations as set out at the start of the report provide the only options available to the committee. Thank you chair
Thank you, Jim
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:05:48
Councillor George as the lead signatory. Can you describe your concerns as set out in the call in notification, please? Thank you chair
Good evening, everyone
Cllr Mandy George - 0:05:55
I want to be clear at the outset that this calling is not about challenge to the principle
of delivering affordable housing, nor to the Council's wider Housing Development Programme.
This calling is supported by members from several political groups, being Labour, Lib
Dam, LRA and Green.
Now unfortunately, Councillor Gabbard was not re -voted back in as a district councillor,
but she still is a parish councillor and supports this fully still.
The issue before this committee is whether the governance, transparency and scrutiny
arrangements surrounding this 2 .67 million pound acquisition provided members with sufficient
information and opportunity for meaningful challenge.
It's important to acknowledge that the acquisition did not arise in isolation and that members
had opportunities to consider the wider housing development programme during the budget process,
being the 13 January during a committee, the 9 February, the 19 February and again the
same meeting on the 19th.
The signatories fully recognised and acknowledged these approvals.
However, while members scrutinised and improved the overall programme framework, budget allocation
and delivery ambitions, this individual acquisition was not considered by scrutiny as a stand -alone
decision before Cabinet committed £2 .6 million of public funds.
Our concern is therefore not whether authority existed within the approved programme and
budget, rather it is whether Cabinet had sufficient information to make a fully informed decision,
and whether scrutiny had been able to satisfy itself that this was the case.
Following the informal calling meeting, members requested access to documentation relied upon
by Cabinet, whilst Appendix 2 was provided that underlying reports and assessments referred
referred to within were not, so we didn't have any other information.
In particular, the report relied significantly upon the independent BNP Paragraphs Viability
Assessment in support of the valuation and value for money case.
Members were therefore able to review the conclusions, but not the evidence based on
which those conclusions were founded.
Our concern is not that those conclusions were necessarily wrong, it's whether members
were given sufficient access to the evidence needed to properly understand and test them.
Following the informal calling meeting, the Deputy Chief Inspector Jen, she did kindly
invite further questions. However, clarification after the event is distinct from providing
access to the underlying evidence on which the decision was based. Effective scrutiny
relies on members being able to review and test relevant information at the point of
It was suggested during the calling that members should have an element of trust.
That is understood.
However, trust is achieved through effective scrutiny which depends not only on trust but
also on transparency and the ability to examine the evidence underpin significant decisions.
The portfolio holder has stated that they were satisfied with the information provided
to Cabinet.
The signatories do not dispute that position.
However, we do not share the same level of assurances, particularly given that it had
also been acknowledged that the Cabinet report could have contained more detail.
We ask the Committee to consider these.
First, whether the Cabinet had sufficient information and evidence to make a fully informed
decision.
Second, whether scrutiny had adequate visibility of significant individual acquisitions that
seek within larger approved programmes.
Third, whether members undertaking the calling
were provided with sufficient supporting evidence
to properly test the council's conclusion.
Fourth, whether the current arrangements
strike the right balance between efficient decision -making
and meaningful democratic oversight.
We are not seeking to delay the delivery of affordable housing,
nor to revisit the principle of acquiring these homes.
We simply ask whether the level of transparency
information sharing and member oversight in this case reflects the standard this
committee wishes to see applied for future decisions of this scale. Finally I
would encourage members of this committee to use this opportunity to
ask their own questions of the leader, the portfolio holder and officers so that
governance, transparency and decision -making processes can be fully
explored and understood. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Councillor George.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:10:31
Councillor Morgan, I thank you for your apologies for the lateness.
Cllr Lisa Morgan - 0:10:34
I just wanted to cheque, do you have any declarations of interest?
No, Chair.
Thank you.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:10:40
Laura Kirman - 0:10:46
Councillor Morgan, the records from Council show that you're not actually on this committee.
It's Councillor Markham from the group.
I'm sorry, I personally produced that agenda incorrectly the first time around
and it was republished with the relevant meeting.
So I apologise for that.
No, no, that's fine.
I was sent the details and I was like,
I didn't know it was on there, but that's why I'm here.
With your permission, Chairwoman,
perhaps Councillor Morgan could move
to the non -committee side for the second.
No, no, that's fine.
I can be used.
Apologies for that, everybody.
When it comes to voting,
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:11:18
if you wouldn't mind just sitting
either just anywhere over there,
or if you'd rather go,
but you're welcome to stay and I'd encourage you to stay
and I'd like you to be in the meeting,
but it's just so it's easier for officers
when they do the voting. No that's fine. Could you take me off of the list though please?
Cllr Lisa Morgan - 0:11:33
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:11:36
Thank you. It's already been corrected and the agenda was republished. I'm sorry if you
Laura Kirman - 0:11:39
didn't get that republication notification. Sorry about that, Erin. We'll relegate you
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:11:42
to the other bit of the chamber, I do apologise. Councillor Patel, as Portfolio Holder, do you
Cllr Smruti Patel - 0:11:53
wish to respond? Thank you, Chair. I will hopefully be able to answer the questions
that Councillor George has raised. So thank you very much. I just want to be absolutely
clear that this decision was made with proper governance. I'd like to demonstrate that with
the fields of stuff that I've come prepared with. So in terms of governance for financial
and constitutional framework already approved by members, so these are the currently strategy
stuff that we already have approved. So yeah, we can always talk about the other stuff that
if you wanna change anything, we'll come to that.
The HRA capital programme is not ad hoc spending.
It is developed by officers through the annual budget
process underpinned by the medium term financial plan
and the 20 year HRA business plan.
It's also always scrutinised as part of the council's
overall approach to housing delivery.
And then it's also agreed by council.
And in this case, we've had a great record of this chambers
where it's been agreed and anonymously agreed in terms of our financial budgets always been
approved anonymously as well. So the wider development pipeline is therefore considered
by members at the strategic level and once that framework is approved individual decisions
are rightly delegated to the portfolio holder or the cabinet according to the value of what
developments are and what we're hoping to purchase. This is, that is literally how good
governance should work and this is not general fund revenue that we're talking about that's
being diverted to day -to -day services. It is HRA capital approved for the purpose of
investing in affordable housing. In this particular case, that investment will secure nine much -needed
affordable homes for local residents at a time when this housing needs remains very,
very acute for our district at the moment. The suggestion that every
individual viability assessment should be reopened through scrutiny is neither
practical nor consistent with the framework members themselves have
approved. It also commercially it's quite sensitive as well for us to reveal that
kind of information you know it ties us back basically. I would introduce it
would actually introduce delay into decisions that are oftentimes sensitive
and clog the system with operational detail.
And materially actually weaken the council's ability
to act when real opportunities to secure
such affordable homes arise.
Security, sorry, scrutiny and council set the policy,
the budget and the programme.
Offices undertake the detailed appraisal and due diligence
and delegated decision makers must then weigh
that professional advice and act responsibly.
within the authority that they've been given with.
This is exactly what's happened here.
I received assurance in this case based on the robust officer input and recognised external
professional advice that this acquisition represented a sound and prudent use of HRA
capital.
I'm therefore satisfied not only that the decision was properly taken, but that it was
the right decision and as Councillor George already agrees it's not about the
money and how much we're spending so we understand we're on the same page
there. So I would insist that this was the right decision and it was lawful,
financially responsible and firmly in the best interest of residents in
housing needs. So yeah I would very much urge for members to take the call in
back and then any other information they need. The offices are available for
questions as well.
Thank you very much, Councillor Patel.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:15:39
And members, what I will just say is we have a very heavy
agenda this evening and I want to give every item
all the attention it deserves.
So we will have, the meeting will take as long as it takes,
but I just want everyone to be mindful that we have got
an item on pink at the end, which I think many members
will want to go into detail with.
So just conscious that as we make our contributions here,
we will do it as thoroughly as we need to,
but I just want members to be reminded of that.
Councillor Murray, did you want to speak?
but if I may, Councillor Morris, sorry.
For various reasons, there are other members
who are part of the call -in aren't here this evening.
And I do note that Councillor Morris is here.
Is there anything you wish to say
before we move on to the wider discussion
as part of the call -in?
The opportunity to say something?
Cllr Martin Morris - 0:16:21
Yeah, I think as you are part of the call -in.
Yeah, sure, sure, I can say something.
So yeah, I did support this call -in.
If we, so if we want to do things,
we want to do the right thing.
so we want to do things correctly and tick all the boxes,
we'd ask audit to have a look at it.
If we want to make sure we're making the right decisions,
then we're going to ask overview and scrutiny
to look at the details of the decision.
My concern arises from attending the cabinet meeting
where this decision was made, where
I didn't feel there was sufficient information provided
to be confident about the decision.
And I guess this is really down to the committee themselves,
the overview and scrutiny committee,
to decide if they are happy with this given the amount of information they've been provided with.
Personally, if I was making the decision, I wouldn't have been happy.
So that's the reason why I've signed this call in, because I think there should be more scrutiny over this type of decision.
But I don't have a view either way of whether this is a right or the wrong decision.
I just want to make sure that people are happy that they've seen sufficient information to
support or refuse this decision.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councillor Morrison.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:17:37
Members, before we move on to remind you that the options are to leave the decision as it
stands or send it back to cabinet.
The actual wider discussion of the decision is less a topic for debate this evening.
Councillor Murray, did you want to speak?
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:17:53
Just a general point and then a couple of questions to help me decide which option I'm
going to go for.
I'm quite happy with the principle of O &S scrutinising the general programmes and the
general parameters and budgets of the acquisition programme.
I wouldn't feel that we would need to scrutinise every purchase and I'm not sure that that's
what the calling people have said.
What I'm a little bit unclear about
is I would have liked to have thought
that the Cabinet and the portfolio holder had read
and were aware of the details of the professional reports
and the value for money assessments.
And it's a little bit unclear to me
whether the Cabinet was happy to leave that to officers
or they actually had access to those reports and had seen those reports or
certainly the portfolio holder because I certainly think that that would be the
case that they should have been aware of those reports and never read them so can
I just have that clarified because I'm a little bit unclear whether what's the
Cllr Smruti Patel - 0:19:07
case there. Absolutely Councillor Murray I mean you know as a portfolio holder I
think I'm not sure if all the Councillors when they come on new and old
you see those documents before they've actually drafted them,
you see them and then it goes through cabinet,
then all the changes, sorry, cabinet briefing,
then several changes happen to those reports
and that's the top line that you would have seen.
But my meeting with one -to -one with the officers
that happens every week,
we discuss all of those things in detail for sure
and then they will reassure me,
this is what it says on there, we've gone and done this
and that's the kind of one -to -one chat we have
on a regular basis with the officers
and I'm quite satisfied that the due diligence that what needed to happen in this case has
happened. The only thing here I think what the problem is that we can't share everything
because of the commercial sensitivity of the issue at hand basically. So other than that,
I think if members keep saying have you seen it, have you seen it, are we satisfied that
you've seen it? I have absolutely seen it. So and I'm absolutely satisfied that I've
the information I needed to make that call. Welcome for any other different questions
that anyone has.
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:20:16
Thank you, Chairman. I'm taking from that that the portfolio holder was saying that
she saw those prior to that cabinet meeting, so that rather pleases me to know that. The
second question I've got is on the two options. What if any risk, if there is a risk, is there
any risk attached to O &S going for option two,
referring the decision back to the cabinet
for further decision.
I'm not saying that's necessarily what I'm going to support,
but I would like to know whether there is any risk
to the securing of these important social units
if we were to make that decision.
Councillor Tanner.
Thank you, Councillor Murray.
Cllr Smruti Patel - 0:21:00
So yeah, I mean, definitely with all of these acquisitions,
they are always time sensitive and delaying any of these steps that we need to take is
unnecessarily can really mean losing those homes and that could really otherwise meet
pressing local need. I have personally also had several emails saying we want our children
to move their council of outcomes at that, when are these ready for us to have. I remember
in one of the call -in informal meetings that we had, one of the discussions came up as
location and all of these and we're actually really lucky as a district that we've got this
opportunity to get hold of these properties within our district and the rural with the huge demand
for that as well so yeah thank you. I'm grateful for that chairman but I don't wish to put them
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:21:46
on the spot but I think it's a perfectly reasonable question I would like to hear from the professional
officers as well whether they consider there's an element of risk. Mr Small indicated he wished to answer your question.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:21:58
I think there are a couple of consequences.
Andrew Small - 0:22:00
I think we can't lose sight of the fact that the developer is also delayed in terms of
disposing of those units, really, and that is having a financial consequence on the developer
themselves, really.
It's gone on for a few months now.
The election is obviously headed to take place in the meantime, really, and all of the time
This is hampering the developer from concluding the sale of its site really.
That has a direct financial consequence on them.
Can I just add, Chair, that I think it's been acknowledged already.
It's in the report.
I think the original report to Cabinet could have been more detailed in that.
I think one of our learnings from this call in really is to try and find the right level
of detail for members of not just Cabinet, of course, but also for the scrutiny committee
as well to feel that the proper due process has been conducted and therefore everybody
satisfied that the decision is robust and value for money for the council. So that's
our takeaway I think and we'll make sure that future reports include more detail. Thank
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:23:11
you. Thank you. Any other members? Councillor Lee, then Councillor George, Councillor Whitehouse.
Cllr Jeane Lea - 0:23:15
Thank you, Chairman. Every single Councillor can attend any cabinet meeting and any other
Butte and Scrutiny meeting.
So anyone who's not happy at that time
should be asking questions and they would get answers.
So I don't understand now why this has come now
when this has been going on for months.
Because if anyone's got a problem,
they can attend every single meeting
and ask any officer or anybody
for the answers that they want.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:23:43
Thank you, Councillor Lee.
I think it's worth just mentioning for members
that the first that members would have known about this
would have been when it went to cabinet just for the record and did anyone wish
to answer council these point point well -made your microphone just as a
Cllr Smruti Patel - 0:24:02
reminder within the financial budget all of these itemised lists are there I take
on board that one of the names of gypsy whatever and then we had the five field
was a bit of a confusion yes we definitely take that on board but in
of the amount and the budgeting value all of those things are all on there so
yeah we would have seen them and finance one and that one actually gets
crucial eyes much more robustly as well by councillors and members
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:24:28
Cllr Mandy George - 0:24:33
Councillor George Thank You chair and I understand that because Councillor
Shari if he's not here this evening I can ask questions on her behalf yeah
There is quite a few, but when we had the meeting, questions were answered, but then that led to other questions and there were other symmetries that wanted to ask questions themselves.
So, I've got a whole list here, but I'm not going to read out every single one.
So, a couple that's come to mind is the first one from Councillor Stryv.
The leader of the Council stated that decisions had been taken in this way since 2015.
How many other significant cabinet decisions since 2015 have been approved without members
being provided with the underloan evidence on which recommendations were based?
And the second one, what changes will be made to ensure that future decisions involving
significant sums of public money are supported by evidence that's available for member scrutiny
before decisions are taken?
I'll leave it at those two.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:25:28
Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:25:31
I would dread to give the number of decisions that have been taken since 2015 and I wouldn't
be able to this evening.
What I would say to you is the way that we purchase these types of properties on site,
as I set out at the pre -scrutiny meeting, is a very process -driven basis.
Obviously based upon the reports we received from BNP Paribus in this instance, and we
work through that basis.
But we would not wish to give up on where housing associations
have said we don't want this particular site and we'll be
looking at off -site purchases where we would lose the
opportunity for local people.
That would be a really bad mistake.
But the other point is that the HRA is separate to the general
fund which goes for a slightly different process altogether even more detailed
cabinet reports and I go back to what councillor Lee said before and I know we
have a number of new members this evening but all members are invited to
cabinet and of course all members can come to any scrutiny panel that they
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:26:42
wish. Thank you councillor Lippard. Councillor George does that conclude your points?
Cllr Jon Whitehouse - 0:26:46
Yeah I think three points if I may. First of all actually
place quite some weight on the fact that the majority of signatures in the call -in did
attend the Cabinet meeting and did ask questions at the Cabinet meeting and were not satisfied
with the answer. I think she'd have a point if the call -in had come from left field from
people who weren't at the meeting, but I think it's the very nature of the experience those
members had at the meeting which caused them to have the call -in. So I don't think that
criticism flies in this case.
And I'm pleased that the chief exec mentions the issue about reports, because it's not
actually the only report that members have raised concerns about in recent months.
Those who were at the scrutiny panel that looked at the museum report, for example,
raised concerns about the fairly perfunctory nature of that report.
There have been other reports where sections were missing or it's not really set out the
issue.
So, you know, this does lead to, you know, better briefing of
offices in terms of what's expected in terms of reports or
fuller reports or reports which actually, you know, we have some
very good reports, but that's not consistent and we should be
aiming for consistency across, you know, cabinets particularly
important and council particularly important because
they make decisions, but, you know, stuff that goes
scrutiny is important as well because, you know, that's where
members get a lot of information, for example.
I mean, for example, in the report we had, the cabinet meeting, it said there were no
applicable background papers.
It took until the informal meeting to reveal that there was actually the BNP Paribas report
behind this.
Background paper is a paper on which people rely on when they write a report, and they
must have relied on that report in order to write the report, and that should be listed
as a background paper.
So I think it's entirely understandable that it was
called in, and I think if speed is the essence, if it does go
back to Cabinet, you know, there are mechanisms to ensure that
Cabinet can, you know, meet before the schedule if needed
in order to consider it.
This is slightly the tangent, but also in the briefing note,
it does talk about difficulty of getting registrars and providers
engaged with the sites.
And we used to have specialist housing associations that dealt
with rural sites. I mean, Hastow was the one that you used to deal with a lot. I know there's
been a lot of consolidation in the sector since then, but do those sort of rural specialists
not exist anymore?
Jennifer Gould - 0:29:23
There has been a number of amalgamations really of housing associations, so those smaller
ones that used to exist and do that sort of specialist housing don't exist in the same
numbers anymore, so I'm not aware of any that are currently operating within the district.
I think it is important to say though as well that quite some time ago the properties were
offered to register providers, there was some interest at that point but it wasn't progressed
at speed for them and then when it came back round that they had moved on from that development.
So this is quite an unusual situation because we wouldn't normally be purchasing directly
from a developer in this way, usually it would be picked up by a register provider first,
so it is a bit of an exception to the rule. Is there a reason for the exception?
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:30:09
Jennifer Gould - 0:30:12
My understanding is that the units were offered to register providers quite early on in the
process and some interest was shown by some of those registered providers but communication
breakdown at one point and say when that was revisited and it wasn't able to be
progressed at that time.
Thank you. Any other members?
Councillor Brooks.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:30:36
Councillor Whiskin has emailed me some questions.
Cllr Rose Brookes - 0:30:40
One of his concerns really was we all know there's a great demand for from our
housing list but it really wasn't about the the choice of Highfield to invest so
much, Fifield rather, my apologies, to invest so much money when there are only a couple
of busses a day and one convenience store. And he felt that there were better locations.
I know that some time ago I was involved with a housing case where we had bought a two -bedroom
flat in Depton from someone who got into difficulty with the mortgage, where transport is much
more sustainable there.
And the other question he said, he just really wanted
some assurances.
We all know people read social media all the time
and what's out there.
But he wanted some assurances that no one at
EFDC or any councillor has any financial interest
in the developers.
Chancellor Patel?
I'll attempt to maybe answer a couple of them,
and then maybe I'll probably defer it to the officers.
Cllr Smruti Patel - 0:31:47
Yeah, I think one of the points that Councillor Wiskin
is talking about is no one having anything to do
with this development itself.
Definitely this is what the declaration of interests
are there for.
I think apart from our chair who's modelled the apartment
and walked around and I've seen that video before.
It's still not sold Councillor.
I know, I know.
So apart from that, I don't know anyone who's actually
present, I mean had any contact with the developer
or even have anything to do with them.
So yeah, definitely.
Sorry, remind me of the other one again.
I must declare this peri -manipole stuff is really bad.
I keep thinking, yes, it is real.
I've never had this much brain fog in my life.
Sorry, Tom.
I think the balance of the question was about the suitability of the location.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:32:31
Yes.
Cllr Smruti Patel - 0:32:35
I'd like to reiterate that we have had inquiries from our own residents that are on the waiting
list as well that they would love to have that as a location and move in.
I understand what they're talking about in terms of transport etc but that is
people's choices and I think we've got to leave them with that.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:32:53
Thank you Chairman. I think it's worth members being aware there is a there is a
demand for rural properties there is a different type of demand but there is a
demand there and I'm sure Councillor Murray and Councillor Brooks will
remember the high demand that we had for the straw houses that we actually had a
Housing Association build in Hyonga.
Thank you.
Councillor Murray.
A proposal or?
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:33:13
Yes, I was just gonna move on to that.
I just had a question, it was linked.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:33:17
Firstly, I just want to point out,
I'm uncomfortable with members being given the impression
that they are, you know,
I appreciate the valid concern about a developer's ability
to have viability in a scheme and there are knock -on effects
if that becomes unviable, but I am concerned that we are,
I feel the advice leans towards suggesting that, you know,
that should be a material consideration.
What happens to a private business
isn't the business of Epping Forest residents
who are ultimately footing the bill for this.
So I'm just of the view that I'm very,
I'm uncomfortable with that element,
but I'm also very pragmatic
and get the wider implications if that goes wrong.
So don't misquote me on that.
With relation to the rural location,
You don't need to convince me
if I feels beautiful place,
in fact, Council Balcombe and I,
it's where our local pub is,
but the sustainability of that location,
everyone I speak to there just moans about everything
from no telephone signal to no busses,
or I have to admit the number 45 is exceptional
if you need to get to Chelmsford,
it's not very good anywhere else.
So that is a very valid point
that Councillor Whiskin via Councillor Brooks has made.
And also the, I guess the concern I have is for,
for whether or not there is benefit
to more conversation at cabinet.
The decision for us as a committee this evening
is should the cabinet have more discussion on it
or should the decision just be taken?
And I think what the committee needs to be mindful of,
is there any added value to further discussion
or is the discussion done?
I think that's what we've got to be mindful of
as we move on.
Councillor Brahe, but I'm going to come to Mr Small first,
if that's OK.
Sorry, Chairman, just to answer some of your questions.
I think there is a material consideration
Andrew Small - 0:35:11
about the financial impact on the developer.
Ultimately, if we put so much financial strain
on the developer through delay and the developer folds,
then we won't get the units at all.
So I think that there is a practical time consideration
that's relevant to us and our interests
that need to be recognised.
And I suppose, in terms of location, everybody will know that the councils used to build
council houses in every village in Hamlet, throughout the district historically.
We were the provider of, particularly of, and I know times have changed, but for agricultural
labourers, we used to make sure there was proper provision across the district and not
concentrated in particular estates in a few locations.
We need to make sure that the provision is suitable for people's needs and not everybody
wants to travel into a town to work potentially.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:36:09
We have to equally be mindful of the fact that inequality exists greater in rural communities.
Health inequality is a significant problem in rural communities, as is sadly when it
comes to social care, huge volumes of loneliness.
So I think there's lots of things the way up there.
Councillor Brougha.
Thank you, a couple of points I was gonna make.
Cllr Jamie Braha - 0:36:29
I was just gonna come back on the,
the registered providers.
They just don't buy a smaller section 106s anymore.
They're just, there's no interest in it.
There is not viable for the housing associations anymore.
And I'm struggling with what we'd gained
by sending it back to cabinet.
I think a number of Councillors have already said
with, you know, they're content with the decision.
It was really just the scrutiny
which they had an issue with so in nutshell what's the point in sending it back to cabinet.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:37:02
Yeah it's a very valid point perhaps the perceived error in process shouldn't necessarily punish
an outcome of what is and could be a good thing. Um Councillor Dadd.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:37:13
Thank you Chairman um as Onga Ward um Councillor um I do know of a number of um residents who
would dearly love to move to the fire field ones
should they become available in social media.
And the issue about public transport is not such a problem
because they'd only be moving a short distance
and they already have children at the school, et cetera.
Thank you.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:37:39
Sure, I appreciate how those people would feel.
And I know from my own case work how those people would feel
if they got the opportunity to live here.
Members, I'll just ask the committee,
Is there anything that you feel you don't know that you would like to know and if it went to cabinet
You would want the cabinets prepare in advance. I mean, that's probably asked Councillor George
I'm just mindful if it does go back to cabinet then it needs to be worthwhile
Cllr Mandy George - 0:38:09
Within the calling meeting it was already discussed that if it were to go back to cabinet they would vote the same way
So the option is that okay, we discussed it
We're not happy with the process and we're looking at the governance
and $2 .67 million is a huge amount of money.
Yes, it is in the appendixes, but that specific
aspect of five fields was not discussed as a stand -alone
and brought to attention.
So we have no problem with anyone
having a property, especially going to five fields because obviously there's been a
month for it. So yeah, great,
but it was just a process. So as far as I'm concerned,
We brought it to committee, we've shared it with everybody,
shared their experience with the call in,
and I know that if it does go back to cabinet,
they're going to choose and vote the same way as they did.
Okay, Councillor George.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:38:57
If there's no other members, I'm happy to move on.
Councillor Lucas.
Oh, Councillor Lucas.
Thank you, Chairman.
I saw a delay in my comments,
Cllr Jodie Lucas - 0:39:03
but Councillor Murray alluded to it earlier,
but if we're looking at a stage for a proposal,
based on everything that we've heard,
I'm happy to propose that we,
does it need to go to a vote
or do you want a proposal at this moment?
Yes, what we'll do, and now we've heard a range of views,
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:39:19
we will, I'll ask Councillor Patel
if she wishes to say anything further,
then once that's concluded,
we will either decide whether or not it goes to cabinet
or whether or not it will remain as decided,
and we will do a vote for that.
And I'll outline that to the committee shortly.
So if there's no other members that wish to speak,
I'll move on to Councillor Patel to summarise and add anything extra before we go to a vote.
Thank you so much.
Cllr Smruti Patel - 0:39:46
Yeah, I mean just a lot of the stuff that I've already said, but it would be nice to
just sort of round it up.
So already for the reasons that I've set out in my initial response to the call -in, I would
ask members to dismiss the call -in.
I don't really like the word dismiss.
I know it was done for the right reasons and now we have the information at hand.
This is the properly considered and financially responsible decision taken in line with the
framework already approved by members and it will help deliver much needed affordable
homes for our residents. In my view, the right course is now to support the decision, allow
the council to proceed, building in further delay risks, losing the opportunity of these
much needed affordable housing units for our residents in need of accommodation. And I
would also like to add besides that is, yes, we've identified through this process as well
that perhaps we do and you know echoing Andrew's comments that we are you know
we will look at the reporting and make sure that we've added as much
information as we can to try to know avoid this sort of situation in future
as well thank you. Thank you council Patel. So we will council George you have
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:40:52
any final remarks? Okay thank you anyone else from the call -in? No? So what we
will now do is we will vote and just be clear to members we will vote either for
referring back to cabinet, against referring back to cabinet or of course
members have the option to abstain as well. So just repeat that will be for
referring it back to cabinet or against referring it back to cabinet. So can I
ask members, I will be a voting chairman as well this evening, can I ask members
and those that are for referring it back to cabinet please.
Three chairmen. Those against referring it back to cabinet.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:41:38
Any abstentions? Okay the matter won't be going back to cabinet. Thank you very much.

9 Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Work Programme

Thank you Councillor Patel. So we're now moving on to item 9 which is the overview and scrutiny
committee work programme. Members the draught work programme is for all the scrutiny committees
and they are attached on pages 29 to 33.
Do members have any comments or items
that they wish to be considered for inclusions?
And if there are any other items members do want
put forward for full inclusion in the work programme,
of course you always have the opportunity
to email democratic services.
So based on the current work programme that we have,
do any members wish to add anything
or request something to be considered?
Councillor Bassett.
Cllr Richard Bassett - 0:42:29
Sorry, just pointing out page 34, we've got the request to add something.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:42:40
Yes, this is for Councillor Dadd's task and finish programme. I'm happy to move on to
this shortly after we've just discussed the rest of the work programme, if that's okay.
We currently have a large work programme. Councillor Whitehouse?
Cllr Jon Whitehouse - 0:42:56
What I don't see on here is the Planning Services review following up on the Planning Advisory
Service review and their interim update review.
Thank you, yes that's a point well made actually.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:43:10
Is that going to any other Scrutiny Committee or is that something that is absent?
Oh sorry, Mr Winslow.
Thanks Chair.
Matt Winslow - 0:43:22
So, that was last considered by the Place Scrutiny Committee in March and it was determined
that it was prudent to wait for the new national regulations that were due to be coming out
before the Council decided what it was going to do further about the recommendations for
Planning Committee.
So, those have been published and that will bring into effect further changes to planning
committees from October this year, including changes to the scheme of delegations.
So that's out to consultation at the moment.
And I mean, Councillor Whitehouse's question I realise is pointed to the consideration
of the review the council was going to conduct itself after nine months of the implementation
of the new processes.
But place scrutiny committee's consideration previously has been that it would wait for
of the national review to determine whether or not any further changes are going to come
out anyway.
Thank you.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:44:42
And Councillor Whitehouse, I've come to you shortly, is that in relation to do you want
to see scrutiny of the implication of the changes or do you want to know more about
what's coming?
I think that's…
Cllr Jon Whitehouse - 0:44:52
I mean the two things are clearly linked as we've just heard.
I mean having it on the agenda of place scrutiny on the 30th of June would allow members to
contribute to consultation response, I imagine it's a six -week or 12 -week consultation, is
it? Or having it on the September agenda would allow us to consider the implications of the
Council before it comes into force in October. So it seems to me one or both of those two
dates would be suitable.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:45:26
We do have the meetings of committee chairs and it might be one for them to decide where
it goes and when, but Councillor Dadd has indicated she would like to speak.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:45:35
Thank you, Chairman. Yes, I was going to raise it. I actually asked for it to be discussed
at the Chairman, Vice -Chairman briefing meeting on the 22nd, I think it is, and it will be
discussed then and what direction it needs to go as applicable if that
answered your question. Yes, so I think we'll have it noted in the minutes of
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:45:56
this meeting that it was your request to see that discussed and it looks like
it's already going to be discussed by the chairs anyway but that has been
formally registered and rightly so very important topic.
Cllr Jeane Lea - 0:46:12
Councillor Lee. Thank you Chairman. We have a community safety partnership and
police come every year and discuss things.
I wondered if it's a possibility that we could
get the fire service to come because they come
around and they cheque people's fire alarms and
they actually will put them in.
And most people don't know about these things.
And all you get is people complaining in Waltham
Abbey, oh, we're paying all this money and we've got
no fire service.
And I think it would be very good for the fire
service to come so that, you know, the public can
know exactly what they're doing for us.
Yes, so I think it would be wise in this instance
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:46:46
to also send to the chairs meeting
a query about the fire service coming.
And of course, that is also linked to,
it is a police, fire and crime commission that we have here.
So perhaps somebody from that office to explain more
on the deeper dive into the fire service,
which I actually feel sometimes gets overlooked.
So I think that's a very good point.
I'm mindful that we don't want to be obsessed
with external organisations,
but also those external organisations
which has had huge impacts on our residents
and they expect us to scrutinise them.
Does anybody else have anything for the work programme?
There was one, I had a meeting before this meeting
with officers just to advise members.
It's something I have also asked to be discussed by chairs
in terms of suitability is the learnings
from the legal action with relating to the Bell Hotel,
but also the planning aspect to that.
I appreciate it's still an ongoing matter financially.
So I've asked for that to be considered
where best placed to be scrutinised.
And I'm also very keen to look at what
external organisations also are relevant
for us to be looking into.
I know the TFL meeting was a huge success
and whether or not it's best placed for this committee
or special meetings of wider membership.
If no one else has any further matters for the work programme,
I will move on.
I think something to be pointed out as a result of the call -in is the process that was discussed.
I would really encourage Councillor George to speak to the Constitution Working Group
about that as well because I think it's right that there's been not quite an apology but
an understanding that things could have been better communication -wise.
I don't think that's for this committee to look at but I think it's definitely worthy
of further discussion.
So I will move on to the item relating to the task
and finish panel, yeah, which is the proposal
is Councillor Dadd.
The members just to be aware, we have the summary
of a task and finish panel on proposed by Councillor Dadd
which is on page 34.
Now this was approved in principle by overview
and scrutiny last year and will consider planning matters
relating to the green belt land in the district
and in particular land classified as best and most versatile food producing land.
It has received widespread support which can be seen also on page 34.
Can I ask if there are any proposals for a chairman of the panel?
Councillor McCann.
Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Craig McCann - 0:49:22
I would like to propose Councillor Dadd as the chair of the task and finish panel.
Thank you.
Do we have a seconder?
Is there a seconder required?
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:49:28
Do we have a seconder?
Councillor Lucas and Councillor Bassett.
Councillor Lucas was first, I'm sorry.
Always room for improvement.
Councillor Lucas, do you second that?
I'm happy to second that proposal.
Cllr Jodie Lucas - 0:49:42
Thank you very much.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:49:45
Are there any other nominations for chairman of the task and finish panel?
In that case, can the committee agree to elect Councillor Mary Dadd as the chairman of the
panel? Agreed?
Agreed. And can we agree that the TOR scope membership
and proposed timescales for the task and finish panel will be established by the chairman
with support from relevant officers and agreement of the panel?
Agreed. Thank you.
And I can request that we received updates obviously
from the panel on your progress.
And as a rural Councillor,
I take significant interest in it anyway.
Congratulations, Madam chairman of the task
and finish panel.

10 COUNCIL'S CORPORATE PRIORITIES

So item 10, we have our councils corporate priority.
Oh, sorry, Councillor Dadd.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:50:40
I understood that also at this committee,
you wanted to know panel members

9 Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Work Programme

and I have had 11 people who would like to be members,
if you'd like me to read those out.
I'm happy for you to read them for the sake of the minutes,
but obviously we're keen to have an update,
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:50:59
and we're also keen to hear your progress,
but I'm very happy to have them,
so they're a matter of reference.
I think it might be nice for them.
Yeah, sure.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:51:05
That's Councillor Amos, Councillor Brahe,
Councillor Bromwich, Councillor Church,
Councillor Barbara Cohen, myself, Councillor George, Councillor Will Kaufman,
Councillor McCann, Councillor Morris and Councillor Sharif and I think that is
quite a good spread across the groups and across the district and I do thank
all those councillors very much and I will be getting in touch with them as
quickly as possible to have our first meeting. Thank you.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:51:39
Thank you Councillor Dunham. Thank you to all members who are involved in that task and finish.

10 COUNCIL'S CORPORATE PRIORITIES

We'll move on to item 10, which is the Council's corporate priorities.
Thank you to the Leader of the Council for being here this evening.
Can I please ask the Leader of the Council to present the Council's corporate priorities
for 2026 -2027.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:51:55
Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Members.
The corporate plan is our key strategic document which we base all our priorities on for the
coming year.
So I'd recommend any member to take the opportunity to read through the corporate plan and understand what our priorities are on the broader aspects of the Council.
I will just pick out a few areas this evening because obviously the extent that the Council operates is vast and there are some key areas that I think need some concentration this year.
Of course housing is always important to us and making sure that our stock stays in good condition.
And of course this year we have a regulatory inspection being done of our housing stock
and processes, which is really important that we do well.
And I know we will, but that's important to us.
Once again, obviously we have a Council House Building Programme that last year supplied
us with 28 new homes with QALYST over in Wolf Mabie, and we will continue to press to deliver
new council homes across the district and of course the acquisition this evening will
be helpful to us in a rural area where we have a demand for affordable homes for our
local residents. And of course that's always on our mind. We have a homelessness problem
in this district as it, like most districts across the country at the moment, our homelessness
tends to be centred around young families and in particular needs to be addressed as
So it's really important that we keep a close focus on that because when you're dealing with homelessness, of course
It doesn't just affect the housing revenue account
It really impacts upon the general fund and of course with our budget issues at the present time
That is something we need to address
Waste and recycling we had a major change in our waste and recycling last year
It seems to have gone well and has bedded down now and making good progress
I know I'm sure Councillor Balcom will make some comments on it later on on how well they're achieving on their collection rates now
There's always going to be teething problems when you make major changes
and of course we went from having a
commingled food and green waste to having separate food waste and
Green waste and that has been quite an upheaval to the system of what we originally put in place
But it's been done well and what's really pleasing for TVS is that they've been recommended and recognised
nationally for awards which I think is really good for a company in its infancy as we know.
It's really important that we continue to keep our commercial estates running well and
of course we have a master plan, SS out for North World and we need to concentrate on
that as well.
The rent roll that we receive from our estate is really important to our budgetary position
And Qualis have been doing a really good job of managing that, which you'll hear about later on.
They've increased our rent roll substantially, but we still need to make sure we do our best that we can from our commercial estate.
It's a big part of our revenue streams that we require.
And of course, we also have the Northfield Master Plan as we seek to see Google come to the next stage of their planning application and see that start to be constructed.
the money that we receive from that estate in particular for the future and
its impact upon the local economic economy. It's really substantial. I've
been in a meeting this morning in London and myself and Mr Winslow were both
surprised by the amount of economic growth that they say will come from
that Google site when it's actually built. It's only 700 people being
employed, but it's the additional growth that it brings
with it, and we're keen to make sure through the Northfield
master plan that we get a cluster of development of
similar type of businesses coming to the area for the
benefit of our young people in the future and addressing some
of the employment aims that we have.
The budget position continues to concern us,
as you can imagine.
Last year's multiyear settlement from government
was not kind to us.
What it effectively means is that not only are we seeing a
year -on -year reduction in the grant from government,
we're also seeing the impacts of inflation and interest rates
and the cost of contracts increasing.
The real problem comes, as we know,
we're in the middle of a war at the moment in Iran,
which is going to push up interest rates in the summer
that has been estimated, and of course inflation will start
to rise shortly.
That will impact us, and it means that the grant
that we have from government doesn't go as far
as we would wish, but we're making good plans
for the budget in the year going forward.
And I know it's our ambition that we continue
to work in the consensual way that we have across
the chamber to make sure that we get the best
budget for our district.
Some of those decisions we made last year
were really important to us, and that's securing
the three -year funding to the CAB.
and I know that members support that.
I can't go by without saying that local government
reorganisation, whilst we don't know timescales completely
as yet, we have to work to what the government has set out
within their policy, and we will see what happens in the next few
months as to whether that progresses on that timeline.
I have to say, for financial sustainability,
see local government reorganisation is a necessity.
If we don't do local government reorganisation, there will be a need for a very stringent
transformation programme and really will mean us finding some substantial savings.
So I hope for the sake of our residents that local government reorganisation goes forward.
I think even though I was not a fan of the five, I would rather see that than no reorganisation
at all.
So I think that's really important to us.
We'll be keeping a watching eye on what's decided by government
in the coming weeks and pushing ahead from there.
Obviously, the local plan continues to be a big issue for us
in the implementation of the local plan.
We really do need to see those sites coming forward now
and start to get boots on the ground
in constructing some of those buildings,
because we do need to make sure
that we keep our five -year land supply healthy.
But of course we also know that the government is looking at areas like Hepping Forest hawkishly
and would like to see the numbers rise.
And we've got to fight really hard to protect our greenbelt as we move forward.
Chairman, I think that covers the key points of what we need to do, but I would recommend
that members go to the corporate plan for a really in -depth look if you're suffering
from insomnia.
Thank you, Councillor Whitburn.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 0:59:01
Councillor Murray, I think you had your hand up first.
Yes, thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:59:05
I don't intend responding to every point the leader made because we obviously don't see
this in advance and that's always been the custom and practise.
The first point I'll make is the report we've had tonight does confirm the way I voted at
the annual meeting.
I wasn't prepared to support a vote of no confidence in you at this stage.
And I thank you for the quality of the report you've given.
I was absolutely delighted that the first three things you mentioned were stock repairs
for our own housing, council housing, building new homes and the homelessness issue.
I think like all members, we understand the priority around those three.
Certainly in the ward I represent, which is one of the wards of highest deprivation as
shown by the usual census indicators that are used.
I was really pleased that you started off with those three.
I'm not going through every point you made.
I would agree with your comments about the waste recycling,
a massive change, and I have to say as a ward councillor,
relatively few teething problems.
I think in other parts of the district there may have been,
but I had relatively few teething problems.
And when there were teething problems,
I have to say our officers and TVS directly because I do email the chief executive of
TVS, fortunately not the chairman, Councillor Lucas, but I do email her quite regularly
and she responds, so that is good.
And then the other point I wanted to make before I ask my question that I do have an
area of concern about is I'm not saying every decision about commercial estates is right
because I'm not in a position to make that judgement and I certainly know some
of the Broadway shopkeepers in my in my ward would question some of the
decisions but again I have to say the level of communication and the level of
response I get from commercial estates under Qualis is infinitely better than
you ever got from EFDC and I will mention the officer by name Ian Mudge
very approachable, very proactive on commercial estate issues.
I'm thinking particularly of the issue we're having at the retail park
as regards boy races.
Couldn't have been more proactive.
So, full marks for qualities on that issue.
My question to the leader, and I think it's quite a reasonable question,
we are now a month into the new year.
But to my knowledge, and I did ask this question to the cabinet as well, so I think he knows
what's coming, to my knowledge we still only have seven out of the nine cabinet portfolio
holders in place and we still do not know who's responsible for what.
So does that mean that the seven portfolio holders we've got don't even know what they're
responsible for in detail?
So I think we do need some clarification.
We're four weeks in, why haven't we got the other two appointments and why haven't we
got the responsibilities for each portfolio holder yet?
Councillor Whitford.
Yeah, thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 1:02:31
And do you know, Councillor Murray, I was going to open my presentation this evening
with the layout of the cabinet.
It will be a seven -man cabinet and it will be very similar to what last year was with
a couple of bits moved around, obviously.
but obviously in the perfect world I'd like to have done something else but
where I am is where I am I've got a really good seven man cabinet all know
their roles all know how to take things forward and I have to say I'm very
lucky to have seven of us who really do engage with what we're meant to be doing.
Cllr Stephen Murray - 1:03:09
And they know their responsibilities in detail because you were going to look at those weren't you and then that will be my last comment Chairman.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 1:03:16
Chairman, they all know their roles and they all know what they're doing and they all know
what's involved in their particular cabinet areas.
Cllr Stephen Murray - 1:03:25
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 1:03:28
Sorry, Chairman, it's due to be put out I think within the next 24 hours.
Thank you.
Any other members?
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:03:34
I have some questions but I'm keen that the committee...
Okay, I'll ask my next question.
I'll ask Spark and have a question.
Thank you, leader, for your report.
There's three points I just wish to ask you about.
Firstly, in relation to LGR,
I note your support for LGR even with the revised option.
Given that the leader of Essex County Council,
Harlow Council, Rochford Council,
Furrock Council, I'm not sure of some of the others,
are taking the decision to prepare for LGR
as per government instruction,
but also resist what they believe to be a bad deal for their residents.
I note your previous position on the current deal not being one that you support.
I also note that your party campaigns in the election to resist this particular deal and
offer a referendum to the people on it.
Given that position, may I just ask why you are supportive of this deal, even though previously
you put on record your concerns about it being a bad deal, particularly very concerned, I
remember, noting your comments about the financial sustainability of the five versus the three.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 1:04:48
And as I think I said at the very beginning of my presentation, no deal at all is even
worse if we've been completely honest with ourselves and looking at the medium -term financial
strategy for councils across West Essex in particular and the level of debt that all
councils carry at the present time, I think not to do reorganisation would be folly.
However, I accept at the moment there are discussions ongoing between the Leader of
Essex and the Government to see whether or not there's a different way forward or a different
timetable.
I think the inevitability is that there has to be a change in the way that we do local
government and that will require a way forward.
the government with their decision, I personally believe that three was a better option.
I even had some hankering towards two at one point because you are, I tend to err towards the more financially sustainable,
but I understand the arguments for three and for five being more geographically placed.
But I've personally, I think we are doing the right thing by continuing to work.
I'm pleased that the county has taken that view as well,
that we continue to work towards the government's timeline
unless something else changes.
But local government reorganisation is really important to us
if we're going to actually deliver better services
for residents in the long term.
I think that you will see, particularly around highways,
bringing things back to a more local level will be good.
I think there is a lot of synergy
between the different authorities they're bringing together,
which will be a benefit.
I think the economic development elements to it will help us in the future.
So personally, I think for residents, it's important to get on with local government
reorganisation, at least follow the process and then see what comes from the leader of
the counties meeting with the government to see whether they changed their mind.
They've changed their mind on other things.
But be only too aware, if you don't do local government reorganisation, you have to do
fundamental transformation and that can be just as big a change and we've done
that and we've been doing that for years I've always said transformation is for
life not just for Christmas and you tend to be doing it forever but you do start
to get into a salami slicing effect and what we actually need is change.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:07:16
Given your view on process are you concerned that Harlow Council
appeared to have taken a very different view and if we are to be married to
Harlow and Uttlesford, does it concern you that as an authority they may not be in the
position Epping Forest is and the impact that could have on the new authority?
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 1:07:35
Where we are in the process at the moment is really a matter of officers working together
to put in place the structure to go to the next stage. We're not at the point of joint
committees yet or anything like that. So it's officers working together in a professional
way to put in place the foundations to build local government reorganisation.
Harlow have got a certain opinion because they're very much into their regeneration
packages at the present time, but when it comes to it, we're following the process,
we're now with the officers at that stage and it will move forward from there.
But I'm sure we'll have a much further idea by the autumn of where we stand.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:08:14
Thank you. It was in the press today that Newcastle Underline Council has saved £2 .2
million pounds by not having net zero fleet with their,
particularly with their waste vehicles.
Do you share a view that perhaps there would be some
financial benefit to this council having less focus on
commitment to any net zero commitment?
And may I finally just ask sort of link to this.
There clearly has been a breakdown in corporate
communications between the council and the people.
I know I felt that reception during the campaign,
but I also feel it every time I read the press.
What can we do differently, or what do you plan to do differently
as leader with this year to improve the relationship
between this council and its people,
a relationship that is clearly very broken at the moment?
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 1:09:02
Well I think we have to...
I see it slightly different from yourself, obviously.
I don't see that the communication links with the public have broken down.
I think what's changed, we're living through very different times, there is a cost of living
crisis that people are going through, high taxation, all those type of problems that
are really, really making people's lives more difficult now.
And therefore you've got a responsibility to review some of what you've been doing,
and some of what you've been doing, you'll do at a different pace.
But let's be honest, we've just come through a local election, you're right that people
said they were not happy, they wanted change in certain things.
But the change that they've been offered is on a national level.
What we're here to deal with is local issues and dealing with local problems.
So that's what we get on with and actually serving people and delivering on the things
that people care about.
Delivering those council homes that people need because they can't afford always to buy.
To make sure that we deliver on the local plan.
To make sure that we have good quality housing.
It is doing the right things that is most important.
Any other members of the committee?
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:10:15
Just a really quick one.
Cllr Smruti Patel - 1:10:19
I know the leaders always really articulate in order to explain the response.
But I think one really major point with this election is what I have noticed.
Is a lot of people now, okay, what is changing now?
Is anything going to change?
And they are actually really frustrated because what they were sold on was the national issues
which none of us can influence.
and I think that keeps coming up now in conversations because they do talk about what's locally,
is that going to change anything locally and no it won't because it's the national stuff.
I just want to add that.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:10:48
I think you might be misunderstood. It was a local election. People knew they were voting
in a local election on local issues. I certainly won my campaign on local issues but I think
we must be very careful not to insult people watching this meeting that they might be in
any way unaware that this was a local election. It was very much a local election on local
issues. I mean, I've got the leaflets myself from all parties on that. Any other members
wish to ask a question to the leader? Okay. In that case, thank you very much, leader.
Do you have any final remarks to the committee? I think we've got a very busy year ahead of
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 1:11:24
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:11:27
us. Thank you very much. I think we all agree on that one. Thank you, members. So we'll

11 Organisation Performance – Quarter 4 2025/26 Outturn and Priority Projects Update

now on to item 11 which is the organisation performance quarter 4, that's 25 -26, outturn
and priority projects update. Members, this is pages 35 -59 on your agenda pack. The next
item is the end of year organisational performance report. Paul and McGinnis will obviously take
this but may I just first of all thank all the officers for being in the Chamber this
I appreciate your very busy people and it's late as well.
I would be very grateful for the sake of new members.
If we could start with Ms McGuinness and go to Mr Johnson and perhaps back around the
semicircle the other way, just to briefly introduce yourself and your role in the organisation.
I think that would be very beneficial to members.
Thank you.
Thank you Chairman.
Paula Maginnis - 1:12:18
Well if I start with myself, I'm Paula McGuinness and I head up the Council's corporate services
services, and that includes KPIs, performance, our project management office, HR, legal,
DEM services, so a whole range of corporate services.
So that's why I'm presenting the report this evening.
Performance does fall in my area.
However, we've made a conscious decision that presenting the report, the KPIs belong to
organisation. What the committee will see is different service directors bringing this
report at the different committees. You won't have to listen to me wittering on.
This evening, just for, I was conscious that there could be...
Ms McGinnis, sorry, is it possible for the other officers to...
Oh, you want the introduction first.
If that's okay, yeah, I think that's very helpful for them.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, apologies, sorry. Yes.
Thank you, thank you.
James Warwick - 1:13:14
Hi, James Warwick, Service Director for Contracts, Partnerships and Procurement.
So I've got procurement contracts, waste, parking, leisure and the airfield, all the
fun stuff.
Evening, everyone.
Nuala Donnelly - 1:13:31
My name is Nuala Donnelly and I'm the Service Director for Finance.
Thank you.
Good evening.
Dawn Harrisson - 1:13:38
I'm Dawn Harrison.
I'm the Service Director for Housing and Property Services, which includes development
Ben Johnson - 1:13:48
and homelessness. Good evening all I'm Ben Johnson I'm the Managing Director of
Qualis Property Solutions so we're responsible for the maintenance and
commercial asset portfolios on behalf of the council. Thank you.
Mandy Thompson - 1:14:02
Hello good evening, I'm Amanda Thompson I'm the Service Director for Regulatory
Services which includes community resilience like Environmental
enforcement ASB, I've got environmental health, private sector housing and licencing team,
I've got environmental protection which includes country care, highway ranges, contaminated
land, land drainage and also fleet operations.
All the fun stuff as well, James.
You can't all have fun stuff, that's just not allowed.
The executive needs to sort that.
Fabrizio Ferrari - 1:14:35
Good evening councillors, I'm Fabrizio Ferrari, I'm the acting director for communities, so
in my portfolio area there is economic development, public health, inclusion and community development.
I do have the fun stuff.
Tracy Scott - 1:14:48
Good evening Councillors, I'm acting director Tracey Scott and I have customer service operations,
that's the customer service contact centre, the welcome area, old money reception and
I also oversee the formal complaints as well as compliments that come into the Council.
I was going to say, depending on the phone call,
you may have the fun stuff, but I imagine often the less fun
stuff.
I understand.
Matt Winslow - 1:15:17
Good evening, members.
My name's Matt Winslow.
I'm the service director for planning.
So that covers teams that deal with planning applications
and planning appeals, planning enforcement, place making,
links to Harlow and Guildstone Garden Town,
and building control.
Thank you very much.
And Paula, I'll hand back over to you.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:15:40
Thank you.
Thank you, Chairman.
Paula Maginnis - 1:15:42
I was conscious that we might have some new members here
this evening that are not familiar with this report.
So this report before the committee sets out
our final position in relation to the council's performance
for the calendar year 25 -26.
and we use KPIs as a mechanism to take a look at our performance across a range of service areas.
So this particular suite that we have and we're reporting on this evening was considered by this committee
and agreed for the beginning of this particular reporting period which started from the 1st of April 25.
KPIs are brought to this committee every quarter and we bring the committee's attention to
those areas that are not currently meeting its target.
In those cases, officers do provide what we call corrective actions and what they aim
to do is to improve the performance for the next quarter of setting out a timeline of
when that performance is due to improve.
So the report before the committee this evening provides an overall summary of each KPI indicating
where it has met the target, whether it's within tolerance or it didn't meet the target
and so therefore outside the tolerance that is set at the beginning of the year.
So we do split the report out into our three areas, which is stronger communities, stronger place, stronger council.
So under stronger communities, we have three KPIs that were met.
There have been a couple of misreporting, so there are five KPIs within that set that
have come in within tolerance and two that didn't meet the target.
Under stronger place, three KPIs were met, two were within tolerance and one did not
meet the target.
For stronger council, five KPIs were met.
One was within tolerance and two did not meet the target.
Within the report there is the detail and the comments and set out in Appendix A. There
is the out -term for all four quarters so you can see the trend of performance across all
of those KPIs.
So our KPI suite for 26 -27 will come to the next overview and scrutiny for their consideration.
And as we've already pointed out, we have a range of service directors here this evening
if members do want to ask some specific questions around each of the KPIs.
So thank you, Chairman.
Thank you very much.
Members, do you have any questions?
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:19:06
If not, I have a couple.
I'll allow you to look through the report.
My first question, OK, Councillor Whyatt.
Cllr Jon Whitehouse - 1:19:17
But yeah, I don't think the issues with the telephone
will become a surprise simply because of the volume of issues
that have happened over the last year.
And I notice also the reference between if more people are
to digital channels inevitably, perhaps, the reception and the telephone are dealing with
more complex inquiries. And I've seen that particularly hanging around the reception
area, how well can the staff there deal with people coming in who have struggled to access
council services in the other way, and that's appreciated. But that also means that if we
were having increasing reliance on digital services, we need to know that they're working
effectively and are delivering things.
And I just wonder, obviously they're outside the scope of
these KPIs, so how do we measure whether or not people are
getting the answers they need via, you know, the forms
and so forth.
I know that sometimes some forms I fill in sort of to
interdiscipline to avoid, others you get a very efficient
and rapid response.
That's a sort of general question.
I think particularly in planning is an area where people
somebody struggle to get a response that they find useful.
Paula Maginnis - 1:20:36
Okay, I was going to hand over specific questions to Tracey
from a customer and Matt from the point you raised
about planning.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councillor Whitehouse.
Tracy Scott - 1:20:46
Yeah, so it's a really good question that's been raised.
So as you said, some of our online journeys are absolutely
without getting too technical, integrated.
So from the minute you hit submit.
So for example, if your waste collection was missed or from those lines, it goes straight to TVS to get that done.
Some of our online journeys though are into a mailbox where my team would then triage that or forward that onto the appropriate teams.
So as much as we do want to channel shift into those spaces, which I think for those who are capable and able to,
So I guess some of the new members I think I spoke to on member induction day,
I did say, no, if you do have residents in your constituents who are able to do
a bit of online banking or do a bit of delivery, that sort of thing,
then to try our online processes.
Because it does free up the capacity of my team to deal with those more complex
queries.
Is there more digital innovation that needs to be done?
I definitely would agree.
How we try to track that end to end,
We do that as best as we can in the sense of a lot of the forms that we use.
In the back end of that we can pull reports to say, well, has that case been closed?
And we do monitor that in the sense of has it been responded to and what have you.
And if not, we chase up with those team managers just to say there's a response outstanding.
But yeah, I would, you know, I hope that's a suitable response. Thank you.
Matt Winslow - 1:22:22
Thanks, Chair. I think for planning, planning has been on a bit of a journey over the last
20 years, whatever local authority you probably have operated in, where there's been a nationally
sponsored shift to a digital system through the government's planning portal. A lot of our
inquiries and applications get submitted through that third party facility. We're seeing it now
that that landscape is changing with the emergence of new AI software that supports applicants
and agents in terms of their inquiries that are coming into us.
We monitor and Tracey's just alluded to some of the intelligence that we get through the
complaints or compliments routes.
officers review those to determine if there are any other activities or services which
we don't provide at the moment that we could provide to improve that experience, particularly
for residents, people who may not necessarily know the ins and outs of the planning system.
We've identified in our service plan this year that that's an area where we would like
to invest a little bit more and perhaps do things a bit differently recognising that's
a gap. But we do take on board the complaints that we do receive and review them to determine
if there's anything else that we can do to improve the service.
Councillor Whitehouse?
Cllr Jon Whitehouse - 1:24:02
Yeah, I mean I think and I appreciate that pre -application consultations, post -application
reviews, the chargeable services and there's revenue opportunities there but I think, I mean
this is probably something to take up separately, I think sometimes the boundary between answering
a question and saying to everything you've got to go to our chargeable service is perhaps not
as consistent and as clear as perhaps it could be and I'm glad to hear that you're looking
into those sort of bits. Thanks. Thank you. Members I'm where we've still got five quite heavy items
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:24:32
on our agenda so we obviously must go through anything members wouldn't want to.
Would anybody else like to ask a question? Yes Councillor Murray?
Cllr Stephen Murray - 1:24:47
Yes yes. I mean really just for the purpose of the meeting the reason why I
haven't got any questions is that we've looked at this a number of times these
and then and the areas that are in red haven't significantly changed and we've
a full explanation on the agenda and a full explanation at previous meetings. So I think
it's worth making that point, otherwise it looks as if we're not interested in these.
We are extremely interested in them.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:25:14
I have two quick -fire questions if I may. The first one is, following the opening of
the Epping Leisure Centre, has there been any impact on attendance at some of the other
leisure centres in the district, or is it that we have just got more people – I hope
this is the case, more people taking part in sport.
Okay, I'll hand you over to James. Thank you.
James Warwick - 1:25:35
I'm pleased to say, yeah, there's a significant increase in Eppin, so obviously there's a
new pool, so swim membership, Learn to Swim programmes have increased. There was naturally
then some migration so people from the other centres have moved to Eppin if they already,
especially if they already live in Eppin, but not anything significantly, everything
kind of really what we would anticipate. Some of the other centres saw a slight decrease
over the last quarter and even prior to Epping Leisure Centre opening.
So the new Leisure Centre has had a real positive overall on the contract and membership and
now we haven't seen a huge migration.
So it could be the case that there are people in Epping that would like to go swimming that
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:26:31
couldn't do it before but now can as opposed to people not doing it anymore.
Great, that's great.
My second question is relating to planning.
Since the introduction of the plan advisory service advice which changed our constitutional
delivery of planning committees, has there been an improvement in appeals and financial
costs to the council?
Matt Winslow - 1:27:05
I think it's still an area that we need to see further a performance improvement over
the course of the next year. The issue to do with the performance measure that the government
uses to determine whether it's to intervene in the local planning authority looks over
data of the last two years. So there's a lag to experience the improvement. As looked at
in the performance report, we should start to see a fall or an improvement, if you like,
in the number of appeals lost on major planning applications. I hope that answers your question,
Chair. Yes, thank you.
Councillor Morris.
Sorry, I was on a, thank you Chairman,
I was on a similar theme.
Cllr Martin Morris - 1:27:53
So yeah, it's red, the major applications KPI.
It mentions work is continuing to avoid the possibility
of having planning power strip.
What is the work?
Just briefly.
Through you Chair.
Matt Winslow - 1:28:09
So that's the continued engagement
of the planning advisory service.
And that's why they came in to do their,
They did a review at the latter part of last year to consider how the council had done
in implementing the series of recommendations that it had made in 2024, including the changes
to committee structure, but that wasn't their sole recommendation.
It's also included now more raised dialogue with MHCLG.
So Mr. Small, my predecessor and myself, we now engage with MHCLG as effectively the adjudicators
as to whether or not the Secretary of State will use his powers to levy a degree of intervention
on the local planning authority.
And there is also that sort of continued effort to try and improve the service just generally
because that's what we would want to do to deliver a good local planning authority.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:29:13
Thank you and I think I may ask a very simple, any other members who have a question?
Councillor Lee.
My only complaint is the phones.
Cllr Jeane Lea - 1:29:19
If you bring people up here, they're amazing downstairs, but I have a lot of people that
will never be able to master computers or anything else.
And I think, and I don't use my computer for that reason,
because when they're complaining to me,
I've got to see if what they're telling me is the truth.
And I've hung on myself for an hour.
There's a couple of people if I ring,
always reply or answer,
but sadly you're hanging on the phone too long
and people aren't getting the answers they want.
And there's always going to be people.
You can't just block them off, I'm afraid.
Well, Councillor Lee, the chairman of this committee
is one of those people that can't stand
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:29:59
all this digital stuff, so don't worry,
I assume it's just one generation.
Would anyone like to, I think the question there really,
and it's a very good one, there are just people
that are not technically literate,
there are people that prefer to speak to somebody,
there are some matters that are just not able
to be hooked on a hook.
So how are we reaching out to those people?
Ms. Scott.
Thank you, thank you, Chair.
Tracy Scott - 1:30:21
So what I'd want to, I guess, start from is,
We're not looking to ever eradicate the phone line.
So just to put that out there, we don't want to say it's going
to be 100 % online and a phone line will never exist.
However, as I said earlier, it's more of where somebody is able
to, please can they.
So we did some analysis some time ago where we found out that
around 65 % of people called us just because they wanted to,
not because they needed to, but because they wanted to.
So that's capacity where there's somebody who really needed to,
could have got through to us and got through to us quicker.
Just to give context, I have seven people who sit and man my phone lines.
It's not a plethora of people.
There's an assumption that call centres are rows and rows of people answering
calls.
I have a team of seven who manage roughly 250 calls a day on a good day.
So, all we're looking to do is just to create capacity.
There are times, yes, the wait times have been long.
Is that something I'm happy with?
No, I'm not.
We have put digital things in place such as,
a bit similar to your doctor surgery,
if you don't want to wait, press now and we'll hold your place
in the queue, and it calls you back.
So, we're trying to put innovation in to try and help
and alleviate where we can.
But where we can.
But I think the ultimate thing is we're doing the best that we can
to try and create that capacity and get that phone answered quicker for you.
During the rollout we did have some long wait times.
Some of it was just purely, we thought people were registering at a nice pace
but some people come the 1st of April decided they wanted to call on that day
in that week and that kind of the demand was higher than we could manage as well.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:32:22
Thank you Ms Scott. Any other members? Oh Councillor McCann.
Cllr Craig McCann - 1:32:29
Thank you Chair. Page 54 the KPI around number of fly tipping incidents. Now I've raised this before
this question for Mayor Thompson around I suppose the appropriateness of that as a KPI. I'd like to
see something more, I think, driven by the performance of officers.
So a number of flight incidents, that's quite passive.
I've recommended this before around potentially a KPI that talks about the responsiveness
of officers when they receive obviously notification there is a flight of incidents.
I can testify for the fact that there's the Council for Abridge that officers have been
actually brilliant in responding to flight of incidents.
But I think we need something that captures the good performance but also if there's an
issue around a lack of attendance at the flight.
So I know previously we've discussed this,
and you said that you were going to look at the KPIs here
to make them potentially more nuanced.
But is there a time scale on that at all, please?
Mandy Thompson - 1:33:26
Yeah, I'm pleased to say we're starting
to embed the new system, because we
was upgraded in the old computer system that they were using.
We've just upgraded to the new system,
and we'll be having a suite of reports built,
especially for us, which will give us this information that you are asking for.
And actually it's what we want as well so that we can monitor it.
Unfortunately, the old system was pretty much broken and unsupported because it was quite old.
The new system, we have set aside some time and we're going to have a suite of reports
that will give us exactly what you're asking for.
On a good note with fly tipping, a positive storey, we raised the fly tipping fixed penalty
notice to the maximum.
I think we spoke about that at the last place committee.
I can just confirm that we've just had our first maximum £1 ,000 fixed penalty paid at
Derby Drive, which was a known hot spot.
the offender was from Brooker Road
and it was their contract cleaner,
but they've paid for it.
They've paid the full amount without question.
So I think it's a real positive storey,
although the storey of flight is perhaps
not where we want it to be.
But I think when we come back to place in September,
hopefully we'll have some good news storeys there.
Thank you, Councillor Lucas.
Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:34:51
I was just gonna come back to Councillor McCann
Cllr Jodie Lucas - 1:34:56
and just to add to Madge Thompson's response, that TVS, I know that it may not be exactly
what you're asking for, but TVS are tracking and it is available how quickly they're responding
to those fly tipping incidents. So they're definitely collating that data as well. So
it isn't just in the EFA, it is being recorded somewhere and it is trackable. So I'm sure,
and also whilst I'm speaking I will give her apologies now that Rosa, managing director
for TVS, couldn't be present this evening just for some family issues so I will just
give her apologies for that but I'm sure she would have answered exactly that and be
happy to feed back to you further if it's necessary, probably via the portfolio holder
or myself.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:35:43
Thank you, Councillor Duda, because Councillor Murray and I have Councillor Morgan.
Cllr Stephen Murray - 1:35:47
This might just be useful because I had an example of fly tipping at the weekend and
I'm told by TVS this is the system they now use. They picked up the report on the Monday,
they sent out investigatory offices on the Tuesday, decided that there wasn't any meaningful
investigation that could take place, reported it for pick up on the Wednesday and it was
picked up on the Thursday. So if that is the system they are working, as a member I'm quite
satisfied with that. Obviously if there are emergency issues around a fly tip
there probably would have to be a faster time scale but given the nature of the
fly tip I thought that was a very good response. Thank you Councillor Murray.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:36:27
Cllr Lisa Morgan - 1:36:33
Councillor Morgan. Thank you chair and I've just got to say TFS I think are
really really good at fly tipping I think on 14 of the fly tips. Collecting fly tipping I hope.
They are not flight attendants, on the collection of flight attendants.
On the 14 I reported in the second half of last month, I think 12 of them were actually
cleared in less than 48 hours, so they were absolutely fantastic.
But what I would like to know is where are we year on year with the fines, because I
know last year I was disgusted that we only raised just over £6 ,000, and I would like
to know where we are year on year at the moment. I know we only just got into it in the first
month but it would be nice to know. Thank you.
Mandy Thompson - 1:37:17
Yeah, that's something that we'll be reporting on for you. I can say that I think in April,
I've got it here, I think in the last quarter they've issued over 16 fines already for
sort of like fly tipping. So that's obviously going to be recorded and that will come out
in the suite of reports. So the way they're working with TVS now is much more proactive
in terms of TVS will go out. If there is evidence there it will get left for the officers to
go to, which is what you're experiencing, and if there's nothing there then it just
goes and gets referred through for getting collected. So that means the officers can
actually focus on where there is the evidence and start dealing with those, the offenders
as if to sort of like progress that quicker.
I think Councillor Morgan.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:38:11
And I believe Councillor McCann,
Cllr Lisa Morgan - 1:38:13
I might not be here,
but I think last time you mentioned about cameras,
about for flight tip in,
and that we only had a few of them.
Where about, where are we on that?
Have we got any more or are we still down to the form?
I'm very aware it is a webcast meeting,
so please feel free to be vague with your answer
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:38:30
and maybe do a more detailed answer
to the member in private just for the...
Good question, I just never know.
The fly tippers might be watching us all.
We can smile and tell them we're coming for them.
Councillor Bassett.
Thank you.
While we're on this, it just,
Cllr Richard Bassett - 1:38:46
something clicked in my brain.
Does do it occasionally.
We do get a lot of industrial size fly tipping
in this area and I think I saw one in progress
on the way here tonight.
I should double cheque it on the way back.
These are normally have to be referred to the
environment agency and they are very slow because if
they do catch them it's a very large fine.
What do we do about that link with them?
Because I know last time I chatted to them they had
about six teams covering the whole of the east of
England which is not exactly going to catch a lot.
Are we linking more with them because I think we are
seeing much more what I would call large scale flight
have been appearing in this district.
Yeah, no, I absolutely agree.
Mandy Thompson - 1:39:40
It really is an excriminal activity at the end of the day.
The team, the service manager is working closely
with the environment agency and Essex County Council
to sort of like try and work collaboratively
to sort of tackle some of these bigger issues
and sort of get like an action plan in place
for certain hotspots and where it's happening.
So I don't particularly want to go into too much detail here, but if we place scrutiny in September
We'll give another full update. I can reassure you that they're working with all the different agencies that they need to
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:40:13
Thank you, and thank you to your team for the prosecutions that we've seen as well recently and credit to all of you
And I have just one question before we move on and it's to each of you obviously
you all represent large numbers of this workforce here and
and many of them are residents too.
And if they're motivated and they're happy at work,
they'll perform better, we know that.
So you have that responsibility.
And I just want to ask each of you,
as we move into LGR,
how are you keeping your teams motivated
to keep things really efficient,
to keep these KPIs really solid,
knowing that potentially the organisation
might be abolished?
How are you keeping your teams motivated?
I'm really keen to hear about this
because it's something that I've had a long discussion
with a county today.
I don't know where.
Who would like to start?
Paul, go in the same order.
Paula Maginnis - 1:41:01
So in corporate services but across the council we do have a process of one -to -ones where
employees meet with their line manager on a regular basis.
We've done a slight reset and any concerns or issues with the employee, from the employee,
can be raised and discussed.
We have an employee forum, again corporately.
In corporate services, we have regular management team meetings.
We have bi -monthly corporate, the whole of corporate services come together.
Our next session is being led on LGR and working through some of their concerns and their issues,
taking questions, but we do have regular updates.
And that's, I think, how you keep the motivation
is by engaging with your employees.
Thank you.
Mr. Lawrence.
James Warwick - 1:42:04
What Paul has said.
Yeah, communicating, keeping staff engaged,
keeping informed.
I think the nature of my service areas,
they're in a relatively good place.
that they're strong services so staff see it as an opportunity, certainly around waste, parking.
I think the people that are involved with parking would love to have on street and have direct
control and influence over on street. So yes, keep them informed and at the moment they're
motivated and enthused because they see lots of opportunities.
Nuala Donnelly - 1:42:47
I think from a finance perspective, I think the team do have some concerns about what
the future looks like. At the moment we're heads down kind of task -orientated about getting
finalising our year -end accounts and moving on to budget settings. So we're very cyclical,
so we have jobs to do and very strict targets. So we're working through those, but at the
need to do for LGR, planning that into a very busy workload
over the next, you know, normal workload.
So I think, yes, communication and sharing information as we
have it and has come through and just helping them shape that
next few months.
Thank you.
Ms. Harrison.
Dawn Harrisson - 1:43:31
Thank you.
I mean, I think it's the same as my colleagues have already said,
but in terms of housing and property services,
whether it exists or not, we still have the homes,
we still have the people, we still need to provide good
quality homes and we want people to flourish and everybody is on board with
that and knows that it's business as usual and we will continue to deliver
Ben Johnson - 1:43:56
services for our residents. I think from a QALYST perspective you know we've been
communicating with staff on a regular basis I think the reality for us is we'll
be probably further down the line so the message to staff is you know while
while there is that disruption going through LGR,
which probably be more in the council to start with,
we're here to continue to deliver,
you know, and deliver for EFDC and its residents.
And I think we've absolutely be selling it
as an opportunity for us to grow and expand.
And we wanna position ourselves really strongly,
which is what part of the business plan
that we're talking about later.
Thank you.
Ms. Thompson.
Mandy Thompson - 1:44:38
I think my colleagues have probably said most of what I would have said, just to echo what
they're saying. Frontline enforcement is always going to be there, be it whether we're part
of the unitary or separate. So it's very much business as usual, very open and transparent,
sharing information as much as we can. The officers have got working relationships with
colleagues in the other areas.
So that's sort of like maintaining those relationships
and seeing where we can work collaboratively.
So positive.
Thank you.
Thanks, Chair.
I'll reiterate what my colleagues have said.
Fabrizio Ferrari - 1:45:14
Yeah, the communication, sharing information is key.
But actually for our area, people are really excited.
I think most of my team are really excited because the
opportunities that will come with the devolved powers around
communities, around economic development, around skills,
particularly public health, all of that is something that we can
make a real difference in.
And I think it's going to be a great opportunity,
particularly for people as well, individuals to develop
and progress in their careers, but actually the opportunities
we have to make a real change across our district.
Thank you.
Tracy Scott - 1:45:44
For customer services, yeah, the team are very engaged.
I mean, there are moments where there is a bit of uncertainty
or clarity is required, and I think that's where communication
is key.
As leaders and as directors, service managers,
as team managers, we've been on some leadership pathways
to how we address those sort of things,
what's within our gift, what's not within our gift.
But the key thing has been, when I don't know,
I will tell you I don't know and make that quite clear.
But customer service is always going through transformation.
We pause if it's not a bin rolled out,
it's a new waste provider.
So I think my team thrive a little bit
on that kind of changes coming.
And I think almost they're a little bit like
bobbins wound up waiting to be let loose a little bit.
So if anything, that's probably the frustration.
But what I would say what's keeping them motivated and
engaged is a lot of the things that we've gone through on the
leadership programme and just reminding them, if you have
got any uncertainty, come and talk to us about it.
What thoughts have you got?
Because even at that level, we don't want it done to them.
We want to do it with you.
So that colleague engagement and keeping that engagement
alive throughout the process has been key.
Thank you.
So finally, but in no way least.
Matt Winslow - 1:46:55
Running last means that most of my colleagues have probably said all that I was going to
say.
I think for planning and for the built environment services, it's interesting to talk, we talk
obviously a lot at district level about local government reorganisation, but some of the
bigger changes and challenges for planning will take place as part of devolution, the
introduction of an Essex -wide development strategy, for example, changes how Epping
would operate now and how the West Essex Authority, should it be created, operate to.
As colleagues have said, what's been very important is ensuring that we are entering
into dialogue with staff.
They don't feel done to.
They know when we don't know the answers, so being quite honest with them, but giving
them the space to talk about those concerns.
In planning, we held a spring directorate workshop in March and LGR came up quite a
lot in various post -it notes.
I'm sure you can probably imagine the kind of exercise we were going through.
But it was just to provide them with a space to air those concerns.
But I'm pleased to say that actually there was a number of people as well who were quite
motivated by the change that could be around the corner because a new planning authority
would end up being created and that obviously does provide opportunities for them too.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:48:40
I know Ms Small wants to speak but I just want to say please pass on to your teams as
as a counsellor, I'm sure many will agree
that we understand how heartfelt it must feel
to work for an organisation for years and years
and years and years and maybe feel that something's
happening to you, so I'm really reassured
that you're taking your colleagues with you
and your teams with you on this journey,
but please pass it back that it's in all the conversation
about money and this option, that option,
it's not lost on us how it might feel
for someone in your team, especially if they've been here,
for decades even, please pass that back,
especially to the ones that have been here for decades.
I know they talk to me and I know how they feel
and I want it to be known and noted that we understand.
Mr. Small.
Thank you, chair.
I mean, I'm really lucky and I acknowledge it often really
Andrew Small - 1:49:23
to have an excellent leadership team.
I think the council is very lucky too.
And they in turn have built a workforce
that delivers excellent services to the council.
So we're nothing without our staff
and we fully acknowledge that.
I'm also pleased for you to hear that there's an amount of enthusiasm about the change in
the journey really as well.
I think that will serve us and our residents really well going into an LGR process when
we will hopefully lead with our experience and passion and enthusiasm for developing
excellent services for our residents into the future.
Communications is key.
Absolutely.
we need to make sure that all staff are properly,
we're all grown ups, they wanna hear it firsthand
and we do our best to make sure that they do.
But more importantly, we listen as well
and take on board there and listen to their concerns
and do what we can to address those where we're able to.
And please tell them that we wanna hear,
if they've got any concerns,
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:50:27
we wanna hear as councillors never to be shy.
Mr. Councillor Murray.
Yes, I don't want to be controversial, Chairman
Cllr Stephen Murray - 1:50:34
but I always say as I feel, everything I've heard tonight
and everything I've just heard just shows
that Epping Forest is not broken.
It doesn't get everything right,
but I read time and time again in recent weeks
that Epping Forest is broken, and it so annoyed me.
And everything I've heard tonight
and everything I've just heard from officers
shows how wide a mark that accusation is.
Thank you. The electorate took a different view, but is there anyone else that wishes
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:51:03
to speak on this matter? If not, we'll move on to thank you very much, all of you, for
being here this evening and for being here in person as well. It's really appreciated
and I appreciate you may wish to leave and if you do, please do if you're not required

12 Budget Monitoring Report 2025-26 Quarter 4

for any other items. Thank you for being here. Thank you for your reports. I'll give you
the budget monitoring, sorry, we must note that report,
which I take as noted, yeah.
The budget monitoring reports,
which is the 2025 -26 quarter,
this is pages 60 to 86 in your agenda.
Do we have Councillor Whitbread?
She's travelling.
Oh, okay, in that case, then Mr. Owen,
Councillor Hollywood isn't here,
so Mr. Owen will take us through this report.
And members, it is worth noting this report
has been out there for a while,
and this is simply for noting.
Owen Sparks - 1:52:02
Thank you, Chair. This report was actually considered by Cabinet on 1 June. Normally
it would come to scrutiny first, but it's really just about the planning of the meeting
dates really, and obviously to make sure that members were aware of the outturn as early
as possible so they could comment on it. As outlined, this provides the provisional outturn
for last year, 25 -26. It is still subject to final tweaking and obviously it will be
subject to audit over the summer and the autumn. In summary, the general fund shows an underspend
of just over £2 .6 million, the HRA of £5 .88 million underspent, general fund capital £26 .38
million and the HRA capital £25 .6 million. In the report, there's detailed analysis
of where these variances occurred. Just in the general fund position firstly, the underspend
videos are mixed with service under spenders under 2 million pounds and also additional
income and funding of just over 0 .6 million pounds. So some of the key pressures again
we have spoken about at this committee a number of times and we've touched upon already this
evening. We've got temporary accommodation, dry recycling income which we've spoken about
a number of times with the market for the sale of the dry recycling has reduced the
prices available. Obviously we've got legal costs to do with the Bell Hotel and the costs
there and increase the bad debt provision to reflect really the methodology used in
recoverability. And a number of underspends as well, so around ICT, the surplus from TVS,
additional planning income that's received, some contributions, the domestic county council
support our raise strategy roll out and some general underspends around vacancies as well.
So a lot of these underspends have already been considered and taken into account as
part of the budget setting in last year, so obviously we fore -cost some of those earlier
on in the year, we built them into the budget strategy for next year.
So in the funding position, the business rate's pooling, so we received £800 ,000 on that,
and that's to do with how we collect and collect our business rates income across Essex to
reduce the amount we have to pay to the government as a tariff, so that's really about how we
manage that.
And we've also got some additional extended produced responsibility income that's really
again to do with supporting the recycling environment across the country. Then on the
HRA the underspend was mainly due to the underspend on the capital programme, so it incurred less
interest costs, we didn't borrow so much and also we didn't do any contributions from capital
and then some general underspends on maintenance and repairs and supervision costs. The capital
programme for the General Fund and the HRA, generally due to slippage on some projects.
So for example, the General Fund, the Booker O development again, which we spoke about
before, that was put on hold, really pending a longer term review. There's some delays
in IT spend, again, looking at the strategic review and linking to LGR and some of the
initiatives we want to progress as we align and work closely with our partners going forward.
and then obviously we had an underspend,
which we've spoken before on the development
of the leisure centre in Epping.
So in the HRA capital programme,
the underspends are mainly due to slippage
on the house building programme
and on the acquisition programme.
And then on capital works,
well if it's under nine million pounds
on kitchens, bathrooms or windows,
a lot of that to do is really getting that
condition survey understanding
where to allocate those resources.
So, again, that's just in the context really, which we can't ignore, is the forecast going
forward and the budget gaps that we are predicting as part of the budget we set last year. So,
one and a half million pounds in 27 -28 and 2 .7 million pounds in 28 -29. So what we're
doing again is collectively as part of the budget development exercise that we're doing
for next year is looking at an out and understanding where some of those costs are one -off and
where they're ongoing and we'll build that into the budget strategy and obviously we'll
bring that back for members to consider and to review over the coming months.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:56:21
Thank you very much, Owen, for that. Members, are there any questions on the report? If
not, we're here simply to note its contents at this stage.
Councillor Murray?
Cllr Stephen Murray - 1:56:31
I'll make the point again because I think it's important this did go to cabinet and
therefore a number of us were able to ask the questions
that we wanted at cabinet
and I'm not gonna repeat them tonight.
Thank you.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 1:56:44
Okay, then members that's been noted.
I take that as noted.
Brilliant, thank you.

13 Options for Concessions for Garden Waste Subscriptions

Then item 13, this is options for concessions
for the garden way subscriptions.
Councillor Ray Balcom and Mr. Warwick are here as well.
And they're gonna outline report to the committee.
Members, this is on pages 87 to 91.
And I believe Councillor Balcom will start.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr Raymond Balcombe - 1:57:12
Firstly, I'd just like to pick up something
Councillor Whitford said earlier.
Last week, rather, we was at our second national award
for waste.
And I'm glad to say that TVS Limited
and Epping Forest District Council have jointly won
a national award for the best recycling
and waste service improvement in a Council 25.
The recognition reflects the significant progress we have made together in transforming waste
and recycling services across the district through our local authority.
Trading company model, the improvement, have delivered a more efficient and reliable customer -focused
service for residents.
The key achievements included were 34 % reduction in missed collections, 40 % reduction in missed
collection calls, 22 % reduction in service complaints, and these are the ones I like,
52 % increase in complements, and a 99 .9 % sustained collection rate.
This award is a clear demonstration of what can be achieved through
collaboration, innovation and a shared commitment to deliver a high quality
service for our residents. I would like to extend my thanks and congratulations
to the EFDC waste team and all the staff within TVS Limited for this outstanding
achievement. Moving on, the green bin. This is an officer's report, it's presented
for further discussion and I welcome your comments at this meeting. The report
sets out options for introducing a concessionary discount for Epping Forest
District Council garden waste service. The recommended approach is to introduce
a 25 % discount on the annual charge for residents in receipt of local Council tax support, aligning
our approach with Huddlesford District Council. The alternative options would be more complex
to implement and the Minister would place additional pressure on resources and would
result in a less efficient service.
James Warwick and myself are here.
I will hand over to James in case he wants to say a few more
about his report.
I'm pleased to answer any questions.
Mr. Warwick.
Thank you.
James Warwick - 1:59:58
Yeah, just so that the report that you have in front of you
is proposing a 25 % discount for those
that are in receipt of local accounts tax support
in developing this report been liaising closely
with Pete Freeman and his team in revs and benefits.
This mirrors the approach used
by Uttersford District Council.
The proposal is that the soonest this can be implemented
would be for any new subscriptions
concessions in the next financial year and any renewals. The rationale for this concession
is that it's target support for those on low -income households via the local council tax support,
which is means tested. This approach ensures that it's simple, transparent and fair and
avoids any complex eligibility cheques.
You'll see kind of all the figures in the report
are indicative of this stage.
Based on kind of, I think it was mid -May,
there was sort of just a shy of six and a half thousand
people, residents that are currently in receipt
of the local council tax support.
We don't anticipate that all of those residents
would take up, but obviously at this stage,
we don't know how many.
As council Belkham has pointed out,
we've kind of looked up other options
which are kind of more complex to administer
would have higher administrative costs.
They're not as transparent or as fair as this.
As mentioned, this would apply from the 1st of April.
Residents would need to provide proof of their council tax bill to claim this concession.
In conclusion, we believe that this provides a targeted modest concession scheme focused
on low -income households.
I'm happy to take any questions.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:02:31
I've got Councillor Murray first, then Councillor Brooks, then Councillor George.
So, Councillor Murray?
Okay, thank you Chairman.
Cllr Stephen Murray - 2:02:37
I welcome this. It's something that a number of us, including myself, across the Chamber were keen to see.
I think I do accept the principle that anything other than this mechanism, and there's an element of cluedness to it, I accept that.
is probably administratively too costly.
And we've got to remember the pressures that we know that are on the budget
and other things that we want to protect for the next financial year
when we're setting the next budget.
So this is going to have implications anyway
and I'm not sure we should have any more.
So I think this is about rights.
The mechanism is right and I think the level of discount is right.
The only two questions I did have was in terms of implementation.
If someone started an in -year application for a bin, which I understand they can do,
could we not start the 25 % reduction if they are in receipt of local council support before
April of next year?
I couldn't quite understand why we couldn't do that.
And are you saying that anyone that's in receipt
of council tax support at the moment
and has paid the 60 pounds,
we don't have an easy mechanism of refunding the,
what would it be, whatever, sorry, I'm not a maths teacher,
whatever it would be, the 75, you know,
you know what I'm trying to say.
Do we not have a mechanism to,
an easy mechanism to refund that?
James Warwick - 2:04:22
If I take the last question first,
yeah, we don't, it would be extremely complex.
We don't know how many, if we were to offer kind of a refund for that,
we simply don't know how many people that would be.
We haven't got a process in place to issue that refund.
Also the process to cheque their legibility
isn't in place yet.
Yet the report,
it's within reason, it's within members gift to say
when they want to implement it,
but I will caveat that please give officers enough time
to implement it.
So, and I think if we implement anything
in this financial year, you will get a backlash
of residents that have already paid
that may be in receipt of the local accounts tax.
So it was felt that it was a lot easier
to implement once for next year's garden waste charge.
If I just, before I move on to other colleagues,
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:05:46
I did a bit of mental referencing so you'll probably tell me I've done it wrong, but would
there be a view, I take your point about implementation and this is meant to help people not wind
them up, so would there be a logic to implementing it next year and then those that inquire then
tell them as they make their inquiries, as you didn't take last year's discount, they
were actually able to reduce it to £30 this year and it would be £45 the following year,
the numbers I think would be the same, but it would mean that you're not winding people
up, you're also not having to fork out a lot of refunds, you're also not overwhelming your
call centre with people wanting to see if they qualify anyway because there are many
people that will know they don't qualify but why not try, that's human nature. So would
there be a possibility of, you know, if this year is what it is, next year it's implemented
and for those that could have had it this year could have that discount applied so they
get an extra discount for that one year?
James Warwick - 2:06:47
Not being the person that kind of builds the IT forms
and everything, in theory, I think it is doable,
but again, it's not me to make that decision.
I'll hand that over to members.
You would have a year one, 30 pounds,
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:07:03
year two, 45 pounds, I think somebody with fiscal challenge,
they may not, but they may have budgeted this year
and made adaptions accordingly,
but that would perhaps alleviate that pressure.
Oh, Councillor Balcombe, did you want to add to that?
No.
Okay.
Then we'll move to Councillor Brooks.
And then I've got you, Councillor Shaw.
Thank you very much.
I also welcome this scheme.
Cllr Rose Brookes - 2:07:23
The recognise it would have been too complicated to do anything else.
It is something that residents have complained to me about.
The one thing, now I could have missed this in my rather tired state, but the one thing
I was looking for in this report was exact details on the take -up. I remember what Dave
Marsh said he was expecting of the take -up of the general population. And I also wondered,
when people move into an area, so you buy a house in Epping Forest in July, when you're
partway through the season, but the people you bought the house from didn't pay their
£60. Do they get a, is there any way they can get a discount?
James Warwick - 2:08:11
Take up, I don't have exact figures to hand. When this report was put together a few weeks
ago we were just under 22 ,500.
So our target was 18 ,400, I think.
So we've exceeded the original target in the report.
The current scheme doesn't offer any in -year discount.
It's a year a one -off yearly payment no matter when you sign up. I
Cllr Rose Brookes - 2:09:01
Know that's one thing a resident did raise with me and I have to say I do think they've got a bit of a point
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:09:09
Thank you council I will just remind members that we aren't able to debate the
Concepts it is simply to do with this report and the concession so I will remind them
I know as we get into this discussion it's easy to fall into a separate debate.
Councillor George.
Hi, thank you, Chair.
Cllr Mandy George - 2:09:25
Great news about this concession.
Question either for you or you, Owen.
What is the surplus per unit or per house still?
Because last year we discussed and it was £21 .52 per house per unit.
So what is it now?
Has it increased?
Has it increased?
before I ask my next question. We haven't reviewed it in detail since we
Owen Sparks - 2:09:52
did that report. Obviously we are mindful of as take -up increases at some point James
and Rosa may need additional crew and additional vehicles, we need to be careful about what
that tipping point is for those step costs. So all things have been equally similar to
what it was previously but there is that risk of James requiring more results as the numbers
increase which obviously is a stepped cost as part of living that service.
Cllr Mandy George - 2:10:18
So we will be given, this is an additional question now, so we will be given an update
of the upturn of residents taking on the green waste and payment and the increase and also
the increase of the profit margin. So that's going to lead into my other question.
Owen Sparks - 2:10:35
So the level of income will form part of the budget monitoring going forward as part of
that service. We weren't anticipating doing that as a separate event but it
will be in part of James's normal report and it will do as part of his financial
update that will come to members quarterly.
I've got Councillor Shaw and Councillor George.
Cllr Mandy George - 2:10:55
I'll just ask a few questions then listen to my next one.
So going back to the surplus of each unit, the £15 discount is brilliant, it's
But there's still then a surplus for TBS to make a profit on top of that.
Now, I'm really naive with benefits.
Does that include children, adults that have pension credits?
What kind of benefits is involved with that to get that discount for 25 %?
And I know this is not going to be liked, but I think personally that our elderly within our district should just get it for free.
or have a really heavy reduction to the service,
because most of them are on their pension,
they don't get a lot of money.
There are some pensioners that do have private pensions
and have got income coming in,
but not everyone has had that forefront
or even that ability or exposure to be able to do that.
So thank you.
James Warwick - 2:12:00
Yeah, Owen would like to answer this one actually.
Happy to come back to you.
Owen Sparks - 2:12:07
I think there's a couple of points there. One is obviously it's understanding what that
demand would be. And obviously what we do as part of the Council of Dutch and Scheme,
we have a separate mix between older people and vulnerable people. So we know what that
difference is. I think the other thing that's very important to bear in mind is we need
to look at this in the context of the overall budget and other decisions that members may
need to make around making savings to balance the budget next year and going forward as
well. So remember in the last item we got a budget gap of £1 .6 billion next year. That's
against the backdrop of inflation and increased interest rates for example. So again it's
just been mindful for members that we need to make those decisions in that strategic
view as well, notwithstanding each item individually is important to consider.
I'm conscious of the agenda and our time and so I'm going to move on to Councillor
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:12:58
Shaw and Councillor Morgan but I just want to cheque Mr Warwick did you have anything
to add on that? No. Oh sorry Mr Small who am I to stop the Chief Executive from speaking?
Floor is yours. Thank you I just think you've been really careful about just assuming because
Andrew Small - 2:13:13
somebody's on a pension that they can't afford to pay. I mean it's just not the case really
is it? There are many many people who are very well off in retirement. So what we need
is a mechanism to determine who needs support and who doesn't.
And the benefit system is one of those mechanisms that we could
use to help target limited resource to the right people.
I think, you know, the winter fuel payment was a good example
of, you know, went to everybody and cost the country an awful
lot of money.
And many people received it and questioned why they received it.
That's not to say that there aren't the people out there at
all who didn't need it.
And there are many people who actually genuinely did.
But what they always, what the government recognised
is it needed a way to target the people
who actually needed that resource
as opposed to giving away resource
to people who didn't need it.
Can I just say, the service doesn't make a profit either.
And profits, the service doesn't make a profit.
Profit's an emotive term in that it contributes
towards the overall costs of providing waste.
But it's not a profit in the sense
that a commercial organisation would recognise it.
Council George, I'm going to move on to other members,
but of course if there is anything you want to raise.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:14:27
I just want to come back quickly to support residents.
Cllr Mandy George - 2:14:31
If that's the case then, where if you know people
that have a really healthy pension and really rich pensioners, great.
There's many that I know that don't have a lot of money.
So maybe as a council, how can we get it out there to residents
that are elderly that don't know about the scheme and the system
that they can actually apply for it?
I know residents that are on the bread line that don't even have internet.
So how can we get it out there to help our residents?
Thank you.
The purpose of Odeon Security tonight is to send feedback to Cabinet.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:15:00
One of the things I have noted is that very point.
So that will be part of the feedback to Cabinet.
Councillor Shaw.
Cllr Geoff Shaw - 2:15:10
I think I'm the only person in the Chamber that's going to be against this because I've
I've had so many residents complaining about the charge for the rubbish collection.
And I think to immediately then to say, oh, well, some of you can have a credit,
I think we'll go against the majority of the residents that will be complaining,
especially if then in a year or two's time you decide to put the bill up for the rest of us.
So, no, I think I'm against it.
If anything, I think you should leave it for a while.
And if in a year or two's time you see that, yes, the revenues are coming in, then introduce
it.
I'd postpone it for at least a year, perhaps two years, and then reconsider it.
That's unless you include all pensioners.
Of course, if you include all pensioners, I'll be very much for it.
Thank you.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:16:01
I will add to the comments.
one of the things we need to mention is about consideration just to wait.
Cllr Lisa Morgan - 2:16:18
Councillor Morgan. Thank you. In fact James Warwick probably won't be able to answer
this because he's just as I put my hand up he actually answered half of it but
I'd like to know how many of these six hundred thousand that you mentioned
obviously that's not houses that's people how many houses are and how many
of them are in the current scheme.
And I know you can't answer me
because as soon as I put my hand up, you said,
I don't have that information,
but maybe you could come back to all councillors on that
when you finally get around to looking at it.
That sounds really awful,
so when you finally get around to it.
I didn't mean it like that.
So, I mean, when we get that kind of information,
it would be very handy for us to know.
Thank you.
I'd rather not.
James Warwick - 2:16:57
It's extremely, I haven't got the resources within my team.
this extreme resource intensive for someone to go through that list to work.
I don't think we'd have the details how you match up with the current
permit holders with those. Can I just quickly come back thank you and it was
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:17:20
Cllr Lisa Morgan - 2:17:21
only just so that we could work out roughly how much it would cost us out of
the budget because obviously 25 % is 15 pounds at the moment and if we
unlike the chair said, maybe give them again next year,
that's 30 pounds.
That's going to end up to a lot of people.
And I'd like to just know the figures.
Thank you.
Yeah, I'll take it back.
I speak to the waste team and Revs and Bends
to see if there is a way,
James Warwick - 2:17:44
but I know we did have a conversation
when we were putting the report together
and it was, it was felt,
it was quite a challenge to be able to get that,
but we're looking into it.
Thank you.
Councillor Whitehouse has his hand up
I will make that the last question before we move on, if that's all right.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:18:02
Yes, it's one of the members who spoke on this at the Council meeting.
Cllr Jon Whitehouse - 2:18:04
I was pleased to see the report and I thought it was helpfully put together.
And I think the ability to run it smoothly without too many anomalies and administratively
is quite important.
I was quite surprised since we issued the Council tax bills, we actually need the Council
tax bill to be submitted to us, given we must know.
but I suppose it's a sort of a double cheque.
I suppose I won't, I, unlike Councillor Murray,
I would quite like to see it implemented sooner,
but I understand the issues that Mr. Warwick raised.
I think it's worth pointing out that the
94 ,000 pounds mentioned there is theoretical maximum
that only occur if every single person
in receipt of council tax support
currently subscribes the garden waste scheme because then the
income would diminish by that count.
In fact, most of them won't be members of the scheme because
some of them, for example, live in flats.
Others will have decided not to take out the option.
Others may have decided it's too expensive.
So it will be, so for new customers attracted to the
scheme, it will actually bring in more revenue to the council
to set aside the fixed costs because all we'll need to fund
is a marginal cost to providing that service to an extra resident. So financially this
could work out quite well depending on quite what the balance is between existing customers
and new service users.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:19:41
Thank you, Councillor Whitehouse. So Committee, our job is to tell the Cabinet what we thought.
So the things I've summarised, just so I'm transparent with the Committee, is this is
effectively what was asked for at full Council, if it will agree, it's what we asked for.
We'd like the cabinet to explore different ways in which that discount could be applied
and implemented, because not necessarily doing it straight away.
Consideration to pensioners and elderly that may not be down on the council tax support,
but may well be of benefit to them to receive, and also to consider whether we just wait
a bit longer to see what the final uptake is.
I would just like to thank the teams that have put this report together.
it was a request of full council and I think it was the right thing to do at
the time so thanks to all the members that contributed to that. So I will move
on members and pass on those comments. The next item for us to consider is item

14 Review of Council Subsidiary Companies

14 on the agenda on pages 92 to 113 and that's the review of council subsidiary
companies. I'm going to ask Councillor Balcombe and Owen here to introduce this
review of the Council's subsidiary companies. Thank you.
Cllr Raymond Balcombe - 2:20:48
Thank you, Chair. Before I hand over to Arwin, I just want to briefly set out the purpose
of this report. Cabinet is being asked to approve a revised company structure, endorse
proposals to re -establish a board representation and note the operational and governance improvements
set out in the report to Cabinet on 13 July. The Council owns two subsidiary companies,
Qualis Group Ltd and Terra Verde Services Ltd. Qualis was set up in 2019 to support
development and property services, while TVS began operating in November 24, to deliver
waste collection and cleansing services. Since Qualis was established, the operating
environment has changed significantly. The impact of Brexit, COVID -19, inflation,
interest rates, wider housing and development markets, pressures and
uncertainty of LGR. As a result, Qols has moved away from development activity and
is now focused on operational services delivery for the Council. This review is
about making sure the governance arrangements are clear,
consistent and fit for purpose, reducing duplication,
improving transparency, maintaining compliance
and strengthening the council's oversight of its company.
In relation to Qualis specifically, the review found
that the structure has become,
well, come too complex, I suppose, over the time,
including a number of dormant companies that no longer serve an active purpose, but still
create an administrative burden. So as you can see, the history of the companies in a
brief report. Owen will take you through some of the financial and other bits, so I'll hand
over to Owen.
Owen Sparks - 2:22:56
Just really to add to that, there's quite a lot of detail in the report. Some of the
changes, as again Councillor Balcom just touched upon, was really simplifying the actual structure
of the companies as time moved on and some of that focus has changed, really to make
it more transparent. That's set to do in a two -stage process and there's more detail
in the report about how that is looking to be established.
It is also looking at reviewing and making more transparent as well the governance arrangement.
So the report proposes establishing a LATCO, a local authority trading company, shareholder
group and that is to sort of oversee and engage in development of business plans. Again, we
will look at that for quality again a bit later. Making sure there is corporate alignment,
annual report insurance and to really address issues and resolutions to any issues that
might arise. We've also looked at consideration of changing the board arrangements to simplify
that for a co -terminus board. So that's really having one board for both companies,
but obviously making sure that the respective responsibilities are still managed. Obviously
some things need to be agreed by the separate companies, but we need to make that efficiency.
And also so there's better joint working between the council and the companies, and
also there's alignment between the board makeup and how those decision processes are taken
forward. So the report recognises and recommends a
member oversight and transparency regime. So as part of that, it considers having strategic
KPIs for the Council, TVS and QALYST, really both brought together and brought to this
committee as part of the over -inscrucinee performance report that you looked at previously.
That is really all those key indicators that affect residents and I'm sure you get, obviously
you talk to your communities about, that's all seen in one place and we can see those
entities and those join up between them in a lot more transparent way.
The business plans for TVS and Tocquotas come through over -inscrucinee and then onto cabinet
on an annual basis, again so members can input into development in those business cases and
to make sure that they are really delivering
what the council wants for its residents
through TVS and through QALYST.
Again, as members are used to now,
the quality financial reports,
really for both companies to come through cabinet
on a quality basis,
and then for an annual report for TVS and QALYST
to come to overview and scrutiny on an annual basis.
And that will really look at that quarter four performance,
a bit like we do for the council.
The other aspects the review looked at
was really about how we could support and get better transparency over operational service
delivery and service support provision. It is actually about how TVS and the Council
can work together with QALYST on a more joined -up way. Examples of that is really better coordination
between TVS and QALYST and the Council through direct to management meetings. For example,
Ben now comes to Council's senior leadership team so you can have that more engaged and
more joined up way of working. About shared grounds maintenance schedules, for example,
so there's better planning for activities like road closures, so when there's grounds
maintenance work litter pickings, that can work in a more joined up way. I really just
about looking at how they can work, we can work collectively better together. We've also
looked at how support services are delivered to Qualis and TVS, so that's basically continued
to be developed. But for example now, the HR service is delivered by the council to
College, that's a good example of that. And that's looking at saving around £700 ,000
in admin and support services in a full year, which will add to that sustainability and
that liveability of College going forward. Again, that's delivered and is reflected
in the business plan, for example, that Ben will take you through later.
So key messages really for members about what the support is seeking to do. It's intended
to create a simpler, clearer and more consistent company structure. The proposals are designed
to strengthen governance, transparency and shareholder oversight. The revised structure,
as he said, really reflects that quality is more on our focus on operational delivery
rather than development. It is also very important to ensure that the Council's companies are
in the best shape they can be, walking into LGR, again, so we can make the most of those
opportunities that might present themselves over the coming years and also then to generate
efficiency savings and operational savings as part of that service delivery.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:27:40
My apologies, thank you. Can you just clarify, I've got your question. When you say about
consideration for efficiency with the boards. Are you suggesting that TBS and Qualis could
be one board or they would still be separate?
Owen Sparks - 2:28:07
They would be separate boards. They would need to be for their company responsibilities.
It would happen at one time, so the board would happen coterminously, but obviously
they still need to make sure they did the same requirement for the company's act.
So for example, both would need to approve their accounts and appoint directors, but
we'd look at the board meetings together to maximise that synergy between the companies
to make sure they're working as effectively as possible.
So the same people on the quality board would be on the TDS board?
No?
Sorry.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:28:35
I'm not following this, sorry.
Owen Sparks - 2:28:39
So each company has to have its own separate directors as part of the company's house,
but they would go to the same joint meeting to discuss performance and to discuss joint
working, to look at how the business plans could work together and we could work with
Council in a better way.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:29:01
And with LGR coming, what is the benefits doing this before LGR when we don't even know
what the future of who's going to own Corliss is at the moment?
Owen Sparks - 2:29:11
So when we looked at the scope of the review, what we've done, we've looked at things that
we think we can improve, sort of short to medium term. There are some longer term activities
that we deem as being out of scope. So for example, looking at IT systems and looking
at call centre activities, because they're longer term things that will take longer to
do. And as you say, by the time they're put into place, it could get overtaken by events.
So when we did initial scope of the meeting, we were very clear about what we could do
quickly to have benefit on what is long -term and should wait till we've got
that long -term strategic direction. And what is the efficiency to merge in the
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:29:46
boards? What is it? Fiscal efficiency? Time efficiency? It's a bit of both. It's
Owen Sparks - 2:29:51
consistency. There are some savings but it's more about oversight, transparency,
joint working and managing that relationship between the companies and
the council in the most productive way to enable us to give a better services
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:30:05
and more joint up -weight. Right. Councillor Murray. Thank you. Thank you
A couple of points and a question.
Cllr Stephen Murray - 2:30:08
I think the reporting mechanism and the oversight mechanism as regards members, which is obviously
important from our point of view, I understand and I'm happy with.
What I know about company structures and really understand them is probably about CIRA.
So I do want to just ask a question.
We're told in 1 .5 that these proposals have come from their working group.
We happen to have three members of the working group, but I'm particularly interested in
Councillor Morris's and Councillor George's response.
Was this a unanimous set of decisions made by the working group or was there some difference
of opinion where there was a majority vote?
So I suppose I'm really asking Councillor Morris
and Councillor George, are you happy with these proposals?
Councillor George, you've been asked.
Yeah, I was part of the working party
Cllr Mandy George - 2:31:14
as Councillor Morris as well.
And the concept of the company directors coming together
and discussing and talking
and seeing how one company can help another,
but the two separate companies still.
So even if say TBS take on administration from Qolis,
then there needs to be some sort of expenditure coming over.
Am I correct in that? Owen, yeah.
So you don't want to blend it too much
where it's kind of getting misty, overcast,
on who is really benefiting from who.
And I do believe when we've had conversations before,
especially with the car park calling actually,
with EFDC staff coming over and speaking to quality staff,
because you've got expertise there.
So it's great that we've got these different expertises,
but I just think there has to be careful consideration as well
on the objectives of each company,
because each company does have their own objectives in company law.
Thank you. I must admit, I think they're both so different.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:32:21
I think in a way they can achieve some collaboration rather than this extremity.
But Councillor Morris, then Councillor Shaw.
Thank you. Yeah, I was part of the working group.
Cllr Martin Morris - 2:32:31
Yeah, I mean, the conclusions arrived out in a consensual manner,
so we discussed it and came up with these solutions.
I think it does provide a rationalised structure for the companies.
It improves governance and it also identifies efficiency
improvements by sharing resources where that's possible.
So that does result in operational cost reduction as
well, so that's a side effect.
A side effect of all of this is it improves cost efficiency in
the operational side.
One thing it won't do, of course,
is tackle the issues in the balance sheet,
but that's a separate question.
But yeah, I did support the conclusions of the working group.
Thank you, Councillor. Thank you both for your input on that.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:33:19
Councillor Whitehouse did have his hand up first, then I'll be to you, Councillor Shaw.
Yeah, I mean, the two things here, simplification and deduplication,
Cllr Jon Whitehouse - 2:33:25
you know, I think are absolutely, absolutely correct.
It's been so intensely frustrating sometimes to sort of call this go off and source stuff elsewhere,
you know, simply just for the sake of being different rather than for any sort of obvious sort of service advantage.
The specific questions, first of all on the deduplication, it doesn't mention external
audit, it doesn't mention security.
I mean as I walk down St John's Road in Bakers Lane, I go past one security company's sign
on the St John's site, then the security company's sign on the leisure centre and the same security
company's sign on the car park.
I just wonder if there's scope there for more efficiency.
The balance of exec and non -exec directors, it talks about up to two non -exec directors.
I'm not sure if that's external, sort of independent directors or internal, but non -exec directors.
And both, you know, there are reasons, there's a reason for both, but it's not clear, you
know, which is intended here and why people have gone for the particular branches there.
And thirdly, there's a reference to it potentially being essential for legal reasons to keep
the investment properties in a holding company rather than transferring them directly onto
the Council's balance sheet.
It would be helpful just to understand a bit more what the argument behind that is.
Owen Sparks - 2:34:58
I think there have been, as you'll be aware from the audit committee, a number of discussions
with the external audit at the moment really about reliance between external audit and
preparation of the council within the external companies. So what we are looking at, one
One is internal audit and using the council sources for that, but external audit, we're
waiting for the external audit to confirm their position and what we are thinking about
is whether we split.
Now one company might do the external audit and one might do the council preparation of
the private companies as part of that council process.
So we're aware of it and we're looking at it, but we haven't reached a firm conclusion
on that at the moment.
I think the question about security is a very valid one and I think about that as part of
the reason for the joint working and working close. So those sorts of conversations can
sort of just happen. At the moment it's a lot more, there's a meeting or, but it brings
out a lot more light. There's lots of things I'm sure that can be explored as we go forward.
As far as the investments that are out of borough, members will be aware that the regulations
have changed quite significantly around holding of external investments. And generally we
have to keep them in a private company so the council doesn't own them. That's to do
with the powers that we're allowed to hold investments in. So that's really just a statute
of responsibility to do with the CAF regulations and who has the responsibility to actually
undertake those external investments out of borough now that are primarily for yield and
not for development of the borough. So that's that distinction there really between the
internal ones and the ones that are out of borough.
Councillor Shaw. Councillor Shaw, did you have your hand up?
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:36:42
Cllr Geoff Shaw - 2:36:44
Sorry yes I tend to agree with Councillor Morgan here on...
George. Sorry. George. George.
That's Morgan over there. That's Morgan over there.
Regarding the company structure with two separate companies, both on Companies House, both with
separate boards and then combining certain services.
Sounds very cosy to begin with,
but I can see this fracturing in time.
Unless you've got a group structure
where you've got a holding company at the top,
carrying out the general services
and then doing it for the two companies beneath.
Once each company will be reporting their own results
to the company's house,
clearly I think there could be problems encountered
if you're combining certain services.
Another point on non -executive directors, when I looked at QALYST generally over the
last six years, I think it's had 17 directors that have come and gone. I've never known
a company for this last six years that's had 17 directors come and go. So clearly we
need to be very particular and cautious in who we choose.
They definitely need to be outside of, I think,
of council structure.
They need to be independent private individuals
with specific experience and expertise in the two
different companies.
And I don't know how we can make sure that we do that.
I'm not sure who actually appoints non -execs.
But I think we need to be a lot better at it than we have been over the last six years.
I think the last six years with 17 directors coming and going is an absolute disaster.
So we've got to be very particular and because they are very valuable, especially as these
are council companies, it's very important that we get some expertise from outside of
council structure from private sector looking as non -execs on these two companies.
Owen Sparks - 2:39:08
Just on obviously the delivery of services, obviously what we can make sure when we're
working on at the moment, obviously there'd be appropriate SLAs in place, there would
be monitoring between the companies and also we spoke at that shareholder board earlier
and that would act as that overarching body if there were any issues that needed to be
results. Obviously that would be properly documented and obviously each company would
have a view and hold the other to account. And that's the same way at the moment. Obviously
the council delivers some services for quality, for example. Obviously there's regular conversations
about performance and about cost as part of that. So that would be part of that delivery.
I think as far as directors are concerned, obviously as a local authority company you
have officers on there, members in the past,
and that does change over time.
What we're looking to do,
what the actual report sort of sets out,
is we'd look to appoint directors going forward
based on a person's specification
as to what skills were required.
And also that would be done for an appointments panel
as part of the council process as well,
so transparency and oversight.
So that's what we're looking really to put into place.
Thank you, members, I'm very conscious of time,
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:40:15
so I've got Councillor Bassett, Councillor Lucas,
and Councillor Kaufman,
and then I think I'll draw matters to a close on this item.
Thank you, just to clarify a couple of points.
Cllr Richard Bassett - 2:40:24
When the company was originally set up,
we set it up with various directors and various external.
Once we established the company, that changed
and we brought in a new board specifically
for that purposes.
Over the course of time, the requirements of members
of the board has changed and some people left
because their skill sets we didn't need
And we brought in other people at the moment.
There is only one non -executive director who does a lot of work for Harlow and we can see
synergies between that and he's very, very good at knowing the whole marketplace and
advising us as the best way forward.
So it's a bit active, shall we say, rather than just change for change's sake.
Thank you.
Councillor Lucas.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:41:13
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr Jodie Lucas - 2:41:16
I just wanted to clarify around the point that was raised around the shared services.
So, okay, yeah, there may be a requirement for potentially QALYST to provide a service
to TVS or TVS to provide a service to QALYST, but I think what we were trying to get to
or what I have taken from the report is that we were talking about shared services, i .e.,
admin, health and safety, external shared sources rather than you worrying about the
shared services between the two and I think the cost saving is there rather than one business
doing something to benefit another business.
So I just wanted to clarify that part.
I mean no doubt there's economies of scale to be rinsed here for sure.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:41:59
Councillor Kaufman.
Cllr Howard Kauffman - 2:42:07
Thank you, Joe. Just a point of really correction for Councillor Shaw. Echo what Councillor
Bassett said. I think 10 of the 16 we moved on. So that was to do with budget cuts or
changes or changes that we brought about. It wasn't people getting annoyed and leaving
us. It was the other way round. And I think in terms of the companies, the portfolio of
the three investment properties are investments, so they would have to be in an investment
structure whereas Qualis generally is a trading business, it's developing and selling, they
are two separate and it's best to keep them separate subject to Owen's view but that's
how I think it should be.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:42:45
Thank you, members. I think we'll move on. Our job here at OBE in scrutiny is to note
the report and to send it to Cabinet and I recommend that Cabinet approve the attached
report. I did just want to raise one point which is just with regards to the flowchart
on page, the one with the second revised company structure, which is on page 109, I think there
just needs to be some greater explanation as to what the shareholder group is. I'm just
very conscious of the public scrutiny on QALYST and they will see something that wasn't really
there on the other picture and is there now and I think it's important for transparency
that's just explained a bit better in the report when it goes to cabinet because I'm
very aware of the lens that QALYST has and we must, unfortunately the organisation has
failed to deal with misinformation so it's important that we can try and deal with it
at source where we can.

15 Cabinet Business

But members I will move on to item 15 which is cabinet business which is on pages 114
to 122.
The forward plan is shown on those pages and this details the planned decisions for the
cabinet.
Have we got any questions on this forward plan?
Cllr Stephen Murray - 2:44:01
I will restrict myself to one. There are four or five I could have
talked about but I am aware of the other really significant items. I
will restrict myself to one. It is one I am really delighted to see.
One to one ending of 10 -year fixed -term tenancies. I know there
is a consultation going on. I don't want to be too victorious on this
I have a very long memory. I was not happy when these were introduced. I said exactly
why they should not be introduced. It was around elements of security of tenure. It
was also for the very reasons why we are now saying that we want to review them and end
them. Sometimes I get things right.
Cllr Jaymey McIvor - 2:44:47
I'm sure it's more than sometimes Councillor Murray. Very modest of you. Any other members
wish to speak on the forward plan? Those are items to be noted so I'll take that as noted
from the committee. Members, item 16, I just want to be very clear for the sake of the

16 Exclusion of Public and Press

webcast but also to new members as well. Due to the advice of the monitoring officer, this
item has been deemed to require exclusion of the public and press. That is not my decision
as chairman, that is on the advice of the monitoring officer. So I will read the statement
now in relation to item 16, which is that members, we must now agree that under section
100A4 of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press should be excluded from the
meeting for items 18 and 19 of the agenda. These reports are not for publication as they
contain exempt information with paragraph 3 of part 1 of schedule 12a to the Local Government
Act 1972, being information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular
person including the authority holding that information. Further, the monitoring officer
has advised that it is considered that in all the circumstances the public interest
in maintaining this exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing this information.
While there may be public interest in disclosing this information, namely that the report is
of public interest as it relates to the business affairs of the Council, the report contains
information that should remain confidential to avoid prejudice to the conduct of the Council's
business affairs.
So if I can ask officers to please make arrangements for exclusion of relevant persons.
Thank you.
Thank you for participating.
Cllr Raymond Balcombe
District councillor for Rural East ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Raymond Balcombe
Cllr Richard Bassett
District councillor for Roydon and Lower Nazeing ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Richard Bassett
Cllr Jamie Braha
District councillor for Grange Hill ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Jamie Braha
Cllr Rose Brookes
District councillor for Buckhurst Hill East and Whitebridge ward
Loughton Residents Association
View profile Cllr Rose Brookes
Cllr Mary Dadd
District councillor for Ongar ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Mary Dadd
Nuala Donnelly
Service Director - Finance & Deputy S151 Officer
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Nuala Donnelly
Fabrizio Ferrari
Team Manager - Economic development & Health Improvement
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Fabrizio Ferrari
Cllr Mandy George
District councillor for Epping West and Rural ward
Liberal Democrats
View profile Cllr Mandy George
Jennifer Gould
Strategic Director - Chief Operating Officer
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Jennifer Gould
Dawn Harrisson
Service Director Housing & Property
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Dawn Harrisson
Cllr Howard Kauffman
District councillor for Loughton St John's ward
Loughton Residents Association
View profile Cllr Howard Kauffman
Laura Kirman
Democratic Services Officer
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Laura Kirman
Cllr Jeane Lea
District councillor for Waltham Abbey North ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Jeane Lea
Cllr Jodie Lucas
District councillor for Waltham Abbey West ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Jodie Lucas
Paula Maginnis
Service Director - Corporate Services
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Paula Maginnis
Cllr Craig McCann
District councillor for Chigwell with Lambourne ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Craig McCann
Cllr Jaymey McIvor
District councillor for Ongar ward
Reform UK
View profile Cllr Jaymey McIvor
Cllr Lisa Morgan
District councillor for Grange Hill ward
Epping Forest Independents Group
View profile Cllr Lisa Morgan
Cllr Martin Morris
District councillor for Waltham Abbey North ward
Labour Party
View profile Cllr Martin Morris
Cllr Stephen Murray
District councillor for Loughton Roding ward
Independent
View profile Cllr Stephen Murray
Cllr Smruti Patel
District councillor for Buckhurst Hill West ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Smruti Patel
Tracy Scott
Acting Director - Customer
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Tracy Scott
Cllr Geoff Shaw
District councillor for Theydon Bois with Passingford ward
Reform UK
View profile Cllr Geoff Shaw
Andrew Small
Chief Executive
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Andrew Small
Owen Sparks
Interim Strategic Director / S151 Officer
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Owen Sparks
Mandy Thompson
Service Director - Regulatory Services
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Mandy Thompson
James Warwick
Service Director - Contracts Partnerships and Procurement
Epping Forest District Council
View profile James Warwick
Cllr Chris Whitbread
District councillor for Roydon and Lower Nazeing ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Chris Whitbread
Cllr Jon Whitehouse
District councillor for Epping East ward
Liberal Democrats
View profile Cllr Jon Whitehouse
Matt Winslow
Planning Director
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Matt Winslow