Interactive webcast player

Cabinet
Monday, 13th July 2026 at 7:00pm

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  2. Cllr Chris Whitbread
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Vivienne Messenger
  2. Cllr Chris Whitbread
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Richard Bassett
  2. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  3. Cllr Howard Kauffman
  4. Cllr Chris Whitbread
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Stephen Murray
  2. Cllr Chris Whitbread
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Raymond Balcombe
  2. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  3. Cllr Graham Wiskin
  4. Cllr Raymond Balcombe
  5. James Warwick
  6. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  7. Cllr Graham Wiskin
  8. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  9. Cllr Raymond Balcombe
  10. Cllr Stephen Murray
  11. Cllr Martin Morris
  12. Cllr Raymond Balcombe
  13. Cllr Jon Whitehouse
  14. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  15. Owen Sparks
  16. Cllr Raymond Balcombe
  17. James Warwick
  18. Cllr Raymond Balcombe
  19. Cllr Chris Whitbread
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Smruti Patel
  2. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  3. Cllr Stephen Murray
  4. Cllr Chris Whitbread
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Raymond Balcombe
  2. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  3. Cllr Jon Whitehouse
  4. Owen Sparks
  5. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  6. Cllr Martin Morris
  7. Owen Sparks
  8. Cllr Graham Wiskin
  9. Owen Sparks
  10. Cllr Chris Whitbread
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Martin Morris
  2. Owen Sparks
  3. Cllr Ken Williamson
  4. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  5. Cllr Stephen Murray
  6. Cllr Smruti Patel
  7. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  8. Cllr Ken Williamson
  9. Cllr Chris Whitbread
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:00:00
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:00:02
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

1 Webcasting Introduction

filmed and to possible use of those images and sound recordings. If any speakers on MS
teams do not wish to have their image captured, they should ensure that their video settings
throughout the meeting are switched off and set to audio only. Members, I don't need to
remind you when you're speaking please turn your microphones on and when you

2 Apologies for Absence

finished please turn your microphones off apologies for absence leader I've
Vivienne Messenger - 0:00:40
had apologies from councillor Hollywood bread thank you are there any
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:00:44
declarations of interest

3 Declarations of Interest

Cllr Richard Bassett - 0:00:54
that's the basset normal one chairman as chairman of qualities yeah thank you
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:00:57
Thank you, Chair.
Also a member of QALIS.
Cllr Howard Kauffman - 0:01:00
Thank you very much.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:01:03
Members, we then go on to the minutes of the last meeting.
Can I take those as being agreed?
I agree.
Thank you.

4 Minutes

Public questions and request to address the Cabinet.
Are there any?
No, there aren't, leader.

6 Public Questions and Requests to Address the Cabinet

Okay.
That's good.
We then go on to the report of overview and scrutiny.

7 Overview and Scrutiny

The chairman of overview and scrutiny isn't here this evening at the present time.
There are a number of members who were present on that evening.
I will first of all go to Councillor Murray to see if he would like to make any comments.
Sorry to drop you in it, Councillor Murray, but if you have any comments on scrutiny.
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:01:41
I don't see some in particular.
All I would say is that most of the items that you've got coming up in the rest of
the agenda, either in part one or part two or part five, were carefully looked at at
O &S.
In fact, the next item very much came from O &S.
and we've asked some quite detailed questions,
particularly about the part two items,
which I think were answered actually.
But that's all I can say off the top of my head.
Thank you very much, Councillor Murray.
Sorry to drop you in at short notice.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:02:20
Members, we've obviously heard,
and a number of us were at the scrutiny meeting,
so we're aware of what scrutiny was thinking on the evening,
and I think there was satisfactory responses
to the questions raised.
If we therefore move on to the first item of the evening,
which is for options for concessions
for garden waste collecting challenges,

8 Options for Concessions for Garden Waste Collection Charges

Councillor Balcombe.
Thank you, chair.
Cllr Raymond Balcombe - 0:02:46
This report we've just heard has been to ONS.
I'm open to further discussions about this,
but the report itself sets out the options
for the introduction of concessionary discount
for the Epping Forest District Council garden waste service.
The garden waste collection charges concession scheme be supported for introduction from
the 27 -28 financial year.
Subject to consideration of this, affordability as part of the annual budget setting process
and periodic review thereafter to ensure it remains effective, affordable and aligned
with policy and annual fee charges.
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 administer, would place additional
pressures on our resources and would result in a less efficient service.
Both James, myself and Rosa are here.
I take it everybody has read the report.
So back to you, Chairman.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:04:06
Members, this was really debated very well over you and scrutiny.
I think it was generally welcomed by members as the best option in order to deliver this.
I would just make clear one thing at this stage, of course, it is subject to budgets
being available when we get to the budget making process in February.
knowing the pressures that we're currently under,
we have to make sure we put that caveat within.
Members, any questions?
Nope, okay, therefore can I take,
oh, sorry, Councillor Wiskin.
Yes, thank you, Chairman.
I'm going from memory here,
but the introduction of the Green Bin Scheme
was going to give a,
Cllr Graham Wiskin - 0:04:51
assuming a take up of 40 % across the district
was gonna give a surplus of 400 ,000 pounds per year.
Was that correct?
Something like that.
Yeah, on those grounds,
can we have an update as to what the actual uptake has been
and what impact that would have upon the impact
of the 94 ,000 which this scheme would cost?
Cllr Raymond Balcombe - 0:05:21
I'm sure you're going to ask an officer to assist with this, but I think we're at
about 25 ,000 now, up to anything, is that right?
James Warwick - 0:05:28
I don't think it's quite 25 ,000.
I think we're close to the target, you're right, was 40%.
I think we're very close to 50 % take up.
So yeah.
Okay.
Councillor Whiskin.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:05:46
Cllr Graham Wiskin - 0:05:48
So my question is, surely that would imply that the £400 ,000 would actually be more
than £400 ,000 we would get, therefore how much would be left removing the £94 ,000,
assuming we remained at 50 %?
The one thing I would say, Councillor Whiskin, I take on board what you're saying and I'm
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:06:06
sure the officers will give a much more better response than I can, but you've got to remember
at certain points you're gonna reach a tipping point
where actually the value of the bin collection
from our point of view goes down.
I think we have to pay that in mind, but Councillor Belcom.
I was gonna ask James, but you've got to remember
Cllr Raymond Balcombe - 0:06:24
I think the bigger the number, the more staff we need,
the more vehicles we need.
So there's a cost to that obviously.
But some of that surplus has gone back in
to paying for other aspects of the waste service.
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:06:50
I just wanted to say, given where we are, I'm supportive of introducing this.
I'll just pick Councillor Whiskin up on one thing, because he's absolutely right in what
he says, but I'm sure he appreciates the figure of 94 ,000.
is if there was 100 % uptake of people in some sort of local county tax support, and I very
much doubt if that's going to be anything like 100 % uptake, it's much more likely to
be the 50 % uptake that is mentioned in the report. So the 96 ,000 cost is the worst case
scenario and it's more likely to be suggested least half that but it's the right step to
do I think I completely support it. Thank you Councillor Murray. Councillor Morris.
Cllr Martin Morris - 0:07:48
Thanks, I would have thought we could make a reasonable estimate on this and we know
who receives local council tax support we know who's on the green bin scheme and the
and so on so I mean we should be able to make a reasonably good estimate should we presuming
that everybody who is in the scheme and has council tax support will take it up. We should
be able to come up with a reasonably good estimate of what the impact would be.
Cllr Raymond Balcombe - 0:08:15
I think you are quite right. We can in the end, but remember, we are only a few months
into this service, really, so we haven't seen it. Let's wait until we get through the last
few weeks. There is still an uptake on who is signing up. Let's just see where we are.
You are correct, we do know some of the figures.
Councillor John Whitehouse.
Thanks.
Cllr Jon Whitehouse - 0:08:37
Having raised this at the budget meeting last February, I am pleased to have seen it come
through scrutiny and come through here.
I wasn't going to speak because I did speak of scrutiny, but I wanted to pick up on the
finance side because we established it scrutiny but it has not been updated in this report
that the 94 ,000 is a zombie figure because it would be the lost income if 100 % of people
who receive council tax benefit were currently received the service including
those of flats and including those without gardens and including those who
don't do any gardening. The additional cost is simply the extra cost of
providing the service to anyone who doesn't currently get the service and is
newly getting the service but actually that's extra income to the council until
you get to the stage that council Bullcomb said where suddenly you need to
leap up to another vehicle or something, or crew.
And we established in the lead up,
to introduce garden waste, that the sensitivity testing had been
that actually there's a really big margin before that happened.
So potentially what we're actually doing,
you only need to cover the marginal cost of each extra
collection, and if that is less than the fee being paid for by
anyone extra to receiving the service it's extra it's actually extra income to
the council not an extra cost so I think we need to be cautious of that 94 ,000
figure and it shouldn't really be be in the report. Thank you. Councillor Whitehouse, I do.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:10:09
Mr. Sparks wants to come in. I think just to reassure members we'll be looking
Owen Sparks - 0:10:14
at the costs and the additional income as part budget setting but also to remind
members we've got the very significant budget gap to close as well I think
Again, it's just looking at various opportunities
and pressures alongside each other as part of that process.
Thank you very much.
Councillor Balcombe, anything to add
on Councillor Whitehouse's question?
No, I think everything's been said.
The one thing I would say actually is,
Cllr Raymond Balcombe - 0:10:36
remember we haven't really started the flat roll,
the roll -outs going out with the bins,
but we're not fully through it yet.
So we don't know what flats will actually have
60 pound green bins.
Is that correct, James?
No.
James Warwick - 0:10:54
This is a short answer.
So the garden waste has been fully rolled out.
So what we're rolling out at the moment with flats is two flats that currently don't have
the food waste service.
So those bins are there.
but people, any flats that have got their individual gardens
have the opportunity now to take up
the garden waste subscription.
What I was really saying was the food waste
Cllr Raymond Balcombe - 0:11:24
might open up some more problems with the green bin
because at the moment, combing waste has been taken
from those and it won't be now,
it will have to be sorted into two separate.
Okay, members, I think everyone again
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:11:38
has had their opportunity for their say.
I think the important thing about this,
and a word of thanks to our officers
that are very busy time implementing new services.
They've actually come up with this concessions policy,
which I believe meets the spirit of what was agreed
at the budget council setting meeting.
It's set out before us this evening
and I just ask members to agree the recommendation.
Thank you.
We then move on to the ending of 10 year fixed term

9 Ending of 10-Year Fixed Term Tenancies

tendencies, Councillor Patel.
Thank you, chairman and good evening councillors.
This one was definitely well received
when we went through overview and scrutiny.
It was to discontinue the 10 year fixed term tenancy.
Cllr Smruti Patel - 0:12:23
We haven't as a council had anyone not take up
the renewal of the tenancy.
So we've got 90 % of our tenants renewed
and remained in their homes.
So while the process creates a significant officer overload and we're looking to redirect some of that
efforts and time into
tenancy sustainment and arrears prevention safeguarding fraud cheques etc all the others, you know work that
Surrounds this topic basically and trying to get some time back and get all of that done in timely manner
I definitely has been well received and I think it was well scrutinised
So if there's any other further questions or anything else
that you have any questions on, I welcome them.
Thank you.
Members, any questions?
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:13:14
Councillor Murray.
I would say to the Chairman,
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:13:19
I have quite a lot to say about this and O &S,
so I will keep my remarks fairly brief here.
Very few reports from me at DC made me very happy.
This was one of the reports when it started its cycle of meetings that made me extraordinarily happy.
The only thing I will add, and it's not a sound note, but it is a sound note, which has never ever been introduced.
I was really opposed to its introduction. I always thought that it was a better thing for officers to do.
And I saw it as an attack on stable communities, an attack that didn't actually work.
So, it's been in the past, but it's great news
and we're in agreement.
Thank you, Councillor Murray.
And you made your points very well at overview and scrutiny.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:14:08
Any other members want to comment?
If not, can I agree with that recommendation?
Thank you.
We then go on to item 10, review of the council companies.

10 Review of Council Companies

Councillor Bougham, you're taking this one, I believe.
Am I?
Cllr Raymond Balcombe - 0:14:25
Well, again, this one went through scrutiny.
Tonight, we seek approval for the revised company structure and endorsement of the proposal
to re -establish a board representation and appointment project candidate and note the
operational and governance improvements set out in the report.
I don't really want to go through all the report.
We've all heard it two or three times now.
Owen is here who can also give me a hand on this one.
Over to questions.
Councillor Balcombe, thank you very much for that.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:15:01
I think it is important for members to realise not only has this gone through scrutiny at
various levels, there was also a Portfolio Holder Advisory Group that was formed that
brought in all groups into those discussions as well, which is really important.
This is something that we would want to do, particularly bearing in mind whatever happens
with local government reorganisation,
but also with the fact we now have two arms length companies
as part of the council's operations
and it's to bring those in line with each other as well.
So I think there's a really good reason
for doing that at this time.
Members open to questions as Councillor Balcom said.
Councillor Whitehouse.
Yeah, the only question I had,
Cllr Jon Whitehouse - 0:15:49
because, as I say, we've covered it scrutiny elsewhere,
is where it talks about that shareholder group
is still a bit vague on who's actually
going to be on that group.
It just talks about it could include
relevant portfolio holders, shareholder representatives,
and so forth in paragraph 2 .19.
And I just wondered at what point
that was going to be and how that was going to be firmed up.
Thank you.
If I could pass that to Mr Sparks, thank you.
Owen Sparks - 0:16:18
That's an initial recommendation, is to actually set that group up. I think the actual details
of who will be on it and how that will be constructed will do as a second bit of work
taking that forward with more details. We can bring that back here or whatever members
want to do to make sure that people are comfortable with that.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:16:36
I should imagine that will go through the scrutiny process in order to make sure that
members are fully aware of what's been done and it's transparent at the same time. So
I'm sure that will be taken care of as we move forward.
Members, sorry, Councillor Morris.
Thanks, chairman.
Cllr Martin Morris - 0:16:53
Yeah, I was part of the group that came up with this idea.
So I suppose I'm definitely for it and think it's a good idea
but it's quite significant changes, particularly to Corliss
in terms of introducing a new board,
changing the structure of the company and so on.
What considerations been given to the risks
surrounding this? I mean, do we have a kind of an idea of how those are going? You can't
make a change without taking some risk. What are we doing to manage that?
Owen Sparks - 0:17:25
Mr Sparks. There will be some risks involved. We'll look
at that on a line -by -line basis. I think a lot of what we are doing is to reduce the
risks that are currently around at the moment. I think it's almost a reverse to sort of
reduce scope and risks that exist at the moment. Again, what we'll do similarly with the
the board changes will take that for scrutiny as well,
that appointments positions as well.
So again, members can have transparency over that.
And as far as for examples,
support service changes are concerned,
each item there is looked at in a bit of detail
with a project plan and with the highlighting
of the negotiations as part of that process
on a case by case basis.
Councillor Wiskin.
Thank you, chairman.
I was also part of the group
Cllr Graham Wiskin - 0:18:06
and I would endorse these changes.
One of the assurances I would like, and recalling some of the meetings we had, one of the topics
was about transparency of costs of the two organisations, and it was clear that there
was still some costs being borne by the Council on behalf of either or both of the organisations.
and we have assurances that they will be teased out and made publicly clear as soon as we
proceed with this process.
Thank you.
Mr Sparks.
Yes, that's part of the work we've undertaken.
Owen Sparks - 0:18:45
That is clear now.
We'll present that so people can see the total cost that Council bears and the company's
bear as well.
So that's part of the activity.
Thank you.
Members, any other questions at all?
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:18:58
Okay.
Can I take those recommendations as agreed?
Thank you.

11 Risk report

We then move on to the risk report, which I will take as members will be aware that
every on a regular basis we undertake a review of our risk, corporate risk register.
This goes to ourselves and it goes to audit and governance as well as the primary committee
for it.
And we're seeing by audit and governance on the 25th.
The risk scoring reflects both likelihood and impact with mitigations and action plans
in place and it's done on a service level basis.
There's key risk themes, in particular you will see there subsidiary company risk, housing
pressures, cyber security, as some of those listed alongside, planning performance, risk
of not achieving national targets for major applications, which as members will know has
led to our position with the designation of the council on section 62A.
There is also partner management, risk related to governance and oversight of key partnerships
with contractors and of course community cohesion which we saw stressed and pressured last year.
We have set out the current risk register that does change on a regular basis and is
kept under review.
Cllr Martin Morris - 0:20:32
members any questions customers thanks chairman and yeah just a note on the
quality of majors item pla 0 0 5 small letters on my and so this was
anticipating the possibility that we might be designated because we haven't
We didn't conform to the government's targets for major applications that were overturned
on appeal.
I just have an opinion that this shouldn't be in the risk register anymore because it's
clearly not a risk.
I'm sure Mr Sparks has the answer for us.
Owen Sparks - 0:21:12
Yeah, that's timing really.
So when the report was drafted we hadn't got that designation but definitely it's crystallised
risk to an issue now hasn't it so um we'll look at that accordingly okay council williamson
thank you chair i think there is still a risk involved because applicants can still choose
Cllr Ken Williamson - 0:21:31
the current route so um yeah we we have to make sure our major decisions overturn that appeal are
less than 10 percent um it's a fact of life i i've been doing a lot of obviously been doing a lot of
work on all of this.
And basically three major appeals that were overturned
would make us one under 10%.
Two out of the seven that have put us into special measures
make us just over 10 .2 % or something.
So it is still fine line.
And if we keep refusing majors and people appeal
and they go to pins and pins overturned,
So it is still a risk, whatever, whatever,
you know, we're putting things in place
to mitigate that risk, but it is still a risk.
Thank you.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:22:25
Members, can we agree to risk register?
Great, thank you.
Oh, sorry, Councillor Murray, my apologies.
Yeah, thank you, my hand was up.
Cllr Stephen Murray - 0:22:35
I do just need to respond to Councillor Williamson.
It wasn't the point that was going to make,
But I need to just make one point about Councillor Blips' contribution.
I completely understand about the fear of losing decisions on appeal, but I don't think
that should stop issues coming to our committees because we fear that members might make the
wrong decision, which we could lose on appeal.
And though I can't be absolutely sure
if that was one of the drivers
by the latest application for the data centre
in Lauten in the Coache committee,
I can't help feeling that that was one of the drivers.
And in the explanation that I had from officers
in their email, they explicitly referenced
a new power that the government has taken
as one of the reasons why on balance,
they felt it should be under, obviously, dedication.
So I think what I'm saying in short,
that when we got a major application in front of us,
and I think a massive data centre is a major application,
we may not technically fit the criteria
of a major application,
we should still be trusting our members
to make the right decision and not run away
putting it forward to committee, but we are where we are.
The question I wanted to ask was,
and it's mentioned a couple of times
in the report is a risk and we all know the issue
and it's a risk in the sense of it's a financial risk,
but obviously it's a real effect on people.
And that's the increase in homelessness.
A number of times we've heard that ideas
are coming through the pipeline
about being able to provide extra accommodation on a temporary basis in terms of homelessness
so it doesn't fall on the general wage fund. And I notice that we've got Dawn Harrison
on the call tonight. Are we any closer to knowing when those various reports are going
to come to members?
Thank you, Councillor Murray. I'm going to pass you to Councillor Patel first of all.
Councillor Patel, any idea when these reports
Cllr Smruti Patel - 0:24:57
are coming forward?
They're all in the pipeline, Councillor Murray.
I'm more than happy to email across the details
and deadlines on them.
Okay.
If we can give Councillor Murray a written response
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:25:11
for the whole, for everyone here this evening.
Yeah, because that's really important to us
as everyone's aware.
Councillor Williamson, you just wanted to come back.
Thank you.
Cllr Ken Williamson - 0:25:20
It was the first point that Councillor Murray made.
and whilst since I'm back from holiday,
I've been through both the overview and scrutiny
and the community scrutiny committees.
And I wanted to correct the record.
I did not take 62A into account at all
in the Langston Road decision.
We discussed it with officers and it was felt that
because there was already an existing
approval for a data centre on the site.
It was an increase in the size of the data centre on the site.
And the pressure on planning committees.
The decision, and I made it and I would still make exactly the same decision today or tomorrow,
was not to take that change to committee, to let it be decided by delegated decision.
At no stage in my email to officers did I mention 62A.
It was not in my mind at all to a concern that this might be another overturn.
I totally agree with you that in all the research I've done into the seven major appeals that
were overturned, certainly on my own voting record, I would not have changed any of the
that I made in any of those planning committees.
So I hope that makes it perfectly clear
that 62A was not part of my decision -making process
on Langston Road.
Thank you.
Okay, thank you very much, Councillor Williamson.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:27:01
Members, can I agree that recommendation
on the risk report?
Two recommendations.
Two recommendations on the risk report, thank you.
Then members, we go on to item 12,
which is any other business,

12 Any Other Business

which there is no any other business this evening.
So we go on to item 13, the exclusion of public and press.

13 Exclusion of Public and Press

To consider whether under section 100 in brackets A
in brackets four of the local government act 1972,
the public and press should be excluded from the meeting
for the items of business set out below
on grounds that they will involve the likely disclosure
of exempt information as defined in the following paragraphs
of part one of schedule 12a of the act as amended or are confidential under section
100 in brackets a in brackets two so we have items 14 which is some exempt minutes and
item 15 which is the housing revenue account capital acquisitions and item 16 which is
the Qualis group business plan can i take us into private session members are we agreed
Thank you.
Okay, so the first item is number 14, which is the exempt minutes.
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 Howard Kauffman
District councillor for Loughton St John's ward
Loughton Residents Association
View profile Cllr Howard Kauffman
Vivienne Messenger
Democratic Services Officer
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Vivienne Messenger
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
Owen Sparks
Interim Strategic Director / S151 Officer
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Owen Sparks
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
Cllr Ken Williamson
District councillor for Buckhurst Hill West ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Ken Williamson
Cllr Graham Wiskin
District councillor for Loughton St John's ward
Loughton Residents Association
View profile Cllr Graham Wiskin