Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed all those present.

Cllr Bradshaw and Cllr Morris sent apologies.

Cllr Hornchen substituted for Cllr Bradshaw.

To note any declarations of interest from the Councillors.  They are asked to indicate the relevant agenda item, the nature of the interest and in particular whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest.

Any declarations of interest made at the meeting which is not on the register of interests should be notified to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion.

There were no declarations.

-          To follow

The minutes of the meeting on the 9 February 22 would be available at the following meeting.

To note any announcements from the Chair

There was no Chair’s Business.

Up to 30 minutes is allowed for this item

Any member of the public or Councillor may participate in Public Forum.  The detailed arrangements for so doing are set out in the Public Information Sheet at the back of this agenda.  Public Forum items should be emailed to scrutiny@bristol.gov.uk and please note that the following deadlines will apply in relation to this meeting:-

Questions - Written questions must be received 3 clear working days prior to the meeting.  For this meeting, this means that your question(s) must be received in this office at the latest by 5pm on Wednesday 23 March

Petitions and Statements - Petitions and statements must be received on the working day prior to the meeting.  For this meeting this means that your submission must be received in this office at the latest by 12.00 noon on Monday 28 March

The Public Forum statement was noted.

The Head of Insight Performance and Intelligence introduced the report.

·     There was a discussion around recycling and it was noted that communication and clarification around the collection days was needed.

·     BCPB225: ‘Increase the percentage of Final EHCPs issued within 20 weeks excluding exception cases’ was discussed and Members requested more information and clarification of the figures, and were advised that monthly data was available.

·     There was a discussion around citizen satisfaction levels, and it was noted that it was a city-wide measure, and individual service areas carried out their own satisfaction surveys.

·     The Chair referred to BPB375 ‘Reduce the number of empty council properties’ and asked for the reasons council homes were empty, and the Board was advised the data would be made available.

RESOLVED;

That;

·       Members be provided with further information detailing reasons for empty council homes.

·       The report be noted

The Risk & Insurance Senior Officer introduced the report.

·     There was a discussion around how the risk level of CRR36 ‘SEND’ was calculated, and it was noted that the date the risks in the report were analysed to was 21 December 21, and that further information would be requested from the risk owner.

·     CRR32 ‘Failure to deliver enough affordable Homes to meet the City’s needs’ was referred to and the Board was advised that reasons behind the risk level, and whether the risk level improved after the HRA budget and Goram Homes Business plan were approved, would be requested from the risk owner.

·     CRR13 ‘Financial Framework and Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP)’ and CRR41 ‘Long Term Major Capital Projects’ were referred to, and the Board requested assurances that there had been proper consideration around how inflation and increasing interest rates would affect the figures.  Members were advised that requests for clarification around the wording related CRR13 on the effect of inflation, and for updated information for CRR41, would be passed to the risk owners.

RESOLVED;

That;

·       Members be provided with further information detailing (i) how the risk level of CRR36 SEND was calculated;  (ii) the reasons behind the risk level of CRR32 Failure to deliver enough affordable Homes to meet the City’s needs; (iii) whether the risk level of CRR32 improved after the HRA budget and Goram Homes Business plan were approved; (iv) clarification around the wording related CRR13 ‘Financial Framework and Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP)’ around the effect of inflation, and (v) for updated information for CRR41 ‘Long Term Major Capital Projects’.

·       The report be noted.

The Head of Democratic Engagement introduced the report.

·       The Board was advised that the report, subject to agreement, would be brought to Full Council on the 24^th May.

·       There was a conversation around resource allocated to scrutiny, and the Chair stated that there was an opportunity to review how scrutiny operated; and it was agreed that there should be a focus on earlier engagement with topics for scrutiny, and there should be resource allocated which enabled scrutiny to affect policy development.

RESOLVED;

That;

·       The Business Plan Workshops and Member engagement into the development of the corporate strategy be added to the report as good examples of policy development work.

·       The structure of scrutiny be reviewed.

To note the work programme.

The Board heard that the Liveable Neighbourhoods Inquiry Day would be scheduled in June/July.  

RESOLVED;

That the work programme was noted

The Head of Policy and Public Affairs and the Head of Insight Performance and Intelligence introduced the report.

·         There was a discussion around TC3 ‘Safe and active travel’ within Theme 6 Transport and Connectivity, and whether the related performance indicators were appropriate, the Board was advised that metrics were aligned to priority statements as much as possible.

·         There was a discussion about the timeliness of the workshops, and the Board was advised that it was a challenge to identify how to best engage OSMB, with the consideration of the tight timeframe to deliver the workshop between service planning and budget setting; and feedback from Members helped to identify the best time to deliver the workshops.

·         Members stated that it had been noted that Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) were not all directly related to the actions, and this was an area for improvement.  However, Members were advised that the intention was to tie KPIs back to the high level Themes and Priorities, and that the new performance framework this year would also report on actions, reflecting the new approach tohow performance was measured.

RESOLVED;

That the report was noted.

The Executive Director of Growth & Regeneration and the Head of City Leap introduced the report.

·       There was a discussion around how City Leap, by way of inward investment and generation of a skills and labour base, aimed for acceleration of decarbonisation across the City.  It was noted that City Leap’s focus was on the Council owned estate; but Board agreed that it was important to bring the benefits to everyone across Bristol, including access for people in privately owned homes.

·       Members welcomed that grass-roots organisations would not be excluded from the opportunities from City Leap, and Members asked for further assurances and details on how the Partner intended to work with and engage local organisations.

·       There was a discussion around the transfer of Council staff from energy services, and Members noted that this would necessitate a TUPE process, undertaken before the transfer was concluded.  Members were advised that the council would not duplicate knowledge and expertise which would be within the City Leap Partner, which would be expected to lead on implementation of concepts and ideas; and the role of the Client would be to hold the Partner’s performance to account.

·         The Board were advised that a fundamental part of City Leap was that it benefitted the people of Bristol, and Members welcomed the plans to supply jobs and apprenticeships for local people across Bristol, and to uphold equality and diversity policies, including aiming to ensure the workforce is representative of Bristol’s communities.

·         There was a discussion around City Leap’s projected annual contribution to decarbonisation, and Members were advised the methodology for calculating carbon savings had been verified by an independent third party.

·       The Board requested assurances that there has been consideration around how inflation and increasing interest rates would affect the figures as set out in the report; including whether inflation had been considered with regard to the Partner’s expected investment.

·       There was a discussion around how the current heat network assets would be transferred and the Board was advised that one company that contained all the assets would be created,  which would be the subject of the report scheduled to be brought to OSMB in June.

·       There was a discussion about the carbon saving target and the Board was advised that an accurate figure at year 5 and beyond as an annual percentage could be provided.

·       The Board were pleased to hear that the Council would retain ownership of its wind and solar assets.

·       There was a discussion about the heat network and concerns were raised around consumer protection. Members were advised that the principle was to protect residents and consumers in advance of a developed regulatory regime; and these safeguards would be detailed in future report brought to OSMB.

·       The Chair referred to the commitment to local training and jobs opportunities, and noted that it was important that areas with high social economic deprivation were prioritised.  The Board heard that the Social Value Portal was utilised and deprived parts if the city had a high weighted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

That under s.100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item(s) of business on the grounds that it (they) involve(s) the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of schedule 12A of the Act.

There was no exempt discussion.

-          To follow on 28^th March 2022

There was no exempt discussion.

The Mayor’s Forward Plan was noted.

The minutes were noted.