The Scrutiny Committee of Melton Borough Council met on Thursday 16 July 2026 to discuss the council's Social Value Framework and review the Forward Plan. The committee also addressed concerns regarding the forward plan's omissions and the implications of Local Government Reorganisation (LGR).

Social Value Framework

The committee reviewed a draft Social Value Framework, designed to ensure that council contracts deliver wider economic, social, and environmental benefits to the community. Michelle Rodgers, Director for Housing and Communities, explained that while social value is already being achieved through various contracts, a formal framework is needed to coordinate, track, and report on these outcomes effectively. The framework aims to move social value from a procurement commitment to a managed and evidenced aspect of contract delivery.

Ryan Ebdale, Strategic Lead for Empowering Communities, highlighted examples of social value in action, such as Access work assisting Age UK with repairs at Gloucester House and the Springfield Centre's community garden project. He emphasised that the framework would allow for more proactive engagement with contractors and better accountability.

Councillors raised several points regarding the framework's implementation and enforcement. Councillor Allen Thwaites questioned how social value commitments would be enforced, to which Michelle Rodgers responded that these are contractual commitments and that the framework would provide clearer expectations and management through contract meetings. Councillor Thwaites also raised concerns about potential additional costs for bidders and the level of weighting given to social value in selection processes. Michelle Rodgers assured the committee that the framework aims to integrate social value without increasing costs and that further details on procurement evaluation would be provided.

Councillor Arthurton shared a positive experience with social value at the Springfield Centre, noting how a small contribution had catalysed significant community involvement. Councillor Margaret Glancy stressed the importance of promoting and celebrating the social value contributions made by contractors. Councillor Sarah Cox highlighted the potential for social value to support faith organisations and suggested considering the impact of large developers and planning agreements. Councillor Pip Allnatt proposed developing a clearer set of expectations for suppliers and engaging with schools and colleges to identify student opportunities.

The committee also discussed the framework's relevance in the context of Local Government Reorganisation (LGR), with the assurance that it would help maintain consistency and demonstrate local priorities during the transition. Councillor David Chubb noted that many larger companies have Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) policies, making a clear framework beneficial for communication. He also raised questions about evidencing ethical supply chains and the transparency of financial calculations for social value. Michelle Rodgers committed to clarifying these points and providing examples.

Councillor Marilyn Gordon expressed concerns about the long-term impact and sustainability of the framework, particularly in light of LGR. Michelle Rodgers reassured the committee that social value extraction is a business-as-usual activity that the framework aims to improve, and that alignment with other councils is being pursued. Councillor Siggy Atherton highlighted the importance of the Armed Forces Covenant and its potential integration into the framework, noting that Melton Borough Council is a gold award holder.

The committee expressed enthusiasm for the framework, with Councillor Pip Allnatt requesting that the committee's thanks to Ryan Ebdale for his work be recorded.

Review of the Forward Plan

The committee discussed the council's Forward Plan for July to October 2026. Councillor Sarah Cox raised concerns about significant carry-overs of nearly £900,000 and how these would be managed, particularly in light of LGR. She suggested that items related to IT system upgrades and the stockyard might be impacted. Councillor Margaret Glancy questioned whether the LGR process and the potential creation of a town council should be explicitly included in the Forward Plan.

Michelle Rodgers explained that the Scrutiny Committee's work programme already includes scrutiny of the revised corporate strategy, which will address LGR implications. Adam Green from Democratic Services clarified that decisions related to the town council would go to Full Council and therefore would not appear on the Forward Plan, which focuses on key executive decisions.

Councillor Sarah Cox identified four key areas potentially impacted by carry-overs: grounds maintenance, provisional year-end budgets, LGR funding, and the asset disposal programme. Councillor Simon Orson noted that the Forward Plan lists key decisions by Cabinet, and there is a need for clarity on which decisions will require Full Council. He also raised questions about the Cabinet's approval of carry-overs the previous night. Michelle Rodgers confirmed that the carry-overs were approved as part of the usual end-of-year process and that work on the corporate plan refresh is ongoing.

The committee agreed to feed back concerns about the absence of LGR-related items in the Forward Plan, the use of carry-overs for their intended purposes, and the potential for significant modifications to the plan due to LGR.

Review of the Scrutiny Work Programme

Councillor Allen Thwaites requested an update on the date for the Older Persons' Housing Review. He also raised the possibility of scheduling a workshop on the HRA business plan for August or September, with the committee favouring August.

Urgent Business

Michelle Rodgers announced that the decision regarding Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) had been communicated publicly. A member briefing was scheduled for Monday evening, and she encouraged attendance. She stressed that it was business as usual for service delivery but that all activities would need to be considered in the context of LGR.

Councillor Pip Allnatt expressed concern that the council would not have a public discussion about the LGR outcome until September. He stated his intention to formally request an urgent item at the next council meeting and to write to the leader about convening a meeting for parish council leaders to be appraised of the situation. Councillor Elaine Holmes agreed with the importance of informing parish councils.

The meeting concluded with thanks to all involved.