Transcript

Good morning everybody. Please can I welcome everyone to this meeting of Cabinet on Wednesday 22nd May 2024 from the Walton Suite, Winchester Guildhall. The time is 9.30am. My name is Councillor Martin Toed, Chairperson of the Cabinet and Leader of the Council. This meeting is live streamed from the Council's YouTube channel and the recording will also be available after the meeting. Subtitles can be switched on and advice on how to turn these on is set out online. Can I remind everyone to ensure that their mobile phones are on silent and can I remind members to use their microphones so that their comments are picked up for video. In the unlikely event that it is necessary to evacuate the building, the fire alarm will sound. Please follow all the instructions given to you by our team. Please can I welcome members of the public to this meeting this morning and we will invite you forward when it is time for you to make your contribution. Turning to the agenda. The first item is apologies for absence and we have apologies from Councillor Thompson. The second item is disclosures of interest. Thank you, can I declare a personal but non-prejudicial interest and non-financial interest. I'm also a County Councillor and there may be points that come up in this meeting which relate to the County Council's policies. Thank you very much indeed, I need to make the same declaration. Are there any other disclosures of interest? The next item is a request from Councillors to speak. Councillor Horrell and Councillor Lee have said that they wish to speak on various items today and I'll call you forward when we get to those items. The item after that is public participation. We have two people who wish to make public comments. Mr Davis I think wishes to make a comment on item 7 and Mr Tate wants to make a general comment now at the opening of the meeting. So Mr Tate would you like to come forward and make your comments. Hey, thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to address cabinet. You may recall that I spoke at the cabinet meeting on the 23rd May 2023 to raise the matter of landlords using section 21 no fault eviction orders to gain possession of rented properties. I also spoke at the cabinet meeting on the 14th March this year saying something very similar. I was very grateful for the supportive remarks that the leader made on both occasions and I shared his concern and frustration that the Renters Reform Bill hadn't yet been passed by Parliament. I am therefore shocked and extremely disappointed that this Council has authorised a registered provider landlord to apply to Winchester County Court for a section 21 no fault eviction order. The property in question which the leader is aware of is located in St Paul's Ward, this ward, and that of the portfolio holder for housing. The property is owned by Winchester City Council and the Council has confirmed that they want the property returned to them with vacant possession. The Council has also offered the RP legal support for the section 21 no fault eviction order. If the judge confirms the order on the 4th July 2024 at 11am, then the tenant of 27 years will be made homeless and the Council will be obliged to offer housing advice and options. This is exactly what happened back in 2022 when the tenant of the other flat in the building was evicted. That flat remains empty to this day. To my mind, the Council is acting no differently to that of a rogue landlord, precisely what the legislation is attempting to get rid of, and the leader's protestations about the injustice of the use of section 21 no fault eviction orders are mere words lacking any real commitment or action. The leader could immediately halt the eviction process and arrange for the tenant to be re-found housed as was eventually the case with the other occupant of the building. This is your quote leader. For someone who used to work for shelter and still supports them, this whole sequence of offence is simply wrong. I have to wonder whether the leader is considering his own position and possibly thinking of resigning over this scandalous injustice, and if not I would suggest he think seriously about this. The Council seems more interested in the properties and investment rather than someone's home. I'm not trying to score political points here, I'm trying to see that natural justice for a tenant of 27 years is resolved. Unfortunate Mr Hendy is not here because he has been trying, but to date no letter of offer of other accommodation has been offered. The guy who lived in the flat below sadly died three weeks ago. His property in Faber's Yard is empty. There is a solution leader. Thank you very much indeed Mr Tate for your comments. Your understanding of events is not the same as mine, but I'm not in a position to talk about individual circumstances. Although I can talk about the building because the building is not a person. The reason the flat remains empty is because the building was surveyed in 2017 and again in September 2021 and it showed that there were problems with subsidence, which means that we are not in a position to re-let anything in that building until major construction work has been done and the flat is made safe for occupation. That is one of the things that we wish to have happen with that building to make two flats available for the public and ensure that two people are able to be housed there. The second thing to say is that this Council, so whenever a landlord serves a section 21 notice, and in this case it was served by the Bournemouth Churches Housing Association and not by the City Council, it is the City Council that has the legal responsibility to support the affected individuals and families to get housing. It's one of the most important things that this Council does and it's one of many reasons that we want to see an end to the section 21 notices and are very disappointed at the sort of weasel words that have been put into the legislation allowing for review of the legal system before an end to section 21 notices are implemented. We take this responsibility extremely seriously and in many cases, and I don't want to get into individual cases, it means that we offer support and we offer a housing place before a section 21 notice is implemented. That is what we would expect to do for everybody and I have no reason to believe it's any different in this case. I have a different understanding as to whether housing has been offered but I'm not going to get into the details of that. We are really serious and I make this commitment to anybody in a similar situation and I know I'm saying this on behalf of the City Council, nobody is going to be homeless in this process. That is an absolute commitment. There will be no stage at which anybody does not have somewhere to live. That is not going to happen and I can make that knowing that is how we do business as a Council and that is going to happen in this particular case. If we do have officers here present who are able to help with any paperwork, there is certain paperwork that needs to be completed in order to ensure that a housing offer can be implemented and I realise that this is entirely a matter for Mr Marsh but if Mr Marsh wishes to talk to a housing officer today, we will get the paperwork sorted out that needs to be done. Again, that's a process that we would go through and we have officers here with the paperwork necessary in order to resolve this situation. All I will say to you is we are the organisation that supports people when section 21 notices are issued. That is the situation here and our commitment to be an absolute leading Council in ensuring that the residents of Winchester do not undergo homelessness and wherever possible avoid the use of temporary accommodation which we certainly intend to avoid in this case remains absolute. Our commitment to ensure that the housing we offer is safe and well maintained is absolute and that is why the second flat has not been let and why we wish to do remedial works to make the building safe for anybody who is living there for the long term and that is why our commitment is that the affected resident in this case gets the housing they need and at no point in the process is homeless. I can't really say any more than that at the moment but if you or anyone else wishes to have a conversation with me after the meeting or to speak with housing officers after the meeting in order to move this forward and get a resolution that is better for people and if you want to handle it in a different way that is absolutely fine as well then we would like we're very happy to make that happen. Moving on to the next item of business. The next item of business relates to approval of the minutes of the previous meeting held on the 14th of March 2024. Can I ask cabinet if the minutes are agreed as a correct record? Agreed. Thank you very much indeed. The following item is leader and cabinet announcements. Councillor Becker, I believe you have a few things to tell us. I do, I'm very pleased to say that during the pre-election period lots and lots of work has gone on and lots of things have started. So to kick off, sorry that is terrible, that was a terrible pun, the football stadium, the work has started on the replacement pitch so this will allow a 3G pitch to be constructed at Winchester Football Club which will enable women's and girls football as well as disabled football to take place because there'll be so much more pitch time and training time available. Keeping with the football theme, the KGV Pavilion is going to be officially opening on the 30th of May which will again offer an exciting and beautiful new home for women and girls football for the whole of Winchester District as well as being a home for cricket. So I know that's been a project that's been going on for a very long time so I'm very very proud to say that that will be opening shortly. Winchester City Council is also supporting the Winchester Ramblers to launch the first Winchester walking weekend from the 14th to the 16th of June. These little postcards are available all throughout town. There are free walks which are suitable for everyone of all abilities and ability to walk long distances so pick up one of those and you can have a look at all the walks that are available. We're also supporting the Ukrainian community in a photo exhibition that opens on the 25th of May at the Nutshell. It's entitled Home as another country, stories from the Ukrainian community in Winchester. We have very talented Ukrainian photographer amongst the community here in Winchester and she is exhibiting these photos in collaboration with the Council. And then this one unfortunately isn't as cheerful. Today marks the launch of the Winchester Community Safety Partnership which I chair in this role, the Violence Against Women and Girls Prevention Strategy and that's launching up at the Buttercross I think at 11.15 today. So this initiative is a result of a Collaborative Grant Fund bid between Winchester, Southampton, New Forest and Test Valley Community Safety Partnerships and the OBCC. So we are focusing our strategy on public places, so making sure that our women and girls feel safe when they're walking around the streets. We're working with licensed premises to make sure issues like drinks biking are looked at, door staff are properly trained, street pastors are given all the facilities that they need and education in schools around healthy relationships as well. So that launches today. Thank you Councillor Becker. Any other announcements? No, good. Moving on, we move to item 7, which is the quarter 4 performance report. So Deputy Leader, would you like to introduce the report? Thank you Leader, the quarter 4 performance report is set out in the same format as previous quarterly reports, except that, as is usual for the quarter 4 reporting period, a financial report is not included since this will be reported separately in the annual out-turn report. The main body of the report, pages 11 to 20, summarises progress in quarter 4 in the four key areas of the Council plan, cost of living support, greener faster, pride in place, and listing better. And it also gives details of the annual review of key performance indicators. Members were invited to comment on the existing suite of indicators, but no responses were received. It is proposed to retain the existing set of indicators due to this being the final year of the Council plan. There are some minor amendments and deletions, and these are set out on page 19. One particular change is to look at the clear up-rates on fly tipping, which was requested by the Scrutiny Committee. Attached to the main reports are the three other appendices. Appendix 1 gives a more detailed update on the four Council plan themes. Appendix 2 is the KPI report for quarter 4, and Appendix 3 is the quarter 4 report on Tier 1 projects. Cabinet should note that this is the last report in this form. The next quarterly report will be in a new shorter format reduced to about 35 pages, as opposed to the current up to 120. Members of the Scrutiny Committee have cited the draft of the new version as part of the training session on Monday evening. We believe that this new format will be more accessible and relevant, and I'd like to thank Simon Howson for all the work that he's done for this. Cabinet, we are asked to note the progress of Tier 1 quarter 4, 24, 25, and endorse the contents of the report, and also to adopt the strategic KPIs as detailed in Appendix 4. Thank you Deputy Leader. We now have Patrick Davis, who wishes to make a deputation on this paper if you'd like to come forward. Thank you Chair. Councillor Cutler has just referred to the contents of this enormously lengthy paper. What I wanted to do was make a few observations on the Appendix 3, which he just commented on, which purports to give details of the Council's Tier 1 programme and projects, and if I can briefly say a word on all of them that affect the town area particularly, but the whole district, which I regard as examples of the way the Council handles these major projects, which I've complained about many times over the years, where much of the work is done in private little groups and only gets reported back to full Council intermittently, and can I just draw attention to one or two things? First of all, on page 76 onwards, the central Winchester regeneration. I know this was approved, the original planning document in June 2018. I was trying to work out what happens next, and apparently in July of this year, there will be a further report where to, it's not quite clear to me, pages and pages of this, but it's extraordinary that it talks about at the beginning, vibrant retail. What is happening on retail? I thought we needed fresh reports on that, should be discussed in public at proper meetings, not tucked away in little panels. Next on page 94, the local plan. Again, it's far from clear to me what is going to happen next. It talks about finally adopting the plan in December 25, the work going on on the next public exercise and particular references to meetings with the Planning Inspectorate. Why isn't that being reported back in public? Because I think we need to know the constraints that are being put on by government or by the Planning Inspectorate, and I could go into detail of my concerns on that, but time is against me. Thirdly, on the station approach, page 101. Again, there's been little gatherings going on. I know I saw an email from somebody at some meeting last week. Who was invited? Why aren't these things being done in public? It is supposed, I think, going to your cabinet in June. Could you just confirm that is so? And when will the papers be available? And then the craziest one of all is the Movement Strategy, page 105. This has been going on for decades. Well, it seems like decades, 2019. And then there's reference specifically to schemes about which I knew nothing. I don't think I've ever been reported to formal committees. A TRO to limit cycling on the pedestrianised section of Middlebrook Street. Why? That sounds dangerous to me. The £100,000 being spent on a liveable neighbourhood in full flood. Why full flood? Who decided that? When did that ever go to a public meeting? £100,000 of still money and more to come. Is that really a priority in this district, in this city, full flood? I know it's your ward chair, but that can't be a main priority of the council. It seems to me quite exceptionally stupid. Can we not have proper public reports at full council meetings and committee meetings? Thank you very much, indeed. Do you want to take that now or shall we get the council deputations as well? I think it would be wise to get the council deputations as well. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Davis. We will address your comments in a later part of the meeting and later part of this agenda item, but also when we come to the forward plan at the end of the meeting. We have Councillor Horrell. Would you like to go first? her good morning and thank you for allowing me to address Cabinet today. It is unusual to have the Q4 performance review presented directly to Cabinet before scrutiny has had the chance to review the latest performance against the council plan. I'm sure the Cabinet will agree the role that overview and scrutiny can play in holding an authority's decision makers to account makes it fundamentally important to the successful functioning of local democracy. And I therefore seek the agreement of the chair that should scrutiny have any comments on this paper once it has had the chance to do its work that Cabinet will receive any comments and action accordingly. In a few short minutes at Cabinet, it is impossible to review the work of the last quarter in the plus 100 page report before us today and do due diligence. Therefore, I have selected two key areas that raise questions for your consideration. The retrofit programme for our own homes has been a key area of work that all members have supported in the council. We have failed to meet our annual target for houses or measures. What does the administration intend to do differently from last year to ensure this target is met going forward, given the significant benefit to our residents of this programme? More people, different contractors, different suppliers, whatever the barriers were to us achieving that very important target. The level of complaints responded to in 10 working days has been commented on throughout the year by scrutiny and is below the 23/24 target. And although there has been some improvement, it is still below expectations. What specific measures is the administration taking to ensure that the concerns are being responded to as we promise? I cannot see anything specifically detailed in the narrative, so would like clarification please. Chair, Appendix 4 in the papers for this item talks to the proposed key performance indicators for 24/25. And can I just correct the portfolio holder? We did not receive these formally at the training session this week. We did a lot of other good work, but we did not review those new KPIs as you mentioned earlier. We note that the proposed KPIs do not reflect any attempt to reframe them from all the scrutiny feedback that you've had through the last year. The only significant change is the monitoring of fly tipping, which we very much welcome and I know everyone will endorse. Can we propose KPI section should start with a sentence or two stating the strategic objective in, for example, vibrant economy so that you can reflect on whether the following KPI actually delivers. In that instance, what the council spends on local services is actually not an indication of a vibrant economy. The most important policy of the administration, the climate emergency, still has not managed to produce a proxy for measuring progress to net zero emissions. Carbon emissions reported annually in arrears is not a KPI. Could we suggest that we report on measures that have been instigated and the carbon emissions you have saved instead? This would really show progress and help everyone to understand the path that we are all on. Thank you chair. Thank you very much indeed, Councillor Horrell. Councillor Lee, would you like to come forward and share your comments? Good morning all and thank you chair for allowing me to speak. Firstly, I think Councillor Cutler has preempted some of what I'm going to be saying and apologies, I didn't attend the scrutiny training the other night, so some of the items I'm going to be mentioning here I may not have included if I'd known what the discussions are about. I wanted to pick up on the adopting new performance measures and the lack of responses to the democratic services notice on the 15th of March, which invited comments on the current performance measures. And perhaps this signals a gap of member engagement and feedback. And I have a number of observations and suggestions for performance measures related to that gap. And as I say, forgive me if some of this was covered in the recent scrutiny training, which I didn't attend. The democratic service invitation for performance measures feedback did not request a nil return, which I suggest creates uncertainty about how many members engaged or did not engage like myself. I missed the opportunity to do unavoidable circumstances. I think this note has landed a time when members' focus was understandably on the forthcoming elections. So I suggest a better approach for engagement in the future needs to be looked at, maybe sending a personal email invite to each counsellor for suggested new or performance measures with a clear request for response if no changes are proposed. This ensures every member has a chance to contribute and dispels any uncertainty about engagement, and maybe the timetable that prior to the last committee committee in the municipal year. My question therefore is that will there be a renewed call for refreshed KPIs for 24/25? I'd like to just pick up on some what I consider missing targets or measures, and this by no means is complete. But given the urgent need to address the climate crisis as evidenced by recent breach of global temperature targets and the nature crisis, the council must intensify its efforts towards net zero. So just going to green, green, green faster. And I did mention this at the last scrutiny meeting, doesn't seem to be picked up. And we need to establish a real world target for electric vehicle charge points rollout based on local traffic and vehicle data, ensuring we contribute effectively to the government's goal of 300,000 electric vehicle charging points by 2030. So I'm sure we can identify a better, smarter KPIs for an initiative like this aligned with local needs and national targets. On page 22, yes, I welcome the pursuing of the local electric vehicle infrastructure funding to catalyse the rollout, but I would welcome opportunity to discuss this with the cabinet member responsible for championing this KPI in this area of work. Then moving on to improving place management, I just want to endorse what Councillor mentioned and that, you know, the delays in addressing fly tipping cleanup are disappointing and of real concern, certainly to my local ward residents. Recent incidents highlighted a two month delay in cleanup in Cott Street between Swanmore and Silverton, which I think highlights a problem. I suggest a review and amendment of the current contract ensure quicker response times for fly tip cleanup is much needed. In the meantime, I do welcome the KPI amendment to include clearance rates within contracted timescales on page 19. Despite the council's declared nature emergency, I don't see any KPIs targeting the greening of procurement processes and supply chains. I suggest we need to develop and implement measures as soon as possible in 2024/25 to align procurement and contracts with OWL and the wider net zero and nature biodiversity goals. I just want to pick up on conservation very quickly, not having mechanisms to maximise the contributions to a wider district conservation groups and to book their successes. So our district greening efforts is a missed opportunity. This report to cabinet highlights a very city and immediate locality focus. There are many out there that can provide a contribution and I guess we can identify some smart measures. Again, a welcome option to talk to the cabinet member responsible for nature. And then I think this is again reflects what's been already said today. I suggest we need better streamlined reports with more quantitative reporting, less qualitative narrative on progress related to measures. This approach I'm sure will enhance transparency and accountability in managing financial environmental challenges. Thank you. Thank you very much indeed. deputy leader quite a few points there raised. Feel free to kick off and share them around other members of cabinet as you see fit. Deputy leader, I think when we consider first of all Mr Davis's comments and in that respect it may be useful for those responsible for each project to comment on them. There were the three projects that were mentioned CWR, which is I think yours leader, Station approach, the movement strategy, and also the local plan. So my view, and it may be that because one is fairly close to it, is that we are pretty good at public engagement and putting out the stages of the process. But if that's not clearly understood, we perhaps may need to look at how we do it better. Councillor Porter. Thank you. I'm just going to address the local plan because that's within my portfolio. Mr Davis, the local plan, as you know, is a long process. We have had continuous conversations with the planning inspector at which we have almost to advise to make sure we're absolutely on the right track. And that goes forward. We did have a conversation about making a certainly a member briefing and then putting things out to the public during the election time. But obviously that's not an appropriate time to do that. There's a lot of noise as well around the election time. The public are not necessarily listening at that point in time, but we have arranged a number of meetings post election. And those we even were discussing even yesterday about how we can get that out to the public. It's a fine line between fitting in between public holidays and elections and making sure that we have that information out there. But certainly, we had an award winning first consultation. We don't expect to slip from those very high standards for the rest of the whole consultation right up to our reg 19 point. You'll be aware because you're very aware of the planning system how complicated it is to a general member of the general public. And we have discussed in the last 24 hours or 36 hours exactly how we can make that approachable and easy to understand for the general public. So I can assure you it is always our intention to make sure the public are well informed. And if I may deputy leader, I'll comment briefly on on central Winchester regeneration and station approach. I mean, firstly, in terms of the public governance and the decisions that have been to be taken, if you look at page 142 of the pack, what you will see one of the things we've done recently is extend the forward plan when we will be taking decisions further into the future, so that people get more transparency about when decisions are going to be taken. And in that one, it sets out that the central winch Winchester regeneration development delivery plan will be decided in July. That's information that wasn't available in the past and now is. But it's important to note also that on many of the projects that you highlight, we have established cabinet committees that meet in public, take reports on the progress of projects, including the plans for public engagement and hearing the voice of the public in the development of those projects. And indeed, that's something I'm always very keen to ensure is in every single paper that talks about central Winchester regeneration and station approach, not only how will the form of governance decisions be taken, but also having meetings in public on how the public will be involved, but also what sort of reference groups we have, what stakeholder groups we have in order to hear from people's voices as plans are developed. And I would recommend attending those. We do also, where appropriate, have open forums which enable wide public briefing on issues, although what we try and do more of now is ensure that the engagement is done through the project rather than automatically being done by the council itself. So as I hope you are aware, for example, our partners Jigsaw have been doing a large amount of public engagement on the subject of central Winchester regeneration. And in the same way, a design engine who are working on the master plan for the station approach area have also been talking widely to interested groups. And there was very large public consultation earlier in that process. We can always do better, and we can always find better ways of making information available to the public. But there is a lot that goes on. The first thing that gets agreed on any of these plans is how will we run the project in a way that listens to the public and hears their views and make sure that they're considered as part of the development process. And we intend to continue doing that into the future. Do you like to move on to the next comment? The other project mentioned was the movement strategy, which is so dependent on Hampshire County Council's decisions, but Councillor Lurney may want to make a few other comments. Yes, absolutely. I mean, the movement strategy, while it's a joint strategy between the city and the county council, because the county council is the highways authority, we are incredibly dependent on their decisions. And I think it's also worth mentioning that a number of measures will also come through other routes other than as part of the movement strategy, depending on development that's going on elsewhere. We have regularly reported on the movement strategy to the Health and Environment Policy Committee. And indeed, all of the schemes mentioned by Mr Davies were reported last September to that Health and Environment Policy Committee. Full flood is a scheme that arose out of the Minnie Holland study, which was a bid made by the county council to the government for a significant amount of funding. Unfortunately, after spending a lot of money on developing the feasibility, that scheme was cancelled by the government. But clearly, we didn't want to waste the work that was already done. Full flood was chosen partly because it's an area which serves schools and colleges with thousands of young people walking and cycling through it virtually every day. It's an area which is relatively confined and manageable to work with. I'm sure the local ward members can confirm that there has been engagement going on with local people there in order to see what they'd like to see, but this is very much proof of concept and an area which so many young people seemed a sensible place to start in the city. Yeah, I can confirm as a ward member that there was very high attendance from local residents at the workshops that have been held. The other point to mention in passing is full flood has had more development than anywhere else in the entire district, apart from more development areas. The meeting was the joint board between Hampshire and Winchester that makes decisions on priorities. Hampshire's request does not meet in public, but whenever resources are committed, it is made through a public process. And in this particular case, the decision went to scrutiny, I think was included in a HEP paper that you referred to. It was included in the HEP paper, and it was at that time an auction which was raised and was open to discussion at the time. Yeah, so it is a decision that certainly we took for it in public. Yeah, I mean, clearly the final decision was not taken in public. And you know, I think that is a product of working across different authorities. And also, this is a relatively minor scheme when you look at the amount of funding that we're talking about committing to it. So it is not something where this council is spending sums of money which would require it to come through the formal governance process. Thank you, Councillor Lenny. And similarly, I think it's been handled in line with the county's governance processes as well. But it was a decision that was taken forward in public for the public to respond to and for councillors to respond to at the policy meeting last year. So while the final decision is because it's a joint decision is not one that our current arrangements have made in public, the City Council's view on what the decision should be was something that was taken forward in public. And the decision that was taken was consistent with the outcome of the policy meeting held in public late last year. That's a fair summary of the situation. Yes, although I think it's for clarification, it was not subject to the formal recommendation, but it was raised at that meeting. Thank you very much. Potentially for discussion. Okay, thanks for that. And if we move on to Councillor Horrell's comments, in terms of it being unusual, I agree, of course, it's unusual that it hasn't had an opportunity to go to scrutiny beforehand. I mean, one of the problems we've always had at this time of year is that by the time the quarter four report has been through scrutiny and then comes to cabinet, it is so far past the end of the quarter that the annual reports been produced and the relevance of the document is perhaps less valuable to be commenting on at that time. That said, of course, it's entirely within the remit of scrutiny to decide how they want to progress with looking at this report. The specific comments on the retrofit programme, Councillor Westfield, would you like to comment on? Thank you, Deputy Leader. Yes, on the retrofit programme, can I remind Councillor Horrell that on the 5th of February, there was a cabinet housing meeting where we had a comprehensive presentation on both the new homes programme and the retrofit programme. And it should be no surprise that we were not going to achieve the target that we set out at the beginning of the year, where in that meeting we presented a revised target for this year. And Councillor Horrell was part of that committee and had the opportunity to ask questions of the officers who were running that programme. So that happened on the 5th of February and the presentations are still available online. Now, the retrofit programme, I consider a fantastic success actually. We started the year with no programme in place and we had achieved four retrofits of council homes the previous year. We've ended this financial year with in excess of 350 homes having been retrofitted during the year. I think that's a fantastic effort on behalf of the retrofit team. I'm very grateful for all the efforts they put in. We went through in detail at that meeting the reasons why we had not achieved the ambitious target of around 500 homes in the year with the consequent measures. And I remember vividly the discussion that the officers gave and comments around the fact that we're not going into empty properties. We're going to people's homes and we have to be respectful of what people want done to their homes and when. And so during the year, as we've ramped up this programme, we've clearly learnt the ways we should approach and work collaboratively with the tenants in their homes. So there was some issues around access to roof space and so on, which we've had thorough discussions with the residents. We now have a report. So addressing your point, Councillor Horrell and what's going to be different this year. We do have agreed policies and approaches with the residents as to how we provide storage space etc when we insulate those lofts and that allows us to access more properties and encourage more people to come forward. We also talked around the need for a communication programme, a proper communication programme. And you know, I've always said to the team that half the job is the technical thing about fitting the houses out and getting up to standard installing the insulation. The other half is good communication with the people in their homes to get them infused and wanting to join the programme. So it is no surprise, should be no surprise to Councillor Horrell that in this report we are not achieving the 500 plus number that we set out at the beginning of the year. But I think the number that we have achieved and answer your question of what we're doing differently, rolling forwards into the next year, we do have a clear way of working and communicating and encouraging and enrolling people into the retrofit programme and allow us into their properties. A second strand of this is that some of our council homes are 100 years old. Others were built after the Second World War and essentially put up in a manner that was not robust at all. And as we go through that process, looking at physically what we need to do, some of these properties, some of these properties, we have to question how do we approach it? Is the viability of upgrading those properties the right route forward? So that was another factor that delayed us in achieving the higher numbers. So rolling forwards, I think the team did a very good job in this financial year for getting this programme up and running and a robust communications programme in place. We now have case studies in place, we have videos in place and video endorsements from our residents on the process. We use that. We've already used it to go out and recruit more people. So already we have more people signed up to the retrofit programme than we had last year. And we have the policies and processes in place to be able to work effectively in people's homes and provide them with the significant benefits that the improvement of the properties give in terms of comfort and lower energy bills. Thank you, Councillor Westwood. Councillor Horrell also raised the issue of complaints responded to within 10 days, and there is a broader problem with this. We're looking at within the TC25 process of how the whole customer service sort of structure works because we recognise that there's quite a bit of double handling in the process at the moment which causes delays and causes problems. However, I will undertake to look to see if we can make short term improvements, but what's more important I think in the longer term is for us to get it right within the digitisation and the TC25 process. I think the remaining comments from both Councillor Lee and Councillor Horrell were about reviewing the KPIs. While scrutiny made various comments about KPIs through the year, the only real specific suggestion that we got was around the clear up rate on fly tipping, which we have incorporated here. It was felt that given that the Council plan runs for five years, we have a new Council plan next year, it will be appropriate during this year to have a really detailed look at KPIs to make sure that when we go into the new Council plan next year that we have a really robust set. So I will welcome comments and we will initiate that process of looking at it later in the year. And finally, I'd like to thank Councillor Lee for his comments about shortening the report. We hope that it will be certainly more accessible and more relevant going forward. Thank you very much indeed. So I suppose the question now is, do cabinet members have any questions? Any debate? Certainly, I welcome the continued scrutiny of our performance. I find it really useful as a cabinet member to have the scrutiny of the performance and be able to look at it objectively. That's really helpful, but I also do welcome the principle of the shorter report. We've had the opportunity to look at that, the privilege of looking at that, and it certainly seems as if it's going to be more quantitative, which I think will be helpful. I also think it's important that we, but that doesn't seem to be always the case. Food waste is the one example, local plans and other. I think that's a very relevant point for any performance. We are in some cases handling public money, in all cases handling public money, and we mustn't be seen to be spending it without knowing that we've got legislation to back ourselves up. I think that's a really useful comment, and I think it's one of those things that we need to also look at closely when we're looking at the KPIs because some. There is probably no relevance to KPIs where we have no control over any of the changes in terms of this performance report. There may be interesting information about the district, but they're not necessarily of value if there are areas where we have very little control. There are indicators and we need to really bottom that out. I think over the next year when we look at the look at how we use the KPIs. And thank you very much. Any further final comments? So I would I would like to first of all thank Councillors and Mr Davis for their comments. And and actually I think where someone of the famously thorough and analytical approach of Mr Davis is saying that we might slightly overdone it in terms of how much information we provide. I think that does show that there is a need to focus the report and indeed as people were making comments and Council's points on that were also well made and people were making comments about. Well, it would be really useful to show what the building blocks are that we're working on climate change and whether we've done them or not. There is an entire section on the carbon neutrality action plan that does precisely that. And similarly, the point about the needing to rethink our KPIs as we move forward and refresh our plan for 2025 to 30 is well made and something that we intend to do. There is a point and and clearly something we think about a bit more in terms of how we make sure that people are clarity about what's coming up in terms of the major projects. I mean, on June 6 we will have a meeting of the Cabinet Regeneration Committee, which will go through, have a presentation made available in advance in terms of what we're planning to do on central Winchester. Sorry, 18th apologies. It's been moved, hasn't it? Yeah, because some person might be on holiday. Sorry, Cabinet Committee regen on the 18th of June. We will have papers available in advance on central interest regeneration and station approach will welcome public comment at that meeting and obviously later in the meeting will be appointing back bench colleagues and opposition colleagues to sit on that committee and also provide scrutiny for that work. Similarly, I think you know that the local plan doesn't just talk about the content of the local plan, but also how we will engage the public on that plan and how we will get input on all the various strategies that make up for it. I think the comments on movement strategy are something that maybe we have a conversation with the new leader at Hampshire to say. At the moment we're. Scrutinizing and. Our own position in public, but is there an opportunity for a bit more public governance in terms of how the joint decisions are made? And that's a conversation I'm happy to follow up on with. The. Leader of the Conservative Group of Hampshire and the likely new leader of Hampshire Council is going to be appointed tomorrow to say, can we think about a bit more public governance on that? It was very useful also, and again, perhaps an indicator of how complicated our governance can be sometimes for. Council Westwood to go through in some detail all the work and thinking that's been going on in the retrofitting and how we're looking to accelerate that program, how we've learned, how we've set ourselves an ambitious target and are learning how to implement with excellence and at pace. I can. Reassure Councilor Horrell that we take the role of scrutiny to do towards these reports very seriously. Myself and. We will take the recommendations from scrutiny and should scrutiny decide that it wants to discuss this paper, then I know Councilor Cutler will be there in order to hear the comments and make sure they're brought back to cabinet. And of course, any formal recommendations from scrutiny. We always take very seriously indeed. Once again, I would like to thank officers. It's important to note that there are the officers that do the tremendous amount of work necessary to bring this report together. And that work is greatly appreciated. But really, the people we need to thank are all the officers who've done the work that's being reported on. It really is a stunning amount of work that's been delivered across the whole area of the Council's work. We've touched on some of the areas today. We've touched touched on the climate emergency. We've touched on redevelopment. We've touched on retrofit. There's a whole lot more in there which I'd be happy to go on about and will go on about. But. The Councillors, the people of the Winchester District owe an enormous amount to the officers who work extremely hard to deliver across an extremely wide range of areas. Some of it's very visible, some of it's less visible, all of it's important. And we're very grateful for that work. And I'd just like to put that on the record and make sure that everybody is aware of how appreciative we are. So the recommendations we have in front of us today are relatively straightforward, which is to note the paper in front of us. Just check I've got my place to note the progress achieved during Q4 of 2023-24. Endorse the comments of the report. Adopt the performance measures in Appendix 4 as KPIs. And that's all in front of us today. As said, if any further recommendations come back from scrutiny, we will consider them, but I doubt they will be changing the contents of the report, so I feel very happy for us to note it today. But you know the role of scrutiny as we learn from the training is that they're always looking for ways for us to improve and we take those recommendations seriously and will consider them and act on them. But today Cabinet, if you could note the report and agree to adopting the performance measures. Then we can consider this item of business complete. Are you agreed with those two recommendations? Agreed. Thank you very much indeed. Right. Moving on, the next item is annual appointments to Cabinet committees in formal groups and fora. Now we should all have a printed addendum in front of us. I will also read out the recommendations as we go through the paper. Let's do it the other way around this time. Councillor Lee, would you like to come forward and go first and say anything you want to say? It may actually be slightly easier actually, given the nature of this paper, unless you have an overall strategic comment. If maybe you and Councillor Horrell come forward and if we get to an individual point that needs discussing, then we'll do it then. I don't know, how do you wish to do this? Do you wish to make an introductory comment at the beginning or do you just want to be at the table while we talk about the roles? It's entirely up to you. If you've prepared something, come forward. Councillor Horrell, please come forward. Definitely. We may all need to, I don't know if this is showing up on the microphones at all, but it is absolutely bucketing down at the moment and it is quite loud. It is useful to have you both at the table for this whole agenda. If you want to make any introductory comments, then please do, then please stay at the table as we go through the paper. We definitely need to be using our microphones and perhaps speaking slightly more slowly than we would do normally in order to overcome the impact of the rain. Councillor Horrell. Thank you, Chair. Oh, it's gone quiet. Yes, it was rather noisy for a moment, wasn't it? And thank you for allowing me to come forward and speak again today and I'm sure we'll get to any specifics in the two papers before us for the committees internally and externally. I just wanted to make a point on the record for those listening that both, I'm sure the two of us are thankful as opposition group leaders for the meeting that we had earlier in the week with yourself, Councillor Todd, to advise on your position regarding the vacant positions for opposition members. I think that makes the process today much easier. So that is appreciated. Thank you for your time. As consequently, I'm following that meeting. We as a Conservative group have not nominated members in several areas of the council's work, despite believing that we have something to offer. And I just wanted to reassure members of the public listening to this meeting and maybe looking at the papers that should you not be aware that it isn't a lack of commitment from councillors that we're not stepping forward to participate, just a matter of the political decisions being made. And I'd also welcome the opportunity on the record. We have discussed this, both opposition leaders with the leader, the assurance that we will use our new opportunity in our revised constitution to ensure councillors who represent us on key external bodies will report to council throughout the year. You, Councillor Todd, did this for PUSH most recently at the council, but we have many other organisations that deserve the opportunity for such a report for all members at council, South Downs National Park, Hampshire Cultural Trust, Citizens' Advisor, perhaps name just a few of those important representations. And so I'm asking you to work with officers and Mr. Mayor to ensure that these reports are regularly added to the council agenda so that the external appointments become more meaningful and the activities shared amongst all council members so that we can understand what is happening and how our representation is being taken in those places. Thank you.

• Thank you, Councillor Horrell. Councillor Lee. - Yeah, thank you, leader. My comments are very brief. To echo largely what Councillor Horrell said, you have nominations from us. We obviously will use the opportunities to robustly engage with council business and to serve and do the right thing. And also just to highlight that regular reports from these external bodies, I think would be very helpful to ensure that wider understanding engagement is well reflected. I think we do. That's it. Thank you.
• Thank you very much indeed. And I agree strongly that I think the reports back on external activity would be extremely helpful. It's something that we have started doing, that I've started doing recently, and then something that we then added to the constitution. I think it is important. It has been a failing in the past under all administrations, including ours, including all the different measures of colours over the years, that we haven't done this as well as we could have done. And now that we are doing this, I think councillors are finding it really helpful. And tying back to a point that was made by Mr. Davis earlier, I think it would have been something that he probably would have appreciated in his day when he was on the council as if we had had that level of reporting back from outside bodies. So it is definitely something that I will ask the mayor that we continue to include and also ask external representatives to continue to report back to full council because I think it is something of benefit to all of us. It actually improves the fact that people knowing that they will be reporting back will encourage them to do a better job, I'm sure, on behalf of the council, but also provides an opportunity for people to understand the wider role of the council's work and people to be held to account for what they are doing on behalf of the council. Now let's move to the detailed proposals in front of us. The first three appointments that we need to make relate to the cabinet committees that we talked about earlier. For legal reasons, these are defined because they are subcommittees of the cabinet in terms of how the voting picture works. The names listed aren't all listed for all cabinet members by each of the committees, but my proposal by default would be that we carry on with the same nominations that we had last year. So I will read those out as we go through. So starting off with cabinet committee local plan, the proposal would be that the members of that committee from cabinet are Councillor Portier, Councillor Learny and myself, Councillor Todd. The three Liberal Democrat nominations are Councillors Brophy, Williams, with Councillor Laming as the deputy, although in practice the standing orders mean that anybody can be a deputy with the agreement with the chair. The Green Party representative is Councillor Lee with Councillor Wallace as a deputy, and the Conservative Party representative is Councillor Horrell with Councillor Godfrey as a deputy. On the cabinet committee for regeneration last year, four cabinet members on this were myself as chair, Councillor Cutler, Councillor Learny and Councillor Thompson. The non-voting members, now the discussion I had with the other parties said that we would broadly try and reflect proportionality in the overall makeup of these three cabinet subcommittees. It is the case that the Green Party has three councillors and the Conservatives have eight. So I think it is, and the Liberal Democrats have 33, and I think it is important that we reflect that in the numbers. So in this case, my proposal is to appoint, as said, myself, Councillor Cutler, Councillor Learny, Councillor Thompson, Councillor Aron and Councillor Reach, with Deputy of Councillor Laming from the Liberal Democrats, and two Conservatives, Councillor Bolton and Councillor Godfrey, with Councillor Horrell as a deputy. For proportionality reasons, I will not propose to appoint a Green Party representative to this committee. And then the cabinet committee housing, the three people last year were councillors Westwood, Becker and Cutler. There are two tacked representatives to be nominated by the tacked board, and the four non-voting members are Councillor Power, Councillor Scott, Councillor White and Councillor Horrell, with the deputies being Councillor Baffoe, Councillor Lee and Councillor Miller. Should we just agree those cabinet subcommittees, we've just done them for the brief? Agreed. Let us move on to the tacked, the next set of appointments, the tacked board. Sorry, could I just seek very rudely a point of clarification? The tacked sort of structure and organisation is sort of amending as part of our requirements for obviously new legislation and the like. We refer to it as the tacked representatives. Is that a fair reflection of where we're sort of heading in the future, or is that something that we'll need to come back to and review, just to clarify, because I know these structures are evolving at the moment? Thank you, Chair. Thank you. I'm happy to discuss that outside of this meeting, just to clarify, but that is my understanding that the new tacked board will be created as and when we have recruited the relevant residents and effectively non-residents onto that board, and then they would have a subset of those represented on the housing committee. Thank you, absolutely. So if there are any changes to tacked board or tacked, then you will bring that back to Cabinet since obviously the tacked board members have not been appointed yet, so we can't put names in, but as and when they are known, then I will bring that back with the two representatives that represent tacked on that committee. Okay, thanks very much. There's no need to bring the two names of tacked back, that will happen by default, because we're agreeing a policy position on that state. If there's any wider reconfiguration, then obviously, because the board is being appointed by Cabinet, then it will need to come back to Cabinet, but that's fine. So the two representatives there are Councillor Westwood and Councillor Horrell on the tacked board. On the Carbon Neutrality Open Forum, the one member at the moment is the responsibility for climate change, which is Councillor Learny, and it talks about a panel of other members and external organisations to be invited, depending on the subject matter of the meeting. I think by default, we currently invite all members, but it is useful to know the priority members expressed by the other parties in terms of invitations to that meeting, and I'm sure we will honour that in terms of how we run those meetings. But there is, there's no formal position of panel other members, but we will make a note to make sure that those names are definitely invited. The Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Forum, and there's a decision slightly later as to who the cabinet member for equality, diversity and inclusion is. I'll take that decision at the same time. That is Councillor Becker, and the member champion is Councillor Bennett. The Liberal Democrats committee member is Councillor Sudhakar Achal, the Green Party, Councillor White, and the Conservative Party, Councillor Brook. They've named the deputy, I'm not sure we can note, but it's Councillor Brook that we are appointing today, and we will take it. We will allow Councillor Becker to accept any party representative as deputies as appropriate for those party roles. The four members of the Winchester Sport and Leisure Park Advisory Board, the cabinet member for Winchester, responsibility for Winchester Sport and Leisure Parks, Councillor Becker, the Councillor, the Principal Opposition Group member for Sports, Councillor Horrell, two other ward members, Councillor Reach and Councillor Aron. The Central Winchester Regeneration Project Board, the two members are myself and Councillor Cutler. The SAPPS board is recommended, oh okay, I think I'm going to change this actually, which is it currently says leader of the council, cabinet member responsibility for finance, cabinet member responsibility for estates, cabinet member responsibility for business. Since the cabinet member with responsibility for estates and the leader of the council is the same person at the moment, I think it would probably be appropriate, I think the decision we took last year was to put Councillor Learney in because we wanted to reflect the climate emergency in any strategic asset purchase decisions in, so that's a change to that recommendation. The Treasury Investment Group, I think the same change applies. Are they constitutionally determined? May I check this, I believe they are. Okay, so if they are constitutionally determined, we might need to change the constitution, but if they are constitutionally determined, we will go with what's constitutionally determined. Yes indeed, leader, so in that case that would be for the SAPPS board, yourself, Councillor Cutler and Councillor Thompson. And I get two votes, no okay, sadly not. Right, okay, so we will go with what's on the page in front of us, but it sounds like that might be something we refer to a cabinet working, constitutional working group at some point. The Kings Barton full. I'm sorry, I think that may be a technical change that the MO may be able to make the constitution, but we can check that out rather than it needing to go to a full meeting of the constitutional working group. Yeah, it almost needs a sort of addition to it that says if any of these are duplicated, one other cabinet member can be appointed or something like that, and that very simply resolves it, doesn't it? I don't think we need to resolve the issue now. However, it is a decision that will be needed made in public, and if it needs to come back to a future cabinet meeting, we will do so, but for the time being, we will work with what's on the page in front of us on the assumption that probably is written in the constitution. Oh, and we have checked, it is in the constitution. Okay, so we're going with these two lists for SAPPS and Treasury Investment Group. Kings Barton forum, it recommends six councillors and two deputies. Last year, I think we had seven, and I think the groups constructed their numbers on the basis of seven, so I think we'll go with seven. So the Kings Barton forum will be Councillor Cremoist and his chair, Councillors Beto, Eve, Morris and Porter, and Councillor Cunningham and Councillor Godfrey, with the deputies listed as Councillors Lurney, Rutter and Horrell. West of Waterloo Hill forum is four members, Councillors Cutler, Bennett and Chamberlain, and Councillor Langford-Smith, with the deputies being Councillors Clear, Porter and Brook. The North Whiteley Development forum, and there is a decision on that in this paper, were six city council members with two deputies, so that's Councillors Vivian Atwell, Sudarka Atwell, Porter and Small, with Councillor Lee and Councillor Miller, and the deputies are Councillors Chamberlain and Latham and Bolton. And then in terms of the champions, we've already appointed Councillor Becker as the cabinet member lead member for Equality, Diversity and Inclusion tonight. The Equality, Diversity and Inclusion member champions, Councillor Bennett has referred to earlier, the Sanctuary champion is Councillor Tippa Cooper, and the Armed Forces champion is Councillor Laming. So the recommendations in front of us are twofold. Firstly, that cabinet appoints the roles that we've just appointed, both to the bodies listed in Appendix A of the report and to the roles of EDI champion, Equality, Diversity lead member champion, Sanctuary champion and Armed Forces champion. And then note that the good work of the Whiteley forum is noted and that the six month trigger for dissolution forum has been reached and that we will agree terms of reference for Whiteley town council for ongoing public engagement during the continued development of this area. So we will make an agreement with them in terms of what the future engagement model is for that area and subject to their decision making processes, we will then be in a position to wind up the Whiteley forum and allow the town council to take the lead on how residents are engaged in decision making in that area. Is that agreed? Thank you very much indeed. We now move to the appointments to outside bodies. This is, I'd like to thank the responsible officer for this, Ms Graham, for a very well organised report, which is much easier to follow than it has been in the past. And this paper essentially lists all the appointments we're going to make. And then the second recommendation, which we've written in the cabinet paper and reflects the comments from Councillor Horrell is that Coint representatives be reminded of their responsibilities while representing the council on external organisation as summarised in paragraph 1.6 to 1.10 of the report and the guidance serving on outside bodies, but also in terms of reporting back to the council as a whole. Let us go through the addendum. We have nominations in front of us now. The first page summarises bodies where no appointment is needed at this time by cabinet. Particularly roles where appointments have been made that stay in place for some time. So that's table one. So we don't need to do anything about that other than to note it. That's correct. Table two is automatic appointments for relevant cabinet members. So this is where the representative is defined in our agreement with the outside body. And so, again, no particular decisions needing to be taken on that. The third is where there is no contest and one name has been put forward. And the two there that we need to agree are the South East employers, where Councillor Morris becomes our representative and Benton Living, where we're looking to reappoint Councillors Batho and Pet as the Councillors, company directors. And the fourth one is where we have more nominations than vacancies. So the first relates to Hampshire Cultural Trust. Historically, we have a trustee on this, and this is because we're one of the founding members of Hampshire Cultural Trust and they hold our museum and the West Gate and various other heritage assets on our behalf and manage them. So it's important we have. So we have one trustee as cabinet member for Culture as Councillor Thompson. And then we have three nominations for observers, Councillor Porter, Councillor White, Councillor Godfrey. I propose that we go with Councillor Porter. The Councillor, the Hospital of St Cross in the Arms House of Noble Poverty, otherwise known as St Cross Hospital. Councillor Horrell, you wish to say something? Chair, if this term has come to an end, then obviously you would be appropriate to rescind Fiona Marple's day. Right. I believe it has come to an end. There was a bit of confusion about that. And Councillor Clear then becomes the only nomination for that position. The Police and Crime Panel, one representative plus deputy, it's four yearly until May 2025, confirmed annually. We have four nominate. Well, we have Councillor Vivian Atwell as proposed with Deputy Councillor Williams, also Councillors Horrell and Bolton. I propose we go with Councillors Atwell and Williams. The River Hamble Management Committee, which, as those of us who got a bit obsessed about Ward boundaries will know, runs down the side of the Whiteley and Sheffield Ward and rises in the Bishop's Waltham Ward. We have nominations of a representative plus deputy, Councillor Vivian Atwell, Councillor Lee, Councillor Bolton with Deputy Councillor Williams. I propose Councillor Vivian Atwell and Councillor Williams to continue in those roles. The Southampton International Airport Consultative Committee, the cabinet member is an automatic member. The representative, we have nominations of Councillor Bennett, Councillor Bolton and Miller. And then deputies nominations, Councillor Reach and Pet. I would propose that it's Councillor Bennett is our representative. Councillors Reach and Pet are deputies, although I will ask, I think if Councillor Ernie, if we could ask if more interested councillors attend the meeting. I know, for example, Councillor Cook is very interested. Yeah, the consultative committee is very descriptive. I certainly don't think there's any harm in having more people at those meetings and having visibility of some of the subjects that are discussed. It is principally just reporting back from the airport. OK, so we will try and get a broader engagement in that committee, if possible, beyond the formal representatives that are listed. And as I said, I do know that Councillor Cook is currently a member. She's not actually in the position, she's not here today, but I suspect she would still want to be one. The Wellborn Community Forum, we have one representative. And the proposals are Councillor Chamberlain, Councillor Lee, Councillor for Brook, Deputies Councillor and Clear. I would propose we go with Councillor Chamberlain, with Deputies of Councillors Cutler and Clear. The Winchester Charity School Education Foundation. We have nominations of Councillor Latham and Councillor Todd and Councillor Cunningham. I propose that we go with Councillors Latham and Todd. The CPRE Hampshire Planning and Policy Committee, one representative co-opted normality member of the planning and policy group for three years and nominations of Councillors Small, White and Latham Smith. I propose we go with Councillor Small. Winchester Housing Trust, one observer, previously Councillor Westwood. We have two nominations, Councillor Bathour and Councillor Horrell. I propose we go with Councillor Bathour. The Central Hampshire Road Safety Council, previously Councillor Living Natural. We have two nominations, Councillor Greenberg and Councillor Boulton. I propose we go with Councillor Greenberg. And the Winchester Sports Stadium Management Committee, one must be the cabinet member of the responsibility for sport, which is Councillor Becker. And then one other, and we have effectively three nominations for that, Councillor Sudhakarachwal, Councillor Horrell and Councillor Warwick. And I propose we go with Councillor Sudhakarachwal. And I believe those are all the nominations. Do I have a seconder for those proposals? Thank you, Deputy leader. Good. So cabinet, we are asked to make appointments to the vacancies detail in Appendix A of the report. And that we remind representatives of their responsibilities while representing their council and external organisation, as summarised in paragraphs 1.6 to 1.10 of the report and the guidance serving the guidance of serving on outside bodies. I think. And I would stress that that paragraph includes a reference to Article four of the Constitution to say that council should receive reports at least. Annually. In particular, outside bodies where powers are conferred to them by the council. So. I believe that that addresses the points that were made earlier in the meeting. So cabinet, are you happy to accept the recommendations and the reminder that we will be issuing to everybody on the agreement to this report? Great. Thank you very much indeed. The. So that report is agreed with the names as given. And then the last item is to note future items for consideration by cabinet as shown on the June 2024 forward plan. Councillor Lee, I do have your name against this. I don't know if you wish to make any comments on it, but you have this. You have your chance. It would be shame to miss it. But. This is the decision to make the key decisions. That's come up there. Section seven. I mentioned. I'm still not clear. There's a decision to report. And I'd like to gain a concern for lack of current social governance. So that is for investments to ensure compatibility with the declaration and resolution. That's other policy. We understand the delegation of this. That's a financial. Sure, we should understand these aspects. It doesn't make sense. Diversification. Have a clear description of the investments and the authority. So, let's go to the. That's literally you have views of. I. They. The area where I wish to put all those things. I think it's because like for a manager, I think when we have what we get strategies. But they. So. Thank you. Thank you very much indeed. That's extremely helpful clarification. I would stress that on page 142 of the report, item six or seven of Section A, we are showing two items that are beyond the 28 day timetable. This is a new thing. We haven't done it before. And we are. So we actually do go beyond 28 days. Similarly, we do also show how the general fund budget decisions will be taken. And in terms of clarifying the process for the Treasury management strategy, I would like to thank Councillor Cutler very much indeed for making that clear. It's not a matter for cabinet in the way that other policies would be. It's a matter for audit and governance and it and indeed, it does come back to full council. Yes. Yeah. So. So this is the policy. The policy that they're referring to here does relate to working to in line with full council policy. So there are plenty of opportunities to influence in the future. But this is it's not the cabinet for the plan where that influencing would happen. Are there any questions from cabinet on this paper?