Skip to main content

Agenda item

Update to the Council's Corporate Plan (2020-2024)

Purpose

To introduce the update of the Council’s Corporate Plan, which was adopted by the Council on 23 September 2020

 

Recommendation(s)

That Council considers the Corporate Plan Update, and agrees to its adoption

 

Minutes:

The purpose of this item was to introduce the update of the Council’s Corporate Plan, which was adopted by the Council on 23 September 2020.

 

Councillor Joe Harris, Leader of the Council, introduced the report and summarised the 3 priorities included in the Liberal Democrat manifesto (Providing Genuinely Affordable Housing, Take Real Action on Climate Change and Deliver a Sustainable Local Economy), and how these now informed the updated Corporate Plan.

 

The Council commented that none of the problems facing the Council had been included and many of the successful Council’s initiatives had originally been developed by the Government, the County Council or other organisations or are not due to be delivered until 2024.

 

The Council commented that the difficulties recruiting Planning Officers is a nationwide issue and any criticism of the Council’s Planning Service was demoralising for hard working Planning staff.

 

The Council commented that the Corporate Plan was easy to read and understand, and that it was encouraging to see vacancy of retail premises in the centre of Cirencester had fallen from 11% to 5%, significantly below the national average of 14%.

 

The Council commented that Planning Officers are not currently required to include planning conditions that specifically respond to the climate change crisis and advised the Council that there had never been a better time to introduce these requirements.     

 

The Council commented on the easy accessibility of the Corporate Plan and that specific details of each initiative would be considered and defined by Committees and Working Groups when appropriate.

 

The Council agreed that the recruitment of Planning Officers was very difficult across the country, leading to some Councils choosing not to accept any future planning applications, but this was not the case at Cotswold District Council. The vibrancy of the Cotswolds as a great place to live, work, and shop was also celebrated.

 

The Council commented that although the planning regulations encourage consideration of measures that contribute to reducing climate change they do not specifically require them to be included.   Comments were also made challenging the importance of car-friendly, town-centre initiatives in other towns and cities.

 

The Council commented that the issue with the high number of planning applications being handled by a reduced number of Planning Officers would inevitably create backlogs and delay decision making and this needed to be resolved.  Support was also given for adequate parking for residents with mobility issues and those living in rural areas.

 

The Council welcomed the improved design of the Corporate Plan but noted that some of the successful initiatives being delivered were put in place by the previous administration and newer initiatives appeared to be aspirational without clear timescales for their completion.

 

The Council commented that it was important that the Corporate Plan was both clear and accessible, and this had been achieved, and noted that Planning and Parking appeared to be the only issues that concerned opposition Members. It was also stated that a referendum on the Recovery Investment Strategy was not needed, as the election that will be taking place within the year will enable all residents to decide whether the current administration’s priorities policies were supported or a new Administration should take over.

 

'Councillor Berry questioned why overall borrowing in the Recovery Investment Strategy had increased when borrowing for social housing had reduced

 

Councillor Evemy commented that CIPFA had recently stated that borrowing to lend on to social housing providers would not be allowed.  The potential borrowing limit had been increased in the updated Strategy to meet the higher income figures required to balance the revenue budget in the updated MTFS.

 

The Council commented that the development of Housing in Kemble was controlled by the Bromford Housing Association, and the Council had consistently encouraged them to commence work as soon as possible to deliver socially rented homes.

 

The Council enquired whether Cotswold District Council had actually delivered the new homes or was this done through partner organisations.  Councillor Spivey confirmed the Council no longer had housing stock and new housing was being delivered through other association and market developers.  The Council’s priority to deliver affordable social housing would however ensure the correct type of housing would be developed.

 

The Council stated that across the country, Councils of various administrations were delivering for their residents, and was disappointed that opposition Members had not suggested positive improvements or supported the Corporate Plan and suggested their alternative Corporate Plan would include cuts to Council services.

 

RESOLVED: Having considered the Corporate Plan Update, the Council agreed to its adoption.

 

Voting Record – For 18, Against 13, Abstentions 1, Absent 2,

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages