Agenda and draft minutes

To note the names of apologies given and deputy members who are attending the meeting in place of appointed members.

Apologies for the meeting were noted as above.

To receive any disclosure of interests from Councillors or Officers in matters to be discussed.

Note: Councillors are reminded of their obligations to declare disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs), other registerable interests (ORIs) and non-registerable interests (NRIs) in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct.

If you require advice, please contact the appropriate Democratic Services Officer, prior to the meeting.

The following declarations were made:

1.    Councillor Wallace declared a disclosable pecuniary interest due to his role as a Hampshire County Councillor. However, as there was no material conflict of interest, he remained in the room and spoke under the dispensation granted by the Audit and Governance committee.

2.    Councillor Pett declared a disclosable pecuniary interest due to his role as a member of the South Downs National Park Authority. However, as there was no material conflict of interest, he remained in the room and spoke under the dispensation granted by the Monitoring Officer.

3.    Councillor Batho and Councillor Pett declared an Other Registerable Interest as they were both Non-Executive Directors of Venta Living.

The Chairperson updated the committee regarding the Planning Enforcement Task and Finish Group. She advised that the group had met, however, due to the timing of the meetings and her work commitments she had been unable to attend. She advised that she would be discussing the findings with officers and that the outcomes from the group would then be compiled and presented to the committee at its meeting in February 2026.

That the minutes of the meeting be signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 8 September 2026 be approved and adopted.

To receive and note questions asked and statements made from members of the public on matters which fall within the remit of the Committee.

Members of the public and visiting councillors may speak at the committee, provided they have registered to speak three working days in advance.  Please complete this form (https://forms.office.com/r/Y87tufaV6G ) by 5pm Friday, 7 November 2025 or call (01962) 848 264 to register to speak and for further details.

Councillor Danny Lee addressed the committee regarding items, 6,7,8 and 9.

Councillor Caroline Horrill addressed the committee regarding items, 7 and 8.

Ian Tait addressed the committee regarding items, 7 and 8.

A summary of the contributions made were captured within the respective agenda item below.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the committee scrutinise and comment on the proposals within the attached draft cabinet report, ref CAB3522 which is to be considered by cabinet at its meeting on the 19 November 2025.

Councillor Neil Cutler, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation introduced the report. The introduction included the following points:

1. The Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) and budget options paper showed a balanced budget for the next two years, with a relatively small deficit in the years that followed.
2. The full detail of Fair Funding Review 2.0 was expected before the end of the year, with the most significant element being the rebasing of business rates, which would create a significant reduction in the council’s revenue.
3. The food waste payment was budgeted at 80% of the full cost, as government confirmation of full funding was still pending.
4. Income from extended producer responsibility came in at £1.6 million, which was higher than the budgeted figure of £800,000.
5. The paper included one-off expenditures for Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) implementation, estimated at over £2 million, and for the community governance review.
6. Savings from the TC25 programme had reached over £1.6 million off the base budget, and the transformation team would now be concentrating on LGR rather than further TC25 savings.

Liz Keys, Director (Finance), provided a further introduction which included the following points:

1. The MTFS showed a more positive and stable financial position for the council compared to previous years.
2. That fewer budget options were presented this year because the move towards LGR resulted in a shorter long-term planning horizon.
3. The report sets out the key assumptions that were being made in preparing the budget for February.

Councillor Danny Lee addressed the committee and raised several points, which could be summarised as follows. He suggested presenting the financial forecasts with best, central, and worst-case scenarios to reflect uncertainties. He asked for clarification on which specific grants were affected by the TC25 community grants reduction and sought a “best-guess” estimate for the costs of LGR.

He also enquired whether a provision for legal and valuation costs related to asset transfers under LGR should be included. Further questions were raised regarding the pattern of rental income risk, whether a contingency for the River Park Pavilion project should be included in the MTFS, and whether the council could be more ambitious with an accelerated solar energy programme.

The committee was asked to scrutinise and comment on the proposals within the attached draft cabinet report, ref CAB3522, which was to be considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on 19 November. The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the report. In summary, the following matters were raised.

1. Clarification was sought on the garage maintenance budget, including whether it applied to garages owned by the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) and its overall cost-effectiveness.
2. A question was asked as to why an increase in garage rental income was classified as a TC25 transformational change and what other income increases were counted in this way.
3. Further detail was requested regarding the planned use of the additional £400,000 for the maintenance and investment in operational assets.
4. A question was raised about how businesses  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the committee scrutinise and comment on the proposals within the attached draft cabinet report, ref CAB3523 which is to be considered by cabinet at its meeting on the 19 November 2025.

Councillor Mark Reach, Cabinet Member for Good Homes, introduced the report, which set out the 30-year Housing Revenue Account (HRA) business plan. The introduction included the following points:

1. The proposals were designed to ensure a sustainable HRA for the next 30 years and deliver the best value for tenants.
2. The main pressures on the HRA related to macroeconomic factors, particularly higher than expected interest rates for the Public Works Loan Board, which were linked to volatile gilt markets. A prudent assumption on future rates had been made.
3. The HRA had a significant level of borrowing, amounting to around £200 million, making it sensitive to interest rate changes.
4. The report included proposed savings, which would be discussed with the Tenants and Councils Together (TACT) Board before being presented to Cabinet.

Councillor Caroline Horrill addressed the committee and raised several points for the committee to consider which could be summarised as follows. She requested details on asset disposals achieved and planned, and how the capital would be allocated between new homes and the upkeep of current stock. She asked if the business plan could be amended to continue building council properties beyond 2032-33. Further questions were raised regarding the estimated cost of repairing poor retrofit work, the provisional nature of new affordable rent levels, the scope of the £41.9 million for capital works, an update regarding void properties and the expected time frame for cost recovery on sewerage charges. Finally, she enquired how tenant input on the proposed savings would be gathered before the February 2026 budget.

Councillor Danny Lee addressed the committee and raised several points for the committee to consider which could be summarised as follows Heexpressed concern about how well the HRA business plan was future proofed against rising costs and climate change. He highlighted the impact on the built environment on carbon emissions and the financial pressures from new regulations and high-emission materials. He recommended the council to be more forthright in adopting Modern Methods of Construction (MMC) and other energy-efficient, low-impact approaches to eliminate the housing performance gap and reduce long-term costs. He also questioned whether the proposed 10% rent increase for five-bedroom social homes was fair and proportionate and asked what mitigation might be considered.

Ian Tait addressed the committee and raised several points regarding the disposal of surplus HRA assets for the committee to consider. He asked for the current criteria used to determine whether an asset was surplus and should be sold. He questioned whether the policy focused on strips of land or properties, citing the examples of Barnes House and The Corner House. He requested clarity on the rationale behind these disposals and asked if a list of surplus HRA properties existed.

The committee was asked to scrutinise and comment on the proposals within the attached draft cabinet report, Ref. CAB3523, which was to be considered by Cabinet at its meeting on the 19 November 2025. The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the report.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

It is recommended that the committee scrutinise and comment on the content within the attached cabinet report, ref CAB3492, particularly the identified “lessons learned” which will be considered by cabinet at its meeting on the 19 November 2025.

Councillor Mark Reach, Cabinet Member for Good Homes introduced the report which provided the lessons learned from the construction of six flats at Southbrook Cottages, Micheldever. The introduction included the following points.

1. The project, which began in 2020, had an overspend of approximately 27% on total costs therefore a report to Scrutiny and Cabinet was required.
2. The properties were built to Passivhaus Plus standard as a pilot development in support of the council’s Carbon Neutrality Action Plan objectives. The report detailed the reasons for the cost overrun and proposed actions to be considered for future projects.

Councillor Caroline Horrill addressed the committee and raised several points for the committee to consider which could be summarised as follows. She stated that while she was in favour of project reviews, she felt the report lacked the full history of the project. She felt that the decision to build to Passivhaus standard meant that the scheme was over-specified. Councillor Horrill highlighted that the report failed to include the loss of revenue to the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) during rectification works and made no reference to issues experienced by the Parish Council with the contractor. She concluded that the report was a lost opportunity as it had not sought input from ward councillors or the Parish Council.

Councillor Danny Lee addressed the committee and raised several points for the committee to consider which could be summarised as follows. He congratulated the housing team on delivering the project, which supported the council’s greener faster priorities. He acknowledged the cost overrun but noted it was a pilot project with a steep learning curve. He argued strongly that full Passivhaus certification was vital for future schemes as it provided quality assurance and eliminated the performance gap between a building’s design and actual energy efficiency. He stated that choosing not to certify future Passivhaus projects would be a poor decision and suggested a future comparative analysis could be undertaken against Modern Methods of Construction (MMC).

Ian Tait addressed the committee and raised several points for the committee to consider which could be summarised as follows. He wished tohighlight that the final project cost represented a 137% increase against the initial appraisal in 2020. He stated that the figures could not be justified, noting that the cost per square metre was more than double that of a commercial developer. Mr Tait advised the committee that the expenditure was from the HRA, funded by council tenants’ rent, and that he felt that tenants wanted more decent homes rather than expensive schemes such as this.

The committee was asked to scrutinise and comment on the content within the attached cabinet report, ref CAB3492, particularly the identified “lessons learned” which would be considered by cabinet at its meeting on 19 November 2025. The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the report. In summary, the following matters were raised.

1. A question was asked about the contract and why remedial works were not included within its original scope.
2. Clarification was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Scrutiny Committee raises with the Deputy Leader or relevant Cabinet member any issues arising from the information in this report, ref CAB3525, which is being presented to Cabinet on the 19 November 2025 and considers whether there are any items of significance to resolve or to be drawn to the attention of Cabinet.

Councillor Neil Cutler, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and

Transformation, introduced the report, ref CAB3525, which provided the second quarterly performance report for the 2025/26 financial year. The introduction included the following points.

1. The report focused on progress in delivering the Council Plan for the period 1 July to 30 September 2025.
2. At the committee's request, the report included the rationale for each of the annual targets associated with the relevant strategic key performance indicators.
3. Performance monitoring information was aligned with the six Council Plan priorities.
4. Areas of progress during the quarter included a 96% reduction in scope one and two carbon emissions against the 2017/18 baseline and the revocation of the Air Quality Management Area in Winchester City Centre.
5. Other achievements noted were the delivery of vehicles for the food waste rollout, the endorsement of a new twinning agreement, continued green business support, and the promotion of events for the 250th anniversary of Jane Austen's birth.

Simon Howson, Senior Policy and Programme Manager, updated the committee and advised that the report included the previous quarter's RAG (Red, Amber, Green) status for service plan actions to provide additional context and show the direction of travel.

Councillor Danny Lee addressed the committee and raised several points for the committee to consider which could be summarised as follows. He suggested that the council's climate emergency action plan should make explicit reference to the government's new Carbon Budget Growth Delivery Plan to ensure alignment. He questioned whether the project's status should be shown as red if national net-zero targets were projected to be missed. He also suggested that data from the Department for Energy, Security and Net Zero could be used to assist with tracking carbon savings.

Councillor Lee sought clarification on the status of the Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund and its impact on the council's ability to deliver its programme of installing solar panels and heat pumps. He enquired about the speed of the rollout beyond the initial 195 homes and the total percentage of council housing suitable for such upgrades. He also raised concerns about the potential underperformance of nutrient mitigation schemes, asked for more detail on proposed small-scale renewable energy projects, and questioned whether the Local Area Energy Plan could be progressed earlier to inform the next Local Plan.

The committee was asked to raise with the relevant cabinet member any issues arising from the report, ref CAB3525, and to draw any items of significance to the attention of the cabinet. The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the report. In summary, the following matters were raised.

1. Clarification was sought as to how nutrient credits generated in Cheriton could be used to mitigate development in Old Alresford.
2. A concern was raised that a lack of available nutrient credits in the Upper Itchen catchment had the potential to prevent Alresford from delivering its housing requirements under the Local Plan.
3. Clarification was sought on whether the council would abandon its net-zero plans for council assets  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

The latest version of the committee work programme can be found here: https://democracy.winchester.gov.uk/mgPlansHome.aspx?bcr=1

RESOLVED:

That the latest version of the work programme which included the Planning Enforcement Task & Finish group findings scheduled for February 2026 be noted.

Forward Plan of Key Decisions - 1 December 2025 to 28 February 2026

RESOLVED

That the latest Forward Plan of Key Decisions be noted.