Agenda item

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 or use alternative methods to achieve its targets.
4. Further clarification was requested on whether phosphate credits for new developments had to be sourced from upstream or just from within the same water catchment area.
5. A question was asked as to whether the delivery date for reducing carbon from the council owned occupied estate should be April 2026 rather than 'ongoing'.
6. A request was made for a members' briefing on the 'Greener Faster' agenda, to cover nutrient credits, biodiversity net gain, and the delivery of offsite credits in perpetuity.
7. An explanation was requested as to why several Healthy Communities key performance indicators such as HC3 and HC4 were rated as green when the data suggested they were behind target.
8. A question was raised as to why the Bar End Depot project was shown with a green status, given that the preferred bidder had withdrawn and a new bidder was being sought.
9. Clarification was sought regarding the 'end of stage report' for the Station Approach project and why the project was not proceeding at this time.
10. A question was asked about what process was in place to address the future and meantime use of assets related to the “paused” Station Approach project.
11. A question was asked about member involvement with the bus options study within the Central Winchester Regeneration project.
12. Further information was requested regarding the “expenditure on use of local suppliers” KPI and how to improve this.
13. An explanation was requested as to why the proportion of housing stock reaching an EPC rating of C had not improved, despite a number of retrofit adjustments having been completed.
14. Clarification was sought as to why no housing retrofits were recorded in the first quarter of the year and whether the council had stopped undertaking works other than solar panel installations.

These points were responded to by Councillor Neil Cutler, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation, Caroline Egan, Service Lead - New Homes, Simon Hendey, Strategic Director, Simon Howson, Senior Policy and Programme Manager, Laura Taylor, Chief Executive, Liz Keys, Director (Finance), and Councillor Mark Reach Cabinet Member for Good Homes accordingly.

RESOLVED:

The committee noted the report and agreed on the following comments and recommendations for Cabinet consideration:

1.    That a members' briefing be arranged on the "Greener Faster" priority, to include updates and clarification on nutrient credits, biodiversity net gain (BNG), and carbon targets.

2.    That future performance reports should make explicit where major projects are paused, restarted, or significantly altered, such as the Station Approach and Bar End Depot projects.

3.    That officers provide a written response to the committee clarifying the data regarding housing stock EPC ratings and the number of retrofits completed (KPIs GH1, GH5, and GH6).

4.    That officers provide further information regarding average trends and comparisons concerning local procurement performance.