(a)

there was only one vision for the city and the ‘our vision – one team serving our city’ complimented the four themes;

(b)

score cards would be available to scrutinise; these would provide more high level information;

(c)

a cross party working group had been established (primarily around street services) to take forward and promote the volunteering agenda; at this stage, it was premature to suggest that the volunteering agenda was excluding anyone from potentially participating;

(d)

the aim of digital accessibility was not to alienate people but to engage with them, in order to provide a more dynamic service, as well as achieving savings;

(e)

the committee’s request for fly-tipping to be added to the priority activity would be taken on board;

(f)

all the stalled development sites had been analysed and discussions held with developers to help ‘un-lock’ these sites;

(g)

the council’s existing commercial estate achieved an occupancy rate of 97%-98% across the portfolio and a net yield of 5.7%; it was also important to have the ability to purchase new assets in order to generate income streams;

(h)

there were risks associated with ‘Brexit’ and at this stage, it was difficult to forecast all the implications; working groups had been set up for Members and officers to identify both risks and opportunities.

(1)

it should be explicit within the Corporate Plan that the move to increased digital accessibility is based on an approach of digital by preference;

(2)

a focus on fly-tipping should be added to the priority activity on littering;

(3)

the Corporate Plan Performance Framework is made available as a standing item to the committee;

(4)

net yield and occupancy rates from the council’s commercial estate and information on stalled sites will be monitored by the committee through the most appropriate mechanism;

(5)

a report on the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union and the impact on and response by the council to be provided to the committee at a future meeting.

(a)

the level of council borrowing had been maintained at under £300m for 2015/16 (this borrowing related to the capital programme); the approved authorised borrowing limits which the council was required to publish (£338 for 2016//17) took into account the council’s overall day to day financial operations;

(b)

the transformation stretch savings were options which had been put forward for an ‘open debate’ with both Members and residents; it was anticipated that the public consultation exercise together with the recommendations from the Select Committee Reviews would help to shape future proposals;

(c)

some of the proposals contained within the transformation stretch savings required further work, so at this stage of the process, no figures had been included; 

(d)

the 2016/17 budget was challenging, particularly when put into context that significant savings (£20m) had already been delivered prior to this budget;  with any such savings there would always be risks and challenges in delivering those savings; (assurance was given that the budget was reviewed and challenged on a monthly basis);

(d)

Councillor Darcy (Cabinet Member for Finance and IT) stated that he was keen to have proper consultation relating to the budget, as this would assist in delivering a balanced budget.

(1)

a Select Committee Review will be held in early September 2016 on the Plan for Waste;

(2)

a joint Select Committee Review will be held, at the most appropriate time, to enable pre-decision scrutiny of the budget, efficiency proposals, the next iteration of the Medium Term Financial Strategy, consultation feedback on the proposals and the findings from the Select Committee Review on waste, prior to decisions being taken by the Cabinet and Council.

(a)

part one of the Plymouth Plan committed the authority to continue to meet the full needs of the gypsy and traveller community, with the provision of both permanent and transient sites; further work on the overall provision (including what sites were needed) was required; the outcome of this work would be fed back into part one of the Plan;

(b)

there were gypsy and traveller sites contained within the Plan that required further discussion and Paradise Road was one such site; the Council, as a landowner, was looking to release land for housing development however, if sites were taken out of the Plan alternative sites would need to be found (Councillor Nicholson would be meeting with residents to listen to their concerns regarding Paradise Road).

?

Quality Inn Hotel;

?

History Centre;

?

Council Tax Support Scheme;

?

Child Poverty Action Plan;

?

Emergency Welfare Fund;

?

SMART working.