There were no declarations of interests made.

The minutes of the meeting held on 30 October 2025 were agreed as an accurate record.

There were no items of Chair’s urgent business.

Liz Bryant (Service Director for Legal Services) introduced the item and highlighted:

a)    The Committee had previously indicated satisfaction with the level of progress;

b)    Much of the action plan had already been completed at the time of the last meeting;

c)    The purpose of this meeting was to provide final confirmation of completion across all areas and seek closure of the action plan.

In relation to Governance, the following update was provided:

d)    A substantial review of the constitution had begun, with specific attention on key decision-making thresholds, urgency procedures, use of the forward plan, capital programme governance, and recording of legal advice;

e)    Plymouth’s key decision thresholds (£1m revenue and £3m capital) were significantly higher than comparable authorities, creating subjectivity around what constituted a significant decision and lower thresholds were recommended in line with national guidance and benchmarking;

f)     Officers reviewed urgency procedures, noting they were legally compliant but overly dispersed, requiring consolidation;

g)    There was a proposal the Chair of the Scrutiny Management Board be given 24 hours to consider urgency requests, improving transparency and managing complexity;

h)    A review of the Forward Plan confirmed compliance with the 28?day rule, but officers recognised that decisions with long lead-in times should appear earlier;

i)     Legal implications needed to always be included in decision reports; templates had been amended to reflect this;

j)     Pre?election guidance had been externally reviewed, with external legal advice confirming previous concerns about over?restrictiveness during the Armada Way decision period. Revised guidance would be reported to Audit & Governance Committee in March 2026.

In relation to Project and Capital Programme Management, the following update was provided:

k)    The Corporate Programme Management Office (CPMO) had progressed significantly since the last meeting;

l)     CPMO provided oversight of benefits realisation, budget tracking, risk management, and stakeholder engagement, but did not remove accountability from project teams;

m)  The Capital Programme Handbook had been updated following recommendations, and a report would be taken to the Audit and Governance Committee later in 2026.

The following was explained in relation to the Consultation and Engagement element:

n)    The consultation and engagement framework was fully embedded. Staff communications had been issued, and training was being developed;

o)    WSP Ltd had been appointed to develop the City Centre Vision, fulfilling the requirement for improved strategic direction.

Environmental Regulations updates included the following:

p)    The Tree Management Principles document had been reviewed by the Tree Steering Group and the Natural Infrastructure and Growth Scrutiny Panel, and both had expressed support;

q)    Senior management had endorsed the document, including additional actions for training and CPMO oversight to ensure compliance;

r)    Implementation monitoring would be undertaken to ensure principles did not become static.

In relation to employee wellbeing, the following was discussed:

s)     Survey results had been analysed and shared with senior management;

t)     Directorate?level action planning was underway.

Si Bellamy (Chief Operating Officer), Pete Honeywell (Transformation Architecture Manager) and Jill Ellis (Head of OD) added:

u)    The implemented actions would result in improved  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

The Committee noted its action log.