Issue - meetings

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration.

The report details the Mid-Year Portfolio Performance and Resource Report for the Communities and Housing Portfolio for consideration by the Committee. This provides a summary of progress in delivering the portfolio priorities, reform programme and other key projects in the first half of the year, with a particular focus on the second quarter (July to September). It includes forecast performance and financial data (where this is available) for the Portfolio, along with an update on the portfolio savings programme.

The Scrutiny Committee is recommended to:

·         Consider the Mid-Year Portfolio Performance and Resource Report;  

·         Review the progress against delivering key projects, priority outcomes, targets and budgets for 2017/18;

·         Highlight key areas of and responsibility for taking forward corrective action to address any performance or resource issues;

·         Highlight any significant issues or changes to be fed back to the Cabinet alongside the Corporate Performance and Resource Report;

·         Identify how areas of strong performance and good practice can be shared in other services.

Officer contact: Alan Lawson on 0161 474 5397 or email:

alan.lawson@stockport.gov.uk

Officer contact: Kora Yohannan on 0161 474 4032 or email: kora.yohannan@stockport.gov.uk

The Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) detailing the Mid-Year Portfolio Performance and Resource Report for the Communities and Housing Portfolio providing a summary of progress in delivering the portfolio priorities, reform programme and other key projects in the first half of the year, with a particular focus on the second quarter (July to September). The report included forecast performance and financial data for the Portfolio, along with an update on the portfolio savings programme.

The Cabinet Member for Communities and Housing (Councillor Sheila Bailey) attended the meeting to present the report and respond to councillors’ questions.

The following comments were made/ issues raised:-

·         In response to a question in relation to the increase in the HRA Capital Programme, it was stated that this was largely attributed to inclusion of the 2019/20 Stockport Homes Affordable Homes programme.

·         The changing role of the Council’s Public Realm Inspectors was discussed and it was confirmed that there would be a change in focus away from the reactive maintenance element of their workload to provide a greater emphasis on guardianship and stewardship which would include closer relationships with community groups.

·         It was commented that there were a significant number of gaps in the performance data within the report.  In response, it was stated that a large proportion of the missing data was due to ongoing discussions between Solutions SK and the Council relating to the underlying Service Level Agreements and how the performance of those would be measured.  It was anticipated that by the time of the next quarter’s report, most of these would be in place with associated data provided.

·         The brownfield register was available on the Council’s website which was subject to frequent updates.

·         The Council had placed bids into the  Housing Infrastructure Fund which was designed to provide grant funding for difficult to deliver sites and the outcome of these would not be known until December.  The council’s bids included the sites at Hopes Carr, Weir Mill, the Stockport Interchange development and a further bid to develop a bus rapid transit system which would be linked to the original SEMMM Strategy.

·         The Disabled Facilities Grant was discussed with particular regard to the increase in the number of applications and whether this represented a change in trend in the use of the fund which had previously been ‘undersubscribed’.  In response, it was stated that there had historically been a waiting list for the Grant but following a significant increase in government funding two years ago this was not currently an issue.  Demand was based on assessments made by Adult Social Care and this was likely to increase as a result of an ageing population, however based on current projections there was sufficient funding to meet demand.

·         Costs associated with the removal of fly-tipping were charged to the culprit where they were able to be identified.

·         The Council had the use of mobile cameras which were placed in locations frequently the subject of fly-tipping.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.