Issue - meetings

To consider a joint report of the Director of Development and Regeneration and the Director of Place Management.

The report provides a summary of progress against portfolio priorities, performance indicators and budgets during the second half of 2021/22, with a focus on the fourth quarter (January to March 2022).

The Scrutiny Committee is asked to:-

a.    consider the Annual Portfolio Performance and Resource Report;  

b.    review the progress against delivering key targets and budgets for 2021/22;

c.    highlight key areas of and responsibility for taking forward corrective action to address any performance or resource issues;

d.    highlight any significant issues or changes to be fed back to the Cabinet alongside the Corporate Performance and Resource Report; and

e.    identify how areas of strong performance and good practice can be shared in other services. 

Contact officers: Alan Lawson 07890 563587 | alan.lawson@stockport.gov.uk

Lisa Joy (474 4044) | lisa.joy@stockport.gov.uk 

The Director of Development and Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) providing the Annual Portfolio Performance and Resource Report (PPRR) for the Economy and Regeneration Portfolio. The report summarised progress in delivering the portfolio priorities, performance indicators and budgets during the second half of 2021/ 22, with a specific focus on the fourth quarter (January to March 2022).The portfolio dashboard for the Economy and Regeneration Portfolio accompanied the reports.  

The Cabinet Member for Economy and Regeneration (Councillor Colin MacAlister) attended the meeting to respond to member questions. 

The following comments were made/ issues raised:

·         In relation to the Local Plan, members were advised that the council looked to bring forward an option for consultation in the autumn. It was noted that members of the Local Plan Working Party considered matters relating to development of the plan.

·         Further detail in relation to how many applicants had secured a job through Stockport Jobs Match would be circulated to members for their information.

·         Members were advised that Performance Indictor (PI) targets would be reviewed and brought back for consideration by the committee in the next meeting cycle. The aim was to set realistic targets as far as possible, and a number of factors were taken into account when assessing targets; this included the economy.

·         In response to a question as to why some of the PI’s did not have targets set, it was noted that some of the measures that were targets for the council were outside of the council’s control, such as, for example, partner measures.

·         Members noted that the number of job vacancies outnumbered the number of those unemployed in Stockport, and that this was reflected nationally.

·         It was noted that District Centres had been aligned to the Communities and Housing Portfolio.

·         In relation to addressing youth unemployment, members were advised that some companies were offering work opportunities to young people so that they could gain an insight into working in an industry. The Cabinet Members expressed that he would like to see further companies offering such opportunities.

·         It was noted that the Full Fibre Network programme was a Greater Manchester (GM) wide project that covered buildings (not residents of the borough). It was requested that status information on coverage be circulated to members for their information.

·         Members were advised that the A6 – M60 bypass scheme would be a matter for the Local Plan Working Party to consider.

·         Once the GM Clear Air Plan was published, there would be an opportunity for engagement with any companies impacted by the plan.

·         It was requested that information relating to where gas was being supplied from across the borough be sought and circulated to members for their information. It was noted that the council had not looked at where gas was supplied from outside of the council’s own supplies.

·         It was asked what the £410k unearmarked in reserves were previously earmarked for, and members were advised that a written response would be circulated to members for their information.

·         In relation to the Flood Management aspect of the SEMMMS scheme, an update on the scheme and ongoing work would be given to members in due course.

·         It was noted that the 14 schemes for tranche 2 of the Active Travel works were nearly complete, and the council were seeking funding from Transport for Greater Manchester (TFGM) to consider a further tranche of schemes.

·         A question was asked in relation to the pedestrianisation schemes around the marketplace, and it was noted that works were currently taking place on-site. The Cabinet Member advised members that he would seek to undertake a review of the scheme following a few months of operation at Churchgate.

·         In relation to earmarked reserves, it was asked whether the £548k capital finance update figure included the £51k allocated for district centres. A written response to the question would be circulated to members in due course.

RESOLVED –  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5