Agenda item

The Scrutiny and Overview Committee considered a report on the Council’s Quarter 2 position regarding its operational Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and 2020-25 Business Plan actions.

With reference to FS104 (Percentage of Business Rates collected (year to date)), Councillor Sue Ellington said that a simple percentage figure did not really provide the kind of information needed for there to be effective scrutiny. While accepting assurances from both Councillor John Williams (Lead Cabinet Member for Resources) and the Head of Finance that the current position was generally positive, Councillor Ellington said that an attempt should be made to demonstrate this by creating a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) that more clearly reflected the state of business in South Cambridgeshire. Councillor Heather Williams asked that the KPI should differentiate between those businesses struggling to pay business rates and those simply not paying.

KPIs PN510 to PN512 related to Development Management. Councillor Peter Fane said that a differentiation should be made between those planning applications determined within the period set by statutory targets and those determined within a timescale set by an Extension of Time Agreement. Councillor Fane asked that the percentage of appeals against major planning permission refusals allowed should specify the proportion allowed in respect of appeals against non-determination. The Committee noted that the number of Extension of Time Agreements and refusals made in order to meet determination targets was unrelated to the time taken to validate applications.

In response, the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development said that only a small number of appeals were against non-determination, and this would not affect the standards being measured. He offered to provide clarity in writing.

While he was unsure how many small applications had been determined within statutory timescale, he confirmed that average time was now recorded for applications. Members noted a chart showing the number of days taken to determine current applications compared with lower and upper quartile performance. A reduction in the backlog of applications had resulted in a progressive reduction in determination timescales for all applications. Further analysis would show those applications falling outside the timescale. The Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development undertook to give further details at the next Scrutiny and Overview Committee meeting.

Councillor Heather Williams said that for some time now there had been concerns about the extent to which the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Service relied on extensions of time agreements. to which the response had been that a system would be put in place. The Chair undertook to pursue this matter with the Lead Cabinet Member for Planning and the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development.

The Committee noted that the number of Extension of Time Agreements and refusals made in order to meet determination targets was unrelated to the time taken to validate applications.

The Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development informed Members that KPI PN519 (Average time to determine validated householder planning applications) should be Amber not Green.”

The Chair invited the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development to make a short statement. That statement

• clarified the number of applications determined within an extended time limit agreed with applicants
• confirmed that the previously reported backlog in validating householder planning applications had been eliminated

The Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development undertook to provide a full written statement of the above to all members of the Scrutiny and Overview Committee. This would also include an analysis of appeals against the non-determination of planning applications.

Councillor Graham Cone questioned how realistic the target of 17 days was referred to in AH211 (Average days to re-let all housing stock). In reply, the Head of Housing gave an assurance that the Council had deliberately set itself a challenging target after benchmarking itself against a group of similar local authorities. Councillor Heather Williams expressed concern about the impact of stated problems with electricity meters on tenants’ cost of living. The Head of Housing assured the Committee that the recently re-let contract required there to be a greater focus on voids and re-lets and that he was confident that this KPI would show improved performance as a result.

Turning to the Contact Centre, and after clarifying that CC303 (percentage of calls handled) referred to calls answered by a contact centre agent, Councillor Sally Ann Hart asked that future statistics should include a measure as to the effectiveness of the call-back option. Councillor Helene Leeming expressed concern at KPI CC307 (Average call answer time (seconds)). The Head of Transformation, HR and Corporate Services acknowledged that the Contact Centre was subject to peaks in demand and assured the Committee that the situation was constantly monitored to make sure that available resources (considered to be sufficient) were deployed in an appropriate and effective manner dependant on demand at any given time.

Moving on to performance against the Business Plan, Councillor Richard Stobart challenged the Leader (Councillor Bridget Smith) to explain why the proposed development of a formal engagement programme with schools and employers was being pursued only locally (Measure A2(ii)). In reply, the Leader said that it was right that the Council should focus on ‘local’ in the first instance but added that it did work with universities when recruiting to higher-paid jobs. South Cambridgeshire was an expensive area to move into although it was hoped that initiatives such as a four-day-week would help compensate for that.

Action B5 related to the delivery of two new sports pavilion, community centre and civic hub (containing health, library, and community facilities) at Northstowe. Councillor Heather Williams said that there was an urgent need for Full Council to consider again the provision of temporary community facilities in the new town especially as a planning application for the civic hub was not anticipated before Quarter 4.

Councillor Sue Ellington used Action C6 (Upgrade our stock of 1,800 streetlights to LED, which will reduce energy consumption and save Parish Councils money) to highlight the very significant financial pressures currently being faced by smaller villages in maintaining their streetlights. Both Councillor Brian Milnes (Deputy Leader) and Councillor John Williams (Lead Cabinet Member for Resources) sympathised with the sentiment but regretted that South Cambridgeshire District Council simply did not have the necessary resources with which to help.

Subject to the comments in paragraphs 2 to 9 above, the Scrutiny and Overview Committee supported submission of the Quarter 2 Performance Report to Cabinet on 12 December 2022.