Growth, Infrastructure & Housing Select Committee - Tuesday 17 March 2026, 10:00am - Buckinghamshire Council Webcasting

Growth, Infrastructure & Housing Select Committee
Tuesday, 17th March 2026 at 10:00am 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  2. Cllr Jonathan Waters
Share this agenda point
  1. Sally Moore - Senior Scrutiny Officer
  2. Cllr Jonathan Waters
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr David Moore
  2. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  3. Cllr Patrick Fealey
  4. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  5. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  6. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  7. Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt
  8. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  9. Cllr Patrick Fealey
  10. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  11. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  12. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  13. Cllr Mark Roberts
  14. Cllr Jonathan Waters
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  2. Cllr Jonathan Waters
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Peter Brazier
  2. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  3. Cllr Simon Rouse
  4. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  5. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  6. Cllr Caroline Cornell
  7. Cllr Peter Brazier
  8. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  9. Cllr Caroline Cornell
  10. Cllr Peter Brazier
  11. Cllr Caroline Cornell
  12. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  13. Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt
  14. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  15. Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt
  16. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  17. Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt
  18. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  19. Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt
  20. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  21. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  22. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  23. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  24. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  25. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  26. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  27. Cllr Mark Roberts
  28. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  29. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  30. Cllr Patrick Fealey
  31. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  32. Cllr Patrick Fealey
  33. Cllr Peter Brazier
  34. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  35. Laura Davies - Libraries Operations Manager
  36. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  37. Cllr Peter Brazier
  38. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  39. Cllr Caroline Cornell
  40. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  41. Cllr Michael Collins
  42. Cllr Peter Brazier
  43. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  44. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  45. Cllr David Moore
  46. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  47. Cllr David Moore
  48. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  49. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  50. Cllr Peter Brazier
  51. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  52. Cllr Peter Brazier
  53. David Jones - Head of Libraries
  54. Cllr Jonathan Waters
Share this agenda point
  1. Sally Moore - Senior Scrutiny Officer
  2. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  3. Cllr Peter Strachan
  4. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  5. Cllr Peter Strachan
  6. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  7. Cllr Jackson Ng
  8. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  9. Cllr Jackson Ng
  10. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  11. Cllr Jackson Ng
  12. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  13. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  14. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  15. Cllr Michael Bracken
  16. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  17. Cllr Mark Roberts
  18. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  19. Cllr Mark Roberts
  20. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  21. Cllr Mark Roberts
  22. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  23. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  24. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  25. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  26. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  27. Cllr Peter Strachan
  28. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  29. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  30. Cllr Peter Strachan
  31. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  32. Cllr Simon Rouse
  33. Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance
  34. Cllr Peter Strachan
  35. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  36. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  37. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  38. Cllr Patrick Fealey
  39. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  40. Cllr Patrick Fealey
  41. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  42. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  43. Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance
  44. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  45. Cllr Caroline Cornell
  46. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  47. Cllr Caroline Cornell
  48. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  49. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  50. Cllr Chirag Chotai
  51. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  52. Cllr Chirag Chotai
  53. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  54. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  55. Cllr Michael Collins
  56. Cllr Peter Strachan
  57. Cllr Michael Collins
  58. Cllr Peter Strachan
  59. Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance
  60. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  61. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  62. Cllr Jackson Ng
  63. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  64. Cllr Jackson Ng
  65. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  66. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  67. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  68. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  69. Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt
  70. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  71. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  72. Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt
  73. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  74. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  75. Cllr Michael Bracken
  76. Cllr Jonathan Waters
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Peter Strachan
  2. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  3. Cllr Mark Roberts
  4. Cllr Peter Strachan
  5. Cllr Michael Bracken
  6. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  7. Cllr Jackson Ng
  8. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  9. Cllr Patrick Fealey
  10. Cllr Michael Bracken
  11. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  12. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  13. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  14. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  15. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  16. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  17. Cllr Peter Strachan
  18. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  19. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  20. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  21. Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt
  22. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  23. Cllr Catherine Oliver
  24. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  25. Cllr David Moore
  26. Cllr Catherine Oliver
  27. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  28. Cllr Peter Strachan
  29. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  30. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  31. Cllr Peter Strachan
  32. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  33. Cllr Peter Strachan
  34. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  35. Cllr Peter Strachan
  36. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  37. Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt
  38. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  39. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  40. Cllr Jonathan Waters
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Jackson Ng
  2. Cllr Mark Roberts
  3. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  4. Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer
  5. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  6. Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer
  7. Cllr Jonathan Waters
  8. Cllr Simon Rouse
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Robin Stuchbury
  2. Cllr Simon Rouse
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:00:00
Good morning. Thank you everyone for joining the meeting of the Growth, Infrastructure
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:00:14
and Housing Select Committee on the 17th of March, 2026. Can I welcome council members,
officers, members of the public, and those watching at home on the webcast. I'd also
I would like to welcome Councillor Simon Rouse,
who is new to the committee as a member.
And can I also congratulate the Vice Chairman David Moore
on the new arrival of his baby boy.
He looks like he's getting some sleep,
and he's bright and cheerful,
but sent all the best to his wife,
and I hope the lady's doing well.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Chairman, could I wish everyone a happy St. Patrick's Day?
A happy St. Patrick's Day.
Can I remind everybody to turn the microphone on each time that they speak and switch off
when they've finished speaking to help the clown to the meeting.
and this is to ensure the webcast picks up their comments
because the camera will come directly to you.
Item one on the agenda,
can I ask if there are any apologies for absence?

1 Apologies for Absence/Changes in Membership

I don't think there are from what I can see.
Everyone's here.
Thank you, Chairman.
There have been no apologies.
Sally Moore - Senior Scrutiny Officer - 0:01:37
Just as you've already mentioned,
Councillor Simon Rous has joined the committee
and Councillor Susan Morgan
is no longer a member of the committee.
Thank you.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:01:48
I'd like to say thank you to Councillor Morgan for her input over most of the
year and sad that she's no longer on the committee. Chairman I'd like to wish to
move a procedural motion please. You may, do you not want to do a declaration of interest at
this point? Well you may move to that first if you wish. And a minute? No? I think after the
Okay, item two, declaration of interest. Does anyone have any declaration of interest for the meeting?

2 Declarations of Interest

We have no declarations of interest.
Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr David Moore - 0:02:27
Select Committee Procedure 2 .64 allows me to submit a motion without notice to the Select Committee
and it does so by engaging the Council's procedure rules and
under 3 .41 I propose that the Select Committee Procedure Rule 2 .4 be suspended and
so as to disapply the length of service of the chairman,
and that the committee elects a new chairman
with immediate effect for the remainder
of the current council year in accordance
with the new proportionality rules.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councillor Moore.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:02:58
Is that seconded?
Councillor Collins, that's seconded, yeah?
Okay.
We are now...
Could I propose an amendment to that?
Yes.
I think we should complete the business that we started and then go to the change of chairman.
Cllr Patrick Fealey - 0:03:23
Because you've been involved in lots of the discussions we've had so far and some of the actions coming out of that.
So we should wind that business up and then start afresh.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:03:41
So that's an amendment from Councillor Patrick Feeley. Is that seconded?
Yeah, I'll second that. It seems quite sensible to do the business of the selectivity and tidy up the procedural motion.
Thank you, Councillor Sutchbury.
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:03:52
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:03:55
Can we go to, sorry, Councillor Cornell.
Shall we go to the amendment first before we go to the substantive?
because anyone wish to comment or should we just go to the vote on that?
Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt - 0:04:17
Yeah I personally think because it's normal to allow a chair to run their 12 -month term
and there is no special urgent reason why a chair needs changing I think it's
in good spirit of the rules to actually allow our current chair who's briefed us
this morning and is aware of what's coming up,
to be allowed to continue to chair to the end of the meeting.
Considering that we have had no issues with the chair
throughout the term, I see no reason
to show good faith, good manners,
and to the public who are watching this,
let's stop game playing and allow our current chair
to run their term and not turn this
into some kind of political win, just because the rules may
allow but the rules certainly don't give the morals or the spirit to allow thank
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:05:06
Cllr Patrick Fealey - 0:05:10
you thank you sorry councillor Phealy your amendment was just to carry on so
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:05:15
that we to item 9 on the item 9 and just to confirm why put item 9 is actually
the same reason that Patrick Phealy has basically stated was to complete the
business and a new chairman can then focus on going forward and I think that
And I'd agree with that. Sorry I've got Councillor Robertson, Councillor...
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:05:39
I mean the reason I second the amendment is it's the purpose of the select committee is to conduct its business.
The politics of the council are the politics of the council and I think
item 9 that can be done it would allow whoever she, he or they are elected to
pick up the agenda from then on. I think the fact that you'd wrote your letter
that you did I thought was expressed that and I think that was wrote in good
intentions, good intent and respect. So I think that today's business is far more
important than the politics of the council and there's some big items on
the agenda from the cabinet member and the local council. I'm going to stop you council structure because one of the key
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:06:21
reasons why I did what I did was to make sure we have plenty of time in this
meeting to discuss particular things like the local plan because I know
Councillor Strachan wants to spend most of his time on that rather than us spending a
lot of time on this item. After Councillor Roberts we'll then go to the vote.
Cllr Mark Roberts - 0:06:42
Yeah I'd just like to support the amendment I think you've done an
excellent job steering the committee through the discussion topics that we
have on the agenda today. I know we've got people waiting to discuss those items
and I think we should support
addressing those issues now and progress with the
Committee's business and then address this item on item 9 as scheduled. And so I support the
proposal, proposed amendment. Okay, shall we go to the vote? Those in favour of the amendment?
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:07:24
Those against.
Three against.
And any abstentions?
No.
So the amendment is carried and the agenda will remain
as stated as it was sent out.
We'll now move to item three, minutes of the previous meeting.

3 Minutes of the Previous Meeting

Does anyone have anything they wish to raise on the minutes?
Or can we approve those minutes?
All that, sorry, Councillor Satchry.
Propose we approve the minutes, Chair.
Those in favour of the minutes to be approved.
Okay, that's carried.
Shall I just quickly sign the minutes for you?

4 Public Questions

I now move to item four. We have a public question. With that we will, because it is
a planning question, we've already raised it and sent it to Councillor Strachan who
will pick it up in his item on the agenda and we'll go to that and Sally will read the
question as the member of the public is not able to attend today. So we'll move

5 Chairman's Update

on to that later. Item five and the Chairman's update. One thing that I'd
like to mention is the local plan is at the core of the work of this committee
and like confirmed that for the remainder of the calendar year it will
be a standing item on the agenda, as I think we would all expect it to be, as things develop,
because there will be regular questions that this committee would like to be talking about
within that. So just thought I would raise that.
There was also the committee had, following the letter that had come in from Matthew Pennycock,
the MP and Minister of State, a few members had raised questions and concerns about what
was in the latter, but particularly in terms of time scales and the consultations and timing
of consultations within the plan.
We had asked for an additional meeting back in February with the cabinet member, but that
has not been arranged and that was not responded to, but I'm sure the cabinet member will discuss
that later.
As I said, the question sourcing is going to come up from the public.
There's a question on housing and particularly social rent and maintaining that within sites
and how we can actually manage to do that.
There is also a meeting on Monday which we've been trying to get with Lisa Michelson, the
Service Director for Housing Strategy, to discuss some of the housing items that we
as a committee have been concerned about and to try and bring some of those items to the
agenda.
That meeting should have happened last week but has been moved next week.
So it may not be myself who is actually going to be in that meeting but I would strongly advise if it's not that that meeting is taken up because it's been difficult to get that confirmed.
Sorry, Robin.
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:11:44
and question chair correct me if I'm wrong we had an outstanding item
response to the response to the Buckinghamshire plan with the cabinet
member is that still outstanding or is that going to be brought forward to a
future meeting or will it we'll have that communication if I'm wrong
correctly I just felt that there was an outstanding item. Are you talking sorry
in terms of the local plan.
The committee had been promised a written report
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:12:14
from the cabinet member following our submission as a committee.
We have still not received a written report from the cabinet member,
though that has been promised on a number of occasions,
but I'm sure we will cover that on the report later in the meeting.
That's all that I would say at this point in time.

6 Library Flex

Can we move on to item six, which is going to cover library flex.
And I'm very pleased to see that the cabinet member,
Councillor Peter Brazier is in attendance.
Cabinet member for Culture and Leisure, who's going to be introducing the item.
We've got David Jones, head of libraries, Laura Davis,
libraries operations manager, and Mark Bateman, reading and schools manager.
Peter, over to you.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning, everybody.
Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:13:10
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to report back on the success of LibraryFlex.
You've done the introductions for me, which is great.
I've got Catherine at the end there, my deputy.
Give me a long list, so I thought I'd better.
Thank you.
LibraryFlex was born out of the convergence of several things.
Library, first of all, libraries are constantly changing.
They're not just about lending books anymore.
They haven't been for a long time.
They've transformed into hubs.
I think hubs is the best word to describe them, which offer a wide range of services
including access to digital services such as printing.
Not everybody has a printer at home.
And even help just finding something on the internet.
So people are going into libraries and getting that sort of help.
They also hold events, clubs, and meetups, and many of our libraries have rooms to rent.
Some even house their neighbourhood policing team.
There are safe, warm space for people to be in, and also most operate as council access
points.
So it's much more than any books.
Secondly, financial pressure.
Obviously, we need a way to save money without diluting the service we provide to our residents.
And finally, technology, using it to enhance the service.
So that's where the team were able to capture the concept of using technology to open our
libraries while unstaffed.
It's not totally dissimilar to the 24 -hour unstaffed gyms that we see popping up now.
So the aim of that was to keep being able to open more hours whilst keeping the staff
costs within budget.
I've been really impressed with how well this has been planned, rolled out, and promoted.
David's team has done a really good job of thinking this thing through, and we've had
few if really no significant issues whatsoever, except perhaps the roof leak at Prince's
Risborough didn't help us.
That's completely out of control, but it meant we had to shut the library flex there for
while whilst we got the roof fixed. Library Flex went live six months ago, phasing out,
rolling it. It was rolled out library by library in a very controlled and carefully considered
way. And we had the formal opening at Chesham Library in October. The leader attended and
literally cut the ribbon for us. So we're well over 5 ,000, 5 ,500 inductions now. So
So the way it works is people have to go through an induction so they understand how the technology
works, how they access the library out of hours, and how they use the library when there's
no staff there, so all the self -service stuff.
We've also seen the usage figures soaring, and we're starting to capture that now as
to how many people are actually swiping in out of hours.
And it's well over 15 ,000 now, I think, David?
Yeah.
Yeah, so it's just been very successful and also it's produced the savings we expected.
So we're saving somewhere in the region of 550 ,000 pounds a year with a capital outlay
of 500 ,000 pounds.
And as announced last week, we are further flexing Flex by increasing our opening hours.
So all of the Flex libraries will be open during the summer from April 7th, will be
open from 8 a .m. to 8 p .m. with the exception of Amersham. So Amersham
Library is within the Chiltern Lifestyle Centre, so that has different opening
hours and that's even greater. That's from 7 a .m. to 9 p .m. I think most days.
So that's just in its own ballpark. So just before I finish
with the chairman's permission, I'd like to read a letter we received from one of the
flex readers from an early adopter.
And she said, hi, I wanted to feedback how great the new library flex service is.
It's great to have increased access to the library.
However, there is an added benefit I wanted to make you aware of.
I have struggled with anxiety my whole life and this can make going places stressful.
I can easily get startled and cause panic attacks.
I used to go to the library as a peaceful place and comfortable for me.
However, when you increase the services and made it a hub, I stopped going so much as
it was too busy and hectic and no longer had the peaceful atmosphere.
I visited using the FLEX service today at Beckonsfield Library and was so grateful to
have a peaceful experience again at the library.
The FLEX service not only gives increased access but also provides for a quiet experience
for those like me who struggle with busy environments.
So Chairman, with the experts sitting to my right, we're obviously happy to take questions.
Thank you very much for that introduction. We've got a few hands up.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:18:21
I've got Simon Rouse I'm going to put in first as the new member of the committee, Caroline Cornell,
Cllr Simon Rouse - 0:18:33
and then Councillor Arthur Hewitt, and then Robin Surchbury, and we'll come back after that.
Thank you, Mr Chairman.
So, I can't remember, it's obviously a really impressive start to the programme.
But one area that obviously just flagged a bit of concern is the disability usage of the service,
which suggests, it's quite difficult data to interrogate,
but it suggests that they are not using the service as much as they would normally be doing.
So, you just take us through what's the response you're looking at to address that concern,
and can you give us a bit more of a flavour as to what might be causing that about the model,
and what further steps we can take.
Yeah, thank you.
As you say, the data in terms of usage shows that
for elderly people, we over -represent
relative to usage as a whole.
Likewise with women where there are concerns
potentially around security, again, we over -represent,
but with disability, this is lower than
the number of disabled customers for the service as a whole.
And that was our expectation.
Need to be candid really in terms of understanding
that a non -staff assisted service for all of the benefits
and the opportunity it creates in terms
of increased access isn't necessarily going to be a model
that works for all of our customers.
What we have done though is we've worked with individuals
and groups in order to try and identify areas
where we can improve arrangements.
So for example, we worked with the RNIB,
we've worked with Bucks Vision, those groups have actually worked with us to design the
induction process and to provide comments and feedback, particularly to do with some
of the ergonomics and some of the technical arrangements. So for example, the access to
the library, through Library Flex is through a swipe card and the entry of a pin. And one
simple suggestion that we've acted on is to have the number five on the pad raised, because
if you're visually impaired, the way that you guide yourself
through a pin is to identify the five, which is in the middle.
And obviously, you can then identify the other numbers
in terms of their relation to that five in the middle.
We will continue to work with individuals and groups
to look at other areas where we can improve access arrangements.
I think what we also need to do is
to go back to the original consultations.
So the original consultation demonstrated
that for all of our customers, but particularly customers over 65 and customers who are registered
as disabled, the peak time in terms of a need to visit the library and a need for staff
assistance is between 10 in the morning, 4 in the afternoon. That's where we continue
to have the staffed offer in most of our libraries for most of the time. What we need to do as
as well as looking at access arrangements
through Library Flex, is to really go back
to the staff towers and ensure that the staff arrangements
that we've got meet the needs of disabled customers.
So thank you for that.
So forgive me, because I didn't look
at the original papers on this,
but when you say we were expecting that,
so if we go back to the equality impact assessment
that was done for this bit of work,
we identified that we expected lower usage
from our disabled users as part of the Equality Impact Assessment.
And in terms of the mitigations you set out then,
are you saying that those mitigations are not working
and we've got to do more, or that...
What are you saying around the action that you took from the Equality Impact Assessment?
What I'm saying is that in terms of the original
Equalities Impact Assessment and the consultation,
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:22:13
we identified that there were times
where disabled customers and elderly customers in particular
identified that these were the peak times of visiting the library and these were the
peak times where they might therefore require staff assistance. So there's two things. One,
where do we have staff available? Are they at the right times in terms of times of peak
demand for all of our customers, the elderly customers and disabled customers in particular?
And now having launched the model and looked at take -up, we're then able to work with individuals
and groups how we can continue as a process of constant service improvement to find ways
of looking at access. The induction process that we have, we have face -to -face induction,
we have online induction, is the best opportunity in many respects to have that individual dialogue
with customers to look at specific access requirements or language needs and then try
and put in place arrangements on a bespoke sort of personal basis. And that's the work
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:23:17
that we do. Thank you. Councillor Cornell and then Councillor Arthur -Cure.
Mine is with library flex, would that be going to all libraries and would that then mean that they
Cllr Caroline Cornell - 0:23:27
will carry on being open, warm spaces for everybody from 8 till 8 in all the libraries?
Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:23:41
The main flex is only available in eight libraries currently. There are ambitions to expand that,
but currently it's the main eight libraries. Amersham, Buckingham, Beckonsfield. Amersham,
Aylesbury, Beckonsfield, Buckingham, Chesham, Marlowe, Hazelmere, Princess, Risper. And does
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:24:02
that mean that people can always access them from 8 to 8 for warm spaces as well?
Cllr Caroline Cornell - 0:24:06
Correct. Will you think be thinking at all of putting it to the smaller
Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:24:14
libraries? As I said there's there's ambitions to expand library flex into
into some of our other libraries some it's just technically impossible to do
it but we're only six months into this one so perhaps in a year's time we'll
we'll open that discussion. Thank you it's an excellent idea thank you.
Cllr Caroline Cornell - 0:24:31
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:24:32
Councillor Arthur Hewitt and then Councillor Robin Sultry.
Thank you.
Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt - 0:24:39
Has any survey happened for users
during the staff part of the day to evaluate
if there's been any notice of difference in service
as a result of the drop in staff to bring in the savings
to roll out library for X?
And has the value of service survey been done
to appreciate what services those staffed hours
users value most. If they choose staff hours deliberately or it just happens to
be that that's the time when they're free and they don't mind whether there's
someone there or not. It just seems that all the stats coming through of how well
library flex is working, it would be good to see some stats about how the effect
of having their staff has panned out for those who use it and also is the
council planning on using the data to decide whether some staff hours
could be dropped going forward to increase the flex times?
Or are staffed hours and employees
for the regular opening hours secure going forward?
So, sorry, you look confused.
Do you want?
Yeah.
Yeah, and finally, just with the disabled users
and the new or diverse users,
you haven't actually sort of said
any analysis or engagement will be done going forward,
but you have on other items.
I think you cleared it up earlier,
but it would be nice to have seen in the report something
like that before the question comes up.
Thank you.
Okay. So the first question was really relating
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:26:12
to what surveying has taken place around the effectiveness
of the staffed hours and whether library flex is impacted
on use of staff hours.
And it's correct, we haven't yet undertaken any evaluation
of the impact of this model on the staff towers.
The initial focus, if you like, was to gage
how well the new model has been adopted,
particularly by those groups where during
the initial consultation in 2024,
there was some reservations, specifically elderly people, also female respondents.
And of course what we know now in terms of take -up is that those groups are engaging well with the model.
There is going to be further survey and research looking at the impact in terms of staff dollars
and one area in addition to looking at to what extent disabled customers are being well
served by the staff towers is children. Because of course with library flanks, children have
to be accompanied until they're 16. And so what we need to do is to measure whether the
overall level of activity and engagement from children has dropped as a net result. And
course there are plans to continue to engage with schools and to promote
library flex in terms of children being able to attend when accompanied. The
second question I think was to do with the level of staffed offer and the model
and I think budgets wasn't it about certainty around that? I think it was
Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt - 0:28:04
whether the success of this is is at the moment being used to consider whether to
extend flexi hours and reduced staffed periods further,
or whether the current staff can be secure
in knowing that there's no,
none of this analysis being used
to potentially cut further staffed hours at this stage.
I mean, the decision made at cabinet January the 5th, 2025
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:28:25
was very much a capital investment of 500 ,000 pounds,
which in turn, as Councillor Brazier has pointed out,
has delivered a recurring year -on -year saving
of 550 ,000 pounds.
and there are no plans at the moment to revisit the model
in terms of the amount of staff availability.
The focus instead is to continue to increase
where we identify demand beyond staff hours.
So all I would say was on a basis that no evaluation
has been done with the effect on staff hours,
I would say it would be very wise to make that
Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt - 0:29:00
an integral part of any decision going forward
to use this data as an example of how perhaps, you know,
you could extend the programme.
I think it would be crucial to have that analysis alongside.
Yes. No, I agree.
I'm sorry I misunderstood your initial question.
Absolutely.
Some of the initial concerns during the consultation was how
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:29:21
this might impact on council access inquiries and the amount
of transactions and services that require staff assistance.
So absolutely in terms of the work that we will take forward
We have prioritised drilling down into those groups who aren't using LabReflex,
but clearly I absolutely accept your point that we need to keep an eye all the time
on how this model is impacting on the staff to offer.
But there was a third question, I think.
Yeah, it was very brief.
Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt - 0:29:54
It was just to say with the mention in the disability,
there was no evaluation put in there like it was for some of the other things
of how to monitor it going forward.
So that was more of a point that it would be nice to see
that included rather than having to have asked specifically.
But the neurodiverse stats where it says,
oh, you know, people who are neurodiverse tend to benefit
from quieter library.
And I think that's too vague a comment.
And I think that neurodiversity can be a range of things
where people feel safer having someone they can turn
to just as much as they like a safe space.
So I just think that that isn't something
that makes a report more valuable to me,
having a vague mention in it.
Okay. That's just a comment.
Yeah. In the equality impact assessment, we are quite explicit about the work
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:30:36
that we'll continue to do in terms of focusing with disabled groups.
But with the comments around neurodiversity, we've looked at the insight that we have.
So we did the satisfaction survey.
It's given us some high -level percentages, but it lacks monitoring data.
After that, in many respects, outside of the registration data, we've got anecdotal comments.
And these were some of the comments that we received,
which we felt would be appropriate to include in the report, but I accept your comment.
It's quite subjective, sort of almost random sort of comments to introduce,
but that's the insight that we have at the moment.
Thank you. I'm now going to move on to
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:31:14
Councillor Suchbury, Councillor Roberts, Councillor Fealing.
Firstly, thank you for the report. I wasn't enthusiastic about the project.
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:31:25
that's not going to be missed to represent my view. I know in 4 .2 you
state in the legal and financial implications you state that you make
savings of five hundred and fifty five thousand and then you state that the
investment the five hundred thousand which is a gap of fifty thousand. I
think you said earlier which is the first question that that savings would
be bedded in in the next financial year,
in the next financial year,
which I think one explanation around.
Just for clarity, the report in itself
and the cabinet member made the salient point
that he said these are hubs.
Those of us who are a bit longer in the legs
in these things can remember when we rolled out hubs
into rural areas.
Now being site -specific, you couldn't get any more North Buxton Royal than Buckingham.
Now looking at the strong points which was made by Simon earlier, and I thought
they were strong points around the access and disability and how you
evaluate that, I'm really concerned that we have got the, and I think this needs
some work done, or where we've got the worked hours correct.
If you live in Buckingham, you have to get on a bus,
or you have to get a vehicle,
or if you need a doctor's appointment or hospital appointment,
you have to go by the hospital cars.
The great thing about the hub principle
was you had a chance to access some of these services
in real time.
And I'm not sure that the reducing the hours, work hours, can reflect that.
And so I want a little explanation how you think you're going to do that.
And going back to the disability, your qualities impact assessment,
I think we do need to punch back on that because I think it was a very good question.
And I was going to ask it myself anyway.
The figures don't tell me how we're doing an analysis
to make sure that we are meeting our obligations under the Equality Act, because we do need
to be demonstrating that none of our decisions has impacted us under the Equality Act.
The figures seem to suggest that there's a drop -off and that we can't measure it.
Anything you can't measure and you can't see should be a red flag.
And over and above my views on it.
And lastly, in the Buckinghams sector, which is where I represent, have you been back to
the friends of the library who have put a lot of time in making the library be a more
friendly place, working collegiately and positively with the library staff to see how they feel,
because they were very strongly against these proposals, remember, how they feel as an independent
non -political point of view, they feel that these proposals are bedding out, open above
my own concerns and prejudice against them, period.
As I hope those questions are clear enough, and there was four things in there that you're
able to answer.
Thank you.
Thanks, Councillor.
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:34:57
I mean, the first point about the capital investment and the recurring savings.
So it's a one -off capital investment.
The net cost of the service affected through staffing reductions has reduced by a total of ÂŁ550 ,000.
And that is a saving that is achieved every year.
And clearly that's a significant saving in terms of the overarching challenge for the library service and the sector in terms of funding.
and it's one way of ensuring sustainability.
But it's also, and I go back to the January 5th report,
in terms of the options set out, it's a way of ensuring that we keep all of our libraries open,
and of course with FLEX we've affected an increase in opening hours.
The point you make about hubs and access to services,
at the moment we have that data from the initial consultation in terms of times of greatest need and demand,
and we've staffed as far as possible around those hours.
But you're correct, as my colleague is correct,
in pointing out that we've yet to properly evaluate
how well those staffed hours are working.
We're six months since the launch of all eight sites
in October with the increases in opening hours.
And so the data we have, in a sense,
has been captured from that time.
and we accept completely that this is an ongoing process.
There's more work to do.
And that links in a sense to your comments
around disabled customers.
That is our commitment going forward
to look at the data we have in terms of take -up
and to focus and hone in on those groups
who are underrepresented to identify
where there is scope for improvements.
And there's a corollary to that,
to look at how effective and successful
the staff towers are. And in terms of the Friends of Buckingham, I'm not aware that
we've had any recent dialogue with the Friends. I really need to cheque with the local team.
As you know, we've got some new members of staff on the ground, we've got a new team
that's come together. But in terms of the initial consultation, we met with the town
Council we've met with the friends we've looked as far as possible at increasing
the opportunities in terms of room hire and maintaining the activities and as we
move forward in terms of our future marketing we're going to be focusing on
encouraging as many groups as possible to use library spaces during those
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 0:37:44
unstaffed hours. Thank you for the response. At what stage so we can
scrutinise this, which is what we're here to do. Do you expect to be in a position to bring back
those very important... One local being the Buckingham Friends of the Library response,
which I'm surprised after six months nobody spoke to them because they put a lot of effort,
voluntary free effort into that library. And the other two strong points that around you made in
response because when you feel in a comfortable position to bring back some
reports on that so that we can, regardless of our views, we can audit the
progress of the change of services to make sure that to intensive purposes we
are making it as efficient and meet the local needs. It's the local needs. They
will vary from one area to another because when the assessment was done
different areas were assessed differently.
Wickham and other areas were assessed differently
to us for opening hours.
And I would question,
with the rural nature of Buckingham
being the only open one,
whether it should have been assessed differently
in those ongoing consultations that we are where we are.
I think we'll quickly go to the question
then we'll move on to the next.
Councillor.
In terms of the friends of Buckingham,
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:39:04
I'm not saying that we haven't engaged or communicated
and simply explaining that we have a new team in place.
A lot of that engagement will take place locally on the ground.
And as I sit here, I can't speak with confidence, Councillor,
as to what level of contact there has been.
But in terms of the point that you're making about scrutiny
and detail going forward, I mean, we've explained or noted in the report
that we will have a further review within a year's time.
and our commitment is to engage with this project
from the point of view of constant service improvement.
This is, it's a new bold innovative,
very challenging in many respects, delivery model.
So far in terms of implementation,
we're very encouraged by the fact that key groups
where we thought there might be some concerns in take -up
are using the service, clearly the number of registrations,
the number of visits, and of course,
the significant increase in opening hours
all reflect the success.
But we're not complacent by any means.
We know that we need to drill down.
We're six months in.
We've got some headlines.
We've reported them.
But we have more work to do.
And it has to be some quite personalised engagement
to actually sit down and talk to particular groups and to look at the
local implications as you set out. I think Buckingham is a good example because it
was quite quite unique in terms of the rural landscape.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:40:43
Councillor Roberts then Councillor Feeley and I have Councillor Collins and
Councillor Moore on my list at this point in time. Okay I think I had a number of
Cllr Mark Roberts - 0:40:50
points but they've been covered by other councillors. I think I just want to home
in on the trajectory around registrations, because we've got the target there, I think,
of 10 ,000 by 2027. Given that we've got the 5 ,000 odd registered with LibraryFlex now,
how does that trajectory map out? Are we ahead or behind schedule on terms of achieving the
target for 2027 and alongside that, what are the actions that will be taken?
Because there will be obviously an initial splurge of interest.
What are the actions that will be taken over the coming period to help keep that progress going?
We're ahead of target in terms of registrations and with visits we're typically averaging about
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:41:46
three and a half thousand a month,
about a 5 % increase per month, month on month.
In terms of the actions going forward,
there's a hiatus of sorts in terms
of our marketing campaign, because as we approach Easter,
there's gonna be a range of competing initiatives,
so we're holding it back.
As you know, we've got the sessional opening hours pilot
from April the 7th, that we'll see.
Well, Amersham is unchanged,
it represents a seven day service.
It's a 129 % increase on opening hours.
But from April the 7th, the other seven libraries
will see an increase in hours from 8 in the morning
to late at night that represents a 93 % increase
on opening hours.
And we'll want to revisit the marketing from that point on,
in part to do with those seasonal opening hours,
but also in terms of trying to move
beyond converting existing customers
to Library Flex as an option and moving instead to looking at what we think is
potential unmet demand because of course what we have now is the facility for
people to visit the library in the morning perhaps before they go to work
or in the evening when they return or as family groups and more so during the
weekends. This facility wasn't there previously and if we look in terms of
the registration data that we have.
We have working age population that is underrepresented.
So we've got some, a real challenge here
in terms of thinking about a marketing initiative
that can engage with those groups.
And we'll have a two -tier approach met recently
with our comms team, who we've worked with
during all of the implementation.
And we're now going to model a whole range
of social media initiatives, essentially focusing
on the idea of almost a day in the life of the library from sunrise to sunset looking
at a whole range of different offers if you like. So for example we know that we have
individuals already who go into their library and work all day, they stay in all day and
work, they're operating their work from the library space. We know as well that we have
lots of students as well who are doing the same. We know there's a facility for commuters,
as a facility for family groups. There's also of course the option as was explained earlier
in terms of printing, wi -fi and so on. So at the moment we're developing that marketing
plan to launch from April looking at promoting all of the different services that are available
during Library Flex hours.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:44:28
Councillor Phealy.
Thank you very much, chairman.
Cllr Patrick Fealey - 0:44:34
There's a couple of points I'd
like to raise.
One is access.
One is about events.
On the access one, as a
Councillor, I often use the
library for surgeries and things
like that.
But I'm not signed up.
Can I have access because my
library is in steeple clean and
we don't go into it.
Is it possible to have access for councillors
just using our badge
as opposed to having to sign up
for LightReflex?
That's the first question.
The second question is
we've successfully
run a
scammer
event in Buckingham recently
and you may have heard of it.
I just wonder whether this is something
in your organisation you're going to do
perhaps in consultation with Councillor Wynne, where you've got 41%, 65 to 85 plus clients
and they are the people that are targeted by scammers. I just wonder whether there's something
we can have a programme of events that would help with that. Now we had Thames Valley Police there,
we had trading standards and other interested parties and it was very successful.
lots of people that came along were not members of LibraryFlex, but they had access because there was a guy on the door that could do it.
So I just really want to work my way through those sorts of events and also access to us.
Okay. Sorry, was there another question?
My question on the last bit was, running events like that, is that something on your agenda?
or is it something you're working with Night Councillor Wynne to have on your joint agenda?
Right, I understand. In terms of the first question, the answer is no, I'm afraid.
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:46:25
The system operates at the moment whereby we have a central computer linked to our database of members
and that computer coordinates access to the doors, lighting, ten eye system, burglar alarm, self -service technology.
and so to enter into the library you need to be a member of the library. Now
the induction once you've registered as a library member can take online less
than 10 minutes or if you prefer obviously we can organise face -to -face
sessions because that gives the added opportunity to walk around the space
understand the safety features and also to be able to test out and trial the
self -service technology and we do that to ensure that customers are confident
in using that technology. So unfortunately we can't use our passes
but we can sign you up and of course once you're signed up you're able to to
use any of the the 28 libraries in the county. In terms of the suggestion
around scanning we have done work in the past with trading standards and TVP and
that's exactly the type of activity that a library is well positioned to deliver
We have a network of 28 sites pretty much evenly distributed across the county.
We're a safe, neutral, accessible, non -territorial space where people feel comfortable to come in.
Our staff have an aptitude of helpfulness and care.
We have free access to IT, free access to a range of information.
And of course with LibraryFlex, for eight of our sites, the opportunity to use that space
has now grown significantly because Library Flex unlocks buildings that at
other times are unused. So we don't have any specific plans in place but in
response to your your suggestion and your request we're more than happy to
engage with Councillor Wynne and put in place a programme to help people be
protected from scamming. Absolutely. Please keep steeple clay and library on
your way down.
Cllr Patrick Fealey - 0:48:29
OK, thank you.
Do you have a library card?
Do you have a library card?
Right, we'll sort you one out.
Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:48:39
Thank you.
Going along to the meeting.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:48:43
Just a quick question on the card,
because I saw you with your card.
Obviously, younger people don't really carry cards very often.
They mainly use phones, don't they?
So do we have an ability to actually move from the card
onto a phone format?
And I noticed the young people actually are quite low numbers to help them take up
Because we're using quite an old technology there which suits people like myself and Councillor Brazier very well
But that's not necessarily a younger generation thing
Yeah, so firstly we have a spiders app and that app has your card digitally within it
Laura Davies - Libraries Operations Manager - 0:49:20
So all the readers for library flex will read phones
So therefore you can just load up the app and scan your card that way
So people can sign up the app. The app also means that they can use the app to issue books when they're wandering around the library
So if the self -service machine is busy a bit like you do in the supermarket with Sainsbury's
You can scan your items on your app. You can scan your library items on your app as you go around as well
So the app is something that we're really trying to encourage and promote as part of the library facts package as well
Apologies to Councillor Brazier, he is way ahead and he's got his barcode there.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:49:55
Sorry, I think...
We should broadcast that through there.
Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:50:01
We've probably picked it up on the screen now, someone's actually using yours.
Councillor Connell just wanted to come in on that item I think.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:50:05
Cllr Caroline Cornell - 0:50:09
Just a quick point, Councillor Feeley said about steeple claim, please don't forget Winslow Library.
That could benefit from this as well.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:50:17
Councillor Collins and then Councillor Moore.
Cllr Michael Collins - 0:50:20
Yes, sir. Thank you, Chairman. Part of my question has already been addressed. However,
based on the successful start to the programme, do we have a further development strategy
in place? Are we looking, for example, at out -of -the -box ideas, even if they may represent
or require further investment.
I think the start that you've made is excellent,
but I don't think we should be stopping there
based on this success.
And I think it's important to have an agreed development
strategy.
And if you've got to come back to the paymaster
and say, I need more money, so be it.
The other thing is that we talk about marketing.
Coming from that kind of background,
Marketing is telling what you've got.
And I do encourage you to develop.
Coming from a production development team,
it's the future you've got to consider.
You're providing a service to your residents.
And you've got to be thinking forward, not looking
at what you have already.
So if I could just pick up on the development strategy.
Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:51:32
We haven't got anything in writing.
I have ambitions, which probably exceed the team's desires, but we'll most certainly,
I mean it still is very early, we're six months in, there's still some learning to go on and
the questions that have been raised today will add to that strategy as it develops and
will most certainly get something in writing at some stage.
And anything to that, David?
No, I can concur completely.
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:52:09
We have a mixed economy of delivery in Buckinghamshire.
We have 28 libraries.
We have a whole range of co -production community
libraries.
We have large town libraries.
We have eight sites with library flex.
We have home visit service.
We have an extensive 24 -7 digital offer.
So there's optimum options in terms of access.
This particular model in terms of the business case focused on the larger libraries
because we have significant numbers of staff in the larger libraries.
And the capital investment delivered a saving essentially through reduction in staffing numbers.
Now that model won't apply as we move to some of the smaller libraries.
So there's a challenge there in terms of identifying the capital investment.
But our minds are absolutely open.
We're six months in and certainly been interest from a range of other libraries outside
of those larger town libraries in wanting to adopt the model
because of the increased access that it can offer.
Councillor Moore.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:53:22
Cllr David Moore - 0:53:25
Thank you, Chairman. Fantastic report. Thank you very much and thank you for your hard work and the importance of libraries.
I like to call libraries their mini universities. I'm a trustee of a library, historic library called the Kedemins Library.
It's not a library flex library, it's actually from the 16th century, but it just shows the importance of knowledge and having access to knowledge for everyone,
no matter what their position is, what their wealth is,
and ultimately reading is a great way to open
all sorts of exciting worlds.
So thank you very much.
I want to just quickly ask about 3 .18 of the report.
Under ethnicity, it says work will now take place
to revise the registration process
to increase the data available
and to organise surveys and focus groups
to see if there are any cultural, religious barriers
to life reflects.
Two questions, what do you define
and minor cultural and religious barriers?
And secondly, how much would that cost
considering budgets are very tight at the moment?
Thank you.
So the background to the point in a sense
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:54:25
is that when we looked both at the consultation stage
and in terms of registration,
we can't draw meaningful conclusions about take -up
in terms of ethnicity, race, or culture,
because we don't have sufficient data.
And the reason we don't have sufficient data
is that when customers register, our current arrangement
is one whereby the field that captures ethnicity
is not an obligatory field.
And for a whole range of reasons, some of our customers
may be reluctant to share information.
Or our staff, indeed, might also be sometimes nervous in terms
of asking for that information.
As we've moved to introduce online opportunities for registration, that problem's been exacerbated.
So the action that we need to take is to revise that registration procedure, support our staff,
and also introduce some written application forms that staff can guide our customers through,
as well as explaining why we're asking for this information.
So that's the context.
In terms of the potential cultural or religious barriers
that might apply, I mean, that could be, for example,
to do with different days of the week
in terms of religious observance and whether, for example,
we've configured our hours of access
in a way that actually excludes people on that basis.
In many respects, we don't know.
It could well be that there are no issues at all.
The report points out that we don't have sufficient baseline data to draw meaningful conclusions.
But in terms of the cost of engagement, I think that's low cost.
I think that in many respects, this is to do with engagement with local organisations
who are more often than not willing to meet
and discuss whether this is a model that could create barriers, as well as looking at people
who visit the library during the staff hours
and simply having conversations.
Are you aware of Library Flex?
Does this work for you?
Is there any reason why the current set out of the model
might exclude you?
And that's what we're looking to do.
What if they, one group says they want it to be open
on this day and another group says another day?
Cllr David Moore - 0:56:45
You've obviously got to balance out
quite a few different views there.
I'm just thinking a library is open to all,
no matter your race, no matter your religion.
So surely that should be the approach.
It is.
This isn't about differential or preferential.
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 0:57:01
It's simply about whether there's
an unintended consequence, whether we've
done something that we could quite easily have avoided,
because we simply lacked an understanding
of a particular consideration.
I mean, the question is hypothetically,
in many respects.
And of course, I think the answer is always difficult
with such a hypothesis because of course there's a whole range of considerations that can impact on access and
the equality duty
Where sometimes there are contradictions and conflicts and I think that we just have to sort of really approach those
On a case -by -case basis when they're identified
Thank you
I've got a couple of questions myself now
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 0:57:44
One of the things obviously with with the whole of this extended hours
I'll be tracking an increase in actual usage or just spreading usage across a
much longer period of time. That's my sort of first question. Also I was very
surprised when I looked at the data in terms of the age group take -up that it
didn't match what I would have judged that this would be maybe something
particularly would have appealed to people of working age, younger people, and they would
have been the biggest level of adopters. So that's why things like data we've just talked
about, assumptions are not quite what your best guess is on. And it's how we can, obviously
there's groups there which are not taking it up, and obviously you're going to do some
work on that, I know, from what you've said. So it'd be good to know the focus of how you
and get that moving.
And there's a third question I've got.
Looking at the local plan in Beaconsfield,
it came up when I went to a meeting the other day,
the Beaconsfield Library seems to be up
on the potential sites for development,
which I wasn't aware of.
Does that mean there is another plan
for the Beaconsfield Library if that actually happened,
seeing as that's one of our key flex areas?
It would be great if it was gonna move,
because I think it's a busy library.
The Amsham model is a pretty good model if you can actually incorporate it with something which is really lively.
But I know it would be controversial in that area to lose the library.
And I think it would be good to know at least some feel of what the thinking is behind that.
I'll take that last point first.
Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:59:30
Yeah, obviously that's slightly controversial.
but the Beccersfield Library at the moment
is in a residential area, it's off the high street.
I visited it recently.
We would make sure that it would be replaced
with something better,
possibly in a more accessible, highly trafficked area.
I don't know where that would go,
but obviously the local plan, as you know,
is very much in its infancy.
So whether or not that site does get pushed forward or not,
I don't know.
but there are other places that Meckensfield Library could be and could be better.
So I'll just take that point. I'll just defer to David on the other issues.
It'd be good to start if that's some ideas you need to get, some consultation there would be
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:00:19
really good in the local community of what those ideas might be so that people don't feel there
would be a loss because that would be a big negative. It's very much on my radar.
Cllr Peter Brazier - 1:00:34
David Jones - Head of Libraries - 1:00:35
And just to add to that, the library works well, but as you know it's in a residential area.
If there were ever an opportunity to relocate in a way that had the support of the service and local residents,
that actually made the library more visible, it was closer to footfall, they include very keen to pursue an option if it increased access.
but at the moment it's an opportunity that's identified
with absolutely no plans or decisions made at all.
In terms of the questions around tracking usage,
we're at a very early stage.
And it is in some respects quite difficult
to draw many conclusions.
We've tracked registration,
we're counting the number of visits,
and we're looking at who's using the service.
because we don't have a facility for light with light comparison.
There are different models similar to Libreflex in other library services,
but nothing quite the same that we can draw a light by light comparison.
The Libreflex hours in the first instance were those hours that were the quietest times of the day
because we wanted the staff to remain available during the busier times.
And so at the moment, I suppose for the year ahead,
we're creating a baseline.
We know that we're capturing about
three and a half thousand visits every month.
We know that that is growing at a rate of around
about five percent each month.
We don't yet know, we aren't able to draw any conclusions
whether that's new business if you like,
whether that's transference.
So that's all to come I think in the year ahead.
And in terms of the second question,
or observation question,
yeah, I absolutely agree.
The focus for the team is very much on looking at
how we ensure that elderly people in particular
weren't disadvantaged or potentially excluded
through a model that requires confidence
around digital technology.
And it's very pleasing that the take up by people over 65
is higher than across the services.
What we think we're beginning to identify,
and this might link to the shift in induction,
is that since moving to online inductions,
we seem to be attracting a higher number of younger people.
So I think over a period of time,
particularly after we've launched
the new seasonal opening hours with that facility
to visit outside of working hours.
We're hoping that that will begin to stimulate a shift
in terms of take up from the working age population.
But as I mentioned earlier on,
we are planning a marketing campaign
to roll out after Easter
with very much a focus on that particular group.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:03:39
Can I thank the cabinet member and deputy cabinet member,
which I didn't introduce actually,
Catherine Oliver earlier on,
for attending and all the officers for your update on this area.
It is a new initiative, a new initiative to take time to settle in.
And I think we've raised a number of questions.
I think one of the key elements is to make sure on the equality of anybody with disabilities
that we are ensuring the access is there.
but also with the staffing areas that we've got the timings right for when staff are at locations to respond to those,
to do some further analysis on those areas in terms of how that works.
And some of the issues which were raised particularly in Buckingham and the local libraries there
was to make sure because of travelling times and things like that that those staff are there and are available.
There was the call for expanding this into other libraries where possible,
but also to understand what that would mean in terms of the staffing and availability within the locations.
I think it will be really useful to find out once you've done some of the marketing
what is the take -up, particularly the younger groups,
because the younger groups will be the future of the libraries.
And once you've got them in there and using,
and the service is working for them,
to actually come back on that.
And one of the things I think in any organisation
is like getting more information from those
who are within those libraries at the moment,
in terms of the Friends as the Buckinghamshire Library,
that we actually do have the information from those groups
who are saying, actually, this is how it's working.
this is how we could slightly change it or improve it as it goes forward.
And it's really good to know that technology is there
and usable for all sorts of methods, whether it's a card or other things.
But also there's no specialist treatment for counsellors, you have to get your card basically.
So that's a clear message to all of us. There's no VIP treatment.
Thank you very much for your time.
Thank you.
I'm just going to bring the screens down, it might be a bit of a racket.
In the background you will hear the screens are coming down because we're going to actually
have a few items on the screen for the next session, so they do take a little time, so
if you bear with us. And there is, as we move on to the next item, there is a little bit

7 The Buckinghamshire Local Plan

our new cabinet members. Right we're now on item 7 update on the Buckinghamshire
local plan and can I welcome Councillor Peter Strachan who's the cabinet member
for planning, Councillor Michael Bracken deputy cabinet member for planning, Steve
Annebrook, Corporate Director of Planning, Growth and Sustainability.
And, as stated before, we have one public question.
As a resident cannot be here to put the question personally, Sally will read it out and a written
response will be followed, will follow up.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chairman.
Sally Moore - Senior Scrutiny Officer - 1:07:24
the following public question was submitted by Philippe Lefebvre. What
measures is the council taking to ensure that developers deliver the affordable
housing quotas agreed in section 106 agreements especially in mind of the
housing development plans in the emerging Buckinghamshire local plan?
I don't know if the cabinet member would like to make a quick comment on that but we have said the written response.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:07:49
Thanks, Chairman. There is a long response to that and complicated and in the interest of time,
I won't read that verbatim with your permission. But what I would say is that Buckinghamshire
Council takes the delivery of affordable housing secured through Section 106 agreements very
Cllr Peter Strachan - 1:08:11
seriously and has a range of measures in place to ensure agreed quotas are delivered against
requirements and the letter in the minutes will go into some detail about
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:08:24
why that is the case chair. It is a question which this committee has asked
itself and so we have gone to that in more detail so that's why. Councillor Strachan
would you like to do a quick introduction before we start on questions?
Cllr Peter Strachan - 1:08:43
Yeah, can I also say we've got Richard Ambrose has joined us as well.
I don't think he's got a desk plaque, but Richard is the Service Director, so he will
join us as part of the panel.
Apologies, Richard.
My head was down when you came in.
In terms of providing a local plan update, since the last update in January, the local
plan has taken a significant step forward. We have now published assessments for over
1400 sites as part of our latest site engagement exercise. This engagement forms an important
part of the regulation 18 stage, regulation 18 stage of plan making where we explore and
test different options for the emerging local plan. As part of this work, we have written
to all landowners whose sites have been identified as potentially suitable for inclusion in the
plan, asking them to confirm whether the land is still available. We have also issued a
site survey to landowners as well as to town and parish councils to help us fact cheque
information on site suitability. Alongside the engagement, we published a series of technical
studies that inform the site assessments. These include a green belt assessment, which
identifies areas of potential grey belt, draught outputs from the Housing and Economic Land
Availability Assessment or HEALR, and a study exploring options for new settlements and
urban extensions. The engagement exercise closed at midnight last night. As of midday
yesterday nearly 5 ,000 site surveys had been completed. The Planning Policy Team
is now reviewing the feedback we received and this information will help
shape the final version of the Local Plan which is scheduled to be published
for consultation by the 23rd of July this year. After that consultation all
representations will be collated and the plan will be submitted to the Planning
Inspectorate for examination. We must submit the Local Plan by the 31st of December in
order to meet the Government's deadline under the current planning system.
And finally, Cabinet last week reconfirmed the Local Development Scheme, the programme
for the Local Plan, confirming that we remain on track to consult on the final version of
the Plan in July and to submit it for examination to the Inspector by no later than the 31st
31st of December this year.
I hope that provides some context
for the discussions we're gonna have.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:11:26
Thank you, I remember.
I've got three hands up so far,
but I'm sure there's bigger to come.
I've got Councillor Linn, Councillor Roberts,
Councillor Satchbrie first of all.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you everyone for coming in today.
My understanding is under the current MPPF land
Cllr Jackson Ng - 1:11:42
within certain protected designations in the green belt,
cannot be classified as grey belt.
that protection comes from what we call footnote 7.
Now the government's proposed MPPF 2025,
which I think the consultation runs out on the 10th of March this year,
proposes to remove footnote number 7 from the grey belt
in definition indefinitely.
Now the council's own grey belt assessment,
as you mentioned earlier,
has identified additional land across Buckinghamshire
to be exposed to grey belt classification
if that change presses forward.
So I've got three questions which are linked to one another.
First question is, now that the Council knows which specific parcels of Buckinghamshire's
green belt would lose their footnote 7 protection, what is our strategy for protecting that land
and has it made formal representations to the government opposing that removal?
Secondly, can the Council confirm, either today or in writing to this committee, how
How many hectares of our green belt would be moved from protected to potentially grey
belt if footnote 7 was removed?
And how many dwellings could those land be in theory be accommodated under the golden
rules?
And the last question.
Now the government argues that the residue MPPF protections, such as the national landscape
policy and the major development test protects, provides adequate protection, has the council
obtained again independent legal advice on whether that is actually the case? Because
once a site has been classified as grey belt, my understanding, it's subject to presumption
that's in favour of development under the golden rules. And that is materially a weak
position than the outright exclusion from grey belt status. Thank you.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:13:41
If I may, so perhaps just trying to take some of those in order.
So just in terms of the consultation that the government's undertaken on the MPPF, you
may have noticed that the council responded to that consultation and made quite a considerable
number of comments.
I think it was over 200 questions that were asked as part of that consultation.
And certainly made comments in relation to the kind of footnote seven point that you raised.
So, sorry.
Yes, indeed.
So, and obviously, again, it's worth making the point that is a consultation.
We await to see how the government respond to that consultation before we, if you like,
can kind of take any particular action.
You ask about the kind of strategy, if you like,
for protecting land, particularly the land
that is covered by Greenbelt designation.
So again, as part of the engagement
we've undertaken through the local plan,
the strategy so far, and again, this is with the caveat
that we haven't actually identified the final sites
that would go into the plan, but the strategy so far is to maximise as far as possible development
that's outside of Greenbelt or Greybelt location.
So regardless of Greenbelt or Greybelt location, the strategy that's before us, if you like,
and that's being consulted on is to, as far as possible, maximise delivery outside of
that area.
We also are engaging in duty to cooperate conversations and again
I make the point and this actually came up at a recent cabinet meeting
We know that the duty the legal duty to cooperate is being removed by the government
But there is still a kind of policy requirement in the MPPF that requires us to engage
And requires our neighbours to engage
Collaboratively particularly on housing numbers, so we continue to have those conversations as well
ahead of a consideration of any designations within the grey belt or green belt areas.
So if you like, the council's strategy as part of the plan is to maximise those locations outside
before we are even in a position of having to contemplate others,
setting aside what changes might be happening nationally.
I don't have the stats available today around how many hectares, how many dwellings, but
we can provide those outside of the meeting.
That's no problem.
And again, just coming back to your kind of final point around presumption in favour, I
think this kind of applies in a number of different areas.
We operate in what's known as a plan -led system.
And so provided we, the council, have an up -to -date local plan and we are able to, through that process,
demonstrate we are maintaining a five -year supply of housing, then we are also, under planning law,
able to determine applications in accordance with our plan.
In other words, where we then have speculative applications, whether they be on Greybelt or in other areas,
that don't conform with our up -to -date plan, we are in a very strong position to
take a view that they are applications that we should be refusing because they
are not consistent with our plan. Where the council and the area becomes
vulnerable is by not having an up -to -date plan and not having an
up -to -date five -year housing spike. That is the situation we find ourselves in
today. So therefore when you see in the MPPF there are areas where the government are saying
there should be a presumption in favour of development here, then those are areas that
we will definitely find ourselves vulnerable with when we don't have an up -to -date plan
and an up -to -date five -year housing and land supply. The plan is our best protection against
those speculative schemes.
Chairman, just one follow -up question.
So can we have a commitment from the Council
Cllr Jackson Ng - 1:18:09
or the Cabinet that if and when the local plan is in place,
the Council's Planning Department will take all steps
to fight speculative grade belt applications by developers?
Thank you.
So I'm not in a position to give a commitment
of that nature, I'm afraid.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:18:32
that that requires us, what we're required to under law
is to determine every application on its merits.
I am not able to give a blanket commitment today
without knowing what applications that we're talking about
and what the circumstances in each application will be.
That would be me binding the hands of decision makers
in applications and I'm not in a position
to be able to do that.
But in theory, if we have a local plan that clearly sets out
Cllr Jackson Ng - 1:19:01
our five -year housing supply, white green belt,
we might or might not want to release,
then surely the council's position would be
whatever application comes in,
we've got to defer to the local plan first.
And therefore any speculative applications,
you know, that is not in conformity with the local plan
will be resisted in theory.
And again, hopefully I've set that very clearly.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:19:29
What I see as being the position when we have an up to date local plan.
What I can't say, unfortunately, directly is, and therefore,
every application that we then receive that's speculative, we will definitely
refuse, I mean, hopefully you can take from my response.
What I see is the position, but hopefully you would just also appreciate,
I simply can't give that blanket commitment.
I'm just going to follow up on that,
if the committee will bear with me.
I think some of this is going to be,
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:19:59
at what point when we've pulled together the local plan,
does it start carrying the weight
that actually makes it feasible to say,
we can see these sites are inappropriate,
which is speculative.
And I think the question underneath that is,
At what point are we able to prove that we have put in place a five -year housing supply?
Because it won't be on the first day and it's about the potential of when houses will be
built and when they're likely to come online.
It's not likely to be on the first day that we actually submit the plan and to get in
people's heads exactly when will actually certain things start to click in so that actually
we get some protection as we go forward.
Because before then, the speculative sites
are the things which most of us are really, really worried
about on top of what the other sites which
might be designated.
And at the moment, if you're sitting outside
of one of the sites we've designated,
you might well be coming through as a developer saying,
I better get in before local plan.
But it'd be nice to know exactly what
put me get a bit of strength there to actually defend
what we think is good planning policy for delivering for housing and infrastructure
and all the other things we need on our plan.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:21:30
And again, I'm afraid I'm not going to be definitive in my answer to that
because only to say that obviously a local plan that is adopted carries full weight
in the decision -making process.
As a plan is prepared through the various stages,
as it gathers momentum through those stages,
it also gathers more weight that can be attributed to it
through the decision -making process.
So therefore, where we are at the moment
is we don't have a plan, an adopted plan,
and we also don't have,
despite consulting on lots and lots of sites,
We don't have a strategy yet about where the developments that are going to take place and therefore how
does the council intend to meet the need that's been assigned to the area for the local plan to meet?
Obviously when we publish the Regulation 19 plan, which is in the summer,
which is in July of this year, at that stage
that will become the council's, if you like,
kind of proposed plan for how to meet those identified needs.
At that stage, clearly, compared to where we are today,
we will have more weight in the decision making,
but we still won't get 100%.
But as we get them through the examination,
we'll get, again, we will gather more weight in the process.
And at each point in time,
if we are considering a speculative scheme
compared to where we are,
we will need to make a judgement as to how much weight we are attributing.
And those judgments will have to be, I can't say to you today,
when we're at that stage it's 80%, when we're at the other stage it's 85%.
It will be a matter of judgement at the time based on the circumstances at the time.
But the general principle is you gather more weight as you proceed.
Just add something to that, because I think this is a very important point that
Cllr Michael Bracken - 1:23:30
obviously has come up in a lot of discussions with members of the council and parishes and
towns across the area, so I think it's really important to understand that the steps that
Peter outlined at the start in terms of what we've just published means that we are not
at zero at this point. So, no one's trying to put a percentage on it, but it was a very
significant step to have published the position statement and the various studies that we
as part of this latest engagement and has moved us substantially along that line in
terms of the protection that we know have from speculates of development.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:24:10
It has, but it also I think if you're in the south of the area has highlighted the pink
areas which are the provisional grey belt they suddenly become until we actually have
something a little stronger, are now very clear
and designated that actually that's what they are,
where before there was a discussion of whether they were
or they weren't.
Now we've actually said this is an area
which does concern people in terms of the speculative
applications that can come in.
So it's one of those things where it's moved us forward,
but in moving forward it also highlighted some key areas
of risk, and I think that needs to be fully understood
as well so it's both points are there.
Okay. Sorry, I've taken up too much time
with my personal case.
Councillor Roberts.
Cllr Mark Roberts - 1:25:05
Yeah. I particularly exercised about the 15 ,000 that's
in the local plan figures for urban,
from urban intensification and about the deliverability
of that, to what extent can we rely
on that figure being delivered from urban intensification and particularly
when we've got so limited number of Brownfields sites already identified to
substantiate that figure. I know in my own ward we've, I won't go into detail,
but we've lost the opportunity of housing at King George's Fifth House. There was
another site that was identified and in the urban potential study but in the
site assessments that's been assessed as an unsuitable site. So that's lost and there are
very limited numbers of brownfield sites included in the site assessments to date.
So that comes back to my question to what extent can we rely on that 15 ,000 figure from
in urban intensification, when if we don't have that,
then that puts green belt areas at risk.
And thank you, and thank you for the question.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:26:29
And again, this is a really important area, clearly.
So there's an expectation at the moment
that we will be delivering that level of growth within particularly in our town centre areas particularly focusing on
how we are supporting
the work around town centre regeneration and also the recently published economic growth plan which which highlights
town centre regeneration as one of our key areas.
That number is
is designed to ensure that we are looking at
maximising opportunities effectively through windfall opportunities in our
town centre. So it's not you know we're not at this stage saying you know we're
going to draw lines around very specific sites and say it's that site that site
and that site we're actually looking at our town centres as opportunity areas as
a whole. There is more technical work as there is lots of technical
work happening still on lots of lots of areas of the plan that's currently
taking place around how we can support the kind of evidence that will be needed
for an inspector when we eventually submit to show how we intend for
those sites to come forward. But again it does, the local plan is
seeking to support the ambition of the council in terms of town centre
regeneration and our economic growth prospects and so this is a real
opportunity for the local plan to be able to demonstrate that and the
effectiveness of that. So lots more work to do and as again as I sit here today I
can't kind of give you that technical evidence because that's work that's
still happening and will need to be concluded before we submit the plan in
July. I'm just come back on on that slightly. They used the phrase windfall.
Cllr Mark Roberts - 1:28:26
we've got a windfall figure as well of 7 ,400.
So we add the 15 ,000 on top,
that's taking us to nearly a third of the total extra homes
coming from what is effectively unidentified windfall.
And that seems very unsubstantiated to me.
So the windfalls provision that's in there,
that's not the town centre windfall,
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:28:57
the kind of 7 ,000 number is based on an historic windfall rate across the whole
of the county so that's not looking specifically at town centres that's
looking at areas across the whole of the county and these will be the I mean
every every member will be familiar with these types of you know ones and twos
and threes that might be happening in different locations across the county
those all add up to a certain number and the way that we've calculated that by a
backward look at what that kind of historic rate has been and that's how we've supported that number.
The 15 ,000 though is a much more of a forward look about how do we change what we want to see in our town centres
and it will require a different approach in our town centres.
It will require much higher densities than we have historically supported or delivered in our town centres.
And so in many cases, certainly in our big town centres, it's going to change the nature of our town centres.
But again, doing the local plan now on the back of the regen strategies and on the back of the economic growth plan
provides us with that opportunity to really set out the ambition for making a difference in our town centres.
So that's the intention behind that number. We're very deliberately taking out the number for town centres
away from the other windfall sites that we expect to see as well.
Cllr Mark Roberts - 1:30:28
If I could just finish on this point. I'm not sure that that's articulated quite clearly enough at this stage.
So in the local plan, when the draught is published, I'd be hoping to see in there more of an articulation about that case for regeneration and the vision for those town centres that supports the figures that you're referring to.
And if I may say, I think that's exactly what an inspector would want to see as well, which
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:30:57
is the purpose of the additional work that's now taking place ahead of submission.
I think also when you're looking at that, one of the things we talk about density in
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:31:07
town centres is also height of buildings, etc, which is quite different and not something
we're used to other than a massive tower block in Aylesbury and by the council. We don't
really have a lot of height, do we?
So that's something which I think the public
would be interested in, so what will this look like
and what is the change on it?
So it's density in town centres is building up,
not just out, and that saves green fields.
So it's having that concept fully there.
Right, I have Councillor Sutchbury, Councillor Rous,
Councillor Feeley, Councillor Cornell.
Thank you very much, Chair.
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 1:31:47
I'll lay out the background to the question so you understand the question. When the Buckinghamshire
Council was established in 2020 to be in 2021, the objective was to deliver a plan by 2025.
That hasn't happened. After that, we carried on discussions about the Buckinghamshire plan.
In 2022, I established that there was a working group in public questions to work on the development
of the Buckinghamshire Plan.
In 2023, we sought through the council to be able to have more involvement of the opposition
members.
So in my questioning to Officer President, I established that there was a working group
in 2023.
that was a much, which didn't carry on after 2023,
it was abolished.
And then it went on to be an involvement
of the cabinet and vice cabinet member
and leader of the council on the production
of this local plan.
Now all times I'm evidence -based in that
from what I've got on my free screens
to make sure that I am correct.
My concern is, and it's heavy concern,
is I can't demonstrate as an elected member
the involvement broadly regardless of political group,
the involvement of the local members in choosing
or being involved in the site allocations.
There may be a legal reason why that isn't so,
but we have to, I think you'll respect,
we have to be able to stand by the site allocations
for whatever reason they've been reduced
and we have to be able to talk to our constituents about that.
And in South Buckinghamshire, as has been expressed earlier by Councillor Jackson,
there's the issue around the Greenbelt issue, which is a specific thing in South Berks.
And he has to express and be able to represent his constituents.
I have to be able to represent the plan in North Buckinghamshire, in my ward in Buckingham,
where we've got a large area. Winslow's no different.
but we've got boundary developments coming forward.
Do you think, in hindsight,
that there should have been more involvement
with local members in the production of this site allocation
even if it had been confidential?
Because it wasn't to the meeting we had prior
to the sites going public
that I feel sufficiently able to say
that I made any contributions on these sites.
then it went to the parishes in the following week.
And we are Buckinghamshire councillors,
regardless of whatever party we are,
we're elected to represent our wards.
And I don't feel that we've had the opportunity
to do that substantively enough.
And I don't think I could generally say
that the local input, and latterly,
the big question which has been expressed quite adequately
by the cabinet member in these meetings and officers
is key, the infrastructure delivery plan.
So on the infrastructure delivery plan going forward,
can I appeal to more input from local members?
But I wouldn't know what South Buckinghamshire,
Wycombe, and whatever needs, but the local members do.
And they know what the infrastructure lacking are.
To think that all that knowledge
could be in so few people's heads
when developing a Buckinghamshire plan
for Buckinghamshire and that's what I've got in my written responses. So I can't
say it and if I'm wrong on that, the cabinet member's response, how do we proceed?
Because whatever we think about the housing numbers, whatever we think about
the plan, we have to be out as Buckinghamshire Council to stand by the rationale of how it's been delivered.
Thank you Councillor Shabir, I think we've got the question. If you'd like to respond.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:35:58
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:36:16
And if I could just pick up on the kind of technical process that we've followed, I mean,
I'll leave the members here to comment on involvement of the members.
So just in terms of the kind of call for sites process that we follow, obviously, we've had a number
of different call for sites over the years of the preparation of the plan
where we've invited submission of sites and there's a plan on the screen which
shows the considerable number of sites that have been submitted and so the kind
of process that we've been following is submitting or asking people to submit
those sites where there is potential development interest and then being able
to kind of do some technical assessments on those sites to assess their suitability.
And therefore, the stage we're at the moment is having done some of those assessment,
we've been able to sift a number of those sites out.
We are left with a significant proportion of sites which are still in the process, if you like,
for further technical assessment.
The final decision, as I mentioned before, about which of those sites make it into the kind
a final version of the plan is a decision yet to be made,
obviously, by cabinet in July.
So that's the kind of technical process
we've been following.
I'll leave others to comment on the kind of the involvement
of members in that process.
Yeah, I think, I mean, Councillor Stutchbury,
Cllr Peter Strachan - 1:37:50
you brought this question to council last year,
you brought it to me in cabinet recently.
And I answered both times.
And I think it's fair to say that the call for sites process
does not include a political lens. The call to sites process requires bodies outside of
this council to put forward sites that they would like for their own reasons to see development
on. This could be landowners, it could be farmers, it could be a whole variety of people.
So I constantly see on social media and I get questions about sites being allocated
to certain areas. That is not how it works. The sites are offered by people who'd like to offer
the sites. So therefore, the job of the officers is to cheque that those sites are available,
properly available and suitable. So there is no political lens to view those sites through,
or else that would create all kinds of mischief. So it's a technical exercise. But I would,
And just to repeat some bits of my answer to you and cabinet,
because I had a suspicion that this was going to be asked again.
I would like to provide this committee with an assurance
that the draught local plan has been compiled in accordance
with the council's constitution and national regulations.
In line with those requirements,
members of all political groups have been engaged throughout
this process by a variety of methods.
Within the last six months, these include regular updates and progress on our website, presentations, and questioning via the planning member forums.
More recently, the team held individual member surgeries for every ward in the county.
Individual surgeries for cross -party discussion about their wards and the allocations that have emerged within them.
And as well as my regular updates to cabinet and full council on significant milestones
reached by the plan, it's been also scrutinised by this committee as it is today.
So personally, I am convinced that this has been done properly and appropriately and all
parties have been engaged with its development.
Can I thank you for the response similar to the one you gave me at cabinet and I'll be
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 1:40:14
I'm just as honest, you read me quite well
that I am naturally interested in these things.
The question that hasn't been answered
is do we believe there was sufficient involvement
on this element, even if it had been confidential
about understanding the site allocations?
Because every member, Councillor Gaps
and other people around here, have to stand by these.
And the key bit I mentioned was going forward,
the infrastructure, I believe,
that every elected member around here,
representing the Claydons, Winslow, South
be necessitated. It may be that some of that is just opinion, but there needs to be some
granular work done with the members because otherwise this plan will go to council. And
I think though what you said is technically correct, the involvement on the technicalities
of that are slim.
Thank you, Mr. Stecher. Can I just quickly interrupt? To clarify, I think, in terms of,
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:41:27
because you've just talked about each member had a one -to -one session with about their ward and
it was offered to them. Not everyone would have attended but it was offered to them that was
that was great but I don't know many councillors when they actually looked at what came up
that actually found in their in their ward that actually there were not some glaring errors and
glaring mistakes. I can look at my ward, there was one which was basically the
respite centre was down for housing and the member the officers didn't even know
it was owned by Bucks Council and that it was actually going to continue as a
respite centre and not for housing, Sealy's house. I looked at
Beaconsfield and all the areas around my ward and we had, Wilton Park came up which
already has planning permissions across the whole of the site as if it was
something that was for further discussion.
It's not for further discussion.
It is a number that is there.
It was like some things which,
and when you went across the whole of the council,
all political, this is not a political thing,
this is a purely local knowledge in your area,
sites which were basically down as could be released
because they were industrial,
had already just gone through planning permission
that they were all going to be converted to housing
in my ward.
already gone, you know, so these things were all there,
and just flagging up earlier,
before ever, and then the horrific thing,
we then had to go, and I did,
to the two parishes in my ward,
two resident societies and explain,
actually no, that's not correct for this reason.
That's the type of thing which can be avoided
by actually talking to the members,
because the local knowledge can go,
it's almost like we've got a little bit of siloing
going on here between our planning teams, our local plan team, and also there's
other issues I raised in terms of legal elements need to be there but that's the
sort of thing I think Councillor Sochtli is going on. By being clearer earlier we could have
made it much better much quicker because we know these aren't confirmed sites and
weren't seeing confirmed sites we were just seeing the initial thinking and some of
that could have just been cleaned up
before we went out there
and we didn't have to spend lots of time
talking about things, which are long gone.
They're not something for the local plan.
I mean, I would just say that this is a huge piece of work
being done at pace.
Cllr Peter Strachan - 1:44:02
And the whole reason for doing the surgeries
with individual wards was precisely to provide
the piece of local intelligence that you described.
That's the reason the work was done.
So, and it is what it is.
We don't live in a perfect world.
We live in the world we're obliged to deal with.
And I can assure you that the entire officer team
are working at significant pace to get this work done in time
because what we cannot allow to happen
is that this local plan be delayed.
Because then all the things that we're trying to avoid
by having it will be the very things that we create.
It's a huge piece of work with,
and the requirements of the plan
are not decided by Buckinghamshire.
they're being laid on us by this government.
So the number of housing, the way it's calculated,
all of these things are being laid on us by,
I may say, a fairly hostile government.
And despite that, I can assure you that me, Michael,
and the officer team are working as hard as we can
to get the job done.
I think the point I was making was slightly different,
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:45:07
which is a little bit sooner,
and we could have had something cleaner that went out
if we'd seen it about a week or so before.
and it's once it went out to the parishes and it went out to the wide public,
that's where it looks like, hang on, do we know what we're doing here?
And that's just being cleaner with things would be better.
And a lot of us have been in planning for quite a long time actually, so we've seen all these applications.
We live it for the last, you know, for me I think seven years.
So, that would be one of the things.
I will now move on to Councillor Raskin who's been very patient and I know Councillor Ng wants to come back in.
Was it on that particular point?
Or did you just want to be on the...
It should be Councillor Rouse coming in.
I know Councillor can just put his hand up.
I don't know if there's a point of information or something.
Was it a point of information
or just to go on the list for later?
Okay, fine.
Councillor Rouse, sorry for holding you up.
I'm sorry.
Cllr Simon Rouse - 1:46:01
So I'm probably gonna take a slightly different perspective
on what we've just discussed.
And I like to think where things need to be improved,
I'm pretty direct around it.
But I have to say, having been engaged in exactly the same way
as Councillor Stachowy and other councillors in terms of timing,
I actually felt, and I wanted to note,
I think the engagement from officers in the member workshops,
the recognition of anomalies where we pointed them out,
which are understandable at the scale of site allocation
that was being referred to, I thought was very constructive
and enabled me to communicate with residents.
But I do think it gets to the heart of what
I think the core challenge is.
I just want to set out some observations and some suggestions, which is we need to build a plan that commands the confidence of the planning
Inspector, but we also need to build a plan that commands the confidence of the public
And I think one of the observations that I have
That is in two areas. One is the more general
Consequences I think of this local sites engagement and I appreciate the cabinet member just reminding us that these weren't sites the council
Chose these were sites put forward
I think what happened is because we're doing an exercise that's highly technical and doing it at pace,
I think some individuals and some organisations filled a vacuum with information that was unhelpful and caused confusion,
and caused in some instances, I think, the wrong focus on what was needed in local sites phase.
And therefore, I do think there is a lesson for the council.
You can't anticipate every way in which people
are going to fill that vacuum and put misinformation
into the system.
But I do think now that the sites engagement is closed,
before the July phase, there is an opportunity
to take some of those myths that were put out
into the public domain and correct them and make
sure the public understand exactly what was being said.
So some good examples.
People were actively trying to say these weren't mandatory
housing targets.
And we've been around that loop so many times.
We know these are mandatory housing targets.
I think we need to be really clear with the public
that they are and the council does not have a choice.
I think there were some specific causes of misinformation
about specific sites.
And we covered one around the Beckonsfield Library
in the earlier session.
And so I think using members' input,
because I think locally we've got things to share,
but also council, I think just a communication fact base now
would be incredibly helpful.
And I think it would help to build some public confidence
for the next phase and set out for the public what they will next expect.
That also leads me then to the new and expanded settlement study, which I'll confess I got to
much later than I probably should have done, and it terrified me.
Because it is a highly technical
document, and I'll be honest, I could not correlate the assessments that I saw in the new expanded settlement.
And I certainly don't consider myself to be a planning expert,
But I don't consider myself to be stupid either.
And I couldn't see how some of the judgments on the nests
that were being taken forward and landed in the site's
structure.
And I'll be honest, two in particular,
the Chalfont St. Peter one, which feels to me
as building a huge city from the sort of Denham, Geraldscotch,
Chalfont St. Peter right up to the border of Chalfont St.
Giles in a site that is in the Cone Valley Regional Park.
I'm not sure all the sites are deliverable.
I couldn't quite work out how the assessments that were done led to that being a site to
take forward versus others. And the other one is the Wubin and Born End site, which
just is clearly in Greenbelt, would again be creating a huge combined settlement. And
again, I couldn't follow how that had happened. And so I do think on the NES bit in particular,
it has to be elevated out of the technical document into language that the public can
understand about why that has been determined and why they've been taken forward. And I
I suppose the sort of ancillary question
is, how locked in are those Nest sites?
Because I hope that the feedback you've had on the Nest sites
will be taken into account with the same degree
that the sites element has.
Because those are probably the most controversial
and the most substantive changes to the character of Buckingham
Share.
And then the third element, I just
want to get some confidence over.
You talked, I think, about 5 ,000 submissions.
I think I probably did 4 ,999 of those, so I'm quite intrigued as to who the others were.
But that's a lot of feedback to absorb in a rapid period of time.
What confidence can you give us that they will be properly assessed and properly interrogated
and properly drive different outcomes?
Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance - 1:50:40
So if I could pick up first on the Nest sites, the new settlements and expanded settlements
ones.
So, yeah, it's very technical, and there's further work going on around those.
They're not all locked in at this stage.
We are taking into account the further assessment that we're doing,
the comments that we're receiving, and certainly the ones that you've looked at,
and particularly where there's green belt, grey belt,
that will be fully taken into account.
So we would expect to see some changes, but work is still ongoing with that,
and we are linking it to the assessments
that we've been having.
So just to give you a bit of assurance
that everything's not locked in,
there's lots of further work to go on from now to July,
and we will liaise with the members
as appropriate in those areas.
But just to add to your general point,
Councillor Rice, I totally appreciate that.
Cllr Peter Strachan - 1:51:33
This is a big communication issue.
I do accept that we need to engage
as much as we possibly can with the public,
with town and parishes, with members.
I absolutely do accept that.
And I'm sure you all appreciate just the size of this task
and that we will endeavour to do our best
to meet all the needs of this at the same time
is getting the new local plan over the line in time.
But I take all the points you made, we will take them away.
And if you've got specifics about what you might like
to see us do different or better,
My door's always open, you can come talk to me.
Sorry, Chair, can I, there was a point as well
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:52:15
about the confidence of the team doing the work
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:52:21
on the assessments, so just to give you, again,
some reassurance, we've got a considerable local plans team
who are all dedicated working on the local plan work.
we have not waited until the end of the engagement process for us to start the
kind of the assessment so as the site assessments have been coming in through
the process we have been working through those and trying to understand you know
where there are themes where there are particular issues so and as you would
expect we've got a a full kind of project management plan behind this with
kind of risks that are fully assessed and so we've got the confidence that
we've got the resources and the expertise but again I don't want to
underplay the fact and I think everybody appreciates this and it's been said
before we are working at pace we're on a very tight deadline we've got very
little room for slippage but we are working at pace and we've got the right
team working on it every single day.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:53:28
Okay, we've got Councillor Feeley, Councillor Cornell, Councillor Chitai and Councillor
Thank you, Chairman.
Just two points if I could.
Cllr Patrick Fealey - 1:53:35
Could you talk me through in preparation for Reg 19 being issued, the blue areas, particularly
they've been discounted at the moment.
Will they be revisited before Reg 19 is issued?
and you could just give me a bit more detail about that.
The second point is which is really just something
I picked up recently is that in Buckingham,
the wards are not marked correctly.
Buckingham South is actually going into Clayton and Grendon
so there seems to be a bit of a hiccup there
and I think that would be worth useful.
It meant that some people looked at it
and didn't look into it in enough detail
until they raise it and I haven't had the opportunity to raise it with a team yet.
But that's my two points.
So just on the second point, thank you.
We'll pick that up outside of the meeting
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:54:28
if there are any amendments that we need to make. Just on the blue areas and again to be clear.
So those are areas that we have published the sites and we have said that we will continue to undertake the technical
assessments of those sites.
they at the moment are not contributing to the overall number that we have published.
So again you'll see from the numbers that we published to say that if we assume that all of the other sites that come forward,
not the blue sites, can come forward, then we achieve somewhere approaching 90 ,000 homes in the plan.
We are publishing those sites now because given the timeline we're on,
what we don't have is the ability, if one of the other sites ends up falling out for
a technical reason, we don't have the ability to kind of run another consultation
on potential other sites.
So all of these sites are being published.
They are being noted in that way so that if we find ourselves in a position
before we make the final decision on the final plan of having to bring one of those
of the sites in, then we've run the consultation on those sites as well.
So there's no commitment to any of the sites at this stage,
but there's particularly no commitment to those blue sites.
But it may be, once we've concluded all the technical assessments,
that one of those sites or more have to be revisited in order for us to finalise the plan.
But again, I can't give you a definitive answer to that
until we've concluded all of the technical assessments.
Can I just come back and start on that?
Cllr Patrick Fealey - 1:56:13
Just on the sites you have discounted, i .e. the red sites,
are they categorised as a totally unsuitable possible
suit?
Yeah, so those are the sites we have discounted
and we are not conducting any further technical assessment
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:56:26
of those.
So we won't be able to revisit those sites
because we're not conducting the level of assessment
we're doing on the other sides.
If I could just add a point on that.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:56:40
As part of the engagement exercise,
Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance - 1:56:44
we are having some comments around why some of those
have been excluded.
So we will consider those as part of considering
all of the surveys.
We've now actually received 6 ,600 responses
to the survey engagement exercise.
So exactly what Steve's just said.
But just to say any comments that come back questioning why we've excluded them, we will obviously look at and make sure that we've done the assessment correctly.
Councillor Cornell.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:57:17
Thank you, Chair. Thank you.
Cllr Caroline Cornell - 1:57:21
Coming in back of Councillor Feeley at Winslow, where you have put two big developments in, which is going to be 10 ,500 houses,
They're not within the Winslow boundaries. They go into Great Hall and Addington.
So that would probably at the end be a problem for Winslow, I would think.
Unless we do something about the boundaries.
And the other one is, is there any provision for ecumenical churches or something religious places?
Because we are going to have a big town up in Winslow now.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:57:57
So on the boundary point again, if there's any kind of technical changes that we need to consider,
then you know, very happy to do that outside of this meeting.
There's no specific allocation within the plan for churches or places of worship.
we would expect that to come forward I think as part of the overall kind of
development of particular areas as part of the kind of obviously essential
infrastructure that would be associated with it. Obviously we we have the
ability through the kind of consultation phases for different providers to also
let us know where there may be particular needs that are arising and we
might be able to reflect that then in policies in the plan rather than
necessarily having sites allocated across the area,
I would expect us to otherwise have a policy in the plan
that requires essential infrastructure to come forward
as part of the development of a particular area.
Can I just come back on that?
And what about leisure?
Because we're going to have all these houses,
Cllr Caroline Cornell - 1:59:02
there are going to be a lot of people.
So we have a leisure centre,
or something, a sports centre for these people.
Yeah, so again, we've heard mentioned today
about the kind of infrastructure delivery plan
that would be associated with this.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:59:13
And so the areas such as kind of leisure provision, et cetera,
education provision, you know, health provision,
are all areas that will be part
of a wider infrastructure delivery plan.
So we'll, and there'll be technical, in relation to leisure
and open space, for example, there'll be kind
of technical assessments that will set out, you know,
the exact requirements in particular areas.
and some of that will be dependent on what's already there compared to what might be needed
on top of that to accommodate the growth. So I would expect a final infrastructure delivery
plan to be able to set a lot of that out.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 1:59:58
Councillor Chitale, then Councillor Collins, Councillor Un.
Thank you, Chair. I appreciate that you know the Cabinet member mentioned that these sites
Cllr Chirag Chotai - 2:00:06
are offered up and they're not picked and also the officers mentioned that
these sites are not locked in which we know will be further down the line.
However I'll draw your attention to one of the larger green blocks in the centre
which is the ward I represent. Now the plan proposes such sites which are the
Opus 509 and 3113 which just account under 10 ,000 of the housing numbers. Now
These sites have been previously refused at appeal after it was found that the level of
harm would exceed the benefits even when the housing need was taken into account.
Now are you able to just very over the top walk us through what has materially changed
since then and how these were still assessed and considered despite historic decisions.
Now again I appreciate that you said that they are just brought in and then you still
need to go through further assessments.
But is there like an initial sort of roadblock or trigger that says,
well actually these were initially rejected or refused.
Why are they still being considered now?
So what I can't do, I'm afraid,
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 2:01:19
is kind of give you a running commentary on each of the individual sites.
Because that's what the engagement process is for and
that's what the current kind of assessment is happening.
I think what I can say is, in terms of what's changed,
the plan that we're preparing is we're required to prepare a plan that delivers 95 ,000 homes.
That's the big significant change from any historic assessment of housing need
that might have been made on any site across the county
will have been based on a much lower level of housing requirement.
And so those assessments will always be done in that context.
And where we are today is we are faced with a very challenging target of 95 ,000 homes.
And that is within that context that any of these sites are published as potential sites.
And as I say, what I can't do is get into the specifics about individual sites.
But that's the context, I think, in terms of what's changed.
Thank you and I appreciate the team that's doing this and the target time that you have.
Cllr Chirag Chotai - 2:02:30
So just for clarity for everybody here and you know those watching at home,
this may not make it through till the end, which means that it may not be considered after all in the end
and this will still need to be reviewed. It is not fixed in stone right now.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 2:02:50
Yeah, hopefully we've been very clear. There's no commitment at this stage to any of the sites.
I mean I know there are different levels of notation on the different sites.
At some point this year the council, the cabinet will need to finalise its plan.
At that point there becomes a level of commitment to some of the sites.
We're not there yet and so any of the sites subject to the technical assessments could fall away.
Thank you.
Councillor Collins.
Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:03:21
Cllr Michael Collins - 2:03:24
A very basic question. With all the time, the resources that we're putting into this programme,
what happens if we fail to meet the July deadline?
Cllr Peter Strachan - 2:03:44
If we don't meet the deadlines as specified by the government, there becomes all kinds of options.
the worst of which is it will be done for us by government,
which is why we are absolutely determined
to meet the deadline and put in the necessary resources,
whatever that requires,
because the implications for not doing so
would be horrendous for our residents.
We'd lose all control whatsoever
about where development might go,
and that would be a disaster.
I fully accept that and of course I'm totally supportive of it.
Cllr Michael Collins - 2:04:25
In terms of financing the programme, to meet that deadline we may incur additional costs,
substantial costs.
Will our budget allow us to fund that or does that come under some kind of special reserves
pot that we have?
Cllr Peter Strachan - 2:04:49
I'll defer to Richard, but I would say that every estimate that we make and every accommodation
we make and every judgement we make will allow us to meet our deadline.
We're absolutely determined to do that.
Yeah, and I'll just add on the finances.
Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance - 2:05:06
We reviewed that on a, I would say a monthly basis at our local planning board, but actually
more regularly than that, we have got sufficient reserves in our local planning reserve at
at the moment to cover those costs.
And yeah, we monitor it, but yes, we do have some
contingency in there for any extra resource we may need
to make those deadlines.
Can I just, on terms of finances, and Councillor Strachan
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 2:05:31
has made the point about if we lose control of the process
and the government effectively steps in and takes over
the process. I just want to be very very clear as well that if that were to happen the council
will be paying for the privilege of the government doing that process for us as well. So what
I can't give you is an answer as to what that might cost, but that is a risk clearly that
actually if we have the government taking over the process then whatever the process
they put in place, they would be expecting the council to pay for that.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:06:12
Councilman? Thank you chairman. First of all can I just say thank you very much for
Cllr Jackson Ng - 2:06:16
all the hard work on behalf of my residents on the local plan, the draught
local plan and consultations etc. I can see there's a lot of work that's gone
into it and I know how important it is from a legal perspective and planning
perspective that this needs to be done to protect our residents and the
precious green belt that we have. What I wanted to talk about was the 95 ,500 homes target.
Now I've been contacted by residents, a local community group, talking about this homes target,
which is based on a government standard method, which I understand can be challenged
through examination, at examination through independent expert. The formula,
I've been told, and I've been lobbied by my residents, does not quite reflect
at Buckinghamshire's actual demographic picture,
an ageing population, outward migration of younger households
and real infrastructure constraints.
Now, my understanding is other authorities
have successfully argued for lower demographic figures
in terms of demographics examination on exactly this basis.
Has this council, have we looked at commissioning
independent demographic analysis to make that case,
and if not, why not?
And can we commit to doing it
before regulation 19 consultation in July?
So the inspector really has a properly evidenced
alternative before them,
rather than us simply accepting a target,
which the residents in Bethenspeal
and local community group has been calling excessive.
Thank you.
Thank you, thank you for the question.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 2:08:03
So I'm not aware that there are authorities
that have successfully challenged the basis upon which
the kind of the national formula is set.
If there are examples that you're able to share outside
of this, then we'd be very happy to look at those
and explore those further.
But as I sit here today, I'm not aware of those.
I am aware that authorities that go through the process have in very limited circumstances
been able to successfully argue that they've not been able to meet the full extent of the
national formula.
That's a slightly different perspective.
Rather than challenging the basis of the formula, authorities have been able to successfully
say we've been through all of the necessary steps you know we've done all
you know call for sites we've done our duty to cooperate we've done our green
belt assessments we simply cannot find the sites to meet the need and there
have been again some limited circumstances where that justification
has been accepted by inspectors I am aware of that and you know and again as
Given where we are in the process, I can't rule out that we might not get to that stage
in our process, depending upon how the technical assessments eventually fall.
So that remains a possibility, given that we are still to conclude the technical assessments.
But as I say, if there are other examples where the specific formula has been successfully
challenged then I'd be very happy to look at those.
Thank you very much for your clarification.
I'll look into it and come back to you.
Cllr Jackson Ng - 2:09:55
I think maybe I'm speaking out of line,
but speaking on behalf of many of councillors
and planning committees and local councillors,
I think a lot of us are feeling quite frustrated
given the pressures, infrastructure pressures,
commuting pressures, you know,
we're talking about waste being discharged
in our local areas.
You know, I think a lot of us will argue actually,
we can't cope with much more.
I'm saying, I can't, I can't say, I said some, right?
Well, certainly the ones I've been speaking to,
now we're concerned about that.
So I think it'd be good if your team
would be able to report back to this committee
and say actually, once technical assessments have been done,
have we got to this stage,
and how we are gonna approach that
in relation to arguing the case
that we can't accept 95 ,500 as a housing target?
Thank you.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 2:10:52
And again, we'll be giving regular updates to this committee in terms of where we've got to and clearly
the ability to meet the
national requirement is something that we will clearly need to
Update both this committee and we'll need to be very clear when we get to the examination with the inspector as well
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:11:11
The point that
a target coming from the central and from government,
that is based on purely a percentage number
and it hasn't been purely built from the base
in terms of local need and local growth.
That basically means in people's minds
there's a huge number of people supposedly
gonna come into Bucks, but actually will those houses
ever get built because if there's not the economic
financial benefit for the developer,
and there's no government money
that's gonna come in to help this,
that means that there's,
there is something here that doesn't quite add up.
And so, though we're going through a process,
there are concerns, I think,
underneath that process of what we're doing,
and we know the skewing has happened particularly
because places like London are not being required
to take their requirements on the numbers so more of that is going up
particularly the home counties to actually take up. So it's large numbers
there's nothing that's telling us that the house builders actually going to
take these numbers up so that's what we're dealing with but we sort of got
something we're working on here in the best way so so that's why I think there
is a disconnect that sits underneath this local plan because of the number
that's driving it, rather than coming from a calculation that's come from base need upwards.
And that is one of the things that we've got. And on the other element, which I think is going to
be important, is infrastructure, because infrastructure is the big worry of most
residents who are already here. How the hell are we going to cope with all of this, particularly
with the add -ons to communities rather than a new town which would create its own infrastructure
and is it the case that basically some sites, because we don't think there's any government
money coming in to support the infrastructure, will be rejected on that alone, though they
might have been a good site if we'd had that infrastructure, sort of thing like around
Aylesbury where we wouldn't have been able to build the road around Aylesbury without
government money. Are there sites where because we at the moment don't think
there's government money but to actually deliver the number of houses I can't
think that's going to happen without some central government funding or a
discussion on that. So again there's a disconnect sitting here that is and
we haven't quite got the answers what that looks like. We could get some
feel of that but it's coming out of some of the things that we're talking about now because
we know the only time any of this sort of level of building has ever happened in the
UK before was clearly directed central government funding whichever the political colour of
the government who was in power at the time particularly after the war they all put in
lots of money to actually build the houses which were needed and the infrastructure and
schools and places of worship and everything else that was needed.
That doesn't sit there at this point in time for these numbers and that infrastructure
is something we're really worrying about I think in all our communities once this comes
in if it's not right.
So that's just some of the questions that are coming up.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 2:14:58
And again, sorry, I mean, I kind of understand the questions that are being asked.
And unfortunately, given the stage we're at, what we're not able to do is kind
of definitively give you an answer to what we might do with all of those particular questions.
You know, we are looking to understand what the infrastructure requirements are
that are derived from delivering that level of housing growth.
We will therefore be looking at what is the infrastructure gap that might be associated with that,
how might that gap be filled, and we'll need to ultimately as a council make some judgments about
whether or not the gaps that we identify are so significant as to exclude sites from the process.
That's a judgement that we'll have to make as we go.
And it might also be a different judgement a planning inspector makes
ultimately about some of those sites.
So until we've got the information and
the technical information that gives us that assessment,
then I can't say definitively where we're going to go with it.
Other than we are gonna use that evidence to support some of the decisions
that ultimately the council will need to make?
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:16:24
Obviously it is a question that a committee that has one of its key things is infrastructure
is going to ask and a level of confidence on that is again one of the things really
that Councillor Ramsay was talking about is it's the type of thing that we need to get
the confidence out there to support a plan because that is the, at the moment, definitely
in the black hole that people are going,
where is this?
How does this look?
And so we get those questions answered,
which are being asked now in some of these sites,
speculative or otherwise.
Okay, I'm gonna take one more question actually,
and it's gonna be from Councillor Arthur Hewitt,
because she's the only one who can have her hand up
who hasn't actually asked a question so far.
Thank you.
So in terms of the value of the consultation,
Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt - 2:17:11
What value are you putting to it in terms of it being a reason to say people have objected or not objected, therefore these sites are possible or not?
Because one of the things that has been very confusing with the consultation is that you're saying here today that it's for people to say,
oh, what about this bit of land, we could build on that. But equally, there's people who viewed it online as saying that it's for them to say, don't build here.
In Downley, there's a red marked area that says not suitable.
That could make you believe that you don't have to comment
on it because the council have got their backs.
And yet today we've heard that everything's up for review
at the end of the day if things change.
I'm not sure that the consultation can be relied upon,
especially as well as, I don't know if this was pointed out
where I had to go and use the facilities,
about the fact that the greenbelt area
wasn't automatically ticked on there
and that provides extra land that may or may not be available,
that may have not been seen by people.
What worries me is this consultation may be used as a people didn't mind
or a people minded as some kind of absolute.
Well, in actual fact, I think it's not been secure enough as a consultation
and easy enough to use and navigate for the public
to actually warrant it being used in any further studies.
That's my key worry. Thank you.
I think just one of the things on that was,
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:18:35
I think the key that came out in terms of the consultation,
or stated to be, was a cheque that basically the sites
were being put forward were still being put forward
by the land owners or people who were put forward.
So actually it's turned into a different sort
of consultation, so the status of the consultation
is a bit vague I think.
There are lots of people have individually consulted.
That wasn't what went out from the officers
in terms of the focus of this consultation.
And it would be quite good to take on Councillor S
to ask you his point about that point as well,
because I think it wasn't quite clear.
Yeah, thank you.
And so the focus of this engagement has been
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 2:19:18
to first to target and to focus on
what might be the planning issues
related to individual sites.
And so those people who are very familiar
with the planning process,
whether it be through local planner, whether it be through individual planning applications.
What's important is what are the planning issues on the site.
So, you know, it isn't a kind of a beauty parade in any way at all.
So it isn't a question of how many people object to this site or how many people support it,
and therefore it's either in or out on the basis of that.
Because actually it can only, you only really need one very significant planning issue
that somebody raises as part of this engagement that we weren't already
otherwise aware of that can make a massive difference as to whether a site is in or out.
And so the value of the engagement is in the quality of the comments.
And we tried very clearly ahead of the process to give people
some ideas about the sorts of issues that we are particularly interested in.
So now that's not to say, as you've already highlighted,
that there will be people that have simply responded to say, not here please,
don't like this or do like that.
And obviously we will take account of that and
we will report how many comments we receive.
But the most value that we will get from the consultation and
the engagement is where people have been much more specific about what might
the planning issues be and those are the things that we will make sure
are completely taken into account in the process.
And so that was always the intention of the engagement.
That's what I hope from the 6 ,000 plus comments that we've received,
we will get quite a considerable amount of that intelligence
as well as the technical studies that we are conducting as well.
And that's what we will feed into the next process before we make final decisions.
Yeah, I mean, I totally get that, but I didn't get it from the consultations.
Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt - 2:21:19
I'm just confirming that anything that came out of the consultation wasn't specifically
what you were looking for won't be used as a kind of pro or con to something
when that in itself wasn't a proper consultation if you get what I mean.
Yeah, I mean where people have raised planning issues then you know then those
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 2:21:35
are those are relevant but as I say if if if simply if somebody's ticked a box
to say I don't like this one but not given us any reasons or any particular
planning issues they're going to carry considerably less way as as they would
if they were commenting on a planning application,
it's much more valuable to give us the kind of the reason,
the planning reason particularly,
as to why certain sites are either preferred
or not preferred.
If I could just add, in terms of the sort of the overall
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:22:09
complexity of what's come out and you were saying,
it's been difficult to say.
Cllr Michael Bracken - 2:22:13
And I think the council did make a large effort to make sure
that it was as clear as possible to anybody engaging with this.
and there's a six page Q &A, for example, which
went through a lot of these issues on what exactly we're
looking for people to comment on.
So I think, of course, it's complicated
and it's going to be hard for everybody
to grasp every detail.
But I hope the committee would recognise
that the council has made a very material effort to make
it as easy as possible for people
to understand what's going on.
Thank you.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:22:47
Thank you for the extended session.
You've had as you can imagine it is an area where
It's right at the top in terms of one of the things that the council is doing at the moment and it's long -term
impact on Buckinghamshire
And future generations is gonna be absolutely huge
So there's a lot of questions there and we want to try and make sure we get them right
I think some of the points that have been picked up
are the clarity in terms of where some of these housing numbers are coming from in terms
of the 15 ,000 in the brownfield, being very clear about what that is, if you understand
what that looks like and what the redevelopment of our towns is going to look like in the
future.
that as we go through things,
there's a huge amount of work that's being done,
but also to make sure that we are getting out there
with the answers to many of those questions
which are being raised and where we are.
It can be confusing and there'll be lots of comments
that will go out, so the comments which are coming back
there and building public confidence
is gonna be really important.
And I think in terms of as we get to the actual July local plan coming up with the detail
on and sites being there, I think for a lot of people it's making sure that there aren't
huge shocks suddenly happen that haven't been flagged.
And I think that's where people understanding the red areas, the dark blue areas, what could
or couldn't come out is important.
So I think those are particularly key areas.
Infrastructure, as I mentioned, we have to get that right.
And we have to get the messaging out there in the right way
to say, we have got all this happening,
but this is how we envisage.
Whether it's GP surgeries, whether it's
making sure we've got the sewage system working correctly,
whether we've got the roads and what roads they would be.
And so actually we have a connected county and connected communities that can deal with the traffic.
At the moment we have a situation with the developments happening from the plans which are already building out.
There are major pressures on what we have currently on infrastructure.
and that we do need to be clear on some sites whether some are going to be ruled out in
the end because we can't envisage how that infrastructure will go in.
So that may put pressure on the areas that again wouldn't have been our number one priority.
So get some of that thinking so that people actually get to understand what it is.
To make sure that councillors continue to be involved in their areas, what's happening
in areas and do some sense checking because I think that some of that was
missed and we want to make sure that that's right and we do realise obviously
I think that's there's there's some of the key key issues so can I thank
cabinet member, deputy cabinet member and the officers for attending it's been
very helpful I think cabinet members going to stay because we're now going to go
through KPIs so you don't get to escape quite so quickly. Okay we'll move

8 Q3 Performance Indicators for 2025 to 2026

on to the next item. Item eight is Q3 performance indicators.
And so as I will start first of all with Councillor Strachan's area so that you may be released
as soon as possible on this. Do you have any questions looking at the KPIs for the planning
portfolio. It all looks pretty strong. I don't know if you have any comments that you'd like to make.
Cllr Peter Strachan - 2:27:28
Just to say, in addition to the green areas, there is one significant area within the portfolio where we're putting a lot of work in at the minute, and that is the planning validation process.
We recognise there is a backlog in that, and it's happened for all the best of reasons.
But just to say that we are putting a lot of time and attention into solving
that because it will speed up the overall process overall.
Steve, is there anything you want to add to the validation bit, or will that stand on its own?
Oh, thank you.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:28:02
Thank you very much for the information and appreciate the information on the validation
Cllr Mark Roberts - 2:28:18
data. It does touch on a point that I have raised before about the impact of extensions on planning applications.
and understand the reasons why this data is presented.
But I really think we need some information
to show what the impact of extensions
on planning application determination is, and how many,
what proportion are going through getting extensions,
what, how long they're being extended for, and so on.
I have asked that at the previous committee,
and I think we really did need to do, understand that
so we can see the true position on the planning applications.
My deputy Michael has been doing quite a lot of work on the data
around this, so perhaps I could just invite him
Cllr Peter Strachan - 2:29:02
to give a short update.
We are completely aligned with your line of questioning,
and that is something that's going to be implemented
Cllr Michael Bracken - 2:29:10
within the next year, so you will see measures.
And I'm extremely keen that we get to a point
where there is a measure of what percentage
of applications are going through
within the original statutory period,
recognising that of course some things are extended
for reasons that are not from the council,
but I think it's a very helpful measure
because I want residents who put in applications
to have the confidence to know realistically
how likely it is they can get through within that time.
Thank you very much for that.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:29:42
Council, Chairman, I just want to make a declaration.
Cllr Jackson Ng - 2:29:46
I've just been, it's just come to my knowledge
I have a penny application variation in place.
So I won't be asking questions, but I like to make that for transparency purposes.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:30:02
Cllr Patrick Fealey - 2:30:07
Just a quick clarification.
On Sill, why was the target reduced from 90 to 70 in 23, 24, or 24?
I think that's the answer.
Cllr Michael Bracken - 2:30:28
Well, what I can answer on that, because again, we've been looking at this ourselves, is that
I don't think this is the right measure, and this is one of the ones that we will be evolving
into next year.
So, I mean, the target is too low, I think is probably the answer, but there's also the
way this is being measured and captured that I think we were keen to refine in the next
measure.
Okay.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:30:54
Okay. Do we have any other questions? Council Sutchbury. Yeah thank you. Thank you for
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 2:30:58
asking Councillor Thiele's question. I'll still have an additional question. Listening to the previous
item and the way that you described the risk of not delivering a plan and the
fact that there's so many different things you don't control.
But I do think that is that going to be showed in the future cabinet report because you evidently
identified some huge risks in not delivering a plan.
You also identified some huge risks in delivering a plan.
So I think some way you need to be able to rationalise what you said in a risk register
so that we can see what you're saying and you can put it against what it is.
It could be those risks go up and down closer we get to 2027 and we should be
able to monitor or the cabinet as well should be able to monitor where the
risks are getting greater to not delivering a plan or getting less.
And I think you need to do that.
In terms of KPIs which are here, that's not one of the KPIs we've got here.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:32:12
It doesn't mean, I'm sure in terms of progress is being monitored, but it's not one of the KPIs we have sitting in our list.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 2:32:24
Yeah, there is obviously all of our risks that are contained within our risk registers and the strategic risks are the ones that go through the risk management group as well.
I think we're due from my directorate's perspective to report to the risk management group in the next month or so.
So that's where those risks are captured.
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 2:32:42
But you stated in statements that you were consulting with the growth and infrastructure committee fully.
So those risk registers should come here to allow the members to assess that risk.
Otherwise, they're not really being scrutinised, are they?
So what's the point of having a select committee if you don't use it?
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:33:03
Risk, well, to my knowledge I think the risk register is looked at a different committee
and that is a scrutiny committee so it would scrutinise that area and that would be where
that would be on the agenda but it wouldn't be on ours.
Chairman, I think they go to the audit and governance committee where they're scrutinised.
Am I right in that?
Cllr Peter Strachan - 2:33:23
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:33:26
Yeah, so that's where that would be. So it's not that it's not being scrutinised, it is, but it's not by this committee.
I'll clearly look at that paperwork, but I didn't see it here, so I raised the question.
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 2:33:35
Fine. Any other questions on this area?
Thank you very much for your time, and we'll now move on.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:33:44
We'll uncover culture and leisure, because at the moment,
and that will be the deputy cabinet member, Catherine Oliver,
who will cover any questions that we've got here.
Again, it is an area that looks very in the green,
in terms of positivity, so you don't really get too hard a time,
so that's fine.
Any questions?
Councillor Arthur -Hewitt.
Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt - 2:34:19
Thank you. So there's just a couple of short questions. The first one is number of visitors to places like leisure centres and
Is there any reason why the numbers of people visiting aren't listed per place?
it'd just be really useful to see if certain places are dropping in number compared to others being really successful and
It might give you an indicator of what places might need more attention
And with the library, the percentage of inquiries resolved, wouldn't it be better to split those
to show quantity of in -person slash CAP slash phone slash CAP plus so that as library flex
progresses, it can be kept in mind in terms of the number of in -person inquiries being
resolved and the value of it.
The type of inquiries would be invaluable too.
So they're just things to suggest for, you know, future progress.
Thank you.
The first question actually I've written down myself in terms of having a good look in terms
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:35:12
of you know the major way particularly is that it's doing incredibly well and so your
numbers look great but actually are there areas where we know actually there's an indicator
when you're underneath the figures that's telling us this one needs more work on it
actually to bring it up?
Yeah I mean I'll take it away I suspect that they're probably beneath that I would imagine
Cllr Catherine Oliver - 2:35:37
that we would have the information by centre anyway. I'm not sure that it's
something that we would want to put through at this level but there is some
there is greater information. I can take it back to the team. It may be even in
the comment section to actually just state though we're hitting the
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:35:55
target, it may be they're all exactly on the same average. I doubt it.
And you probably could guess a few which are probably up and down depending on
facilities. Yeah that's my problem and in terms of the library one I want to say
that is one that we've been looking at possibly changing because I'm not sure
that we convinced that this is particularly meaningful in its own right
but again I'll take it I'll take the question away. The other one that I had
is the archives.
Because of the change in terms of these reels
and things which are going out at the moment, it's hitting the stratosphere
in comparison with your KPIs. So actually, we need to actually look
with that as the new way of doing things. Those engagements are
different, and so it would be good having a KPI to say actually, that's all, you know,
we're heading in the right direction and we're doing really well,
incredibly well, so well done, but it's actually it now you've changed exactly
what's happening and so actually the KPI needs to change so it doesn't look
completely out of sync in terms of what's what's happening. So yeah thank
you. So that would be good. Any other questions at all anyone have?
Cllr David Moore - 2:37:18
Councillor Moore. Thank you Chairman. First we want to congratulate you and
Councillor Fraser and the officers for these fantastic APIs, especially on country parks,
because Black Park and Lally Park are in my ward in the Fond of the Stoke Poggies. And
we're about to get a third country park in South Works, which is opening in the summer.
That will mean 75 % of Black's country parks will be in one ward, which is a lot to take
in. But I have no complaints walking through lovely flowers and lovely pathways and great
forests and cycleways to enjoy. So it's a sport for choice. But on the target of 849 ,000
people, you smash that to 896 ,000 people, which is almost a million visitors, which
is very impressive Q3. So my question really is, are there any kind of measures to help
facilitate not only the uptake, but support that increased number? I know you've got the
cafe in Black Park. It's just such a wonderful number to see it being
appreciated. Thank you. Thank you Councillor Moore. I suspect, in fact I know
Cllr Catherine Oliver - 2:38:23
that it's an ongoing process to keep the parks engaging for every member of
the local communities that use them. I personally had some feedback from a
friend of mine who visited the other day Black Park and said how lovely it was
and how such a great location and great facilities that we have there and for a
relatively small amount of money to pay to park in car park. But I mean it's
constant we run most of these parks at a you know a no cost basis in that most of
the parking revenue is what generates the ability to be able to make any
improvements into the parks and to fund the teams that look after it.
So I think it's really key but I mean it's an ongoing process to keep the facilities up to scratch to change and I know that there are I think there were some improvements due on some of the play areas I think within Black Park if I recall correctly.
So yeah I mean it's a constant moving feast. Thank you.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:39:26
Thank you, Councillor Oliver. We now have, we've got two other lists of KPIs, one for
Councillor Mark Wien, Housing Regulatory Services Portfolio, but there is not a cabinet or deputy
cabinet member who is here. So what we'll do is if anyone has any questions, we will
write those down and send them to the cabinet member to respond on. And also the same for
The leaders portfolio because I don't think the two over deputy. All right, so council Strachan is gonna
cover for
Council broadband, so maybe if we did
Council ball bends area first then that would be helpful to you
Any questions on the
Let me can I just add just a couple of very short notes for the leaders. He does have
and firstly apologises his diary has him elsewhere unfortunately.
Cllr Peter Strachan - 2:40:23
The first red item is about commercial floor space
and just to say the Buckinghamshire Enterprise Zone is one of the most successful in the country
and has deliberately set challenging annual targets for new floor space delivery to maximise growth.
The delay in the development of phase five at Silverstone has meant that this year's target will not be met.
However, these works are now being planned for 26 -27.
A new five -year business plan is currently being developed for the period 26 -31 to help
advance the next phases of delivery.
The second Reddy has is about strategic infrastructure projects and mainly the sealer.
And he just points out to me that in projects as huge as the sealer, there are variations in spend per quarter,
depending on the phase of the project as it's running through.
So he wants me to assure the committee that these are normal variations within this portfolio and will balance out over quarters.
Councillors, actually.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:41:38
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 2:41:39
Thank you Councillor Strachan for the silverstone obviously in my
electoral division half of it is the other half in Northamptonshire. I think
it would be good to give a briefing if possible from the leader on how he
progresses that because that sites moving backwards and forwards depending
on the economic climate so doesn't mean it won't it might all come through next
But we built a lot of hope on that, didn't we?
And it hasn't delivered,
and I expect it's not that the council hasn't delivered it,
the external people who delivered this haven't delivered it,
but it will make quite a lot of difference
to that end of the Buckinghamshire
and then the in its total add
to the Buckinghamshire economic profile.
So please, can you ask that we get a,
when appropriate, we know the knowledge,
a member's briefing on it for the local members if possible.
Just me asking, I think the other two members need to know as well.
Thank you.
I'm sure that'll be possible.
Cllr Peter Strachan - 2:42:43
You can either put it in the minutes or write separately to the leader who will pick it
up either way.
Fine.
I don't want to put it in the minutes.
We'll capture it and make sure we get an answer on that.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:42:51
Any other questions on this?
One thing I was looking at is, I don't know how important it's going to be in terms of the Woodlands area in Aylesbury,
and it's stating that we're expecting the exchange to take place in Q4.
Do we know if that's still looking likely? Okay, because that's...
Yes, I'm led to believe it is on time as anticipated, Chairman.
Cllr Peter Strachan - 2:43:26
Because that is also a very important part of the local plan as well.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:43:32
And if that goes through as originally looked, it would be a very positive element for Aylesbury.
Cllr Peter Strachan - 2:43:42
The thing about woodlands is there is so much contingent on it that we see it as a very important project.
and there aren't many days when we don't progress it further.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:43:54
Thank you very much. Any other questions? No, thank you.
Thank you for covering Councillor Strachan.
We now have anyone who's got any questions on Councillor Wynne's area.
Councillor Arthur -Hewitt.
Cllr Hazel Arthur-Hewitt - 2:44:12
Yes, so just a brief one on the housing thing.
It would be good to have a stat for the average weight on the register,
depending on the number of rooms required, because at a previous meeting,
they said there was an issue with people not moving off the list for
Buck's Home Choice with requiring three beds.
It's hard to see if having under the target amount on there is a success,
if it's the same people waiting month on month.
How many people have been housed and how many people have been waiting, say like for example more than six months, would be equally a good metric.
So my concern is it doesn't really tell us if there's people getting stuck in that process.
And last meeting it was kind of inferred that there were people stuck in that process.
I think that's really important to keep track on. Thank you.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:45:10
One of the questions, thank you very much, I had was on the number of households on the
council housing register.
And the out turn at the moment is 4613, which is below the 5 ,000.
But it grew in this period by 377.
If it did the same in the next period, we would be over the 5 ,000.
And do we believe that this is continuing in that direction or is plateauing off, I
think?
So is it actually going to start to get into an amber soon rather than a green?
Because we've had the drop off in where the whole system was amended and now the gradual
registering and taking that forward. So it's keeping on top of that is going to be an important
thing so actually people aren't just stuck on this list. So I'd like that to get a feel
of whether that's going in the same direction from what we can see and they'll have a better
idea at this point.
Councillor Suchbury.
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 2:46:28
Just to follow up on the house and register question, I'm only quite curious that, and
in green when we got five thousand people needing housing. I would have thought that it was quite red.
I would have thought that you've got that many people wanting to be accommodated but it was quite
alarming. Not a green, not easy to administer, not something we should accept. I'm sure as how
that's a green. What logic would possibly make it a green if you're waiting to be housed? I think it
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:47:03
you should be pushing it down each year
and not keeping it stable.
So like any target, it's what direction is it going?
And that is definitely a message to be sent back.
Any other questions that we need to send to Councillor Wynn?
No, that's okay.
We'll now move on to item nine on the agenda,
in which I will make a statement.

9 Chairman’s Further Announcement and Election of Chairman

Each of the members of the committee received a letter from myself, of which I said that
I would make an announcement after item eight, and that following the amendment from Councillor
Feeley is exactly what I'm going to do. With the change of proportionality on all the committees,
and this committee has got a conservative majority
and it is right that the committee has the opportunity
to review and vote for their chairman.
So I don't have an issue with that.
And what I wanted to make sure was that
it was managed in a clear, sensible way
way because I've always had a great deal of respect for all the members on this committee
and how we work together and as we come out of this process, which we're just going to go through,
I think we should be going through in exactly the same way and as today
we've all asked lots of questions. I'm sure no cabinet member has felt completely
that
any member of the political badge on actually was being any kinder than any other in terms of the questions that they were being given
So that's how we've operated. I'm sure that's how we'll operate going forward
So what I will do now is a formulate tender my resignation so that we now can produce
Go into nominations and a vote for a new chairman
councillor
Chairman, thank you very much
but before we get to that could I just say on behalf of the residents back into and
Cllr Jackson Ng - 2:49:23
And myself, thank you very much for your service to this committee
Thank you.
Councillor Roberts.
Cllr Mark Roberts - 2:49:34
Yeah, I think in reply to your email that you sent round ahead of the committee, I expressed then that I was not aware of any concern about how you chaired the committee.
And I said earlier about that I think your chairmanship has been exemplary.
So I'd like to thank you for that.
I'd also like to re -nominate you.
Just carry on as chair.
that we should allow that to continue.
I'll be part of that process.
I wouldn't dispute the state of the hand.
Sorry.
I can't be part of the process of the nominations
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:50:04
because of this part of time.
But I believe that Glenn Watson will actually
take over at this point in time.
So I will hand over to him.
I think if you can take that on record.
I'll come to that in a second.
Thank you, Chairman.
My name is Glen Watson.
I'm Senior Governance Manager
and one of the Deputy Governance Officers of the Council.
Following the motion earlier
and the statement from the Chair,
there now needs to be an election
for Chairman of this Committee.
I will call for nominations in a moment.
If there is only one nomination,
then that person is deemed elected.
If there is more than one nomination,
two or more, then I'll call for a show of hands
Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer - 2:50:55
in favour of each candidate in turn.
To be successful, a candidate needs to have
a majority of the votes in the room.
So, are there any nominations for chairman of the meeting?
Well, if Councillor Waters is willing,
then I would like to nominate Councillor Waters to continue.
Is that seconded?
Yes.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:51:22
Okay. Are there any other nominations?
Councillor Moore.
Thank you, Deputy Monitoring Officer.
I would like to nominate Councillor Simon Rous
as chairman of this committee.
Is that seconded?
Thank you.
Are there any other nominations?
In which case, I will ask for a show of hands
for each candidate in turn.
Those in favour, I will say it before doing so,
one can only vote for one candidate.
Glenn Watson - Principal Governance Officer - 2:51:51
So put that out there.
So those in favour of Councillor Waters
being chairman of this committee, please show.
One, two, three, four, five.
One, two, three, four, five.
Okay, thank you.
Those in favour of Councillor Rouse
being chairman of this committee.
Okay, thank you.
That is five for Councillor Waters
and six for Councillor Rouse.
The decision of the committee therefore
is that Councillor Rouse is chairman of this committee
and can take the chair for the remainder of the agenda.
Can I wish Councillor Rouse very well
and I'm pleased to hand over now.
Cllr Jonathan Waters - 2:52:35
I will move seats so that you can take control
of the rest of the meeting.
Thank you. Hopefully you know who I am. So I apologise for destroying my name badge.
Firstly, can I just say Councillor Waters knows that I hold him in high regard and whilst
I haven't served in your committee more than one meeting.
I want to pass across my thanks for what you've done this year.
Cllr Simon Rouse - 2:53:23
And thank you for the kind words you're handing over.
I also just, for the benefit of members,
whilst I wasn't on the committee this year,
I had previously been on the Growth Housing and Infrastructure
Committee.
And it's really good to be back.
I'm very keen that we continue the level of scrutiny
that we've demonstrated today.
So just one formal item, which I think I need to do,
which is confirm that I will appoint Councillor David Moore
as Vice -Chairman for the remainder of the year as well.
That moves us on to item 10, which is the work programme,

10 Work Programme

so an opportunity for us to reflect on the work of the year
to date and to suggest potential items for the year.
I don't know if you just want to quickly,
shall I quickly run through what the committee has done
just so you remember?
You did an update on the Buckinghamshire Housing Strategy,
Planning Overview, Key Priorities and Challenges,
and the Culture and Leisure Overview,
Key Priorities and Challenges.
You did a review of the local plan for Buckinghamshire draught consultation,
future primary health care planning review 12 -month update, Buckinghamshire
economic growth plan 25 to 35 overview and the legacy of everyone in and
homelessness 12 -month update. You did the town centre regeneration, active places
and spaces strategy, Q2 performance monitoring 25 to 26, capital works to the
Stoke Pages Memorial Gardens, updates on the progress of the Buckinghamshire
Local Plan, Buckinghamshire Archives, Aylesbury Housing Infrastructure Funding Projects.
And today we've done the update on the library flex and update on the progress of the Local Plan
and Q3 performance monitoring. The committee has also formulated and agreed a formal written
response on behalf of the committee to the Buckinghamshire Local Plan consultation.
And that's obviously been a full agenda for the year. Are there any items that members want to
flag for a future work programme? Councillor Stutchbury. Thank you, Chair. Welcome to your
in the position. Could you please make sure we bring back the response to the
Cllr Robin Stuchbury - 2:55:17
local plan next meeting as chair and bring that back. I think it's relevant
that we carry on that work because it's a cross -party piece and I think it will
may be quite insightful. Agreed.
Cllr Simon Rouse - 2:55:34
Any other items members want to suggest? Do feel free to drop any at cost by email as
well if necessary. Okay, that moves us on to Item 11, which is the date of the next

11 Date of Next Meeting

meeting, which will be at the full Council meeting on the 20th of May 2026. On that note,
I will declare the meeting closed. Thank you everybody for attending and watching on the
webcast, and have a good rest of the day.
.