Meeting Details

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting on 9 July 2025 be confirmed as a correct record.

Sir Bob Russell addressed Cabinet pursuant to the provisions of Meetings General Procedure Rule 5(1).  In respect of the report due to be considered by Cabinet on the Procurement Strategy, he hoped the Council’s procurement was already being used to support local businesses.  He was aware of five events , including the opening of St Nicholas Square, where the Mayor had not been invited to perform openings or other duties that should fall to the Mayor.  The Mayor was First Citizen of the City, and their role differed from that of the Leader of the Council or the Member of Parliament. They should always perform public duties such as the opening of council developments and this needed to be reiterated to those responsible for organising such events.

Councillor J. Young, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio for Housing, responded and explained that whilst she could not comment on historic events, she had ensured that the Mayor was invited to the opening of the Chesterwell development and would ensure the Mayor was invited to all such events that she attended as Portfolio Holder.  She had sought advice from the Monitoring Officer who had advised that the interpretation of the protocol put forward by Sir Bob Russell predated the Cabinet system and that a slightly more flexible approach was now taken.  The Mayor should have been invited to the opening of St Nicholas Square, along with a number of other individuals. The confusion around this may have resulted from the invitations to the event being sent by the Business Improvement District.

Sir Bob Russell responded and explained that it was a well-established protocol that the Mayor undertake such duties and that practice had only changed over the last few years. 

Councillor Cory, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Assets responded on the issues raised about the Procurement Strategy and confirmed that localism was a key priority within existing procurement processes.

The Chief Executive submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

Councillor King, Leader for the Council and Portfolio Holder for Strategy, introduced the report.  The Council was approaching a transformational moment, following the announcement in December 2024 that the government was seeking devolution and the reorganisation of local government.  Considerable progress had been made in a short period, and Full Council was due to consider the issue at its meeting on 17 September 2025.  Four business cases were in preparation.  The business case in support of the proposal for five unitary authorities had been published, and the others were in development and would be shared soon.  It was appreciated that there would be considerable amounts of information to digest for those who wanted to examine the proposals in detail.

The Council’s statutory officers had provided outstanding work and support to ensure that the Council was in a position to take an informed decision.  Once the preferred future structure of local government was known there would be a challenging transitional period.

Cabinet members discussed the report and the following issues were raised and points made:-

• Thanks were expressed to the Leader of the Council for the leadership he had provided.
• Thanks were also expressed to the key officers who had supported this process.
• The process had been dealt with in an open and transparent way within the Council, with information provided as it became available.  This contrasted with the practice at some other authorities.  The development of the business case for five unitary authorities had also been handled in a transparent way.
• There were a number of key issues that were still unresolved, such as council debt.
• The early development of a partnership approach with Braintree and Tendring had been of crucial importance.  There were strong economic ties between the three areas which made a unitary authority based on the three authorities a logical and sensible outcome. 
• The final decision on the future structures of local government was for government to take.  There would be some relief in a decision being taken to give some certainty on the future and to be able to engage with the public with some clarity.
• The 5 unitary authority option was the most beneficial in both financial and democratic terms.
• The experience of the creation of Southend and Basildon as unitary authorities showed that the process could be undertaken successfully.

Pam Donnelly, Chief Executive, was invited to comment and stressed the leadership provided by Southend Council in developing the business case for 5 unitary authorities, and the effective partnership it had developed with district councils.  Anna D’Alessando, Interim Section 151 Officer, highlighted the contribution made by Neil Jarvey on the financial aspects of local government reorganisation.

Councillor King summarised that considerable progress had been made through working across party and across boundary. The contribution of the leadership of Southend Council was acknowledged. It was important to keep in mind that were considerable potential benefits from reorganisation, particularly in terms of health and social care.  There was a prosect of providing a better and more local service at little or no extra cost, which would change the lives of residents for the better.  

RESOLVED that the contents of the report be noted.
 
REASONS

To provide an update on the Local Government Reorganisation process for Essex.  

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

No alternative options were presented to Cabinet.

The Chief Executive of Colchester Borough Homes submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

Councillor J. Young, Portfolio for Housing, introduced the report and stressed the importance of the provision of housing towards the quality of life for residents. The regular updates on housing provided to Cabinet were welcomed. There had been an unprecedented level of change in the social housing sector recently.  There were robust processes in place to ensure challenges were met.  The Housing Revenue Account Business Plan had been developed with the help of leading sector experts and was sustainable and viable. Through the delivery of plan, the Council was seeking to build and acquire more housing to address the need and reduce the reliance on temporary accommodation. Whilst the report was for information it captured a key issue on which the Council should be focused on.

Philip Sullivan, Chief Executive of Colchester Borough Homes and Strategic Lead for Housing, addressed Cabinet.  The report set out updates in the sector arising since the June Spending Review.   He echoed the Portfolio Holder’s comments on the scale and pace of change in the social housing sector. Several of changes proposed would have a material impact on the council’s housing.  Some impacts would be positive but there would also be some challenges.  Responses to the consultations on the Decent Homes Standard, Rent Convergence and Minimum Energy Standards had now been submitted.  These had been written in consultation with the Portfolio Holder and had sought to protect the interests of social housing tenants in Colchester and the social housing sector as a whole.  Where changes  to policy had been confirmed, they had been incorporated into the HRA Business Plan.  Where the changes were proposed in consultations, these would be incorporated in the Business Plan once the outcome of these consultations were confirmed.  The report set out possible financial implications arising from the consultations. However, the Council was in a strong position in respect of the new electrical safety proposals and the new energy efficiency standard. 

Councillor Pearson, Portfolio Holder for Economic Growth and Transformation, explained that the Council was in a position where it was anticipated that more social housing would be provided than had been in previous decades.  There continued to be a real need to families and individuals to be provided with social housing in order to have a decent home.  He was pleased that the Council had gone through a detailed review of its Housing Revenue Account in order to be able to begin to invest in a sustainable way in council housing.

Councillor King, Leader of the Council and Portfolio for Strategy, thanked the Chief Executive of Colchester Borough homes and his team.  The report was an excellent summary of the current position, and it was appreciated that the situation was changing rapidly.  The viability of the HRA business plan as it stands was stressed. The model was very sophisticated and complex, and the presentation that councillors had recently received from Colchester Borough Homes and leading industry experts had provided reassurance.  It was understood that the future viability did depend on a number of variables remaining as they were or moving in the right direction, and the situation would need to be closely monitored.

Anna D’Alessandro, Interim Section 151 Officer, was also invited to comment and  stressed that the budget setting for housing was approached in the same way as any other service, with appropriate planning, setting of parameters and close monitoring through performance information and risk management.  The HRA Business Plan contributed towards a sustainable way forward toward providing a more permanent solution towards the temporary housing problem.

Councillor J. Young reiterated the need to address the issue of temporary housing and that if this was not done, there would be continued pressure on the general fund budget.  The Council had adopted the right strategy and external experts had confirmed that the HRA Business Plan was viable. 

RESOLVED that:-

(a) The social and affordable housing strategy updates from the June Spending Review and subsequent Government announcements be noted. 

(b) The implications for the City Council arising from the announcements and the Government consultations be noted and that officers would respond to them in conjunction with the Portfolio Holder for Housing. 

REASONS

It was important for the City Council to remain abreast of the rapidly changing social housing external operating environment so that implications could be established and lobbying opportunities identified.  

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

There were no alternative options presented to Cabinet.

The Head of Operational Finance submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

Councillor Cory, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Assets, introduced the report and explained that it had been decided not to go into full partnership with the Essex Procurement Partnership and to proceed with a more local approach.  The new Strategy aimed to maximise value for money through an increased emphasis on data and the use of Artificial Intelligence.  It would also maximise the use of social value and encourage spend within the local economy.

Councillor J. Young, Portfolio Holder for Housing, emphasised that  the Council, as a major purchaser in the city, had an important role in ensuring that it used its economic power to ensure social good.  She was pleased to note that the Strategy put a greater emphasis on quality and on social value than the equivalent policies at Essex County Council.

Samantha Preston, Head of Operational Finance, was invited to contribute and highlighted that data would be used to ensure best value, and that there would be an emphasis on social value and sustainability.  Training would be provided through the organisation to ensure more effective contract management. 


RESOLVED that the new Procurement Strategy 2025-2030 be approved and adopted.

REASONS

The strategy aimed to ensure that the Council was compliant with legislation and regulations, including the Procurement Act 2023, within its procurement activity.  

The strategy defined the Council’s approach to procurement in line with the Strategic Plan, ensuring value for money and maximising use of social value. 

The strategy included improvements around the use of data, monitoring and review, to help continually improve Council performance on procurement. 

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

Not to adopt the new Procurement Strategy.

The Head of Governance submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member together with the draft minute from the Governance and Audit Committee meeting of 29 July 2025.

Councillor Pearson, Portfolio Holder for Economic Growth and Transformation, introduced the report and emphasised that a comprehensive risk management process was now embedded through the Council.  During the reporting period, Zurich Risk Services had been asked to conduct an independent review exploring attitudes to risk.  Councillors and officers had contributed to this review. There had been slight differences in the risk appetite of councillors and officers, but views were broadly similar and attitudes to risk appetite were in the mid-range. A number of areas had been identified as of most concern in terms of managing risk.  This now included devolution and local government reorganisation as well as cyber and data security, organisational resilience, budget strategy, economic climate, workforce wellbeing, financial equality, corporate assets and ICT infrastructure. The report had been considered by the Governance and Audit Committee who had made no formal recommendations. 

In discussion, Cabinet members indicated that the approach to risk management set out in the report demonstrated the seriousness with which the Council approached governance.  There was a very clear commitment to risk management among both councillors and officers and risk was regularly discussed at the Council’s Leadership meetings.  It was acknowledged that the Council’s risk appetite had been reduced as a result of the impact of global events.  Risk appetite would now be addressed in all decision-making reports.

RESOLVED that:-

(a) The Council’s progress and performance in managing risk during the period from April 2024 to March 2025 be noted.

(b) The current strategic risk register be noted.

(c) The proposed Risk Management Strategy for 2025/26 be approved and  RECOMMENDED TO FULL COUNCIL that it be included in the Council’s Policy Framework.


REASONS

Cabinet has overall ownership of the risk management process and is responsible for endorsing its strategic direction. Therefore, the risk management strategy states that Cabinet should receive an annual report on progress and should formally agree any amendments to the strategy itself.

During the year progress reports are presented to the Governance and Audit Committee, detailing work undertaken and current issues. This report was presented to the Governance and Audit Committee on 29 July 2025, where they approved its referral to this meeting.

As part of the Policy Framework, any changes and reviews of the strategy need to be approved by Cabinet and ratified by Full Council.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

No alternative options were presented to Cabinet. 

The Democratic Services Manager submitted a progress sheet a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

RESOLVED that the contents of the Progress Sheet be noted.

REASONS

The progress sheet was a mechanism by which the Cabinet could ensure that public statements and questions were responded to appropriately and promptly. 
 
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

No alternative options were presented to the Cabinet.