Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

To invite Councillors to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests and / or Other Disclosable Interests they may have in items on the agenda, and to confirm the nature of those interests, and to declare any Party Whip.

Councillor Sharon Harvey declared an other disclosable interest in respect of Minute Item No. 6 – Construction of Redditch Innovation Centre – Pre-Decision Scrutiny – due to the fact that she was named in that report as the ward member consulted for that report. She remained present for the debate for that item and to vote thereon.

The minutes of the meeting of Overview and Scrutiny Committee which took place on 16^th of March 2026 will be considered at this meeting.

The minutes of the meeting of Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 16^th March 2026 were submitted for Members’ consideration.

RESOLVED that

the minutes of the meeting of Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 16^th March 2026 be approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chair.

To invite members of the public who have registered in advance of the meeting to address the Committee in relation to an item of business on the agenda.

There were no public speakers registered to speak at this meeting.

Should it be necessary, in the opinion of the Chief Executive, during the course of the meeting to consider excluding the public from the meeting on the grounds that exempt information is likely to be divulged, it may be necessary to move the following resolution:

“That, under S.100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following matter(s) – to be specified - on the grounds that it/they involve(s) the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the relevant paragraphs (to be specified) of Part 1 of Schedule 12 (A) of the said Act”.

These paragraphs are as follows:

Subject to the “public interest” test, information relating to:

·         Para 1 – any individual;

·         Para 2 – the identity of any individual;

·         Para 3 – financial or business affairs;

·         Para 4 – labour relations matters;

·         Para 5 – legal professional privilege;

·         Para 6 –  a notice, order or direction;

·         Para 7 – the prevention, investigation or prosecution of crime;

and may need to be considered as ‘exempt’.

[With the agreement of the Chair and the Committee, the order of the agenda was changed and this item 14 on the published agenda was considered as item 5 at the meeting – and recorded as Minute No. 5].

RESOLVED that

Under S.100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following matters on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12 (A) of the said Act, as amended:

Minute Item No. 6 – Construction of Redditch Innovation Centre – Pre-Decision Scrutiny.

This report will follow in supplementary papers after it has been published for the meeting of the Executive Committee (due for publication on Monday 1 June 2026).

This report is due to contain exempt information and may need to be considered in exempt (closed) session.

[With the agreement of the Chair and the Committee, the order of the agenda was changed and this item 15 on the published agenda was considered as item 6 at the meeting – and recorded as Minute No. 6].

The Regeneration Project Manager presented a report on the Construction of Redditch Innovation Centre.

In relation to timescales, it was reported that construction was due to commence in Summer 2026 and that there was an anticipated seventy-week construction period with building works due to be completed by the end of 2027.

Speller-Metcalfe had been appointed to work alongside the Design team to complete the stage four designs for the Innovation Centre. Members were informed that extensive value engineering had been undertaken.

Following presentation of the report, Members held a detailed discussion regarding the project at its current stage and costings.

A typographical error was noted in respect of the report sign-off, which listed the previous Portfolio Holder rather than the current Portfolio Holder as having sign-off for this report.

In respect of recommendation three of the report, an amendment was proposed to add that the relevant Portfolio Holder would also be consulted in entering into the necessary contracts and legal agreements required to implement the other two recommendations. This amendment was seconded and on being put to the vote agreed by the Committee.

The Committee endorsed recommendations one and two of the report as printed.

RECOMMENDED that

1)    The Council utilise all available underspend from within the Town Deal programme for construction of the Innovation Centre.

2)    The Council accept the £2,425,000 Enterprise Zone funding from Birmingham City Council for the construction of the Innovation Centre and incorporate it into the Council’s Capital Programme.

3)    Subject to the agreement of recommendations 1 and 2, authority be delegated to the Assistant Director of Regeneration and Property Services, in consultation with the Section 151 Officer, and in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder, to enter into the necessary contracts and legal agreements required to implement the recommendations within this report.

(During consideration of this item, Members discussed matters that necessitated the disclosure of exempt information. It was therefore agreed to move to exclude the press and public prior to any debate on the grounds that information would be revealed relating to the financial and business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)).

The Redditch and Bromsgrove Partnership Manager introduced the report and in doing so noted that Redditch Partnership was the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) for the Redditch area and aimed to bring together representatives from a wide variety of agencies across the public, private and voluntary and community sectors to enable partnership working for the benefit of residents locally.

It was explained that the makeup of the Redditch Partnership had changed in recent years for a number of reasons, including changes around health with the introduction of Integrated Care Systems (ICS), which were formalised in 2022. As part of those changes District Collaboratives were formed, including Redditch District Collaborative  

The Redditch and Bromsgrove Partnership Manager provided an overview of the structure and work of the Redditch Partnership and Redditch District Collaborative (RDC) in addition to a number of other partnership groups highlighted in the report in which the Council was involved in a co-ordinating or partnership role.

Following the presentation, a Member expressed concerns about the performance of the Redditch Partnership and the RDC. In addition, concerns were raised about the lack of elected member representation on Redditch Partnership or any of the groups mentioned in the report.

A response was provided by Officers that the Worcestershire County Council Health and Wellbeing Board (HWB) provided a Member oversight over the work of the partnership groups across the county. Redditch Borough Council was represented at the HWB by a Member chosen at the Annual Council (Councillor Brandon Clayton was the Council’s representative for 2026/27). As the same elected member was also invited to join the Redditch Community Wellbeing Group, it ensured there was a connection between the local Redditch Partnership Group and the Worcestershire-wide health board. It was also confirmed that the relevant Portfolio Holders were also represented on the Redditch Partnership last year and this was hoped to continue.

In response to concerns over the performance metrics and monitoring, it was highlighted that the Redditch Partnership was a completely voluntary, non-statutory partnership, it was difficult to set precise targets as the aim of the Partnership was for voluntary organisations and public sector bodies within Redditch to come together and form connections and partnerships.

It was explained that several years ago the Redditch District Collaborative (RDC) was in a situation where multitude of groups existed that were not connected to one another with the result that a number of different groups of voluntary sector and public partners worked in isolation. Following a review outlined within the report, the number of groups under the umbrella of Redditch Partnership had reduced. Membership of each group was also reviewed and all groups retained had to set out how they linked to the overall Redditch Partnership structure. It was noted that work continued on establishing which organisations were best represented through the RDC.

It was emphasised that collaboration through RDC enabled the different organisations to network and share ideas on how they were delivering their individual programmes and initiatives and how their organisations could collaborate to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

This report will follow in supplementary papers after it has been published for the meeting of the Executive Committee (due for publication on Monday 1 June 2026).

The Housing Development and Strategy Manager presented a report on the Shared Homelessness Strategy for 2026-2031.

The Committee was informed that Redditch Borough Council had worked in partnership with Bromsgrove District Council, Malvern Hills District Council, Wychavon District Council and Wyre Forest District Council to develop the strategy. It was noted that the Homelessness Act 2002 required all housing authorities to have a homelessness and rough sleeping strategy in place, based on a review of all forms of homelessness within their area. This was alongside compliance with the Homelessness Reduction Act, the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 and the Renters Right Act 2025.

Members were advised that a consultation had been undertaken and that the responses received had been considered and incorporated where appropriate.

In relation to measurable outcomes, the Overview and Scrutiny Committee was informed that the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) had provided the required metrics for the Local Outcomes Framework. The core outcome measures on which local authorities were assessed were outlined as:

·       The rate of households with children in temporary accommodation (per 1,000 households)

·       The number of families in Bed & Breakfast accommodation for over six weeks

·       The percentage of duties owed where homelessness was prevented or relieved

·       The number of people sleeping rough on a single night

·       The number of people sleeping rough over the month who were long-term rough sleepers

The financial implications of the strategy were outlined and it was explained that the new Homelessness, Rough Sleeping and Domestic Abuse Grant would provide funding to support delivery. The Committee was advised that a separate report had already been presented to Members detailing spending priorities for the subsequent three years.

In considering the context of Local Government Reorganisation, Members were reassured that the strategy had been developed to be adaptable for incorporation into either one or two unitary authorities, pending the development of a new single strategy based on a fresh homelessness review as required by the Homelessness Code of Guidance.

Members made further comments in relation to these areas:

·       New duties on the Council as a result of Renters’ Rights Act 2025 – It was reported that additional £60,000 in funding had been awarded through Government funding to the Council’s Private Sector Housing Team. This was used to employ additional staff in that team to help with ensuring the Council could meet additional workload and duties arising from Renters’ Rights Act 2025.

·       Domestic Abuse Victims– It was explained that often in cases of domestic abuse, a victim would be relocated to a confidential refuge accommodation via the Council’s sanctuary scheme as it was necessary to escape from the perpetrator. Members observed that in such cases it remained the victim and their children who suffered more disruption by having to move out of their house. It was noted that often this was a necessary step to avoid the perpetrators finding out the location of the victim.

·       Officers reported that under the Social Housing Bill (which currently passed the second reading in the House  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

This report will follow in supplementary papers after it has been published for the meeting of the Executive Committee (due for publication on Monday 1 June 2026).

The Assistant Director of Community and Housing Services presented the Quarter 4 Update and 2026/27 Housing Improvement Plan (HIP) report.

The Committee was reminded that, following an inspection in July 2025, the Regulator of Social Housing had identified that Redditch Borough Council required significant improvements in several areas, including repairs, maintenance, fire safety, tenant engagement and stock condition surveys.

The report demonstrated the progress made since that inspection judgement, with eighteen actions having now been completed. It was noted that work had also been undertaken in collaboration with the Regulator across the consumer standards, with relevant actions having now been completed.

The revised HIP aimed to improve gap analysis and ensure that the Council moved towards embedding compliance with the Consumer Standards.

The main issues highlighted for Members’ consideration within HIP included the delay experienced in receiving a formal proposal for the independent review the Council’s delivery programme for fire safety and the introduction of a tenant portal which was intended to support residents by providing access to self-service options.

It was also noted that the Housing Annual Report for 2025/26 would be shared with tenants and leaseholders by the end of July. As part of this, opportunity would be taken to seek interest from tenants for participation in an array of tenant scrutiny and engagement opportunities.

The Assistant Director of Community and Housing Services acknowledged that the formatting of the Housing Improvement Plan had been difficult to read due to the small font size and advised that this would be improved in future reports.

Members discussed the report. Comments were made about the Regulator of Social Housing judgment with the opinion expressed by some Members that the Council had responded well following the inspection results published in July 2025, with progress having been made across many of the areas highlighted by the Regulator as needing significant improvement. Members also commented that internal governance arrangements and regular meetings with the Regulator of Social Housing had also helped the Council to progress improvements required.

With respect to the delivery programme for fire safety, it was explained that the major area of the Fire Risk Assessments (FRA) programme and major area of backlog in fire remedial actions, related to the replacement of fire doors. It was clarified that properties in the affected blocks already had fire doors installed but many of these had become non-compliant in the last three years following the publication of the latest fire door regulations and therefore needed to be replaced to comply with the new regulations.

In relation to the ongoing fire safety checks it was noted that this would be reported in full detail under Housing Performance report but it was clarified that an external company undertook fire safety checks in Council tenanted properties and they had experienced staffing resource issue at Q4 resulting in the drop in performance from 100 per cent at Q3 2025/26 to 88 per cent at Q4 2025/26.

Report recommendations were endorsed by the Committee although it was requested by the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

This report will follow in supplementary papers after it has been published for the meeting of the Executive Committee (due for publication on Monday 1 June 2026).

The Assistant Director of Community and Housing Services presented a report on Quarter Four 2025/2026 Housing Performance incorporating Tenant Satisfaction Measures Results.

The Committee was informed that the Regulator of Social Housing had established the ‘Tenant Satisfaction Measures’ (TSM) which placed a responsibility on all social housing landlords in England to return performance information so that each provider could be assessed for how well they were providing good quality homes and services.

It was reported that performance during Quarter Four had been positive although there were a number of a number of key areas remained below target. This included the repairs completed within target timescales for non-emergency and emergency repairs (measures RP02.1 and RP02.2) where performance had been improving but remained below the required target at 77.6 and 93.1 per cent for non-emergency and emergency repairs respectively. Members were advised that proposals were in place to address this.

Other key areas where performance remained below target included the Homes that do not meet the Decent Homes Standards (measure RP01) and fire safety checks (measure BS02). In relation to anti-social behaviour, it was reported that there had been an increase in hate-related crime; however, this was attributed to improved reporting as such incidents had historically not been recorded under a separate category.

Members were advised that a separate annual housing complaints report was also being reported to the Executive Committee. 

In relation to the Tenant Satisfaction Measures, it was noted that the Tenant Perception Survey showed year-on-year improvements with increased tenant satisfaction recorded across the twelve measures. There was a 35 per cent increase in the response rate to the 2025/26 Tenant Perception Survey compared with the previous year.

A Member raised a query regarding gas safety checks, noting that the report referred to 134 tenanted properties where the gas supply had been capped. Officers explained that this figure included a combination of void properties, properties where tenants had refused access for gas safety inspections and properties where tenants had chosen not to have a gas supply. It was highlighted that the Council’s Tenancy Team undertook visits to tenanted properties with capped gas supply to understand the reasons for the tenant having a capped gas supply, and take actions if possible to resolve the situation.

In relation to the measures, a question was asked in relation to the action which the Council could take in cases where tenants had damaged the property. It was responded that this area would be addressed through a new recharging policy which would detail how tenants could be charged for any damage. This policy would be presented for Members’ consideration.

Members discussed the Total Mobile system implementation. It was noted that the project suffered from issues with initial consultant assigned to work with the Council that were now being resolved. It was explained that the Total Mobile system would automate the scheduling of repair and maintenance jobs and enable an electronic audit trail of job completion. The rollout of the system was now expected in July  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme was considered, as well as the items and topics suggested by Members at the Overview and Scrutiny Training and Work Programme Event on 2^nd June 2026. The document detailing Members’ suggested additions to the Overview and Scrutiny work programme, as made at the Work Programme Event, were tabled at the meeting.

The Committee agreed to add the items as set out in the document referred above to the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme. These items are:

·       Introduction of Food Waste Collections

·       Town Centre Strategy

·       Community Investment Fund

·       Housing – Housing Strategy Review

·       Community Cohesion and Engagement Strategy

·       Parking (parking violations and enforcement)

·       Play Strategy (incl. progress within specific wards)

·       Mental Health in the Community (including investigation of potential issues such as lack of mental health crisis support)

·       Homelessness Strategy – considered at tonight’s meeting but to include any future updates

·       Post-16 Education including NEETs (Not in Education, Employment, Training)– and following up from the Task Group review that was bei ng undertaken.

·       Parks – including specific updates on Arrow Valley Lake and Morton Stanley Park.

·       Review of Community / Neighbourhood Warden enforcement powers

·       Bromsgrove and Redditch Network (BARN) – information report including on impact of the network

The dates for consideration and the type of scrutiny format for each of these topics would be determined by Members of Overview and Scrutiny and relevant Working Groups in due course.

RESOLVED that

the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme be updated as per the pre-amble above.

The latest version of the Executive Work Programme will be published on 1 June 2026 and will be published in supplementary papers for this meeting.

Overview and Scrutiny requested that of the items considered for addition under the previous item, for which there would be Executive reports, be added for pre-decision scrutiny at meetings of Overview and Scrutiny Committee. This included the addition of:

·       Introduction of Food Waste Collections

·       Town Centre Strategy

·       Community Investment Fund

to the 27^th of July 2026 Overview and Scrutiny meeting agenda.

This is in addition to adding the Executive reports pertaining to updates on the Housing Improvement Plan and Housing Performance as discussed under the relevant agenda items at this meeting.

RESOLVED that

items from the Executive Committee Work Programme be added to the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme as per the pre-amble above.

Overview and Scrutiny Committee is asked to consider the attached Budget Scrutiny Working Group Terms of Reference and to appoint five Members to sit on the Working Group.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered appointing Members to the Budget Scrutiny Working Group. Nominations were proposed and seconded for Councillors Sharon Harvey, Joanna Kane, Nicola Lloyd, Nic Pioli, and Rita Rogers.

On the nominations being put to the vote it was

RESOLVED that

Councillors Sharon Harvey, Joanna Kane, Nicola Lloyd, Nic Pioli, and Rita Rogers be appointed to the Budget Scrutiny Working Group.

Overview and Scrutiny Committee is asked to consider the attached Performance Scrutiny Working Group Terms of Reference and to appoint five Members to sit on the Working Group

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered appointing Members to the Performance Scrutiny Working Group. Nominations were proposed and seconded for Councillors Sharon Harvey, Joanna Kane, Nicola Lloyd, Nic Pioli, and Rita Rogers.

On the nominations being put to the vote it was

RESOLVED that

Councillors Sharon Harvey, Joanna Kane, Nicola Lloyd, Nic Pioli, and Rita Rogers be appointed to the Performance Scrutiny Working Group.

Overview and Scrutiny Members are asked to consider whether they wish the Post-16 Education Task Group investigation to continue in the 2026-27 municipal year and, if so, to appoint to the 4 positions on the Task Group that are currently vacant.

Attached is the Post-16 Education Task Group’s scoping document that details the agreed remit of work for this Task Group.

Members considered whether the Post-16 Education Task Group should continue in the new municipal year and, if so, to appoint Councillors to sit on the Task Group.

It was highlighted by the Member proposing this Task Group review in 2024, Councillor Jane Spilsbury, that the proposal for the review had as its primary aim, to look at the training and course provision of the local further education college. It was confirmed that the Task Group had discussed the further education college post-16 course and training provision at one of its previous meetings.

It was commented that the Heart of Worcestershire (HoW) College in Redditch had responded well in this respect and had recently expanded its post-16 offer within Redditch as well as enhanced its special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) provision in Redditch. Members further discussed that the Task Group would aim to look at how to reduce the number of young people in the Borough who were ‘Not in Education, Employment or Training’ (NEET).

During the discussion it was agreed that the Task Group should continue with new Councillors and brought to a conclusion in a timely manner. Further, nominations were proposed and seconded for Councillors Sharon Harvey, Nicola Lloyd, Rita Rogers, and Jane Spilsbury to be appointed to the Post-16 Education Task Group. On being put to the vote it was:

RESOLVED that

1)    The Post-16 Education Task Group continue in the 2026/27 municipal year.

2)    Councillors Sharon Harvey, Nicola Lloyd, Rita Rogers, and Jane Spilsbury be appointed to the Post-16 Education Task Group.