 am gynnwys bwysledd, ygychydig yn gweithio'r methu. Mae cyfnodaethau ym mhwn yn fwy o'r gwyllt gydig, yn gyffinol i'ch gael gwahanol arall, yr hynny rydyn ni, i'r c dashboard sy'n gweithio ar gwyllt gydig yn y gweithio ar gyfer y cynaint wrth nhw, oedd yn mor fawr yn cyfnod, mae'r cyfnod yn adam, ond nesgerfodd wnaeth ysgrifenniad yn cael ysgrifenniad. Mae'r cyfnod yn mwy o'r cyfnod o'r cyffredin iawn. We have had a public question submitted, but the person has not attended in person. Do we need to send a… What do we know we do? Do we know we send a… All right, so perhaps they'd like to come for our next meeting and ask their question. Thank you. So, moving on, update on scrutiny in the overview committee. Councillor Bradnam, do you want to speak now, or do you want to speak within the body of the meeting? Okay, thank you very much indeed. So, starting off with the item 7 is the quarter 2 performance report. Councillor John Williams is going to introduce this. Thank you, leader. I'm very delighted to be able to introduce this report for second quarter. It follows on from the first quarter which showed that we were exceeding in most areas or meeting our KPIs, and the second quarter continues to show positive improvement. I think the… I would only comment. The only area where we have three in our rag sort of colour coding is in the average days to read that housing stock. As we know, we have set ourselves a very tough target on that of 17 days, whereas the average for councils is just over 32 days. So, and we are actually achieving better than that average anyway. So, nevertheless though, I think we have set ourselves a tough target on this, one in which we are determined to meet, but don't be alarmed by that intervention because we are doing better than the average of other authorities that have housing stock. But, otherwise, it's an extremely good quarter again and really does demonstrate that we are maintaining, if not improving, our performance across the board. Thank you very much, Councillor Williams. Councillor Henry Baxter, I think you're good to second. Do you want to comment on the stage? Well, just to confirm that you're happy to second the recommendation and to say it's so pleasing to see a lot of improvement as time has gone on from quarter to quarter. I mean, especially, for example, on the average call time answered when it was back in July 184 seconds, and now it's more than half that at 78 seconds as of September. So, yep, I'm perfectly happy to second the report later. Thank you very much indeed. I would come to scrutiny in a minute. Any other comments from Cabinet? Councillor Bradman, would you like to come in now? Thank you, Chair. A leader. Scrutiny and Overview members asked a number of questions on a number of the rag ratings, but were very satisfied with the progress that's been made and we commended these to the Cabinet, as it says in the paper. No real comments, thank you. Thank you very much indeed. Yes, it is very gratifying to see that the efforts of our staff are undoubtedly leading to the continuous improvement that we as a council strive for, so marvelous. So, it's recommended, the recommendations are on page 19 and A, to review the KPI results and comments that appendix A and the progress and delivery of the 2324 business plan output to appendix B and recommend where appropriate any actions required to address issues identified within appendices. So, do Cabinet agree with recommendations? Anyone voting against? Anyone abstaining? Good. Cabinet therefore agrees the proposals by affirmation. Thank you very much indeed. And item eight is the Rural England Prosperity Fund and John Williams is going to introduce this and I will happily second it, so over to you, John again. Thank you, leader. I'm doing this instead of Peter Macdonald, who's the lead member for this, as he's got a county council meeting this morning. But I'm here in the business team, I put a lot of work into this and I'm very delighted to be recommending the, well, to move in the recommendations in the report. I think it's very important for us because we don't have a town or a market town or a city at our centre. We are in fact a district of 106 parishes and of course our two town councils. And so therefore this funding is very important to us to be able to support our rural businesses as well as the fact that we are influenced by the Greater Cambridge area and the prosperity that that's delivering and also the importance of start-ups in supporting that economy. So I'm very delighted to move the recommendations so that we can press on and start to use, allocate the fund that has been given to us. Thank you very much. Any questions from any members of cabinet? No, thank you. So it's really good that government have involved this money down to district level. I hope in recognition of the fact that it's us that know our communities and know our businesses best and therefore it's exactly right that it's this level of local government that's responsible for disseminating this money. This is obviously a two-year project. Government are certainly looking for early delivery on the money. They've made it pretty hard to actually get the whole system started. It's been tricky, hasn't it? But we finally know where we are. I'm very enthusiastic about the investment in north stowe cafe and gym. I think we've really turbo charged what's happening at north stowe now. I think that's recognized by the residents and certainly by the town council. I went to see last week who were very welcoming. I'm also delighted to see some investment in Camborn as well on the footpath accessibility project. I think this time last year I got covered in mud trying to walk the path that leads to the school and witness children arriving on their bikes splattered with mud which I imagine delighted their teachers and their parents when they got back home. So I think this is a very wise intervention in two new communities by this council. I'm sure it will go down very well. So if there's no more remarks or questions, recommendations are set out in page 65 going on to page 66. So we're allocating just under 300,000 of the fund to a series of capital projects within the district in this financial year and then just shy of 900,000 to a grant scheme to be available to communities and businesses to apply for the next financial year and I think work is ongoing on what the terms of reference is going to be for that but that's going to be very, very exciting indeed and something I'm very pleased that the responsibility has been devolved to us because I know that we can deliver really good schemes that benefit the whole of the district. So do cabinets agree with the recommendations? Anyone wish to vote against? Anyone abstaining? So cabinet therefore agrees the proposals by affirmation. Thank you. I'm moving on to item nine, which is the health and well-being strategy. So this is over to Councillor Bill Handley and Councillor John Batchelor is seconding this, I believe. So thank you, Bill. I'm sorry. Oh, sorry, I'm missing a pie to make. I've just done that to make. Yes, I've done that to make. Jolly good. Councillor Handley, please. Good morning everyone. This is a refresh of the council's health and well-being strategy, and it's needed for a few reasons, such as the lessons learned during the COVID pandemic, the cost of living crisis, and also because of changes to the way health services delivered now, notably the formation of the integrated care system. The scrutiny and overview committee, I know Councillor Badden will give us some more detail in a moment, but they've been involved in the development of this revision. A workshop was held in the summer, and the views expressed there were incorporated into the report. The scrutiny and overview committee also gave the report a pretty thorough examination, and an additional para was added to the previous draft following comments on the challenges that some people face. Getting to medical appointments, for example, to the poor or non-existent public transport. This is an excellent report. I'd like to thank officers for it, particularly Leslie McFarland, and the recommendation shown on page 113 that Cabinet approves the report and the associated appendices. Thank you, Councillor Handley. Councillor Batchelor. Yes, happy to second this. Nothing further to add. The scrutiny and overview. Thank you very much, Llyda. Yes, we found this a really heartening report, seeing what we've been able to do to help our residents during the difficult times of COVID, but recognising, as Councillor Handley has said, the difficulties, particular difficulties around transport and other aspects that I'll come to. So, one of the things that was proposed was that we would ask the Cabinet Members, the Cabinet Members for Communities, to look again at how the council can support community transport schemes to find more volunteer drivers, because we already have a number of volunteer driver schemes to take people to hospital appointments when they either cannot use the bus, they don't have a bus, or for whatever reason. But from my own experience in Milton and Water Beach, we know that we have an excellent car scheme with a number of really diligent volunteers, and yet still they don't have enough drivers to do all the calls that they're being asked to do. So, if any help can be given to support communities in finding new drivers, that will be most welcome. And also looking at best practice for schemes, because obviously it's not an entirely straightforward job, and so encouraging people to take it on when they can would be most welcome. And indeed, for example, in Canborn here, they have a WhatsApp group that could be, that same technology could help other groups when they want to make unplanned journeys or where community transport is not an option. We also looked at the aspects of mental health, and we recognise the complexity of this and the need to work with the integrated care system so that our delivery is dovetailed with and not at odds with. So, we hope that the council can seek to enhance those relationships with the integrated care system. And finally on this paper, we've talked about communication, and I'll just read the report. It's well-noting that there's an extensive network of communication channels used to promote health and wellbeing measures, including more passive channels, such as the South Cams magazine, which we recognise for its value in that it goes to every home. The Scrutiny and Overview Committee calls for ongoing active promotion to be used as well whenever possible to ensure those most in need of being supported so by social media as well. And anything that the Scrutiny and Overview Committee can do to help that would be very welcome, but certainly those are the things that concern us. Thank you very much, leader. Thank you very much indeed. Councillor Handley, do you want to respond to any of those points? Well, just to say that noted, the Scrutiny and Overview Committee did give this a very good examination. I was really pleased with the way it was received as well. I've taken those notes on board. Thank you, Councillor Bradlin. Thank you very much. I think the relationship we have with the integrated care service is, I think, is very good, thanks to Liz Watts, actually, and through the Public Service Board. Back in 2018, we had no relationship with health providers at all. So I think we're in a very, very good place now. We're in a strong position to build on that. Also through the work of the combined authority, because we obviously have a mayor who's a public health worker and has health and well-being very much at the top of his list of priorities. And it's certainly something that is becoming part of discussions far more. I mean, when we talk about public transport, in the report, it's one of the determinants of health, of good health. So I think this is going to become very much an overarching priority for all councils, really. So thank you to Liz and Farlin, who's done a massive amount of work on this. The recommendation on page 113 is that the strategy and its appendices are approved by Cabinet today. Cabinet agree with the recommendation. And we'll vote against anyone abstain. Thank you very much indeed. So that's good. And item 10 is now the proposed fees charges. Councillor John Williams is going to introduce it and Councillor Henry Bachelors volunteered to second it. Thank you, Leader. I'm very pleased to be able to move this, the recommendations in this. I think this again shows what a strong and robust council this is. If you take first of all to the savings part of this, you'll see that, you know, 400,000 additional income from investments. Over 190,000 in additional income from fees from our planning service. 250,000, you know, a quarter of a million pounds found by our review of our underspends. We continually look for how we're making our budget more removing any sort of waste we didn't have. You're overlapping between reports. You're speaking to item 10, are you? Specifically on fees and charges? Oh, sorry, I'm thinking about that. I know there's lots of overlap. I know, I was just trying to work out. Sorry, I do apologise. I'm so excited. Right. Okay, on fees and charges. Just to say on fees and charges, one of the things we want to do is to ensure that we cover our costs in planning. The government is enabling us now to do that. We don't feel it's right that our cash tax payers will be subsidising the work we do for developers. We are now, you'll see that we intend to, we're aiming for full cost recovery from developers through our planning fees. There are also other increases in line with inflation like everybody else. We have to buy goods and services and we have to reflect the increasing costs that we are incurring. Unfortunately, we have to pass that on to those who use our services and pay for them. But otherwise, I hope you'll see that it's a reasonable increase and that obviously increases are needed to keep up with costs and they flow through to us being able to continue to deliver services of good quality. So I would recommend that you approve these, the changes to the fees and charges in the report. Thank you very much indeed. Councillor Batchelor, do you want to add anything? Thank you, happy to second leader. But just a quick comment. Members may see that there are some lines highlighted in a peachy colour, just to make everyone aware these are fees that are set nationally. So we don't set them locally, they're set by central government. And there are specifically some gaps where we haven't set a fee for this year that's because we're waiting for that fee to be set by government. So if there are any gaps predominantly in my own portfolio, that's because we're waiting for that fee to be set by central government. Thank you, that's really helpful information. Councillor Bradman, did scrutiny want to comment on this? No, scrutiny didn't, but I would if I may. Of course you may. Thank you. I just wanted to ensure that, thinking about pre-app advice, as a chair of one of the council's planning committees, I'm very mindful how much benefit is gained by the time we get to planning application stage if an applicant has got taken pre-application advice. And I'm just hoping that the fees and charges used, Councillor Williams has talked about full cost recovery and that's right and appropriate. But I hope it wouldn't discourage applicants from taking pre-application advice because it's so very valuable in the evolution of their plans. I wonder if anyone could comment on that. Councillor Williams. I would just say it's in their interest because if they don't take pre-app advice and the application is therefore not successful, I would have said that, yes, it helps us if obviously their application is fit for purpose. But also it's in their interest because they don't want to see their application fail and that money that they've spent on that application wasted. So it is in their interest to seek pre-application advice. And as I said, going back to what I've said, our view is that particularly in Greater Cambridgeshire where we are seeing a lot of development, a lot of very big development and of course looking forward to Cambridge 2040 there will be more development happening, large-scale development happening, that large-scale development should be paid for by the developer, not by the council tax. Thank you, Councillor Williams. Peter Maddox, please. All I was going to say was that there's always a balance to be had between cost recovery and making sure that services are accessible. I think in this particular case, as John said earlier, I think we wouldn't want an additional burden on tax payers. I think it's right and proper that we charge based on cost recovery for something like this. But I take the point, you know, it's possible somebody could in theory be put off. Councillor Bradlin. Thank you. Yes, I absolutely agree. The cost shouldn't fall to our residents. The point though is that of course pre-application advice is voluntary and so they're volunteering to pay a fee to get our advice and so some don't. And we often see that applications are the poorer for it, so it'd be good to get the balance right and it's right and proper that they should pay. And let's face it, the most responsible and often the best developers do take pre-application advice. It's in their favour because they get a better application. I think the key thing is that it's seen to be a valued quality service and people are willing to pay, you know, a fair amount for a high quality service. So, you know, and I think our, the reputation of our planning, our joint planning service actually is greatly enhanced of late. So, you know, hopefully that will encourage it as well. Okay. If there's no more questions, we'll move on to the recommendations on page 139, which approve the fees and charges as detailed in appendix A, other reports take effect on the 1st of April 24, unless otherwise stated, or the earliest feasible date thereafter. And note the proposed variations in fees and charges in comparison to prevailing inflation rate detailed in the report. So, our cabinet, happy to accept those recommendations. Anyone wish to vote against? Anyone wish to abstain? Cabinet therefore agrees the proposals by affirmation. So, Councillor Williams, we're now on item 11. Thank you, David. Back on track again, sorry about that. Yes. So, going back to what I said originally, I'd like to go first of all to the savings and income generation. It's 171, I'm not sure of that report, 171 on, oh, I've got it done. You'll see there that, you know, we are looking at some very big figures there. We're looking for savings, you know, from, as I say, our underspends, and we continually review our budget and look for those items where, you know, they're in the budget, but actually at the end of every year we find we've underspent on them. So, we're constantly doing that to ensure that every penny that's put in the budget is actually spent. There's no point in putting money in the budget if it's not going to be spent, because obviously that carries on through to the council tax that our residents pay. So, I'm very pleased that we are continuing to do that work and say some quarter of a million pounds has been saved by doing that. And also, I'm very pleased about the income from our conversion investment. We set ourselves an aim when we first came, when we first took over the administration as a council, we set ourselves an aim that 25% of our income would come from conversion investment. And I'm very pleased to say that we have met that aim and are delivering on that. And that again is helping us to provide services that we wouldn't otherwise be able to provide if we were simply relying on our council tax and business rates. So, it's very, very, very hardly to see that. And then going to those items that officers have asked to add to the budget, you'll see that in most cases it's about creating new posts or about changing temporary posts into permanent posts. Because again, we've seen that the council grow and the offer that we're making to our residents grow and therefore we need additional staff to be able to do that and we're able to fund that additional staff, as I've said, because we're being able to find savings and additional income. So, all in all, it's a very satisfactory report and I would recommend it to Cabinet. Thank you, Councillor Williams. Councillor John Batchelor, you were seconding this. Yes, thank you very much. I was delighted to second this. As Councillor Williams has said, I mean, what is displaying is the strength of our budgets here, which many of our compatriots around the country will be more than delighted to see similar outturns. In this particular area, it demonstrates that we're on a path of constant improvement and congratulations to all those involved. Thank you. Thank you. I was reading today's paper about the struggles that Somerset are having with eye-watering numbers that need saving. It's very sad indeed. And I'm very interested that the traffic lighting is on the climate impact. I think that's just recently been introduced and makes an interesting addition to the report. So, thank you very much indeed. The recommendations are on page 163. Sorry, a bigger part, Councillor Bradley. I'm so keen to romp on over to you. Thank you very much, Leader. Broadly speaking, we were very encouraged by the report and very heartened by the work that the council has done to make sure our finances are in such a good position, very heartening considering what other councils are going through locally. And we were happy to commend the recommendations. But we just had a couple of questions. One was relating to new digital phone lines. And I think this related to on page 167, because we were just slightly concerned that if we were going over to digital phone lines, would they still support the red button alarm systems that are in many of our supported living, but also that are many of our elderly residents used? The actual terminology was looking forward to committee members being kept informed about the progress and notified the measures to protect the functionality of red button systems. The question I think was will they work with a new digital system? And the second thing, we questioned a number of new roles at the council. Sorry, that was on page 167. I think it related to transformation. I'm not sure. I think it was there. And the second thing on that page was the empty homes officer in the middle of that page. Amongst other posts that have been proposed, we questioned quite hard on the value for money aspects of having an officer, especially to do this. And we were very much reassured at the reduction in void time of our properties as a result of this role, but also engaging with people who have empty homes, private owners who have empty homes, and engaging with them, so that they could be built back onto the market and made into homes for people in South Cambridgeshire. So we found that very reassuring and we received a detailed note as well separately. So thank you very much, leader. Thank you. That was very helpful, yes. And I think we took away the question about the alarms. I don't know if we've got to the bottom of it yet. Councillor Batchelor, you might know it's a work in progress. It is. The whole area of lifeline is being reviewed at the moment, but just to be clear, in our own shelter and housing, we don't actually charge for the facility. So we're still supporting our own people, but lifeline is a commercial operation and it's not just our own properties. We actually support the private sector as well and the difficulty there is there's a lot of competition and we're reviewing at the moment to see if it, in the medium term, is viable. OK, John Good. I think the main question was about whether it technically would continue to work. So I don't know, does Peter Campbell want to come in on that? Or whether changing to digital would actually make a difference? If I may, Chair, only two or four members that there will be a report coming to informal cabinet in the next two or three weeks, specifically about this with a lot more detailing. So rather than giving you a blind answer now, if you can just wait until that many port comes through over there. Thank you. So I thank Scrutiny for raising that. I thank Councillor Williams first and then Councillor Bradman. Yeah, just a point of information actually. We're seeing BT change its normal telephone lines to digital. I mean, certainly in my case, and that happened a couple of months ago, where the BT telephone number is actually now a digital number. They don't use the copper wire anymore. It comes through the same box as the internet. So I think this is an issue that everybody is going to have to face eventually as we go digital. Thank you, Councillor Bradman. Sorry, yes, to clarify, the concern was the technology, the fact that we were going to analog, remove the analog system, and it's the analog system that drives the lifeline systems. So we wanted to make sure that we had a clear way ahead to maintain those systems for us. Absolutely. Councillor Batchelor. Thank you. Just going on to a different topic. On the post of the empty homes officer, it's probably worth, I appreciate this will have been gone over in Scrutiny, but just to be clear, so the post has been a temporary post for the past two years, and we're just proposing on making this permanent because over the last two years, the value we've seen in having that officer in post has been huge. I'm not underplaying that. It has been significantly beneficial to the authority because I think what we've seen is bringing an empty home back into use is obviously a lot more efficient than having someone build a new one. So that's the value that we've seen over the past two years. In terms of rag rating, it's rated green, but I can't stress how valuable that officer has been to us over the last four-year months. Thank you very much indeed. At a time when other councils are losing staff, I'm really pleased to see we are investing in our staff because they are without doubt our biggest asset, and without them we won't achieve what we want to achieve. Okay, so there's no more questions. I'll move on to the recommendations at page 163. It's a bit long, so I won't read it. Our cabinet is happy to agree with the recommendations. Anyone voting against? Anyone abstaining? Cabinet therefore agrees the proposals by affirmation. Item 12 now is the capital programme update and new bits. Yes, Councillor Williams. I'm just checking right now. It's just a little check here for the right place. Councillor Williams, thank you, and I'm happy to second. It's the Councillor Williams show this morning, isn't it? I'm not going to say very much on this, but it speaks very much for itself. But I will highlight paragraph 25 in this report. And I think it demonstrates the ingenuity of our officers on this council and the reason why we run a very tough... financially we are in such a good position because we are always constantly looking for ways to save money. And I think this really shows that, you know, it really demonstrates that in the fact that we had an opportunity for an ex-demonstration, most we would come up and we snap it up, you know, and we save ourselves a lot of money. And this is what we're doing constantly. Our officers are doing this all the time, which is why, you know, we are in such good financial shape on this council. I just thought I'd bring that to cabinet's attention. Thank you very much indeed. Are there any questions from cabinet? OK, thank you for what you said, Councillor Williams. I have nothing to add to that. So if we move to the recommendations on page 173... Sorry, I'm seconding it. Page 173. Do members agree with the recommendations? Anyone voting against? Anyone abstaining? Cabinet therefore agrees with the proposals by affirmation. And item 13, Councillor Williams again. I think Councillor Handley's seconding this one. So this is the Revenue and Capital Budget monitoring for Order 2. Councillor Williams. Thank you, thank you, our leader. I think the big story on this is the amount of money we haven't had to find this year for agency staff, particularly in planning if you compare this quarter with quarter two last year. Quarter two last year we were having to find some quarter of a million pounds because we couldn't recruit to difficult posts in planning this year because of, I'm going to say, four-day week trial. We have virtually eliminated that. And therefore that 250,000 odd pounds can now be put to better use rather than paying above the odds for staff because we have to use agency staff. So if anything illustrates the success of the four-day week trial, it is that figure in that second quarter. And it follows on obviously for the first quarter which also showed that we were starting to get on top of the problem of the cost of agency staff and the four-day week is certainly proving, you know, to show that we are definitely saving money as a result of the trial. Thank you. Councillor Handley. I'm very happy to second this. I've nothing much to add except to say what fantastic news about agency staff. And I hope we can make something of it for comms because I for one have been getting tackled in my local ward about what the four-day week's about. And this is a very good example of where it's a very positive news. Absolutely. And we mustn't lose sight of the problem that we set out to solve through the trial which was that of recruitment and retention and spending an awful lot of money on agency staff. I mean, we'll always need agency staff because we have lots of short-term projects, pieces of work to do, and agency staff are the most cost-effective way of doing those time-limited pieces of work. But where it doesn't work in our favour is when it's a long-term solution to long-term problems of recruiting and the sort of people we really need to deliver our core services, especially in planning. So, yeah, that is good news. And let's just hope the government thinks it's good news as well. So, the recommendations are on page 191. Do members agree with recommendations? Anyone voting against? Anyone abstaining? Cabinet therefore agrees the proposals by affirmation. That brings us on to the last item of the morning, this is a record, which is the Utdlesford draft local plan. So, I will introduce this, and Councillor Henry Batchelor will second it because he lives quite close to it. So, Utdlesford are now at the stage where... Are we still under duties... Oh, Hallis, do you want to... Actually, do you want to do a bit of an introduction so you can probably do it better than I can? Thank you. Thank you, Llywydd. So, yes, we are still under the duty to cooperate. This is the draft Utdlesford local plan following our previous issues and options a couple of years back. Obviously, upward to the south of South Cambridgeshire. They are planning to progress to a regulation 19 version of the plan, what they consider to be the final version of the plan next year. So, the key points to guess about the content of the plan is that no new housing allocations are proposed close to South Cambridgeshire. The most substantive development proposed in the plan is additional employment plans within the existing footprint of Chesterford Research Park with further flexibility to support applications at that site beyond that. The plan does recognise the topic of water stress in the district and the wider area and includes a number of policies to seek to try and address this. And it also seeks to take ambitious climate biodiversity policies. For example, seeking 20% net gain for biodiversity. The proposed response as a paragraph 10 of the report focuses on water stress. So, noting that they've taken an ambitious approach. There's a few key points noting that it would be very helpful to have further evidence that the level of extraction required can be supported sustainably because that isn't clear in the evidence supporting the draft plan. And then they have additional policies seeking to address water supply in the short streams that I think could be made clearer and clear in terms of how they could be implemented. Beyond the water, the other key point I guess is that it's just not clear currently to officers what the transport impacts of the expansion of Chesterford Research Park might be and so recommendation to just seek that clarity. And then as per previous responses to neighbouring plans officers are recommending just supporting the ambitious climate and biodiversity approaches in the Ethelsford plan. And full responses appendix 1 to that report. Thank you. Thank you very much, Stuart. That's really helpful. So it's obviously advantageous if local plans are complementary to each other and I sense that's what we're going for here because ours is very ambitious as far as the environment is concerned and it would be, I'm sure Ethelsford want theirs to be but we're asking for clarification, aren't we? I'm glad we've put in about abstraction and the impact of the short streams as well. Councillor Batchelord, do you want to speak at this point? Thank you just to clarify, I'm happy to second this from a personal point of view. I think it's some relief certainly in my ward which does border Ethelsford that the original plan to build a new town of Great Chesterford has been scrapped and the houses have been proposed elsewhere. I think there is certainly some relief amongst my parishes and I'm sure those that also border Ethelsford. I'm absolutely happy to support this response to Ethelsford's consultation. That's probably everything I need to say. Thank you very much. Any other questions from Cabinet Members? Councillor Bradman. Thank you, Leader. I come to this having had a similar discussion, as I say, as Chair of the Joint Development Control Committee when we were faced with an application for a business building that was quadrufling the footprint of the building, the floor space of the building, but we were being assured that it would use no more water than the existing building. We cast around in our minds as to how we could actually ensure that that assurance was, in fact, delivered. In fact, what came out of that discussion was the point that with residential premises you could put a water meter on, but for business premises, of course businesses buy their water from a wholesaler and so there is no effect. There is no, as it were, water metering possible. So what I would just like to urge Cabinet and planners is to consider are there ways that we can monitor or seek a monitoring regime so that we can ensure that assurances that are given under planning for water usage do transpire to be what is delivered in the living building that's built or the development that's built because it's easy to say. Yes, we'll only use the same amount of water as this building, or indeed, in this case, we'll ensure that abstraction from the aquifer does not harm the tool environment, but we need to have ways of ensuring that actually is delivered when the development happens. So if we can encourage and urge our planners to think in terms of ways of seeking, it might even need changes in government, but monitoring that as the development builds out. Thank you, Councillor Bradman. That's one of the issues that we are currently discussing with civil servants as part of Mr Goh's vision per game britcher and he's got this water task force. Obviously he has to look in the round not just at providing reservoirs and piping water down from goodness knows where, but also on water usage, and we are pretty profligate with our water use as things stand for them. So if there aren't any more questions, the recommendations are on page 216. Do members agree with recommendations? Anyone voting against? Anyone abstaining? That's fine, so Cabinet therefore agrees with the proposals by affirmation. It's a gesture to you and your team. It's a very good piece of work and very nicely presented in language that I can understand, which is really helpful. Thank you. So that brings us to the end. I haven't got a date for the next meeting. The next Cabinet meeting... Six of February. Six of February, the next Cabinet meeting. Special date in the middle of there. So thank you very much indeed everybody. Thank you very much to all the officers who have participated.