To provide the committee with an overview of the transformation of the economy and environment directorate.

1. The committee considered the transformation of the Economy and Environment Directorate, with discussion focused on whether the revised structure had strengthened the council's ability to deliver its environmental ambitions and respond to climate-related challenges. Concerns were raised that environmental priorities, including the climate and ecological emergency declaration, did not appear to have been a primary driver of the transformation.

2. Officers explained that environmental responsibility had been embedded across the organisation rather than concentrated within a single service area. They stated that the transformed structure was intended to encourage integrated working across departments and ensure that environmental considerations formed part of all council activities.

3. Members explored whether the new arrangements had improved the council's resilience and responsiveness to issues such as flooding, drought and wildfire risk. Officers highlighted work undertaken with communities, partners and internal services to improve preparedness and strengthen the council's ability to respond to emerging environmental challenges.

4. During discussion of resources and priorities, some members expressed concern that environmental objectives could be overshadowed by economic ambitions. In response, officers and members emphasised that economic growth and environmental sustainability should be viewed as complementary rather than competing objectives, with long-term prosperity dependent upon environmental resilience.

5. Attention then turned to performance management. Members questioned how the success of the transformation could be measured and suggested that clearer key performance indicators were required to demonstrate improvements in responsiveness, collaboration and service delivery. Officers accepted that performance measures could be strengthened and agreed that further work on meaningful KPIs would be beneficial.

6. Further debate focused on the absence of an overarching environmental framework. Members noted that while several individual strategies and plans existed, there was no single document bringing them together to provide a coherent strategic direction. Officers acknowledged that existing plans could be better integrated and presented within an overarching narrative.

7. The committee also considered the role of risk management. Members questioned whether climate change, environmental resilience and wider county-level sustainability risks were sufficiently reflected within current corporate risk arrangements. It was suggested that a broader approach to environmental risk management would assist strategic planning and resource allocation.

8. Discussion subsequently examined working relationships across the directorate. Officers reported that regular cross-service meetings, joint working arrangements and informal collaboration were helping planning, transport and environmental teams to work more closely together, despite responsibilities being contained within separate teams..

9. Members also reviewed specialist environmental capacity. Officers advised that limited core resources were supplemented through grant-funded programmes, enabling the council to access specialist expertise in areas such as ecology, nature recovery, retrofit programmes and river management. Members emphasised the importance of ensuring that specialist environmental expertise remained a key consideration within future budget planning, to meet specific demands such as conducting habitat impacting assessments timely in planning applications.

10. Finally, the committee considered the process for environmental impact assessments. Officers explained that assessments were generally undertaken where required for specific projects and major schemes, often using external specialist consultants. Quality assurance arrangements formed part of the project governance process, with project teams and senior responsible officers retaining overall accountability.

11. At the conclusion of the item, the committee agreed the following recommendations:

That:

i.               The Executive put together an overarching plan to deliver the council’s response to the declared climate and ecological emergency, that brings together the various environmentally focussed plans being delivered across the council, for example LNRS, LTP, Carbon Management Plan, Waste Strategy.?

ii.              The Executive should draw up a delivery plan that sets out at a lower level the outcomes expected from E&E on the environment.

iii.            The Executive should review the current process for drawing up environment impact assessments and report back to Council with an assessment of the efficacy of them and any proposed improvements required.

iv.            Current directorate KPIs are reviewed to reflect how the environment and economy team improve performance, particularly about response times, and to understand in particular what processes are failing.

v.              To accelerate the delivery of the update of the Local Plan to provide an overarching plan-led view of the environmental and economic objectives for the county and ensure then that the subordinate plans and policies align with and support delivery of that Local Plan.

vi.            For the directorate to identify explicitly how the Herefordshire Council Plan transformation objective of "becoming a data and performance rich culture" can promulgate environment and sustainability objectives and capture progress in their delivery for individuals and for service areas.

vii.           The relevant Cabinet portfolio holder consider whether the council and directorate risk registers sufficiently reflect environment and sustainability risks to the council and to the county, and report back to the committee on their findings.