To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies had been received from Cllr Robert Highfeld.

To receive details of members nominated to attend the meeting in place of a member of the committee.

Cllr John Stone was the named substitute for Cllr Robert Highfield.

The Chair noted that -- to maintain political proportionality within the committee -- Cllr Elizabeth Foxton (Independents for Herefordshire), would be joining the committee as a permanent member and Cllr Helen Heathfield (Green Party) would be stepping down from the committee. The Chair welcomed Cllr Foxton and thanked Cllr Heathfield for her contributions to the committee’s work. 

To receive declarations of interests from members of the committee in respect of items on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive the minutes of the meeting held on 12 May 2025.

The minutes of the previous meeting were received.

Resolved: That the minutes of the meeting held on 12 May 2025 be confirmed as a correct record and be signed by the Chairperson.

To receive any written questions from members of the public.

One questions had been received from a member of the public, which had been published, along with a response, as a supplement to the meeting agenda on the Herefordshire Council website.

A record of a supplementary question asked and a verbal response provided during the meeting, are attached at Appendix 1 to these minutes.

To receive any written questions from members of the council.

There had been no questions received from members of the council.

To provide information to the Environment and Sustainability Scrutiny Committee on Carbon Neutral Housing. The report details whether new houses and self-build properties are ‘zero carbon ready’ and looks at the role of fuel replacement to heat homes.

The Chair took the report on Carbon Neutral Housing as read and opened the item up for debate. The key points of discussion included:

1. Members were advised that the Future Homes Standard was expected to become legally enforceable from December 2027, requiring new homes to be net zero ready, predominantly electric and removed from the gas grid.

2. Officers confirmed that while carbon neutral homes had higher upfront installation costs, particularly for heat pumps and insulation, running costs could broadly balance out where homes are well insulated.

3. It was reported that industry awareness of the Future Homes Standard was increasing, although readiness to deliver at scale remained mixed, with larger developers better placed than smaller builders.

4. Officers confirmed significant and ongoing skills shortages across key construction trades, with limited training capacity and a risk that locally trained workers may leave the area.

5. Members were advised that housing delivery was developer-led, with most construction labour subcontracted, limiting incentives for developers to invest directly in workforce training.

6. Officers advised that the Future Homes Standard would add cost and complexity to housing delivery and could place additional pressure on housing numbers alongside existing viability challenges.

7. It was confirmed that all new housing, including affordable and social housing, would be required to meet the same standards, as well as the required percentages for such housing laid down in the Local Plan.

8. Officers advised that while low-density development was less efficient, it remained necessary to meet housing needs, and that higher-density development may improve efficiency where appropriate.

9. Members were advised that accommodation for construction workers was already constrained and was being considered as part of Local Plan development.

10. Officers confirmed that heat networks were uncommon in domestic settings due to cost and management challenges and that new homes were expected to be fully electrified.

11. It was confirmed that electricity grid capacity was a significant challenge and that the council was working with the Distribution Network Operator to inform future investment planning.

12. Officers advised that retrofitting of existing homes was unlikely to be mandated, with current support focused on voluntary grant schemes such as Warm Homes.

13. Members were advised that while planning policy could be prepared in advance, development management and building control services would face increased pressures once the standard became statutory.

14. Officers confirmed that no specific mortgage or finance products recognising lower running costs were identified, although this was noted as an area for potential future exploration.

At the conclusion of the debate the committee discussed and agreed the following recommendations to the Executive.

That:

1. The Executive should commission a piece of work in collaboration with housebuilders (including housing associations) to quantify the impact of implementation of the Future Homes Standard on the achievability of the new housing target for the County of 27,260. This should include the future availability of new affordable and social housing.
2. The Executive should continue discussions with relevant industry partners to evaluate the skills required to deliver the Future Homes Standard in the County and how this will feed into  ...  view the full minutes text for item 147.

To agree the terms of reference for the task and finish group and to receive an update on the group’s work to date.

The committee considered a progress update from the Chair of the Bus Services Task and Finish Group:

1. The committee formally approved the Terms of Reference for the Task and Finish Group, noting that these had been available to Members for some time and no amendments had been proposed.

2. Members were advised that the Task and Finish Group had held two review meetings to date, supported by lines of enquiry style sessions and officer engagement. While officer support had been positive, access to consistent data had been limited, highlighting a key issue in itself. Further detailed information, particularly in relation to subsidised routes and subsidy criteria, was expected at the next review meeting.

3. The committee noted that the council’s current role in bus provision was limited to convening the Enhanced Partnership, managing infrastructure, and identifying and funding socially necessary routes. Accountability within the Enhanced Partnership was described as weak, particularly in relation to commercial operators. However, new bus services legislation would potentially expand local authority powers, including the potential for franchising.

4. Members were advised that delivery of bus service improvements was constrained by operator capacity, with all operators facing driver shortages and limited technical capability. Approximately two-thirds of local routes were subsidised, and there continued to be significant overspend on home-to-school transport, driven by increased demand for specialist provision and reliance on taxis.

5. The committee welcomed the confirmation of three-year Bus Service Improvement Plan revenue funding, providing greater financial stability and scope for longer-term planning, while noting a reduction in capital funding.

6. A lack of reliable and consistent data was identified as a critical weakness, limiting effective service planning, performance management, and the ability to demonstrate value for money in funding bids. New data tools were being introduced to help identify travel demand and network gaps, but members agreed that improving data collection should be a priority.

7. The committee noted that integrated ticketing and improved passenger information remained key public priorities. Officers were progressing a “Making Buses Easier” initiative, focusing on reliability, accessibility, digital integration, and real-time information, alongside investment in upgraded bus shelters across the county.

8. Members discussed opportunities arising from devolution, the proposed Hereford Transport Hub, improved bus–rail integration, and cross-border working through the Marches Forward Partnership.

9. The committee was advised of a forthcoming Bus Summit involving operators, users, community transport providers, and officers, at which emerging issues and potential solutions would be discussed.

10. Members raised concerns about the long-term viability of the current bus delivery model, recent operator failures, and the impact on rural communities and school transport.

11. The committee encouraged the task and finish group to consider alternative delivery models, including potential pilot schemes, alongside community and demand-responsive transport options. Members also noted the importance of developing a more strategic, long-term vision for bus provision.

12. The committee indicated flexibility regarding the reporting timetable and confirmed its support for the task and finish group to widen the scope of its review where necessary to address the fundamental sustainability and deliverability of bus services.

To consider the work programme for the committee.

1.     Members raised concerns about the robustness of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) supporting the Local Transport Plan (LTP), following debate at Full Council. Officers had advised that the LTP decision could not be revisited, but members agreed scrutiny should focus on delivery and implementation, with clear milestones and a defined timetable.

2. The committee emphasised the need for a more ambitious approach to rail strategy, including improved connectivity and potential line reinstatements. Despite the strategy not yet being in draft form, members felt early scrutiny could help shape development.

3. Members supported allowing more time for the bus service task and finish study group to fully examine different transport delivery models, including rural services, school transport, and cross-boundary working.

4. Flooding was recognised as a significant, ongoing issue. Members agreed scrutiny was needed across prevention, response, and recovery, but timing should avoid short-term reactive focus.

5. Capacity constraints were noted, (particularly with elections approaching). Members agreed on shared responsibility for work programme development and the use of informal meetings to support planning.

Agreed Action Points:

• Add SEA delivery scrutiny (LTP) to the June meeting.
• Move the transport task and finish study group final report to September.
• Include rail strategy scrutiny as a substantive item in September.
• Discuss establish a flooding task and finish study group, commencing June.
• Officers to provide LTP delivery milestones to support effective scrutiny.
• Arrange an informal work programme planning meeting in the New Year to plan items beyond September.
• Members to submit suggested scrutiny topics to officers for future consideration.

To be confirmed.

Monday 2 March 2026, 10am

Supplementary question from member of the public – Environment and Sustainability Scrutiny Committee, 16 December 2025