►
From YouTube: Extraordinary, Overview and Scrutiny Management Board Wednesday, 24th August, 2016 6.00 pm
Description
Extraordinary, Overview and Scrutiny Management Board
Wednesday, 24th August, 2016 6.00 pm
Distribution:
Councillors: Charlie Bolton, Nicola Bowden-Jones, Tom Brook, Jude English, Geoff Gollop, Gill Kirk,
Brenda Massey, Olly Mead, Graham Morris, Anthony Negus and Steve Pearce
0:00:10 - Agenda Item 01 - Welcome, Introductions and Safety Information
0:00:22 - Agenda Item 02 - Apologies for absence
0:00:32 - Agenda Item 03 - Declarations of Interest
0:00:39 - Agenda Item 04 - Chair's Business
0:00:40 - Agenda Item 05 - Public Forum
0:00:44 - Agenda Item 06 - West of England Devolution
A
A
A
C
And
I
can't
thank
you.
So
the
report
before
you
summarizes
the
consultation
responses
that
we've
received
in
relation
to
the
questions
that
were
posed
across
the
region.
I
think
it's
just
worthy
of
rehearsal
that
this
is
a
consultation
exercise
that
we
have
undertaken
on
behalf
of
the
Secretary
of
State.
It's
part
of
the
formal
processes
that
we
have
to
comply
with
to
get
through
a
devolution
deal.
C
It
wasn't
meant
to
be
an
extensive
consultation
on
the
detail
of
the
proposal.
The
response
rate
does
not
appear
to
be
out
of
sync,
with
response
rates
on
other
devolution
deals,
and
my
colleagues
have
urn
can
give
further
detail
on
that,
if
required,
and
so
actually
this
this
is
really
for,
as
agreed
at
full
council.
This
is
really
just
to
bring
back
those
consultation
responses,
fraud,
awesomes
and
scrutiny.
Colleagues,
consideration
prior
to
submission
to
the
Secretary
of
State
and
I.
Think
probably
it's
best
to
keep
the
introduction
short
and
just
take
members
questions.
A
Remind
members
that
we
we
originally
wanted
to
have
this
meeting
as
a
fallback
to
give
us
the
opportunity
to
review
the
consultation
and
express
comment
it's
either
to
Marvin
or
to
the
Secretary
of
State.
If
there
was
anything
in
the
consultation
that
differed
from
the
views
that
have
been
expressed
by
counsel.
So
that
was
the
reason
why
we
we
set
this
in
place
and
do
any
members
have
any
comments
or
questions
arising
from
the
consultation
John
thanks.
D
Jack
I
should
perhaps
declare
on
I'm
subbing
for
counts,
the
gray
Morris,
but
the
the
question
is
it's
more
general.
Actually
it's
it's
something
that's
been
raised
in
the
press
recently
and
that
is
the
question
of
the
Metro
manner.
You're,
probably
ready
for
that
question.
Has
it
been
a
shift
because
I
know
there
was
some.
C
Colleagues,
either
side
of
me
have
actually
already
engaged
with
deal
with
detailed
yield
nice.
So
if
you
I'll
give
my
perspective
on
it
and
if
I
need
to
I'd
other
points,
then
colleagues
Pete,
please
feel
free
at
this
point
in
time
there
is
no
shift,
there's
lots
of
speculation,
but
there's
no
shift
and
we
have
been
advised
by
D
cell
G
that
the
deal
that
we
want
that
comes
with
money
rakaat.
C
It
currently
still
requires
a
metro
mare
that
isn't
to
say
that
we
wouldn't
make
representations
for
clarity,
and
indeed
that
is
absolutely
the
mayor's
intention.
Sorry,
if
I've
stolen
your
Thunder
and
Marvin,
but
but
we
we
will
seek
clarity,
and
we
will
continue
to
seek
clarity,
but
we
have
very
clearly
been
told
that
at
this
present
moment
in
time,
it's
nothing
more
than
speculation
and
the
position
is
as
per
as
we
set
it
out
for
you
at
full
council.
A
D
E
E
It
certainly
doesn't
bear
relationship
to
things
like
exit
polls
and
other
things
which
have
cast
eye
uncertainties,
and
it's
interesting
that
in
the
charts
of
interest,
I
think
many
of
the
things
that
we
talked
about
before,
and
certainly
we
talked
about
in
full
council
in
terms
of
things
that
interest
people
most
are
the
ones
of
actually
roots
the
head
of
the
list.
So
I
mean
that
is
indicative,
but
this
meeting
is
convened
to
take
note
of
and
move
forward
from,
the
information
that
we
see
in
front
of
us
and
I.
E
My
question
simply
is
how
how
valid
is
that
information
in
terms
of
coming
to
a
conclusion?
There's
a
secondary
and
picking
up
what
John
said:
I'm
I'm
actually
surprised
at
how
little
appeared
to
be
the
concern
about
nature
and
there
and
about
the
additional
level
of
government.
I
expected
this
to
be
something
that
were
featured
fairly
highly
in
this,
and
it
hasn't
come
out
as
much
as
I
would
have
expected.
So
can
anyone
answer
that
question
if
I
could
find
the
words.
C
Through
you,
chair
and
I,
I
think
I
think
the
response
rates
to
a
secretary
of
state
consultation
so
remembering
that
this
is
a
secretary
of
state
process
that
we're
enacting
on
the
on
his
behalf,
hasn't
he
that
who
engendered
a
lot
of
public
public
debate
or
indeed
significant
response
rates.
So
I,
don't
think
our
response
rates
on
the
subject
matter
or
out
of
kilter
with
others
that
have
gone
before.
C
What
I
think
one
of
the
things
that
we've
been
discussing
with
the
mayor
and
will
be
something
that
we
might
think
about
for
few
Ellucian
deals
is
how
we
get
the
public
engaged
in
the
comp.
The
real
theme
that
is
behind
this,
which
is
about
how
you
do
devolve
power
to
local
communities
and
what
that
might
look
like.
That's
not
about
the
deal
itself
so
where
we
are,
is
about
the
process
to
get
to
a
deal.
That's
what
we've
been
consulting
on.
C
We've
been
consulting
on
the
on
the
Secretary
of
State's
questions,
I,
think
you're
more
likely
to
get
engagement.
If
you
were
doing
a
difference
of
consultation,
which
was
about
what
would
you
like
to
see
devolved
that
that
might
create
a
much
more
significant
engagement
in
the
public,
so
I
I,
suppose?
In
summary,
it's
not
that
that
different
to
other
places
at
the
places
some
of
the
earlier
combined
authority
deals
I've,
given
advice
that
they
were,
they
had
fewer
a
lower
response
rate.
C
Some
one
in
particular
that
we
know
about
has
had
to
help
us
a
slightly
higher
response
rate,
but
we've
just
got
to
remember.
This
is
the
secretary
of
state
process
about
the
deal
that's
on
the
table,
so
it's
about
the
construct.
If
we
were
consulting
with
the
public
and
ran
our
own
were
running
our
own
consultation
process
as
a
region
around.
What
would
you
like
to
see
in
future
deals?
I,
suspect,
we've
get
a
lot
more
engagement.
E
No
I:
this
is
not
a
competition
I'm
not
trying
to
be
better
than
anybody
else.
I'm
simply
in
terms
of
this
meeting
this
evening,
which
we
called
especially
to
respond
to
that
information,
I
I'm
just
interested
to
know
how
valid
is
what
we
have
in
front
of
us
in
terms
of
being
able
to
recommend
moving
forward
or
going
in
a
particular
direction,
because
that's
why
we're
here.
A
Before
I
hand
over
Thailand,
just
so
I
think
I,
don't
think.
That
is
why
we're
here,
I,
think
why
we're
here
is
to
review
the
consultation.
The
Secretary
of
State
will
make
the
decision,
so
the
idea
was
that
we
would
review
it,
and
if
there
was
anything
we
felt
was
different
from
counsels
decision,
we
would
emphasize
it
to
Marvin
or
to
the
Secretary
of
State.
A
That's
always
the
case
with
any
consultation,
but
it
was
a
very
my
view
is
that
it
was
a
very
widely
publicized
consultation.
People
had
the
opportunity
to
respond
if
they
wanted
to,
and
that
I
think
is
what
we're
trying
to
assess
is.
Was
there
anything
that
we
feel
inappropriate
but
Anna
over
to
you
aunt
Thank.
C
You,
chair
and
I
would
just
remind
everybody
all
members
that
actually
is
the
decision
about
the
actual
consultation
process,
its
validity,
etc.
Is
a
matter
for
the
secretary
of
state
to
consider
when
he
actually
thinks
about
and
and
gives
full
consideration
to,
the
devolution
deal
and
the
the
comments
and
reflections
of
of
the
public
that
have
decided
to
engage,
though
in
some
ways,
I'm
just
restating
what
Council
of
God
apper
said
and
but
also
I.
Think
just
again,
so
your
your
bold
this
evening
is
you're
not
making
that
decision.
C
A
Before
get
on
any
further
can
I
just
remembered
I
should
have
given
one
apology
as
well,
because
councillor
Helen
Holland
was
he's
intending
to
be
here,
but
her
train
and
he
gets
into
Temple
Meads
in
a
few
minutes
time.
So
we
perhaps
have
a
challenge
to
see
whether
we're
still
meeting
when
she
makes
it
here
or
not,
but
I'll
I'll
leave
that
challenge
to
members
does
anybody
else
have
anything
they
want
to
add.
Yeah
Nicola.
C
So
I'm
afraid
I'm
caught
a
bit
on
the
hop
on
that
question.
We
had
a
small
Sun
set
aside
as
part
of
the
devolution
program
teams,
budget
and
I'm
advised
that
that
was
9,000
pounds,
but
I
shared
across
three
authorities,
but
I
know
that
there
was
office
this
time.
On
top
of
that,
so,
for
example,
Tracey
and
Linda
went
to
libraries
with
pre
publicized
times
to
engage
with
people
about
the
devolution
process
and
if
there
are
any
questions
etc
and
that
wouldn't
have
been
factored
into
the
9000
across
threat.
The
three
authorities.
C
I'm
not
sure
that
I
could
answer
that
question
I
think
that's
an
opinion
rather
than
a
matter
of
fact.
If
I
may
I
think
that
we
are
obliged
to
provide
certain
information
around
this
as
part
of
the
Secretary
of
State
process,
and
that
would
include
things
like
the
scheme,
things
like
the
money
etc.
But
you
know
whether
we
could
have
done
that
more
succinctly
in
terms
of
engaging
with
the
public.
It
is
a
reflection
that
we
will
go
away
with,
but
there
are
certain
matters
that
we
had
to
happen.
C
C
F
I'm,
assuming
you're,
referring
to
the
59
page
document
in
front
of
you
that
were
talking
about
this
evening.
That
document
forms
the
basis
of
the
report
which
we
are
sending
to
the
Secretary
of
State,
which
needs
to
set
out
exactly
how
we
carried
out
the
consultation
and
what
their
responses
were
in
as
much
detail
as
possible.
So
we
had
to
produce
this
kind
of
a
document
for
the
Secretary
of
State
and
what
we've
done
is
we've,
given
you
a
slightly
different
version,
but
not
significantly
different
and
hence
the
length.
E
C
I
say,
but
we've
got
even
if
we'd
have
had
one
respondent,
there's
a
there's,
a
set
format
in
relation
to
the
response
that
we
have
to
make
to
the
Secretary
of
State,
so
it
might
have
been
easier
in
shorter,
but
the
analysis,
the
requirement
around
the
analysis
would
have
been
the
same.
It
just
would
have
been
a
lot
easier
if
there
was
just
one,
but
in
terms
of
the
the
necessary
analysis
that
is
actually
required
by
the
secretary
of
state
in
terms
of
what
he's
expecting
to
see
in
in
relation
to
the
consultation
responses.
A
Can
I
probe
scientifically
as
well
if
this
had
been
in
the
days
of
paper
circulation?
The
cost
of
this
report
might
have
been
significant,
but
because
most
of
its
electronic
I
have
to
say,
I
found
it
very
useful.
The
analysis
and
the
information
that
went
with
the
responses
so
I
think
it's
it's
a
different
set
of
circumstances
when
it's
produced
for
information
and
in
this
way,
Steve.
D
G
H
Just
need
pushing
doesn't,
let's
make
it
work,
I'm
interested
in
the
piece
about
the
adult
education
skills
and
employment
and
I.
Welcome
that
I
think
it
will
be
very
interesting
to
see
what
the
long-term
consequences
are
of
having
an
integrated
approach
right
across
all
of
the
different
areas
involved,
and
particularly
about
the
link
with
skills
and
workforce
training,
etc.
I
think
that's
something
that
we
could
really
make
something
off
so
I'm
pleased
to
see
that
some
fairly
positive
responses.
I
Thank
You
Chad
I
just
quick
points,
while
I
make
lots
of
clunking
noises
for
the
viewers
at
home.
I
was
intrigued
by
the
figures
for
I
mean
south
meet
hall
filled
and
Lockleys
between
the
three
of
us.
Our
wards,
where
we've
got
over
30,000
registered
voters
of
less
than
35
or
so
fewer
than
35
people
responded.
C
Just
I
think
one
of
the
reflections
would
be
the
timing
of
our
consultation
because
it
was
over
the
summer
and
I
am
advised
that
we,
we
did
actually
try
to
go
through
the
some
of
the
neighborhood.
We
did
so
and
also
it
I've
just
reflect
on
the
consultation
and
types
of
consultation.
Actually,
when
we
have
big
really
in
issues
where,
where
it
might
be
about
service
delivery,
for
example,
I
won't
mention
put
any
in
particular
of
the
past,
we
do
tend
to
get
some
very
significant
engagement.
C
Actually,
when
it's
not
about
service
delivery,
we
don't
tend
to
get
an
awful
lot
of
consultation.
So
I'm
not
for
one
moment
saying,
there's
not
lessons
to
be
learned,
quite
the
contrary,
and
we
will
always
listen
to
feedback
and
ensure
that
there's
reflection
but,
as
I've
said
before
on
this
particular
subject
matter,
reflecting
upon
other
other
areas
that
have
gone
before
this
isn't
a
dissimilar
response
rate.
So
I
think
it's.
C
You
know
sort
of
I'm
not
being
complacent,
I'm,
just
saying
I
think
we
have
gotten
things
to
think
about,
but
maybe
that's
about
the
topic
and
what
would
you
like
to
see
and
getting
that
engagement
up
front
about
the
tone
and
and
of
the
devolution
and
what
it
might
include
rather
than
the
process
the
process
bit
is
probably
the
bit.
That's
always
going
to
be
slightly
challenging
to
get
people
involved
with
and
of
course
it
was
the
Sun
in
the
Sun.
I
Okay,
okay
or
I
mean
it
was
some
of
it.
I
was
at
an
event
just
the
other
day
and
my
warden.
We
had
about
at
least
60
70
people
there
of
all
ages.
They
I'm
just
saying
there
is
stuff
that
that
it
might
be
able
to
target
I
think
the
other
thing
is
I'm,
the
kind
of
information
that
we
were
being
provided
with
at
briefings
beforehand,
if
it
was
the
same
kind
of
stuff
that
dr.
I
We
need
a
joined
up
transport
approach
across
a
bigger
region
than
just
the
city
boundaries
I'm,
not
entirely
surprised
that,
with
that
kind
of,
if
that's
more,
the
kind
of
angle
that
was
taken
on
the
consultation
and
people
would
actually
have
felt
that
it
seemed
like
quite
a
good
idea,
because
it
did
look
like
a
positive
starting
point
and
with
future
possible
devolution
deals
to
improve
and
tweak
and
fine-tune
I.
Think
I'm
not
entirely
surprised,
I'm
quite
pleased,
actually
that
people
seem
to
be
so
positive
about
it.
But
again,
I
do
share.
I
Nikolas
are
so
nice
about
and
Jones's
point
about
the
low
numbers
of
respondents.
It's
a
bit
of
a
concern,
especially
when
some
of
the
areas
that
Phil
would
have
had
historically
I
mean
I
think
they
had
a
nine
percent
vote
when
we
had
the
formal
referendum
on
having
a
mayor
for
Bristol
and
about
the
same
sort
of
turnout
in
the
election
in
2012.
I
C
I
major
I
suspect,
I
can't
prove,
but
I
suspect
that
the
the
the
election
engagement
and
the
turnout
will
be
very
significantly
different
to
a
consultation
run
on
behalf
of
the
Secretary
of
State.
We've
limited
that
that
is
actually
about
the
process
around
the
combined
authority,
not
the
contents
of
the
deal,
and
that
was
why
I
was
trying
to
differentiate.
C
So
we
weren't,
we
had
very
limited
questions
with
very
limited
scope
that
the
were
about
a
process,
a
technical
process
around
the
deal
that
come
as
in
as
in
the
combined
authority,
not
there
that,
what's
included
in
the
deal,
what
not
what's
being
devolved
to
us
and
I
I
suspect
that
impacts
on
people's
level
of
interest,
because
I
suspect.
If
we
had
the
level
of
interest
when
people
were
engaging
and
having
the
engagement
events
was,
was
actually
very
welcoming
and
heartening
and
they
were
asking
lots
of
questions
etc.
A
J
Well,
thank
you,
Jay,
and
so
I
was
just
going
to
disagree
with
counsel
appears
because
I
don't
think
we
can
extrapolate
from
that
sample
to
say
that
it's
representative
of
the
population
Bristol
as
a
whole.
But
then
this
isn't
an
opinion
poll.
It's
it's
a
consultation,
so
you've
been
so
the
people
are
interested
have
responded
and
they
laid
their
views
clear.
So
don't
necessarily
think
it
matters.
The
people
who've
responded
if
said
they're
in
favor.
J
My
other
point
was
backing
up
to
counsel
ago
dangerous
about
the
metro
mayor.
The
thing
in
the
paper
the
other
day,
and
will
you
be
dead,
handy
to
know
for
sure
whether
the
metro
mayor's
in
or
out,
and
could
we
make
some
efforts
to
confirm
that
either
way
because
it
summers
I
want
to
be
part
of
it
or
not.
C
If
I'm
a
chair,
we
have
made
those
efforts
and
I
think
my
earlier
comments
tried
to
explain
that
so
at
the
moment,
DC
LG's
clear
position
is
that
the
deal
that
we
have
is
on
the
table
with
a
metro
mayor
and
their
position
has
not
changed
in
relation
to
a
metro
mayor.
We,
when
subject
to
submitting
this
when
we
do
I,
am
very
sure
that
each
local
authority,
that
is
part
of
the
devolution
deal
will
be
making
representations
for
absolute
clarity
and
I
know.
The
mayor
is
absolutely
key
to
this.
C
We
want
confirmation
about
their
position
and,
and
that's
absolutely
what
we're
asking
for,
but
right
now,
D
seulji's,
clear
advice
to
my
colleagues
that
will
run
the
phone
call
was
nothing
has
changed
that
we
can't
you
know,
but
I
just
I
just
need
to
be
clear.
Why
we're
here
today
and
I
just
would
like
to
reiterate
councillor
gallops
guidance
to
the
committee,
which
is
actually
we're
here
today
to
to
look
at
that
consultation.
We
have
to
submit
it.
It's
not
the
secretary,
it's
the
Secretary
of
State
that
will
actually
make
the
determination
about.
C
Was
that
and
that's
why
there
is
a
59
page
report
to
try
and
anticipate
the
questions
that
the
Secretary
of
State
will
need
to
answer.
So
how
was
the
process
run?
What
did
it
do?
Who
responded,
what
were
their
comments
etc,
and
the
Secretary
of
State
will
then
make
that
call
as
to
whether
that
that
they
believe
that
the
consultation
process
was
sufficiently
robust
to
enable
him
to
make
a
decision.
A
A
E
E
My
question
was
and
I
think
it
affects
all
of
us,
no
matter
what
reason
for
us
being
here:
Jeff
we're
not
talking
about
73%
of
people
approving
a
certain
thing,
we're
talking
about
73%
of
a
tiny,
tiny
figure
and
if
we
I'm
simply
asking
whether
the
numbers
that
we
have
in
front
of
us
allow
us
to
make
any
observations
at
all.
I'm
perfectly
happy
for
us
to
pass
this
process
on
to
the
Secretary
of
State,
for
him
I
think
to
to
decide
what
what
happens
from
now
on.
E
What
bothers
me
is
if
any
of
us
around
this
table,
including
you
Marvin,
were
to
make
any
observations
on
what
is
actually
a
figure
which
I
think
it's
very,
very
hard
to
justify
taking
any
response
from,
but
that
does
not.
You
know
that
really
is
not
condemning
anybody
and
validating
anything.
It's
simply
I'm
asking
your
guidance
as
to
whether
this
is
meaningful.
E
E
I'm
not
asking
for
these
numbers
to
be
higher.
We
are
simply
where
we
are
I'm,
simply
saying
that
I'm
asking
for
guidance.
What
are
we
somewhere
that
we
can
actually
make
a
pronouncement,
or
are
these
figures
in
fact
so
low
that
and
frankly,
that
they're,
not
demographically
representative?
And
if
you
look
at
the
figures,
the
the
the
certainly
geographically-
and
that
means
socio-economic
areas
and
super
up
retirees
are
in
the
areas.
E
K
Just
to
clarify
the
resolution
from
full
council
is
that
you
will
look
at
the
public
consultation
responses
and,
in
light
of
those
responses,
you'll
consider
whether
or
not
this
committee
wishes
to
make
any
further
representation
to
Secretary
of
State,
so
that
is
literally
what
you're
doing
tonight
you're
looking
at
those
responses
and
then
decide
it,
and
it
may
be
that
your
comment
is
that
there
were
very
few
responses.
It
may
be
that
your
comment
was,
it
was
overwhelming.
You
saw
support,
but
all
you're
doing
tonight
is
whether
or
not
you
want
to
make
additional
comments.
A
C
And
I
just
sort
of
followed
up
castle
in
some
ways.
What
you've
just
said
is
exactly
what
I
would
have
said,
which
is
I
can't
change
the
response
rate.
The
response
rate
is
the
response
rate
is
the
response
rate.
Shazia
is
clarified
for
the
committee.
What
it
is
that
we're
here
to
do,
and
from
a
from
a
perspective
of
it
in
terms
of
other
deals
that
have
gone
before
is
this
response
rate
out
of
kilter.
Therefore,
DC
LG
wouldn't
accept
it
informally.
A
I
just
add
to
that
I
think
there's!
No.
When
we've
been
involved
in
campaigns
at
once
or
another,
we
know
that
if
people
feel
strongly
on
an
issue
they
will
respond.
We
can't
always
control
which
way
they'll
respond,
but
if
they
feel
strongly
they'll
respond,
though
the
purpose
I
saw,
this
consultation
was
to
actually
identify
whether
there
was
a
real
strength
of
all
positioned
and
that
the
council
decision
was
totally
out
of
touch
with
with
residents
now.
A
What
in
fact,
we've
found
is
a
little
bit
from
a
small
number,
but
the
no
one
felt
strongly
enough
motivated
for
an
overwhelming
response,
but
the
response
endorsed
the
view
that
council
had
taken
so
I
think
we've
we've
got
a
bit.
We've
got
to
be
realistic
about
this
because,
as
someone
made
the
point
earlier,
this
isn't
an
opinion
poll
where
you
need
to
apply
statistical
analysis
to
say
whether
you've
got
a
big
enough
sample.
A
This
was
a
consultation
of
people
who
wanted
to
be
consulted
and
those
who
didn't
want
to
be
consulted
because,
whether
it
because
they
were
happy
with
the
status
quo
or
not
sufficiently
wearing
that
by
the
decision
that
they
were
never
going
to
respond
so
I
think
we
need
to
bear
that
in
mind.
Can
I
just
add
the
other
point.
The
shells
you
didn't
refer
to
there
was
the
we
said.
A
The
report
that
will
go
to
the
Secretary
of
State
does
not
say
anyway,
because
otherwise
all
we
are
doing
is
effectively
stating
the
obvious
which
is
already
presented
in
the
report
and
I,
don't
feel
that
adds
to
the
situation
and
I.
Don't
think
we're
marvin
sat
here,
hearing
our
debate
and
marvin
having
seen
the
report
anyway,
that
we
actually
need
to
write
to
Marv
into
this
to
tell
him
what
we're
thinking.
So
that
is.
That
is
that
that
is
my
suggestion
of
how
we
move
forward
Steve
and
then
Olli
and
then
Nicola
I,
agree.
A
I
Thank
you,
yeah,
look
forward
to
calling
you
before
audit
when
they
may.
The
was
the
kind
of
thing
yeah
I
was
I.
Do
agree
that
we
don't
need
a
full
council
on
this,
because
I
don't
see
any
point
in
it.
I
think
we
can
almost
certainly
finish
quite
earlier
than
we
had
anticipated
or
feared
this
evening
and
go
on
home
and
have
lovely
evenings
doing
whatever
fun
things
we
planned
on
doing
in
terms
of
the
kind
of
feedback
I
mean
I.
I
The
fact
that
they're
more
concerned
about
twenty
mile,
an
hour
zones
in
the
city
than
they
are
about
sorting
out
public
transport,
housing,
education
and
so
forth
across
the
whole
region
is,
is
also
quite
interesting,
I
suspect,
but
not
surprising
either,
but
I
think
it's
some,
although
that,
like
I,
said
I
have
a
couple
of
queries
about
whether
it
could
have
been
perhaps
in
future,
at
any
rate
that
there
could
be
more
responses.
I
think
it's
it's
it's
it's
a
decent
enough
outcome
and
it
probably
reflects
anyone
who
actually
cared
about
it.
B
I'm
just
a
bit
curious
about
something,
so
my
understanding
is
that
this
59
page
document
is
part
of
a
bigger
document
which
is
going
to
go
to
the
Secretary
of
State,
and
one
of
the
things
that
was
said
earlier
was
the
reason
it's
so
large
is
because
we're
not
sure
what
needs
to
go
in
the
report
that
we
want
to
cover
all
bases.
So
I'm.
Just
thinking
about
that
and
I
wondered.
How
did
we
know
which
questions
we
needed
to
put
in
the
consultation
documents
that
went
out
to
everybody?
Does
that.
C
F
Yeah
we've
been
discussing
what
we
need
to
do
with
DC
LG
officers
for
several
months,
and
so
we
are
fairly
clear
on
what
is
required.
We've
also
discussed
this
with
other
cities
going
through
the
same
process,
so
we
have
a
pretty
good
idea
of
what
is
required.
The
key
behind
it
is
three
statutory
tests
which
need
to
be
met,
and
these
are,
as
far
as
we're
aware,
well
met
by
what
we've
produced
in
this
report
and
what
which
we
carry.
A
Think
just
to
follow
on
and
I
saw
I
can
see
where
Nikhil
is
coming
from,
but
I.
What
Anna
said
very
clearly
was
that
the
report
had
to
cover
all
the
angles
that
were
needed,
that
the
Secretary
of
State
might
want
answers
to
which
was
different.
To
saying
we
don't
know
what
the
Secretary
of
State
wants,
but
I
understand
how
you
came
to
your
interpretation
of
the
position,
but
it's
simply
trying
to
be
both
embraces
to
ensure
that
there
is
no
potential
question
they
could
ask
of
us.
A
L
It's
just
the
lingering
thing,
I
think
that
one
of
the
takeaways,
which
is
not
necessary
to
do
with
issues
not
to
do
with
devolution,
specifically,
which
is
about
public
engagement
in
in
political
debate.
That's
not
just
the
council
officer
responsibilities,
that's
our
responsibility
too!
So
if
we
were
at
an
event
that
had
60
people
in
our
community,
did
we
say
to
them?
Hey?
M
But
Tom
I
was
just
going
to
say
that
I
think
only
hit
them
now
on
the
head
that
it's
it's
about.
The
people
interested
that
were
that
cared
about
it
did
respond
and
there
wasn't
a
big
force
made
and
on
the
unbalanced
people
were
in
favor
and
going
on
to
what
Marvin
just
said
that,
yes,
there
there
maybe
could
have
been
a
bit
more
done
to
promote
it,
especially
by
others,
counselors
but
I.
M
Think
on
the
whole,
it
was
relatively
well
promoted
in
terms
of
suggestions
about
improving
the
questions,
all
statistics
and
such
that's
definitely
something
that
we
we
should
take
into
account
if
a
future
thing
happens
and
ensuring
that
there's
more
time
and
such
and
what
you
said
right
at
the
beginning,
I
know
about
asking
what
people
want
not
not
about
the
processing.
What's
on
the
table,
I
think
we
should
start
on
that
as
soon
as
possible.
Really.
C
Counts:
look
elope
if
I'm,
if
I
might
just
respond,
I,
don't
want
you
to
feel
that
we
weren't
listening
to
your
comments
about
the
engagement.
We
will
think
about
what
you've
said.
We
will
learn.
That's
that's
part
of
what
we
have
to
do
all
the
time,
I'm
very
grateful
to
the
mayor
for
saying
that
it
wasn't
just
our
responsibility.
C
A
So
that's
something
that
we'll
that
referral
will
come
to
our
aid
for
September
meeting,
but
I
think
may
well
help
populate
some
of
what
we
do
and
that
fits
in
with
Marvin's
comments
as
well,
because
it
is
very
much
about
engagement
because
we
all
benefit
from
that,
and
it's
all
part
of
why
we're
here
and
what
we're
doing
can't
just
take
Helen.
Given
you
moved
heaven
and
earth
to
get
here.
N
Did
have
to
stop
myself
saying
something
on
social
media,
but
I
have
the
press
instant
pre-booker
seat,
but
they
were
I,
think
the
point
I
was
going
to
make
that
it
has
now
been
covered
it
by
Chris
is
the
it's
appointment.
Of
course
you
would
have
liked
far
more
people,
and
you
know
I,
look
at
my.
Would
it's
probably
the
lowest
response,
as
it
often
is,
and
we
did
make
a
specific
effort,
but
it
isn't
out
of
line
with
what
other
I
think
you
said,
cities.
N
Of
course
it's
not
all
cities,
local
authority
areas
that
are
going
for
devolution
deals
have
have
found
and
what
I
found
of
more
interest
really
than
they
just
a
straight
consultation
responses
was,
was
dropping
in
on
on
one
of
the
consultation
events
and
hearing
for
myself
what
people
said
and
a
lot
of
that.
Our
questions
that
we
can't
answer
yet
like
how
much
is
the
bureaucracy
for
all
this
going
to
cost?
Well,
we
don't
know
so
you
know
it
was.
It
was
good
to
engage
and
I.
N
Think
I
think
that
people
who
were
there
when
I
when
I
happen
to
be
there
and
could
engage
with
a
politician-
and
you
know
here-
have
had
those
points
listened
to
was
useful,
but
so
much
of
it
and
I
think
this
is
a
frustration
that
Marvin
and
I
have
shared
so
much
of
it.
We
won't
know
until
we
see
there,
the
white
smoke
go
up
or
not
in
in
the
autumn,
and
I
think
our
intentions
are
both
that
it
it's
a
much
more
meaningful.
N
The
local
transport
plan
we
had
92%
of
people
said
that
park-and-ride
was
the
best
way
forward
and
then
the
people
on
the
port
way
found
out
that
we
meant
opposite
their
houses
and
they
weren't.
Quite
so
keen.
So
you
know
it
just
shows
that
actually
it's
when
it
comes
down
to
your
your
own
back
garden,
that
that
you're
more
more
likely
to
take
an
interest,
and
our
job
is
to
interpret
all
of
this
about
how
it
does
it
impact
on
real
people's
everyday
lives.
Not
it's
not
just
big
stuff.
A
The
devolved,
Authority
and
actually,
if
we're
talking
about
public
involvement
once
we
start
coming
to
those
infrastructure
schemes
that
really
do
involve
them,
I
think
that
there
it
becomes
real
at
the
moment.
It's
actually
something
that
it
seems
very
distant
and
remote,
because
it's
a
load
of
politicians
talking
about
something
they
don't
understand,
but
once
it's
it's
actually
about
how
we
improve
the
infrastructure.
I
think
that
will
will
change.
My
sibling
I'll
sit
here
and
agree
for
the
rest
of
the
evening,
but
I.
A
A
Secondly,
that
we
agree
that
there
is
for
a
further
cattle
meeting
at.
Thirdly
that
we
agree.
There
is
no
need
for
us
to
add
any
comments,
but
that
we
would
with
that
and
that
and
that
Marvin
has
happen,
our
discussion
and
if
he
feels
there
is
anything
pertinent
from
that
discussion
that
he
will
note
it
and
and
add
it
to
anything.
He
submits
to
the
Secretary
of
State,
now
see
I
knew
and
I
didn't
know
any
agreement.
Disagreement
to
that
which
means.