►
From YouTube: Leeds City Council - Climate Emergency Advisory Committee (Consultative meeting) 28/07/21
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
D
How
about
that
I'll?
Take
me
headphones
out.
Does
that
work
that
works?
We'll
go
with
that
and
thank
you.
Everyone
I'll
go
through
some
of
the
introductions,
bits
and
then
see
what
we've
got
on
the
agenda
for
today
so
good
morning
and
welcome
I'm
councillor
carlill
standing
in
for
councillor
walt
shaw
today,
so
I'll
be
chairing
today's
meeting
typical
opening
remarks.
D
At
this
point,
I'd
like
to
clarify
that,
while
this
meeting
is
being
webcast,
live
to
enable
public
access,
it's
not
being
held
as
a
public
meeting
in
accordance
with
the
local
government
act.
1972
as
such,
this
is
a
remote
consultative
meeting
of
the
climate
emergency
advisory
committee
and
the
consultative
status
of
today's
meeting
means
that
some
of
the
usual
formanities
will
not
take
place
at
the
start
of
the
meeting.
D
So
hopefully,
that
all
makes
sense
with
everyone,
and
can
I
remind
members
to
send
their
microphones
to
mute
when
they're,
not
speaking,
and
to
use
the
hand
raising
function.
Please,
if
you
can,
I
will
try
and
look
out
for
everyone,
but
it
it
helps,
keep
everyone
in
the
correct
order.
So
my
apologies.
If
I
don't
come
in
the
order,
you
put
your
hands
up
I'll,
try
my
best
and
we'll
start
off
with
a
round
of
introductions.
D
D
I
think
I
got
all
the
elected
members
there,
so
shout
out,
if
I
haven't
heard
yet
in
the
meantime,
we'll
ask
officers
to
introduce
themselves
so
we'll
we'll
just
go
through
the
offices
of
the
of
the
committee
and
then
any
any
of
the
speakers.
If
you
can
introduce
yourself
when,
when
you
start
to
speak
so
polly.
D
A
D
D
D
I
don't
see
any
indications
of
those
so
we'll
leave
those
to
approve
at
the
next
formal
meeting.
Next
item
is
usually
the
open
forum,
but
I
understand
we've
had
no
submissions
to
the
open
forum
today.
So
we'll
move
on
to
item
five
working
groups
update
so
polly
you,
okay,
to
give
an
update
to
those.
F
F
D
Don't
see
any
indications
so
we're
gonna,
that's
good,
because
we've
got
quite
a
substantive
item
for
discussion
today,
so
we
should
be
able
to
have
a
really
good
discussion
on
it.
So,
as
members
all
know,
we've
been
having
themes
to
these
meetings
of
various
ones,
and-
and
this
month's
theme
is
funding
climate
action
so
really
important.
But
really
we
all,
I
think,
appreciate
the
scale
of
the
challenge.
We've
got
ahead
of
us,
but
we
do
need
to
pay
for
it
in
some
way
and
pay
for
the
work
that
needs
doing
so.
D
F
F
Right,
can
you
just
confirm
when
you
can
see
that
yeah,
okay?
So
really?
I
just
wanted
to
set
the
context,
so
we
are
in
a
position
where
actually
we
know
what
needs
to
be
done
when
we
talk
about
the
climate
emergency
most
of
the
technology,
not
necessarily
all
the
technological
solutions
exist
and-
and
there
are
two
kind
of
I
suppose-
key
barriers
now
in
terms
of
actually
delivery
and
the
first
one
is
our
focus
of
today,
which
is
around
finance,
and
this
this
data,
that's
up
on
the
screen.
F
The
moment
comes
from
the
climate
commission's
roadmap
and
talks
about
the
cost-effective
cost
neutral
and
technical
potential
and
the
level
of
investment
and
you're
looking
there.
If
you
have
those
three
figures
up
at
about
2.6
billion
a
year,
that's
required
and
which
is
far
short
from
what
we're
currently
spending
on
climate,
and
so
the
focus
of
today
is
really
starting
to
look
at.
Actually,
what
could
we
do
differently,
and
you
know
that
finance
does
exist
in
the
system,
but
it's
not
necessarily
being
spent
on
climate
emergency.
So
how?
F
How
do
we
start
to
turn
that
around
then?
The
second
key
barrier
is
what
the
last
working
group
we
talked
about
is
based
on
is
really
about
how
you
might
bring
everyone
along
with
you,
and
that
engagement
and
making
sure,
and
that
people
know
what
decisions
they
need
to
make
within
their
own
homes
when
they
start
to
make
changes.
F
F
Thank
you,
somebody
else
to
put
those
in,
and
so
just
in
terms
of
the
challenges
to
investment.
If
you
look
specifically
at
housing,
and
quite
so
quite
often,
the
focus
at
the
moment
is
really
around
grant
funding
and
how
we
help
social
housing
and
and
how
and
the
private
sort
of
the
owner
occupied
and
that
sort
of
private
landlord
gets
left
behind.
F
And
so
really
that's
one
of
the
key
gaps
that
we
want
to
talk
about
today
and
one
of
the
key
things
that
rufus
will
focus
on
in
his
presentation
about
how
we
start
to
do
that.
And
there
is
some
element
of
policy.
That's
needed
to
support
that,
and
but
there
are
also
some
alternative
finance
mechanisms
that
are
required.
F
So
when
we
talk
about
finance
in
the
city,
so
this
is
a
study
that
shows
how
savings
vary
across
the
different
income
quartiles.
So
somebody
who's
earning
in
the
top
20
of
the
population,
actually
saving
about
22
000
pounds
a
year
and
the
average
is
about
2
160
pounds
a
year.
If
we
just
put
that
into
a
lead
context
that
actually
works
out
about
773
and
million
pounds
that
we're
saving
as
a
as
a
city
in
a
year-
and
so
that's
sitting
there
in
bank
account.
F
So
what
we're
looking
for
is
alternative
ways
for
people
to
invest
that
money
than
maybe
the
traditional
and
what
we've
also
seen
during
cave.
It
is
actually
that
change
in
inc
in
savings
and
quite
interesting
to
see.
In
january
to
march
we
saw
an
increase
of
8.9,
and
then
that
went
up
to
25.9
in
april
to
july,
and
so
we've
seen
a
real
change
in
spending
patterns,
for
obvious
reasons
and
and
something
that
is
unlikely
to
carry
on.
F
But
again
it
shows
that
there's,
probably
more
money
sitting
in
savings
accounts
at
the
moment
than
you
would
normally
expect
and
again
we're
seeing
how
how
much
money
is
actually
in
shares
within
the
uk
and
invested
in
uk
companies.
So
I
think
it's
just
interesting
context
to
know
you
know.
Obviously,
people
are
investing,
and
what
I
suppose
we're
talking
about
here
today,
is
how
we
change
the
way
that
people
invest
and
so
we're
not
asking
people
to
invest
additional
money
or
differently,
but
we're
trying
to
show
that
there
are
alternative
ways.
F
G
F
How
does
that
bond
work
alongside
some
of
the
community
bond
offers
that
are
available,
and
so
just
to
give
a
bit
of
an
introduction
to
carl
who's
coming
to
speak
after
ruthless
is
really
just
to
say
that
the
uk
100
local
partnerships
and
innovate
uk
have
launched
a
large
national
campaign,
encouraging
local
authorities
to
release
a
community
or
a
municipal
finance
investment,
climate
bonds
and
leading
up
to
cop
26
and
carl
works
for
the
chief
exec
of
abundance.
He's
mentioned
in
that
third
paragraph,
and
so
it's
been
a
key
part
of
that.
F
And
so
what
we're
saying
is
there's
that
current
gap
and
at
the
moment
there
are
investors
out
there.
We've
shown
that
in
kind
of
the
early
slides
about
the
amount
of
money,
that's
there
in
the
economy
and
what
rufus
will
talk
us
through
is
actually
how
do
you
get
that
economy
to
that
that
finance
to
match
the
projects
that
we
actually
need
to
deliver?
F
H
H
Thank
you
for
the
invitation
to
speak,
I'm
going
to
try
and
cover
quite
a
lot
in
in
20
minutes
roughly,
so
I
may
skip
over
some
bits,
I'm
very
happy
to
share
the
slides
afterwards.
Stop
me
during
or
after,
however,
you
want
to
want
to
do
q
a
or
for
any
clarifications
I'll
talk
about
who
we
are
very
briefly
how
we
operate
the
kind
of
projects
we
get
involved
in
and
some
learnings
from
the
work
we've
done.
H
I'm
gonna
cover
three
bits
of
good
news
and
then
talk
about
three
components
that
we
think
make
up:
city
climate
finance,
but
I'm
going
to
try
and
get
to
the
the
key
bit
that
polly
mentioned
to
talk
to
use
existing
building
retrofit
as
an
example
for
some
of
the
stuff
I'm
talking
about,
and
if
you
get
time
to
talk
about
some
of
the
governance
challenges
that
go
along
with
the
with
the
funding
challenge,
and
so
very
very
briefly.
We
are
a
not-for-profit
financial
advisory
firm.
H
We
work
collaboratively
with
cities
to
try
and
think
about
the
challenges
they
have
design
structures
by
which
they
can
be
financed,
determine
funding
gaps
and
then
try
and
source
solutions
to
fund
those.
We
are
regulated
by
the
fca
as
a
fundraiser
and
we
use
what
we
call
the
deal
engine.
I
won't
go
into
lots
of
detail
on
that,
and
the
way
that
we
work
is,
we
would
say,
is
systemic.
H
So
while
we
bring
finance
and
funding
to
the
table
that
being
our
sort
of
core
skill
set,
I
think
a
lot
of
the
success
that
we've
had
today
has
been
through
collaboration
with
other
organizations,
particularly
around
things
like
citizen
engagement.
How
do
you
bring
communities
with
you
on
this
on
this
journey
and
that
diversity
of
a
range
of
viewpoints
and
skill
sets?
So
you
get
not
single
domain
technical
solutions
but
systemic
solutions
to
the
to
the
issues?
H
H
H
So
just
picking
up
one
thing
that
polly
was
talking
about
earlier,
we're
doing
some
work
with
vienna
on
a
city
token
system
to
to
encourage
active
travel,
the
more
you
you
cycle
and
walk,
you
earn
tokens
which
give
you
access
to
the
cities,
museums,
art,
galleries,
etc.
So
it's
a
kind
of
cultural
incentive
for
active
travel,
just
just
a
sort
of
very
quick
bit
of
context.
H
I
think
everyone
understands
the
scale,
but
just
to
take
a
a
an
example:
a
city
of
half
a
million
people
or
have
roughly
200
000,
plus
dwellings,
if
you
think
about
really
full
carbon,
reducing
targeted,
retrofit
you're,
looking
at
something
like
a
five
billion
pound
cost.
To
do
that-
and
this
is
you
know,
typically
20
to
40
percent
of
a
a
city's
co2
emissions.
H
It's
it's
a
significant
amount
of
money,
and
that's
you
know
that
is
both
making
buildings
more
thermally,
efficient,
so
you're
reducing
energy
requirements,
but
also
maximizing
energy
generation
potential,
so,
whether
that's
heat
source
or
or
solar,
pv
generation.
It's
it's
a
significant
cost
and
there
is
an
urgency
to
get
going
on
this
right
now.
You
know
you
need
to
start
spending
today
to
to
get
to
where
we
need
to
get
to
by
2030
and
beyond.
If
you
add
in
mobility
and
the
other
interventions
required.
H
This
is
a
much
bigger
problem
than
a
normal
annual
revenue.
Budget
of
a
city
can
can
cope
with
which
I'm
I'm
sure,
you're
you're.
All
very
aware
of
there
are
three
pieces
of
good
news,
though
the
first
is
that
this
isn't
just
a
cost
problem,
so
so
sometimes
the
direct
financial
returns
can
be
challenging.
H
When
you
combine
all
that
together,
we
think
there
is
actually
a
return
for
spending
this
money,
and
that
means
that
these
don't
necessarily
just
have
to
be
thought
of
as
costs
that
need
to
be
funded,
but
they
are
investments
with
returns,
and
if
we
can
harness
those
returns,
we
can
bring
in
finance
to
pay
for
at
least
part
of
that
upfront
cost.
So,
switching
from
that
funding,
mindset
to
investments
mindset
is
important,
I'll
come
back
to,
and
the
second
piece
of
good
news
is
that
this
isn't
just
a
carbon
problem.
H
Civic
legitimacy
is
critical
where
there
is
full
and
deep
citizen
engagement,
bringing
communities
on
the
journey
so
doing
this
with
not
two
is
is
incredibly
important
and
then
the
third
piece
of
good
news
and
polly
touched
on
this
in
her
slides
is:
there
is
a
huge
shift
going
through
the
financial
sector.
It
started
in
europe
and
the
uk.
It's
now
starting
to
spread
to
the
us
investment
banks.
Asset
managers
have
traditionally
only
focused
on
returns.
H
You
know
you
want
your
pension
pot
to
be
as
big
as
it
can
be
when
you,
when
you
retire,
but
now
individual
asset
owners,
whether
that's
pension
fund
holders,
insurance
policy
holders
etc.
Savers
who
are
providing
their
assets
are
increasingly
demanding.
Those
funds
are
not
just
invested
for
a
return,
but
also
for
positive
impact.
There's
over
50
trillion
dollars
of
assets
that
are
signed
up
to
the
principles
of
responsible
investing.
H
Now
there
is
inevitably
some
posturing
and
greenwashing
within
that,
but
the
challenge
that
those
asset
managers
now
have
is
how
can
they
demonstrate
to
their
customers?
They
are
investing
with
impact.
There
is
a
real
demand
to
be
able
to
invest
where
there
is
real
impact
in
decarbonization,
and
some
more
progressive
asset
managers
are
realizing.
That's
not
just
about
you
know
deciding
which
listed
companies
you
invest
in
it's
about
how
you
engage
with
the
public
sector,
where
a
lot
of
the
real
asset
work
is
going
to
have
to
happen,
and
these
three
points
are
really.
H
You
know
what
we
work
on.
How
do
we
generate
pipeline
of
investable
projects?
How
do
you
design
projects
with
an
investment
return
mindset?
How
do
you
aggregate
for
scale,
because
often
these
investors
need
to
invest
at
significant
scale?
They
can't
look
at
small
projects
and
how
do
you
standardize
and
work
on
the
reporting
from
these
projects
so
that
impact
money
can
demonstrate
the
impact
that
it's
had
to
investors,
so
innovative
finance?
I
I
don't
really
like
the
phrase.
H
To
be
perfectly
honest,
it
suggests
there's
some
sort
of
dark
art
of
new
financial
magic.
That's
going
to
magically
solve
all
of
our
problems.
Unfortunately,
that's
not
the
case.
There
are
some
new
ways
to
raise
finance,
but
it's
much
more
than
that
and
as
a
simplification,
we
think
of
three
areas.
So
the
first
is
is
going
out
and
raising
money
for
existing
requirements.
We
have
a
project
with
a
funding
gap.
How
can
we
raise
money
to
pay
for
it
when
we
work
in
this
space?
H
The
u.s
has
a
very
well
developed
municipal
bond
segment
where
local
authorities
effectively
cities
are
raising
money
directly
from
investors
and
those
are
increasingly
green
city
bonds
so
where
the
money
is
ring,
fenced
for
net
zero
transition
or
other
other
green
projects.
In
theory,
that
should
have
a
better
cost
of
borrowing,
not
necessarily
actually
the
case
in
practice
at
the
moment,
but
that's
that's
where
it's
moving
to,
and
so
there
is
some
potential
for
that.
But
clearly
an
authority
can
only
carry
so
much
general
debt
and
the
public
works.
H
Loan
board
is
already
a
very
competitive
lender,
so
it's
not
necessarily
the
full
solution.
There
are
then
performance
bonds,
which
are
the
same
thing,
with
a
subtle
difference
in
that
the
cost
of
debt
that
you're
paying
back
to
the
to
the
lender
is
explicitly
linked
to
the
outcomes.
So
if
you
decarbonize
by
a
certain
amount,
you
pay
a
lower
interest
rate,
for
example,
and
then
there's
project
financing.
So
a
good
example
would
be.
H
How
do
you
finance
the
electrification
of
a
bus
system,
and
usually
this
is
about
structuring
projects
so
that
a
large
upfront
capital
expenditure
build?
We
need
to
buy
a
load
of
new
buses,
and
batteries
can
be
turned
into
opex
over
the
life
of
the
of
those
assets
so
that
it
fits
into
the
annual
budget
cycle
matches
capital
outflow
to
the
benefit.
So
things
like
reduced
fuel
and
maintenance
costs
that
can
ultimately
pay
for
that
that
finance.
H
H
But
the
third
area
is
probably
the
least
tangible
and
in
our
view,
it's
the
most
important.
That's
what
I'm
going
to
concentrate
on
it
comes
back
to
how
do
we
create
projects
in
the
public
sector
in
the
first
place
that
are
fit
to
be
invested
by
the
private
sector
and
given
the
huge
amount
of
money
that
we
need
to
raise?
It's
about
designing
the
responses
of
cities,
climate
change
in
a
way
that
maximizes
the
potential
to
be
funded.
H
How
can
we
work
directly
in
a
collaborative
way
with
teams
of
city
staff,
building
capacity
and
capability
around
some
of
these
problems,
whether
that's
built
environment,
retrofit,
new
development,
green
infrastructure,
et
cetera-
and
you
know
this
is
about
dealing
with
often
misalignment
of
incentives
and
agency
issues.
So
how?
How
do
you
connect
the
returns
with
the
initial
upfront
spend?
So
a
lot
of
these
problems
or
challenges
create
long-term
benefits
could
be
energy
savings
over
decades
it
could
be,
as
I
said,
better
healthcare
outcomes.
H
These
sort
of
payback
periods
fit
really
well
with
things
like
pension
fund
investment
profiles,
and
we
think
this
is
one
of
the
really
important
things
for
us
to
consider.
You
know
the
uk
asset
management
industry
manages
9.1
trillion
pounds
worth
of
assets,
there's
a
huge
pool
of
money
out
there.
Uk
domestic
household
saving
currently
is
about
50
billion.
So
again,
that's
a
large
amount
of
money,
not
quite
the
same
scale,
but
very
significant
and
can
be
really
tapped
into
with
things
like
the
abundance
program.
H
What
I
mean
by
rethinking
project
design
if
we
take
green
infrastructure
first
and
so
milan,
a
city
we've
been
working
with
1.9
million
people
is
in
the
process
of
planning
to
plant
and
then
maintain
three
million
trees
in
the
city
centre,
so
huge
urban
reforestation
project,
considerable
cost,
but
significant
benefits
and
there's
a
lot
of
evidence
around
the
impact
on
mental
and
physical
health
of
inhabitants,
improving
things
like
the
prescription
of
of
antidepressants
drops.
If
you
live
within,
you
know
certain
number
of
meters
of
tree
density,
etc,
etc.
H
Water
runoff
and
flood
mitigation
is
abated.
If
you
plant
trees
that
impacts
water
companies,
a
water
company
has
operational
cost
of
managing
water
flow.
If
that
water
flow
is
reduced,
their
costs
go
down
so
getting
the
water
companies
to
co-invest
with
cities
to
to
plant
trees
which
we're
starting
to
see
happen
across
the
uk.
Real
estate
prices
go
up,
propensity
to
spend
in
commercial
districts
improves
if
you
plant,
trees,
air
conditioning
costs
are
reduced
through
anti-heat
island
effects.
H
So
how
can
we
think
of
a
tree
planting
program
as
a
utility
and
an
investment
program?
How
can
we
leverage
data
technologies
to
track
and
measure
those
benefits
and
then
engage
with
people
who
care
about
those
benefits
to
help
co-fund
them
as
preventative
measures,
and
how
can
we
engage
with
communities
to
to
maximize
that
impact?
The
second
example:
I'm
going
to
talk
about
is
building
retrofit
there's
a
huge
price
tag.
I've
talked
about
previously.
H
There
are
29
million
homes
in
the
uk,
so
I
was
talking
about
200
000
at
a
cost
of
5
billion.
You
can
scale
up
the
math.
It's
a
lot
of
money,
it's
in
the
sort
of
quarter
to
half
a
trillion
for
the
uk
overall,
and
it's
a
great
example
of
two
key
problems
we
encounter
all
the
time.
First
is
the
agency
issue,
so
the
current
model
for
achieving
deep
building
retrofit
is
to
believe
that
individual
private
owners
have
the
responsibility
to
undertake
the
work,
and
you
can
understand
why
that's
the
the
starting
point.
H
The
agency
issue
is
that
the
building
owner
who
who
has
to
make
the
capital
investment,
we're
talking
20
25,
30
000
pounds
to
do
really
deep.
Retrofit
per
average
residential
house
doesn't
feel
ownership
of
the
returns
they
get
because
those
returns
are
small
energy
savings
which
only
really
add
up,
if
you
think
about
them
for
20
to
30
years
and
unless
you're
committed
to
living
in
your
house
for
30
plus
years
or
you
believe,
the
house
price
is
going
to
significantly
respond
to
that
investment
with
which
the
evidence
is
pretty
limited.
H
You
don't
you
don't
feel
that
ownership
of
that
return,
and
so
you
don't
make
the
spend
and
globally
we're
seeing
essentially
zero
take-up
of
deep
retrofit.
I
mean
the
uk
rate
is
under
0.3
percent
of
houses
per
year,
which
is
going
to
take
us
far
too
long.
The
second
issue,
then,
is
one
of
of
returns,
so
the
overall
society
returns
for
doing
retrofit,
I
think,
are
very
good.
There
is
lots
of
evidence
about
improved
housing,
leads
to
much
better
healthcare
outcomes
that
reduces
the
cost
required
in
the
healthcare
system.
H
There's
improved
productivity
because
people
are
healthier.
Air
quality
goes
up
the
better
places
to
live,
etc.
There's
lots
of
positive
positivity,
but
a
lot
of
those
returns
are
distributed
across
society.
The
actual
pure
cash
flow
returns,
which
is
energy
savings
from
a
from
an
investment
perspective.
Those
returns
are
pretty
poor.
If
you,
if
we
look
over
a
30-year
payback
period,
you
don't
get
your
capital
back,
let
alone
a
return.
H
What
sets
of
interventions
to
choose
and
then
manage
lots
of
different
contractors
to
do
that,
work
all
to
yield
long-term
savings
that
aren't
that
attractive
if
we
go
beyond
superficial
decarbonization
and
which
they
probably
won't
even
be
living
in
the
house
to
realize.
So
it's
no
surprise
that
this
model
of
honomer,
home
owner
subsidy
and
cheap
finance
isn't
yielding
results,
and
it's
also
regressive.
H
Most
of
the
finance
effort
around
this
space,
uk
and
globally
focuses
on
lending
and
subsidy.
How
can
we
lend
money
to
homeowners
so
they
can
move
their
properties
towards
net
zero
through
a
mix
of
renewable
generation
demand
mitigation,
and
when
we
don't
see
retrofit
rates
accelerating
we
throw
subsidies
at
them
to
try
and
change
it.
H
That's
going
to
be
part
of
the
answer,
and
certainly
for
the
able
to
pay
section
of
of
of
society.
That
may
be
part
of
the
answer
may
need
to
be
part
of
the
answer,
but
we
don't
think
it'll
get
us
where
we
need
to
get
to.
So
we
we've
come
up
with
a
a
potential
solution
of
something
that's
very
different
from
lending
we
call
green
neighbours
as
a
service,
so
there
are
some
key
reasons
why
lending
doesn't
work?
H
The
agency
problem,
I
talked
about
scale,
29
million
homes,
23
million
of
which
are
estimated
to
require
some
form
of
energy
retrofit.
Even
if
you
put
on
low
budget
on,
as
I
said,
that's
quarter
of
a
trillion
pounds
could
be
double
that
to
really
decarbonize
we're
talking
to
someone
at
treasury.
Recently,
who
said
the
two
choices
are
on
the
table
at
the
moment:
either
we
treasury
foots
the
bill.
I
we
pay
for
it
through
subsidy
or
we
use
policy
to
force
homeowners
to
foot
the
bill.
H
You
can't
sell
your
house
if
your
epc
is
d
or
below
either
way
we
bankrupt
the
country,
so
neither
of
those
particularly
attractive
options.
We
need
to
find
ways
to
engage
institutional
impact
finance
at
a
significant
scale
and
that
isn't
going
to
be
lending
house
by
house.
You've
talked
to
a
pension
fund,
it's
hard
to
get
them
to
engage
in
anything
less
than
50
million,
and
so
talking
about
20
000.
For
a
house
isn't
going
to
work,
as
I
said,
the
cash
economics
aren't
very
attractive.
H
H
Fundamentally,
these
are
place-based
measures
and
that's
one
of
the
things
we
think
a
lot
of
policy
really
struggles
with
a
lot
of
policy
is
driven
by
individual
technology
domains.
Let's
create
a
subsidy
for
heat
pumps,
for
example.
If
we
start
thinking
at
a
neighborhood
scale,
there's
an
awful
lot
more.
You
can
do.
Yes,
you
can
retrofit
houses,
but
you
can
also
invest
between
houses,
so
you
can
incorporate
green
infrastructure.
H
For
example,
you
can
think
about
community
regeneration
investment
in
community
assets
in
civic
assets
that
change
transport
behavior
by
creating
assets
closer
to
where
people
live
again,
not
something
that
individual
house
by
house
lending
can
unlock
and
then
finally,
that
point
about
regression
the
regressive
nature
of
individual
lending.
So
the
opportunity
is
to
go
into
a
far
broader,
more
holistic
and
systemic
set
of
investments
at
a
neighborhood
scale
that
yes
includes
retrofit
and
energy
generation,
but
also
includes
mobility
services
to
assets,
community
assets
and
green
infrastructure.
H
As
I've
said,
we
think
an
approach
to
doing
this
is
to
develop
a
solution
that
moves
away
from
distributing
capital
outwards
to
homeowners
in
small
increments
to
one
that
focuses
instead
in
aggregating
parts
of
the
energy
savings
centrally.
So
you
can
fund
a
central
agency
to
do
city
retrofit
and
greening
as
a
public
service
so
community
by
community
approach.
It
improves
the
overall
economics
because
you're
procuring
at
scale
rather
than
the
individual
household
level.
It
allows
a
much
more
systemic
approach.
H
Just
looking
at
retrofit,
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
all
of
the
mechanics
of
these
these
next
couple
of
slides,
but
I
just
wanted
to
put
them
up
to
show.
There
is
some
substance
to
what
we
were
talking
about.
So
this
is
a
central
agency
that
we
we
fund
with
with
external
debt.
So
that's
part,
grant
funding
part
impact
finance
from
from
the
likes
of
pension
funds.
H
Again
super
complicated
slide,
I'm
not
going
to
go
into
all
of
the
mechanics
of
this.
There
are
some
links
at
the
end
of
the
of
the
deck
that
go
through
in
more
detail,
but
allowing
having
a
centralized
funding
model
allows
us
to
engage
with
multiple
different
sources
of
finance.
So,
yes,
there
are
sources
of
repayable
capital,
so
think
about
pension
fund
money,
for
example,
that
could
be
local
authority
pension
schemes.
H
H
There
is
also
thinking
that's
required
around
stewardship
and
and
government
governance
around
this.
This
is
10
to
20
30-year
work.
It
doesn't
fit
neatly
with
a
typical
political
cycle,
setting
up
governance
structures
in
a
way
that
avoid
these
programs
being
derailed
by
politics
is,
is
critical
to
their
success
and
and
ensuring
that
you
know
this
funding
can't
sit
on
local
government
balance
sheet.
H
The
numbers
are
too
big,
but
we
do
need
local
governance,
alignment
and
and
some
level
of
control,
so
thinking
about
the
governance
structures
that
that
help
management
and
how
that
we
engage
with
with
with
the
the
communities
to
really
make
it
a
legitimate
approach
to
drive
it
forward.
I
guess,
if
I'm
gonna
leave
you
with
some
key
things,
the
investment
mindset
is
really
important.
How
do
we
think
about
returns
as
a
way
of
driving
funding?
You
can't
do
this
to
people.
D
Thank
you
for
that
and
I
think,
as
there
was
a
lot
of
detail
there
and
some
some
really
useful
details,
I
think
if
we
come
with
any
questions
to
rufus,
first
we'll
kind
of
try
and
hold
away
from
the
debate
and
the
discussion
about
how
it
might
work
in
leeds
until
after
all,
the
speakers
but
obviously
there'll,
be
points.
People
want
to
pick
up
on
that,
but
there's
some
really
interesting
bits
around.
I
mean
I
think,
looking
at
the
scale
of
it
and
it's
not
often
in
local
government
finance.
D
We
start
talking
about
trillions
of
pounds.
Very
often
is
it,
but
looking
at
the
scale,
it's
clear
that
everything's
kind
of
part
of
the
answer
and
everything
needs
to
be
part
of
the
answer.
So
there's
a
lot
to
unpick
there.
When
we
come
through
councillor
buckley
did
you
want
to
come
in
with
a
question.
C
Well,
yes,
chair
and
when
you
say
a
question
with
your
indulgence,
I've
got
several
questions.
I
can
either
well.
I
hardly
know
where
to
start
really
so
the
only
place
to
start
is
at
the
beginning,
and
I
think
obviously,
a
lot
of
works
have
gone
into
this
and-
and
I
don't
wish
to
be
in
any
way
rude.
C
C
C
C
If
you
are
optimistic,
it
would
mitigate
the
increase
in
health
costs.
Health
costs
are
going
up
all
the
time
because
people
now
routinely
live
to
1995
and
so
on,
and
this
is
a
problem
across
the
western
world
that
the
money
having
to
be
spent
on
healthcare
is
therefore
proportioned
at
the
law.
That
trend
will
go
on.
So
if
this
mitigates
the
increase,
we're
still
left
with
the
original
problem
of
higher
health
costs,
household
savings
can
be
tapped
into
it's
their
savings,
their
savings
they
own
it
change
the
way.
People
invest
it.
C
What
about
if,
in
theory,
a
huge
amount
of
this
wall
of
money
was
was
invested
in
these
things,
what
would
happen
to
the
stock
market
where
we
all
depend
on
the
stock
market
for
our
pensions?
Those
of
us
who
have
not
spent
in
our
entire
life
times
earning
money
from
the
state
that
would
go
down
because
there
would
necessarily
be
less
money
there.
C
Now
I
can't
see
that
being
a
vote
winner
would
householders
be
forced
to
retrofit
their
homes,
and
this
word
came
in
again
asking
homeowners.
It's
been
a
very
fashionable
word
in
the
last
two
years.
We
ask
people
to
do
things
and
when
it
actually
means
we're
telling
them
to
do
it,
and
reference
was
made
to
bankrupting
the
country
well,
it
would
and
we'd
end
up
like
zimbabwe
and
venezuela
with
so
much
inflation.
We
couldn't
pay
for
any
of
it.
There
we
are
chair.
Thank
you.
C
D
Thank
you
neil.
I
think
there's
obviously
a
lot
a
lot
of
detail,
a
lot
of
detail
in
there,
so
I
think
we'll
we'll
ask
rufus
to
come
back
on
a
couple
of
them.
I
mean
there's
a
couple
of
points
I
can
come
in
with
just
my
own
reflections
on
that.
I
mean
you'll
have
heard
me
saying
full
council
at
one
point
that
when
we're
talking
about
investment
in
cycle
infrastructure,
for
instance,
reports
have
shown
that
one
every
pound
invested
in
cycle
infrastructure
saves
the
nhs
four
pounds.
D
So
I
think
it's
in
that
scale
of
the
return
that
we
can
get
on
healthcare
costs.
So
I
I
do
take
it.
Healthcare
costs
are
increasing,
but
I
think
there
does
need
to
be
a
way
of
decreasing
those
and
continuing
to
fund
them,
rather
rather
than
just
allowing
them
to
increase,
but
also
just
on
the
point
of
some
of
the
pension
funds.
D
I
mean
I've
had
my
pension
invested
in
an
ethical
fund
as
opposed
to
the
standard
fund
over
time
and
mine's
grown
more
than
some
of
the
more
standard
funds
over
that
period
of
time.
So
I
think,
there's
not
there's
not
necessarily
that
disconnect
between
what
could
be
an
ethical
fund
and
and
whether
that
investment
is
going
to
increase
in
the
same
amount
of
something
else.
But
I
don't
rufus.
Do
you
want
to
pick
some
of
those
up
before
we
bring
some
others
in.
H
H
Pensions
are
only
going
to
invest
in
these
kind
of
schemes
if
they
do
see
that
potential.
For
that
two
three,
four
percent
annualized
return-
and
you
know
a
large
chunk
of
the
uk
pension
assets-
are
currently
invested
in
guilt
and
they're
earning
zero
point.
Something
percent
return.
So
there
are
the
the
kind
of
return
you
have
to
give
in
order
to
create
that
compounding
growth
in
all
of
our
pension
schemes.
H
H
H
There's
some
really
good
work
being
done
in
bristol
university,
putting
numbers
around
lots
of
different
negative
components
of
poor
housing,
and
what
that
you
know
the
hospitalization
rates
and
also
lack
of
productivity
is
not
just
when
people
are
hospitalized,
but
when
people
are
unable
to
work
and
putting
some
some
cost
value
to
that,
I
think
there
is
a
there's
been
a
a
quote
that
every
10
billion
spent
on
retrofit
would
save
the
nhs
1.4
to
2
billion
per
annum.
Now
you
can
question
some
of
those
assumptions,
but
there
is.
H
There
is
a
real
saving,
at
least
against
future
cost,
whether
that
leads
to
overall,
less
increase
or
an
absolute
decline
is
debatable.
So
a
lot
of
the
points
raised
absolutely
agree
with
this
is
about
finding
alternative
sources
of
paying
for
this
work
that
aren't
requiring
individuals
to
become
indebted
or
the
government
to
spend
more
than
it
can
raise
through
taxes
and
taking
the
cash
based
returns.
Things
like
energy
savings
to
do
part
of
that.
When
we
talk
about
non-cash
returns,
the
health
benefits
we're
not
expecting
individuals
to
invest
to
achieve
those
absolutely.
H
Why
would
they?
But
there
are
some
very
real
examples
where,
for
example,
water
companies
are
contributing
to
local
council
tree
planting
budgets
because
it
is
reducing
the
amount
of
water
flowing
through
their
drainage
infrastructure,
their
operational
cost
of
processing
and
cleaning
that
water
goes
down.
The
capital
cost
of
maintaining
those
assets
goes
down
and
therefore
they're
quite
happy
to
contribute,
and-
and
there
are
there
is
lots
of
philanthropic
money
looking
for
ways,
for
example,
to
alleviate
fuel
poverty.
H
If
you
have
a
way
of
improving
housing
in
deprived
areas
and
reducing
fuel
costs,
you
can
absolutely
turn
this
into
a
scheme
to
do
that
and
capture
some
of
those
those
funds
to
come
into
a
blended
structure
to
to
deliver
it.
It
is
complicated,
stuff
totally
appreciate
that,
but
it's
an
incredibly
complex
problem
which
we're
trying
to
solve.
D
C
Different
reaction
to
neil
that
was
actually,
I
thought,
the
best
and
most
enjoyable
presentation.
I've
heard
in
40
years
at
local
government
service
actually
got
to
grips
with
the
issues
and
showed
real
understanding,
something
afraid,
neil,
you
didn't
show
neil
we're
on
a
boat.
It's
going
to
sink,
at
which
point
arguments
about
how
much
it's
going
to
cost
to
put
the
patches
on
is
a
bit
irrelevant
and
that's
the
way
I
approach
this
problem.
H
If
we
can
fund
10
that's
better
than
zero,
I
actually
think
we
could
do
30
40
50.
Potentially
we
need
to
work
through
these
pilots
to
work
out
whether
that
is
achievable,
but
the
goal
here
is
to
avoid
that.
I
think
there
are
some
more
micro
answers
to
that
question.
So,
for
example,
if
you
do
off-street
ev
charging,
you
get
charge
v80
at
five
percent.
If
it's
on
street,
it's
20
that
doesn't
make
any
sense
at
all.
So
there
are.
H
E
I've
got
a
number
a
number
of
points,
but
can
I
just
preface-
and
this
is
not
meant
as
a
criticism-
I
personally
would
have
been
able
to
probably
debate
better
if
we'd
seen
the
slides
in
advance-
and
I
could
have
done
some
preparation,
but
that's
not
a
criticism.
That's
just
in
retrospect,
hindsight's,
absolutely
great.
So
the
issues
that
I've
got.
I
think
I
think
it
was
slide.
25.
E
You
talked
about
how
this
model
was
going
to
be
paid
back.
If
I
understand
it
correctly,
if
my
monthly
cost
for
my
fuel
was
a
hundred
pounds
to
make
it
easy
was
100
pounds
and
I
introduced
behavioral
change
of
my
own,
which
saved
me
10
pounds
say
by
reducing
my
put
my
thermostat
down
by
one
degree
as
an
example
of
a
measure
that
you
could
take
for
behavior
and
my
bill
then
came
down
to
50.
E
Do
you
get
50
pounds
or
do
you
get
40
pounds
as
your
as
your
return
based
on
the
well
my
understanding
of
25,
then
we've
got
the
profit.
Is
there
if
a
local
authority
was
going
to
be
signing
up
to
any
of
those?
Do
you
think
there's
any
way
that
the
local
authority
could
share
in
any
profit
over
a
certain
level,
because
we've
looked
at
that
in
one
or
two
other
schemes
within
the
council?
E
So
you
know
that
we
we
don't
maybe
get
affordable
housing,
but
if
they
reach
an
x
a
level
of
profit
share.
We
then
want
hours
here
so
that
we
can
invest
in
it.
Is
there
any
chance
of
that?
What's
the
risk
of
some
people
losing
their
capital,
their
capital,
because
some
people
are
risk
averse
investors
and
soon,
as
someone
says,
your
capital
is
at
risk,
they
back
off
it.
So
is
there
any
possibility
of
that?
E
Who
would
decide
on
the
investment
priorities,
the
funding
organization,
or
would
it
be,
in
our
case,
lead
city
council?
If
lead
city
council,
you
would
you
would
then
assess
the
risk
and
say
yes,
we'll
give
you
the
money
for
these
list
of
priorities,
or
do
we
just
borrow
the
money
x
amount
and
we
then
decide
what
we
do
with
the
money.
E
What
do
you
do
about
different
governance
regimes
in
various
governments?
You
know
we've
got
you
know
without
bringing
brexit
up
too
much.
You've
got
europe
has
got
one
way
of
doing
it.
America's
got
another
way
of
doing
it.
Britain
is
trying
to
do
it
somewhere,
different
there's.
No
doubt
china
do
things
differently.
So
what
do
we
do
about
all
these
different
international
governance
regimes?
E
Now
in
leeds,
we
have
a
very
successful
treasury
function,
who
don't
always
use
the
public
loans
board
to
get
money
for
the
council,
we
use
our
own
skills
that
we've
got,
you
know.
So
what
happens?
If
we
come
up
against
competition,
you
know
we
can
actually
get
our
funding
cheaper
and
yet
we've
signed
an
agreement
with
yourselves.
How
would
we
deal
with
that
and
then
finally,
who
owns
this
model?
E
Because,
let's
say
you
sold
us
on
this,
but
then
the
brains
that
we've
got
within
our
treasury
department
can
see
a
better
way
of
improving
on
it,
improving
the
returns
etc.
Do
you
own
the
proprietary
or
could
leads
develop
its
own
model
thereafter.
Thanks
hope.
I
know
that
might
sound
a
bit
boring,
but
to
me
they
are
important
issues.
Super.
H
H
So
it
would
typically
be
in
a
separate
vehicle.
When
I
talked
about
the
governance
challenge
is
exactly
what
you
talked
about.
It's
how
you
create
a
supervisory
capability
over
that
entity,
which
you
would
you
would
you'd
have
to
you'd
structure
the
mandate
to
be
a
not-for-profit
mandate.
We
are
thinking
and
you
would
create
a
degree
of
control
from
the
local
council
over
you
know
things
like
investment
priorities
which
areas
you
target.
H
First,
how
you
move
through
that
process,
so
we'd
see
it
as
a
city
aligned
entity
which
you
know
isn't
our
entity
we're
we're
merely
suggesting
this
is
a
structure
that
could
be
put
in
place
so
it'd
be,
it
would
be
independently.
Not
you
know,
not-for-profit
foundation
effectively
that
sits
alongside
the
council,
but
there
are
different
ways
of
doing
it.
We've
discussed
different
models
with
different
councils.
H
H
What
we
are
fundamentally
trying
to
look
at
is,
if
you
know
the
average
bill,
which
is
actually
about
100
pounds
a
month.
If
you
were
to
reduce
that
to
40
purely
through
the
work
that
this
agency
did
so
that
would
be
windows,
insulation,
solar
panels,
heat
pumps,
etc,
etc.
Then
you've
got
60
pound
energy
saving
to
play
with.
Now
you
could
try
to
contract
all
of
that
60
pounds
a
month
back
into
the
central
agency
that
would
maximize
the
economic
return.
H
It
would
maximize
the
amount
of
say,
pension
fund
money
that
you
could
bring
in
as
a
funding
source,
but
it
would
leave
not
a
huge
incentive
for
the
resident.
Now
they
will
get
a
nicer
warmer
home.
They
will
get
trees
down
the
street,
whether
maybe
they
weren't
before
they
might
get
a
community
centre
put
into
where
they
live.
H
So
there
is
some
incentive,
but
we
think
in
reality
you
might
need
to
leave
a
bit
of
the
saving
behind
and
depending
on
which
district
or
neighborhood
you're
looking
at
there
might
be
a
public
imperative
to
leave
some
saving
behind,
because
you've
got
a
particularly
deprived
area.
You've
got
fuel
poverty
et
cetera,
but
you
can
make
those
decisions
area
by
area
to
to
optimize
the
outcome.
H
As
long
as
you've
got
the
funding
sources
and
from
our
perspective,
thinking
about
this
from
a
funding
structure,
perspective,
we're
kind
of
agnostic
we're
trying
to
create
a
system
that
could
be
set
up
to
maximize
the
amount
of
private
capital
or
could
be
set
up
to
maximize
the
amount
of
social
impact
or
anywhere
in
between,
and
it's
a
sliding
sliding
scale
between
the
two.
But
I
don't
think
I'm
sorry.
The
bad
news
is.
H
I
don't
think
this
is
going
to
be
a
money
spinner
for
local
councils,
it's
a
way
of
mitigating
some
of
the
required
cost
and
bringing
in
that
pension
fund
money.
So
to
your
the
final
point
I
think
I
haven't
touched
on
capital
at
risk.
I'm
not
sure
this
is
a
particularly
good
scheme
for
local
residents
to
invest
in
directly.
They
could
do
absolutely
could
do
they
could
do
through
an
abundant
style
community
bond
structure
that
I'm
sure
carl's
about
to
talk
about.
H
H
D
I'm
sure
we
will
it's
an
important
one,
isn't
it
so?
I
think
we'll
we'll
keep
going
back.
I
do
I'll
bring
the
rest
of
the
people
in.
I
do
want
us
to
get
to
the
next
speaker
and
make
sure
we've
got
time
afterwards
to
have
a
bit
of
a
discussion
about
what
can
happen
and
what
what
could
happen
in
in
leeds
perhaps
and
what
we
see
positive
steps
towards.
But
so,
if
I
bring
people
in,
if
you
do
appreciate
the
brevity,
we
may
need
council
fossey.
A
Well,
thank
you
very
much
and
thank
you
very
much
for
an
amazing,
detailed
presentation.
Actually
I'll
ask
my
first
question,
and
that
is
there's
so
much
more
in
there.
I
know
that
you
could
spoken
about.
How
do
you
consider
putting
that
on
a
video?
That's
longer
that
we
people
can
engage
in
so
there's
one
part
of
that.
I
just
picked
up
on
one
of
the
slides
that
I
don't
think
you
had
time
to
talk
about.
There
was
something
about
a
circular
economy.
A
I
just
wondered
if
there
was
anything
whether
we've
got
time
for
you
to
sort
of,
invest
and
talk
about
that
a
bit.
The
other
thing
that
perhaps
you
you
didn't
right-
you
haven't
mentioned
in
terms
of
the
pension
funds,
we're
now
talking
a
lot
about
divestment
and
there's
a
lot
of
people
who
wanting
or
are
wanting
to
divest
in
their
pension
funds
and
for
those
of
us
who
sort
of
looked
into
this
we're
talking
here
about
the
tipping
point
of
where
you
know
stranded
assets
will
be.
A
I
know
that's
a
bit
of
a
sort
of
side
issue,
but
I
really
wanted
to
mention
that,
because
of
one
or
two
other
comments
that
have
been
made.
So
that's
my
questions
by
the
way
with
having
many
of
my
residents
who
live
in
the
heights
are
two
high-rise
flats
who,
within
the
last
couple
of
years,
have
had
ground
source
heating
who
now
have
more
money
in
their
pockets
and
warmer
homes.
You
know
this
is
fantastic,
so
thanks
very
much.
H
We
haven't
thought
about
recording
a
video
of
it
all.
There
are
a
couple
of
bits
and
pieces,
but
maybe
we
should
do
circular
economy
is
something
we
have
done
some
work
on
across
europe.
It's
it's
one
of
those
subjects.
That
is
it's
a
catch-all,
but
there's
lots
of
very
different
things
within
it
circular
economy.
How
it
applies
to
the
construction
industry
is
very
different
from
how
it
applies
to
the
fashion
and
textiles,
industry,
food
systems,
etc,
etc,
and
then
there's
the
whole
waste
management
component
to
it.
H
From
a
funding
perspective,
there
are
parts
of
it
that
require
capital
investment
to
to
make
it
work.
So
if
you're
setting
up
a
recycling
and
sorting
sorting
and
recycling
plant,
for
example,
you
need
the
money
and
how
do
you
create
that
that,
in
that
business
case
for
things
like
reusing
building
materials,
you
have
some
very
practical
issues,
which
is
where
do
you
put
all
of
the
timber
and
bricks
and
steel
after
it's
taken
out
of
a
out
of
a
demolition
site
before
it's
then
put
somewhere
else?
H
How
do
you
make
it
available?
How
do
you
check
provenance-
and
there
are
some
really
interesting
work
going
on
in
that
space,
around
effectively
inventory
systems
for
for
demolition
materials?
That
could
be
then
be
reused,
but
it's
from
a
finance
perspective.
It's
not
one
neat
thing
that
you
can
say
well.
This
is
how
you
finance
it.
You
have
to
look
project
by
project,
I
think,
and
there's
a
lot
around
behavior
change
and
policy
requirement.
I
think
to
make
some
of
these
things
happen.
H
So
we
were
talking
with
one
city,
for
example,
about
creating
a
a
city-wide
inventory
for
demolition
materials
and
then
tracking,
which
which
building
companies
use
it
effectively
scoring
those
building
companies
on
their
engagement
and
having
that
part
of
public
procurement
processes
going
forward.
So
you
create
an
incentive
for
the
building
industry
to
to
engage
with
that,
but
you
have
to
also
take
the
view
from
private
industry
that
that's
going
to
create
cost
and
impact
profitability
and
we're
trying
to
you
know
it's
a
complex,
complex
topic.
H
It's
about.
How
do
you
fund
these
these
projects?
It's
a
bit
like
a
new
version
of
sort
of
public
private
partnership,
but
without
maybe
some
of
the
baggage.
That
goes
with
that.
How
do
you?
How
can
we
engage
at
scale
for
those
pension
funds
and
there's
a
frustration
in
the
in
the
financial
services
industry
that
there
aren't
projects
they
can
invest
in
a
sufficient
scale,
and
I
think
there's
also
a
bit
of
a
mismatch
of
language
and
and
understanding
between
public
sector
and
private
financial
sector
to
a
degree.
G
B
Some
of
the
schemes
we
did
at
the
empire
I
did
and
working
on
an
individual
scale.
Moving
to
that,
more
neighborhood
approach
is
absolutely
right
and
that's
borne
out
by
evidence
and
and,
as
you
rightly
said,
the
treasury
getting
his
hands
burned
more
than
enough
times.
And
did
you
question
my
question?
B
I
might
just
suggest
to
council
buckley
that
he
actually
maybe
speaks
to
council
scopes
about
stranded
assets,
and
it's
very
strange
that
a
conservative
councillor
is
suggesting
that
institutional
pension
funds
might
not
want
to
invest
in
something
that
makes
a
profit
for
their
savers,
which
is
what
their
entire
job
is.
But
you
know
that's
a
strange
peculiar
world.
You
may
also.
G
B
Look
at
your
own
government's
policies
on
evictions,
because
you're
actually
slightly
wrong
with
what
you
said
earlier
anyway,
going
to
my
actual
question
in
terms
of
scale.
How
quickly
could
something
like
this
scale
up?
So
if
you
started
on
day
how
quickly
and
obviously
every
city
is
different,
but
how
quickly
could
something
like
this
get
to.
G
B
H
H
I
think
part
of
the
answer
as
to
whether
this
can
succeed
is
effectively
how
much
of
the
upfront
capital
per
house
can
be
funded
through
energy
savings,
long-term
energy
savings.
If
it's
20
we've
got
a
big
gap
of
funding
that
we
can
have
to
fill
from
somewhere
else
and
treasury
aren't
going
to
fill
all
of
that,
and
I
think
it
will
be
a
long
road
to
get
enough
foundations
and
philanthropists
and
corporates
to
come
in
and
fill
that
gap.
H
If
we
can
get
to
50
60
70,
then
it
becomes
much
easier
and
I
think
you
know
I
was.
I
was
talking
with
a
couple
of
sponsors
of
cop
26
recently
who
are
desperate
for
projects
to
be
financing
and
funding
to
show
you
know,
demonstrate
their
commitment
to
the
cause
and
ones
where
they,
where
they
have
skin
in
the
game.
From
a
corporate
perspective,
one
was
a
a
lender
and
one
was
an
operator
of
a
large
electricity
grid
in
the
uk.
H
If
you
can
work
out
who
that
is
so-
and
I
don't
know
the
answer
to
that-
and
the
only
way
we
can
find
out
the
answer
to
that
is
is
by
piloting.
We
are.
We
are
very
close
to
a
pilot
in
copenhagen
and
we
have
a
local
pension
fund.
That's
come
on
board
to
part
fund
that
work,
we're
very
close
to
a
pilot
in
krakow,
in
poland
and
the
city
and
and
milan
as
well,
and
in
both
those
cases
that
initial
pilot
is
going
to
be
focused
on
100,
city-owned,
social
housing.
H
So
we've
simplified
the
ownership
problem
for
a
pilot
to
prove
that
we
can
do
the
legal
contracting
that
we
can
generate
that
income
stream
and
what
that
income
stream
is,
I
think,
getting
pension
fund
money
to
fund
a
pilot
is
going
to
be
very
challenging.
You
know,
that's
not
what
they
do.
It's
too
small
and
it's
too
high
risk
and
it's
not
not
their
bread
and
butter,
but
wherever
we
bring
money
in
from,
we
need
to
treat
it
as
if
it
is
so
that
we
can
show
we
could
have
repaid
it.
H
Had
we
needed
to,
I
think,
once
we
can
do
that,
we
are
in
communication
with
a
large
number
of
pension
funds
about
this
model.
There
is,
inter
at
definite
interest,
and
if
we
can
go
back
and
say
we
have
retrofitted
these
500
houses
in
these
three
streets
and
we've
created
an
annual
income
stream
to
this
entity
of
x
million
per
year.
We
had
to
spend
this
much
up
front.
Therefore,
we
could
give
you
a
a
return
of
two
percent
three
percent,
whatever
it
might
be,
you
know
would
that
work
for
you.
H
Now
that's
a
very
loose
conversation,
whether
that
turned
into
reality
in
a
you
know,
sort
of
hard-nosed
negotiations,
a
different
question,
but
it
it
it
does
go
to
show
you
don't
need
to
be
generating
huge
returns
for
it
to
be
competitive
for
a
pension
fund
investor.
You
know
the
years
of
five
to
eight
percent.
Return
to
investing
in
the
stock
market
may
not
be
with
us
going
forward
over
the
next
decade
or
two
and
pension
funds
are
very
aware
of
that
and
are
trying
to
work
out
how
to
find
alternative
strategies.
B
Obviously
there's
that
gap
between
the
investor
want
to
make
a
profit
and
actually
where
the
other
source
is
coming
from
in
terms
of
the
conversations
you've
had
with
the
other
cities
and
other
partners.
What
is
the
feeling
from
the
governmental
institutions
so
from
institutions
like
are
comparable
to
organizations
like
the
nhs
who
are
looking
for
preventative
to
save
money
in
the
long
term
to
deal
quite
well
with
what
council
buckley
said
about?
Actually
the
increasing
cost
of
care?
B
Now,
actually,
sometimes
it's
not
about
you
know,
we
all
accept
care
costs
are
going
to
increase
it.
It's
about
mitigating
that
cost
increase
so
that
the
actual
natural
process
of
inflation
and
cost
increases
actually
doesn't
erode
further
into
the
budget
streams
is,
is
the
institutional
from
the
public
sector,
particularly
the
health
sector,
in
things
like
this
because
of
the
actual
significant
savings
to
the
public
person,
the
long
term.
H
H
I
think
it's
more
about
diverting
funds
that
have
been
allocated
for
green
infrastructure,
for
example,
and
bringing
that
into
this
program,
so
we're
doing
lots
of
different
things
in
one
place.
Looking
at
local
biodiversity,
looking
at
fuel
poverty,
foundations,
we're
talking
to
a
number
of
foundations
around
built
environment
as
potentially
as
a
way
of
funding.
Some
of
this
to
start
with,
and-
and
it's
also
there
are-
there
are
other
things
you
can
bring
in
that
could
help
incentivize.
H
So
could
we
work
with
mortgage
providers
not
to
be
lending
to
people
incremental
funds
to
to
pay
for
this,
but
to
reward
people
who
sign
up
with
it
with
maybe
slightly
lower
rates,
because
the
risk
on
those
properties
has
gone
down
and
it's
probably
created
a
bit
of
real
estate
value
and
so
that
it
reduces
the
risk
profile
of
a
of
a
mortgage
book
without
having
to
lend
any
additional
money.
But
you
could
create
a
little
a
free
incent.
It's
not
free,
obviously
to
the
to
the
corporate.
B
Yeah,
this
might
be
over
a
long
one
or
a
really
short
one.
Depending
on
his
initial
answer,
I
mean
obviously
the
the
basic
premise
of
what
you're,
what
you're
presenting
is
very,
very
high
capex
investment
in
terms
of
and
a
funding
mechanism
to
to
get
to
that-
and
I
think
you
know
it's
undoubted-
that
as
a
society
as
a
country
as
a
planet,
we
need
to
invest
in
you
know
low
carb
and
decarbonization
and
more
sustainable
ways
of
living.
B
One
thing
I'm
curious
as
to
whether
your
organization
is
involved
in
is
as
well
as
the
you
know.
The
technologies-
and
you
spoke
about
which
are
kind
of
broadly
using
existing
technology,
just
deploying
finding
ways
of
creatively
funding
them
to
deploy
them
on
a
much
larger
scale
and
hitherto
has
been
thought
possible.
B
I'm
also
really
curious,
because
I
come
from
a
research
and
development
background,
and
actually
you
know,
as
a
region,
you
know
leads
in
the
uk
and
the
north
of
england
has
been
at
the
forefront
and
in
both
creating
and
profiting
from
both
economically
and
sustainably.
You
know
other
industrial
revolutions.
You
know
we
are
a
creator
of
ip.
We
are
deployers
of
ip
and
I'm
curious
is
your
organization
involved
in
basically
sitting
there
there's
a
lot.
I
said:
there's
a
lot
of
money
sat
out
there.
B
We
have
a
lot
of
not
a
large
knowledge
base
in
our
country
in
our
region.
Our
city,
in
terms
of
deploying,
are
you
involved
in
creating
you
know
the
research
and
the
knowledge
that
can
then
be
deployed
in
because,
obviously,
the
things
that
we
can
do
in
our
city.
But
beyond
that
there
are
things
that
we
can
do
in
our
country.
B
Then
you
know,
people
see
it
succeeding
and
as
well
as
modeling
that
behavior
in
terms
of
how
we
behave
and,
as
you
know,
our
citizens
and
other
individuals
and,
as
you
know,
as
and
as
regions,
so
we
can
say.
Actually
you
know
what
you
can
do
green
things
and
you
can
do
it
profitably
and
you
can
create
better
qualities
of
life
and
take
out
all
those
kind
of
things
that
matter
to
people.
B
H
Schultz
answers:
yes,
I
think
that
was
so.
We
work
with
innovate
uk
around
around
some
of
that
and
we've
we've
done
a
project
with
a
city
not
in
the
uk,
to
help
them
set
up
effectively
an
investment
fund.
So
how
do
they
feed
fund
early
stage
companies
in
technology
around
the
green
economy
and
that's
both
from
a
cash
perspective,
but
also
from
a
sort
of
incubation
can
are
there
empty
council
offices
that
could
be
used
as
sort
of
temporary
workspace
for
start-up
businesses?
H
Can
they
help
provide
some
support
around
the
sort
of
finance
and
legal?
You
know
leverage
the
assets
that
the
that
city
council
already
has,
and
can
they
partner
with
some
sort
of
venture
capital
type
investors
in
their
local
region
to
help
bring
in
the
investment
funds
to
to
to
create
that
sort
of
cohort
of
local
local
companies
and
they're
thinking
exactly
the
same
thing.
Can
they
be
a
hub
for
ideas
that
can
then
yes
impact
their
city,
but
impact
more
broadly
and
bring
jobs
and
value
creation?
H
I
think
the
other.
The
other
element
of
that
is
one
of
the
failures
of
the
green
deal.
Is
it
didn't,
create
a
long-term
sustainable
lead
market
for
some
of
this
stuff,
and
so
a
lot
of
the
companies
in
the
supply
chain
didn't
know
how
much
to
invest
or
how
quickly
and
so
didn't,
and
so
we
have
this
there's.
This
very
big
problem
of
this
is
great
if
we
can
start
retrofitting
streets
and
streets
of
houses,
but
you
know
who's
going
to
do
it.
There's
a
training
gap,
there's
a
skills
gap.
H
Right
now
we
are
much
more
focused
on
what
can
you
do
in
the
next
two
three
four
years
to
reduce
carbon
emissions
from
housing?
So
that
does
mean
it's
not
thinking
about.
Well,
what
could
hydrogen
do
over
the
next
10
years,
because
we
could
go
round
around
in
circles
on
that?
We
know
that
you
can
put
heat
pumps
in
certain
housing
typologies
and
it
works.
We
know
you
can
put
insulation
and
it
reduces
the
amount
of
energy
required.
H
We
know
you
can
put
solar
on
roofs
and
it
creates
energy
and
that
offsets
bills
and
creates
savings.
So
I
think,
as
we've
seen
with
solar
technology
and
battery
technology,
increasingly
as
that
demand
drives,
you
see
a
significant
unit,
cost
decline
and
the
economic
start
to
improve.
We
haven't
yet
seen
that
come
through
in
heat
pump
technology
to
the
same
extent
it
will
do
and
we
will
have
innovation
which
we
you
know.
We
are
very
good
at
as
a
as
a
country
over
the
next
five
ten
years.
H
C
C
C
C
So
yes,
we
need
to
do
things
and
we
need
to
certainly
look
at
these
things
in
new
build
properties,
but
it
would
be,
in
my
view,
disproportionate
to
risk
banker
bankrupting
the
city
and
the
country
when
china
is
20
100
times
bigger
in
terms
of
this
stuff
than
we
are
and
they're
doing
nothing.
Thank
you
chair.
C
D
D
I
think
we
all
agreed
that
there
was
a
problem
in
here
and
we're
here
to
look
at
the
ambitions
and
the
policies
in
leeds
and
what
we
can
do
in
leeds
and
we're
aware
there's
issues
in
other
countries
around
the
world
and
all
of
those
needs
sorted
and
that's
something
for
for
all
governments
to
work
together
to
try
and
sort
those.
But
it
doesn't
mean
we
should
sit
on
our
hands
necessarily
in
the
city
and
and
we
could
lead,
and
hopefully
by
example,
then
others
may
follow
suit.
D
G
Hello
polly.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you,
chair
and
yeah
nice,
very
enjoyable
presentation
actually
beforehand.
So
thank
you,
rufus.
I
really
really
enjoyed
that
the
sort
of
the
scope
of
it
and
listening
to
the
discussion
afterwards,
so
I'm
going
to
talk
about
community
municipal
bonds
and
very
much
their
sort
of
context
in
helping
solve
the
climate
emergency.
I'm
just
going
to
switch
to
the
presentation
and
is
that
on
a
I'm
just
going
to
go
to
this
full
screen
share.
Is
that
shared
for
everyone
correctly,
yeah.
G
G
Talking
about
solving
and-
and
there
was
a
desire
by
people
to
move
some
of
that
money
into
creating
the
solutions
and
funding
the
solutions
and-
and
the
second
reason
for
founding
abundance
was
that
we,
you
know,
we
sort
of
understood
that
the
transition
was
was
significant.
It
was
massive
it
was
going
to
require
change
across
all
layers
of
society,
individual
business
state
council,
and
if
we
were
going
to
carry
the
public
with
us,
we
needed
them
to
be
involved
and
understanding.
G
What
was
what
was
happening
and-
and
we
thought
that
more-
that
people
were
directly
involved
in
the
in
the
in
the
projects
and
companies
that
were
driving
this
change,
the
more
they
would
understand
things
and
that
understanding
would
build
acceptance
and
and
support.
So
we
we
sort
of
I'm
not
supposed
to
to
deliver
on
that
mission.
We've
always
focused
on
the
accessibility
of
what
we
do.
So
people
can
invest
from
five
pounds.
They
can
use
money
within
their
ices
and
pensions
to
back
the
projects
that
we
we
bring
forward.
G
So
today
we
funded
115
million
of
different
types
of
net
zero
project
across
the
uk.
A
lot
of
that
traditionally
has
been
in
the
in
the
sort
of
corporate
sector,
so
maybe
to
rufus's
point
more
than
sort
of
private
finance,
sometimes
that
private
finance
has
been
in
partnership
with
councils.
Other
times
it's
been
100.
G
You
know,
company
led
we've
been
involved
in
funding.
The
first
tidal
stream
projects
in
the
uk
raising
seven
million
for
a
company
called
orbital
that
was
co-funded
between
ourselves
and
the
citizens
of
the
uk
and
the
scottish
government
and
and
some
private
equity,
and
then
we've
funded
individual
wind
turbines
and
deep
geothermal
plants
and
rooftop
solar,
so
a
whole
array
of
different
types
of
project.
G
A
company
that
swindon
had
sent
set
up
to
deliver
that
project
and
central
government
took
an
interest
in
that
project
and
and
funded
a
thing
called
financing
for
society,
which
was
a
sort
of
research,
r
d
sort
of
project
administered
and
led
by
the
university
of
leeds
working
with
three
local
authorities.
And
then
some
nhs
trusts.
G
Looking
at
how
community
investment
could
be
brought
into
the
public
sector
using
the
sort
of
mechanism
of
crowdfunding
to
help
deliver
projects,
build
community
engagement
and
and
sort
of
and
and
sort
of,
accelerate
the
transition
to
net
zero.
So
the
three
councils
involved
in
this
sort
of
pilot
project
was
actually
lead:
city,
council,
bristol
city
council
and
the
isle
of
wight.
And
through
this
we
we
sort
of
looked.
G
But
what
he
sort
of
talked
through
was
actually
how
leeds
historically
had
raised
money
from
residents.
So
I
don't
think
you'll
mind
me,
sort
of
telling
telling
the
tale
that
his
first
job
as
an
apprentice
in
leeds
treasury
team
sort
of
several
decades
ago
was
administering
a
local
bond
program
where
the
council
raised
money
from
residents
and
and
obviously
paid
an
interest
rate
for
that
capital
and
and
and
david
described,
sort
of
what
was
good
about.
G
That
is
that
you
know
they're
connecting
with
residents
and
when
residents
receive
an
interest
payment
in
in
the
post
as
a
check
they,
you
know
sometimes
got
letters
sent
back
in
and
saying.
Thank
you,
and
also
I
like
what
you've
done
with
the
money
over
here.
You
know
it's,
you
know,
there's
a
process
of
engagement
and
sometimes
they
got
complaints.
You
spend
your
money
over
here.
G
What
are
you
doing,
but
it
was
a
platform
for
connecting
with
residents,
but
but
david
could
also
describe
the
the
pain
of
running
a
local
bond
program
in
the
age
of
paper
because
they
had
to
you
know
almost
get
a
quill
out
to
write
out.
The
bond
certificates
have
a
big
paper,
let
a
book
with
all
the
names
and
addresses
in
and
and
obviously
sending
checks
the
huge
cost
to
delivering
that
which
ultimately
made
it.
You
know
non-competitive
with
with
the
alternative
sources
of
borrowing
that
that
developed
over
the
last
20
years.
G
So
so
the
challenge
that
sort
of
david
set
as
we're
sort
of
scoping
out
this.
This
project
was,
if
you
can
create
a
mechanism
using
the
innovation
of
crowdfunding,
which
means
that
we
can
raise
money
from
residents
at
a
cost
which
is
competitive
with
our
other
sources
of
borrowing
and
produces
that
mechanism
for
engaging
the
public.
Then
yeah
and
that's
something
that
is,
is
really
interesting.
G
And
you
know
that
that
principle
is
is
fundamental,
because
if
the
cost
of
borrowing
from
residents
is
higher
than
say
the
pwrb,
then
fundamentally
it's
regressive.
Because
you
know
the
best
will
within
the
world
in
in
in
in
the
uk,
50
percent
of
a
population
don't
have
money
to
save
and
invest
at
the
end
of
the
month
the
year.
So
we're
only
really
ever
going
to
bring
in
the
the
top
50
of
the
community
in
terms
of
wealth
into
this
type
of
investment.
So
therefore
it
has
to
be
creating
value
for
the
community.
G
As
a
whole,
if
you're
going
to
source
money
from
from
residents,
the
second
point
is:
it
has
to
be
as
easy
to
use
as
possible
and
trying
to
emulate
the
ease
of
use
of
the
public
works
loan
board
which,
if,
if
you've
sat
if
you
sort
of
sat
with
the
treasury
team,
it
is
a
very
easy
mechanism.
It's
a
phone
call
basically
to
the
the
pwlb
to
get
the
funding.
G
And
then
on
the
back
of
that,
we
can
issue
the
the
investment,
but
then
critically,
the
sort
of
the
the
mechanism
has
to
create
a
new
way
of
connecting
and
communicating
with
residents
and
and
from
a
climate
emergency
perspective.
You
know
we
see
this
as
sort
of
the
most
important
aspect,
because
we've
talked
about
already
here
on
in
the
meeting.
Ensuring
that
citizens
feel
part
of
the
process
and
involved
in
the
process
is,
is
critical.
G
You
know
it's
a
tool
that
allows
them
to
demonstrate
leadership,
so
it's
great
if
a
council
retrofits
a
building,
but
if
nobody
in
the
community
has
heard
about
that,
some
of
the
impact
is
lost
because
it's
an
opportunity
to
show
things
being
done,
show
that
technologies
are
being
implemented
and
the
technologies
work
and-
and
therefore
we
see
climate
bonds
using
this
sort
of
mechanism
of
community
municipal
investment
as
a
way
to
communicate,
engage
and
demonstrate
action
and
build
optimism.
I
suppose
within
the
community.
G
So
we've
piloted
this
concept
with
two
councils
and
I
think
we're
still
going
through
a
process
with
leads.
There's
been
challenges,
getting
the
hands
around
the
project
with
which
to
pilot
the
concept
and
there's
still
some
grant
money
sitting
in
in.
I
think,
with
with
you,
as
the
council
to
sort
of
you
know,
fund
the
last
bits
of
this
project
for
internal
internal
support,
but
warrington
and
west
berkshire
council
last
year,
piloted
it
and
we
raised
money
for
them.
As
as
climate
bonds,
we
undercut
pwlb
by
half
percent.
G
The
model
is
designed
so
that
it
can
sit
alongside
public
works
loan
boards.
We
raised
a
million
pounds
as
sort
of
pilot
bonds
for
both
warrington
and
west
berkshire,
and
that
money
was
blended
with
other
money
to
deliver
the
projects
warrington
used
the
money
to
build
a
30
megawatt
solar
plant
and
west
berkshire
used
it
for
an
array
of
projects
within
their
net
zero
strategy.
Everything
from
cycleway
improvement
to
flood
the
fence
to
solar
panels
on
rooftops,
so
ranges
of
different
things.
G
25
of
the
investors
were
investing
100
pounds
or
less,
which
is
a
really
important
piece
for
us.
This
is
about
the
accessibility.
I
think
it
was
two
percent
we're
investing
the
five
pound
minimum,
so
broad
spectrum
of
the
community
were
were
getting
involved
and
a
piece
which
we're
most
excited
about.
G
G
We
saw
huge
sums
donated
to
the
nhs
during
the
time
of
crisis,
which
was,
you
know,
obviously
fantastic,
but
I
don't
think
any
money
was
donated
to
councils
during
that
period
and
councils
were
obviously
on
the
front
line,
helping
their
communities
in
times
of
crisis,
helping
the
families
who
are
in
crisis,
helping
the
people,
who've
lost
their
their
jobs.
You
know
the
the
glue
holding
communities
together
and
what
we
think
is
if
we
can
start
to
rebuild
that
connection
between
citizens
and
their
councils
through
this
type
of
investment
mechanism.
G
Having
built
in
a
mechanism
to
help
financially
when
times
are
difficult,
is
that
if
we
can
scale
this
model
over
the
next
five
to
sort
of
ten
years?
Maybe
when
the
next
crisis
hits,
you
know
we
might
find
a
significant
proportion
of
local
residents
giving
up
their
interest
to
help
with
whatever
that
might
be
at
the
time
meals
on
wheels.
You
know
sort
of
additional
support
for
for
communities
that
are
in
in
challenging
times.
G
So
that's
two
pilots
that
we've
we've
run
with
we're,
starting
to
build
up
to
launching,
probably
about
six
other
councils
over
the
remainder
of
the
the
the
year
and
early
into
22..
Just
a
little
bit
on.
You
know,
polly's
already
thought
a
bit
about
the
the
sort
of
size
of
of
of
the
retail
investment
market
within
leeds,
and
this
provides
just
a
little
bit
more
of
a
backdrop
to
that.
G
As
we
know,
most
of
that
is
probably
flowing
out
of
the
city.
It's
going
into
international
companies.
You
know
sort
of
national
banks-
very
little
of
it
is,
is
intentionally
directed
back
into
the
locality
and
what
we
know
from
all
our
experience
in
abundance
and
we
can
actually
track
digitally
when
we
put
banners
out
to
communicate
investments.
G
All
of
those
mechanisms
for
investing
into
communities
have
been
being
lost,
but
there
is
a
real
appetite
for
people
to
back
their
councils
and
invest
locally,
and
we've
done
a
variety
of
surveys.
Over
the
few
years,
we've
been
developing
this
this
concept,
but
just
pulled
data
from
from
the
more
recent
one
in
2020,
which
indicates
that
63
of
savers
and
investors
within
leads
were
interested
in
lending
money
to
their
council
for
green
and
social
projects.
G
So
not
all
of
that,
six
billion
is
going
to
be
looking
for
the
return
profile
that
a
community
municipal
investment
offers.
It's
low
risk
not
going
to
lose
your
money
sort
of
type
investments.
That
is
a
proportion
of
your
money,
but
even
if
it's
five
percent
of
that
six
billion,
it's
a
large
amount
of
money
which
could
potentially
be
attracted
back
into
the
community
to
help
and
just
just
to
conclude
and
and
polly
sort
of
references
briefly
as
well.
G
E
G
An
excitable
it's
an
innovation
in
green
finance,
which
is
one
of
the
reasons
they're
interested
in
it,
but
also
it's
a
it's.
A
a
very
good
example
of
you
know
where
councils
are
using
the
mechanism
of
councils
moving
from
essentially
declaring
climate
emergencies
and
showing
an
intent
to
do
something
to
actually
start
to
show
that
they're
taking
action.
F
We
were
in
an
interesting
position
where
the
schemes
we
were
going
to
put
into
it
we
basically
secured
grant
funding
for
and
which
is
why
we've
had
a
bit
of
a
kind
of
rocky
start
in
a
way,
and
but
it
is
still
something
that
we're
exploring
and
looking
at
other
options
of
what
we
could
put
into
it.
But
that's
why
we
haven't
going
with
it
yet
just
to
set
that
context
just
conscious.
I
won't
be
here
if
anyone
wants
to
ask
that
question.
D
Thanks
polly-
and
I
guess
if
we
come
back
in
then
for
any
questions
to
carl,
but
I
do
want
to
focus
this
as
well
on,
obviously
we're
here
to
suggest
ideas
that
we
think
we
want
to
be
followed
up
in
leads
or
schemes
that
we
think
that
would
have
pos
possibilities
across
the
city.
So
if
people
have
got
any
questions
for
carl
first
and
then
also
just
on
that
any
reflections
on
what
we've
heard
today
really
and
what
and
what
we
think
we
could
look
at
going
forward.
D
C
Yeah,
I
think
some
of
us
would
like
to
go
away
from
this
this
session,
which
is
enormously
interesting
and
productive
and
and
reflect
on
it
and
perhaps
in
the
day
or
two
time,
approach,
people
further
discussion.
So
it's
rather
putting
it
on
the
spot
to
expect
us
to
do
it
without
notice
straight
away.
But
I
would
love
to
get
further
involved
in
this
and
we'll
intend
to
try
and
do
so.
D
Absolutely
thanks,
john.
I
wonder
then
I'll
come
in
I've.
Seen
a
couple
of
other
hands
go
up.
I
wonder
whether
we
can
look
at
then.
Obviously,
I'm
just
your
substitute
teacher
for
today,
taking
over
from
councillor
walsh
or
maybe
we'll
have
a
word
whether
it
could
be
brought
into
one
of
the
working
groups
that
obviously
all
members
are
able
to
attend
and
bring
through,
or
we
bring
it
back
for
a
bit
of
a
discussion
at
the
beginning
of
the
next
meeting.
One
of
those
two
seems
suitable,
because
I
completely
take
your
point.
D
John
there's.
A
lot
of
information.
We've
got
here
a
lot
of
research
that
we'll
want
to
go
away
and
do
and
think
about
how
it
might
work
in
our
communities
and
then
yeah,
either
through
the
working
groups
or
the
next
meeting
we'll
see
if
we
can
bring
a
discussion
back
for
that.
So
thanks
for
that,
that's
really
useful
and
I'll
bring
in
ann
and
then
barry.
A
E
All
I
was
going
to
say
is:
could
we
get?
I
don't
want
to
keep
adding
working
groups,
but
I
mean
I
don't
know
which
one
it
would
go
to.
So
what
I
was
going
to
suggest
is:
should
we
set
up
a
one-off
working
group
and
invite
our
treasury
function
to
come
along
to
explain
their
pure,
because
we've
had
reference
in
the
conversation
we
just
had
about
how
they
have
been
working
with
us.
E
So
I
think
we
as
a
city
have
got
to
start
showing
that
we
are
going
to
be
leading,
irrespective
of
what
cop
26
comes
out
with.
So
that's
what
I'm
suggesting
in
the
next
two
to
three
weeks,
we
have
a
one-off
working
group,
get
treasury
to
come
in
and
get
the
papers
out
to
us
that
we've
been
presented
today
and
we
might
be
able
to
make
a
more
informed
debating
discussion
about
it.
F
D
That
make
sense.
Thank
you
for
that.
Well,
let's
look
at
that
I'll
I'll
speak
to
council
walsh
as
soon
as
I
can
and
see
what
we
can
get
in
terms
of
another
meeting
for
that
discuss
it
in
more
depth,
because
yeah
we've
all
learned
a
lot
today
and
taken
a
lot
away
from
it.
I
think
there
was
incredible
lots
of
detail
so
yeah
if
we
can
get
the
slides
around
as
soon
as
possible
and
and
then
we'll
look
into
that
in
more
detail,
and
it's
thank
you
for
that.
D
Everyone,
as
as
we
consultative
we
don't
have
necessarily
an
aob
on
the
agenda.
So
the
only
thing
to
report
really
to
to
finish
us
off
is
that
the
next
meeting
will
be
13th
of
september
at
10
o'clock.
So
with
that
I'll
thank
everyone
for
attending
and
we'll
continue
these
discussions,
but
also
very
much
thanks
to
the
presenters
we've
had
today,
who've.
Given
us
quite
a
lot
for
thought,
I
think
across
the
city
and
quite
a
lot
that
we'll
discuss-
and
hopefully,
if
you
don't
mind,
it'd,
be
lovely.
D
If
you,
you
might
come
back
to
that
working
group
and
discuss
with
us.
So
you're
there
for
any
further
questions
that
come
out,
that'd
be
much
appreciated
and
I'm
sure
we'll
continue
working
with
you
as
leeds
tries
to
meet
it's.
It's
quite
ambitious
aims
on
this.
So
thank
you
very
much
everyone
for
coming
and
with
that
I'll
close
the
meeting.