Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies received.

Members of Cabinet are asked to consider whether they have an interest in any of the matters of the Agenda and, if so, to formally declare that interest.

There were no declarations of interest.

Questions are invited from members of the public about the work of the Cabinet.

Notice of any question must be given to Democratic Services by midday on Monday, 11 July 2022. Approximately 30 minutes will be set aside for Public Question Time, if required.

The following question was asked at the meeting by a member of the public, Charlie Allen:

Why is Ribble Drive not on the road resurfacing plan?

Responding, Councillor Alan Quinn reported that there was only so much of the road network that could be covered by the available funds. Further funding was coming through but it was uncertain how far this would stretch with increased costs. Councillor Quinn undertook to contact Ms Allen with a detailed answer on the Ribble Drive outside the meeting.

Questions are invited from Elected Members about items on the Cabinet agenda. 15 minutes will be set aside for Member Question Time, if required.

Notice of any Member question must be given to the Monitoring Officer by midday Friday, 8 July 2022.

The following question was submitted in advance of the meeting by Councillor Jack Rydeheard:

As a Councillor for Elton, and as a member of the Children and Young People's Scrutiny Committee on this council, I was very pleased to see the Our Lady of Lourdes Proposal to establish Specialist Resourced Provision, which is in Elton ward. In the report on Item 12, on the proposal it is stated that there is a requirement that the Governing Body of the School and the Local Authority will enter into an annual Service Level Agreement in relation to the delivery of the Specialist Resourced Provision. Please can the cabinet member clarify whether the relevant committee will have sight of this SLA, in order to provide oversight for what looks to be an excellent proposal, and which committee this will be?

Responding, Councillor Lucy Smith thanked Councillor Rydeheard for the question and confirmed that she would be happy to bring the specification/service level agreement in respect of this and other proposed Resourced Provisions to a future meeting of the Children & Young People’s Scrutiny Committee for its consideration, should the Committee request it.

Minutes from the meeting held on 1 June 2022 are attached.

It was agreed:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 1 June 2022 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Culture and the Economy is attached.

Councillor Charlotte Morris, Cabinet Member for Culture and the Economy, presented the report which provided an update on negotiations with Bury Football Club Supporters Society Ltd (‘BFCSS’), Shakers Community Society Ltd (‘Shakers’) and private benefactors, and requested approval for funding of £450k subject to the conditions set out in the recommendations.

Members voiced their cross-party support for the project, noting that further detail on the ‘library of things’ would be provided. Thanks were extended to all the fans, community groups, benefactors, Council staff, and to the government funding received, which had led to this important step.

Decision:

Subject to the successful outcome of the vote on the proposed merger by the members of Bury Football Club Supporters’ Society Ltd (‘BFCSS’ previously ‘Forever Bury’) and Shakers Community Society Ltd (‘Shakers’), Cabinet -

1.    Agreed to commit £450k of funding to Bury Football Club Company Limited, to be used for the purpose outlined within the report;

2.    Delegated the detailed terms of the commitment to the Chief Executive and the Executive Director of Finance after consultation with the Leader and the Cabinet Member for Culture and the Economy, for approval;

3.    Agreed that the £450k recommended grant be conditional on:

a.    Satisfactory financial diligence on the business plan;

b.    Evidence that the match funding from the private benefactors and balance of the grant from the Community Benefit Fund is available;

c.    An agreed merger, following a successful outcome of voting by both the BFCSS and Shakers Community Benefit Societies, in line with the structure set out in Appendix 2; and

4.    Agreed that the £450k recommended grant be deployed to fund the capital expenditure outlined in the report with the final costs to be determined through tender exercises.

Reasons for the decision:

The Council now has a proposal which meets, or is on the way to meeting, the requirements set out in January when Cabinet considered the principle of providing financial support. There is a business plan which demonstrates financial sustainability. There is clarity on how community benefit will be achieved. Finally, subject to a successful vote by the members of both parties, there will be a merger of Bury Football Club Supporters Society Ltd (‘BFCSS’) and Shakers Community Society Ltd (‘Shakers’).

Bringing professional football back to Gigg Lane will bring pride and optimism to Bury. It will bring back trade to the supply chain of small businesses that previously supported the football club and there will a range of benefits to the communities surrounding Gigg Lane, which include some of the most deprived neighbourhoods in the borough. The community benefits will include contributions to the health and culture objectives of the Let’s Do It strategy.

The proposal is for a fan-led club which will avoid the difficulties which caused the previous club to go into administration and to be ejected from the football league. The proposal is based on a merger of Bury Football Club Supporters Society Ltd (‘BFCSS’) and Shakers Community Society Ltd (‘Shakers’) which is the only way to  ...  view the full minutes text for item CA.26

Report of the Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing is attached.

Councillor Tamoor Tariq, Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing, presented the report regarding proposals for the floating Support/tenancy support services for the next 2 years. In response to a Member’s question, it was noted that the contract had been extended by two months to allow Cabinet to consider the longer extension, which had been approved through existing delegated authorities.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Agreed to extend contractual arrangements from the 1st July 2022 to 30th June 2023 aligned to the proposed service delivery model;

2.    Agreed to reduce the contract value from £634,970.77 to £599,970.77 per annum- saving the Council £70,000 over a 2-year period; and

3.    Delegated authority to the Executive Director Strategic Commissioning for any future extensions relevant to this contract. (Within the specified Contract provision).

Reasons for the decision:

Despite impacts of the pandemic, Calico have worked exceptionally hard to deliver housing services to meet demand and varying need. Therefore, providing confidence the service would continue to deliver during periods of ‘normality’ and coverage for service users would be more impactful.

The department is in the unfortunate position where either savings are required from commissioned services or ensured value for money by delivering further outcomes within existing cash envelope. For a charity to find savings is a substantial challenge, however Calico have proposed alternative contractual arrangements. They include:

·         Reducing the contract value by £35,000 per annum. Over a two-year period, this will deliver a £70,000 saving.

·         The £35,000 will be achieved by reducing staffing resource by 1.5 FTE, reducing the number of support hours delivered from 875 to 800. Assurance has been -provided that the impact on the service would be minimal, given there is flexibility in the model to ensure Calico meet the needs of sufficient referrals. The contract value per annum will reduce from £634,970.77 to £599,970.77.

·         As added value Calico have asked their Personalised Services Manager to complete a supplementary service review, to understand how they could make the service more personalised. Calico have existing good practice with the partnership with East Lancashire CCG, where they have achieved positive outcomes for the customers, including reductions to the public purse.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

The alternative is to retender this provision. However, the department is content with the service delivery and existing contractual arrangement allows for a 2-year extension. It should also be noted that the needs of people who are at risk of homelessness has changed since the pandemic and a shift in the housing market. This requires a more detailed understanding which an extension will allow the authority to navigate and comprehend for future service delivery.

Report of the Leader and Cabinet Member for Strategic Growth and Skills is attached.

Councillor Eamonn O’Brien, Leader and Cabinet Member for Strategic Growth and Skills, presented the report which sought approval for the creation of a Mayoral Development Zone within the North-East Growth Location and for this to be named the Atom Valley Mayoral Development Zone.

Members discussed the report, noting that the zone covered the Northern Gateway and would provide confidence on delivery for this site in the short and long term. Members noted the potential for this site to attract larger companies, creating a ripple effect for the area, as well as allowing existing innovative Bury businesses space to expand.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1. Gave consent to the Mayoral Development Zone, its boundary and agree for it to be named Atom Valley;

2. Gave approval for the Mayoral Development Zone boundary that sits within the Bury local authority area;

3. Approved the establishment of the Atom Valley Mayoral Development Zone Board with the delegated authority to develop a strategy for the Mayoral Development Zone and create a business case for investment and external funding support with the Greater Manchester Combined Authority;

4. Delegated implementation of Bury’s involvement in the Atom Valley Mayoral Development Zone to the Director of Place in consultation with the portfolio holder for Regeneration and Skills and the Chief Executive; and

5. Noted that regular reporting will go to the Council’s Regeneration Board and Cabinet as appropriate.

Reasons for the decision:

The Atom Valley Mayoral Development Zone will support inclusive and sustainable growth that boosts and maximises the competitiveness of the northern part of Greater Manchester in relation to its local economy and will provide an influx of employment opportunities for its residents, as well as linking in the development of important sustainable transport links across the north of the conurbation.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

No other options were considered/were applicable.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Finance and Communities is attached.

Also to consider the following recommendation from Overview and Scrutiny Committee:

That prior to its consideration at the Cabinet Meeting on 13^th July the Overview and Scrutiny Committee recommends that:

1. The Cost of Living Support and Anti-poverty Strategy is amended to reference and incorporate the recently published Greater Manchester Poverty Action briefing (Briefing on the current scale of the socio-economic duty in England) and the Cabinet consider as part of its Anti-poverty strategy adopting voluntarily the Socio Economic Duty as detailed in Section 1 of the Equality Act 2010; and
2. The financial data contained with the report be updated

Councillor Richard Gold, Cabinet Member for Finance and Communities, responded to the Scrutiny recommendations, advising that the financial data had been updated as far as possible and that the Socio Economic Duty as detailed in Section 1 of the Equality Act 2010 was already considered as part of the strategy and the equality assessment carried out.

He went on to present the report which outlined the strengthened focus undertaken by the Council on anti-poverty over the last 18 months, and the refreshed anti-poverty strategy. It was noted that, given the increasing cost-of-living pressures, the proposed strategy had been updated to consider the immediate operational response and support available to residents in the short term, alongside the medium term measures to increase resilience locally.

Members discussed the report, and the Chairs of Overview & Scrutiny Committee and of Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee thanked Councillor Gold for his attendance at their meetings and accepted his response to the recommendations. Councillor Gold thanked the two Scrutiny Committees for their input and interest in the report, and advised that a guide was being developed for Councillors on this strategy.

Decision:

Cabinet approved the cost of living and anti-poverty strategy, including the proposals in relation to the Household Support Fund.

Reasons for the decision:

The strategy sets out the Council and partnership activity to take place in immediate and short-medium term, to mitigate cost-of-living pressures in the Borough whilst striving towards delivering the outcomes set out in the Let’s Do It! Strategy. This allows for a co-ordinated, targeted approach, capturing progress on deliverables and provides a framework through which to keep informed of the impact of pressures locally and through which to shape local responses to any future additional support measures made available.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

The plan has been developed with local partners and networks to align existing and future activity and to build on existing strengths. The immediate activity in relation to cost of living pressures has been aligned to the longer-term anti-poverty approaches so that there is a holistic local approach that seeks to tackle the causes of poverty and inequality rather than just react to the symptoms of current pressures.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People is attached.

Councillor Lucy Smith, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, presented the report which sought approval to progress with transformation of Children’s Services. Members discussed the proposals, noting that they were ambitious but necessary. Concerns were raised on the logistical challenge of improvements and the difficulty recruiting posts in a competitive market, and it was noted that the Council’s journey to rebuilding the service would take time.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Approved the proposed structural changes, including an additional 56.75fte increase to posts, as set out within the body of this report as a basis for consultation with affected staff; and

2.    Delegated authority to the Executive Director of Children and Young People and the Cabinet Members for Children’s Services and HR and Corporate Affairs in consultation with the Director of People and Inclusion and Monitoring Officer to consider responses received from the consultation, produce a final version of the structure and to determine whether the final version is to be implemented or returned to Committee for approval prior to implementation

Reasons for the decision:

The proposal is sets out a plan of transformation of Children’s Services, necessary to both integrate and align services to improve the delivery of our statutory responsibilities across early help, social care, education and SEND.

As Executive director of Children’s Services this proposal is in my view necessary to improve outcomes for children and families in Bury and to meet the requirement to improve and imposed upon us by the DfE and to deliver transformation on SEND.

The proposal will;

·         Enable the delivery of the social care improvement plan

·         Support the role of the Bury in its duties to vulnerable children and education, and begin to lay the foundations to support the Education White Paper implementation

·         Given the scale of change proposed, the work leading up to this proposal has been developed and supported by colleagues across the executive.

·         As Children’s Services is currently subject of an Improvement notice, imposed by the DfE, the support of our DfE advisor is required, I am pleased to report that the outline proposals have been shared with both the DfE and Ofsted who are supportive of the plan.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

The rationale for the proposal is driven by the requirement upon Bury Council to improve Children’s Services, which includes the need to ensure compliance with statutory responsibilities and deliver the improvement plan - Bury Children’s Services are held to account by Ofsted and the DfE on the delivery of this. Given the seriousness of this, the proposal has been the result of collaboration within the council resulting in the proposal presented.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People is attached.

Councillor Lucy Smith, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, presented the report which ought approval to engage with the Centre for Family safeguarding in Hertfordshire and to collaborate with the local partnership, by establishing a local board to explore the opportunity and consider the feasibility of implementing the Hertfordshire Family Safeguarding model of Practice within Bury’s safeguarding social work teams. It was noted that this approach drew strength from partnership working, which would increase relationships between bodies across the borough and address a point made in the Ofsted inspection.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Approved Children's Services engaging Hertfordshire as Sector Led Improvement Partners, and to establish a partnership group with representation of local partners and the Centre for Family Safeguarding to work collaboratively to consider the feasibility of implementing a plan to deliver the Family Safeguarding model;

2.    Agreed in principle the additional investment of £1.081m and £0.992m in the event that the board recommends moving to implementation; and

3.    Agreed in principle to progressing with the recruitment of staff.

Reasons for the decision:

Within Children’s social care there is a requirement imposed upon us by the DfE to improve the quality of practice to children in need of help and protection, this is a key priority of our improvement plan and necessary to ensure that children are safeguarded and that support to families is effective, these are the pre-requisites of achieving improved outcomes for the children of Bury who are at risk of harm or are suffering harm.

Family Safeguarding has been identified within the independent review of Children’s services 2022 as best practice. The model has been independently evaluated and has also been positively evaluated by the DfE’s Innovation unit, who are now supporting the scale and spread of the model. Evidential evaluation indicates improved outcomes for children and parents by successfully reducing risk of harm to children; this leads to a reduction in entry to care, and cost avoidance by those authorities that have fully implemented the model as outlined in the Business case appended to the report (Appendix 1). Details of the independent evaluation can be found at Appendix 2 & 3. Successful implementation of the model will result in cost avoidance to the Council. The Department for Education (DfE), Independent advisor and regional improvement lead support Bury in adopting this model because of its evidential base and because of the need to evidence improvement. The DfE have made available £140k grant funding to support with set up costs and have indicated that they would, via an improvement grant, fund the cost of Hertfordshire acting as Sector Led Improvement Partners to support implementation of the model which is estimated to take 10 months.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

Other models have been considered and discounted, including further development of our existing model of practice Signs of Safety. The rationale for identifying Family Safeguarding as the preferred model of practice is its strong evidence base of delivering improved outcomes for children by reducing risk of harm.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People is attached.

Councillor Lucy Smith, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, presented the report regarding the delivery of a new secondary school in Radcliffe. It was noted that there was typo in the report, and that the Council had been asked to provide vacant possession of the site by September 2023 (not 2022). It was further noted that the feasibility study was still awaited but a meeting with DfE was taking place this week.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Noted the indicative financial costs that will fall to the Council;

2.    Approved the funding of indicative costs as set out in Part B of this report, to meet the Council’s financial obligations, to be met from the Children’s Services schools capital programme; and

3.    Delegated approval of the final costs to the Executive Director of Finance.

Reasons for the decision:

·         To unlock the delivery of a new secondary school for Radcliffe.

·         Utilise a Council owned Brownfield site for development.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

In order to deliver the new school in Radcliffe, the Council is required to confirm that it will commit to meet certain financial obligations. Failure to provide such a commitment will prevent the scheme form being progressed.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People is attached.

Councillor Lucy Smith, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, presented the report regarding a proposal published by the Governing Body of Our Lady of Lourdes Roman Catholic (Voluntary Aided) Primary School regarding the establishment of specialist resourced provision at the school with effect from September 2022. It was noted that this was the first of a series of provisions coming through from the ‘Safety Valve’ agreement with the DfE.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Noted the outcome of the consultation; and

2.    Approved the proposal to establish a new 10 place Specialist Resourced Provision for Key Stage 2 pupils with Autistic Spectrum Conditions and Speech Language and Communication Needs.

Reasons for the decision:

The proposal will build on the good standards for teaching and learning already in place at the school. The development will provide places for children and young people with SEND within the Resourced Provision. This development will not have any negative impact on other schools, academies and educational institutions in the area.

The proposed resource base will not replace existing provision but will supplement and improve provision across the borough, in line with the Safety Valve agreement and development of a broader continuum of provision through the programme of SEND transformation. The addition of the Special Resource Base to the school will not have a direct impact on admissions or provision at other schools within the area but will have a positive impact in the capacity and quality of outreach support to be offered to other schools.

Long-term value for money will be achieved by pupils having their needs met within appropriate mainstream provision with specialist support rather than in special school provision. This will free special school places for pupils with the highest level of needs and provide the opportunity to place high need pupils within the borough, rather than in out of borough provision. Increased capacity for outreach will deliver support for pupils in mainstream settings, leading to fewer pupils being transferred to specialist provisions and improving inclusion opportunities in mainstream schools.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

The proposal supports the Council’s programme of SEND transformation, in expanding in borough specialist provision, targeted at the right areas of need.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Environment, Climate Change and Operations is attached.

Councillor Alan Quinn, Cabinet Member for Environment, Climate Change and Operations, presented the report regarding public Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure (EVCI) to encourage residents and visitors to make the transition from Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicles to Zero Emission vehicles including Electric Vehicles (EVs).

It was noted that the proposed procurement exercise would allow a supplier to own, install, operate, and maintain a network of public EVCI on Council land, increasing the Public EVCI available without having to invest its own funds, but it  wouldn’t preclude the Council looking at investing in EVCI in the future.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Approved the approach to procure a concession contract for public EVCI, which offers Council Land to suppliers to install, operate and maintain a network of EVCI. In return the council significantly increases its EVCI and will look for profit share/rental income opportunities as part of the procurement process;

2.    Approved an eight-week consultation starting on the 18 July using One Community Bury to engage the public on the proposed locations;

3.    Delegated authority to the Executive Director of Operations and Executive Director of Finance in consultation with the portfolio lead for Environment, Climate Change and Operations to award the subsequent concession contract once procured; and

4.    Delegated authority to the Executive Director of Place and the Cabinet Members for Strategic Growth and Environment, Climate Change, and operations alongside the Executive Director of Finance to negotiate and agree terms for leases to site the charging points once a contract has been procured.

Reasons for the decision:

There is a lack of Public EVCI in Bury (12 EV charging points per 100k of the population) compared to the national average (45 EV charging points per 100k of population) and the Northwest average (26 EV charging points per 100k of population).

It will help to provide a substantial increase in Rapid and Ultra Rapid EVCI that will help to give residents and visitors confidence to make the transition to an EV.

This is a no capital cost option to the Council and shifts all operational responsibility and ongoing maintenance of the EVCI to the supplier.

Bury Council has adopted the Greater Manchester EVCI strategy. The strategy adopts an approach which focuses on providing EVCI hubs. Charging hubs are better suited to faster EVCI i.e., a 50kw rapid charger, which can give an 80% charge in an hour. The current government funding available to local authorities only permits the installation of 7kw fast chargers, which take typically 6 hours to charge a vehicle.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

Using Council funds or funding we can apply for to install Council owned EVCI. This option is still available to us if we adopt the recommendation of a concession contract for EVCI on Council land, but the council does not have the funds required to invest in rapid / ultra-rapid charges needed to improve the network so could not deliver the same impact / service for residents.

Officers continue to work with Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM)  ...  view the full minutes text for item CA.34

Report of the Cabinet Member for Corporate Affairs and HR is attached.

Councillor Tahir Rafiq, Cabinet Member for Corporate Affairs and HR, presented the report regarding the future operation of the Bury Aces function, subject to the consultation of affected staff. It was noted that, whist the Bury Aces function had proved effective in supporting Council resourcing in a number of areas, it was not consistent with the Authority’s commitment to stable and high-quality employment because it did not provide a guaranteed minimum number of weekly working hours to individuals. Councillor Rafiq advised that it also posed a number of risks to the Council and, as such the closure of the provision subject to consultation with affected staff was recommended.

Although there was a small financial saving, in response to a Member’s question regarding alternative providers it was noted that this decision reflected the Council’s desire to ensure services were fit for our purposes and values rather than savings. As such the Schools Supply Service was proposed to be retained.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Approved the closure of Bury Aces provision subject to consultation with affected staff;

2.    Established roles and make offers of permeant employment to those individuals currently engaged as Bury Aces casual staff but with accrued employment rights; and

3.    Delegated authority to the Director People & Inclusion and the Cabinet Members for Human Resources and Corporate Affairs to consider responses received from the consultation, produce a final proposal and to determine whether the final version is to be implemented or returned to Cabinet for approval prior to implementation.

Reasons for the decision:

Whist the Bury Aces function has proved effective in supporting Council resourcing in a number of areas, it is not consistent with the Authority’s commitment to stable and high-quality employment in line with the Greater Manchester Good Employment Charter. Furthermore, the operation of this function as currently managed poses a number of risks to the Council.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

An alternative provision is already available through the Greater Manchester Agency Contract and the proposal is to cease the current Aces function and move to the utilisation of this service. Where employees have legitimately accrued employment rights then this will be honoured.

Given the lack of a currently viable alternative, the high regard with which the function is held and the current challenging market place, the Schools Supply Service will be retained until at least September 2023, pending a full review of the Council’s HR support to schools.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Corporate Affairs and HR is attached.

Councillor Tahir Rafiq, Cabinet Member for Corporate Affairs and HR, presented the annual Health and Safety Report which set out key health and safety activity over the 2021/22 financial year alongside a summary of reported health and safety incidents, and also proposed a set of Health and Safety Priorities for the 2022/23 financial year. Members voiced concern over the rise in work related violence and it was noted that more robust health and safety practices were now in place to address issues such as this, and that it would be a priority over the year ahead.

Decision:

Cabinet approved the 2021/22 Annual health and Safety Report.

Reasons for the decision:

This report is produced in accordance with the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) best practice.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

N/A

Report of the Cabinet Member for Corporate Affairs and HR is attached.

Councillor Tahir Rafiq, Cabinet Member for Corporate Affairs and HR, presented the report which set out amendments to the appointments made at the Annual Meeting of the Council held on 25th May 2022.

Decision:

Cabinet noted the appointments and amendments to appointments made since the Annual Meeting of Council.

Reasons for the decision:

N/A

Alternative options considered and rejected:

N/A

To consider the minutes of meetings of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority held on 27 May 2022.

It was agreed:

That the minutes of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority meeting held on 27 May 2022 be noted.

To consider passing the appropriate resolution under Section 100 (A)(4), Schedule 12(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, that the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the reason that the following business involves the disclosure of exempt information as detailed against the item.

Decision:

That the press and public be excluded from the meeting under Section 100 (A)(4), Schedule 12(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, for the reason that the following business involves the disclosure of exempt information as detailed against the item.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People is attached.

Councillor Lucy Smith, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, presented the Part B report which set out the financial details.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Noted the indicative financial costs that will fall to the Council;

2.    Approved the funding of indicative costs as set out in Part B of this report, to meet the Council’s financial obligations, to be met from the Children’s Services schools capital programme; and

3.    Delegated approval of the final costs to the Executive Director of Finance.

Reasons for the decision:

As set out for the Part A report.

Alternative options considered and rejected:

As set out for the Part A report.