Council’s Internal Delivery Plan delayed

Manchester City Council has confirmed to MCFly that there will be a delay in putting its Internal Delivery Plan (IDP) forward to the Council’s Executive. for aproval. Following on from the launch of “Manchester A Certain Future” last December, the IDP was supposed to be agreed on September 15. The IDP needs, when it is released, to set out how the Council’s own employees and departments will meet the ambitious 41% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions laid out in the Certain Future document, and how it will be creating a ‘low-carbon cutlture.’
A council spokesperson told MCFly “the Delivery Plan will be considered by the Executive Committee in October rather than September. This is a slight delay in completing the plan: the process of developing understanding and targets across the the organisation has taken longer than envisaged and it is important that the Council’s proposals for delivery on this agenda are effectively integrated with our other priorities.”
The Delivery Plan, an early draft of which has been seen by MCFly, sets out practical actions and targets for all Council departments, and includes plans to close down inefficient buildings. It foresees the Council, whose emissoins only make up 5% of the total 3.5 million tonnes at stake, as having four roles in making the “Certain Future” document’s words into reality. These roles are as a Leader, a Regulator, a Deliverer and an Influencer.
The original plan is available at Despite many confident pronouncements, the site has not yet entered its second ‘interactive’ phase. Presumably it will do so before the Tuesday November 30 “Stakeholder Conference”, at which the Council will announce the practical progress made so far. At this rate, we will all be home by lunchtime.
The REAL scandal
A month’s delay in the release of the IDP is neither here or there. Given the Council’s track record, we should count ourselves lucky it ain’t longer. The real scandal is that endoresements of “Manchester a Certain Future” are only 100 or so (out of 1067 asked) AND that the same excuse – “we haven’t got their permission to name names” – is still being trotted out despite an assurance to the contrary. As asked several MCFlys ago, what sort of endorsement is a ‘secret’ endorsement?


About dwighttowers

Below the surface...
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s