Transcript
Thank you for attending. Please note the meeting may be recorded and broadcast by the council or any person present. Can I remind speakers to please turn on the microphone by pressing the speaker icon when speaking and off when finished and please speak directly into the microphone so that the audio can pick up clearly for those joining the meeting in the gallery and remotely. Also please note that we are currently in the pre-election
in advance of the Finchley Church End by-election on the 6th of March. During this time, ordinary council business can continue but members are reminded not to refer to candidates or parties in relation to the upcoming by-election. Right, thank you for your support and ensuring that these principles are respected at all times. Are the minutes of the previous meeting held on the 5th of February 2025 agreed as a correct
record? Thank you. Thank you. I don't believe there's any absence of members. Do members have any declaration to make in relation to the agenda items? No declarations of interest? Right. Then as I think we know by now that we have 15 minutes for questions from non-executive members.
Depending on the number of questions, depending on the number of questions, the first four will be from opposition group members and then it can be rotated after that. A limit of 15 minutes will be given to the asking and answering of questions by councillors. I take it there are questions. There are. Well, you're welcome to come up to the table, Peter.
Peter, and your 15 minutes will begin when you ask your first question.
Well, I'd like to start by asking you around the question that I was unable to ask you at the council meeting
because it was the next question on the list when time ran out, which essentially is around regressive taxation and what this administration's approach to regressive taxation actually is.
And I ask it in the context of the changes to the household support fund because the household support fund was there to support the most vulnerable members of Barnet.
And what seems to have happened, and it has taken an inordinate amount of effort to get the data to actually understand it.
And I realise that even the data that I've got is not correct because in addition to what you're doing in adults,
you're also making some changes in relation to the children's savings and the household support fund.
But from the data that I have been sent, it seems to be the case that approximately £2 million has been taken out of the money which is available to the residents
to pay for services that were previously paid for out of the general fund.
And this seems to me to be the most extraordinarily regressive step in that effectively we have reduced the funds available to the people who rely on the household support fund by nearly 50%.
I don't understand it.
And I don't understand why none of the statements in any of the documents actually make that clear.
Fine, I'm not sure what the 50% refers to.
What happens with the, well, you've got the household support fund is there, you're right, to help vulnerable people.
There is taking some money, the administration cost.
So there is money being transferred to the administration cost.
But at the same time, things like our discretionary report, as you will see later, we're increasing by half a million.
We've pushed the benefits calculator, which is a council initiative that has so far brought over £12 million more into the borough
for the people who are the most vulnerable and lowest paid.
So I don't think you can take these things in isolation.
So you've got things like the council tax support, where we're putting 20, if you like, there's £25 million not being taken as a, you know, as a reducter.
There's the household support grant.
And yes, some of that is being used for the administration of the grant, as we're allowed to.
There's increasing in discretionary grants.
So if you take the whole lot, can more be done?
Yes.
But calling it a regressive tax, or council taxes a regressive taxation, aren't you?
But I'm afraid changing taxation policy is beyond the purview of this council.
But, Barry, have you added up all of the different things that you are doing to withdraw grant subsidies from those who are the most vulnerable against...
Because if you take what you're doing in the council tax support scheme, the support fund, and some of the other things that we're doing in relation to adults and children,
and we just add all those up, the question that I have to ask is how much of the savings are coming from the most vulnerable residents in the borough,
and how much of the savings are coming from others?
And I think we've got the balance wrong.
And I think if we add it all up, we will be amazed at how much we are taking away from the most vulnerable members of Barnet.
And the problem is, because of the way it is scattered through the cost savings in the budget, it is exceedingly difficult to work out what is going on.
But what I would ask you to do in your consideration of the budget is to ask officers to actually add up how much we are taking away by effectively moving.
And I'm not saying that we're not allowed to do it.
Of course we're allowed to do it.
Otherwise, it wouldn't be in the budget.
But I'm talking about the impact of what we're doing, if you add it all up in terms of all the things we're doing to save money, and where they are coming from, and which stratum of the residents of Barnet are actually paying for them.
All right, there are two or three parts to that, and I'll try and go through them.
Yes, we're coming to present a balanced budget, a balanced budget not just in terms of the auditor's way of balancing the budget,
but making balanced decisions of where savings can be made, where increased fees and charges can be made.
The truth is that we are supporting vulnerable residents to a great extent, and in fact, some of the money being spent by things like adults and children is for vulnerable residents.
So I think it would be a difficult calculation to make.
Now, have we got a varied group of policies in order to reach a balanced budget, and some of that does affect more vulnerable members?
But there's also a lot of money going in to support vulnerable members, increasing some increase.
So balancing out, you have to go across a whole load of things, whether that is the best use of an officer's time.
However, I would remind you, we're in this position after 14 years of having local government finance hollowed out by a conservative government.
And I don't remember when you, not you personally, but when the conservatives were in the administration, much complaint about that.
What we're trying to do is present a way forward to financial sustainability after austerity, after budgets, after a big increase in inflation,
after the big increase in interest rate, and having the fairest approach we can.
And I'm confident that that is.
Are you saying, do I think some people will be a bit worse off?
Yes, I do.
I don't think that's to do with their vulnerability.
I think that's to do with the situation we've been given.
We're trying to create a new way forward for Barnet.
After so many years, I've seen year after year local government not being trusted with money,
with more higher expectations of local government without the money following it.
And yes, I wish we could do more, but yes, I wish we hadn't had 15 years of austerity under a conservative government
that had absolutely no respect for local government.
So, it's where we are, and I think we're making the best decisions we can in these circumstances.
I understand your answer, but I still think that this piece of analysis as to where the burdens
of the cost savings are falling has not actually been done.
And we will be forming our own view of this, and I would strongly recommend that you form a view too,
because I don't think the balance is right.
But if I could move on, if we turn to page 41 of the budget presentation, the MTFS,
there is a table which is label appendix A, medium term financial strategy.
And at the bottom of the page, in black, right at the bottom, is a little column of numbers,
or a row of numbers, I apologise, called GAP.
And if you add up the GAP, it comes to about 400 million.
I wondered what that is.
What is this gap?
And why is it not in the table?
It's right at the bottom of page 41 of the pack.
Appendix A.
It just seems to be a repeat of the budget gap after EFS.
Because you're making a presumption there that that 55 million is every year within the MTFS.
I think you'll find the plan to reach financial sustainability is part of the action plans,
which is to find that...
I think following your logic, what you're saying, it would also be thoroughly misleaded,
because it presumes there is no movement, no action taken over the next four years,
and there's just a rollover of the 55 million overspent.
But we've got four years of taking action to reach.
Not completely true, because you have got a requirement already for 23 million of savings next year,
which is a lot of pain, as we've just been discussing.
We've got further savings in future years, some of which may have been identified, some of which may not.
But that's the maximum that you've been able to find.
And therefore, there is nothing in this document to indicate where that 55 million is coming from.
And I agree with you completely.
If you find a way, or if the government gives us money in the settlement to fix that, that will be wonderful.
But in terms of the projection over the period, given the care and precision to three decimal places with which this document is produced,
to just ignore that 200 million hole across the MTFS without any comment at all is, to me, completely irresponsible.
It's just not right.
And again, I leave it to you and your colleagues, because you are responsible.
But that paragraph, which is the key introductory paragraph to the budget in terms of setting the scene,
only tells part of the story and does not explain that that number can only be right
if during next year you are miraculously able to find an additional 55 million of savings.
Given your previous role on, if you like, scrutinising and looking after finance,
I'm surprised you don't realise this is a projected forecast based on the information we've got at the moment,
not taking into account any changes in pensions, not taking into account any changes in the fair funding formula.
But there's things we don't know yet that you can't put in.
So, you know, any forecast is only based on what you've got.
You know that, Peter.
I do know that.
I absolutely know that.
And I also know that all the things that you have just said are completely true.
I am making a different point, which is that you do not explain.
I'm not saying that there is going to be a deficit of an additional 200 million.
What I'm saying is that this paper lacks a sentence which says,
this deficit assumes that during 2526, the 55 million budget gap will be eliminated by one means or another.
To the extent that it is not eliminated, that gap will flow through across the MTFS.
And it is only with that additional sentence that it is possible to understand these numbers.
Because normally we have a balanced budget and therefore the savings in one year flow through to the next year.
And that's what people have seen year in, year out in terms of the appendix A presentation.
This year is different because we've never had a budget gap before,
because we've never had to go and ask the government for help before.
Peter, we've granted a few of your questions.
I mean, my understanding is that, as you know, I'm new to this job,
that we set a one-year budget and that it's not, therefore, within the purview of the budget
to sort of balance of all four years of the MTFS in a one-year budget.
Of course, this is the start of a process where we're going to be looking, as I mentioned,
room branch around service delivery
and about how do we run the most efficient, tight ship we possibly can.
But four years ago, we couldn't have guessed what interest rates were now,
with Trump being back in the White House and having a trade war.
We couldn't have guessed what inflation was going to be like.
So I think we've got a process to identify on an ongoing basis,
as many savings as humanly possible,
by having a much more rigorous approach to partnering with services to do proper redesign.
We've also been continuing to do the usual savings process
by trying to ask people to make difficult cuts.
But I think it's ambitious, and I'm pretty sure I'm precedented.
I haven't been around long enough to try and say,
can you find four years' worth of savings in year one,
to tell us what it's going to look like in year four, if that makes sense.
I don't disagree with any of that.
But what I'm saying is, I'm not saying that any of you are wrong
in what you're saying about the world.
What I'm saying is that this budget presentation,
which goes into an enormous amount of detail,
does not explain what the impact of the 55 million budget gap,
which is not resolved in 25-26, is on the rest of the MTFS.
And honestly, that is a serious flaw, in my view, in the budget presentation.
And I've discussed this with officers,
and I think they won't obviously agree with everything I say,
but they do believe that there is a point here which is worthy of some consideration.
And again, I merely raise it for your budget discussion later.
But you all need to be aware that this is not like the usual Appendix A,
and it's got this huge 200 million,
and the actual answer is going to be between zero and 200 million.
I accept that.
But up to 200 million or 220 million gap in the explanation.
And I think you need to think about it.
Anyway, I think I've exceeded my...
I've exceeded your time.
But if it gives you any comfort,
if it gives you any comfort,
I'm probably in the same position as some of the officers
of not believing everything to say or relying on it.
I think the difference is you've got quite a pessimistic outlook.
We're quite determined.
We will have a balanced budget every year,
obviously, not just because you have to legally,
but we believe that is the sensible and rational way of being in administration.
We have a plan of how to get there,
and we're determined to get there.
And we're more optimistic that we will get through this,
which is a difficult financial situation.
And as a result of that,
Barnet will be a better place for its residents.
But thank you for your questions.
Go through.
There's been no petitions, no deputations,
no public questions and comments,
no matters referred to the executive, but from council.
There have been recommendations from the overview and scrutiny committee,
but we will take them as part of item 12 on business plan
and item 13 as council tax support scheme,
rather than dealing with them separately.
So then we can move on to item 10,
which is the Tree Financial Office report 24-25,
quarter three, financial forecast and budget management.
And I believe Councillor Radford will introduce.
Thank you.
Although I'm slightly surprised Councillor Zinkin has left for this,
considering his interest in matters budget.
Thank you.
Anyway, thank you very much.
So I guess for those tuning in from around the world,
less aware of Barnet Council's financial position,
than some of us,
just to set the scene a little bit.
So as everyone here knows,
we're seriously exposed to the current local government crisis.
And we're projecting a budget gap of up to 79 million pounds
for 25-26 without mitigations.
But councils across the country face a perfect storm
of spiralling temporary accommodation costs
and an escalating social care bill for adults and children's services.
And so our administration's trying to steer a course of tough decisions
to bring the council back to financial safety and sustainability.
You know, considering the weather,
which is sort of buffeting us,
we're kind of trying to grab the steering wheel
and pulling the plane back
so we can regain some altitude.
What complicates this situation is that we've been impacted
by decades of national austerity funding cuts to Barnet.
Under George Osborne,
he politically decided to make local governments have most of the cuts,
and that effectively has halved the council's budget since 2010.
Economic and other external shocks, of course, have also impacted us.
We've had a period of high interest rates and inflation
after zero interest rates and low inflation for a long period of time.
This was especially,
although it's often unpopular to point it out in the council chamber,
following the September 22 fiscal event,
the mini-budget, which has sent costs skyrocketing,
causing demand for services the council has a legal duty to provide
to surge beyond the council's budget.
I would say that President Trump's election
and a threatened trade war
has also sent interest rates rising again,
which has not been terribly helpful.
And finally, we have constrained reserves,
and this is a point which is worth underlining and making, I think,
which is there's a misinformation that, you know,
there was lots of cash reserves when we came into office,
but these were earmarked to fund capital projects,
and therefore this has left the council without a safety net for next year.
When we could have externalized borrowing when interest rates were zero
and instead we used cash,
now we actually have to externalize our borrowing
when there's a period of high interest rates.
We're currently projecting £1 million left in usable reserves.
So we've got the situation,
we've got the complication,
to the final point of the well-worn strategy consulting framework.
What's the solution?
So since May 2022,
Barnett's administration has been systematically working
to ensure the council is financially sustainable
and is plotting a course with the current challenges in three main ways.
Firstly, through tightening up our processes,
further strengthening the council's budget planning and processes.
Secondly, protection,
protecting frontline services and investing in a plan for growth.
We've had two Ps,
you'll never get to the third one also starts with a P,
partnership,
working with the new government on options
to fix the medium and long-term structural problems,
including possible capitalization directive or EFS.
Barnett's cabinet discussed their draft budget plans
at cabinet on Thursday the 5th of December
before they had the pleasure of my company
and following statutory consultation
is now recommending the 25-26 budget to full council.
So the headline budget position for 25-26
is made up of the following.
23.544 million pounds worth of savings proposals
and a 55.727 million pounds worth
in exceptional funding support from the government
pending a final announcement.
I'm happy to, you know,
I guess answer further questions on this
and go into more detail,
but let me stop there
and then see if there are any questions.
Right, we open it up.
Have any members got any questions on this?
Right, I'll ask the first one then.
I don't know if it's for Councillor Radford or Dean.
On page 25-26, table 4,
which is the full car savings delivery,
I'm just wondering any comment
because there's things,
obviously there's such a variation,
but at the moment the forecast
is we'd reach 83.6% of the savings.
Yeah, and it's similar to last year.
I think last year was about 84.
I just wonder how,
I think it's similar the year before that.
I think they're all in the mid-80s.
Is there something I'm missing here
why we always miss by the same amount?
And I don't know if you can know that answer.
But it's important when we're planning forward
to realise that not all savings will be achieved,
but there will be overachievement somewhere.
There will be fees and charges and income.
This doesn't look at the income.
But given the situation we're in,
would you agree that it is vitally important
that we push down on savings as much as possible?
But basically, I'm saying that
we can't keep just reaching 84%.
Yeah, I think you're right.
I mean, last year as well in 23-24,
it was around about 80 to 85%.
So it does seem to be a bit of a consistent figure.
I think going forward in the budget papers,
I know it's on an extra-agenda item,
but I think we've built in an assumption
around the gap in terms of savings delivery
at similar levels.
Quite a sensible thing to do from experience,
but I also think is,
should we have these as savings figures
if we're always going to be 85%?
But we can look at that a bit under the whole budget.
Sorry, I did...
Can you ask a question?
Yeah, and one of the things that's noticeable is the...
I mean, I'm a school governor,
and it's obviously something that I think,
you know, as a school governor is very aware of,
is the fact that we've...
One of the budget pressures,
it seems to be around the unprecedented increase
in the number of pupils with HCPs,
120...
I think it's 120%,
and I think, you know,
our pupil population is...
That's far outstripping it,
and I just wondered if there were any comments on that,
and it relates to a whole lot of other things
in relation to a...
the costs that that brings to schools,
but I just wondered if you were able to comment on that.
Yeah, I can give a bit more colour on that.
So, you're right,
120% is the sort of increase
in the number of pupils with EHCPs
from 2015 to 2024,
which is significantly higher
than the increase in pupil population in Barnett,
which is just over 10%.
So, the spend on children's social care
in 2021-2022 increased 41% from 2009,
while the children's population grew by less than 10%.
So, you can see the sort of demand-led pressure
that's...
and what that must mean for our budget.
Increased demand for SEND Transport,
where the cost of the service increased
from over 4.5 million in 2021
to over 6 million in 2022-2023.
That's, you know, almost a 20% increase.
And this is despite the fact
that Barnett's cost per EHCP for SEND Transport
is the third lowest in London at 1,600 per head.
So, this budget increase is not
because we're particularly extravagant,
we're still being very efficient,
but because of the secular rise in demand,
it's putting extreme pressure on our budgets.
I'd also say that, you know,
Barnett is famous for its schools.
I have a young family.
It was definitely a reason
why we thought about moving to Barnett
in the first place.
And so, we should be very proud
of our SEND provision,
but that's also a reason
why people both move to and stay in the borough.
And that's a good thing,
but it's a challenge
in terms of budgetary matters,
in terms of finding the money
to best support those families.
One other thing to note as well
from certainly Family Services,
which we've found,
is the cost of care packages,
which has rocketed.
And we know we've tried to mitigate this
by having more provision in-house,
but that's something
that doesn't happen overnight,
and it's something we do have to provide
when you've got very vulnerable young people.
But, you know,
if we think we've got eight packages
that are over £10,000 a week,
it soon mounts up,
and it's going to take a while
to be able to make sure
we have more in-house,
and it's going to take more
with the government actually
taking the lead now, thankfully,
on making sure they look
at the profiteering
of other vulnerable care packages
that sometimes we have to resort to
when we've got nothing local
to actually resort to
to provide it in-house.
Any other comments on this one?
All right, Councillor Clarke,
then Councillor Moore.
Just a general question.
I'm wondering,
given our social housing stock,
as councillors,
one of the most frequent requests
we have is for social housing
and people, you know,
inadequately housed,
one thing that really strikes me,
and Barnett,
is just how little social housing we have.
I'm wondering if you can comment
on what impact that actually has
on our budget.
Yeah, I happen to provide
a bit more information on that
to Councillor Clarke.
And I know it's an issue
that you've been campaigning on
and cared about
for a long period of time.
So there's almost 90,000 children
living in temporary accommodation
in London.
I think that's the equivalent
to one in every 21 children,
or at least one homeless child
in every London classroom,
which when you break it down like that,
it's quite striking.
We had 950 new housing applications
in Q1 this year,
which is more than double the amount
two years ago,
and equivalent to 10 new
homeless applications a day.
The Q2 position is we've had
1,015 new housing applications.
So for us,
the cost of emergency
nightly temporary accommodation,
or ETAN to its friends,
is now around £8,000 per unit per year.
So that's a potential cost
of over £7 million
to house just the 950 new homeless families
that arrived in Q1,
plus 8 million to house
new homeless families in Q2.
In October,
we housed 757 homeless families in ETAN.
And that's all in the context
of Barnett having the sixth lowest
social housing stock in London.
I think I mentioned earlier
about we had an opportunity
when we had low interest rates,
when we had huge cash reserves,
and could have externalised the borrowing
still relatively cheaply.
And we could have increased
the base, frankly, as well,
and generated revenue
to not use it for political purposes,
where we could have invested
in these long-term solutions
to problems that have now built up
and built up and built up,
and have meant that we've inherited
a council with real financial fragility.
We did have,
as you can see,
with all of these statistics
going in one direction,
we had a kind of a period
where the sun was shining,
and we could have mended the roof,
refurbished the house,
maybe even built a greenhouse
and a conservatory.
And we didn't do any of that.
And now it's up to us
to stop the roof from leaking.
But I appreciate the question.
Thank you.
And I've just,
if I might,
it does sound like I'm adding
to the pile of gloom,
but at the other end
of the age range,
we have a massive challenge.
You know,
we celebrate our older community
in Barnet,
and I think we're,
you know,
we're working proudly
towards being an age-friendly borough.
But the reality is
that we have a growing
older population
living longer,
often with more people
with poor health
or needing support.
So what kind of impact
is that having on the budget?
Because it's,
again,
it's a statutory area
and a challenging area for us.
And that's clearly
one of the elements
that we've cited
as being a particular pressure.
So how is that playing out
currently in the budget?
Thank you, Councillor Moore.
Yeah, I mean,
it's a similar story
to my answer
to Councillor Clark's question,
but in a very different context.
So as you say,
we, you know,
we celebrate the fact
that our older relatives
are living longer,
but often they're not having
more healthy years,
as you know.
So in Barnet,
we have 75,300 people
over 65
and long life expectancy,
but around 20 years
of unhealthy life expectancy
or poor health.
And those 20 years
in human terms
can be painful
and miserable.
They can be a source
of anxiety
for their relatives
and carers.
And locally,
the number of people
with long-term support
increased by 806,
which is about 14% increase
between 2019
and 2023.
I'm sure that's,
you know,
if you go further back,
an even more rapid increase too.
And over nearly
the same period,
the cost of commissioned care
for us has increased
by 1.1 million pounds
a week
or 46.6%.
So I think it behooves
those who,
you know,
are saying,
you know,
Appendix A,
small print,
et cetera, et cetera,
to perhaps come up
with some solutions
to some of these things.
If there are ways
of progressively
raising revenue
or having cuts
not fall on people
who could use more support,
I'm always,
I believe we all are.
And so while I think,
you know,
perhaps it's important
that not necessarily
to be gloomy
but to tackle this problem
with the kind of solemnity
and seriousness
it deserves,
I think we also need people
who want to be around the table
to be constructive
in terms of proposals
rather than just explaining
particularly when,
frankly,
they had an opportunity
to fix things
a long, long time ago
and missed the opportunity.
Absolutely.
And there are medium
and longer term strategies
that we can develop around,
for example,
older people
in terms of health
and well-being
but we're dealing
with the challenge right now
which we've inherited.
Councillor Edwards.
Yeah,
I'd just like to pick up
the point
that Councillor Moore
referred to
and I think
it's an opportunity
really for me
just to say
some positive words
particularly about
the people who work for us
and particularly
in my area
of adult social care
and they've,
you know,
they've been doing
this daily job really
to try to keep costs
under control
and spend under control
and I think it's worth
just pointing out
that, you know,
they use what's called
a strength-based approach
to working with people
who present
needing support
from adult social care
and what they do
is they start with people
what people can actually
do for themselves
and I think
I'm kind of encouraging people
to be far more independent
and recognising that
they, you know,
they have got
their own skills
and stuff
and I think
it's particularly
important to note
that as a result
of the approach
that our staff
have taken
we're seeing a reduction
in the overall
home care hours
commission per month
and that's really,
really positive
particularly
given what
Councillor Moore said
about the growing
elderly population
and, you know,
as it gets older
it's more likely
to become ill
or housebound
or whatever
and so I just wanted
to underline that
and I also think
it's really important
to stress that
we also have
a reablement service
which has been
particularly successful
so I'll just give you
one statistic
we've seen
the reduction
in the number
of reablement hours
commissioned
from 10,000 hours
per month
to 6,500 hours
over a two-year period
and that in itself
is reducing
helping to reduce
the cost
but more importantly
I think
it's a sign
that we're being
successful
with maintaining
people living at home
in their community
and being
able to make use
of their skills
and their strengths
and having
the minimum support
just to stay
living independently
so I think
I just wanted to say
that because
I think it's down
to the people
who work for us
who have made
this happen
and being conscious
as well
that we live
in difficult
financial times
and say
the local government
finance
so I just thought
that was important
to say
I just want to pick
up on a point
that Councillor
Radford made
and also
Councillor Clark
in relation
to the housing
situation
one of the things
that I found
really kind of
challenging
in the last
period
with this budget
is the situation
has been looking
at the capital
programme
and having to
take very brutal
decisions about
taking I think
it's 98 million
projects out of it
and I think
part of that
is also the way
that we were using
the reserves
to fund projects
and not actually
including capital projects
and I think
one of the things
that the Statistic
Council of Radford
quoted
but it's one
that I think
is really valid
is the fact
that we are
along with Croydon
the biggest London borough
in terms of population
we've got the sixth
smallest social housing stock
and that is because
of decades
of underinvestment
in affordable housing
which when the perfect
storm of housing
supply and costs
and need
kind of all
hit us this year
has led to us
being in a position
where we're not
basically we're not
as well prepared
as we should have been
to deal with that storm
because if we had
more larger housing stock
we would have been
better prepared for that
now it's a cross London
problem
but I do think
that if over the last
number of decades
and also recently
that if we'd invested
in providing social housing
that would have
gone some way towards
mitigating those costs
and of course
the thing about
investing in housing
rather than projects
is it is actually
an investment
in actually
the bottom line
over the medium
and longer term
because the rents
housing investment
pays back
it pays back
in terms of all
the social
effects that
poor housing
caused
all the other
council services
having to pick up
education
social services
and the way
that it wrecks
family life
and people's
life chances
but also
the bottom line
financial bottom line
it's costing us
way over
we're spending
a fortune
way over
our current budget
on temporary accommodation
and it's just a point
I think that's worth
it's about investing
in the right things
and investing in things
that are actually
going to
pay off
for the people
of this borough
in the medium
and long term
Thank you
if there's no other questions
we're around to say
there's some positive
things in this report
in the sense that
the first two quarters
saw a big rise
in the shortfall
and this has sort of
plateaued off
so there are signs
that good work
is being done
and while we're on
good work being done
I want to
and I don't know
how Dean's going to cope
with this being
his last cabinet meeting
it's going to be difficult
but I'd like to thank you
for all the work
you've done
and help you've been
on that note
it doesn't have to be
his last
just to point out
you're welcome
to keep coming back
yeah you know
tune in anytime
right the
on page 15
we have the
recommendations
as with every
financial report
there's too many
to read out
are we happy
to agree
the seven recommendations
as on page 15
of the report
thank you
go on to the next item
which is
agenda item 11
the corporate plan review
and I think there's
a lot of good
and interesting
things in here
why it's a review
is obviously
where
it's half
halfway through
I suppose
halfway through
the administration
when this was put together
so it does
a couple of things
it looks at
all the treatments
we've had
and we must
never lose sight
that there's
lots have been done
over the last couple
of years
that have made
a real
significant difference
but it's also
focusing on the items
that we want
to
that we are
prioritising
over the next
couple of years
so it's
it's a mixture
of things
to say
it's
taking consideration
for
it's refining
the plan
because obviously
financial sustainability
is going to be
the key element
but within that
we can still be
ambitious
we can still look
forward to
we can still want
to make changes
and so on
and build on
the strong position
we've got
I don't know
if either
you want to add
anything about
the role of the plan
but I think that's
fair enough
this is what we've
done
this is what we're
going to focus on
for the next couple
of years
this is how we're
going to make a
difference for residents
in Barnet
I'll open it up
for any questions
or comments
one thing I will
mention
people may not
guess this
but I've been around
quite a long time
as a councillor
and I'll just say
after 20 years
of watching
administrations
without a plan
I'm glad to see
that at last
we've got one
with a plan
Councillor Conway
sorry it's so long
since I've spoken
I can't remember
what to push
yeah I just wanted
to say
to note my thanks
to the teams
that I primarily
work with on safety
and on participation
and everything
I think we've
got to a really
good place
over the past
two and a half
nearly three years
I also wanted
to note
the plan
talks about
partnership
and our
partnerships
going forward
and I think
the work
of the
safer communities
partnership
of all the
different partners
really underlines
the strength
of partnership
and how much
it is possible
to achieve
I was with
a very large
team of people
and residents
on a Collindale
North Ward walk
today
and that
really showed
the strength
of everybody
working together
it completely
underlined
where we have
been able
to take
a very difficult
place for this
borough
over the past
two and a half
years
and I just
really want
to thank
everybody
and note
the foundations
that we've been
able to put
in place
that whatever
the challenge
is
enable a much
more collaborative
and productive
process ahead
thank you
I suppose
Warwood Walks
are one example
amongst many
of the changes
we've made
and the difference
it makes
and how that's
become part
of normal
council business
Councillor Snyderman
yes I just
wanted to
just wanted to
comment on
it's a really
you know
it's a really
clear document
that really
sets out
what sets out
really clearly
what's been achieved
which includes
I might mention
community skips
again which are
in there
but also
you know
fair play
playgrounds
sustainability
action plan
and also
sets out
clear priorities
going forward
in a way
that I think
is accessible
to residents
in a contrast
from some
of the plans
that we've had
in the past
that are
very dense
and impenetrable
so I hope
it is
actually
you know
gets
more coverage
than such plans
have in the past
and it's a really
good summary
of what's been done
as I say
and the
our priorities
for the coming year
which are still
ambitious
despite the
challenging
financial circumstances
and I think
one of those
achievements
was to actually
recognise
and work
with local
residents
and say
there are
issues
there is a
climate emergency
and we will do
something about it
and we need to do that
and that's gone
through the
whole organisation
but also the work
with partners
I think a lot
has been picked up
you know
by many
many partners
sorry
Councillor Moller
yes I've just
got to
if I might
just comment
on the areas
that fit
within my
portfolio
specifically
I'm going to
start by saying
yes I agree
absolutely
about having
a plan
and as somebody
who spoke
several times
about vision
having a vision
but also a
systematic
action plan
so you can get
meaningful change
that people can
recognise
across the borough
but I wanted to
comment on the
joint health and
wellbeing strategy
actually which
features within
the report
and we were
talking earlier
about that
challenge that
we have across
our population
about those
of us who
are people
who are living
longer lives
but not necessarily
healthier lives
and actually
there's a golden
thread that runs
through the
joint health and
wellbeing strategy
that's in
development at the
moment and that's
around helping
supporting and
inspiring people
to live healthier
lives so that
they're living
healthier longer
better connected
lives but also
are able to be
economically productive
longer as well
so that you're not
having people
suffering from
health challenges
that keep them
out of work
while they would
be working age
adults and so
that what you're
doing there is
trying to make
sure that you're
slowing down
the call ultimately
on both health
and adult social
care recognising
of course that we
have inequalities
in many ways
across our population
not least health
inequalities so
helping to reduce
those so that
everyone is living
as healthier and
longer life as
they can but of
course then
needing less in
terms of the
sorts of services
that are giving us
some financial
challenge at the
moment.
I just also want to
welcome that even
in times with severe
strain on council
finances we're still
going forward and
producing things that
really help communities
if you go around and
speak with people
frequently what they
will say that they
like best about where
they live is things
like public art and
public spaces that
they're directly involved
with or their neighbours
are the rest of the
community is involved
with and I think it's
excellent to see that
we're for the first time
having public art
guidelines which is
something that I think
you know we get lots
of queries about but
more than that people
I think there's never
been an assumption
that this is something
that council does but
this is something where
we can provide clear
information for
councillors for
residents and for
community groups
interested in you
know doing it for
themselves and really
growing those grassroots
movements that we see
across the borough where
we see communities
taking on spaces and
improving them but also
it's we're also
including in that a guide
for how you might get
funding and sponsorship
for such pieces of art
and such pieces of land
and I think this will
make a real difference to
our communities across
the borough but also
again to welcome the
cultural impact award
and how that's going to
strengthen our local
culture and the
opportunities across the
borough so there is lots
and lots of good news
in here thank you
right just yeah just on
that I think I say not
only is it important that
we mention crime
emergency the fact that
we can use words like
reducing poverty and
culture within Barnet
Council is actually new
in itself and important
sorry Councillor Houston
yeah I mean it's a
really good kind of
obviously aspirational
document that's
showing actually what are
aspirations for Barnet and
our ambitions for Barnet
are in the next few years
and I think it's really
good to have something
like this to focus on
I clearly one of the
things that it does cover
is that a homelessness
prevention and the
importance of that which
I mean obviously given
the other discussion we
had and the delivery of
new affordable housing
when we're we are
a borough that is
building and it's
important that when we
do a regeneration
and that we do deliver
a new affordable housing
it's also important that
we actually look at
maximising our own
assets in terms of the
you know Barnet homes
have a programme of
delivery of housing
on the housing revenue
account at the council
it's the own council
estates and I think
that's that's all part of
the package that helps
deal with making this
borough a more affordable
place to live I think
it's worth noting that
this week I mean one of
the case studies is around
Brent Ross which continues
to be a successful
regeneration project
the Sheffield Hallam you
know is is on on track to
move in on 2026 that will
be a key landmark and that's
something that's covered in
in the plan I mean one of the
things that I think what it's
worth noting this week is the
fact that Whitefields the
state residents moved in to
plot 12 starting in the
beginning of this week and
that is another key landmark
in terms of I you know the
the Brent Cross project I one
of the things that we did do
was we managed to get
additional grant to deliver
another 50 social units of
Brent Cross and you know
that's the sort of thing that
we need to continue pressing
is to do you know deliver more
affordable housing in Barnet
when we've got the
opportunities to do so and we
do have a government which is
prioritising the importance of
affordable housing delivery so
it's a perfect you know
hopefully partnership to use
Simon Councillor Radford's
words with government to
deliver on the growth
ambitions and make sure that
the that the as part of that
affordable affordability is
right at the core of it so
thank you
right then do you have a
question of councillor
Coakley Webb
no really just like to
reiterate which I've probably
said many times but it's good
to see it again here that we
actually set out our principles
for corporate parenting and
reminding that it's all
councillors that are corporate
parents and we also put the
onus on the council to make
sure that every policy and
every aspect that goes through
council takes into account our
responsibilities as corporate
parents and I'm sure everyone
will know the strides that we've
made and what we've done in
order to give young people a
voice and to listen to their
views which I think is something
that they really appreciate and
something we will still work on to
make sure that they are
consulted and they have their
views heard right across the
council and are you know able to
express it both in their forums
and as we've heard in full
council and we also make sure that
when it comes to send and the
change programme and the really
great service we have involved and
the coordination we have with all
our schools that we really value
that service what is provided to
schools as well as all the work
that is done with our looked after
children and our care leavers and
we think we've maintained that and
it's something that we will
continue to do
thank you if there's no other
questions we can move to the
recommendations on page 127 but I
think it's important there to
realise what we're doing is
recommending this to council this
will go to council both obviously
looking at the priorities and the
refocusing and also delegating
authority to the interim chief
executive to work to make sure this
is delivered are we happy with those
recommendations agreed thank you move
on to item 12 which came on in a
different an additional document
called business planning but I would
also remind you that there is also
another additional document which is
the recommendations and comments from
overview and scrutiny and we will be
taking those at the same time yeah okay
I think it's counter record again
yes thank you so I'd like to thank
officers or where have I misplaced
this yeah so obviously a lot of work
have been done on this before I came
into place and I'd like to thank
officers and my predecessor for their
work which went into it of course
there's some some tough choices which
have had to be made but we're kind of
bringing ourselves in line with other
other councils there was sort of
another main point that's worth
highlighting is that we're still
making sure there's adequate support
for those who really can't pay their
council tax so we've made sure that
there is a proposed budget of 0.115
million for additional staffing
resource which can help people both meet
their council tax but also find ways to
sustainably get themselves into higher
paying jobs and other ways to get
support so they can afford to do it on a
ongoing basis so happy to stop there
but just to say this is a kind of a
necessary step bringing us in line with
other councils and while still protecting
the most vulnerable and I think those are
the three core principles which kind of
inspired this report and I therefore
recommend it all to you
okay open it up for any questions
are we shocked everybody maybe I'll just
maybe I'll just freelance add a point to
anticipate the questions as well I know
that we've been working with officers and
others as well to make sure that we are
signposting in the communications the
residents receive so that they are
signposted the earliest possible
opportunity as well to boost and other
support services as well and we've been
communicating with CAPTCHA about how we
can do that as well so again thinking
about prevention as well as cure
Councilor Houston and Councilor Snyderman
maybe more operational question for
officers but part of this is obviously a
discretionary support fund and how it's
just really for reassurance about how
effectively you know we will be
targeting that to so it does genuinely
hit the most vulnerable residents that
need it so just really comment on that
yeah it was more more of a comment than
just there may be a question for
Councilor Radford but I think it's worth
noting he Councilor Radford referred to
the three P's earlier but in terms of the
process it's just worth reiterating some
of the changes that you know the
administration we've made now in order
to in order to you know establish better
financial sustainability and better
processes and that's partly the cabinet
system financial sustainability board
a separate cabinet member and just
through all of that process the you know
the Council's budget is getting far more
scrutiny than I think it has got in the
past and I think given the challenging
circumstances we're facing I think that
that is very important I don't know if
Simon wanted to comment on that
apart from saying that I agree with you I
I mean I think I think you can see the
benefits of these new processes in terms
of the fact that we've arrested the
overspend this year and there's been a
very small adverse movement compared to
previous quarters I think obviously
there's more we can do we saw last
Council in terms of thinking about more
processes and governance around the
pensions issues that's it's an ongoing
challenge a bit like the fourth bridge
that as soon as you've finished looking at
all your process and governance you probably
have to start from the beginning again but
I do think that looking at this trying to
make sure that people are looking
holistically at these issues bringing
people together has made a real
difference and I think that's thank you
for highlighting that
I did actually have a question I wanted
an officer to respond sorry about how we're
going to target because I think it's
important to have a release of
reassurance that that's going to be done
I think we have Alan Clarke online who's
probably best place to answer that
it is an operational question rather than
a policy one
I'm sure you do this is this is taken as
read but there's a lot of very good work
that I'm certainly very aware of it goes
on in relation to tenancy sustainability by
was dealing with people in temporary
accommodation but also barnet homes tenants
and I think obviously working with boost and
other organizations obviously making sure
that there's an overlap with that very
good practice work because it's very much
what you're saying actually it's very
much targeting the most vulnerable and
also the support where it's most needed
and where it's most effective so a there's
a lot of very good work already happens in
relation to tenants and people in temporary
accommodations are just that kind of you
know cross cross working as well
and I think we've probably gone through this
many many times to reach this position and
realize it's about presenting to council a
balanced budget but if you like the work
doesn't stop when you didn't get the budget
we will continue to work following our plan
to reach financial sustainability as soon
as we can if there's no other I'll just go
over to the I suppose the one recommendation
from overview and scrutiny that was on a
separate addendum they requested that in any
application for additional government funding
the council should highlight the pressure
impacting Barnet including the number of
older people the adult social care
pressures and the number of hospital
discharges in the borough all of which are
amongst the highest figure in London
that's true and obviously that came more from
adults but the general feeling there was all
three scrutiny the overall one the children and
the adults all had long discussions about the
budget just on that in a way that has happened
because in our application we highlighted the
council's pressure in adult social care as
well as temporary accommodation and other
things but in adult social care and I think
we continue to raise this in conversations both
politically and at officer level because we
should send something back to the scrutiny that
we've taken account of that if that's it I'll move
on to the recommendations there are so many my
voice won't take it but I presume people have
read the various the important that this there's
three parts to this in a way there's what we're
recommending to council and as you know with
the budget council there'll be a full debate on
the council there's things to note like on
policies and so on but there is also I think draw
your attention to recommendation seven which
is actually a decision which is approves the
procurement of an improvement partner to work
with members and officers to support the
council's journey to financial sustainability this
is an important part of our plan to get there so
some of this will go to council some of this is
approving the figures but there's also that
decision for an improvement partner are we
happy to agree those recommendations agree
thank you move on to item 13 the council tax
support scheme which again there is some
overview and scrutiny recommendations which
we'll come to later this has also gone to a
long process and a lot of consultation we
were presented with quite a few options and
decided to go for the most balanced one which
does mean people pay slightly more because
we've reduced it from seven bands to five and
changed the percentages slightly but as part of
this we're also increasing the money for
discretionary support and to provide more
officers actually to ensure that it is
targeted properly and goes to the right people
included in the estimate is a presumption there
may be a fall in the collection rate but that
happens anywhere while it's seen that we
we are increasing the amount we are asking
for so on the 72% subsidies are 70% this is
still providing 25 million pounds more well
it's 25 million pounds we are not asking for
from people so it's how we are doing as much
as we can to help the most vulnerable we are
trying with the cost of living crisis but we are
also saying to the questions from councillors
thinking you have to take this in the round you
have to put in the benefits calculator you have
to put in other discretionary awards you have
to put in the household support grant all in all
there is a lot going on and a lot of support can
there be more yes always can be and if we find a
few million down the back of the sofa I might
recommend that but at the moment we've got to be
sensible the overwhelming thing is to be in a
financially sustainable place so that we can
continue to deliver for the people of Barnet
I'll open it up for any questions and there's two
people ready online to answer all the difficult
questions and you don't want them to sit there
bored so any questions or comments and so we have
gone through this before before it went out
to consultation
Councillor Clarke
I realise Simon Rudford, Councillor Rudford sorry
partly hit on this but I think you know I did
raise this at sort of pre-cabinet meetings but I
just just to just to ensure that before this is
rolled out that we once again make contact with
all our partners to be sure that everyone has as
you suggested the benefits calculator and all the
other support that we have so that everyone has the
latest most up-to-date info because you know all
changes can can carry some worry with them but to
really hammer home the point that there is
support available and that we ensure that our
that our networks are aware of all that support
yeah just to ask officers obviously the presumption
is that a lot of people will ask for that advice
online but have we got the provision so that if
people that are maybe elderly that are not online
will there be will they be able to phone and get
the advice they need or the direction where they
need to be advised to see if there is extra help
available
sorry you are right and I also mentioned that is the
working age people that are affected by this not not
older people can some more but well working age or not and this will be a change for people and I welcome your comments about the availability of information not necessarily in a digital format because actually quite a number of what a percentage of those more vulnerable residents will be
so because of for a range of reasons but literacy and and and and and and and and and and and and other deficits actually may well be part of that part of their vulnerability so it's really important that we know that that that information is available but also that our partners and our partners and the
organizations are up to speed with with what we're doing and we've talked a lot of
residents will be so for a range of reasons, but literacy and other deficits actually may
well be part of their vulnerability. So it's really important that we know that that information
is available, but also that our partners and organisations are up to speed with what we're
doing. It feels to me, and we've talked a lot about this scheme as it's been developed,
and I think it's about recognising that we're trying to strike a balance between ensuring
that we do support our more vulnerable residents, but that also we're marshalling the council's
resources and ensuring a sustainable future, because if we don't have that, we're not able
to help those residents in the way we should. So I think it's striking that balance between
the two. Change is always difficult, but just we want to make sure that that change will
impact in the least deleterious way on our vulnerable residents.
Thank you. Deborah, you wanted to contribute? Thank you. And that was a very visible and
effective campaign, the money worries. I thought that was really well done. Any other questions
or comments? Right. Now, from the comments and recommendations from overview and scrutiny,
there were two, but one's not one that you have to respond to. It just recommends that
Cabinet carefully reconsider all of the five options for the Council Tax Support Scheme in
the context of the Council's updated budget position to ensure the appropriate balance
of savings and support. That was just about having a balanced approach and I think we did.
The other one was the recommendation that Cabinet considered comparative data. One of the
appendixes does give what's happening in some other London boroughs and so on. There's
a lot going on and I know there are recommendations to change the Council Tax Support Scheme. Places
like Wilson, Redbridge, Redbridge. They've got a demonstration there tonight about it. There's
a lot of boroughs are having to look at this and it is how you ensure that where there is
a very difficult decision to make. We spread it out but we ensure we protect the vulnerable
as much as possible. Going back to the Households Report Group, AIDS UK actually distribute a lot
of it on our behalf and working with partners is an important part of what we do. Given that
the recommendations as set out but including that having considered the comments and recommendations
from Overview and Scrutiny Committee that we note and take account of the consultation and
the comparative data of Appendix F for the Amending Scheme that we agree the proposed Council
Tax Support Scheme which is Appendix A should be referred to full Council for approval. Agree the
continuation of the discretionary support scheme subject to full Council agreeing the budget
and agree the proposed budget of $115,000 for additional staffing resources should be also
referred to full Council for approval. So this will be going to the budget meeting with
the Council. Are we all agreed?
Agreed.
Agreed.
Now we move on to item 14 which is the controversial item of Bishopswood Bowls Club Lease Renewal.
Hello Robert. You do, you do. This one, I suppose in my name, I can say it's straightforward but then
I've learnt that if anything straightforward goes to cabinet it stops being straightforward. What
happens is there were a whole lot of pieces were done at one time which was for the Bowls Club
which was hanging over the management and returned for not charging rent and so on. As it so happened
at that time Bishopwood had a different, well the Lease already covered that but they were on a different
timeframe and now this is to bring the situation to get together and make sure each Bowls Club
is treated the same way. Is that fair enough?
That's absolutely right because it was already at that point in time covered under a Lease on the same terms
it got left off the report to Environment Committee. That Lease expired. We need to renew it and because
it's the less than best transaction it has to come here.
Discussing quite powerful things like the Budget and the Council Tax support, we now have this
oops type issue. Anybody got any questions or comments? Councillor Sniderman, Councillor Hooster, I knew there'd be more to say. Go on.
This playing field is one of the, I believe it's locked, one of the boxes. I do know from the, I think, well I just want, it's more of a comment actually. I do, you know, I do support this.
And I think, you know, Bowls Clubs, there are several Bowls Clubs throughout the borough and that are very, you know, that are used and, you know, needed by those members that go there, that get lots of, you know, encourages social interactivity as well as keeping healthy and fit.
So I definitely think we need to be supporting our Bowls Clubs and granting the Lease that was missed out for Bishopswood.
I know on their website they say they used to only allow people who had high positions in politics and industry to play but nowadays, I don't know, I don't know if that counts anybody in the room today.
But, yes, just wanted to support this and I think, I hope and I'm sure that the members will appreciate the, you know, having a sustainable position with the Lease.
So, thank you.
Thank you.
I know the dangerous idea of democracy in the 21st century has finally reached visible at Bowls Club.
Councillor Huston.
I think it's just good to see the writing of a clear injustice that was done by leaving them out.
So, it's nice to be able to correct them with something that was clearly unfair.
Any other comments?
I think we've had this.
Go on.
It's going to be the same.
No, no, no.
I'm just thinking that if this Leases for 25 years, when probably we won't be around to deal with renewing it, then that will mean that the others that were renewed earlier won't tie in with this?
Or are we tying this in with the end time?
Yes.
They'll all be within a few years of each other.
And they're all 25 years and they're all fairly close.
Other questions or comments?
Fair enough.
The recommendations are on page 444, which is about the granting of the lease through the aforementioned and delegate the authority to the Head of Property and Portfolio Management to advertise a proposed lease as required under section, and we hear this a lot, section 123 of the Local Government Act.
Are we happy to agree those recommendations?
Okay.
We've got another item for noting, which is the cabinet forward plan, which is a bit of a moveable feast, but I'm sure we're going to get hit with one with about 40 items on it when it all comes up.
Happy to know the forward plan.
Our apologies for finishing the meeting so early.
Thank you everybody.
