Transcript

• Thank you, good evening members and public and officers. This meeting will be webcast and a recording retained on the council website for up to two years by participating in this meeting. You are consenting for your name, the content of what you say and your image to be broadcast and stored to the council website. If any member, officer or member of the public addressing the committee has concerns with this, please contact the committee services officer immediately. For those at home viewing the webcast, I would like to inform you that if you look above the video, you'll see a resources tab. Select this link and the agenda will appear on the right hand side. This will allow you to open the agenda in a PDF form and follow the discussion and debate. I've had no apologies for members tonight's meeting. Item three is members code of conduct and declarations of interest. Any members have any declarations of interest? No? Okay, thank you. Item four minutes. Members, on the minutes, there's a minor correction that needs to be made. So draw your attention to the minute 103, capital monitoring quarter three, 23, 24, the minute currently states resolved that. But it should state, recommend to council that. And with that minor correction, can we agree by a cent? Thank you. We have no public or member questions in advance. So that. (mumbles) Okay, thank you. So that brings us to item six, the budget medium term financial strategy, pages seven to 126. I would just like to, before being mat in, thank members of this committee and all committees for their work togethers to this point, where we can recommend a budget to full council. And that has enabled Matt to present this report for consideration this evening. I think the report demonstrate to council's commitments to produce a stable improvement financial basis to operate from, and recognizing the financial resources that we do have, we are putting into good use. I'd like to highlight a recommendation for D, which asks the council to approve the creation of a one million pound project fund within the budget, as set out in section three, and the oversight of the project fund to be retained by financial committee. And our members will want to be keen to discuss this further. And as we've had meetings in the past about this issue, it will all be best that we have those discussions rather than at this meeting, but at the future meeting once we've had the director of finance and law and governance work up the criteria in the process for us to discuss that finance sub-working group, which will be called immediately after budget council, and that will enable us to have conversations with officers before comprehensive report that will be presented in March to spend this special project money. Before I invite Matt to speak to the report, I emailed all group leaders explaining that I'd like to add the following recommendation to those present being recommendation six to authorize the reinstatement of the one off saving of £400,000 from the temporary closure of Wallisstown Hall in fall until April 2025, and add that the additional 246,000 savings this producers to the one million pound investment funds for activities linked to visible improvements in the services across the borough. And with that, I therefore will formally be moving to recommendations one to five within the report with the additional recommendation six, which I've circulated, and I will seek a second of that. Thank you. So I will now invite Matt to speak to the report.
• Thank you, Chair. I'll keep this relatively brief, as obviously you've been involved in this process throughout the year, and obviously give you the opportunity to discuss report and ask questions in detail. There are a couple of pertinent points I'd like to point out. And the overall budget that we've got here, which is just under £400 million, this was ultimately in line with the original assumptions that were made back in November, and reported to the committee then, these are shown on page 115, which is Annex two of Appendix seven of the medium term financial strategy. As a result of these minimal changes that we've got, then the savings that were reported in November of £21 million for the financial year 24/25, which includes £80.6 million from the proposed 4.99% increase in council tax remain unchanged from those that were previously discussed by the committee. At that point in time, there was a £465,000 deficit, and changes needed to be made to balance the budget. Those changes were made as a result of the settlement that we received as well. And the details of all those are shown on page 123, which gives you the reconciliation from the position we have in November to the position we have now, the balance budget. I would like to highlight though, particularly in page 103, the medium term financial strategy. This demonstrates that they still have a challenging position going forward with the cumulative gap over the medium term financial strategy of £27 million still being forecast. Should also point out that does not include the high needs deficit within the ESG, which we may have to at some point bring into the assumptions as well if the statutory override ends that the government has provided. And of course, we still have the requirement to rebuild reserves over the medium term financial strategy period over the next five years, and we do need to get those reserves up to 5% as the budget allows. However, there has been some potential for investment within the budget as well that's highlighted in section three. In particular, there are three things. There is a proposal to release £4.5 million of the Public Health Reserve for investment over the next three years. Director of Public Health has taken forward proposals to Budget Workshop for the Committee already. And it will be taking a formal proposal in March. I should point out that it currently represents the amount we have in reserve 22% of the grant that we receive, and that would be considered excessive if we do not release these reserves and invest the money in Public Health, and there is the danger that the money will be either clawed back or that we reduce funding in the future. The other two elements for investment include the money that we've received from the combined authority in relation to when I post the cancellation of HS2. There is a small amount of money for highways in there, which is nearly £600,000. And as a leader has already mentioned, the million pounds investment in the project fund that's been made available. That's primarily available as a result of the decreasing levels of inflation that we see at the moment, which has allowed us to reduce the amount that we potentially hold into contingency, and also the reduced level of savings that we've got this year in comparison to other years. I'll leave it there. Happy to take any questions on the report. Thank you. OK, we've got Pat and then Helen. Pat. Yeah, thanks, Chair. Just want to refer back to your preamble when you refer to a recommendation for D in the report and the special project fund. It mentions in there that the oversight for the fund would be retained by the Finance Subcommittee. Our view is that the Finance Subcommittee, it's quite a small subset of Councillors and it meets in private rather than public. So our view would be that it would be better in terms of transparency and also to incorporate into the normal scheme of work of the policy committees that instead of being retained by the Finance Subcommittee, it would be retained by the relevant policy committees. Like yourself, I did email group leaders with that proposal earlier today, so I'm just formally moving us at the moment. Thank you. On the second date. Thank you. Seconded. Seconded. OK, thank you. Helen. Mine was a question, so we're not opening a debate on this, are we, at the moment. Mine was just a question about. I was going to open a debate on the two recommendations. What's a question to them? OK, so it's just a question, Matt, because obviously I welcome the release of reserves through public health. I've asked about it over the last couple of years, a couple of times, but just on page 113, I think it's just a typo, because it definitely can't be 3.530 million, because that would be 3.5 billion. It definitely can't be 3,000 something. I'm guessing it's around the 30 million mark, but can you just confirm what the actual public health grant was, which I think was confirmed recently, but it definitely isn't in the billions, although 4.5 from the reserves is great, because I'd tried several times, but been smacked down on it. You're quite right. It isn't brilliant. Apologies. The-- it shouldn't be a comment, it should be a full stop, and it's in the wrong place anyway. It's around 35 million pounds to the public health grant. Thank you for pointing that out, we'll get that corrected. OK, thank you, Harry. Thank you. 6.2 refers to the staffing implications of the budget proposal, and how we look to use voluntary schemes as much as possible when reducing staffing levels. And can you give us any idea of the likelihood of requiring any compulsory redundancies as part of these proposals? As part of these proposals, the main staffing changes would be in relation to the enabling services review, which looks at the back office functions. It's not in visit at this point in time. That would require compulsory redundancies. The only other saving, which might have staffing implications, is in relation to the floral pavilion, where there is an adjustment to the budget for that, which is being considered by the relevant committee in March, I believe, and it would depend on the outcome of that as to whether there were any staffing implications and whether there would need to be dealt with through a redundancy process or not, or could be redeployment. We would always work toward redeployment first. Kate, any more questions, comments? Joan? Thanks. Green Council has welcomed this budget for reasons. Firstly, it means that there's no closures of valid front line services. Secondly, the real living wage or PLIFT continues to be offered to providers of adult care. Thirdly, the compulsory job losses are not envisaged. And, fourthly, the additional £2 million of one-off funding means that there could be new investment in our environment, new green jobs and services could be created by, for example, claiming flight tipping from alleyways and installing renewable energy to reduce bills and carbon emissions. So, thank you. Thank you, thank you, Joan. Members, could I ask that it's one-metre because it's a bit off-bottom when people are talking. Did you put your hand up, Jeff? You did. Jeff? I'm presuming we've moved on to the discussion element to this now, because I didn't sound like a question. So, can I say that, personally, I welcome this report also? Primarily, because I think it's shown how closely groups can work together. I think you've already referenced your thanks to the policy committees for the work they've done, and certainly the work that the finance group has done. I think it's been one of the most painless processes with regards to set the budget, I can remember, for quite a while. And so, I think we should also thank Matt and his team, and the senior leadership team for the work that they've done. I've seen the process. There's clearly been a lot of challenge, been a lot of discussion. There's a big emphasis on reviewing services to make sure that they are as effective and efficient as they can be, because we all remember, we all know, don't we? That this is residents only that we're talking about here. You know, if still people have any choice about whether they pay council tax or not, it's something they have to do. And therefore, they have a reasonable expectation, I think, that we as the stewards of that money would only go and ask them for money if it is absolutely required to deliver the services that they have shown as we as their representatives have said that they believe that we need. I also welcome the specific project fund, if you like, that's been developed. I know it took about $2 million, but I think it's now 1.246 of revenue and a million of capital. We haven't got on to the capital report yet, but having read the papers, we know it's coming. So I think that's very welcome to-- I think the key thing here is it's one-off funding. So we're not getting into that confusion of using one-off money to fund or to try and fund ongoing service delivery, so it's a specific time-limited temporary injection and reinvestment of resources. And I like the fact that it's talked about universal services so that it should be of all the people from across world should be able to see those visible improvements that we're talking about and see where the council tax is actually going, and they can see that we as their representatives are responding to some of the things that we all get every day in terms of services that people want improving. I think the closer alignment or the alignment, I think we should say, between the MTFS and the council plan is good and important. And it's a real progress it's starting to have rather than just a set of numbers that just seem to come and go as we went through different years. It does seem to be that that linkage is there. And I know that was following the Ada Burns review and her critique of the way the council had done things and the work of the IAB. It's one of their points was we should have a medium-term financial strategy that matches our council plan in terms of where we want to take the council. So I think for all of those reasons, and I know council tax will go up by 4.9%. But I think it's 2.9% of that is actually the council spending money on itself at its services. There's another 2% which of course is linked to adult social. It's a precept. And I'm sure everyone is aware of the issues across the country really in trying to manage federal social services and social care and the costs of that. And so I think it is very wise of the officers and of the council to seek to, and the government has been said, to seek to address that issue by raising the right amount of money to provide good quality care for our elderly and people who need it. So actually I think this is a really-- and I should say as well, I mentioned about the issue of us being very focused on efficient and effective services. I think I should mention as well the transformation projects or program that the council has put together. I think that is going to be really important. I noticed that it's just a one-off, it isn't just a figure that's been clocked out of the air in order to make the book's balance. My sense of this when we've talked about this in the finance subgroup and other places is there's a real commitment to actually review, transform those services and use that as a method of further improving the services on offer to the public. I think that's important. The other thing I would say that I think is going to be important is I know we've got better this year at identifying deliverable savings and then working to deliver those savings. I think, again, there are savings identified in this budget. And I think it's going to be important for us all as a council, as a set of committees and so on, to make officers to make sure that we actually deliver those services and that the cashable services are delivered to give us the opportunity to go forward with more confidence to reach that sustainable level of council finances. So I think we certainly accept the recommendations as written and as amended in this particular case. We won't be accepting the Green Amendment because we don't, as I said, a project is a project, i.e. as a start, middle and end, and it's time bound. And that is what we're doing in this particular case. It is a project. So I think the views about how that is going to be managed are appropriate to the circumstance, what we're doing. But certainly we will be supporting the recommendations with the additional recommendations about Wolsey Town Hall, the temporary closure of Wolsey Town Hall. Thank you, Chair. Thank you very much, Jeff. Phil? Thank you, Chair. You're quite right. I think everyone has said so far that much work has gone over several months to get this into the situation we are now in. I do like to think, though it's hopeful, that we've turned at least one corner because whilst we have thankfully managed to compile this fund that's been described, it will help us turn one corner, and it will help us get the basics right, as I've always seen it. I have to say that without that diligence, people would have continued to point out what they see as decay and decline in the borough. But if we can get that targeting that's in the fund that's talked about right, we can get it off the ground quickly, and we can tackle the things that people complain to us about most, and the way they see the place, then I think when we're on a better road. I do, you'll forgive the usual jokes, but I did read the debate in Parliament with Simon Hall, the Secretary of State for Leveling Up Housing Communities, who said, The settlement is a generous wall. And that was because Conservatives in the LGA had really, say, held his feet to the fire, because about a month ago, the leader of the Conservatives on the LGA was saying, Regrettably this year, I feel that the finance settlement falls short of the level of support that the sector needs. So that's the position that we are all in, and mentioned has been made rightly of the 500 million going to care, and given that, as members of that committee, Janet and I, look at the numbers of people receiving and needing care, we look at the need for extra care housing, and we look at what needs to be done to provide people with a decent last few years that they can face with some pleasure, and to help them out for years at poor health. Then we are driving on a need to drive on with that case to the government. I just have to say, another quote from Simon Hall, did talk about the Reformed Funding Formula, which keeps being put off and off, and he said a Reformed Funding Formula would provide stability and security to our local authorities, and the best way to deliver it is through cross-parting working. I just wish that that could be sorted out in Parliament so that we get a formula that helps us meet the needs of our borough. So that said, with all the work that's been put in to try and get this two million plus project off the ground, then I don't think we can sit around waiting for reports back to committee after committee after committee. We need to drive on with that and see early results, and so that's why I'm willing to have finance subcommittee getting that through and getting on with it while we've got this window of opportunity.
• Thank you, Phil. So any more comments, questions? No? Okay, so the path you want to read out, your amendment or motion, please.
• Sorry, yeah, section 4D of the recommendations. So the new wording would be, approve the creation of a one million pound project fund within the budget for 2024-25, a set out in section 3, and that oversight of the project fund be retained by the relevant policy committees.
• Okay, thank you. Before we go to the vote, I just want to just say that we have had these meetings, and we've discussed this at P&R, as chairs and spokes at budget and subcommittee, and I was under the impression that we'd got to a position where for the purpose that Phil has just highlighted, for expediency, we'll have a report that comes back in March that will define what this budget is going to be spent on, and then the purpose of P&R, Finance Hub, will to be to make sure that it is delivered. Those relevant committees are more than they will, they will get updates with regards to those projects as well. And that was my understanding of that. So very much in the same vein as Phil and Jeff, I wouldn't be supporting that amendment either. So with that said, I'm now going to go to the vote. So those in favour of the amendment, can you put your hands up please? Thank you, and those against. Okay, so that has fallen. So we now go back to the substantive, which is the five recommendations that I'm not going to read out in the report, but I'll just, for clarity, I'll read out the sixth additional recommendation that isn't in the report, which is to authorize the reinstatement of the one-off saving of 400,000 from the temporary closure of Policy Town Hall in full until April 2025, and add the additional 246,000 savings, this produces to the million pound investment fund for activities linked to visible improvements and services across the borough. So with those six recommendations for this item six on the agenda, can I have a second to please? Thank you, and those in favour? Okay, members, that is unanimous. Yes, that has been a while. I just want, before we move on, I just want to just sort of reinstate my thanks to all members, all chairs and committees, leaders, past and present, and more just as importantly our officers that got us to this point. It has been a difficult few years to get to this kind of stability, although there's going to be difficult years ahead, no doubt and difficult decisions that we still have to make. Working together, we have managed to bring this budget that will be proposed to Budget Council in the next couple of weeks. Maybe. Okay, so we're now on item seven to capital program pages 127 to 152. That the program members contain significant amount of repo for Ireland between 24, 25 and 25, 26. It's clearly ambitious and will be challenging to deliver, which kind of just picks up on what I've just said at the last item. I'm going to invite my mat to present the report, but specifically could you highlight the process behind arriving at the estimates and what's being done to improve forward casting, please? Thank you, Chair. So this report is effectively an extension of the report you received last month, which was a quarter three monitoring of the capital program. The changes, it's a leader alluded to, mainly relate to the re-profile and the expenditure for 24, 25, primarily into 25, 26. This has been looked up with the relevant directors and directors in terms of what is possible in terms of the delivery of schemes. The vast majority of the re-profiling has taken place in relation to regeneration schemes and is linked to the grants and the timescales that we have for spending the grants. So these current re-profiling assume that the grants can always spent within the times that they've been given and the schemes will be delivered over the space of the next two to three years. We are working closely with the directors now to re-profile the program further when it comes to the out-turn report, which will come in June. And that's because obviously there'll be a variation, as there always is, between what was assumed to be spent this year and what actually has been spent this year. And that will lead to further re-profiling come the out-turn time. We are working hard on the delivery resources as well, within regeneration in particular in order to actually deliver these schemes within the timescales that have been set and the timescales that the funding require. The only other element of the report that I would draw your attention to is in Appendix A, which is pages 139 to 140, which includes the 3.3 million pounds of additional schemes that have been added into the program. Included within that is the million pounds for environmental improvements, which is to support the million pounds of revenue that we've recently discussed in relation to the project budget. Happy to take any further questions.
• Okay, thank you. Jeff, Pat?
• Oh, yeah, so thank you for that. I think this is, again, an interesting report. I understand the needs for the re-profiling. Couple of questions, really. First of all, I don't want to do a fill on this, but I remember, back in the day, other colleagues might remember it, that we used to, at P&R, have a report about the proposed capital program. And we would also agree some criteria against which bids would be made, so we would agree that criteria. Then people would make those bids, and then we would be able to see what bids came in, which have been agreed and why. And I think in all fairness, it was an office of panel. We used to do the marketing against those bids. To see that they were consistent with the criteria that we'd set, and maybe I've missed this, but I haven't seen one of those for a while. We get the monitoring reports. We've got this report about the future capital program, but I haven't seen the list of all schemes that came forward. The criteria was used to say yes or no, and how they were assessed against the others. So I just wonder if that's something we will get back to at some stage, if people consider it desirable. The other thing, just to pick up on page 131, the environmental improvement, 3.18, you'd expect me to obsess around this sort of thing about litter bins, that's welcome. That's something that we've spoken about all year, about the extra money for litter bins. But can I also welcome the fact that there's gonna be an investment in gully cleaning machinery. Certainly, again, it's quite topical, we just had a lot of, like we've had rain for the last three months, and our gullies don't seem to be a clearing, and there's been an awful lot of surface flooding. I did speak to Helen about issues. In her ward, we've all got particular problems in others, but I did speak to a former highways engineer. Used to be quite senior officer within the highways department. I couldn't go into a supermarket, would you believe? And we were chatting, he said, he made the point, what we need is the gullies need a good raking. So oftentimes, they're filled with leafs, and detritus, Helen was mentioning about some places where the stuff comes off the fields, and it becomes soil, and you block the drain, so you can get a gully sucker in as much as you like, but it's not actually going to then clear the flooding. So I just wonder if there's anything within here, if there is a machine, so we can put capital to it, but is there anything that we have a plan to start thinking about how, as well as buying a gully sucker, which I think is a great idea, about raking those gullies also, which should, one would hope, help us with the surface water flooding, which situation, which seems to be getting worse. I don't think it's more rain, although it might be more concentrated. I think it's big gullies are now actually blocked. So is there any work around that? I wonder, I don't know which officer picks that up these days, it all gets quite complicated, but if we're going to do something here, it will be useful to do something alongside that as well.
• Thank you. In relation to the criteria for capital investment, there is reference to it within the medium-term financial strategy, but it would be helpful to have a workshop with members, probably as part of the finance subgroup, to get an idea of what capital prioritization you have. Given that we do have very limited resources, I would like to manage expectations in advance of this, but if more resources become available, it is good to know what the priorities would be on a collective basis, so that we can look to prioritise schemes to come forward into the programme as a result of those priorities, so that's something I will get set up. I'll take that as well as in action. In relation to the gully cleansing, I'll take that one away and speak to the director of neighbourhoods about it, but I think part of the proposals are, by the purchasing of a gully cleansing machine, it will allow staff to do reactive work and proactive work within the gullies, and to have a cyclical cleansing contract is one of the proposals that's been looked at, which would obviously enhance the services being offered, but I will get a full answer for you.
• Thank you very much. - Thank you.
• Thank you, Rob Patton and Liz Denfield.
• Thank you, Chair, and thanks to Matthew for his hard work and the report and the clarity of it, which is appreciated across the piece tonight. Particularly welcome was the comments around the work that's going on to increase delivery in the regeneration, in the regeneration work. I very much hope that this budget year will be one that marks a real shift upwards in terms of regeneration on the delivery of the various and important regeneration schemes. I did have a question. It relates to paragraph 3.29, which talks about the Freeport Investment Fund, which was approved almost a year ago, although not with our support, I might add. We have a lot of concerns about Freeport, and one of them is transparency. And I would just quote briefly from the report where it says, Any proposals for funding from the Freeport Investment Fund, which fulfills the requisite eligibility criteria, will be subject to a robust appraisal process and considered and decided on a case-by-case basis as they come forward?" It's not clear to us what the kind of member oversight is in that respect, so my question would be, can we get any clarification as to, where do members get involved in terms of any proposals that come forward through the Freeport Investment Fund?
• Thank you. My understanding is that investment for Freeport or where Water's Investment Fund would go through the RH Committee in the first instance, but happy to bring a report back in terms of the activity that we've seen in relation to Freeport and where Water's Investment Fund, if members would like it to either this meeting or to the RH Committee.
• That would be, yep, that's a good suggestion from our point of view, would be very welcome.
• Okay, Liz, Phil, and Tony.
• Thank you, Chair.
• Just going back to, I think it was Jeff's point before, about the gully sucking and just wanted to reassure him that we have talked about this environment climate emergency and transport committee, and we have asked that the Council's gully cleansing capacity is looked at, so that is something that they are aware of. And I just wanted to also thank Matt for another excellent report that really, really clear and all the work that has gone into this. And I just wanted to clarify what you said about the workshop to get our ideas, because obviously we're all going to have lots of ideas about where we'd like to direct this. And probably overlapping ideas, probably a considerable amount of agreement. So is that workshop for all Councillors? Is it for PNR? Where do we get to go to this workshop? I just wanted to clarify what your idea was for a workshop there. Thank you.
• My initial idea was it would be done through financial committee, so it would be done through group leaders, but we can also have it done through the budget monitoring panels that will be being introduced this year for each of the committees, which will be done with my head to finance, and that can feed into the process, which can then go to financial committee.
• Okay, Phil and Tony.
• Thank you. I'm very pleased that the report does include a line on extracur housing. It's in Appendix C in page 145 in the printed version, where 2.276 million pounds is suggested, which might be our contribution to a scheme that somebody puts forward. I just hope that we can get our ducks in a row. You'll forget the description, because we're as a committee, adult care for the health, really want, as a social temporary health, really want to work closely with planning colleagues to ensure that we actually get schemes developed and through, rather than have any hiccups, because the people we want to benefit from extra care are, because it's effective in the investors, the save scheme will benefit and have services on the spot as it were. On the matter of gully sucking, you probably know that I enjoy going looking down gullies and grids and things. I have followed the gully sucking vehicle on my bicycle, and I've watched the team work at it, but the work done in our area is with a machine with a 55 registration plate, which is rather quite aged for a good machine, industrial machine. And I'm aware that it isn't always available, because it needs a degree of maintenance that takes it off the road. So by having a more effective machine, we'll actually get back to having a regular clearing program. And as has been pointed out, and I think I'll raise this at Council in October, and Liz got the question at the time, we did need to do something about that. We've seen a problem. We've all identified it, and we're going to progress it. It's part of that stage of actually using those milestones, new machine, get on with the work and the backlog, clear those drains that Jeff was waxing lyrical about, and the soil of the gullies. (indistinct chatter) You couldn't hear it because you weren't switched on, Jeff. But essentially, if there's a goal face, there's a gully face, and if we can get it right, our residents will not be seeing water piling up alongside the roads and getting very annoyed about it. It's part of getting back to basics. Thank you, Chair.
• Thank you, Phil. Tony?
• Thanks, Chair. It's just to welcome any free port report to the R.H. Committee. But I think it's worthy of note, the free port initiative does, and will have its own governance structure.
• Okay, thank you. Would no more comment or questions. Can we agree about the recommendations and the report?
• I agree, I agree.
• Thank you. Okay, item eight, capital finance and strategy 24, 25. Pages 153 to 170, I'll invite Matt.
• Thank you, Chair. Again, this is a report that you usually receive every quarter. It's a very standard report, and it simply sets out how the planned capital expenditure will be funded, and the impact that will have on things like the MLP repayments. In here, including the potential indicators that we're required to report against regarding our borrowing limits and affordability. Happy to take any questions.
• Okay, thank you so any questions, comments? Phil?
• I have been reading comments, but nationally about the transformation and productivity plans. I've read comments from the government who are not happy about the use of consultants. Over time, I think a number of members are maybe asking for spreadsheets showing where there are consultants, where they're being used. So in section 343, it does make it clear that worst council staff do not have the knowledge and skills required, use is made of external advisors and consultants that are specialist in their field. Which I think brings me just to touch on regeneration, because in the capital program, there is the use of consultants. In order to actually get the projects that we want to turn our borough around in the Pathfinder areas, literally off the ground, and we need that investment in those salaries should the capital program to actually achieve the turnaround of our borough. 'Cause that's what we're here for. And turning the borough around may give us the increase in business rates and council tax income from you people living here. And when we have to reply to this government document about the transformation on productivity plans, we need to make the case that we've got people in place and why we need them and why we're trying to get on with the work, while we can.
• I think Councilor Chris, you're referring to the letter that came through the second state last week, which was to do the additional funding. That's to do with productivity, not necessarily around transformation and not necessarily around the use of consultants in local government, talking about local government, the use of consultants in central government. We will continue to need to use flexible resource, particularly for regeneration, 'cause of the lack of skills and lack of specialist skills that we'll need for the regeneration. In the letter that came from the secular, sorry, I haven't got it with me, the letter that came from the secular state last week, there was a condition in there, the local government now needs to start productivity plans, but there is no template yet, so we can see what D like we're going to ask for, and we're working up on what that template may look like, but that's a separate thing from, I think it's that letter that you're referring to, which is slightly separate to what's required or what you're asking for around use of consultants within the Council. We do continue to provide that spreadsheet to group leaders as you're aware. But yeah, we will continue to monitor that in all areas of the Council, but as I say, particularly for regeneration, we will need to continue to rely on consultants and agency for a particular piece of work.
• Okay, thank you. No more questions or comments? Can members agree by a cent? Thank you. Item nine, treasury management strategy 24, 25, eight is one, seven, one, two, zero, eight. I'll hand over to Matt again.
• Thank you, Chair. Again, this is another standard report that you generally receive on a quarterly basis. Simply details the management of the Council's cash flows to minimize costs and control the financial risks. Note within here, there's a requirement for net borrowing in the medium term for the Council to support largely the Council's planned capital investment, and therefore we have minimal investment in comparison to the borrowing that we have. Section 3.35 details the reductions in local liabilities in the current year as well, which obviously reduces the Council's exposure, which I know is something members have been interested in in the past, and we will seek to continue to reduce those as the options become available. Happy to take any questions on the report.
• Chair.
• Thanks to Director of Finance for yet again, they're very clear and easy to accept reports. I just would question around the Atlanta Social Investment Partnership, which is mentioned in Appendix B. The Council has asked to redeemed any funds that have not been utilized for the original purpose, and they're asking when could Council's have an update on that, please.
• Thank you. So the investment that we made into that fund was made for a period of 10 years, and we do not have the ability to recall that money early. However, the fund have recently approached us and asked for an extension in time in making investments on our behalf out of that fund, which the Council declined. So if that money has not been invested within the timescales that have been agreed, then that money would be returned to us. The conditions around that would depend on voting, basically, by all the people who had invested in the fund, if more than 80% didn't agree to it, then the money would be returned. I haven't yet received notification of what the outcome of that vote would be.
• Okay, Chair.
• Yeah, again, can I echo the comments that we've made about this report and the others about their clarity and that they are easy to follow and clear, and that's always very welcome. When this can get a bit complicated, follow in the money and certainly follow in the way treasury management works. I know when I was chairman of the audit committee, at Lobo Loans, one of those things that there were people who did a lot, I mean, a lot of investigation into Lobo Loans, what they were, how they came about and the exposure the Council had to them. And I know it's, I think the fact we are, you know, reducing our exposure to these, the cost. We are where we are in terms of how long we've had them and how much it's cost and how it, you know, I suppose we'd all say now, shouldn't have been done in the first place. But it was, I think the fact that's been recognized and that we're now seeking to get out of Lobo Loans when we can and when it's cost effective to do so, 'cause that's the issue with this sort of stuff. Seems like a one-way bet for the people that have loaned us the money, the other lenders option, if you will. So the fact we're coming out is very welcome and I hope those people back from when, as I say, I was chairman of the audit committee. The people that did those investigations into them and the scandalous nature of them in terms of the way that they were taking money from us, as we've talked already about council taxpayers, I hope they also welcome the fact that we are reducing our exposure and future residents of World's Exposure to these financial instruments, frankly.
• Thank you.
• No.
• Okay, no more questions or comments. So can we agree with this by a cent? Thank you, members. Item 10, the investment strategy, 24, 25 pages, 209 to 222, Mart.
• Thank you, Chair. This is the annual report that you received in relation to investment strategy. It's not particularly long report effectively, simply details the activity that we have in relation to commercial property, loans, shares, which we don't have any help, and financial guarantees that we've made to various different companies. Happy to take any questions on the report.
• Yeah, I'm not sure whether this is the right place to raise its all asking and be told it's either the right or the wrong place, but I do think the public are now about half involved with the pyramids, that are aware of some of the regeneration, the very ambitious regeneration plans that we have. And then also, be aware that we now own the pyramids. I just wonder whether they are aware, or whether we're all fully aware about how that relationship with the pyramids works in terms of receiving rent, how that's managed, how it is, I think, sort of separated from the council's accounts and borrowing and so on and so forth. And I just wonder whether that's, I'm sure they do on the regen committee and so on, but I just wonder if the public, through us, if you like, are aware of how that whole arrangement works, and the fact that we are, as a council's own standard, pretty well annured from issues that, but also if we don't get the benefit in some cases, then you'd from the impact of that whole pyramids and the regeneration program that we're doing. 'Cause there's clearly it's a major commercial property that the council is involved with, if you will.
• Thank you. So, yeah, I mean, I think it's paragraph 3.19, table two, the properties held for investment purposes. What that tells you is properties effectively that the council has bought for regeneration purposes and what their accounting value is at this point in time. So obviously, some of them are worth less than what we actually paid for them at the start. But you're quite right, that doesn't address the revenue implications of holding those properties. And they send, they sit effectively within the investment estate, which is part of the ERH budget. Again, I'm quite happy to bring a report on investment properties in general. If that's something the committee wants added to this, committee is part of a budget monitoring report or directly to the ERH committee.
• I just think it's one of those things that the public will often say. The council knows these. Now, from what I can see the parameters is a bit of success story, it's increased football, it's going well, we're up round there the other day with David Hughes, we're seeing it's becoming quite vibrant again. So there's a bit of a good news story. So, I think the more people know about how all that is working and what the council is involved in on the people of Whirls behalf, if you like. The more information is out there that can be shared, the better I think. So, the public are informed in a way, in case of terms of transparency issue that we mentioned a little bit earlier. So, I just wonder if I'm not sure how you'd do this, but I just think the greater knowledge, the greater ability to talk to be able the greater background all members might have, actually, when approached around that, the better, I think.
• Okay, I'm gonna bring Tony in in a second, but I don't know about what he meant by bringing a report here, but I'm just mindful that if we keep bringing reports from other committees, it's probably not the right thing or the relevant thing. I'm not so sure that at seven o'clock on a week, day, evening, that there's many people out there that would be watching us. So, it's in the public domain, all this information, and those reports probably would be best sat in the relevant committees, rather than keep bringing things, pulling them out and bringing them into a pre-and-a-half a note, and Tony?
• Thanks, Chair, yeah, I was just about to suggest that if it's felt that there's a report needed, I think it's probably best placed that it comes to ARH. I'm mindful of not so much this civic year, but certainly the previous civic year, there were a number of reports that came to ARH, and then were passed on to PNR, and the debates that we had at ARH, some of them quite forthright, lasting up to 45 minutes in one case, where we actually arrived at a conclusion, and then that recommendation then came to PNR, and for want of a better description, there was a tendency to unravel the decision-making process that had taken place at ARH, actually at PNR. So, not unravel and change the decision, but a lot of the same questions, which had helped with the decision-making process of the service committee were then refreshed, it's probably the kindest word I can use at PNR. So, I think it's probably best placed if there is, felt that there's a need for that information, and that report, it's probably best coming to ARH. Thanks, Chair.
• Thanks very much, we've got Jan, Phil, and Liz.
• Yeah, just to support what Tony's just said there, I remember that particular item comes to PNR, and it was a lengthy debate, and actually you've been a lot more diplomatic than I would have been, because we were on course to unpick the actual decision that came from Regent Commissie. I think if those sad individuals, members of the public who are interested in this, as Jeff says, are equally capable of logging on to any ARH committee, I'm marching the debate on follow-up, as they are to view this committee, and the information will be in writing and made public anyway. It just doesn't need to come through to Commissies, in my opinion.
• Thank you.
• You've got Phil, Ben, Liz.
• Yeah, thank you, Chair. This is another chance for Jeff to remind me of the past. Years ago, we used to get estimates books, a blue book, which is probably about a 150 pages thick, and I think because we, first of all, as a gold page at the front, thank you, because we went through C as the Strategic Directors, then reorganized, and then got away from the printing system to the cabinet, and then cabinet got reports, and now the committees are thankfully developing a life of their own, and the ability to know what the decisions are in the history is. There was some training to members at the start of municipal year, of course, from lots of new members, we began to see what the powers of committees would be and what the budgets were. But I think what may be missing, and listen to what Matt has to say about this, was now we're getting the new all-singing, all-dancing finance system that we'll see where things are, in progress, as it were, still. There might be a case to put to the new ex- municipal year, committees, a breakdown of what the budgetees, what the elements are, so that, as Tony was mentioning, and you mentioned the precincts in certain matters aside, but there are elements of the budget book, as used to be, that could be put to committee to bring them up to date with what the budgetees and what the variances are actually from. I throw that in, as a useful suggestion, not intended to bog people down with more work, but to enable members to get a clear picture of how, where the money is, where it goes, what it's specified for, and what the difficulties are with achieving the target. Thank you. Yes, I mean, whether we have the new system or the old system, the finance and information is still available. It's just reported at a certain level, and that level is obviously for the committee to determine whether that is adequate or whether they want more detail. In relation to this, it is quite straightforward, for example, to enhance the ERH budget report to include effectively the trading accounts or details of the trading accounts for these particular properties, so that both the committee can see them, and obviously the public can have sites of them as well. There will be budget workshops effectively going forward with all the committees that will be done by the heads of finance that have recently been appointed, as we have strengthened the finance team. They will be taken forward with the committees on the chairs and how better to present the budget information and what additional information they would find useful in terms of interrogating the budgets that we have. OK, Liz, Dan, Angie. Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to go back to what Tony and Jeanette have just been saying in their response that I think it's important to remember that the committees have a lot of background knowledge and to acknowledge that there's a lot of work going into them and that the decisions that they come up with are informed by that collaborative working within the committee and the background knowledge and the work that they do with the officers. And I think committee matters wherever possible committee matters need to stay within the committees, and I just think it's important where there's an overlap, and it's unclear, the remit of the committee might be unclear and P&R can really come into its own there. But I just think we need to really be careful not to be bringing things to P&R, just for the sake of it. So I totally agree with Tony. Thank you. Thank you, Angie. Yeah, I think just reflecting on this report as well as a number of the other reports as well, and it's just come back to me really, I think, I know I've asked in the past about some training for members around, you know, financial scrutiny and how we do that, particularly on some of these things, you know, that are so niche, aren't they? So I just wanted to kind of make that ask again, really, about kind of having some training for us as members around, you know, being able to scrutinise some of these financial reports. So really please. Thank you. And I'm assuming that any training that we've had will have been recorded, so members could go back on that, and if there's any relevant updates, and we can, you know, Matt can bring that to us. Just with regards to what Matt just said about bringing in, potentially bringing in more detailed reports, it's up to the relevant committees, but we want to try and avoid strain into any exempt information that is commercially sensitive, and we end up going into exempt, which I know that the Director of Law and Governance next to me doesn't like. So just with that in mind, and yeah, absolutely, you know, that's what the committees want, and that's what the committees should get. Jeff? Yeah, I don't recall saying that I wanted a report to come back to Peter. I seem to recall saying, actually, we've got a good-look story. Oh, no, good look. I well done a good news story on our hands about what we're doing with the pyramid, and that it would be better if more people were aware of that. If there's something that could be done through the, through ER8, then fine. I was raising that with regards to commercial, because we have this house, commercial property. And people may not know how well the pyramid to do in terms of the extra football, you know, the voids, and so on and so forth. That is actually turning into, as it stands at the moment, I just don't understand it, a success story wasn't looking to make life difficult, wasn't looking to take over committee work, wasn't trying to, blah, blah, blah. I just thought there is a good story in there. After years of everyone, you know, we can look at this and see how much we pay for the views of them and how much it's worth now. See, people could make a very different case around some of these things we've done. So, it would be, you know, we have a potentially good news story. It would be good if more people were aware of it, and certainly more members were aware of it. But actually, we did something bit controversial, and actually it's working out well in terms of regeneration. I apologise. I won't try to bring up any good news stories again. >> Thank you, Jeff. >> In fairness, I think it is probably fair to highlight that, you know, those risky decisions or, you know, decisions that have been made in the past, that we've been criticised for as a council either by elected members, the media or people outside this organisation that just want to have a snipe. I think, you know, this falls into that sort of venue of we need to shout loud about the things that we get right and the things that we do right. So, it's different to bring in reports back and things like that. But, yes, absolutely, you know, the purchase of the pyramids and, you know, that is a success story, and we're going to get reports coming forward. And there are people out there, members included, criticised as for doing that, and probably still do, so maybe they should read the reports themselves as well before criticised and goes on. >> The good news bit has been widely reported in the local press about increase for full. I think my reluctance to, I don't think that the same people you've read, the good news headlines are going to be that interesting. Some of them may not be that interested in delving into big vast tables of numbers. And those that are will be able to access them. So, I'm just going to see if that was the point of view. [ Inaudible ] >> Jeff. >> So, I think the point's being made. >> There's just no need. >> The point's being made, and so with the recommendations, no more comments to make. Can we agree by a cent? Thank you. [ Inaudible ] >> Item 9. >> 11. [ Inaudible ] >> 11. [ Inaudible ] >> I'm not sure what to do with it again. >> No. [ Inaudible ] >> Sorry. [ Inaudible ] Yeah. I'm clearly not mad. [ Inaudible ] >> Item 11, budget monitoring quarter three period to the 31st of December. My comment on before being mad is that, you know, I'll welcome this. It's largely unchanged from last quarter, and it's a positive direction to travel, and the sign that the directorates are beginning to get a better grip of their budgets, particularly neighborhoods. I noticed that the director for neighborhoods has sat at the back there as well, and I'm hoping that the directorate for neighborhoods will be able to get a further grip on that going forward as well as that being problematic in the past. >> Thank you, Chair. So, indeed, this is the quarter three budget monitoring position. Overall, there's an eight million pound overspend, which is being offset by five million pound contingency and a two point two million pounds from reduced energy costs, which leads us with an overspend just under 800,000 pounds, a page 225, sure as to break down by a directorate. And I should point out that there have been a couple of significant changes within that between quarter two and quarter three. The increase has been within the finance directorate of two million pounds, which is -- which is my directorate, yes. So that is unfortunately due to two accounting areas, two separate accounting areas, which is detailed in the report that actually relates to previous financial years that we've had to address in this financial year now that we've recognised them. However, the good news within this is that the neighborhoods and the regeneration place directorates have reduced their overspend and that the ones within adult care and health and children's have been largely controlled the levels that were previously, which has allowed the mitigation of this two million pounds. We don't actually have a net worth position than we had in quarter two, so that is a real positive at this point in time, not least because those two issues of the two million pounds that have come up are very much one off issues and will not be recurring in next financial year. So there are a number of positives despite the fact we are still overspend. That has been a very challenging year to date, can't lose sight of the fact that it is an eight million pound overspend still, and that is a significant portion of the budget even though we've mitigated it through contingency and reduced energy costs. There will be an increased focus on budget monitoring going forward and making sure that directorates come back in on budget. Happy to take any questions on the report. Pat? Yeah, thank you, Chair, and thanks again to Matt. I just had a comment really on what you mentioned early on there about the energy costs and the 2.2 million pounds of expected savings from reduced energy costs. I did kind of inquire about this in a bit more detail because I was very interested to know how much is due to lower energy prices and how much is due to actually using less energy, which of course were particularly keen on, I know my colleagues, various policy committees have been pushing hard on. And the answer I got back was very encouraging in many respects. It referenced, I'll read it out briefly, there have been a number of leisure initiatives which have helped reduce gas consumption. These initiatives include installation of pool covers, installation of low flow shower heads, increase in pool hole humidity settings, and the repair of damaged pipework insulation. And in total, the financial savings from reduced energy consumption comes to 200,000 pounds. So that's a very significant savings in money. It's a saving in carbon as well. And it's a long-term saving, though it will be repeated year after year after year. And it shows the enormous benefit of investing in our facilities, investing in energy efficiency and the benefits that that brings. So I think there's still more potential in that direction and there's lots more we can do but results to date, very encouraging. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Pat, any more questions, comments? What's your answer? Can you give the directorate next year a will coming on budget and not have such a significant overspend as we've reported here tonight? Well, I can't give an absolute assurance because, unfortunately, it's impossible to predict what the pressures are that are going to, that services are going to be confronted by. What I would say is that we've been through a very thorough budget process and we've addressed a number of the inherent overspends within the budget, particularly within neighborhood services. So a number of those will not be recurring again next year. We've also made allowances within the budget for demographic growth between in both adults and children's services, which we believe is at a sufficient level. So hopefully, there will be a much better control of the budget next year, but we can't lose sight of the fact that we also need to save, once we take the council tax out of it, over £12 million and that will still be challenging to deliver. Although directors are on with that process at this point in time, it can't be guaranteed that it will be delivered in full. We will work hard to deliver compensating savings, whether that's not possible as well. And all directors have been reminded that their responsibilities and terms have been ensuring that they balance their budgets. OK, thanks. How will the committees be facilitated to be more effective, have more effective oversight of their budgets as well? So as I mentioned a couple of times now, we are going to change the process in relation to how the budgets are brought to committees. So they will be brought on a quarterly basis as is normal, but there will be separate meetings arranged with each committee with the head of finance to go through in detail. The budgets and the various pressures within the budgets and ensure that you all have a full understanding of what the main cost drivers are within that and what the areas of mitigation are. These will be done in conjunction with the director as well, so that you can have those conversations about what they are to the possible is, what is required to actually bring a budget back into balance. So there will be a much greater focus on the scrutiny and the information we provide to members next year. OK, thank you. No other questions or comments? So recommendations are set out in the report, 1-4, greet by a cent. Thank you, members. Item 12 is the procedure for budget decision meeting of council, pages 2-0-2-2-2-2-2. I invite Jill. Thank you, Chair. This is a standard report that is presented to you annually as part of the budget suite of reports that you receive. It asks you to review the appendix A, which sets out the procedure in respect of the council meeting that is proposed and for you to consider carefully whether that's the process you'd like to adopt at the forthcoming meeting. Thank you. Questions, comments? Yeah. Yeah, and again, thank you to Jill for the report and for answering some of the questions outside the meeting. I suppose the question for me is, with regards to amendments, the earlier report makes it very clear that any amendment to this particular set of recommendations which we've agreed i.e. the budget that will go to full council have to be signed off and assessed against all series of criteria, both from section 1-5-1 and also from the Burris solicitor, I forget your section, I didn't apologize, I have to check those items over. So does this lay out by when any amendment has to be accepted and the fact that we will have to have some sort of letter from the director of finance to say that it is legal and when, if ever, will the rest of the council get an opportunity to see an amendment because clearly if there is to be an amendment, maybe there isn't going to be, I don't know, but if members will get to see the amendment, so they can take their own advice in terms of the likely impact and consequences around anything that is being proposed. So I wonder if you can help me, if that is already sorted in here, we know everyone knows the time scores. Yes, thank you Councillor for the question, if you look at page 247 of the report, the timeline for those processes that you've identified are all set out in there. So for example, five calendar days before the council budget setting meeting, if there are any amendments to be made to the recommendations that have been agreed this evening, there will be to be submitted to MAT to MAT no later than 9am and the process starts from there, so it's all set out. So apologies, is there a, so just so some clear, what that means is if someone wanted to do an amendment, they would hand him to MAT and then MAT would start his process of assessing and if MAT said there was something wrong with them, whoever was doing it wouldn't be able to adjust it before it arrives and it's illegal and therefore it can't be voted on because the council can't pass it, is there not, you know, an earlier point by which somebody has to say that they're okay or someone can tweak it or what could they do, do you see what I mean? It should be in, you shouldn't then start a whole process of adjusting it because that's your amendment, do I, am I making myself clear? Yes, so there is time for negotiation in advance with the Chief Finance Officer and myself and any amendments that wish to come forward and discussion so you don't have to wait to the deadline, we're available to support members in that discussion should that so be decided. Okay, I just want to, I'll bring Phil in in a moment, I just want to be clear that that's calendar days, not working days. Thank you, Phil. Yes, I was trying to be helpful, believe it or not, I was going to suggest that perhaps officers after tonight's meeting just send a note with dates in calendar form so it's clear to all members. Happy to oblige. Okay, any more questions or comments? Okay, I will just say that, you know, given the meeting that we've had tonight, that this is a plea as a political leader now, if any parties are thinking of putting an amendment of a full budget, then I would appreciate as a fellow leader they've used to give heads up so that we can be prepared for that and the same way that we've been working on this but you're coming forward in the first place, I would not, it would not be conducive to a working relationship if the first time that we get to see it is five working days or five calendar days beforehand if members are going, are minded to put an amendment to a budget council, that's my comment on that. Without any further comments or questions, can we agree that procedure by a send? Okay, thank you. Members, just before we close the meeting, we don't have a work program item agenda but there's been a couple of things that have been brought up tonight. The capital prioritisation workshop and the free port activity report to P&O, if members that are happy with that, we can put that on the work program for March to go on the work programme. Okay, thanks so much. Thanks members, good night.