Issue - meetings

An opportunity for the Committee to question the Leader of the Council on her Cabinet portfolio:

-       Growth and investment

-       Commissioning

-       Communications

-       External partnerships

-       Council performance

-       Corporate policy and strategy

Received the Leader’s portfolio briefing, which focused on some of the key activities including the vision for Haringey, engaging with residents and growth and inward investment, a copy is included in the agenda pack.   .

The Leader, Cllr Claire Kober, highlighted that the Council’s draft medium term financial strategy, including proposals to close the funding gap, was being prepared for publication on 8 December alongside a Workforce Plan and Corporate Plan to deliver the Council’s priorities. 

Noted

a.         In response to concerns raised about the budget consultation, it was explained that there would be many opportunities for public engagement before budget proposals were presented to Cabinet in February 2015.  The intention was to produce a package that would exceed the required £70 million savings in as open and transparent a dialogue with the community as possible.

b.         It was suggested that performance monitoring was inconsistent and, in response, it was reported that performance figures were reported to Cabinet quarterly, in arrears.  The Council was consulting on a new set of performance indicators for a more regular and clearer outlook on performance.  Richer conversations were being held on a regular basis with a specific corporate delivery unit for understanding poor performance.

c.         In response to further questioning about monitoring the performance of external providers it was explained that the Council had appointed an Assistant Director of Commissioning to ensure rigorous management arrangements and the Council was also setting up a commercial unit to ensure a stronger commercial function with clear rigour and reporting processes. 

d.         Further to questioning on why a one-year budget plan would not suffice: it was highlighted that the Council had a Corporate Plan for the next three years and a three year budget needed to be closely aligned to this. A one year budget would not be a transparent  reflection of the austerity measures which are set for at least the next three years and service improvements were often not seen after one year.

e.         In response to a question about why the Council could not use its contingency fund or increase Council Tax it was explained that using the Council’s contingency would only benefit a one year anomaly where improvements were expected thereafter. Local government spending was expected to continue to reduce until at least 2018. An increase in Council Tax would not benefit the Council, a 2% rise (which required a referendum) would bring in £1.6m but would forgo the Council Tax freeze funding of £1m and would place additional burden on the people in the community who were the worst off.

f.          In response to a question about how income would be generated it was stated that infrastructure investment would drive growth: plans being consulted on included improved transport links to attract businesses and quality jobs to the Borough, increasing the Council tax base, building more homes, running services in public, communities working together and interventions to sustain resourceful individuals.

g.         Early interventions for residents who most relied on the Council was key  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61