Agenda and minutes

Please note that this meeting may be filmed or recorded by the Council for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site or by anyone attending the meeting using any communication method. Although we ask members of the public recording, filming or reporting on the meeting not to include the public seating areas, members of the public attending the meeting should be aware that we cannot guarantee that they will not be filmed or recorded by others attending the meeting. Members of the public participating in the meeting (e.g. making deputations, asking questions, making oral protests) should be aware that they are likely to be filmed, recorded or reported on. 

By entering the meeting room and using the public seating area, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

The chair of the meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming or recording, if in his or her opinion continuation of the filming, recording or reporting would disrupt or prejudice the proceedings, infringe the rights of any individual or may lead to the breach of a legal obligation by the Council.

The Chair referred Members present to item one on the agenda in respect of filming at the meeting and Members noted the information contained therein.

Apologies for Absence were received from Anita Jakhu, Kanupriya Jhunjhunwala, Lourdes Keever and Yvonne Denny.

None.

None.

None.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on the 29^th of November 2021.

The Committee noted that, contrary to the previous minutes, Cllr White was present at the meeting of the 29^th November.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on the 29^th of November 2021 were agreed as a correct record, subject to the above amendment.

To receive and note the minutes of the following Scrutiny Panels and to approve any recommendations contained within:

Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel 15 November 2021

Children and Young People’s Scrutiny Panel 18^th November 2021

Environment and Community Safety Scrutiny Panel 11^th November 2021

Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel 4^th of November 2021

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the following Scrutiny Panels were received and approved and any recommendations contained within were also approved:

Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel 15 November 2021

Children and Young People’s Scrutiny Panel 18^th November 2021

Environment and Community Safety Scrutiny Panel 11^th November 2021

Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel 4^th of November 2021

The Panel considered and commented on the Council’s 2022/23 Draft Budget / 5-year Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2022/23 – 2026/27. The papers were introduced by John Warlow –Director of Finance as set out in the agenda pack at pages 51-146 of the agenda pack. Along with a cover report the budget papers included the following appendices:

·         Appendix A – Recommendations put forward on the budget by the four Scrutiny Panels (and the Scrutiny Committee in respect of Your Council).

·         Appendix B – 2022/23 Draft Budget & 2021/26 Medium Term Financial Strategy Report (presented to Cabinet 8^th December 2020) 

·         Appendix 1– Summary of General Fund Revenue 2021/22 Budget and Medium Term Financial Plan 2026-2027

·         Appendix 2 – 2022/23 New Revenue Budget Proposals

·         Appendix 3 – Agreed Revenue Savings 2022-26

·         Appendix 4 – Proposed 2022/23-2026/27 Capital Programme

·         Appendix 5 - 2022/23 New Capital Budget Proposals

·         Appendix 6 – Budget Consultation Plan 

The Director of Finance gave a short introduction to the Committee. The key points were:

• The Director of Finance set out that this was a different budget to normal as the process was taking place in a very different climate, given the pandemic and the impact it had on how services were being delivered.
• There was an election coming up in May and the manifesto commitments for the political parties would drive a refresh of the Borough Plan.
• Local government funding had been in a position of stasis for some time. In light of provisional local government funding announcements, the Committee was advised that there was an expectation that funding would become more needs driven and reflect the levelling up agenda.
• The Committee was advised that the budget had been underwritten with a £10m reserve held to mitigate budget savings requirements.
• There were no new savings proposals in the budget, for the first in many years. Some degree of a step up in savings may be required for the following year.
• There was a significant amount of growth funding included in the budget (circa £12m).
• An updated budget report was due to be agreed by Cabinet in February and then Full Council on 1^st March.

The following arose during the discussion of the Council’s 2022/23 Draft Budget / 5-year Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2022/23 – 2026/27:

1. The Committee sought assurances around the extent to which officers were confident in the ability to deliver a balanced budget. In response, officers advised that the growth proposals were made possible by increased government funding. The budget before the Committee was a multi-year financial model as the funding requirements were ongoing. The Council had made an assumption that the level of grant funding was ongoing, albeit there was some degree of uncertainty around this. The government’s Spending Review 21 set out some additional funding for local authorities. In summary, the Director of Finance advised that he was pretty sure of the budget envelope for next year but that there was some degree of uncertainty for years two and three onwards.
2. The Committee  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

The Committee received a copy of the Treasury Management Strategy Statement 2022/23 for comments, as set out in the agenda pack at page 147-172. The report was introduced by Tim Mpofu, Head of Pensions and Treasury.

*Clerk’s note at 21:51 – The Committee agreed to suspend Committee Standing Orders, in order to allow the meeting to continue past 22:00. The Committee agreed to a short adjournment in order to allow a comfort break*.

*22:00 – The meeting resumed*

The following arose during the discussion of this agenda item:

1. The Committee did not have any formal comments to put to Corporate Committee on the Treasury Management Strategy Statement.
2. The Committee sought clarification around the borrowing and investment strategy and queried how much the authority was allowed to borrow and where this was set out in the report.
3. The Panel also sought an update on the extent of LOBO loans that were still being used by the Council.
4. The Committee sought clarification around the £0.1m listed as being lent to local residents and questioned what this £100k was for.
5. The Committee also sought clarification over the authority’s debt repayment strategy - whether it paid back capital as well as interest and whether it would seek to repay debt above the minimum payment terms in order to pay off the debt sooner.
6. The Committee sought clarification as to what the total revenue impact on was from borrowing on both the General Fund and the HRA.
7. Officers agreed to respond to these points in writing. (Action: Tim Mpofu).

RESOLVED

That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee scrutinised and provided

comments on the proposed updated Treasury Management Strategy Statement for

2022/23, prior to its presentation to Corporate Committee and Council for approval.

The Committee received a report which provide an update on budget monitoring as at Quarter 2 of the municipal year. The report was introduced by Thomas Skeen, AD for Finance as set out in the agenda pack at pages 173-222. The following arose during the discussion of the report:

1. The Committee requested an update on the overspends contained in the budget monitoring report and enquired whether this was going to continue to increase in quarters two and three. In response, officers acknowledged that the pressures on demand led budgets were an area of concern and that more resources had been allocated to this area. Officers acknowledged that despite the extra resources they could not give a firm assurance that the pressure on demand led budgets would reduce by year end.
2. The Committee also sought assurances around the expectation on being able to achieve the savings for next year that were set out in the MTFS. Officers advised that delays in delivery of savings had taken place across different service areas, particularly as a result of the impact of the pandemic. The updated budget report to Cabinet in February would provide an updated assessment on the delivery of savings for next year.
3. The Committee referred to Paragraph 6.2.2 of the report and sought clarification around the step up in demand for social care services since Q1 and the assertion that those pressures were not due to be met by the government. In response, officers advised that they could not give any specific assurances around the extent of that pressure at year end and whether it would exceed £20m. The report sought to highlight to Members that this pressure existed and should be considered as a risk.

RESOLVED 

Noted.

N/A

The Committee noted the work programme and agreed any recommendations contained therein.

10^th March 2022

10^th March 2022