Questions received under Council Procedure Rule number 11.1:
(a) Question from Councillor Witherford to the Executive Member for Finance
“Pre May 2015 the Conservative Group circulated their key pledges to local residents, one of which was to “protect the Council’s finances by reducing its debt burden”. Your implication was that the previous administration had left the Borough Council with an unsustainable multi-million pound debt. After two months in administration, are you still of this opinion? Should this still be your belief, in the interest of transparency can you detail the areas of your concern and advise when we can expect to see the “sound fiscal plan” that was promised as a matter of urgency which would, in your opinion, restore this authority to a sound financial position”.
Response from Councillor Surtees
“Can I thank Cllr Witherford for her question, as it gives me the opportunity to clarify the position of the Conservative Administration, having now taken control of the Council. As we said in our election manifesto, we were concerned as to the sustainability of the Council’s finances. There were two main areas of concern, firstly the high level of debt to which it had committed itself in recent years, and secondly the suggestion in a report to Council in March 2015 that the council’s reserves could be depleted.
Whilst recognising that the level of HRA borrowing is capped by Government, and that the terms of the PSLB loans are very favourable, although with high costs for early exit, most people will be baffled as to why the previous administration opted not to pay anything back in the first seven years. The result is significantly larger repayments in years 8 to 30 and will lead to additional interest charges. There have been regular additions to borrowing for capital developments and more is still needed both to fund the current capital programme and to support the council’s new Development Company in its start-up phase.
In March the council identified required savings and additional funding requirements to meet its medium term budget and agreed to spend reserves rather than making a tough decision over the funding of the green waste collection service.
We have engaged in detailed dialogue with senior officers within the council since we took control to protect our finances, reduce our debt and interest payments. We are reassured by the financial management exercised by officers.
This involves detailed analysis which we are undertaking with officers, which will address some very complex and challenging issues. The outcomes of this analysis – our “sound fiscal plan” – will be incorporated into a revised Medium Term Financial Strategy, which we will submit to Council in November of this year”.
(b) Question from Councillor Bray to the Leader of the Council
“With the Conservative Group having spent the past few years opposing the Crescent development, voting against it in Council meetings and even writing to Sainsbury’s to pour scorn on the scheme, can I take it, in light of members of the new administration lining up for photo opportunities, that the Conservative administration has had a change of heart?”
Response from Councillor Hall
“Ten years ago, a Conservative Administration produced the Hinckley Regeneration Masterplan. This was reported in the Hinckley Times in 2005 and again two weeks ago.
Along with development of the Atkins building and new council offices, there were plans for a cinema and supermarket on the bus station site, and a new leisure centre on Argents Mead. These were all part of a plan to improve prosperity and quality of life for people in Hinckley.
The current Conservative Administration sees the Crescent as a part of that plan, and very much as work in progress, which will benefit from our commitment to complete the regeneration. Cllr Bray should therefore not take this as a change of heart, and when he and his colleagues want to discuss the merits of regeneration schemes that we bring forward, I will not take that as his group now opposing the regeneration of Hinckley”.
Minutes:
The following questions were asked and responses provided under Council Procedure Rule 11.1:
Questions received under Council Procedure Rule number 11.1:
(a) Question from Councillor Witherford to the Executive Member for Finance
“Pre May 2015 the Conservative Group circulated their key pledges to local residents, one of which was to “protect the Council’s finances by reducing its debt burden”. Your implication was that the previous administration had left the Borough Council with an unsustainable multi-million pound debt. After two months in administration, are you still of this opinion? Should this still be your belief, in the interest of transparency can you detail the areas of your concern and advise when we can expect to see the “sound fiscal plan” that was promised as a matter of urgency which would, in your opinion, restore this authority to a sound financial position”.
Response from Councillor Surtees
“Can I thank Cllr Witherford for her question, as it gives me the opportunity to clarify the position of the Conservative Administration, having now taken control of the Council. As we said in our election manifesto, we were concerned as to the sustainability of the Council’s finances. There were two main areas of concern, firstly the high level of debt to which it had committed itself in recent years, and secondly the suggestion in a report to Council in March 2015 that the council’s reserves could be depleted.
Whilst recognising that the level of HRA borrowing is capped by Government, and that the terms of the PSLB loans are very favourable, although with high costs for early exit, most people will be baffled as to why the previous administration opted not to pay anything back in the first seven years. The result is significantly larger repayments in years 8 to 30 and will lead to additional interest charges. There have been regular additions to borrowing for capital developments and more is still needed both to fund the current capital programme and to support the council’s new Development Company in its start-up phase.
In March the council identified required savings and additional funding requirements to meet its medium term budget and agreed to spend reserves rather than making a tough decision over the funding of the green waste collection service.
We have engaged in detailed dialogue with senior officers within the council since we took control to protect our finances, reduce our debt and interest payments. We are reassured by the financial management exercised by officers.
This involves detailed analysis which we are undertaking with officers, which will address some very complex and challenging issues. The outcomes of this analysis – our “sound fiscal plan” – will be incorporated into a revised Medium Term Financial Strategy, which we will submit to Council in November of this year”.
(b) Question from Councillor Bray to the Leader of the Council
“With the Conservative Group having spent the past few years opposing the Crescent development, voting against it in Council meetings and even writing to Sainsbury’s to pour scorn on the scheme, can I take it, in light of members of the new administration lining up for photo opportunities, that the Conservative administration has had a change of heart?”
Response from Councillor Hall
“Ten years ago, a Conservative Administration produced the Hinckley Regeneration Masterplan. This was reported in the Hinckley Times in 2005 and again two weeks ago.
Along with development of the Atkins building and new council offices, there were plans for a cinema and supermarket on the bus station site, and a new leisure centre on Argents Mead. These were all part of a plan to improve prosperity and quality of life for people in Hinckley.
The current Conservative Administration sees the Crescent as a part of that plan, and very much as work in progress, which will benefit from our commitment to complete the regeneration. Cllr Bray should therefore not take this as a change of heart, and when he and his colleagues want to discuss the merits of regeneration schemes that we bring forward, I will not take that as his group now opposing the regeneration of Hinckley”.