Members are asked to note that any reference to the Deputy Chief Executive (Corporate Direction) in the following reports (items 10 – 16) should read ‘Interim Deputy Section 151 Officer’ as the former has not been involved in the compilation of these reports. By contributing to and being involved in the presentation of these reports, the Interim Deputy Section 151 Officer is confirming the necessary financial assurances.
Minutes:
In advance of the Executive member presenting the budget reports, the Chief Executive referred to:
· Item 10-16 (‘Finance reports’) on the supplementary agenda which explained that any reference to the Deputy Chief Executive (Corporate Direction) in those reports should read ‘Interim Deputy Section 151 Officer’ as the former had not been involved in the compilation of the reports and that by contributing to and being involved in the presentation of the reports, the Interim Deputy Section 151 Officer was offering the necessary financial assurances on this occasion.
· Items 10-16 would be presented and discussed together, but a vote on each report would be taken separately.
· A recorded vote was required by statute on items 12 and 13 (General Fund budget and Council Tax setting).
Councillor Williams arrived at 6.47pm.
Following the Executive member for Finance’s presentation of the budget reports, discussion ensued thereon, during which the following points were raised:
· The change in recommendation since consideration of the MTFS by the Scrutiny Commission
· Loss of recycling credits from Leicestershire County Council contributing to the budget gap
· Reduction of the government’s revenue support grant in each year of the MTFS
· The reduction of parking charges in the town centre a few years previously, the loss of revenue from which had been supplemented from the special expenses area budget
· The potential for the Wholly Owned Housing Company to generate income for the authority, but that this was not certain during the period covered by the MTFS
· Concern regarding potential increased fly tipping on introduction of the charge for green waste collection, as experienced by Birmingham City Council, but not elsewhere
· The welcome new affordable housing schemes at Southfield Road, Hinckley; Ambion Court, Market Bosworth; and Martinshaw Lane, Groby
· Freezing council tax for the past four years had eroded the council tax base and led to the need to now make difficult financial decisions
· Increases in fees and charges for cemeteries
· The new charge for rat treatments which had previously been free of charge
· Disproportionate leisure centre fee increases for concessions/seniors
· The welcome news that funding to install a public toilet in Earl Shilton would be identified in 2016/17
· The charge for market stall holders remaining unchanged was welcomed
· Support for the Voluntary & Community Sector was welcomed
· Additional funding for the Parish & Community Initiative Fund was welcomed
· The assumptions made in relation to business rates retention, as the matter was still out for consultation by the Government
· Assumptions for salary costs had not been made for years five and six as this was outside of the scope of the Medium Term Financial Strategy.
In response to questions about the change in the MTFS and the added charge for users of the garden waste collection service since the matter had been discussed by the Scrutiny Commission, it was explained that, whilst the £5 increase in council tax meant a balanced budget for 2016/17, it did not secure by itself a balanced budget/MTFS for following years. Members were reminded that the Scrutiny Commission had recommended that further consideration be given to how this may be achieved, which had been done and, as a result, was presented in these reports.
In relation to the £24 charge for the garden waste service, a member asked if provision had been made in the event of a take-up of less than 40%. In response it was noted that, based on the experience of other authorities, the take-up was highly unlikely to be less than 40%, but that a reserve had been built in.
A member asked why there had been a delay in creation of the Wholly Owned Company, as it had been in advanced stages of development a year ago. In response it was explained that the company and directors were in place, but that the business case for the company was being developed as expediently as possible, whilst ensuring a robust position for both the Company and the Council going forward, with advice being sourced from other local authorities and to ensure risks were identified and managed.
Attention was drawn to the charge for pool hire (page 83) which appeared to be set to decrease from £52.10 to £9.00 per hour and the accuracy of this was questioned in light of general increases across the board. In relation to fees and charges for the leisure centre, it was explained that these were set by the operator and were the maximum permitted charges, but that, as with the previous provider, promotions and concessions throughout the year would mean that the maximum fee may not be charged.
In considering the New Homes Bonus, it was noted that the anticipated decrease from six to four years in 2018/19 was accounted for in the MTFS. In relation to the additional payment of £350 as outlined in paragraph 3.17 (page 14), it was noted that this payment was per affordable home, per year.
In response to a question in relation to Discretionary Housing Payments, it was noted that the sum was being included in the base budget so would be available each year going forward. It was noted that the impact of Universal Credits was unknown at this point.
Reference was made to the table on page 12 of the agenda pack ‘Hub savings (VCS) income’ and a member asked what this meant. Officers agreed to provide a response following the meeting.
The Executive member for Finance was thanked for her clear and comprehensive presentation of the reports, the Finance team was thanked for their hard work in the budget setting and reporting process, and the Strategic Leadership Board, Corporate Operations Board and service managers were thanked for the savings they had identified.