Agenda item - Draft Revenue Budget and Capital Strategy 2019/20

Report of the Executive Director Finance & Resources (copy attached)

RESOLVED: That the Committee –

(i)            Noted the updated forecasts for resources and expenditure and an estimated budget gap for 2019/20 based on a 2.99% Council Tax increase.

(ii)          Noted the refreshed 4 year Integrated Service & Financial Plans (ISFPs) including draft savings proposals for 2019/20.

(iii)         Noted that the format of the 2019/20 Budget Book will replicate the revised 2018/19 Budget Book format as per paragraph 6.1 and Appendix 5.

(iv)         Directed that the draft savings proposals identified at Appendix 2 be subject to further consultation and engagement with relevant stakeholders and across the council and partners, meeting all statutory consultation requirements.

(v)          Noted the update on Schools and HRA budget setting set out in section 7.

(vi)         Noted the Capital Strategy update set out in paragraphs 4.10 to 4.13.

(vii)        Received and noted the draft Equality Impact Assessments undertaken in relation to the draft budget proposals.

(viii)      Noted that subsequent decisions and information from central government regarding the Local Government Financial Settlement (LGFS) may impact on the proposals in this report.

81.1    The Committee considered the report of the Executive Director Finance & Resources which presented the draft revenue budget and capital budget proposals for the final year of the four-year planning framework introduced in 2016/17, which was aligned with the current central government spending review period and four-year funding deal.

81.2    Councillor Wealls referred to ‘residential, respite and short breaks’ and asked how the saving proposal of £140k would be achieved, and asked for confirmation that that would not negatively impact on the quantity or quality of respite provision. The Executive Director Families Children & Learning said the savings were not in relation to provision for children, but were about managing things in different ways, for example some contracts had been reviewed and it had been able to reduce costs, there had been changing staffing levels etc. Overall the budget was going up not down.

81.3    Councillor Sykes asked if there had been stress testing for critical areas of the budget? He was concerned about one off use of contingency funds to cover the budget gap, and asked what the risks of doing that were. He referred to the 60% reduction in funding for initiatives, and asked for an explanation of what those initiatives were. He noted that year on year there were cuts to services such as Environmental Health and Environment Protection etc, and asked how they were able to continue to provide the relevant services, and was concerned about the cuts to community safety. The Executive Director Finance & Resources said the budgets were managed on a risk basis. He said that next year the Finance Team would look at a new four year plan, and look at all variables which could affect the budget and that would be a form of stress testing. With regard to the one-off use of contingency funds, it could be used to ensure that there weren’t cuts to services whilst waiting to know of changes to local government funding. The Executive Director Neighbourhoods, Communities & Housing said that there had been cuts to Environmental Health and Environmental Protection last year, but that was to reduce management and officers were now looking at working more efficiently and ensuring that staff were at the right level doing the right job. With regard to community safety, Field Officers had been appointed and there had been changes to the way that anti-social behaviour was dealt with. With regard to the Initiatives Budgets, the Director said that she didn’t have examples with her but would provide them after the meeting. The following examples were later provided:

·         Social value training for procurement, commissioners and CVS

·         Signlive – BSL video relay trial at Barts customer service centre

·         Grantfinder license

·         Evaluation of third sector commission

·         Taking account 4 – social and economic audit of the CVS

·         Additional networking sessions in the community hub areas

·         Red Box set up

·         Neighbourhood action plan development in areas outside of the community hubs

·         Research into barriers into employment for disabled people

·         Research on race equality in employment and skills in B&H – this was citywide and all sectors – not to be confused with GHPO

81.4    Councillor Janio noted that the net expenditure had increased this year, and said it would be useful if next year the report could set out what the actual total expenditure was, and also asked if all the grants received could be listed. He referred to paragraph 5.1 of the report which showed the breakdown of the current budget, and asked for clarity on how those figures were arrived at as it wasn’t clear. He said that last year the Conservative Group had had a deal with the Labour Group on aspects of the budget, but this year that would not happen as this budget showed no imagination to take the city forward, and said that when austerity ended he wanted the other parties to spend wisely and liaise with each other.

81.5    The Chair referred to Councillor Janio’s comments that the budget showed ‘no imagination’, and said that officers and councillors had been incredibly imaginative in delivering £30m of investment to deliver £70m of recurrent savings. He said that the budget book, which was an innovation to bring to life the budget for people, listed the grants received. The Executive Director Finance & Resources accepted that the budget papers could be hard to understand, but the budget book was provided to address that. He referred to paragraph 5.1, and said that officers would try and provide the information in a different format for the papers being considered at Budget Council.

81.6    Councillor Mac Cafferty said that budgets for Adult Social Care and Young People were not adhered to last year, and asked if this year savings would cost us more than they would save us or if there had been a temptation to just get things off the books as quickly as possible. He referred to the Capital Strategy and said that there was the opportunity-costs for capital and then the real cost, and asked if that had been captured.  He referred to Housing Options saving, and understood that that was an area under stress due to the new Housing Regulations, and asked as that was a ‘red’ risk what would happen. With regard to children and young people asked if a gateway process was being used for assessing referrals, and asked about the cost of using agency staff. With regard to adult social care asked if the Council were using home carers to try to bring down the costs and whether there was concern over consultant’s fees.

81.7    The Director Finance & Resources referred to the savings in Adult Social Care and Young People and said that the modernisation fund was designed to ensure that savings were really challenged. The Capital Strategy was still under construction and said that the authority had been able to invest using capital receipts to make ongoing savings, but decisions would have to be made going forward and be selective in future investments. The Executive Director Neighbourhoods Communities & Housing said that Housing Options saving was a ‘red’ risk, but this saving had been put forward a number a years ago, before the changes to legislation and it would be wrong to take it out and not show that it was a saving that was expected to be achieved. The Executive Director Families Children & Learning said the number of young people being looked after had reduced and the savings identified last year had been achieved. A gateway process was used for assessing asylum seekers. No agency social workers had been used for around a year, and there was no spend on agency workers within the Directorate. The Executive Director Health & Adult Social Care referred to the Social Care Programme and said that departments were working together to look at opportunities to make additional savings, and home carers was something being looked at closely. He confirmed that at present consultant’s fees were not a concern.

81.8    RESOLVED: That the Committee –

(i)            Noted the updated forecasts for resources and expenditure and an estimated budget gap for 2019/20 based on a 2.99% Council Tax increase.

(ii)          Noted the refreshed 4 year Integrated Service & Financial Plans (ISFPs) including draft savings proposals for 2019/20.

(iii)         Noted that the format of the 2019/20 Budget Book will replicate the revised 2018/19 Budget Book format as per paragraph 6.1 and Appendix 5.

(iv)         Directed that the draft savings proposals identified at Appendix 2 be subject to further consultation and engagement with relevant stakeholders and across the council and partners, meeting all statutory consultation requirements.

(v)          Noted the update on Schools and HRA budget setting set out in section 7.

(vi)         Noted the Capital Strategy update set out in paragraphs 4.10 to 4.13.

(vii)        Received and noted the draft Equality Impact Assessments undertaken in relation to the draft budget proposals.

(viii)      Noted that subsequent decisions and information from central government regarding the Local Government Financial Settlement (LGFS) may impact on the proposals in this report.