Agenda item

To receive the Budget Bids 2011/12 update and to consider whether to make any recommendations on the subject.

(Reports attached)

Officers delivered a presentation and report on the Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan 2011-14 to enable Members to review the current position and recommend changes on the draft budget proposals. 

Members were informed that only those revenue and capital bids that had been classified as a ‘high’ priority had been included within the Medium Term Financial Plan. This had been necessitated by the requirement to cover the Council’s medium term shortfall resulting from the two year provisional grant settlement from Government that was significantly greater than previously estimated.

Other immediate means to cover the shortfall had been identified. This included the undertaking of a full detailed review of all unavoidable pressures and proposals for income generation, and also an extensive line by line analysis of all expenditure and income which would deliver savings that would have no detrimental impact on service delivery. A number of options for change had also been proposed, including staff terms and conditions of service; and also a reduction in the scrutiny budget.

Officers informed Members that the limiting of the Council Tax rise in 2011/12 to 0% would be off-set by a 2.5 per cent Government grant for 2011/12. This would cover the difference of the original assumption. This followed Government’s assumption that there would be no Council Tax rises during this period, although it was explained to Members that the Council was not strictly prohibited from doing so.

Members suggested that it might be more appropriate for the Council to focus on achieving a gross rather than net minimum approved level of general fund balances. This had followed concern that the Council might underestimate the final balance by focusing on the net figure.

The Committee also argued that the principal focus of the budget bids should be on serving the immediate need of the public. It was suggested that bids that would enable the Council to deliver services that supported the public should be prioritised over those that promised either longer-term benefits or benefits that would not be directly accrued by the public.

Members heard that the capital bid for the installation of Solar PV panels on suitable Council buildings had been re-classified from a medium to a high bid. Officers expected that the cost of installation would be off-set by the Government’s commitment to reward green measures introduced by local authorities.  Members requested further information on the efficiency of the Solar Panel that had been installed at the Countryside Centre in 2005/6 on the basis that this would help to inform a decision regarding the Solar Panel capital bid (£48,000).

Members commented that they often encountered difficulties when attempting to use the Council’s IT system. In part, this was due to a need for the Council to comply with Government protocol concerning IT usage at local authorities. Officers agreed to provide further information with regards to this matter.

The Committee also requested further information on a number of proposed bids, including: fleet replacement, in particular regarding mileage and age of the current fleet (Capital bid - £471,000); the costs and risks involved with not pursuing the revenue bid regarding security for PCs (£6,000); the breakdown of the revenue bid for organisational development (£50,000); and flood alleviation measures at Batchley Brook and the potential for Persimmon Homes to contribute to costs.

In relation to the organisational development bid to members commented that in previous years expenditure on training had been less than anticipated because many members of staff had not utilised the opportunity.  In order to monitor this situation Officers agreed to provide information about the take-up of staff training and the costs involved within the quarterly budget monitoring reports.

Some Members expressed the view that the proposed funding of the Grants Officer post would help reflect the Council’s continued commitment to supporting the voluntary sector.  It was suggested that allocating further resources to supporting the voluntary sector would help enable voluntary sector organisations to become more self-sufficient and less reliant on the Council for support, thereby helping the Council to realise long term cost benefits as a consequence. However, it was conversely argued that the Council should prioritise short term benefits, including boosting employment rather than the Grants Officer post.

RESOLVED that:

1)            Officers provide the information requested for consideration at the following meeting of the Committee;

2)            subject to receipt of this additional information the Committee reconsider the budget bids item at the following meeting of the Committee; and

3)            the report be noted.