Invitees:

Cllr H Williams Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member Resources

Darren Mepham, Chief Executive
Andrew Jolley, Corporate Director – Operational & Partnership Services

Randal Hemingway, Head of Finance & Section 151 Officer

Members considered a report on the draft Medium Term Financial Strategy 2017-18 to 2020-21, which set out the spending priorities of the Council, key investment objectives and budget areas targeted for necessary savings. The strategy included a financial forecast for 2017-21 and a detailed draft revenue budget for 2017-18.

Members asked for more information regarding digitising the Council Tax Reduction Scheme and the fact that many people in receipt of benefits would not be able to manage this online. The Deputy Leader explained that a budget had been allocated to deal with this and everyone who was entitled to it would receive it. An online platform was being configured and instructions were being issued with Council Tax bills encouraging residents to complete transactions on line rather than by phone. Other services would continue to support residents unable to apply on line.

The Committee requested details of the proposed savings in Democratic Services. The Corporate Director – Operational and Partnership Services explained that this did not specifically relate to scrutiny.  There would be a different form of Local Government in future and a requirement to collaborate more. If scrutiny collaborated more, it was likely that it would cost less and savings could be made from this. The role of the Mayor was also being considered including the part the authority played in supporting the Mayors work. These were not finite proposals but issues to be considered in the future. It would be possible to make the savings required by looking at the way services were delivered including combining the scrutiny function. If Members protected this part of the budget then that could create a problem.

Members asked for clarification regarding not reducing the scrutiny function but changing the way the service was delivered. They were concerned about collaborating for education and social services and different priorities for each authority. Some Members were aware of joint scrutiny arrangements that had failed because others were not willing to participate. The Corporate Director - Operational and Partnership Services explained that there could be collaborative working but not collaborative scrutiny. 

This would not damage the scrutiny function and it was important to continue to look at different ways of working. More information would be available in January about the proposed merges and consideration could then be given to staffing proposals for the transitional period. This report was being presented to scrutiny when the authority was approaching a period of change. In terms of work now, the authority could think about a structure that could embrace collaboration in future.

Some Members suggested that monthly council meetings were unnecessary and this could be reviewed. The Corporate Director - Operational and Partnership Services explained that he was under the impression Members were happy with the current arrangements and added that web casting appeared to be becoming more popular. 

Members raised the issue of the Community Action Fund, some wards being larger than others and multi member wards. The Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer confirmed that discussions had taken place in BREP and it was difficult to make it equitable for all members. He confirmed that funding could be pooled. 

The Committee questioned why less staff were required for Direct payments however additional money was required. The Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer explained that there had been adjustments between the teams and he was happy to provide further information if required. 

The Committee questioned how achievable savings were from reducing the number of staff in HR, OD and Communications and business support. Members were advised it was difficult when the only cuts that could be made involved people. This could have an impact on the service delivered and why collaboration was so important.

Concerns were raised about reducing visits to food establishments. The authority was broadly compliant but there would be concerns if there was a reduction. The Corporate Director - Operational and Partnership Services explained that the purpose was to maintain performance and there was currently a review underway.

Conclusions

Additional Information requested:

·      Members have requested further information in relation to the unavoidable 2017-18 service budget pressures against the Chief Executive & Finance Directorate, with reference to the increase in volume and complexity of administration for Direct Payments.

The Committee are concerned that collaborative scrutiny without extra resources could result in a poor level of scrutiny which would be damaging to the authority. The future picture is unclear and the authority should continue to value scrutiny as it played an important part in holding the executive to account and supporting the quality of decision making. The Committee recommend that resources be retained.