The Pre-Decision Scrutiny Questions and officer responses were noted.

DECISION

1.    To note the Council’s projected outturn position against General Fund, Dedicated Schools Budget, Housing Revenue Account and earmarked reserves for 2020-21, based on forecasts as at 31st December 2020;

2.    To note the reserves position of the Council is uncertain pending the closure of the statement of accounts for the period 2016 – 2020;

3.    To note the Council’s projected outturn position against General Fund and Housing Revenue Account capital programme approved budgets, based on forecasts as at 31st December 2020;

4.    To note that there are no equalities implications directly resulting from the report, as set out in Section 4 of the report.

Action by:

INTERIM CORPORATE DIRECTOR, RESOURCES (K. BARTLE)

(Head of Strategic Finance (Chief Accountant) (A. Khan)

Councillor Candida Ronald, Cabinet Member for Resources and the Voluntary Sector introduced the regular budget monitoring report. The general fund showed a predicted £2.9 million overspend which would result in an equivalent draw down of reserves if that was the year end situation. The DSG was forecast with a £100k overspend and £11.2 million cumulative deficit. The HRA was forecast to underspend by £1.5 million.

The report set out details for each directorate and it was noted that the Covid Pandemic had had a significant impact on the Council finances.

It was noted that the report had been updated to increase financial transparency including on business rate and council tax collection figures, Covid spending and details on adult social care which showed the particular challenges to that service.

The Council had proposed savings of £21 million for the year of which £11.7 million was being forecast as to be delivered. Overall, Council finances remained uncertain and even though Government had provided significant support in relation to the Covid pandemic this was still expected to have a significant negative impact.

The Pre-Decision Scrutiny Questions and officer responses were noted.

The Mayor noted the pre-decision scrutiny questions and officers responses and noted the extremely challenging financial position at the Council and the increasing demand for services. He thanked Kevin Bartle, Interim Corporate Director, Resources and his team for their hard work supporting the Council’s finances. The Mayor proposed the recommendation as set out. It was agreed without dissent and it was:

RESOLVED

1.    To note the Council’s projected outturn position against General Fund, Dedicated Schools Budget, Housing Revenue Account and earmarked reserves for 2020-21, based on forecasts as at 31st December 2020;

2.    To note the reserves position of the Council is uncertain pending the closure of the statement of accounts for the period 2016 – 2020;

3.    To note the Council’s projected outturn position against General Fund and Housing Revenue Account capital programme approved budgets, based on forecasts as at 31st December 2020;

4.    To note that there are no equalities implications directly resulting from the report, as set out in Section 4 of the report.

The Committee is asked to review the 2021-2022 Budget Proposals

As a result of a full and wide-ranging discussion on the appraisal of the budget proposals.

The Chair Moved and it was: -

RESOLVED to:

1.    Thank all those attendees for their contributions to the discussions on the changes to the MTFS; and

2.    Agreed the changes to the review as detailed in the attach Budget Scrutiny and Budget Pre-decision Scrutiny Questions and responses.

A copy of the report will be made available prior to the meeting.

The Committee received and noted the draft copy of the Review of 2021-22 Budget Proposals it was noted that there had been proposed new elements for the Council’s Budget Capital Programme, Housing Revenue Account (HRA) expenditure and income and other changes to savings.

Following a full and wide-ranging discussion it was agreed to:

• Defer detailed consideration of this report until the 1^{st of} February Reserve Budget meeting; and 
• Formally request the Interim Monitoring officer’s approval to moving the start time of Monday night’s Reserve OSC Budget meeting to an earlier start at 4:00 p.m. to facilitate discussions.

The Chair thanked Councillor Blake; Councillor Hassell; Councillor Ronald; Kevin Bartle; Denise Radley; Ann Sutcliffe; James Thomas for attending tonight’s meeting and for the information that they had provided which would help to inform further discussions by the Committee.

Arising from the discussions on the presentations the Committee noted the following key issues that had arisen:

v  The main theme of discussions had been on the reserves policy and the interplay between government grants; the reserve policy and the associated risks.

v  To consider better ways of comparing rises in fees and charges e.g. market pitches, parking, and the community facilities.

v  Is the Council putting in place an infrastructure to ensure that they are ready for the impacts of Covid to address the economic shock e.g. on the Housing Capital Programme, Homelessness and Housing Options Services.

v  Ideally the report should provide the actuals from last year to compare to the budget going forward and that is not in the report and it is considered best practice for scrutiny to consider the actuals as part of any budget scrutiny. Whilst difficult for the current year it should be possible for previous years to do such a comparison. If not at the directorate level, then it should be still possible to do that on a wider level.

v  Scrutiny should have access assumptions that upon which a budget for each department is agreed.  Therefore, going forward, it would be helpful to have a sense of what the capacity is within service areas to understand any risks associated with the savings being put forward.

v  Felt that arguments that have put forward regarding the anticipated income not to be very to be very persuasive regarding especially with reference to (i) New Homes Bonus; (ii) Council Tax Support Grant and (iii) the Social and Care Grant.

v  Budget setting should include context and does not have departmental budgets, elements of the budget are drawn out which are subject to growth/savings and it makes it difficult to piece together.

v  Flagged up from their briefing on Covid-19 funding that would look to cover the costs incurred to the Council and felt that more clarity is required on this.

v  Wished to know where the overspend in the Temporary Accommodation Subsidy has come from and some of the specifics there about the assumed level of Housing Benefit Subsidy

v  On markets the fees and charges 195% increase, charging £1K per year just for a Saturday pitch let alone what they would pay Monday to Friday is completely counterproductive and that this should be reviewed.

v  Need to consider the risks outlined Treasury Management Report that goes before the Audit Committee at that provides an outline of the risk’s element (including the housing revenue account) and will inform the Committee of the timeline that we are working towards.

v  Need a better understanding the reverberations of the pandemic going forward with reference on the use of the Councils Reserves e.g. The Council needs to maintain  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6

v  HAC is a significant area of Council spend £110M of which £87M is spent on packages for care packages supporting 3500 individuals.

v  The Committee raised concern on the transformation and review of homelessness service and enquired whether some of the Covid grant funding (used for temporary accommodation) could be better utilised to support the homelessness services. It further asked that there should be a focus on substance misuse service reductions given the pressures to make savings the Committee felt that some of the objectives would be missed and to make sure that the households are prevented from becoming homeless.

v  The Council confirmed that for substance misuse reduction, one of the savings is specifically about the rehabilitation services is a manageable reduction in service provision given the current cohort and other options. The Council confirmed that there is a long-term saving about Hostel use and substance misuse scheduled in 2023-24. The reason for that Council should be working in partnership with GLA and other London boroughs in terms of how hostel provision are funded.

v  Savings 15 which are also substance misuse – Healthy One which was previously funded from general fund or core budget. Healthy One is 2 nurses providing clinical support to homeless people with substance misuse and the Council will successfully bid through Public Health England for rough sleeping, drug and alcohol treatment grants that provides support with mainstream pathways.

v  The Council confirmed that in terms of the transformation proposal this will take place in year three of the medium-term financial plan because they wish would have a obtain considered view on their spending for substance misuse and in hostels. It is a significant amount of money and its services users are often people with complex needs.

v  The Committee also felt that services users who have left the services and “cleaned up” should also be considered for support.

v  Committee asked for clarity around savings 6 and 7 and raised concern about young population being more vulnerable to Covid because of the gaps in their education and situation in the family and if the Council was dampening demand and whether it was setting itself up for a bigger crisis and further spending needed in the future.

v  The Council had outlined that they built capacity within the system including restorative practice model, investment in staffing through Social Work Academy, reducing duplication by restructuring early help services, the other area is external partnership including safeguarding children and working intensively with troubled families programme to deliver results.

v  The Council is looking to use some of the schools funding to part fund some of the capacity for educational psychologists but acknowledged that some of the issue is to make sure that the resources are in the right place.

v  Committee asked if the Council has enough capacity to deal with future demand and how much can be expected from the partners to serve children.

v  The Council outlined that for safeguarding it is the statutory partners such as how the children services is working with health and police. In terms of capacity depends on demand but are confident that they have the resources to support.

v  Council outlined that they are in the process of conducting a review on the proposals to make sure they are delivering against it including increased demand in new assessments and how that measures against the financial assumptions made.

v  Support for Learning Service (SLS) 46% cut is across whole service not just one area, the Council outlined that the provision can be supported by other services who are more suitably qualified but have just concluded the consultation for SLS and Special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) so have not yet reached or finalised conclusion. 

v  The Committee felt that savings was small compared that what is being delivered by SLS and requested to understand the mapping for other services that will be stepping in.

v  The Committee questioned the level of certainty that there will be a provision akin to what was previously provided.

v  From the changes made previously on the Children's centres it has resulted in a in a much wider reach to parents and is an example of where LBTH are using schools funding to part fund increased capacity for educational psychologists. In addition, on the SEND improvement work LBTH are working with health partners to look at faster diagnosis of a special educational need or disability such as dyslexia or Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)that turns into increased capacity.

v  In terms of Children's Social Care capacity LBTH have endeavoured to utilise part of the Government's social care grant of which there's an Adults' and Children's element that that has not yet been allocated to a specific area of spend within Children's Social Care.  This will be maintained as a buffer as it is not possible to accurately predict  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6

To consider the responses received regarding the Council’s 2021-22 Budget Report and Medium-Term Financial Strategy 2021-24