Meeting documents

There were no apologies for absence.

To declare any personal or prejudicial interests.

There were no declarations of interest.

Context:         Will the proposed budget for 2010/11 and the medium-term plan for subsequent years enable the Council to continue to provide the level of services expected by Buckinghamshire residents?

Issues to be addressed with each Cabinet Member will include:

1.     The impact of service reductions and efficiency savings

2.     The impact of a possible prolonged economic downturn

3.     The balance of statutory and discretionary service provision

4.     The effect on service delivery of forthcoming reductions in staff due to Transformation

5.     The potential for reducing vacant posts and/or reducing use of agency staff

6.     Major corporate risks affecting services within the portfolio

7.     Performance outturn for 2009/10 and the implications for 2010/11

8.     The adequacy of the capital programme

Background Papers:-

Appendix 1: Revenue Budgets

a) Recommended Revenue Budgets 2010/11 – 2013/14 and 2009/10 approved budget

b)  Detailed breakdown of Council's revenue budget in each year

c) Detailed analysis (for leaders portfolio) highlighting the key items that make up the totals for increased income, efficiencies, service reductions and service developments. 

Appendix 2: Capital Budgets

Appendix 3: Quarter 2 Risk Information

Appendix 4: Quarter 2 Performance Information (to follow)

David Shakespeare was welcomed to the meeting. The following questions were asked:-

Will the proposed budget for 2010/11 and the medium-term plan for subsequent years enable the Council to continue to provide the level of services expected by Buckinghamshire residents?

It is a priority to balance the budget. There are difficult challenges and choices ahead and to combat this, the Council have been working on the Transformation and Pathfinder Programme. Savings from the Programme should be realised in 2011/12 but progress has been slower than expected.

In relation to the sheet on budget monitoring pressures and various over and under spends do you think the budget will balance?

A balanced budget is anticipated by identifying savings in some areas and counteracting overspends which are inevitable e.g. baby p case has changed the risk assessment and now more children are in care. Some children who have more difficult needs could be sent to specialised establishments which could be out of County and could cost  up to £200- 250,000 per year per child.

Trying to match the public’s expectations in this financial climate must be difficult e.g. the recent snowfall – how can this be managed?

There will be a need to make careful choices – the need to look at core business and discretionary, mandatory and statutory spend, thereby focusing on what the Council needs to do by law. Discretionary services may be eroded significantly.

What are the biggest risks?

The Council now has to draft their budgets three months before it is agreed and there are so many uncertainties – different pressures emerge after the budget has been drafted. As explained earlier safeguarding has escalated and it was unclear whether this was a one off or a trend that would last. If it continues to increase there will be severe pressure on the budget next year. Insurance provisions have been put in place but this would not cover the worst case scenario.

In addition the Government are introducing free care for the elderly, which is estimated at £670 million per year – there is a feeling that this is underestimated by £250 million. This initiative does not appear to cover residential care. Buckinghamshire has higher than average self funders and if all residents claimed for free care, even though they could afford to pay for it, it could cost the Council up to £27-28 million on the budget, with the Government contributing very little.

If this impacted on residential care, this would create a difficult situation. Some older people had chosen expensive residential homes because they could afford to pay for them and it suited their lifestyle. This could cost up to £900 per week whereas the Council spent £450-500. When the money ran out would you move the older person to standard accommodation and incur the stress of moving or would you let the older person stay where they were but put extra burden on the taxpayer?

Is the overspend on safeguarding under control?

This is a difficult  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

Context:         Will the proposed budget for 2010/11 and the medium-term plan for subsequent years enable the Council to continue to provide the level of services expected by Buckinghamshire residents?

Issues to be addressed with each Cabinet Member will include:

1.     The impact of service reductions and efficiency savings

2.     The impact of a possible prolonged economic downturn

3.     The balance of statutory and discretionary service provision

4.     The effect on service delivery of forthcoming reductions in staff due to Transformation

5.     The potential for reducing vacant posts and/or reducing use of agency staff

6.     Major corporate risks affecting services within the portfolio

7.     Performance outturn for 2009/10 and the implications for 2010/11

8.     The adequacy of the capital programme

Background Papers:-

Appendix 1: Revenue Budgets

a) Recommended Revenue Budgets 2010/11 – 2013/14 and 2009/10 approved budget

b)  Detailed breakdown of Council's revenue budget in each year

c) Detailed analysis (for Deputy Leader’s portfolio) highlighting the key items that make up the totals for increased income, efficiencies, service reductions and service developments. 

Appendix 2: Capital Budgets – not applicable

Appendix 3: Quarter 2 Risk Information – not applicable

Appendix 4: Quarter 2 Performance Information (to follow)

Will the proposed budget for 2010/11 and the medium- term plan for subsequent years enable the Council to continue to provide the level of services expected by Buckinghamshire residents?

The people of Buckinghamshire should not have to pay a high council tax and the Council has to be prepared with the reduction in funding to look after residents to the best of its ability by decreasing back office services. There is a huge difference for Councils in the North who get most of their funding from the Government rather than the Council tax payer. In Buckinghamshire the Council tax payer has to contribute 79% of the Councils total funding. Buckinghamshire is perceived to be a rich County but it has areas of deprivation.

With budget reductions how will you meet the aspirations of the Corporate Plan?

The Corporate Plan was agreed in September last year which was later than normal. The Plan was put together when the budget was on the horizon, Members knew that it would be a difficult budget but not to what extent. The Corporate Plan reflected that budget at that time. The Corporate Plan will need to be reviewed alongside the budget, as the budget will now have to influence policy.

How many local area co-ordinator posts are being reduced?

Two in total but one per year. These posts had to be cut to deal with the pressures on safeguarding.

How will you deliver on Locality Services?

The Council has to do the best within the resources available; with restricted budgets it is hard to improve services.

Are you expecting the District Councils to contribute to Locality Services?

This is a new initiative and will take time to implement. Locality working is one of the fields that Buckinghamshire is leading on. Officers have to give up their time to attend the Local Area Forums (LAF) and 17 of these are now running across the County. A recent meeting was held with LAF Chairman and they confirmed that attendance and enthusiasm was high.

In view of the recent weather could you use Community Engagement to help improve service delivery? The County Council could help facilitate an emergency plan?

Extreme cold weather has not been experienced since 1963 and the Local Area Forums would be good ways of getting the community more involved in clearing the snow and helping others – also including farmers and use of their ploughs. This issue will be discussed at the next round of Local Area Forums.

The Annual Sustainability report was encouraging – how can we reduce CO2 and the cost of fuel when 70% of the users are schools?

4% is achievable by working with the Council buildings and replacing boilers etc. The rising cost of oil is a worry. It would be good to replace school boilers over the next 25 years and make more use of wood burning fuels, which are cheaper. However, these boilers are more costly to put in which is difficult in the current financial  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Leader

• There are hard times ahead and a number of unknowns in the budget as follows:-

Ø      The pathfinder initiative.

Ø      Free personal care, the small amount of Government funding will barely cover the cost.

Ø      Impact of baby p and the additional numbers of children who have gone into care.

Ø      Transformation needs to deliver savings.

• Does the budget stand up to these uncertainties? The budget looking forward to 2011/12 need to address these issues on an ongoing basis.
• The budget has to be a work in progress not a definitive document – there are external forces which are out of the Council’s control. Members need to revisit the financial profile at regular intervals, particularly taking account of the general election.
• Managing the resident’s expectations. There are risks with the budget proposals being putting forward. With the shape of the budget this year and next, there is no new money to organise.
• The larger portfolios bear the brunt of the burden. This needs to be developed with Lin Hazell and Marion Clayton. Further thought needs to be given to the impact of below the line information. There is a need to identify high risk in all portfolios and separate the less high risk/discretionary areas to adjust accordingly between portfolios. What is in their portfolio that can be given up as a saving which could be spread around equally?
• A priority is to protect vulnerable people
• Some judgements are presented as facts. Strategic thought needs to be given on the budget to make it into a medium term 3 year plan rather than a one year budget. Further clarification needs to be given on the level of reserves and how capital and revenue are apportioned. What reserves were earmarked – it would be useful to have a breakdown of this information?
• Transformation has to be delivered to the right level and reassurance would be welcomed on this area. There are surpluses predicted in future years as a result of transformation – how does this square with the tough years now?
• There are so many strands of change which have the potential to destabilise the organisation and there was some uncertainty on whether they would be delivered. £33 million would be spent over 4 years – in addition to this £30 million savings were required which meant a 20% cut in the budget.
• There is an overspend on the current budget because of the baby p issue putting pressure on other services.
• The principle of invest to save was important and there needed to be a clearer capital strategy to invest in the future of the County – e.g. school and road maintenance, looking after the Council’s assets. Is this a national problem? Not spending strategically now could catch Members out later – but there were Cabinet concerns about not having big interest payments and making further debt for the children of Buckinghamshire to address. However, borrowing could be used as a solution to combat rising costs. £5 million had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Context:         Will the proposed budget for 2010/11 and the medium-term plan for subsequent years enable the Council to continue to provide the level of services expected by Buckinghamshire residents?

Issues to be addressed with each Cabinet Member will include:

1.     The impact of service reductions and efficiency savings

2.     The impact of a possible prolonged economic downturn

3.     The balance of statutory and discretionary service provision

4.     The effect on service delivery of forthcoming reductions in staff due to Transformation

5.     The potential for reducing vacant posts and/or reducing use of agency staff

6.     Major corporate risks affecting services within the portfolio

7.     Performance outturn for 2009/10 and the implications for 2010/11

8.     The adequacy of the capital programme

Background Papers:-

Appendix 1: Revenue Budgets

a) Recommended Revenue Budgets 2010/11 – 2013/14 and 2009/10 approved budget

b)  Detailed breakdown of Council's revenue budget in each year

c) Detailed analysis (for Planning & Environment portfolio) highlighting the key items that make up the totals for increased income, efficiencies, service reductions and service developments. 

Appendix 2: Capital Budgets

Appendix 3: Quarter 2 Risk Information – not applicable

Appendix 4: Quarter 2 Performance Information (to follow)

Will the proposed budget for 2010/11 and the medium-term plan for subsequent years enable the Council to continue to provide the level of services expected by Buckinghamshire residents?

This portfolio had a direct impact on residents. The disposal of waste is done to a satisfactory level and the Waste Strategy supports local Districts. There is a separate food and green waste collection. In terms of Aylesbury growth 27,000 houses are being built which is above the trajectory and is better than Milton Keynes. Jobs are being lost in Aylesbury from Lloyds banking and work is being undertaken with AVDC on supporting residents who had been made redundant and helping businesses rather than dealing with corporate issues. Wycombe had also lost employment, there had been no big closures but many firms were making staffing reductions which had a big impact overall. Country Parks were a valued facility for residents and are a great place for leisure. The Cabinet Member was confident that they would continue to deliver on priorities in the budget.

Are there pressures on your budget?

There has been an underspend on the budget for the following reasons:-

• Waste volumes – District Councils are paid credits for recycling and composting. However, it is very difficult to forecast waste volumes which were lower than expected e.g. weather patterns have an impact, bad weather and wet summers will decrease the volume of waste.
• Economic recession – people are buying less consumer goods which reduces waste.  The portfolio were clamping down on expenditure overall. There were pressures to save to help fund safeguarding which was experiencing unprecedented demands.

Can the budget be reduced next year as it was underspent this year?

Work was being undertaken with District Councils on the new waste model on disposal, recycling and composting. In remodeling projected waste volumes we had factored in recent service demands causing underspends (e.g. economic recession) along with all other influencing factors.  As a result the waste treatment/disposal budgets have been reduced for 2010/2011 from the levels identified in the previous MTP process.

Recycling credits are paid to avoid LATS and it is important to invest in a good waste strategy now to avoid LATS in future years. Good recycling would also reduce collection costs. There were 12 different scenarios for waste collection. If LATS and disposal costs could be avoided then money could be freed up. The cost of landfill tax ratchets up in the next four years and this has been allocated for in the budget. No funding had been put into LATS for 2011/12 but £250,000 had been allocated for 2012/12 – LATs was charged on a three year period.

There was an underspend this year to help with pressures in safeguarding and other areas. However there were pressures on the budget next year such as LATS and waste treatment. Funding was going to be taken out of the legal and finance external budget. However, specialist advice was considered essential for large scale procurement (energy from waste plant) and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

·         There was evidence of working strategically – which was important for this portfolio e.g. building waste disposal units takes time. In order to do this earmarked capital is important.

·         High risk energy from waste project – risk escalates towards the end of the plan period when the plant is built.

·         There was an under spend this year with some unpredictability in this budget e.g. volumes of waste cannot be predicted, number of public inquiries etc. Was there some margin in the budget?

·         There was increased costs year on year – outtake on waste due to successful composting. There was an overestimation on the sum of money required for recycling credits. Should this underspend be taken off the base budget and recycled into other budgets?

·         This is a high profile public facing services going through a rapid change. The recycling rates could be improved using more sophisticated methods. Further consideration could be given to what materials are more cost effective for the Council to collect e.g. plastics.

·         Biggest risk was landfill tax and the increase in LATS in the near future.

·         Residents did not want waste recycled near where they lived and also transported by road near to their house.

·         The County Council was the strategic authority and lead on priming the economic development infrastructure. Further consideration should be given to improving the website – there are a lot of Councils chasing knowledge based industries.

·         There had been some good work with small businesses and understanding the needs for Aylesbury in the future e.g. knowledge led entrepreneurial based.

·         There was evidence of efficiency savings and service reductions.

·         Ringfenced capital should be highlighted – some Departments were unable to ring fence capital.

Context:         Will the proposed budget for 2010/11 and the medium-term plan for subsequent years enable the Council to continue to provide the level of services expected by Buckinghamshire residents?

Issues to be addressed with each Cabinet Member will include:

1.     The impact of service reductions and efficiency savings

2.     The impact of a possible prolonged economic downturn

3.     The balance of statutory and discretionary service provision

4.     The effect on service delivery of forthcoming reductions in staff due to Transformation

5.     The potential for reducing vacant posts and/or reducing use of agency staff

6.     Major corporate risks affecting services within the portfolio

7.     Performance outturn for 2009/10 and the implications for 2010/11

8.     The adequacy of the capital programme

Background Papers:-

Appendix 1: Revenue Budgets

a) Recommended Revenue Budgets 2010/11 – 2013/14 and 2009/10 approved budget

b)  Detailed breakdown of Council's revenue budget in each year

c) Detailed analysis (for Resources portfolio) highlighting the key items that make up the totals for increased income, efficiencies, service reductions and service developments. 

Appendix 2: Capital Budgets

Appendix 3: Quarter 2 Risk Information

Appendix 4: Quarter 2 Performance Information (to follow)

Will the proposed budget for 2010/11 and the medium-term plan for subsequent years enable the Council to continue to provide the level of services expected by Buckinghamshire residents?

There are uncertainties about the economic situation and this portfolio is involved with services across the Council and external forces. The portfolio itself covers 7 services; transformation, human resources, property, ICT, customer contact, legal and democratic services.

Why are there large inflation costs on gas and electricity as these figures were renegotiated last year and should be included in contract prices?

Inflation values and interest rates have been taken into account and their impacts on the portfolio. Inflation is unpredictable. The charges have increased significantly in the renewal of contracts; this is a catch up increase as it was lower than the current market price.

Will transformation mean that expertise is lost from the Council?

It is not good to lose staff but the Council has to improve the way things are done and to make better use of IT. This is the only way to make savings. A reduction in headcount also produced savings on facilities. In terms of staff leaving, the Council looked for voluntary redundancies first and were providing workshops for staff threatened by redundancy and help with CVs and interview techniques. There had been a large uptake on these courses. There would be a report back on the success of these courses as to whether staff had found another job.

Will transformation deliver on all the strands? The spend on transformation and the savings expected could mean a 20% reduction in the Council’s total budget?

Savings are required and savings from the first two years will need to fund the remaining parts of transformation. One of the strands of transformation is 3^rd party spend and the Council is on track to deliver these savings to help fund further strands. The Cabinet Member would provide information on how the costs for each strand were broken down and the savings expected. The early stages of transformation were looking at easy wins such as more efficient procurement e.g. having one contract for providing meals for schools and older people. Transformation was monitored very carefully and if savings were not expected other areas would be investigated.

With your service reductions will this transfer costs elsewhere in the Council?

2 fte equivalents had been made redundant and this would marginalise costs. Specialists would be bought in when required and savings would be made as they were not required full time. Services had been advised of this.

Are the costs on health insurance new entrants to the Scheme?

Further clarification is being sought and would be reported back to the Group.

Are the savings on the integration of the contact centre shown in the budget?

Yes it should be in the budget.

Will there be savings from HAYS of £56,000 in the first year?

This depends on how much they are used and how long transformation takes to improve services.

Why are there  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

• There were a lot of different areas in this portfolio which sometimes resulted in a lack of clarity in some areas of the budget. This budget had been split up into Directors areas rather than Cabinet Members. There was some expenditure in this portfolio relating to other portfolio areas which were not the responsibility of the Cabinet Member eg Localities.
• Some early wins in transformation would help fund the project but there was a higher risk in later elements and again uncertainty as to whether this would be delivered.
• A central procurement team was being set up to avoid piecemeal procurement. Some concern was raised about people centre services such as adult services which dealt with vulnerable people – this needs to be devolved to people who understand all the issues.
• There were a number of concerns regarding the capital programme, debt budgeting the next three years and deteriorating assets. What is the right structure for estate asset management, it would not be good value for money getting rid of £24 million of property in a depressed market? Property should be invested in now.
• There needs to be a clear capital strategy.
• Building maintenance needs to be fit for purpose and facilities improved  to the required standard.

The next Budget Task and Finish Group will be held on 21 January 2010 at 9am in Mezzanine Room 3, County Hall, Aylesbury.

21 January 2010 at 9am