Meeting documents

1.    Cabinet are asked to consider recommendations 1-10 as set out in the report.

Mr Tett, Leader introduced the item by highlighting the Cabinet were asked to recommend the Council’s final budget to County Council in February for the final decision.  As part of the process there had been a public consultation and budget scrutiny led by the Finance, Performance and Resources (FPR) Select Committee had taken place across three days in January where each Cabinet Member was held to account for their respective portfolios.

Mr D Watson, Chairman of the Finance, Performance and Resources Select Committee and Mrs K Sutherland, Committee and Governance Manager attended the meeting to present the Select Committee’s recommendations to Cabinet.  Mr Watson highlighted the following points:

• Mr Watson thanked all Cabinet Members for taking in part in the budget scrutiny process and thanked supporting officers, in particular Mrs K Sutherland, Committee and Governance Manager.
• There were 10 recommendations in total for Cabinet to consider and a number of further recommendations that were portfolio focused.
• Mr Watson recognised there was little choice but to increase council tax, the need for which was reflected in salary inflation projected to be 2%, the inexorable rise in demand in Children’s Services and Adult Social Care and cost inflation from outsourcing.
• There was an agreement to increase the unitary transition budget and also the Children’s Services legal budget.

In relation to the 10 recommendations set out in the report, Cabinet raised and discussed the following points:

• Mr Whyte, Cabinet Member for Children’s Services highlighted recommendation 5 which requested a realistic budget to be set for legal fees in Children’s Services.  Mr Whyte was happy to accept the recommendations and additional money had been built into the draft budget.
• Mr B Chapple made reference to recommendation 2 and stated that in some cases due to commercial sensitivity full financial information could not be shared, for example the Energy from Waste contract being run by an external company meant that their profit and loss accounts could not be shared.
• Mr Shaw highlighted recommendation 8 and the increased budget for gully cleansing and weed management.  Additional money would be spent on main town and village centres.
• Mr Chilver made reference to recommendation 3 and the requirement of a balance sheet and cash flow budgets to be prepared for a 4 year period.  Mr Chilver stated that this was already prepared for the year ahead and that the new authority would need to consider how best to extend this to cover a four year period.
• Mr Tett highlighted that this would be the last budget prepared for Buckinghamshire County Council.  Going forward there would be a consolidation of budgets with district councils.  Decisions on the budget of the new authority would not be decided by Cabinet.
• Mr Appleyard highlighted the request for improved visibility of individual budgets such as the Skills Budget and that there was no budget for schools as the operating of skills improvement was carried out via the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP).  Mr Appleyard stated that all information relating to demand for school transport had been included which was welcomed by the Select Committee.  Mr Appleyard also stated that the number of full time employees referred to in the recommendation was of no real consequence, but that it was more prudent to monitor the cost of the work whether that be carried out by our own staff or external bodies.
• Mr Chapple reassured that extra budget had been put into the budget for fly tipping and hoped that the new unitary authority would also save money by bringing contracts together too.  Mr Tett highlighted the need to scrutinise any contracts that would go beyond next year ensuring that they did not hinder the new authority.
• Lin Hazell highlighted the budget pressures within Adult Social Care which were also a national issue.  Lin Hazell stated that there were now permanent senior managers in place across the service which were becoming very effective.  In relation to recommendation 6, it was confirmed that the health and wellbeing contingency budgets would be reviewed ongoing as high risk areas.

Mr Watson responded by highlighting the following:

• Over the last 5 years the Council’s financial responsibilities had broadened with increased external providers and that financial reporting was yet to reflect this.
• Poor visibility of some budget areas should be tackled now rather than waiting for the new authority.
• Appreciated the increase in the roads capital budget reflecting the increase in road usage with the growth agenda.
• Please to see the increase in budget for Children’s Services legal fees.
• The biggest risk facing the council was the projected increase in demand and that this needed to be looked at a local and national level.
• There was still a need to give more financial visibility in the areas highlighted including the need to keep on top of the number of people we indirectly employ.
• Delays on the Green Paper had not helped the position of Adult Social Care and appreciated the strains and risks of increased demand that could not be foreseen.
• Mr Watson stated that he would support a council tax freeze, however recognised this was not realistic given all the financial pressures of the council.

Mr Tett thanked all members of the FPR Select Committee for their work and hoped that the new authority would take on a similar process in scrutinising their budgets.

Recommendation: Cabinet are asked to consider recommendations 1-10 as set out in the report.

A copy of the proposed recommendations with Cabinet’s full responses had been tabled at the meeting and would be appended to the minutes.

RESOLVED:  Cabinet responded to the recommendations as set out above.