Agenda item

For the Shadow Executive to consider the recommendations of the Budget Scrutiny Task and Finish Group.

RESOLVED:

All recommendations with the exception of 2, 4, 13, 19 and 22 were agreed in full.  A complete breakdown of the recommendations with their responses can be found here.

C Whitehead, Vice Chairman of the Budget Task and Finish Group and A Collingwood, Chairman of the Shadow Overview and Scrutiny Committee attended the meeting to present their findings and recommendations following the intensive budget scrutiny process that had taken place over 4 days in January 2020.

A Collingwood highlighted that the scrutiny process looked at each portfolio area in detail and their recommendations were put forward in order for the budget to meet the key aims of delivery better services and better outcomes for residents.  The recommendations were summarised and a copy would be published after the meeting and also appended to the minutes.  The Executive, Portfolio Holders and officers were thanked for their input and work over the scrutiny process.

C Whitehead clarified that although it was a three year budget, Yrs1 and 2 had been reviewed by existing councils, however Yr 3 was harder to predict and scrutinise and there was still work to do in particular in relation to capital expenditure and the savings proposed under the Transformation programme.  It was highlighted that climate change was a high priority for the council and residents.

The Executive raised the following points in discussion:

• Members of the Budget Task and Finish group were commended for their work and the final budget presented would be improved due to their work.
• The Executive were not the ongoing Cabinet of the new authority and therefore could not dictate policies for the new council.  However, the Corporate Plan had been shaped in some areas e.g. Climate Change and a £5m special initiatives budget had been proposed to help address the topic. 
• The concerns related to Year 3 assumptions were echoed and it was an area the new authorities’ executive would want to address.  It was stated that the Fair Funding Review committed to by Central Government had been put on hold and the impact of that review was not known so broad assumptions had to be made to form the budget.
• The business case in 2016 highlighted the initials savings target and some of these had already been achieved.  The new authority would want to review savings and decide on policies on how those savings are used. 
• Climate Change was discussed in more detail and scrutiny’s recommendation for the Corporate Plan for Buckinghamshire Council to include a stronger commitment to Climate Change, with the aim of the Council being net Carbon Neutral by 2035 and the County generally by 2050.  A Collingwood stated that a closer date was needed in order for there to be a real focus and push to deliver on the target.  B Chapple highlighted that Buckinghamshire County Council was already 53% carbon neutral and exceeding targets.  Members recognised that the new authority would need to have a strong focus on Climate Change as it was also a high priority for residents and required large scale culture change. 
• There were some areas of recommendations where it was felt that the targets were less specific and it was stated that this meant officers were given some level of flexibility in order to be able to deliver against the massive transformation and change programme required.
• Best practice from each of the existing authorities could be used in particular areas where great work was already happening, e.g. homelessness and rough sleeping.
• Although there was a desire to reduce agency staff it was understood that there would always be a need for some element of agency staff in order to deliver services in high risk areas.

In summary the Budget Task and Finish Group believed that following their recommendations, the budget was lean, robust and deliverable and thanked officers and the Shadow Executive for their work.  The Leader also thanked the committee for the work and subsequent recommendations and thanked all supporting officers.

RESOLVED:

All recommendations with the exception of 2, 4, 13, 19 and 22 were agreed in full.  A complete breakdown of the recommendations with their responses can be found here.