Agenda item

The Strategic Director of Resources presented the reports for both agenda item 4, Performance Report (Finance) and agenda item 5, Draft Medium Term Financial Strategy Report,to the Committee and advised that the current  budgetary position outlined in item 4 was inextricably linked to the Council’s proposed Financial, Capital and Treasury Management strategies detailed in item 5. These strategies set out the draft Revenue, Capital and Treasury Management Budgets over the medium term and determined the amount of Council Tax to be levied from residents for 2010/11. The proposed revenue budget for this period was £103.979m, which equated to an increase of 1.5% from 2009/10 period and assumed an increase in government funding of 1.5% and a proposed rise in Council Tax of  2%. General fund balances had been maintained at previous year levels. Together with reserves and contingencies;, these were currently adequate but there would be a need to keep a watching brief to ensure reserve levels were maintained in line with expenditure over the medium term.

There were a number of pressures facing the Council including  the national framework being applied to local government, which would drive a future requirement for further efficiencies and potentially greater restrictions on council tax increases. Further to this, there was an expectation that future years’ budgets would come under growing pressure as demand and expectation increased but government grant support reduced, with an emphasis on prioritisation, efficiency, innovation and collaboration in service delivery.

In the subsequent discussion, Members raised several issues, including:

• Noting the council tax increase of 2%, a Member enquired as to how much income this would bring to the Council and was informed that it was approximately £900k.

• A Member requested an update on the situation regarding the Council’s investment in Icelandic banks. The Committee was advised that the Council had already managed to secure the return of some of the investment and maintained it’s expectation that approximately 80% of the original investment would be returned in due course.

• A Member queried the funding allocated for the Slough Cemetery and Crematorium, in consideration of the recent consultation held regarding the management rules and planned expansion. The Strategic Director of Resources advised that £700k had been allocated but if further funding was required, Cabinet would have to make a decision following consideration of the financial implications of any specific proposals. 

• With reference to the national sum of £11 billion of savings drawn from ‘smarter government’, which included the rationalisation of the Arms Length Bodies, a Member queried whether there would be any adverse effects resulting from this. The Committee was informed that the budget included no assumptions regarding the ALMO People 1^st (Slough). However, if it was decided to  bring the management of the Council’s housing stock back within the Council’s functions, the budget for People 1^st (Slough) would also be absorbed. People 1^st (Slough) had been established to deliver the Decent Homes Strategy and had allowed Slough to receive approximately £40m investment to improve the quality of the Council’s housing stock. As this had, in the main now been completed and significant investment secured, the Council was in a strong position to re-absorb the management functions.

• A Member sought clarification on the consultation process applied with regard to the budget and enquired as to how effective it had been and if this could be substantiated with quantitative data. Members attention was drawn to the detail of the consultation process provided in the report pack and the Leader of the Council further advised that the consultation briefings had been well attended and had been expanded this year to include meetings held at the trading estate to consult businesses and an open briefing held at the Town Hall to consult residents and voluntary groups.

• With regard to discretionary charges for council services, a Member queried whether these were being examined. The Committee was informed that the Council was currently reviewing fees and charges as it does annually.  Charges would be increased by 1 ½ % as a minimum in line with the Councils approach to inflation across expenditure heads. Any increase in excess of 3% would be reported to Members.

• A Member requested an update on the situation regarding Slough’s funding position from central government in relation to the population figures and migration. The Strategic Director and the Leader of the Council advised the Committee that the Council was continuing to address this issue in several ways. In addition to continuing to meet with Ministers to discuss the issue, the Council had begun a targeted campaign to demonstrate that specific services areas required additional funding. It was acknowledged that the Census return in 2010 would be key and the Council was working in partnership with its partners to prepare for this.  A Member queried how, in the context of this funding position, the Council would continue to cater for the particularly high demand for school places and was informed that temporary solutions such as the bulge classes would be utilised  alongside expanding the permanent capacity.

• A Member highlighted the considerable uncertainty surrounding the Free Personal Care Bill and raised the concern that without further information, the Council was in a very difficult position to make any financial plans. The Strategic Director informed the Committee that currently, no assumptions regarding this Bill had been built into the budget. The Council along with other council leads  was lobbying the government regarding this issue

• With regard to the reserves of £5m, a Member queried whether this was adequate and whether other Councils assumed a similar position. The Strategic Director advised that the levels of reserves was adequate to meet the organisation’s needs. The basis underpinning this assurance was explained fully in the budget presentation and the document pack.

• A Member enquired as to what involvement Members have with regard to the allocation of Area Based Grants (ABG). The Leader of the Council advised that the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) would discuss where to target funds and Cabinet would then make a decision regarding the LSP recommendations.

• A Member queried whether the Council had any control over the level of Parish precepts as the increase in some areas were high and whether performance could be measured. Members were advised that the  Parish precept levied was a matter for each Parish Council to consider. The Deputy Borough Secretary advised that the Community Governance Review which would take place in the near future, could enable Members to consider governance arrangements in the Borough.

The Chair thanked Members for their contribution and proposed that the report be noted and that the Cabinet be requested to agree that any windfall income received by the Council in Year be reported to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee as part of the Performance Report, and that Scrutiny be allocated a budget of up to £10k to be vired from existing Member related budgets to enable:

• More short, sharp focussed reviews on particular topics or more in-depth reviews;
• Support to Councillors in reviewing performance information;
• Additional scrutiny training in investigative skills and analysing data/evidence.

Resolved –   That the report be noted and the Cabinet be recommended to   agree:

1.  That any windfall income received by the Council in Year be reported to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee as part of the Performance Report from 2010/11

2.  That Scrutiny be allocated a budget of up to £10k to be vired from existing Member related budgets to enable:

·  More short, sharp focussed reviews on particular topics or more in-depth reviews;

·  Support to Councillors in reviewing performance information;

·  Additional scrutiny training in investigative skills and analysing data/evidence.