11 December 2006 - Minutes

BABERGH DISTRICT COUNCIL

OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY (COMMUNITY SERVICES) COMMITTEE AND
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY (STEWARDSHIP) COMMITTEE

MINUTES OF A JOINT MEETING OF THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY (COMMUNITY SERVICES) COMMITTEE AND THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY (STEWARDSHIP) COMMITTEE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, COUNCIL OFFICES, CORKS LANE, HADLEIGH ON MONDAY, 11 DECEMBER 2006

PRESENT: Ms J A Jenkins – Chairman

Mr R E Kemp, Mr J A B Long and Mr J M Owen were unable to be present.

1     ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN

RESOLVED

That Ms J A Jenkins be elected to Chair the meeting.

2     DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

There were no declarations of interest.

3     PETITIONS

None received.

4     QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS

None received.

5     BUDGET 2007/08

Mr D M Busby, Chairman of the Service and Financial Planning (SFP) Group, presented a report (Paper F137) setting out proposals for the Council’s 2007/08 Budget.

In doing so, he drew Members’ attention to the following points:-

·     The Group had met five times, and its recommendations were as set out in paragraph 2.1 of Paper F137, with the addition of the following bullet point:-

-     LAMP and other new ICT/e-Government projects (Appendix 2)

·     The Group’s objectives had been to make proposals for the 2007/08 Budget which would support the development of the Council’s priorities and the delivery of the Corporate Plan, whilst at the same time achieving a Council Tax increase for Babergh at no more than the rate of inflation. The Group believed it had identified significant savings and additional income to achieve these objectives, without any detriment to Council services.

·     The Group and officers had begun to identify lower priorities and to consider value for money comparisons, but had further work to do in these areas.

·     The General Fund Capital Programme included the LAMP Phase 2 project with a provision of £1M over the next two to three years. A substantial amount of work had been put into the business case for this project, and both the e-Government Steering Group and the Service and Financial Planning Group were recommending the full solution.

·     Paragraph 4.11 of Paper F137 gave an indication of the estimated revenue cost of the borrowing which would be required to finance the General Fund Capital Programme.

·     As explained in paragraphs 4.20 and 4.21 of the report, the headline inflation rate - 3.6% - was adjusted by the Government in relation to Business Rate increases and the ‘average’ inflation rate equated to 3%. The SFP Group favoured a Council Tax increase of 2.9%.

The Head of Finance drew attention to paragraph 4.17 of Paper F137, relating to the Government’s Business Rates Growth Incentive Scheme (LABGI). Current indications were that Babergh would receive just over £100,000 in 2007/08 and could receive about the same amount in 2008/09. A report on this and how the money should be spent, taking into account potential aligning/pooling with the Local Area Agreement, would be submitted to the Strategy Committee in due course.

In the ensuing discussion, the following were among the points noted:-

·     The Planning Delivery Grant for 2007/08 would not be known until the middle of 2007 and the amount in 2006 was £106,000. The Government would be reducing the overall grant available nationally in 2007.

·     Members’ Allowances were currently being reviewed by the Independent Remuneration Panel. As the outcome was not yet known, the Group was recommending that no allowance should be made in the Budget, and that any additional costs should be met from reserves.

·     Concern was expressed at the proposed level of borrowing, especially since borrowing to finance the Customer Access Strategy (CAST) and the Local Authority Modernisation Programme (LAMP) would not result in the Council acquiring new capital assets. It was recognised that expenditure on CAST had been agreed by Council and that the ongoing borrowing costs would be funded by estimated Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) efficiency savings. It was also acknowledged that the LAMP project borrowing costs should be offset by the estimated savings and benefits indicated.

·     It was confirmed that Babergh was making every effort to drive down costs through joint working with other authorities.

·     There was general support for a Council Tax increase of 2.9 %. If this were accepted, a Band D Council Tax payer would be charged less than £2.50 per week. Members believed this was a fair amount considering the range and quality of services offered.

RECOMMENDED TO STRATEGY COMMITTEE

(1)     That the General Fund and Council Housing Capital Programmes set out in Appendix 1 to Paper F137 be approved.

(2)     That the new General Fund Revenue Budget Service’s priorities set out in Appendix 4 to Paper F137 be approved.

(3)      That proposed efficiencies, savings and additional income for 2007/08 as set out in Appendix 5 to Paper F137 be approved.

(4)     That the CAST budget and funding arrangements set out in the table in paragraph 4.22 of Paper F137 be approved.

(5)     That the LAMP and other new ICT/e-Government projects set out in Appendix 2 to Paper F137 be approved.

6     REVIEW OF CALL-IN PROCEDURES

The Head of Corporate Services presented a report (Paper F138), requesting the Joint Committee to:-

·     Clarify the intention in relation to the process and criteria to be used when the validity of a Call-In request is considered;

·     Ensure that the Constitution and the Protocol for use of Call-In Procedure were not in conflict; and

·     Agree any appropriate amendments to the Constitution for submission to Council.

He explained that two alternative versions of amendments to the Constitution were appended to Paper F138. Appendix 1 incorporated the recommendations to Council contained in Strategy Minute No. 56, but did not include any Protocol. Appendix 2 incorporated the recommendations to Council contained in Strategy Minute No. 56, but included an amended Protocol.

In the ensuing discussion, it was noted that in Appendix 2 Protocol 2, the first bullet point had been amended to refer to any decision which committed the Council to expenditure exceeding £100,000. The Monitoring Officer explained that this was an attempt to define what was meant by a decision which gave rise to significant financial issues. The figure of £100,000 had been suggested because it was 1% of the net revenue budget.

A majority of Members favoured Appendix 2, but some had reservations about the first bullet point in Protocol 2, because they considered that there might be grounds for calling in any transaction, even if it involved less than £100,000. In addition, it was noted that the wording as proposed did not specifically refer to any disposal of assets. It was agreed that the first bullet point could be deleted because Members considered that the criterion was adequately encompassed by the third bullet point concerning decisions contrary to the budget framework.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL

(1)     That Appendix 2 to Paper F138 be adopted as part of the Council’s Constitution relating to Call-In, subject to the deletion of the bullet point on page 1 of Protocol 2 which reads:-

·     The decision commits the Council to expenditure exceeding £100,000.

(2)     That the Head of Corporate Services be authorised to make appropriate amendments to the Constitution in accordance with recommendation (1) above, together with any consequential amendments which may be required.

Note: The Committee adjourned for refreshments between 10.50 a.m. and 11.05 a.m.

The business of the meeting was concluded at 12.05 p.m.

Chairman