Items
| No. |
Item |
135. |
Apologies
To receive
any apologies for absence from Members.
Minutes:
Apologies were received from Cllrs M Earl and D Kelsey
|
136. |
Substitute Members
To receive
information on any changes in the membership of the Committee.
Note – When a
member of a Committee is unable to attend a meeting of a Committee or
Sub-Committee, the relevant Political Group Leader (or their nominated
representative) may, by notice to the Monitoring Officer (or their nominated
representative) prior to the meeting, appoint a substitute member from within
the same Political Group. The contact details on the front of this agenda
should be used for notifications.
Minutes:
Cllr D Brown substituted for Cllr M Earl and Cllr A Filer
Substituted for Cllr D Kelsey
|
137. |
Declarations of Interests
Councillors are requested to declare any interests
on items included in this agenda. Please refer to the workflow on the preceding
page for guidance.
Declarations
received will be reported at the meeting.
Minutes:
There were no declarations of interest
|
138. |
Confirmation of Minutes PDF 222 KB
To confirm and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meetings
held on 4 January 2021.
Additional documents:
Minutes:
The Minutes of the meetings held on 4 January 2021 were
agreed as a correct record.
|
139. |
Action Sheet PDF 290 KB
To note and
comment on the attached action sheet which tracks decisions, actions and
recommendations from previous meetings.
Minutes:
The Board’s latest action sheet was
noted following an update from the Chairman.
|
140. |
Public Speaking
To receive
any public questions, statements or petitions submitted in accordance with the
Constitution, which is available to view at the following link:
https://democracy.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeID=151&Info=1&bcr=1
The deadline
for the submission of a public question is 4 clear working days before the
meeting.
The deadline
for the submission of a statement is midday the working day before the meeting.
The deadline
for the submission of a petition is 10 working days before the meeting.
Minutes:
There were no public statements,
questions or petitions submitted for this meeting.
|
141. |
Budget Scrutiny 2020/21 PDF 1 MB
For the Overview and Scrutiny Board to
consider and scrutinise the following budget related Cabinet reports which are due
to be considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on 10 February 2021:
· 2021/22 Budget and Medium-term Financial Plan (MTFP)
(pages 21 – 172)
· Housing Revenue Account Budget Setting 2021/22
(pages 173 – 230)
· Dedicated Schools Grant and Early Years Formulae
2021/22 (pages 231 – 246)
The O&S Board is asked to
scrutinise the reports and make recommendations to Cabinet as appropriate.
Also attached are notes from the
Children’s Services O&S Committee Budget Working Group (pages 247 – 248).
In addition, the Chairs and Vice-Chairs from the Children’s and Health and
Adult Social Overview and Scrutiny Committees are invited to attend the Board
for consideration of this item.
The following Cabinet members have
been invited to attend for this item: Councillor Drew Mellor, Leader of the
Council and Portfolio Holder for Finance and Transformation.
The Cabinet report for these items are included with this
agenda for consideration by the Overview and Scrutiny Board.
Additional documents:
-
Appendix 1a Counicl Tax Harmonisation Modelling, 10/02/2021 Cabinet , item 141.
PDF 16 KB
-
Appendix 1b Schedule of Council Tax by Area, 10/02/2021 Cabinet , item 141.
PDF 22 KB
-
Appendix 2a Budget Summary 2021/22, 10/02/2021 Cabinet , item 141.
PDF 220 KB
-
Abbendix 2b Budget 2021/22 and MTFP Savings Schedule, 10/02/2021 Cabinet , item 141.
PDF 59 KB
-
Appendix 3 Reserves Strategy, 10/02/2021 Cabinet , item 141.
PDF 183 KB
- There are a further 23 documents.View the full list of documents for item 141.
Minutes:
The Leader of the Council, the Portfolio Holder for Housing
and the Portfolio Holder for Covid Resilience, Schools and Skills presented a
series of reports, copies of which had been circulated to each Member and
copies of which appear as Appendices 'A-C' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.
Budget and MTFP
A number of issues were raised
by the Board in the subsequent discussion, including:
- A Board
Member queried the additional £13M to be added to the adult social care budget,
particularly when the majority of it was to be spend on the minimum wage
increase? He further queried why the decision had been made to not take
advantage of the option of a precept increase this year as allowed by the
Government and if it would be pursued as an option for next year. The
Leader of the Council stated that he would ask the S151 Officer to cover
the detail relating to the additional £13M before explaining that it had
been identified that the council, helped by the transformation programme,
had no need to increase the adult social care precept this financial year.
He added that whilst there was the opportunity to increase the precept by
a full 3% next year, this was not the ambition it was hoped that this
would not be necessary and would therefore allow residents to be better
off for it. The S151 Officer highlighted that Section 42 of the report set
out the reasons for why £13m extra investment was needed for adult social
care.
- A Board
Member agreed with the importance of keeping money in the pockets of
residents, but it did appear to him that this meant the council was
borrowing more and also selling off more of its assets. He stated that it
was important that vital services were funded, and it seemed odd that the
Leader was not taking advantage of the offer from central government to
increase the adult social care precept. The Leader of the Council
highlighted that the council retained the option to take advantage of this
allowance in 2022/23, but aspired to not have to do this in full unless
absolutely necessary. He added that 41% of conservative-led councils were
taking advantage of precept offer, as 82% of labour-led councils, which
was proof that BCP Council were being more efficient and £44M of these
efficiencies were from the transformation plan.
- A Board
Member commented that the use of flexible capital receipts needed to be
done responsibly and felt that the current method was “on steroids” and
queried why utilising capital receipts had been “turbo charged”? The
Leader disagreed with this analogy and indeed the comments raised. He
added that the Council should be retaining assets and not selling them
selling off, what was being done was allowing the Council to maximise
offers from the government. The S151 Officer referred to figure 11 and
section 65 of report, which set out the capital receipts/assets which had
been used for this budget and stated that ... view the full minutes text for item 141.
|
142. |
Scrutiny of the Corporate Strategy Delivery Plans Refresh 2021/22 PDF 160 KB
To consider
the Corporate Strategy Delivery Plans Refresh 2021/22 Cabinet report due for
consideration by Cabinet on 10 February 2021.
The O&S Board
is asked to scrutinise the report and make recommendations to Cabinet as
appropriate.
Cabinet
member invited to attend for this item: Councillor Drew Mellor, Leader of the
Council and Portfolio Holder for Finance and Transformation.
The Cabinet
report for this item is included with the agenda for consideration by the
Overview and Scrutiny Board.
Additional documents:
Minutes:
The Leader of the Council presented a report, a copy of
which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as
Appendix 'D' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.
A number of issues were raised by the
Board in the subsequent discussion, including:
- The
Chairman referred to Page 259 of the report, and raised a query relating
to connectivity improvements and if big changes and improvements could be
expected? The Leader of the Council explained that there was a big
opportunity to do something at scale and it would be necessary for the
Council to bring forward some large-scale infrastructure projects. He
explained that he believed the futures fund would bring forward significant
interest and investment and that he hoped to entice government and other
partners into working with the Council to assist with the delivery of such
projects.
- The
Chairman asked the leader to define what was meant by the creation of an
iconic cityscape and queried if residents would want this? The Leader of
the Council explained that whilst none of the three towns within the
conurbation were cities, the scale of the conurbation could be compared
with cities such as Bristol or Brighton and Hove and as such the Council
needed to attract business and funding to the area in order for it to
flourish.
- The
Chairman stated that there had been some significant changes to the
corporate delivery plan and that he would like to see the baseline of the
corporate plan retained. The Leader of the Council explained that he
agreed with the comments that had been made and advised that he felt this
would be useful.
- A Board
Member queried how other industries that had not been listed in the big
plan could present development opportunities that would fit into the
priorities? He also queried how a key area such as Tourism, for example,
could impact on how the council utilised its infrastructure? The Leader of
the Council explained that there were clearly some core industries, but
there were others that could emerge from the smart cities programme and
the council needed to understand and unlock the potential of such
industries and what they can bring to the area. He added that through the
futures fund the council could pump-prime different schemes if required.
He further explained that tourism was a huge business for the conurbation
and that the council promoted itself as a destination for services too.
- A Board
Member stated that there seemed to be a lack of consultation in relation
to the production of this document, particularly with the public. She
queried what the innovative projects that were referred to were? She added
that whilst she agreed with the principle of revising the delivery plan as
things did often change, she was disappointed that there did not appear to
be any document explaining the difference between the existing plan and
the proposed plan. The Leader of the Council explained that this was a big
ambitions plan ... view the full minutes text for item 142.
|