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.
|