Agenda item

Further to the O&S Board meeting of 18 December at which budget scrutiny took place, to consider an update report which provides detail and risk analysis on the savings and efficiencies identified to date, and as outlined in Figure 1 of the 20 December Medium Term Financial Plan Cabinet report for the following areas:

·         Adult Social Care

·         Children’s Services

·         Regeneration and Economy

·         Environment and Community

·         Corporate Services

All Cabinet members are invited to attend to update on savings in the above areas as appropriate.

The Chairman of the O&S Board has requested a written report on the above, which is expected to follow this agenda.

The Chief Executive made a statement advising the Board that some issues were still under negotiation and therefore needed to be treated as non-public at this time.

The Chairman reminded the Board of its decision at the last meeting to request further detail and a risk analysis of the savings and efficiencies identified. An outline of this information had been circulated to the Board prior to the meeting. The Portfolio Holder for Finance introduced the report and advised that the numbers in the current report and that provided to the Board in December would not match as changes to savings had been made in the intervening period. The Portfolio Holder also thanked the finance team for providing the breakdown of the savings information.

Assumed savings - A member of the Board questioned the deliverability of savings which were amber rated and commented that they would have preferred more detail in order to be assured that the savings were deliverable. The Portfolio Holder advised that the report format was historical in terms of the level of detail and the other Cabinet members were in attendance to provide more detail if required. It was noted that the Amber ratings could encompass a wide spectrum and were an indication that action was ongoing but not yet completed.

In response to a question the Portfolio Holder advised that he felt the figures within the report were currently the best that could be prudently provided and were sufficient to deliver required savings and provide a balanced budget.

The Board noted that LGR forecast savings of approximately £44m and the current savings were significantly less than this. The Portfolio Holder advised that BCP had driven out savings of approximately £19.5m from the current year and further detailed savings were contained within the report. A similar number would be driven through transformation savings.

In response to a question the Portfolio Holder gave assurance that the figures provided to the meeting were in line with those already reported within previous papers, it was noted that transformation savings would form part of the 2021/22 budget.

Resources – The leader advised that the amber at line 2 referred to duplicate contracts which were due to finish at the end of the year and minor staffing changes.

Children’s – The Portfolio Holder provided the Board with further detail on the staffing savings which was at amber, this included savings from residual Dorset County Council Posts and service redesigns. The Board questioned the difference between the savings figure provided in December and the current figures, it was explained that the December figure reflected budget pressures from preceding councils which didn’t materialise. In response to a question on the High Needs Block of the Dedicated Schools Grant the Portfolio Holder advised that it didn’t fall within this process but would be considered by the Schools Forum that week. Work was also ongoing with the Department for Education to address this.

Adult Social Care – In response to a question the Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care advised that the detail of line 9 would be considered further at the Health and Adult Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee the following week. Board members were invited to attend. With regards to line 15 which was at amber the Board was advised that this was in relation to savings generated by advisors to support self funders. It was noted that item 22 referred to joining up current catering teams to work through one central point. It was noted that fees and charges were currently at amber a public consultation was required.

A Board member enquired about the wording of line 23. The Corporate Director explained that there were currently two different ways of delivering this service but that she would look at the wording used to make sure this was consistent. In response to a question it was noted that the transformation savings identified were based on tried and tested methods from other local authorities and represented a mid-point in terms of what might be achieved. In response to a question the Portfolio Holder advised that whilst the service based impact would be looked at elsewhere the service user experience would not be reduced.

In response to the Board’s enquiries it was suggested that further detail on the identified savings could be taken through the Health and Adult Social Care O&S Committee.

Regeneration and Economy – The relevant Portfolio Holders outlined the lines within the report which were rated as amber. In response to a question on line 25 it was noted that this was specifically on school bus routes for the current academic year and that service users had been consulted. In relation to a question concerning line 36 it was noted that a small amount was though harmonising and that the Portfolio Holder was confident that the changes in charges would keep up with the planned budget. A member questioned the savings identified against the adventure golf for the current year.  It was noted that as the facility had only operated for half of the current year the assumed income from the facility needed to be adjusted. In response to a question it was noted that the beach hut income was due to an increase across all areas but that full harmonisation across beach huts was still being scoped out.

Environment and Communities – The Corporate Director responded to the public questioned as outlined in the above minute advised that the saving was from the in-house Bournemouth maintenance team being employed to deliver across a larger estate and gaining efficiencies of scale. In relation to line 37 a Board member questioned how the identified savings were being made. It was noted that the savings related to the management of the services and not the services themselves. The Board commented on the fee alignment for the green waste service when different services were being provided. Others commented that this issue had been decided and further discussion was not relevant to the budget scrutiny.

The Chairman concluded the meeting and thanked the Portfolio Holders for responding to the Board’s queries on their budget areas.