Issue - meetings

For debate and decision.

A      Report and recommendations (pages 33-48)

B      Medium Term Financial Strategy (pages 49-159)

C      Council Strategy (pages 161-183)

D      Budget consultation (pages 185-210)

E      Scrutiny budget report (pages 213-215)

F       Due Regard Statement including member briefing (pages 217-278)

The report before members included the Budget recommendations, Medium Term Financial Strategy, Council Strategy, Budget consultation report, Scrutiny Budget report and Due Regard Statement.

Jo Walker, the Council’s Section 151 Chief Finance Officer, provided advice relating to the current status of the Local Government Finance Settlement. She explained that the Council had not yet received the final financial statement for 2017-18.  The debate in the House of Commons was likely to take place in the week starting 20 February 2017 when Parliament returned from its recess, following which the Department for Communities and Local Government would publish the final settlement. 

The Council had taken legal advice on the implications of a local authority setting its budget in advance of the final settlement being agreed by Parliament and had also reviewed the advice given by the Local Government Association.  In summary, the Local Government Finance Act 1992 placed a duty on local authorities to set a balanced budget with regard to the advice of its Section 151 Chief Finance Officer.  Major precepting authorities, like the Council, were required to issue a precept for 2017-18 before 1 March 2017.

Each local authority needed to make sure that it set a balanced budget and this could be done on the basis of the provisional settlement if it was the best information available at the time.  The Council’s proposed budget was based on the best information available.  The risk associated with reduced funding in the final settlement would be dealt with through the Rates’ Retention Reserve and General Reserve.  Any amendments would be reported in the budget monitoring reports as was normal custom and practice.

Jo Walker’s advice was to proceed in setting the budget and to authorise her to resolve any changes to the final budget publication. 

The Chief Executive explained the procedure that would be followed at the meeting for setting the budget (as set out in the flow chart attached to the briefing paper). First, Cllr Mark Hawthorne, Leader of the Council, and Cllr Ray Theodoulou, Cabinet Member for Finance and Change, would be asked to present the budget recommendations from the Cabinet.

Second, in order to reach a position where a substantive motion could be debated, the other groups would be invited to propose amendments to the budget but there would be no debate at that stage.  This would be a departure from the normal procedure where only one amendment could be moved and discussed at any one time.  The Chairman therefore proposed that under procedure rule 24.1 the following part of procedure rule 13.5 be suspended for the duration of the budget debate:

‘Only one amendment may be moved and discussed at any one time.  No further amendment may be moved until the amendment under discussion has been dealt with.’

The Vice-chairman seconded the motion and, on being put to the vote, the motion was supported.

Once the amendments had been presented, the Chairman would call for an adjournment to provide an opportunity for the Group Leaders to reach  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7

For debate and decision.

A      Report and recommendations (pages 39-54)

B      Medium Term Financial Strategy (pages 55-178)

C      Council Strategy (pages 179-204)

D      Budget consultation (pages 205-228)

E      Scrutiny budget report (pages 229-232)

F       ‘Due regard’ statement and member briefing (pages 233-290)

The Chief Executive explained the procedure that would be followed. Firstly, Cllr Mark Hawthorne, Leader of the Council, and Cllr Ray Theodoulou, Cabinet Member for Finance and Change, would be asked to present the budget recommendations from the Cabinet.

Secondly, in order to reach a position where a substantive motion could be debated, the other groups would be invited to propose amendments to the budget but there would be no debate at that stage.  This would be a departure from the normal procedure where only one amendment could be moved and discussed at any one time.  The Chairman therefore proposed that under procedure rule 24.1 the following part of procedure rule 13.5 be suspended for the duration of the budget debate:

‘Only one amendment may be moved and discussed at any one time.  No further amendment may be moved until the amendment under discussion has been dealt with.’

The Vice-chairman seconded the motion and, on being put to the vote, the motion was supported.

Once the amendments had been presented, the Chief Executive advised that the Chairman would call for an adjournment to provide an opportunity for the Group Leaders to reach a common position. 

After the adjournment, the Leader of the Council would advise members of those areas where it had been possible to reach agreement.  Any amendments which had not been accepted or withdrawn would then be presented by the groups, debated and voted upon. 

Thereafter all members would have an opportunity to debate the budget in line with the normal rules of debate.  At the end of the debate, the Leader of the Council would have the right of reply. 

Finally, a recorded vote would be proposed from the Chairman on the substantive motion, seconded by the Vice-chairman. 

Cllr Mark Hawthorne, the Leader of the Council, presented the recommendation from the Cabinet meeting held on 3 February 2016.  He said that the Council faced challenges in finding savings whilst meeting increasing demand for services, particularly in adult social care and children’s services.  The proposed increase in council tax would be the first rise in five years with a 1.99% rise and a National Adult Social Care Levy of 2%.  He stated that the amount of money available was only part of the story and it was as much about how it was spent in meeting the Council’s priorities.   He noted that the Council continued to deliver efficiencies in a number of areas including the buildings and procurement programmes. 

He noted that 93% of the respondents to the public consultation believed that the Council had the right priorities: supporting the most vulnerable, working with communities and individuals to help them do more for themselves and reducing the Council’s running costs to get the best out of its assets.

He was pleased that the Government had listened to the concerns around reductions in funding through the Local Government Finance Settlement.  Following the Cabinet recommendation, the Government had notified the Council that a transitional grant of £2.475 million would be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8

For debate and decision.

A      Report and recommendations (Pages 27 – 44)

B      Medium Term Financial Strategy (Pages 45 – 160)

C      Council Strategy (Pages 161 – 184)

D      Budget consultation (Pages 185 – 280)

E      ‘Due regard’ statement (Pages 281 – 324)

The Chief Executive explained the procedure that would be followed. Firstly, Cllr Mark Hawthorne, Leader of the Council, and Cllr Ray Theodoulou, Cabinet Member for Finance and Change, would be asked to present the budget recommendations from the Cabinet.

Secondly, in order to reach a position where a substantive motion could be debated, the other groups would be invited to propose amendments to the budget but there would be no debate at that stage.  This would be a departure from the normal procedure where only one amendment could be moved and discussed at any one time.  The Chairman therefore proposed that under procedure rule 24.1 the following part of procedure rule 13.5 be suspended for the duration of the budget debate:

‘Only one amendment may be moved and discussed at any one time.  No further amendment may be moved until the amendment under discussion has been dealt with.’

The Vice-chairman seconded the motion and, on being put to the vote, the motion was supported.

Once the amendments had been presented, the Chief Executive advised that the Chairman would call for an adjournment to provide an opportunity for the Group Leaders to reach a common position. 

After the adjournment, the Leader of the Council would advise members of those areas where it had been possible to reach agreement.  Any amendments which had not been accepted or withdrawn would then be presented by the groups, debated and voted upon. 

Thereafter all members would have an opportunity to debate the budget in line with the normal rules of debate.  At the end of the debate, the Leader of the Council would have the right of reply. 

Finally, a recorded vote would be proposed from the Chairman on the substantive motion, seconded by the Vice-chairman. 

Cllr Mark Hawthorne, the Leader of the Council, presented the recommendation from the Cabinet meeting held on 5 February 2014.  He said that it was the first budget of the Meeting the Challenge 2 Programme.  He thanked the officers for all their hard work in helping to deliver £114 million of savings over four years as part of the Meeting the Challenge 1 Programme.  The Council was smaller in terms of the number of staff employed and the number of properties occupied but he believed that it was better engaged with partners and the local community.  He stated that the proposed 2015/16 budget would continue to protect vulnerable people.  He referred to the investment in the recruitment and retention of social workers, record management and employment intiatives for people with learning disabilities. 

The local economy remained a priority and funding had been secured for major projects through the GFirst Local Enterprise Partnership.  The Government had made a commitment to resolve the A417 ‘Missing Link’ at Birdlip.  He said that more money was in people’s pockets with the Council Tax frozen for the fifth year running.  Members were able to support their local communities through initiatives such as Highways Local and Active Together.  Public Health England had highlighted Active  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8

For debate and decision.

A      Report and recommendations

B      Medium Term Financial Strategy

C      Council Strategy

D      Budget consultation

E      ‘Due regard’ statement

The Chairman stated that the budget was arguably the most important item of business for the Council each year.  With a minority administration the Council’s task was more complex than in previous years.  The collective objective was to agree the Council budget and Medium Term Financial Strategy and, following discussion with Group Leaders, a pragmatic approach had been agreed on how the budget should be presented and debated.  In order to facilitate this, there would need to be some flexibility to the normal rules of debate.

The Chief Executive explained the procedure that would be followed. Firstly, Cllr Mark Hawthorne, Leader of the Council, and Cllr Ray Theodoulou, Cabinet Member for Finance and Change, would be asked to present the recommendations from the Cabinet.

Secondly, in order to reach a position where a substantive motion could be debated, the other groups would be invited to propose amendments to the budget but there would be no debate at that stage.  This would be a departure from the normal procedure where only one amendment could be moved and discussed at any one time.  The Chairman therefore proposed that under procedure rule 24.1 the following part of procedure rule 13.5 be suspended for the duration of the budget debate:

‘Only one amendment may be moved and discussed at any one time.  No further amendment may be moved until the amendment under discussion has been dealt with.’

The Vice-chairman seconded the motion and, on being put to the vote, the motion was supported.

Once the amendments had been presented, the Chief Executive advised that the Chairman would call for an adjournment to provide an opportunity for the relevant Group Leaders to reach a common position. 

After the adjournment, the Leader of the Council would advise members of those areas where it had been possible to reach agreement.  Any amendments which had not been accepted or withdrawn would then be presented by the groups, debated and voted upon. 

Thereafter all members would have an opportunity to debate the budget in line with the normal rules of debate.  At the end of the debate, the Leader of the Council would have the right of reply. 

Finally, a recorded vote would be proposed from the Chairman on the substantive motion, seconded by the Vice-chairman.  This fulfilled the expectation of the Government that decisions on the budget and Council Tax were transparent.

Cllr Mark Hawthorne, the Leader of the Council, presented the recommendation from the Cabinet meeting held on 5 February 2014.  He said that the proposed budget followed the principles established in recent years: ‘supporting vulnerable people, living within our means, providing the basics as the Council could not do everything and helping communities to help themselves’.  He was proud that despite the cheque from the Government getting smaller, the Council had been able to maintain spending on Adult Social Care at the same level as 2010.  He noted the success of community run libraries and youth activities.  Significant sums had been invested to support the local  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18

The Leader of the Council, Cllr Mark Hawthorne, presented the recommendation from the Cabinet meeting on 6 February 2013.  He said that 2013-14 was the third budget of the ‘Meeting the Challenge’ Programme.  The programme would achieve £114 million in savings to reflect reductions in funding from central government and increasing demand for services, particularly from the most vulnerable people.  Adult social care spending to meet the needs of vulnerable people represented around half of the Council’s budget.  Whilst other local authorities had been reducing spending in this area, the Council had invested an additional £4 million over the last three years.

He stated that the Council was continuing to invest in jobs and growth.  He referred to the Grow Gloucestershire campaign to kick start the local economy and help young people back to work, support for the doubling of the Kemble to Swindon railway line, the first time buyers’ scheme, the rural broadband project and the ‘Yes to Jobs’ website to encourage young people to take up apprenticeships.  He said that the 2013-14 budget would provide a further £1 million for the first time buyers’ scheme and investment in a new business loan scheme through the government backed ‘Full Circle’ scheme which would result in around £1.4 million being made available to local businesses. 

He reported that £29 million had been invested in flooding since 2007 and he noted that this had paid dividends in recent months by protecting 500 homes that would have otherwise been flooded. He confirmed that the Council would continue to invest in flood prevention in 2013-14.

Cllr Hawthorne declared that for the third year running the council tax was being frozen.  He noted that £100 million in savings had already been achieved, many ahead of target. The headcount had been reduced by 1,500, 80 offices had been closed across the county and the number of councillors would be reduced from 63 to 53 from May 2013.

He presented the following additions to the Cabinet recommendation on pages 25 and 26 of the agenda pack:

a)        To move £3 million from forecast underspends to pay for additional road repairs.  This was in addition to the £2.1 million announced in November and December 2012.

b)        To move £1 million from the Transformation Reserve to fund a package of measures to promote adoption.

Cllr Theodoulou, the Cabinet Member for Finance and Change, seconded the amended recommendation from the Cabinet and spoke in support of the proposals.

A member said that he supported a freeze in council tax and the amendments proposed to the Cabinet recommendation.  He noted that the freeze to council tax had been made possible as a result of the Coalition Government providing a specific grant to local authorities across the country.  He expressed concern, however, that funds were being wasted because of bad decisions.  He referred to the costs of £200,000 incurred on the libraries judicial review which could have been avoided and the £0.5 billion committed to the residual waste facility over 25  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19