Agenda item

To consider the report of the Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources which details year-end forecasts and progress made against agreed savings targets for the 3^rd  quarter ended 31^st of December 2019.

9.1       Councillor Norman introduced the report. She explained that the report was the current best estimate of the council ‘s year-end position, and hence the impact on the general fund. Moreover, it was hoped that there would be further positive traction in some service areas before year end. The Quarter 3 report showed a year end position of an increase in the General Fund of £55,000 versus a budgeted position of £91,000 decrease.

9.2       Councillor Norman outlined that there were pressures within the report in the Planning and Housing portfolio which at present was forecast to be £527,000 over budget by year end. The reason for this variance, as outlined in 9.2 of the report was the reduction in the current volume of planning applications which were forecast, hence a reduction in income. Similarly, as set out in paragraph 9.3, the department had spent approximately £100,000 in relation to the City Plan and £60,000 for the JCS. Councillor Norman added that whilst this was disappointing, it was worth noting that in the previous year, the Planning and Housing portfolio had outperformed its allocated budget by over £200,000, and had thus helped to balance the overarching Council budget

9.3       Additionally, the Environment and Culture and Leisure portfolios were also experiencing small scale pressures within their budgets. Councillor Norman pointed to paragraph 8.4, explaining that report pressures in Culture and Leisure could be attributed to lower than budgeted income at Blackfriars, and reduced income from the Guildhall café. 

9.4       On the other hand, the Regeneration and Economy, Communities and Neighbourhoods and Performance and Resources portfolios were currently forecast to be on budget or underspent by year end. Within Performance and Resources, it was anticipated that there would be a £132,000 underspend this year. This portfolio included the Revenues and Benefit Admin line item and Housing Subsidy figures. With a budget of around £42 million, even the slighted shift could have an impact either way as year-end approaches.

9.5      Finally, Councillor Norman explained that as the present report was for Quarter 3, the costs to the Council as a result of MGL entering insolvency proceedings would not be displayed. However, any costs from this would be shown in the year-end financial position. Additionally, as this report was generated for Quarter 3, the Regeneration and Economy portfolio still had a single cabinet member. She informed the Committee that although the finance team had offered to split the portfolio for the year-end report, she had suggested that this was left in its current structure in order to receive a consistent full year picture. After the local elections which were due to be held in May 2020, decisions on that portfolio and other portfolio structures would be made, and a new report format could be created and used.

9.6       Councillor Hilton questioned whether the demolition of Bruton Way Car Park had an impact on the other car parks in the City. Councillor Norman stated that Bruton Way Car Park had been occupied by NCP, and the idea was that NCP would vacate the car park, and it would become a service car park. This would be cost neutral for the Council. She stated that there was capacity in the City for parking, for example at Eastgate Car Park.  Longsmith Street Car Park was a potential concern in terms of parking. She highlighted that a potential business case for Longsmith Street Car Park was being looked at, however, she could not comment on this at present.

9.7      Councillor Haigh asked whether the County Council was proposing to build a 500 space car park. Councillor Norman stated that she was not aware of any proposals by the County Council to this effect.

9.8       Councillor Haigh stated that she was disappointed with the persistently reduced income at Guildhall Café. Furthermore, she asked when Members would be made aware of changes to the Guildhall, if any. In her view, Guildhall Café was a lost opportunity, given the potential it had to generate income given the number of visitors that the Guildhall attracted.

9.9      Councillor Norman advised that this would be a question for the Head of Cultural Services and the Cabinet Member for Culture and Leisure. Moreover, it was an issue which could be included into the Overview & Scrutiny meeting for consideration at a future date. Councillor Morgan stated that he had looked at this issue since seeing the figures from the Financial Monitoring Q3 report. Improving the Café would require a lot of work alongside the rest of the Guildhall. For example, part of the solution could be to reduce costs.

9.10    Councillor Haigh asked for clarity on whether there would be a reduction in quality. Councillor Haigh stated that there would not be a reduction in quality just a reduction in costs.

9.11    Councillor Hilton asked for clarification on the GL1 emergency works and tall ships easement in the Capital Programme (Appendix 2).The Head of Policy and Resources explained that the £46,490 was the budget for GL1, whilst the tall ships easement was historic, and was included in error.

9.12   Councillor Stephens stated that he would welcome the improvement to the Guildhall.  He then asked for further clarification on the forecast £160,000 overspend in relation to IT as outlined in paragraph 7.2. Secondly, he expressed his concern with the £80,000 variance in relation to the Guildhall.  He questioned when this would be turned around, and whether the targets were good enough. Thirdly, referring to paragraph 10.2, he queried why the Amey contract indexation was higher than the Council had budgeted for.

9.13  The Head Policy and Resources responded to Councillor Stephens as follows. Firstly, the forecasted overspend in IT was in relation to the continued spend on transformation projects. The aim was to balance this out at year end, and to see what could be capitalised on. Councillor Stephens replied to say that it would perhaps be more useful to have a more detailed breakdown of the expenditure within the transformation projects, and information on which, if any, expenses would be recurring. The Head of Policy and Resources explained that there would be a more detailed breakdown of the expenditure in the 2019-2020 Financial Outturn report. In relation to Councillor Stephens’ query about the Amey contract indexation, he advised that the higher indexation was a one off due to  the fact that the pay element of the indexation was budgeted at 2.5% , but the actual staff working at Amey were lower grade NJC staff for which National Agreement applied an increase of 4.5%. This would lead to an additional pressure for 2019/20.

9.14    Lastly, Councillor Norman responded to Councillor Stephens’ query about the Guildhall. She explained that the Interim Head of Cultural Services had only taken over the role in November 2019. Thus, it could take some time before changes were put in place. She noted however that the Head of Cultural Services was undertaking work at the Guildhall café. Moreover, an analysis would be carried out to look at why income at Blackfriars Priory was lower than usual. She suggested that, in part, this could be because there were fewer wedding bookings than usual, perhaps, as a result of the building works which were being carried out near Blackfriars. The sight of the building work could have perhaps deterred people from making wedding bookings.

9.15   Councillor Wilson referred to paragraph 5.4 and asked whether this was income lost. The Head of Policy and Resources advised that there was no income lost.

9.16    Councillor Wilson pointed to paragraph 10.3, and asked whether the Head of Policy and Resources and Councillor Norman could elaborate on the services and opportunities which had been identified at the  Crematorium. The Head of Policy and Resources informed him that this was primarily in relation to expanding the services offered. For example, offering different services such as sunrise services, as well as opening a tearoom. Thus far, these initiatives seemed to be promising, and had added approximately £4000,00 to the Crematorium ‘s monthly income. 

9.17    RESOLVED; - that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee NOTE the report.