Agenda item

Andy Goodwin, Head of Strategic Finance and Ceri Lamoureux, Head of Finance – Place, presented the budget report to Members to enable them to deliberate and assess the detailed budget proposals within the Committee’s jurisdiction. It was confirmed that the budget report would be presented at the 15 February 2024 Cabinet meeting. Subsequently, the Cabinet would be tasked with advocating the budget proposals at the full Council meeting on 22 February 2024.

Members were informed that, for the fiscal year 2023/2024, services under the purview of the Residents’ Services Select Committee projected an overspend of £2.4 million. This overspend stemmed from three primary sources: Green Spaces savings impacted by external factors such as inflation; Community Safety enforcement influenced by issues at Heathrow, Brexit-related changes and the cessation of Government funding; and income pressures within the Planning service. Notably, there was a target of £12.5 million in savings within these services for the specified fiscal year. Among these savings, £242,000 was flagged as red, indicating concerns about delivery, while £1,642,000 fell under Amber 2, signifying progress initiation with some apprehensions regarding timely completion. A portion of this sum, specifically £839,000, related to fees and charges income, and the remaining £83,000,000 pertained to Green Spaces savings. Additionally, £267,000 was recorded as Amber 1, indicating ongoing progress with the likelihood of full delivery, albeit with potential spillage into the next financial year; this element also related to savings within the Green Spaces service area.

Moving to the Council's budget strategy, the consultation budget, presented to the December Cabinet, had estimated a saving requirement of £51 million by 2028/2029. The identified saving programme amounted to £33.4 million, leaving a residual gap of £17.6 million. Exceptional inflation, contributing £48 million to the budget gap by 2028/2029, remained the foremost factor in this Strategy. Within the Committee's jurisdiction, there were no exceptional inflationary items. However, the Committee's total requirement accounted for £6.5 million of the overall inflationary figure, with the pay award constituting the majority at £5 million and an additional £1.5 million linked mainly to contracts.

In terms of service pressures, Residents’ Services forecasted an additional £24 million, with services under the Committee's remit contributing £8.1 million. Of this, £5.1 million was attributed to waste services due to population growth, and £3 million was driven by increased demand for homelessness support. Corporate items added £14 million to the saving requirement, with £7 million allocated for the Council's borrowing requirement and £5 million related to the TFL concessionary fares levy, both resulting from demand returning to pre-pandemic levels.

Following detailed analysis during the autumn, the consultation budget proposed a saving programme of £33.4 million, with £15.8 million of that set to materialise in 2024/2025. Within this programme, £6.6 million fell under the Committee's jurisdiction. Notable savings within this remit included £2.2 million against fees and charges, primarily linked to Yellow Box Junction charges, and a remaining portion attributed to inflationary uplifts. An additional £1.5 million was earmarked for maximising the use of Section 106 funding, with £6 million allocated to realign the Council's staffing budgets for Committee-related services and a further £1.5 million linked to smaller items, as outlined in the report.

Shifting focus to the capital programme, the proposed budget amounted to £218 million for the period up to 2028/2029, with £9 million allocated within the Committee's jurisdiction. The majority of this sum related to the £7.5 million Chrysalis programme budget, with an additional £1 million earmarked for environmental and recreational initiatives. The Housing Revenue Account established a capital programme budget of £442 million to invest in housing stock, encompassing the supply of 614 new dwellings and maintenance of the existing 10,000-plus stock. On the revenue side, the Housing Revenue Account maintained a balanced budget over five years, ensuring reserves were maintained at £5 million over the medium term.

Members raised concerns about the overspend and pressures, particularly related to fees and charges and enquired about contingencies to compensate for the predicted shortfalls. The response highlighted the inclusion of rebasing in the budget build to account for shortfalls and enable consideration of new initiatives.

The Select Committee sought further clarification regarding the prediction to generate further income of £1.8 million from the enforcement of Yellow Box Junctions and enquired how this would work. It was confirmed that an additional member of staff in the CCTV room would be tasked with identifying hotspots where repeat offenders operated and using that information to work out who the culprits were, thereby facilitating the issuing of fines.

In response to further questions from the Committee regarding “black cash settlements" Members heard that this related to the assumption of static Central Government grant funding until 2024/2025, acknowledging potential adjustments based on Government policy changes. With regard to the two sets of figures in the savings proposals as set out on pages 18 and 19 of the report, it was confirmed that the £5.8 million mentioned was the total figure.

Members enquired about incorporating corporate sponsorship models into the tendering process for contracts. The response highlighted an ongoing review for a standardised corporate sponsorship policy.

In response to queries regarding the financial impact of the Mayor of London's ULEZ expansion it was indicated that an estimated cost of £240,000 had been incorporated into the budget proposals for 2024/2025.

Officers were commended on delivering an excellent budget. Members expressed satisfaction with the ring-fenced HRA funds and sought information on the historical impact of COVID-19 on the Council's resources and finances. The response acknowledged ongoing challenges and highlighted the utilisation of local funds to meet pandemic-related costs until 2023/2024.

Concerns were raised about fly tipping and additional CCTV cameras were proposed. The response emphasised the data-driven approach in the budget and assured ongoing monitoring to address any risks.

It was agreed that the Chairman would formulate budget comments outside the meeting in consultation with the Opposition lead.

RESOLVED That:

1.    The Residents’ Services Select Committee noted the budget projections contained in the report and commented as appropriate on the combined budget proposals affecting the relevant service areas within the Residents’ Services Cabinet Portfolio, within the context of the corporate budgetary position; and

2.    The drafting of the Committee’s comments in response to the budget to be submitted to Cabinet be delegated to the Democratic Services Officer in conjunction with the Chairman (and in consultation with the Opposition Lead).

(Note: following the meeting, comments to Cabinet were agreed by the Chairman in consultation with the Opposition Lead. It should be noted that the Opposition Lead did not fully endorse the comments).