To receive the report.

Andrew Vallance updated the Panel on the latest financial position of RBWM. At month 6, there was a small underspend of £46,000, which was a £700,000 improvement over month 4. The reasons for this were contained in the Outbreak Management Fund and extra money from the CCG had been received. There had been a severe overspend reduction in children’s services, down to £684,000 which was mainly around placements. For adult’s services, there was around a £500,000 overspend which was similar to other Berkshire local authorities. There was £1 million underspend in property.

Councillor L Jones said that the outturn position overall was roughly £50,000 above what was expected. £400,000 had been received from CCG, £1 million from property but there were still 6 months to go. She was unsure about bringing in the £1 million when there was still a lot of uncertainty. On the savings tracker, there were ‘potentially unachievable’ savings listed of £2.2 million, Councillor L Jones asked how achievable these savings were.

Andrew Vallance said that the £1 million had come from the property team, some of the savings would turn to green from amber. Those that did not, alternative savings would be found.

Adele Taylor added that one of the amber savings had recently turned to green after a Cabinet decision.

Councillor Werner said that the update was showing a different picture to the last update that the Panel had received. He asked what work had gone in to change the overspend to an underspend. How would this be embedded into the system so that this did not happen again.

Andrew Vallance explained that the main reason for the £700,000 change was the CCG money being confirmed. There were further reserves which could be used if needed to balance the budget. The provisional figure for month 7 was a £9,000 underspend.

Adele Taylor said that RBWM spent over £100 million in total, so small amounts of movement like this were common. Budget mangers were going through the data in detail which led to greater transparency and it was shown to the Panel where things were being changed where needed. The start of the financial year was less certain than mid-year and therefore it was based on estimations and assumptions. Government had supported the council with grant funding which had an impact on the budget and it was difficult for officers to predict how much support RBWM would receive going forward. Any movement was explained in the report but officers were happy to explain any further detail.

Councillor Werner asked for clarification that the Head of Finance had suggested that if there was any further overspend, there were other sources of income which could be used.

Andrew Vallance said that there was money in reserves available which could be used if required.

Councillor Sharpe said that there were a number of pressures, he asked if officers were sure that all the pressures had been outlined.

Andrew Vallance responded by saying that officers were aware of many pressures, but some were unknown for example the impact of any additional Covid restrictions on income.

Adele Taylor said that there were demand led budgets, for example children placements were expensive and one or two additional children could be an added additional cost. Reserves were one off spending, there were no plans to use reserves and they would only be used as a last resort.

Councillor L Jones asked for an explanation on the gross borrowing forecast and risks associated with it. She had noted from the recommendations in the report and was concerned about the purchase of waste vehicles, she could not find any reference to this in any other report. Councillor L Jones said that this was a significant amount of capital being spent and Members should have been given an overview of this decision.

Andrew Vallance said that mixed borrowing was always under review. Interest rates did not go up in November 2021, the next likely time they could increase was February 2022. Two waste vehicles needed to be approved this financial year, with Cabinet being asked to confirm this spending as part of the report. The other four additional waste vehicles would be part of the draft capital budget. The two purchased this year would be funded by money receiving from Community Infrastructure Levy, the four additional waste vehicles next financial year would be funded by borrowing. The new vehicles needed to be purchased to cover new routes which had recently been agreed.

Councillor L Jones requested that the Service Lead was invited to a future meeting of the Panel to explain the reasoning behind the decision, this was agreed by the Panel.

ACTION – The Service Lead for Waste to be invited to a future meeting of the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Panel.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Panel noted the report.