To consider the update.

Councillor Hilton, Cabinet Member for Asset Management & Commercialisation, Finance and Ascot, said that there had previously been discussion at scrutiny about the role that Cabinet Members played. It was important for the Panel to hear from officers and ask questions of the experts, Cabinet Members were there to answer any questions if required.

 

Councillor Werner thanked Councillor Hilton for his comments.

 

Andrew Vallance, Head of Finance, reported that the council had an underspend of £2.35 million. As a result, the general reserves had been increased to £8.75 million, which was above the minimum level required. The final outturn on the schools budget was an overspend of £257,000, the final capital outturn was expenditure of £26 million with slippage of £42 million. There was movement of £2 million from the month 10 monitoring report, the reasons for this had been outlined in the report.

 

Julian McGowan, Senior Finance Business Partner, talked through the revenue budget outturn. For each service area:

 

·         The Chief Executive service area had underspent by £1.6 million.

·         Law and Governance had underspent by £700,000.

·         Children’s Services had overspent by £200,000.

·         Adults, Health and Housing had underspent by £139,000.

·         Resources had underspent by £743,000.

·         Place had overspent by £662,000.

 

A member of the public, Mr Andrew Hill, addressed the Panel. The report showed a pleasing underspend and Mr Hill thanked all Members for limiting their special responsibility allowances in the public interest. He had noted that remote meetings and remote working were saving the council large sums of money, for example over £100,000 had been saved from printing and stationary costs, while the use of Zoom meetings had saved £55,000 on petrol claims. Mr Hill asked officers if they thought that there needed to be an even bigger push towards entrenching and expanding home and remote working in RBWM. Mr Hill continued by commenting on the £487,000 underspend on libraries and resident services. He asked if there were plans to use this underspend to reverse the decision to reduce library opening hours.

 

Mr Hill asked a number of further questions:

 

·         There had been a transfer into the reserves of £140,000 for art funding, did this represent potentially new money which could be available to organisations like Norden Farm?

·         The Vicus Way car park was mentioned and had some new cladding, was this scheme projected to come in on the original budget that had been set for the project?

·         Was the delay mentioned in 15.3 in the report due to the contractual termination date of 2025 for Maidenhead Golf Club?

·         It was noted that there was an adverse variance of £500,000 on the train station forecourt. Who covered this cost, was it the Local Enterprise Partnership or the residents and RBWM, and what had caused this loss?

·         Why was the council paying for 106 Westborough Road when it had been transferred to the RBWM Property Company?

 

 

Andrew Vallance said that the council was in an established position of hybrid working. The Town Hall office space was available for staff to work from if it was preferred but most staff worked from home most of the time. Some of the space in Zone D at the Town Hall had been reconfigured to become a collaboration zone, each service area was encouraged to use the zone once a month for team meetings and collaboration activities. The library and residents services underspend had been one off which was mostly due to the delayed weddings over lockdown, there were currently no plans to change the library opening hours. The money set aside was £140,000 in the original budget for arts funding. Vicus Way was projected to come in on the original budget, the slippage on the golf club was due to the contractual date change late in the financial year. Andrew Vallance was unable to answer the question on the railway forecourt, he would respond to Mr Hill with a written answer. On 106 Westborough Road, the property would be refurbished prior to transfer as the council could recover the VAT.

 

Councillor Sharpe said it was a useful financial update. There were a lot of numbers and variables in the report, he asked which numbers officers were concerned about and should therefore be highlighted to the Panel.

 

Andrew Vallance said that there been an increase in spending on older people towards the end of the last financial year, this had now stabilised but was still at a high level. Vacancies were another area of concern nationally for all councils, recruitment was difficult in a number of services. Inflation was something to consider this financial year and the next financial year.

 

Councillor Werner thanked officers for the report, it had answered a number of his questions. He highlighted the big change in underspend since month 10, this seemed to be based on a number of one-off grants. Councillor Werner felt this was similar to past budgets from the previous administration. He commented that officers would have known that some funding, for example on the Property Company, did not need to be used, this money could have been factored into the budget. Councillor Werner asked how the ‘veering’ could be prevented going forward.

 

Andrew Vallance said that there had been significant volatility over the past couple of years with Covid. The projected overspend for the Property Company had been reduced in tranches and the outturn forecast for the company had changed over the course of the year. Julian McGowan had been brought in to help deal with the issue and a number of other business partners had also been employed by the council.

 

The Chairman said that the last year had been the most unpredictable year in all areas of finance. Handling fiscal management and measures over this period had been a difficult job and officers had done well in the circumstances.

 

Councillor Hilton said that he shared Councillor Werner’s view, he felt that some of this money could have been identified earlier. The finance team had been through a significant period of change since 2020, it was important that the team were on top of every budget line so that it could be challenged effectively. Considering where the risks were, around 70% of the budget was spent on adult and children’s services, this was where small movements could make a big difference. There would be a change shortly which would see a difference in how adult social care was funded.

 

The Chairman agreed that it was a significant area of the budget where the council was exposed to fluctuations in financial variants.

 

Councillor Bond commented on funding including council tax being nearly £1 million short, he was puzzled by this figure. He asked if the answer to Mr Hill’s question on the train station forecourt could also be shared with Members of the Panel. Councillor Bond felt that the dedicated schools grant was high level and was therefore a general risk area for the council.

 

Julian McGowan confirmed that a written answer on the council tax query would be provided to Councillor Bond after the meeting.

 

ACTION – Written answer to be given to Councillor Bond on the query about funding including council tax after the meeting.

 

ACTION – The answer to Mr Hill’s question on the train station forecourt to also be circulated to the Panel.

 

Councillor Hilton said that the dedicated schools budget was something that he kept an eye on as it was a risk.

 

Councillor Price clarified that the council had been operating with an underspend, but the underspend could not be repeated in the current financial year due to the nature of the underspend. Therefore, there would not be savings as they were one off. Councillor Price asked if this interpretation was correct.

 

Andrew Vallance said that it was difficult to say, a significant proportion of savings were one off but officers were currently undertaking a review to see how much of the savings would be recurring and how much was one off. This would part of next year’s budget process.

 

Councillor Price commented on the inability to recruit staff, she asked if as a result of this any work had been done to investigate the impact on the service which was delivered to residents.

 

Emma Duncan, Deputy Director for Law & Strategy, said that recruitment did affect the quality of the service that the council could deliver. The pool of people that the council could recruit from had expanded, which showed the positive impact of remote working. A number of these positions were new posts which had been created, it was important to get the right person for the job to ensure a good quality of service.

 

Councillor Price noted the capital slippage and asked what the negative effects were of this, she assumed that the slippage rate had been built into this year’s budget.

 

Andrew Vallance said that slippage was an issue for all local authorities. He had chaired the last meeting of the Capital Review Board and the last agenda was focused on slippage, there would be a further examination of scheduled works and how likely they were to happen on the outlined timeframe. Some delays had been caused by Covid, issues getting hold of labour and raw materials. It was being looked at as an urgent priority, slippage would always happen but officers hoped to minimise the impact.

 

Councillor Price said that general fund reserves should only be used in an emergency. Inflation was an issue of concern, would the general fund be used to deal with the level of inflation.

 

Andrew Vallance said the Medium Term Financial Plan was currently being developed, there was an assumption made about inflation and how long the level would remain high. Reserves should not be used for recurring costs, only a temporary spike in inflation could be a justified use of reserves. If inflation and costs were to remain high for a long period of time, using the reserves would not be beneficial or sustainable.

 

Councillor Price asked why reserves had been earmarked at £3 million.

 

She was informed that there was a specific reason for each earmarked use of reserves, he gave a few examples of where this was the case.

 

The Chairman queried the figure of £188,000 on budget objections which was an unforeseen cost to the council.

 

Andrew Vallance said that this cost had been set aside due to the additional cost of external audit, including investigating the objections to the 2019/20 accounts.

 

Councillor Walters believed that remote working was not entirely satisfactory, he felt it was not as efficient as in person working. There had been a significant number of risks discussed, he asked if there was a significant sum of money coming into the council.

 

Andrew Vallance said that the significant sum of funding would come from the development of Maidenhead Golf Club. Government funding was on a year by year basis, so there was no long term certainty.

 

Councillor Shelim commented on the current business rate discount, he asked if this had affected the council’s budget.

 

Andrew Vallance explained that the government compensated the council through grants.

 

Councillor Werner said that there had been an agreement with some parishes to help fund the libraries but Maidenhead and Windsor did not have their own parish councils. He asked if the Special Expenses could be used to help fund libraries and extend their opening hours. On the property that had been mentioned by Mr Hill, Councillor Werner asked if the council would be reimbursed by the Property Company. Councillor Werner was pleased to hear about the line-by-line budget review that the Head of Finance had mentioned, had this happened each year or was this the first year a review like this had been done. Councillor Werner commented on the Property Company overestimating the amount of money that they would need to spend, he asked if the finance team were able to review the financial performance of the Property Company independently.

 

Andrew Vallance said that the funding for the libraries could be considered as part of the next budget. He was not sure on the reimbursement, this would be double checked and an answer given to Councillor Werner after the meeting. The line-by-line review had occurred in last year’s budget, this had recently been introduced and would be continued for future years. The finance team engaged in regular dialogue with the Property Company.

 

ACTION – Andrew Vallance to check how the council was reimbursed in relation to 106 Westborough Road.

 

Councillor Werner suggested that any difficulties encountered by the finance team could be brought forward to the Panel.

 

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Panel noted the Finance Update.