In accordance with the Regulations, Members are invited to declare any personal or prejudicial interests they may have and the nature of those interests in respect of items on this Agenda and/or indicate if Section 106 of the Local Government Act 1992 applies to them.

No declarations of interest were made.

To receive any petitions, deputations and questions received from Members of the Public in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rule 217.

The total time allowed for this item shall be 30 minutes. Petitions, declarations and questions shall be dealt with in the order in which they are received. Questions may also be submitted at short notice by giving a written copy to the Committee Administrator 15 minutes before the start of the meeting.

The total time allowed for questions at short notice is 15 minutes of the total time for 30 minutes. Any petitions, deputations and questions that have been submitted with prior formal notice will take precedence over questions submitted at short notice. Any questions that are not considered within the time limit shall receive a written response after the meeting and be the subject of a report to the next meeting.

No petitions, deputations or questions had been received.

To consider any questions with notice from Members received in accordance with the provisions of Procedure rule No. 219 and No. 219A.

No questions with notice had been received from Members.

To receive Report No. 8/2018 from the Director for Resources.

·         The above report was presented to Cabinet on 16 January 2018 and the recommendations within the report were approved.

·         Cabinet has requested that Scrutiny review and comment on proposals before the Cabinet on 20 February 2018 so as to inform the decision-making process.

·         The report and its proposals may be amended following the outcome of the Scrutiny Panel.  Scrutiny is therefore asked to consider the report and provide feedback to the Portfolio Holder and Director.

Report No. 8/2018 from the Director for Resources was received.

The Acting Leader, Mr Hemsley, introduced the report advising Members that on 16 January 2016 Cabinet had approved the draft budget for consultation which the Scrutiny Panel had before them.

The context for the draft budget was one that the Council was now unfortunately used to: getting less Government funding at a time when it had significant pressure on the budget through greater demand for important services, like providing care for adults and children.

Councillor Hemsley set out some of the key points:

·         The Council was getting £1.5m less in Government funding this year. This came on the back of cuts in previous years. The best example was Revenue Support Grant – it was £4m in 15/16 and was now 0. Only 20% of the Council’s funding per head came from Government compared to a national average of 40%. The Council continued to lobby on this point as it was unfair.

·         The Government response to funding cuts was to allow Council to raise an additional 1% in council tax. If the Council did this (and the proposal from Cabinet was that Council raised council tax by 4.99%), the extra council tax of £1.6m would effectively replace the lost Government funding but it would not be enough to meet the pressures the Council was seeing on costs.

·         Members would prefer to avoid raising council tax – but the loss of funding put the Council in a difficult position. The report itself showed that the consequences of not raising council tax to the full amount were significant over the medium term.

·         Like all councils Rutland did not want to spend more than it needed to and it prided itself on being low cost but it now faced uncontrollable costs of c£1m arising from increases in inflation and a proposed pay award (agreed nationally).

·         On top of these pressures, there were service pressures of over £1m.  £522k related to children’s care services where the Council had seen costs increase over 100% since 11/12.  Keeping children safe in Rutland is costing more than ever before but was something which was very important to all.

·         So despite the fact that the Council had come up with savings of over £1.3m, it was still left with a budget that was increasing.

·         This meant therefore that despite proposed council tax increases, the Council would still have to use its reserves to balance the budget.

The financial outlook over the coming years remained challenging – it looked like there would be no more funding but the Council would continue to lobby to get the best deal it could and do its utmost to protect front line services. The Council knew that it faced a financial gap in the future and this was something which it wanted to resolve. The Council’s plan for this was to:

·         Close the gap in a measured way – there was no need for drastic action

·         Continue to look for savings as it had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 538.

To receive Report No. 6/2018 from the Director for Resources.

·         The above report was presented Cabinet on 16 January 2018 and the recommendations within the report were approved.

·         Cabinet has requested that Scrutiny review and comment on the proposals. The report will be presented to Full Council for approval on 26 February 2018.

The Chair noted that the Panel would be discuss the Treasury Management Strategy first and would then discuss Capital Investment Strategy.

Treasury Management Strategy

Mr Della Rocca introduced the report and noted that the treasury management report was similar to reports in previous years.

The Council would continue with the strategy of short term investments, and would not consider longer investments at present with any cash balances being made available to fund the Commercial Investment Policy (CIP) 

During discussion the following points were noted:

      i.        The ability to borrow money would not be affected by the current financial position assuming that the return from investments would allow debt to be repaid. Borrowing to fund non-revenue generating assets was unaffordable in the context of the MTFP.

    ii.        It was noted that the £10m fund for commercial investments was a good starting point, and was taken as a safe figure to start working with.

   iii.        The £10m was not related to St George’s Barracks. 

   iv.        Members training regarding the Treasury Management would be reviewed through the Audit & Risk Committee. Training for officers would be reviewed through performance reviews and managers.

    v.        It was noted that ‘Capita Asset Services’ should be changed to ‘Link Asset Services’.

Capital Investment Strategy

Mr Della Rocca introduced the report. 

The CPS was new and is included in the newly required Capital Investment Strategy.  The proposal was to set up a £10m fund to invest in with the idea of generating revenue income to help close the financial gap.

During discussion the following points were noted:

      i.        Miss Waller noted that while she supported the principle of the strategy, she was not sure that what was written reflected best practice, and what the Council actually did. There was no reference to the role of a project board. The report needed to be explicit as to what governance arrangements might be put in place in respect of particular investments. . Mr Hemsley noted that the report writers would make sure the wording is tidied up, making sure there was strong governance.

    ii.        It was noted that ideally investments would be restricted to within Rutland, but if a good opportunity arose then an investment outside the county would be considered.

   iii.        The Chair noted that in the Capital Investment Strategy it was specified that officers would specifically exclude investments that involved alcohol or tobacco production or sale. However, some Local Authorities do invest in hotels, and those hotels were likely to be licensed premises. Mrs Briggs mentioned that the Council and the Museum were both licensed premises. It was noted that the paper would be amended to reflect this.

---oOo---

Chairman closed the meeting at 8.23 pm.

---oOo---