Agenda item

To eceive the information, consider the general risks arising from the savings slippages

DECISION:

1.    To accept the report and note the situation and relevant risks in the context of the Savings Overview

2.    To recommend to the Cabinet that detailed challenge is required on unrealised schemes – need to ensure regular review of those schemes that are slipping and refer the schemes to the relevant Scrutiny Committees’ work programme

a)    A report was submitted by the Cabinet Member for Finance, which summarised the Council's savings position.  He asked the committee to note the situation and relevant risks in the context of the Savings Overview and offer observations on the situation for the Cabinet to consider as they approved the report on 25 October 2022. It was also explained that the departments had presented the savings schemes and that the finance officers were merely reporting on the situation.

The Senior Finance Manager reiterated:

·         Since 2015/16, as part of the Council's financial strategy, savings to the value of £35.4m had been approved to be realised during the 2015/16 - 2022/23 period. It was noted that a total of £33.4 million of savings had been realised, which was 94% of the required amount over the period.

·         That the impact of Covid seemed to have contributed to the slippage in the savings programme in some fields.

·         The main schemes that were yet to be achieved were schemes those in the Adults, Health and Well-being Department and the Highways and Municipal Department.

·         That there was a need, when preparing the 2022/23 budget, to acknowledge that the situation had changed so much that there was no way to achieve the savings that had been planned originally, and therefore, almost £500k of plans were removed from the budget and the delivery profile was moved for plans to the value of £1.3 million for 2023/24 and subsequent years.

·         That it was inevitable that realising savings to the value of £33.4m (out of a total of £35.4 million) since April 2015, had been challenging. With a delay and risks to delivering some of the remaining schemes, there was a need to review the plans by the end of the financial year.

Gratitude was expressed for the report and it was expressed that the positive elements in the report needed to be congratulated -

b)    During the ensuing discussion, the following observations were made by members:

·         That 94% of the schemes had been completed - this was encouraging

·         That the departments themselves had proposed the savings and they were not something that had been forced on them

·         That some of the schemes were historical

·         That pressure needed to be placed on those departments that were unable to achieve savings to reconsider plans or plan again

·         That there was a need to encourage more detailed information - if there was no movement on schemes, then better schemes were needed

·         When planning new savings, there was a need to consider elements that were beyond control - the impact of making cuts today leading to greater expenditure in the future, e.g. road maintenance

·         Suggestion to highlight clearly that appendix 4 features slipping savings

·         That savings schemes needed to be challenged in more detail in the future

·         Eager for plans that were slipping schemes to be addressed and be scrutinised

c)    In response to a question regarding the intention to set more ambitious targets for the departments to contribute to the savings scheme, it was noted that this will be inevitable and that work is underway to develop an appropriate procedure. It was reiterated that different processes had been followed to meet the savings to date and that difficult decisions would need to be made in the future.

In response to a comment regarding a £25,000 slippage (Finance Department - delay to a 'Generating Income through Fraud Prevention' plan), the Head of Finance highlighted that the scheme had been established and staff had been trained in the field, but that the Covid period had prevented formal interviews from being held and so the scheme had not commenced. It was reiterated that this was slippage and not a failure and unless it would be possible to deliver in the future, then alternative arrangements would need to be considered.

In response to a comment that the waste field was transferring to the Environment Department and whether this was going to recommence the process of responding to the savings scheme, it was noted that the Environment Department was aware of the need to realise the savings and that discussions had been held between both departments to ensure that the effort to deal with the financial situation continued.

RESOLVED:

1.  To accept the report and note the situation and relevant risks in the context of the Savings Overview

2.  To recommend to the Cabinet that detailed challenge is required on unrealised schemes - need to ensure regular review of those schemes that are slipping and refer the schemes to the relevant Scrutiny Committees' work programme.