Agenda item

To scrutinise the information before the Cabinet considers approving the Savings Plan in its meeting on February 14th.  

DECISION:

 

·         That the process of identifying the savings had been challenging

·         That reasonable steps, under challenging circumstances, have been taken to draw up the Savings Plan

·         That the savings proposed are reasonable and achievable

·         That the risks and implications of the decision are clear

·         That the report is adequate to enable the Cabinet to make a decision on the entire Savings Plan

·         To present observations from the discussion on the report to the Cabinet for their consideration when discussing the 2023/24 Savings in its meeting on 14/2/23

 

Note:

·         The risk of not achieving schemes needs to be better highlighted

·         We need to highlight that the impact of the savings will not have a disproportionate effect across the County

 

a)    Submitted – the report of Councillor Dyfrig Siencyn, Council Leader, asking the Committee to consider the propriety of the process of identifying the savings, and submit observations to the Cabinet to consider before coming to a decision at their meeting on 14-02-23. It was reported that it was not the Committee's role to express an opinion on the size of the savings or the features of individual proposals recommended as savings, but rather to ensure that the Cabinet was clear on the facts that were presented to it, so that the decisions made were based on robust information.

 

When presenting the background to the work, it was noted, despite receiving a better settlement than projected from the Welsh Government, that the sum was insufficient to meet costs, and that there was a financial deficit of £12.4m in order to achieve a balanced budget.

 

In order to identify savings, 320 proposals were received from Council Departments (with a value of approximately £23m). Every proposal had been assessed by the Chief Executive or by one of the Corporate Directors and they were placed in four categories to assist Members to prioritise with an awareness of what the level of risk would be from implementing any individual proposal.

 

It was reiterated that a legal assessment and high-level financial assessment had been completed on every individual scheme in order to ensure that they were achievable. When submitting their proposals, the Departments had included an assessment of the impact of each proposal on the residents of Gwynedd as well as an initial consideration of equality considerations.

 

Over a three-day period, every Head of Department had submitted their proposals to workshops comprising of Cabinet Members, Scrutiny Chairs and Vice-chairs, as well as the Leaders of the Council's Political Groups. Throughout the process, the main aim was to seek to identify proposals that would have the least impact on the residents of Gwynedd should they be implemented. The outcome of the process was identifying around £6.4m of efficiency savings that could be implemented.

 

Considering that the Council was facing a financial deficit of around £12.4m over the next two years, it was reported that the first phase of savings (£6.4m) would not be sufficient to address this, and that the proposal was to revisit the remaining proposals submitted by the departments over the coming months. Based on the current financial projections, a total of between £8m and £8.6m would need to be found towards a financial deficit of £12.4m - between £1.6m and £2.2m would need to be found in additional savings before setting the 2024/25 budget. It is anticipated that this would push the Council into the territory of cuts instead of efficiency savings that are recommended in the report, and the need for more support by the individual Scrutiny Committees to face this challenge was noted.

 

The officer was thanked for the report.

 

In response to a question regarding how the Adults, Health and Well-being Department would cope, considering that they have an overspend and slippage in current savings plans, it was noted that some of the schemes were now historical and that new plans and ideas were needed. It was reiterated that current circumstances were very different to the situation in 2015 and therefore there was a need to consider the situation realistically. It was noted that a sum for the failure to deliver had been earmarked.

 

In response to a question that substantial plans within the Adults, Health and Well-being Department and the Children's Department had existed for some time and if the proposals submitted were aspirations (which needed to be completed in two years!), it was noted that the proposals were more than aspirations, and that there were no definitive plans at present as business cases had not been drawn up for every scheme. Consequently, a risk figure would have to be included. (It was reiterated that the 'Child Placement Plan' was progressing, with a business case completed and a grant identified).

 

In response to an observation regarding bridging the deficit to complete the proposal / plan, and the allegation that this could reduce the effort of completing within the budget, it was accepted that some schemes were more complicated than others and that this needed to be highlighted to the Cabinet.

 

In response to a question about asking all Departments to offer savings of 20% and that this had not been realised, it was noted that Schools and some Corporate Schemes had not had to propose 20% since they were under direct control.

 

In response to a comment that there was a need to ensure that the schemes would not have a harmful impact on work in the future, it was noted, indeed, that the proposals had not been considered as temporary measures.

 

In response to an observation regarding giving consideration to carbon emissions and the need to reach net zero by 2050, it was noted that some of the revenue savings were climate schemes, e.g. £3m of solar panels on 80 Council sites.

 

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

·         That the process had been thorough

·         That the work had been completed in an orderly way - every Department had had the opportunity to contribute and that the guidance had been very professional

·         It was good to see that two years were being considered, and they welcomed savings instead of cuts.

 

In response to a question about the process of raising income, it was noted that a number of factors had been considered and that it was not possible to set the same percentage for every Department since some services competed with the private sector. It was reiterated that the proposal, in some departments, such as YGC, was to extend units of work to generate an income. It was reiterated that an annual income review was being implemented as a part of setting the budget.

 

In response to a question regarding the £1.6m fund for risk and if the usual accounting practice was to reach this amount or another rationale, it was noted that a combination of what was accepted in the field of accountancy, project management and practice had been considered.  It was reiterated that the amount was higher than what had been used in the past, but that this was a combination of good practice and experience.

 

In response to a question regarding equality impact assessments and the consideration that savings and cuts would have an unbalanced impact across the County, it was noted that no scheme proposed a specific change in one part of the County. It was reiterated that there was no intention to offer different services in different parts of the County, but a warning was given that this may be a possibility in the second phase. In a supplementary comment, it was suggested that this needed to be included on the impact assessment form.

 

The Leader took the opportunity to give thanks for the valuable comments submitted. He reiterated that the process had been beneficial and that it should possibly be considered as an annual process.  He noted that any cut would be likely to affect the County's residents but that the first phase would not be proposing cuts to services or provisions. The main aim was to achieve a balanced budget by having the least possible impact on the residents of Gwynedd.

 

RESOLVED

           

·         That the process of identifying the savings had been challenging

·         That reasonable steps, under challenging circumstances, have been taken to draw up the Savings Plan

·         That the savings proposed are reasonable and achievable

·         That the risks and implications of the decision are clear

·         That the report is adequate to enable the Cabinet to make a decision on the entire Savings Plan

·         To present observations from the discussion on the report to the Cabinet for its consideration when discussing the 2023/24 Savings in its meeting on 14/2/23

 

            Note:

·         The risk of not achieving schemes needs to be better highlighted

·         We need to highlight that the impact of the savings will not have a disproportionate effect across the County