Agenda item

To review Brent Council’s budget performance and draft budget proposals.

Councillor McLennan, Deputy Leader and Lead Member for Resources, introduced a report on the Council’s budget performance and the implementation of the 2020 budget scrutiny recommendations. The Committee was then invited to raise questions on the report, which focused on a number of key areas as highlighted below:

·       It was noted that there had been around a £23 million loss of income and around £14 million of costs as a result of the pandemic. The cost of personal protective equipment (PPE) was estimated at around £3 million, and around £1.3 million was spent on costs relating to shielding.

·       The pandemic had highlighted the areas in which the Council needed to target its funding in the future, such as on poverty and health inequalities. In response to a question from the Committee, it was noted that targeting funding in this way would allow the Council to assess outcomes and measure success in a way that had not been possible in its immediate response to the pandemic.

·       No assurances could be given as to level of funding for individual departments of the Council, including those that relate to the environment. Each department would put forward its own set of savings, which would be considered when the budget was set. The importance of balancing the budget was emphasised, as was the Council’s commitment to its environmental priorities.

·       It was noted that the budget had been delayed because there was uncertainty about the level of funding it would receive from central government and about the costs of the pandemic going forward. The situation was ongoing and the Council was having to react to new information from central government, and the course of the pandemic itself, quickly and efficiently.

·       Should the costs for the current financial year be unmet by central government or in-year savings, the Council would need to look to its reserves. The Council was hesitant to use capital contributions to revenue because it would still need to pay back that capital over a long period.

·       In response to a question from the Committee, it was noted that the Council would be engaging with the public about the possibility of cuts and the impact it could have on them. The Communications team would be leading on this within the Council, and the Labour Group would also be working with members to look at the ways in which they could share the message. The Committee was also assured that members would be involved in the budget setting process.

·       The Committee was assured that any proposals to cut expenditure would involve detailed equality impact assessments which would ensure that the impact on the most disadvantaged and vulnerable residents in the borough had been carefully examined.

·       It was noted that the impact of the removal of free travel for under 18s in London was an important consideration for all local authorities across the city.  The Council had joined others in pressing central government to reverse the decision and/or cover its immediate costs. It was currently unclear whether the Council would face any additional costs as a result of the implementation of this policy.

·       It was noted that £3.3 million had been received from central government for the discretionary grants scheme, all of which was set to be spent. The funding would reach 561 small and medium-sized local business across the borough. 

·       It was forecasted that the Council would receive 3-4% less income from council tax receipts than the previous year as a result of the pandemic. While central government would not reimburse local authorities for the loss of collection, it had allowed them to repay their collection deficit over three years as opposed to one. Council tax support had also reduced the amount of tax local authorities were able to collect, and it was unclear when this policy would end.

Resolved

The Committee made the following information requests:

1.    A breakdown of the £37.4 million of costs and loss of income referenced at paragraph 4.3 of the report. 

2.    How the Council reviews the delivery and value for money of the shared NHS/Local Authority budgeted initiatives in the integrated social care system.