Agenda item

6.1     Budget & Council Tax 2022-23

 

This report sets out the Council’s budget proposals for 2022/23.  It also details the results of the consultation, scrutiny and equalities considerations in relation to the budget proposals.  The report also sets out the overall financial position facing the Council for the medium term and highlights the significant risks, issues and uncertainties.

 

Members are asked to note that the recommendations in the report were approved by Cabinet on 7 February 2022 for reference on to Council.

 

(Agenda republished to include a revised version of Appendix P to the main budget report – Pay Policy Statement 2022/23 on 22 February 2022)

 

6.2     Conservative Group amendments to the Budget & Council Tax proposals 2022-23

 

To consider the proposed amendments submitted by the Conservative Group in relation to the Council’s budget proposals for 2022-23.

 

(Agenda republished to include the Conservative Group alternative budget proposals on 22 February 2022)

Council RESOLVED to:

 

(1)       Agree an overall 2.99% increase in the Council’s element of Council Tax for 2022/23, with 1% as a precept for Adult Social Care and a 1.99% general increase.

 

(2)       Agree the General Fund revenue budget for 2022/23, as summarised in Appendices A and B of the report.

 

(3)       Agree the savings proposals for 2022/23, as set out in Appendix C of the report.

 

(4)       Note the report from the Budget Scrutiny Panel in Appendix D of the report.

 

(5)       Agree the HRA budget for 2022/23, as set out in section seven of the report.

 

(6)       Agree the Dedicated Schools Grant, as set out in section eight of the report.

 

(7)       Agree the changes to the existing Capital Programme in relation to additions of new schemes and reprofiling, as set out in section 10 of the report and Appendix E, and note the Capital Pipeline Schemes in Appendix F of the report.

 

(8)       Agree the Capital Strategy, the Investment Strategy, the Treasury Management Strategy and the Minimum Revenue Provision Statement as set out in Appendices G, H, I and J of the report.

 

(9)       Agree the Reserves Strategy and schedule of reserves, as set out in Appendix K of the report.

 

(10)     Note the action plan to implement CIPFA’s Financial Management Code, as set out in Appendix L of the report.

 

(11)     Agree the schedule of fees and charges, as set out in Appendix M of the report.

 

(12)     Note the results of the budget consultation, as set out in section six and detailed in Appendix N of the report.

 

(13)     Note the advice of the Director of Legal, HR, Audit and Investigations, as set out in Appendix O of the report.

 

(14)     Agree the Pay Policy Statement for 2022/23, as set out in Appendix P of the report.

 

Council Tax recommendations

 

(15)     As a result of confirmation having been received on the final GLA precept in advance of the recommendations being put to the vote at the Council meeting it was agreed in relation to the Council Tax for 2022/23:

 

            That the following amounts be now calculated as the Council’s element by the Council for the year 2022/23 in accordance with Sections 31 to 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 as amended:

 

(a) £1,067,562,055  being the aggregate of the amount that the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A(2) of the Act.

(b) £927,416,795      being the aggregate of the amounts that the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A(3) of the Act.

(c) £140,145,260      being the amount by which the aggregate at (a) above exceeds the aggregate at (b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31A(4) of the Act, as its Council Tax requirement for the year.

 (d) £1,419.48           being the amount at (c) above, divided by the amount for the tax base of 98,730, agreed by the General Purposes Committee on the 6 December 2021, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31B of the Act, as the basic amount of its Council Tax for the year.

 

(e)                                           Valuation Bands

 

being the amounts given by multiplying the amount at (d) above by the number which, in the proportion set out in Section 5(1) of the Act, is applicable to dwellings listed in a particular valuation band divided by the number which in that proportion is applicable to dwellings listed in valuation band D, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 36(1) of the Act, as the amounts to be taken into account for the year in respect of categories of dwellings listed in different valuation bands.

 

(16)     That it be noted that for the year 2022/23 the GLA precept issued to the Council on 24 February 2022, in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, in respect of the GLA, for each of the categories of dwellings are as shown below:

 

 

(17)   That, having calculated the aggregate in each case of the amounts at (15)(e) and (16) above, the Council, in accordance with Section 30(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, hereby sets the following amounts as the amounts of council tax for the year 2022/23 for each of the categories of dwellings shown below:

Valuation Bands
A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H
£	£	£	£	£	£	£	£
1,210.05	1,411.72	1,613.40	1,815.07	2,218.42	2,621.77	3,025.12	3,630.14

 

(18)     That it be noted that the Director of Finance has determined that the Council element of the basic amount of Council Tax for 2022/23 is not excessive in accordance with the principles approved under Section 52ZB of the Local Government Finance Act 1992.

 

(a)       That the Director of Finance be and is hereby authorised to give due notice of the said Council Tax in the manner provided by Section 38(2) of the 1992 Act.

(b)       That the Director of Finance be and is hereby authorised when necessary to apply for a summons against any Council Tax payer or non-domestic ratepayer on whom an account for the said tax or rate and any arrears has been duly served and who has failed to pay the amounts due to take all subsequent necessary action to recover them promptly.

(c)        That the Director of Finance be and is hereby authorised to collect revenues and distribute monies from the Collection Fund and is authorised to borrow or to lend money in accordance with the regulations to the maximum benefit of each fund.

 

In accordance with Standing Order 43, as the above decisions related to the setting of the budget and Council Tax they were subject to a recorded vote.

 

Prior to the above recommendations being approved, the alternative budget proposals moved as amendments to the budget report by the Conservative Group were put to the vote and declared LOST.

 

The voting recorded on the amendment moved by the Conservative Group was as follows:

 

For the Amendment (3): Councillors Colwill, Kansagra and Maurice

 

Against the Amendment (45): Councillors Afzal, Agha, Ahmed, Akram, M.Butt, S.Butt, Chan, Chappell, S Choudhary, Choudry, Conneely, Daly, Dar, Dixon, Ethapemi, Ezeajughi, Farah, Gbajumo, Georgiou, Grahl, Hassan, Hirani, Hylton, Johnson, Kabir, Kelcher, Kennelly, Knight, Long, Mahmood, Mashari, McLeish, McLennan, Miller, Naheerathan, Nerva, M.Patel, Sangani, Shahzad, Ketan Sheth, Krupa Sheth, Southwood, Stephens, Tatler and Thakkar

 

Abstentions to the Amendment (3): Councillors Colacicco (Mayor), Aden (Deputy Mayor) & Mitchell-Murray.

 

The substantive recommendations, as detailed above, were then put to the vote and declared CARRIED.  The voting recorded was as follows:

 

For (44): Councillors Afzal, Agha, Ahmed, Akram, M.Butt, S.Butt, Chan, Chappell, S Choudhary, Choudry, Conneely, Daly, Dar, Dixon, Ethapemi, Ezeajughi, Farah, Gbajumo, Grahl, Hassan, Hirani, Hylton, Johnson, Kabir, Kelcher, Kennelly, Knight, Long, Mahmood, Mashari, McLeish, McLennan, Miller, Naheerathan, Nerva, M.Patel, Sangani, Shahzad, Ketan Sheth, Krupa Sheth, Southwood, Stephens, Tatler and Thakkar.

 

Against (4): Councillors Colwill, Georgiou, Kansagra and Maurice

 

Abstentions to the Amendment (3): Councillors Colacicco (Mayor), Aden (Deputy Mayor) & Mitchell-Murray.

The Mayor then moved on to receive the report from the Director of Finance setting out the Council’s budget proposals for 2022-23.  Included within the report were the results of the budget consultation, scrutiny and equalities processes along with a summary of the overall financial position, risks, issues and uncertainties facing the Council over the medium term.

 

In accordance with the procedural motion agreed at the start of the meeting, the Mayor invited Councillor M Butt, as Leader of the Council, to introduce the report.

 

Councillor M Butt began by thanking members, officers, the public and other stakeholders for their involvement in the consultation and preparation of the budget.  Highlighting that the proposals presented another balanced budget he felt they not only set out a fair and responsible approach but also one that would continue to make a difference for residents across Brent in terms of the aspirations for continued growth and opportunity not only in the coming year but also beyond.

 

Commenting on the alternative budget proposals presented by the Opposition Group he felt it important to outline the risks identified when compared to the ambitious but responsible budget presented by the Labour Administration, which had been designed to not only provide value for money but also remove the barriers to enable residents to access opportunities and ensure no one was left behind.  Referring to the budget proposals set out within the report, Councillor M.Butt highlighted these included no additional reductions beyond the £2.7m approved as part of the 2021-22 budget, along with an unprecedented level of capital investment made possible as a result of the prudent stewardship and commitment of the Administration, despite the challenges of austerity and the pandemic.  He was also proud of the additional support being provided through the Council Tax Support Scheme and Resident Support Fund which, as a result of the effective management of the Council’s finances, had meant Brent was able to offer one of the most generous packages of support within London for its most vulnerable residents and in order to fill the gaps created as a result of the ongoing funding restrictions being imposed by central government.

 

In referencing how the budget would support and improve the lives of Brent residents, Councillor M Butt advised of the ambitions included within the budget for the future for Brent residents.  These included:

 

·             Work to deliver a £15m programme of investment and repairs on Brent’s priority roads and pavements following the winter season with it noted that over 1000 pot holes had already been filled over the last year.

·             Continuing the progress being achieved through delivery of the New Council Homes Programme with over 1000 safe, secure and affordable homes already being delivered and additional funding to tackle homelessness and reduce the reliance on temporary accommodation.

·             A commitment to rebuild and reimagine local neighbourhoods to create safe inviting spaces that were fit for the future and residents across the borough.

·             The roll out of Brent’s innovative Digital Strategy, which would include development of the Councils website and the provision of devices and internet access for digitally excluded households along with training and support.

 

Councillor M Butt continued by highlighting the current administrations track record for leading effective change that had made a positive impact on residents.  This included Brent’s commitment to decarbonisation, the success of the Brent Black Community Action Plan, Brent Heath Matters and the investment of £44m to expand and upgrade Brent schools that would include the provision of 427 new places for SEN pupils.  In order to harness the potential of local people and change lives for the better, he also highlighted the significant level of funding being provided to support local businesses and provide opportunities for Brent residents to access education, training and qualifications through the Brent Start programme.  As the Council emerged from the pandemic he also outlined the Council’s evolving plans, as set out within the capital programme and pipeline, which included delivery of an Adult Education Centre of Excellence at Morland Gardens, the commitment to continue building new Council homes, plans to invest further in fire safety across the housing stock and within town centres in order to level up the boroughs high streets.

 

Turning then to focus on the alternative budget submitted by the Opposition Group Councillor M Butt highlighted his disappointment at what he felt to be the lack of a responsible and reasonable alternative budget and lack of awareness with regard to the current impact of the cost of living crisis on local residents, which had been further exacerbated by the programme of austerity and funding restrictions being imposed by the Conservative Government resulting in a real term funding reduction over the previous four years of £80m.  Whilst unwelcome, it had been necessary to propose an increase in Council Tax reflecting that until central government changed the way in which local government was funded, this remained the council’s primary source of funding in order to ensure residents were able to continue receiving the services they relied upon.  Concern was also expressed in relation to the proposal to remove the funding set aside to cover the payment of the London Living Wage on new contracts within the Opposition’s alternative budget which it was felt demonstrated how far the Opposition were out of touch with the impact of the current cost of living crisis.

 

As an alternative and in summing up, Councillor M Butt advised that the Administration in presenting its budget proposals had recognised and sought to respond to the needs and aspirations of local residents across Brent which would not only fuel ambition but also deliver opportunities and a fairer future for all.  On this basis he urged the Opposition Group to consider withdrawing their alternative budget proposals and commended the budget, as set out in the report, to all members for approval.

 

The Mayor then invited Councillor Kansagra, as Leader of the Conservative Group, to respond to the budget proposals.

 

Councillor Kansagra began by thanking the Director and Deputy Director of Finance for their assistance in formulating the alternative budget proposals which had been submitted by the Conservative Group.  In presenting the alternative proposals be began by highlighting concerns regarding the basis and fairness of the proposed 2.99% increase in Council Tax included within the budget recommended by the Leader on behalf of the current Labour Administration.  Commenting on the impact arising from the increase in Council Tax within Brent since 2016, he advised that the Conservative Group, in maintaining their stance as the party of low taxation, had proposed a lower alternative increase of 1% which would be ring fenced for Adult Social Care and would alleviate the current pressures on household budgets.  In order to fund this measure and secure a balanced budget he then outlined the additional proposals being recommended by the Conservative Group, which included:

·             Removing the proposed growth to support the London Living Wage, which he advised would result in a saving of £1.5m.  In presenting this proposal Councillor Kansagra highlighted that whilst supportive of the National Minimum Wage the Conservative Group also believed in fair wages for fair work.

·             Removal of the landlord incentive scheme to achieve a saving of £1.8m.  In commenting on this proposal, Councillor Kansagra highlighted the Conservative Groups concern at the impact of the scheme on the housing rental market and at incentivising landlords to provide accommodation for those who ordinarily would have been unable to afford to live in the borough.  Given that many ordinary working households had needed to move out of the borough in order to find somewhere affordable to live, he queried the nature of the scheme in seeking to subsidise landlords in this way and felt that those requiring housing as an alternative to temporary accommodation could, where appropriate, be moved out of borough to areas that were more affordable and where they could be more easily accommodated.  Whilst acknowledging the potential risk identified by the Director of Finance in this approach, given the potential impact in higher temporary accommodation costs should it not be possible to secure alternative housing outside of the borough, the Conservative Group felt this would be mitigated by the longer term potential to drive down rent levels across the borough

·             The deletion of a Cabinet Member post, saving £20k.  In presenting this proposal, Councillor Kansagra highlighted the cross over between certain Cabinet Member remits and current vacancy on Cabinet.  As a result it was felt the saving could be achieved by merging the existing Cabinet remits covering Environment, Regeneration, Property & Planning.

·             Use of a proportion of the New Homes Bonus to balance and support the General Fund element of the revenue budget.

 

In commending and formally moving the Conservative Groups alternative budget proposals, Councillor Kansagra ended by highlighting that the proposals had been assessed as producing a legally balanced budget which he felt would also provide a common sense approach as well as further opportunities for investment in council services.  Prior to ending, he also took the opportunity, given the previous rhetoric expressed by the Leader, to remind members about the £40m of support which had been made available to the Council by central government in response to the covid pandemic.  These had been in addition to initiatives such as the Furlough Scheme and he queried why the full level of funding provided had not been utilised by the Council along with the approach adopted by the Administration in relation to the overall use of the Council’s balances and reserves.

 

The Mayor thanked Councillor Kansagra for his comments and for moving the alternative budget proposals and then invited Councillor McLennan, as Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Resources, Children's Safeguarding, Early Help and Social Care to speak as the next stage in the budget debate.

 

Councillor McLennan began by thanking the Council’s Chief Executive and Finance Team along with all other officers involved for their efforts and support in preparing the budget proposals, which she advised would not only continue to ensure value for money but would also meet the needs and aspirations of residents across the borough.  In recognising the impact of the pandemic, she highlighted her pride at the way Council staff, members, local resident groups and the voluntary and community sector had come together with other key stakeholders in order to support those most vulnerable residents and was pleased that despite the significant difficulties experienced this had also presented opportunities to build stronger relationships with residents and community support groups.  In discussing the budget, Councillor McLennan outlined the carefully planned and prudent approach undertaken in formulating the budget proposals and in terms of managing the Council’s finances.  As a result, and despite 10 years of Conservative Government austerity, it had still been possible to extend the generous package of assistance being made available to support the most vulnerable residents.  Referring to the debate earlier in the meeting, she also reminded members how the robustness of the Council’s financial arrangements had been recognised independently through the External Audit process, whilst also commending the balanced nature of the budget which had been recommended given the challenges identified as a result of the Government’s current approach towards the funding of local government.

 

In addressing the proposed increase in council tax, Councillor McLennan expressed regret that an increase would be necessary, however given the cuts in funding received from central government she felt local authorities had little choice but to consider raising Council Tax in order to continue supporting the essential services relied on by so many residents, especially given the impact of the governments approach towards addressing the cost of living crisis.

 

In commending the budget to Council, Councillor McLennan ended by reminding members of the detailed consultation and scrutiny which the budget proposals had been subject to, along with the prudent approach adopted by the Administration in relation to the use of balances and reserves in order to protect the provision of essential services to residents.  On this basis she also urged members to reject the alternative budget proposals moved by the Conservative Group, with specific concerns identified in relation to their approach towards the landlord incentive scheme and managing the location of households within temporary accommodation.

 

The Mayor thanked Councillor McLennan for her comments and as the final contribution prior to opening up the debate then invited Councillor Ketan Sheth, as Co-Chair of the Budget Scrutiny Task Group, to present the key themes within the Budget Scrutiny Task Group report, which had been included as an appendix to the Budget and Council Tax 2022/23 report.

 

Councillor Ketan Sheth began by thanking Councillor Mashari and other members of the Budget Scrutiny Task Group for their support in undertaking the scrutiny review.  In introducing the report, he highlighted that the Task Group had, in undertaking the review, recognised the challenging financial environment in which the Council was operating given the long term reduction in Government funding, level of savings already achieved by the Council, social and economic impact of the pandemic and increasing complexity of demand for Council services along with similar pressures on other statutory and voluntary and community sector support.

 

In considering the second year of a two year budget phase, Councillor Ketan Sheth advised that the Task Group had undertaken extension consultation and engagement in order to seek evidence from a wide range of stakeholders with a number of areas scrutinised in depth.  These had included:

 

·             the impact on School finances in relation to the pressure within the Dedicated Schools Grant;

·             the Covid Recovery programme;

·             the impact of the pandemic on Adult Social Care, particularly in relation to mental health;

·             the impact on health inequalities work once Government grant funding had ceased;

·             the impact of the pandemic on business rates, Council Tax and Housing Revenue Account rent collection.

 

As a result the Task Group had made a number of recommendations, as detailed within section 2 of their report, which he was pleased to report had been welcomed and supported by Cabinet for consideration as part of the final budget decision making process.

 

Councillor Ketan Sheth thanked all the members, officers and other stakeholders who had supported the wide variety of engagement undertaken as part of the review process.  He felt that the approach adopted had enabled a more holistic assessment to be undertaken in relation to the impact of the budget proposals at ground level and their context in relation to emerging budget pressures and the future needs of local communities.

 

In concluding, Councillor Ketan Sheth highlighted that whilst trying to be as objective as possible in the review, it had not been possible to ignore the impact of the Government’s programme of austerity over the last decade and piecemeal approach towards the funding of local government which had made it more difficult for local authorities to be able to plan financially.  Highlighting concern at the impact and damage being caused by the Government’s approach, financial uncertainty in which local authorities were having to operate and extent of savings already delivered, he was supportive of the longer term approach adopted towards financial management within Brent and hoped this would be matched by the Government along with the provision of a fair funding formula.  Councillor Ketan Sheth ended by once again thanking all those who had participated and engaged in the review process and commended the Task Group report to Council.

 

The Mayor advised that this now concluded the opening statements and thanked Councillor Ketan Sheth for his comments.  Before moving on to open up the budget for general debate by other Members, she invited the Director of Finance to provide a brief update for members on the recommendations within the report.

 

Minesh Patel (Director of Finance) advised members that during the course of the meeting confirmation had been received from the Greater London Assembly on the precept set in relation to the Mayor for London’s budget (as detailed within recommendation 2.16).  As a result this would enable the Council to consider and set the Council Tax for 2022/23 without requiring a meeting of the Council Tax Setting Committee, meaning recommendations 2.17 – 2.19 within the report could now be withdrawn from consideration.

 

The Mayor thanked the Director of Finance for the update provided and having noted the advice opened up the debate on the budget proposals for comment by other members.

 

Councillor Tatler, Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning opened the debate by outlining her support for the budget proposals introduced by the Leader and went on to express her pride that despite austerity the Council’s effective and prudent management of its budget had enabled continued investment in services making a positive impact on residents.  Highlights included the construction of additional social housing, investment in High Streets, support for local businesses and the London Living Wage (LLW) along with the successful programme of grants provided through the Neighbourhood Community Infrastructure Levy (NCIL).  In commending the budget to Council, Councillor Tatler ended by re-iterating that despite the government’s ongoing restrictions in funding the Council had continued, through its effective approach towards financial management, to deliver a programme of investment providing long term positive outcomes for local residents.

 

Other members who spoke on the budget proposals were as follows:

 

Councillor Agha, in expressing his support for the budget, highlighted the need to ensure that the Council continued doing all it could to effectively support residents given the ongoing impact of the government’s programme of austerity, current cost of living crisis coupled with the social and economic impacts arising from the pandemic recovery and climate emergency.  Supporting the need for the government to provide, a longer term and fairer funding solution for local government he felt the current Administration remained best placed to deliver the long term and stable support required to ensure Brent continued to prosper.

 

Councillor Mili Patel in supporting the budget felt it was important to recognise the way in which the proposals had been designed to address a range of inequalities currently being faced by Brent residents as specifically highlighted through the pandemic and also current cost of living crisis.  Expressing frustration at what she felt to be the lack of impact arising from the Conservative Government’s pledges in relation to “Levelling Up” and the piecemeal approach towards their funding of local government, she felt it important to highlight the ways in which the budget proposals had been targeted on the provision of vital services across the borough.  These included employment and training support being provided through Brent Works, provision for payment of the LLW, investment in High Streets, the provision of affordable social housing, measures to tackle anti-social behaviour and address digital exclusion, which she felt highlighted the current Administrations difference in approach towards tackling inequality.

 

Councillor Stephens, Cabinet Member for Schools, Employment and Skills then spoke to share his support for the budget and in so doing outlined the ambitious nature of the proposals in relation to both employment and training as well as in supporting the aspirations of families and young people in Brent.  In terms of employment he highlighted the importance in supporting provision of the LLW along with the support for Brent Works, provision of a new Adult Education Centre and local green economy and technology.  In terms of families and young people he highlighted the way in which schools had been supported throughout the pandemic which had resulted in them being able to maintain such high attendance, the support in providing holiday activities and food programmes and to the proposals and investment included as part of the budget to increase the number of Special Education Need places within the borough by almost 50%. In summarising, Councillor Stephens highlighted what he felt to be the Administration’s clear plan and vision for improving the lives of residents in Brent when compared to the approach outlined by the Opposition group within their alternative budget proposals and Conservative Government in relation to addressing the cost of living crisis or in supporting the LLW.

 

Councillor Georgiou advised that he would not be supporting the proposed budget, given what he felt to be the failure, in terms of the Council’s strategy relating to use reserves, to support the offsetting of any increase in Council Tax to mitigate against the resulting impact on local residents arising from the cost of living crisis and Governments increase in National Insurance contributions.  Highlighting concern at what he felt to be the lack of rigorous scrutiny of the current Administration and budget proposals (which had caused him to resign as a member of the budget scrutiny task force the previous year) Councillor Georgiou ended by re-iterating his concerns regarding the strategy identified in relation to use of reserves and way in which residents views were being taken into account by the current Administration.

 

Councillor Farah, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care, then spoke and in highlighting his support for the budget proposals praised the track record of the current Administration in terms of delivering for the elderly and vulnerable across the borough.   This included investing in support for Care Homes across the borough during the pandemic, including the provision of PPE and infection control measures, as well as in a multi-disciplinary team approach towards support.  Highlighting his disappointment at the lack of support from the Opposition Group in terms of provision for the London Living Wage (LLW) he felt it important to recognise the impact this would specifically have on home care workers and in increasing pressure on a sector already experiencing significant challenges in terms of staffing.  As result he urged members to reject the Opposition Groups alternative budget proposals.

 

Councillor Kabir then spoke and began by highlighting her opposition to the alternative budget proposals moved by the Opposition Group.  Moving on to outline her support for the budget proposals moved by the Leader she praised the approach and funding being provided to address the challenges identified in relation to the increased demand for SEN places within the borough and in managing the associated cost pressures on the High Needs Block Funding provided for schools and as a result of the Health and Social Care Levy.  Despite the challenges identified she felt it important to recognise how the Council had continued to offer a high level of support to vulnerable pupils and to celebrate the investment included for the provision of a new school for children with special needs in Brent.

 

Councillor Mahmood in expressing his support for the budget shared his gratitude to all council officers and elected members for the continued work to support Brent residents despite the challenging financial climate, adding that he was proud to commend the proactive, secure and resident focused budget that the current Administration had proposed.

 

Councillor Kelcher felt it was important to draw attention to the challenging nature of the budget, in light of the current economic context, increased levels of inflation and the general cost of living crisis.  He went on to express concern that the alternative budget proposals moved by the Opposition Group only appeared to compound the struggles being faced by many residents, particularly in relation to those on the lowest incomes given their lack of support for provision relating to the LLW.  Councillor Kelcher felt that the alternative budget proposals and contribution from the opposition in general on the budget offered no credible alternative and in supporting the budget proposals moved by the Leader, expressed disappointment at the approach which had been adopted in this respect by Opposition members.

 

Councillor Knight, Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Engagement in supporting the budget proposals and issues highlighted by previous speakers felt it important to recognise the pressures faced by many local residents as a result of the cost of living crisis.  Referring to research undertaken by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation relating to the impact of the current crisis on household income, she felt this had been further exacerbated by poor economic management from central government.  In terms of the budget, Councillor Knight expressed her support for the approach taken by the Administration, despite the challenges of austerity, in continuing to put in place support for residents to ensure the ongoing delivery of vital services. In drawing attention to the correlation between increased deprivation and crime she ended by highlighting the measures included within the budget to support the continued prioritisation of community safety, including the programme of action to tackle violence against women and girls, which she felt reflected the efforts being made to ensure residents across the Borough felt safe, secure and stable.

 

Councillor Afzal, as initial context to his comments on the budget, began by highlighting his concern and frustration at the financial challenges faced by Brent as a result of what he felt had been central government’s continued underfunding of vital public services, poor handling of the pandemic and indifferent approach to the most vulnerable members of society.  Despite the significant challenges faced and scale of reductions already delivered, he felt it important to recognise how hard the Council had worked to fill these gaps and support residents in accessing key services, recovering from the pandemic and tackling the impact of the cost of living crisis making specific reference to the increased support for the Council Tax Support Scheme and Resident Support Fund as examples.  In supporting the budget proposals, Councillor Afzal also felt it important to recognise the wider support being provided in relation to the climate emergency, support for the voluntary and community sector and Black Community Action Plan which he felt served to contrast the difference in approach between the Council and Conservative Government in seeking to support local residents and those more vulnerable members of society, despite the constraints in resources.

 

Councillor Naheerathan also speaking in support of the budget proposals recognised the difficult nature of decisions which had needed to be taken in setting the budget, given the impact of the ongoing reductions in funding imposed by central government over the previous decade and their approach to dealing with the pandemic.  Highlighting the injustice in what he perceived to be the failure of central government to support the most vulnerable members of society, Councillor Naheerathan commended the budget proposals which he felt would offer fairness, justice and equality for Brent residents.

 

Councillor Grahl also commended the proposed budget and in doing so highlighted her specific support for the ongoing programme of community wealth building schemes.   In addition, she felt it important to recognise the commitment towards addressing decarbonisation, including the Council’s housing stock, air quality, the provision of affordable homes and safeguarding funding for social care.  Councillor Grahl ended by expressing her disappointment at the Opposition Groups alternative budget proposals, including removal of the provision for the LLW and at the stance taken by central government towards the funding of local government and impact on the most vulnerable members of society, which she urged all members to continue challenging.

 

Councillor Krupa Sheth, Cabinet Member for Environment began by reflecting on the challenges experienced by the Administration in securing the delivery of key services for residents given the decade of ongoing austerity and funding reductions imposed by central government.  Despite these challenges, she felt it important to highlight the approach taken by the Administration in Brent in seeking to continue delivering a programme of investment and infrastructure improvements across the borough.  These included improvements made to local parks, town centres, cleaner streets and recycling (including community skip initiatives), highway and footway maintenance and repairs, action to improve air quality and enhance green and more sustainable infrastructure across the borough (including a sustainable procurement policy) and through a retrofit programme of works and increased provision of electric vehicle charging points.  In addition, she drew attention to the ongoing support within the budget to deliver the Council’s Climate & Ecological Emergency Strategy and success of the Brent Environment Network and School Climate Champions Network.  In highlighting the success achieved, support for those most vulnerable and ongoing proposals for investment, Councillor Krupa Sheth advised she fully supported the proposed budget.

 

Councillor Maurice, speaking in support of the Opposition Group’s alternative budget proposals, whilst acknowledging the reduction in funding for local government over previous years felt it also important to recognise that when broken down on an annual basis this should not have presented significant financial hardship for the Council to manage.  Commenting on what he also felt to be the current Administrations poor financial management, with specific reference to the repairs at the Granville Home Blocks, he also highlighted the extent of financial support provided by central government in terms of the pandemic and concern at the impact of the landlord incentive scheme.  For these reasons he advised he would be voting against the budget proposals moved by the Leader and in support of the Conservative Groups alternative budget proposals.

 

Councillor Southwood, Cabinet Member for Housing and Welfare Reform began by highlighting what she felt to be the fair and inclusive nature of the budget proposals moved by the Leader which offered support for all communities, ensuring that no-one was left behind in Brent.  In expressing her support for the budget, Councillor Southwood highlighted a number of key successes achieved by the current Administration in Brent which included the delivery of significant numbers of new social and genuinely affordable housing along with measures being taken to reduce the number of households within temporary accommodation.  In responding to the Opposition Group’s alternative budget and proposal to remove the landlord incentive scheme she felt it important to recognise the level of risk associated with such a move given the impact in terms of tackling homelessness, and potential to increase reliance on more expensive temporary accommodation should it not be possible to secure alternative housing out of borough.  In addition concerns were expressed regarding the social impact of relocating those more vulnerable members of society out of borough.  Highlighting what she felt to be the Government’s ineffective response to the pandemic and current cost of living crisis she ended by outlining her support for the inclusive policies contained within the budget, including support for the Council Tax Support Scheme and Digital Inclusion Strategy, which had been designed to support all residents moving forward together.

 

Councillor Ezeajughi, in outlining his support for previous comments and the proposed budget also felt it was important to recognise the impact created by the Conservative Government’s programme of austerity and economic mismanagement in terms of the current cost of living crisis on Brent residents.  For these reasons he welcomed the approach adopted by the Council’s current Administration in prioritising support for Brent residents in managing these impacts including through the Council Tax Support and Resident Support Schemes and increased provision of affordable and social housing.  Whilst noting the ongoing work still required he advised he would therefore be supporting the budget given the invaluable and necessary support it would provide for those most vulnerable residents.

 

Councillor Hirani then spoke and began by commending the current Administration in being able to produce a balanced and fair budget which he believed was in direct contrast to the approach taken by central government in mismanaging the economy, response to the pandemic and current cost of living crisis.  In outlining the long term damage caused by the Conservative Government’s programme of austerity he also expressed concern at the approach adopted by the Opposition Group in terms of the lack of support for provision of the LLW (given its impact on the lowest paid) within their alternative budget proposals.  Referring to his role as London Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow he advised that he would continue to support the approach adopted by the current Administration in seeking to support the most vulnerable residents in society, including refugees, and on this basis commended the budget to all members.

 

Councillor Nerva, Cabinet Member for Public Health, Culture & Leisure also spoke in support of the budget but felt it important to begin by taking the opportunity to focus on the success of the Covid vaccination programme in Brent and to thank all community groups who had supported its delivery, particularly within those more vaccine hesitant communities.  At the same time, members were reminded that Covid had not disappeared, with the pandemic having highlighted the significant health inequalities needing to be addressed across many local communities.  Despite the challenges faced in relation to the impact of central government reductions in funding for local services, Councillor Nerva highlighted the response and investment being co-ordinated across Brent in seeking to address the inequalities identified, which had included measures to improve housing, address air quality, poverty and encourage more active modes of travel as well as to establish the Brent Health Matters programme, enhance the availability of diabetes testing and review access to GP services across the borough.  In celebrating these initiatives, Councillor Nerva also commended the budget to members, recognising the improvements that would be delivered to support the health and wellbeing of residents in Brent.

 

Councillor Ahmed echoed his support for what he believed to be a robust and sensible budget that promoted residents prosperity, despite the ongoing impact arising from the Conservative Government’s programme of austerity and response to the pandemic and cost of living crisis.  In drawing specific attention to the support the Administration had provided in terms of community wealth building and to local businesses, particularly in their recovery from the pandemic and through the Business Support Fund as well as through the Council’s sustainable and ethical Procurement Strategy he also urged all members to support the proposed budget.

 

Councillor Johnson also spoke in support of the budget, highlighting the importance, given the Conservative Government’s approach towards austerity and in managing the pandemic, Brexit and cost of living crisis, of the proposals in seeking to maintain the provision of essential services and much needed support for the most vulnerable in society.  In commending what he felt to be the prudent financial management of the Council’s resources and support for the actions being taken to tackle poverty, he was concerned at the approach adopted by the Opposition Group in terms of their alternative budget proposal to remove provision for the LLW, having noted that Brent had led the way as a LLW employer and in encouraging local business to seek LLW accreditation, which he felt was an achievement to be proud of.

 

Councillor Kennelly, in also supporting the budget, felt it important to recognise the way in which the proposals had been designed to stand up for local residents and maintain the provision of essential local services despite the ongoing funding restrictions imposed by central government.  Referring to the highway and footway infrastructure improvements within his ward, support for local businesses and investment in the local economy (particularly given the lack of government support for the self-employed during the pandemic), he also went on to highlight the importance of the current Administrations on-going commitment to improving the lives of residents through the Resident Support Fund, support for ending Fire & Rehire employment practices and by tackling air pollution alongside delivery of the Climate and Ecological Strategy and encouragement of more active forms of travel, including the School Streets initiative.  As a result he advised he would also be supporting the budget, as moved by the Leader.

 

As a final contribution to the debate Councillor Sangani ended by also expressing her support for the budget and in so doing praised the aspirations of the Labour Administration in seeking to support local residents and maintain local services despite the financial challenges created through the Conservative Government’s approach towards austerity and in managing the cost of living crisis.  In commending the proposals to members she highlighted her pride at being part of an Administration that championed equality, diversity and a fairer future for all in Brent.

 

Having concluded the debate the Mayor thanked all members for their contributions and then invited Councillor M Butt to summarise and respond to the points raised.

 

In response to the debate, Councillor M Butt began by thanking all members for their contributions at the meeting and support provided to their local residents.  In responding to the Opposition Group’s alternative budget proposals he expressed concern at the approach and rhetoric adopted in terms of the language used regarding provision of accommodation and placement of those most in need of support within the borough and the lack of what he felt to be a viable alternative budget.  He therefore urged all members to reject the alternative proposals moved at the meeting, which it was felt had demonstrated a lack of understanding regarding the need of residents across Brent and impact of the Conservative Government’s ongoing approach towards funding of local government and public services.

 

In contrast, he felt the Administration’s budget proposals not only demonstrated an understanding of the challenges faced by residents but also recognised their aspirations for building a positive and fairer future.  As such he highlighted how the proposals had been designed to protect and support residents in the borough by delivering affordable housing and reducing reliance on temporary accommodation, investing in digital infrastructure and support for the local economy and business (including provision for the LLW), improving fire safety, providing investment in town centres, providing additional SEN provision, safeguarding vulnerable young people and adults as well as tackling climate change, poverty and inequality. In summing up, Councillor M Butt outlined his pride that despite the challenges highlighted during the debate, the Labour Administration had been able to present a balanced budget that continued to defend and protect services for local residents whilst also seeking to meet the needs and aspirations of communities across the borough.  On this basis he ended by once again commending the budget to Council.

 

Having thanked Councillor M.Butt for his closing comments, the Mayor advised that this now concluded the debate on the budget and she would therefore be moving to the vote on the alternative budget proposals and then (subject to any amendments agreed) the recommended budget moved by the Leader of the Council.  As the recommendations to be considered related to the budget setting process she reminded Members that, in accordance with Standing Order 43, these would all need to be subject to a recorded vote.

 

On a recorded vote being taken the budget proposals, as moved by Councillor M.Butt were declared CARRIED.

 

Accordingly Council RESOLVED to:

 

(1)      Agree an overall 2.99% increase in the Council’s element of Council Tax for 2022/23, with 1% as a precept for Adult Social Care and a 1.99% general increase.

 

(2)      Agree the General Fund revenue budget for 2022/23, as summarised in Appendices A and B of the report.

 

(3)      Agree the savings proposals for 2022/23, as set out in Appendix C of the report.

 

(4)      Note the report from the Budget Scrutiny Panel in Appendix D of the report.

 

(5)      Agree the HRA budget for 2022/23, as set out in section seven of the report.

 

(6)      Agree the Dedicated Schools Grant, as set out in section eight of the report.

 

(7)      Agree the changes to the existing Capital Programme in relation to additions of new schemes and reprofiling, as set out in section 10 of the report and Appendix E, and note the Capital Pipeline Schemes in Appendix F of the report.

 

(8)      Agree the Capital Strategy, the Investment Strategy, the Treasury Management Strategy and the Minimum Revenue Provision Statement as set out in Appendices G, H, I and J of the report.

 

(9)      Agree the Reserves Strategy and schedule of reserves, as set out in Appendix K of the report.

 

(10)    Note the action plan to implement CIPFA’s Financial Management Code, as set out in Appendix L of the report.

 

(11)    Agree the schedule of fees and charges, as set out in Appendix M of the report.

 

(12)    Note the results of the budget consultation, as set out in section six and detailed in Appendix N of the report.

 

(13)    Note the advice of the Director of Legal, HR, Audit and Investigations, as set out in Appendix O of the report.

 

(14)    Agree the Pay Policy Statement for 2022/23, as set out in Appendix P of the report.

 

Council Tax recommendations

 

(15)    As a result of confirmation having been received on the final GLA precept in advance of the recommendations being put to the vote at the Council meeting it was agreed in relation to the Council Tax for 2022/23:

 

          That the following amounts be now calculated as the Council’s element by the Council for the year 2022/23 in accordance with Sections 31 to 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 as amended:

 

(a) £1,067,562,055  being the aggregate of the amount that the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A(2) of the Act.

(b) £927,416,795     being the aggregate of the amounts that the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A(3) of the Act.

(c) £140,145,260     being the amount by which the aggregate at (a) above exceeds the aggregate at (b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31A(4) of the Act, as its Council Tax requirement for the year.

 (d) £1,419.48         being the amount at (c) above, divided by the amount for the tax base of 98,730, agreed by the General Purposes Committee on the 6 December 2021, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31B of the Act, as the basic amount of its Council Tax for the year.

 

(e)                                    Valuation Bands

 

being the amounts given by multiplying the amount at (d) above by the number which, in the proportion set out in Section 5(1) of the Act, is applicable to dwellings listed in a particular valuation band divided by the number which in that proportion is applicable to dwellings listed in valuation band D, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 36(1) of the Act, as the amounts to be taken into account for the year in respect of categories of dwellings listed in different valuation bands.

 

(16)    That it be noted that for the year 2022/23 the GLA precept issued to the Council on 24 February 2022, in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, in respect of the GLA, for each of the categories of dwellings are as shown below:

 

 

(17)  That, having calculated the aggregate in each case of the amounts at (15)(e) and (16) above, the Council, in accordance with Section 30(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, hereby sets the following amounts as the amounts of council tax for the year 2022/23 for each of the categories of dwellings shown below:

Valuation Bands
A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H
£	£	£	£	£	£	£	£
1,210.05	1,411.72	1,613.40	1,815.07	2,218.42	2,621.77	3,025.12	3,630.14

 

(18)    That it be noted that the Director of Finance has determined that the Council element of the basic amount of Council Tax for 2022/23 is not excessive in accordance with the principles approved under Section 52ZB of the Local Government Finance Act 1992.

 

(a)      That the Director of Finance be and is hereby authorised to give due notice of the said Council Tax in the manner provided by Section 38(2) of the 1992 Act.

(b)      That the Director of Finance be and is hereby authorised when necessary to apply for a summons against any Council Tax payer or non-domestic ratepayer on whom an account for the said tax or rate and any arrears has been duly served and who has failed to pay the amounts due to take all subsequent necessary action to recover them promptly.

(c)      That the Director of Finance be and is hereby authorised to collect revenues and distribute monies from the Collection Fund and is authorised to borrow or to lend money in accordance with the regulations to the maximum benefit of each fund.

 

Prior to the above recommendations being approved, the alternative budget proposals moved as an amendment to the budget report by the Conservative Group were put to the vote and declared LOST.

 

The voting recorded on the amendment moved by the Conservative Group was as follows:

 

For the Amendment (3): Councillors Colwill, Kansagra and Maurice

 

Against the Amendment (45): Councillors Afzal, Agha, Ahmed, Akram, M.Butt, S.Butt, Chan, Chappell, S Choudhary, Choudry, Conneely, Daly, Dar, Dixon, Ethapemi, Ezeajughi, Farah, Gbajumo, Georgiou, Grahl, Hassan, Hirani, Hylton, Johnson, Kabir, Kelcher, Kennelly, Knight, Long, Mahmood, Mashari, McLeish, McLennan, Miller, Naheerathan, Nerva, M.Patel, Sangani, Shahzad, Ketan Sheth, Krupa Sheth, Southwood, Stephens, Tatler and Thakkar.

 

Abstentions to the Amendment (3): Councillors Colacicco (Mayor), Aden (Deputy Mayor) & Mitchell-Murray.

 

The substantive recommendations, as detailed above, were then put to the vote and declared CARRIED.  The voting recorded was as follows:

 

For (44): Councillors Afzal, Agha, Ahmed, Akram, M.Butt, S.Butt, Chan, Chappell, S Choudhary, Choudry, Conneely, Daly, Dar, Dixon, Ethapemi, Ezeajughi, Farah, Gbajumo, Grahl, Hassan, Hirani, Hylton, Johnson, Kabir, Kelcher, Kennelly, Knight, Long, Mahmood, Mashari, McLeish, McLennan, Miller, Naheerathan, Nerva, M.Patel, Sangani, Shahzad, Ketan Sheth, Krupa Sheth, Southwood, Stephens, Tatler and Thakkar.

 

Against (4): Councillors Colwill, Georgiou, Kansagra and Maurice

 

Abstentions to the Amendment (3): Councillors Colacicco (Mayor), Aden (Deputy Mayor) & Mitchell-Murray.