Agenda item

To answer questions asked after notice in accordance with the provisions contained in paragraph 10.3 of the Council Procedure Rules of the Constitution on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties or which affects the District:

(a)               to the Chairman of the Council;

(b)               to the Leader of the Council;

(c)               to the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee or

(d)               to any Member of the Cabinet;.

Council Procedure rule 10.4 provides that answers to questions under notice may take the form of:

(a)       direct oral answer;

(b)       where the desired information is in a publication of the Council or other published work, a reference to that publication; or

(c)       where the reply cannot conveniently be given orally, a written answer circulated later to the questioner.

Answers to questions falling within (a) and (b) above will be made available to the member asking the question one hour before the meeting. Answers to questions falling within (c) above will be circulated to all councillors.

Questions, if any, will follow if not received in time to be incorporated into the agenda.

(a)        General Fund Underspend

Councillor J M Whitehouse asked the Finance and Economic Development Portfolio Holder the following question:

“Please list the following figures:

(i)         estimated General Fund underspend for 2011/12; and

(ii)        actual General Fund underspend for 2010/11, 2009/10, 2008/09”.

Councillor Mohindra, Finance and Economic Development Portfolio Holder read the following reply:

“(i)        When the budget was set for 2012/13 at Council in February, the estimates for 2011/12 were revised as part of that process.  The third quarter financial monitoring reports that were made to the Finance and Performance Management Cabinet Committee on 19 March and the Finance and Performance Management Scrutiny Panel on 20 March state that the outturn is expected to be in line with the revised estimates.  Therefore, at this stage it is not anticipated that there will be either a significant General Fund underspend or overspend for 2011/12;

(ii)        The actual General Fund underspends, compared to the revised estimates, for previous years are listed below –

2010/11 - £579,000

2009/10 - £702,000

2008/09 - £432,000”.

Councillor J M Whitehouse asked a supplementary question arising from the reply.  He pointed out that approximately £1.7 million had been added to the Council’s reserves over the last three years based on the revised estimates and he asked the Portfolio Holder if he agreed that this provided a possible means of funding for potential community or leisure facilities.

Councillor Mohindra pointed out that Council had recently taken on a £185 million debt and that there were still many other uncertainties in relation to the future financing of Local Government.  He advised that the £1.7 million had been accrued at times when the Council had been in a healthy financial position in order to provide some flexibility in more difficult times and to ensure that decisions could be taken which would be of benefit to the community.

(b)       Changes to the Right to Buy for Council Tenants

Councillor J M Whitehouse asked the Housing Portfolio Holder the following question:

“According to your report, under the new Right to Buy arrangements the Council may use only 30% of the receipts from additional Right to Buy sales to fund replacement housing.  Given this, how will you ensure that each dwelling sold is replaced by a new affordable home on a “one-to-one basis” without eating into other Council resources including those required for the Council’s intended additional affordable homes and Council House Building Programme.”

Councillor McEwen, Housing Portfolio Holder read the following reply:

“The rationale behind borrowing more than the Housing Revenue Account Capital Financing Requirement to make the self-financing payment was to provide flexibility to the Housing Revenue Account in the future.  That flexibility was primarily to allow for an expansion of the house building programme in future years.  However, given the changes to “Right to Buy”, some of this funding can instead be used to support a scheme of one-to-one replacements.  Because the Council has this flexibility it should be possible to deal with this additional challenge without reducing either of the programmes that members have already agreed to enhance the existing stock and commence new house building”.

Councillor Whitehouse asked a supplementary question arising from the reply.  He asked if the extra borrowing to be taken on for one-to-one replacements could be entirely supported from the 30% receipts received.

Councillor McEwen stated that she would respond to this supplementary question in writing.