Agenda item

Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, together with paragraphs 6 and 24 of the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Constitution requires that the permission of the Chairman be obtained, after prior notice to the Chief Executive, before urgent business not specified in the agenda (including a supplementary agenda of which the statutory period of notice has been given) may be transacted.

In accordance with Operational Standing Order 6 (non-executive bodies), any item raised by a non-member shall require the support of a member of the Committee concerned and the Chairman of that Committee.  Two weeks' notice of non-urgent items is required.

Draft Budget 2022/23 (including General Fund & HRA revenue & capital, Fees & Charges and an updated Medium-Term Financial Plan):

Decision:

1)         The Cabinet considered the draft General Fund revenue budget proposals for 2022/23;

2)         The Cabinet considered the draft Housing Revenue Account (HRA) revenue budget proposals for 2022/23;

3)         The Cabinet considered the draft General Fund and HRA capital proposals for 2022/23 through to 2026/27 ;

4)         The Cabinet considered the draft Fees and Charges proposals for 2022/23;

5)         The Cabinet considered and approved the updated Medium-Term Financial Plan (General Fund and HRA); and

6)         The Cabinet requested that the Stronger Council Select Committee considers the draft budget proposals for 2022/23 and associated documents and make comments for consideration at the Cabinet meeting on 7th February 2022.

The Finance, Qualis Client and Economic Development Portfolio Holder, Councillor J Philip, introduced the draft Budget report; he apologised for the lateness of the report.

The first major milestone in the Financial Planning Framework was reached on 11th October 2021, with Cabinet receiving and considering an updated Medium-Term Financial Plan (MTFP) for 2022/23 to 2026/27. The MTFP revealed a projected deficit of £1.504 million for 2022/23 on the General Fund; it is a deficit that required eliminating in full if the Council was to fulfil its legal obligation to set a balanced budget for the forthcoming financial year.

The MTFP also identified a projected deficit of £2.755 million on the Housing Revenue Account for 2022/23, although this was almost entirely offset by an initial surplus of £2.651 million in 2021/22.

On 27th October 2021 – alongside the Autumn Budget 2021 – the Chancellor announced a three-year Spending Review covering the period 2022/23 through to 2024/25 (although it’s still unclear if this would translate to a three-year settlement); this included assumptions about real terms growth in Council Spending Power (the Government's preferred measure). However, it should be noted that the calculation of Spending Power assumes that councils would increase Council Tax by the maximum permissible without a referendum, which in the case of Epping Forest District Council was a £5.00 increase.

Details of what the overall increase in Spending Power means for individual councils would be announced in the Local Government Finance Settlement 2022/23, which was due in December 2021. Some adjustments, especially to funding assumptions within these proposals, can be expected to follow on from that announcement.

Councillor Philip went on to summarise the position of the council’s finances and the likely expenditure expected in the coming year and the problems and hurdles still facing the council. When this was presented to the Select Committee, he hoped to have much more detail in the report.

The Leader of the Council thanked Councillor Philip and the Finance Team for their hard work, noting that it had been a hard task to put this all together.

Councillor Burrows asked when would we expect to get the notification of the Government settlement. He was also glad to see there was money for the Highway Rangers. He was told that the notification was expected around 16 December, but this date could slip back. And yes, we were still putting money into the Highway Rangers and the apprentices.

Councillor Patel noted the reliance the Council had on Qualis. He then asked about the disabled facilities grant, there seemed to be a large spend programmed in for 26/27. Why was this? He was told that this was 100% funded by government grants, so it was cost neutral to the council.

Councillor Brookes queried the rental income from shops and assets. Were we still owed money and what could we expect from that? And on Fees and Charges, why had after school clubs charges gone up by 40%? She was told that as with other landlords we were behind on rental income and were looking to see how much we were owed. However, we were recovering more quickly than our neighbours. As Councillor Patel indicated, we were also reliant for some of our revenue on Qualis and also to regenerate areas in the district to bring in money to the Council. As for fees and charges we will take that back to the service and get an answer for you.

Councillor Murray asked about the line in employee charges which implied that we had a cost centre in the HRA which should have been in the general fund, how long had that been going on and what was the impact on the Housing Revenue fund. He was told that this had no impact and had no issues whatsoever, they were just putting it back to where it belonged, in its right place.

Councillor Murray asked about the Disabled Adaptations to council homes. Would the HRA have to pick this up or was it the Government. Councillor H Whitbread said she thought the answer was no (the Government did not pick this up) but she would confirm.

Councillor Murray then said that he did not disagree that the Council Chamber needed an upgrade, but at £160k that seemed a lot. He was told that was not a lot in a place as complex as this, as well as it being a listed building. The £160k would be a maximum provision.

Councillor Patel asked about the venue hire charges listed, did we calculate these by the square metre?  And did we know what it costs us to run a venue? He was told it was very difficult to do that in a practical way as we incurred costs whether the space was occupied or empty. The key thing here was not to make excessive increases in charges.

Councillor C Whitbread commented that this was the first step in the provision of the budget. We were also still waiting to know what the Government funding would be and that there would be more challenges in the year ahead. An updated report would now go to the Stronger Council Select Committee in January.

Councillor Philip asked that if members had any detailed questions for that meeting that they let him or officers have them ahead of the meeting so that answers could be sourced in advance.

Decision:

1)         The Cabinet considered the draft General Fund revenue budget proposals for 2022/23;

2)         The Cabinet considered the draft Housing Revenue Account (HRA) revenue budget proposals for 2022/23;

3)         The Cabinet considered the draft General Fund and HRA capital proposals for 2022/23 through to 2026/27;

4)         The Cabinet considered the draft Fees and Charges proposals for 2022/23;

5)         The Cabinet considered and approved the updated Medium-Term Financial Plan (General Fund and HRA); and

6)         The Cabinet requested that the Stronger Council Select Committee considers the draft budget proposals for 2022/23 and associated documents and make comments for consideration at the Cabinet meeting on 7th February 2022.

Reasons for Proposed Decision:

To provide Cabinet with an initial draft Budget for 2022/23 for consideration (alongside comments from the Stronger Council Select Committee held on 16th November 2021) ahead of the forthcoming Budget scrutiny process in January 2022; and for Cabinet to provide Finance officers with any direction required to further refine the Budget.

Other Options for Action:

N/A.