Agenda item

Budget Analysis for Housing Revenue Account and General Fund

To receive and consider a report of the Head of Scrutiny and Member Development on a budget analysis for the Housing Revenue Account and General Fund.

Minutes:

The Head of Scrutiny and Member Development submitted a report containing an analysis of the outturn position 2009/10 for both the HRA and the Environment and Neighbourhoods Directorate General Fund, together with an analysis of the same budgets for Quarter 1, 2010/11, and a projected outturn position at the end of the 2010/11 financial year.

 

In attendance at the meeting and responding to Members’ queries and comments were:-

 

-  Councillor P Gruen, Executive Member (Neighbourhoods and Housing).

 

-  Neil Evans, Director of Environment and Neighbourhoods.

 

-  Richard Ellis, Head of Finance, Environment and Neighbourhoods.

 

-  John Statham, Strategic Landlord Manager, Environment and Neighbourhoods

 

In brief summary, the main points of discussion were:-

 

·  The latest update, up to the end of August 2010, would be available next week, and the Chair requested that this be circulated separately to all Board Members as soon as it was available;

 

·  In response to a Member’s query, the Director reported that due to problems with clearing the backlog caused by the industrial action taken by refuse collection and Streetscene staff, the new revised refuse collection routes had not been introduced as quickly as had been anticipated.  However, good progress had now been made and it was anticipated that the Council would be able to dispense with 11 collection vehicles, as opposed to the originally envisaged 9, and the likely additional savings were in the region of £400,000 per annum.  The Director undertook to keep the Board informed on developments in this area;

 

·  The Swarcliffe PFI Sinking Fund stood at £10.946 million, as at 31st March 2010;

 

·  The fall-out from the Connaught contractors situation continued, and it was not at all clear at present exactly what the firm’s, or the Council’s, final position was.  The company had been responsible for maintenance and repairs in respect of 15,000 of the 58,000 ex-Council properties, now vested with the ALMOs.  Due to Connaught’s bankruptcy, their contract with the Council was effectively ended.  However, there was conjecture that parts of the business/workforce had been taken over by Lovells Partnerships, and the Council was urgently seeking clarity from the administrators, KPMG.  Theoretically, the Council could negotiate with this firm to take over the former contracts, subject to the normal checks and assurances being carried out.

 

In the interim, contingency plans were being implemented for urgent and emergency works to be carried out utilising a combination of Keir and/or ALMO direct labour staff.

 

Clarity was also being sought via KPMG regarding existing over-payments to Connaughts, which may be substantial.  Some repayments had been received in May and June, but none since then, and a stop had been put on further payments until the matter could be resolved.  Recouping some of these over-payments might form part of any negotiations with possible successor contractors.

 

The new repair and maintenance contract(s) were due to come in with effect from April 2011, but would obviously be influenced by the outcome of the Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review, the results of which were due out in late October.

 

Concerns were expressed regarding the effects of the demise of Connaughts in respect of the local labour force and the training of apprentices.  Assurances were given that these two aspects would be taken into account in any discussions with successor companies, and when the new contracts were awarded with effect from April 2011.

 

The Director undertook to keep the Board informed of developments;

 

·  Right to Buy Scheme – The Director confirmed that this was a national policy.  He had not heard of any proposals to abandon the scheme, but changes were being mooted which would enable local authorities to retain and re-invest the capital receipt.

 

Some Board Members regarded that social housing providers should be subject to the same strictures as local authorities, and that the RTB scheme should be extended to allow private landlords to acquire properties.

 

RESOLVED – That subject to the above comments, the report be received and noted.

 

(NB:  Councillor Driver declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item and left the meeting during its consideration – see Minute No. 22).

 

Supporting documents: