Agenda item

To consider a report from the Head of Democratic Services that introduces the Council’s proposed budget for 2024/25 and provisional budgets for 2025/26 and 2026/27 for consideration, review and comment on matters and proposals that fall within the Scrutiny Board’s remit and note the intention to provide comments and feedback to Executive Board at its February meeting through a composite report from all five scrutiny boards.

The Board considered a report from the Head of Democratic Services that introduces the Council’s proposed budget for 2024/25 and provisional budgets for 2025/26 and 2026/27 for consideration, review and comment on matters and proposals that fall within the Scrutiny Board’s remit. Following consideration of the report feedback from this board will be incorporated into a composite report that will be submitted to Executive Board for consideration on 7 February 2024 as set out in the Council’s Budget and Policy Framework.

In attendance for this item were:

·  Cllr Debra Coupar, Executive Board Member for Resources

·  Cllr Jonathan Pryor, Executive Board Member for Culture, Economy and Education

·  Victoria Bradshaw, Chief Officer – Financial Services

·  Mariana Pexton, Director of Strategy and Resources

·  Eve Roodhouse, Chief Officer Culture and Economy

·  Andy Dodman, Chief Officer Human Resources

By way of introduction the Chief Officer for Financial Services set out that key elements of the report which were, the assumptions contained in the budget, the funding announcements made by Government, details of the Provisional Local Government Settlement and the outcome of the Government’s Autumn Statement announced on 5 December 2023. To enable a balanced budget to be proposed, as required by law, the 2024/25 budget sets out a total of £65.8m of savings.

It was noted that the report also covers other elements of the budget including Business Rates, Council Tax, Dedicated Schools Grant, Capital Programme and Housing Revenue Account including rental increase for Council Homes.

The Council faces further challenges in future years totalling £106.7m combined in 2025/26 and 2026/27.

The Board heard in more detail the proposals that impact on its remit these were broken down into Arts and Heritage services and Strategy and Resources services.

In response to comments and questions from board members the following discussion took place:

·  The Executive Board Member for Resources set out the severe nature of the budget challenge and that unfortunately as a result some difficult decisions will be required. In different financial circumstances some of the proposals under consideration would not have been made.

·  Members queried the consultation held in relation to the Golden Acre car parking charges proposal and the timing of the expected decision. The Board were informed that a decision on the parking charges would be unlikely before the Full Council meeting in February.

·  In respect of the Pudsey Civic Hall service review proposal the Board mentioned that it is used on a city wide basis and there were concerns about marketing of the site and ‘under selling’ of the facility that if done differently would assist in it delivering a balanced budget and that a strong case could be made for it remaining open. It was also suggested that accessibility of the site should be a key consideration as it is used by groups who have wheelchair users and is considered to be a good venue from an accessibility perspective. The Board heard that income from events covers the operational costs of the hall but the overall feasibility of the site is dependent on income from parking which has dropped post-covid when a long term lease agreement with a business nearby was not renewed resulting in an income pressure for the site. The Board also heard that action is already underway to improve marketing including implementation of findings from a commercial review undertaken by Leeds Museums and Galleries in autumn 2022 and a service review of Events and Attractions. Whilst there is new car parking available at the train station there were also concerns that impact of the closure could affect residents in the surrounding area, particularly if alternative local venues were used that do not have adequate parking on site.

·  The Board heard that the Executive Member for Economy, Culture and Education had agreed to attend the Outer West Community Committee to discuss the Pudsey Civic Hall proposal in more detail. In addition, the Board were assured that the Equality Impact Assessment would be updated should the proposal be taken forwards. Accessibility of alternative venues will also be an important consideration.

·  Similar concerns were aired around the Thwaite Mills service review proposals, particularly in respect of marketing and on the site being a heritage asset with significant historical value for the city. In response the board heard that the site is promoted by Leeds Museums and Galleries alongside the other eight sites with dedicated resources carrying out this work. Visitor numbers were low and would be lower if numbers were taken out for those attending events held at the site, which in the current financial climate has led to concerns about its viability.

·  The Chair asked about the ability of the Canals and Rivers Trust to manage the site or contribute to it in the future. In response the Board were informed that they do not have the resources to keep the site open if the Council lease were to cease. Officers from the service remain committed to working with partners, including the Canals and Rivers Trust to develop alternatives, where possible, that would ensure that the site can be maintained and open to the public.

·  On Thwaite Mills the board also heard that there are significant maintenance costs linked to the site as it can flood, and this leads to issues with maintenance of the water wheels and can result in significant costs when this occurs which is also linked to invasive species.

·  In response to further questions from board members on these issues, it was noted that the service reviews on both Pudsey Civic Hall and Thwaite Mills were not easy for officers to bring forwards and that public consultation on the proposals will be factored in when finalising the budget for 2024/25.

·  The Board referenced the possibility of consultation fatigue in relation to the parking charges proposals as charging had been the subject of a consultation earlier in the year. By way of response the consultation on the budget that takes place annually has been at a similar level to responses in 2024 compared to previous budget rounds, suggesting that consultation responses to the budget as a whole is unchanged.

·  On a wider point about consultation members were keen to ensure that residents felt this was meaningful and that their voice can have an impact on the budget proposals being put forward. The Board heard that decision making does take account of consultation and that often these are documented in the reports that set out the decision. It was noted that a consultation is not a vote and communication on any decision that is not in line with consultation responses is done carefully and with regard to consultation responses.

·  The Board wanted to know more about the approach to voluntary redundancies and how this will ensure that essential skills and experience are not lost to the authority. It was reported that 361 staff (2-3% of the workforce) are impacted by the budget proposals. In anticipation of the budget challenge being faced a number of initiatives were introduced most notably voluntary leavers and flexible retirement schemes and through these means it is anticipated that the 361 ‘target’ can be achieved which will avoid the need for any compulsory redundancies. An important element of this approach has been consultation with both staff and Trade Unions to ensure fairness and transparency.

·  In addition to the potential loss of skills through voluntary redundancy the Board felt that work should be done to ensure that there is not a disproportionate impact on minority groups or disadvantaged staff through the voluntary redundancy processes.

·  The Board questioned the new Homes Bonus and whether this would continue in future financial years. the New Homes Bonus will continue in 2024/25 following confirmation from the Government. This funding mechanism tends to benefit more affluent areas as they generate more new homes bonus. This funding was originally part of the Revenue Support Grant (RSG), and Leeds would likely receive more funding if these monies were allocated on the needs based formula. The Board were also informed that right to buy purchase, estimated at 550 sales in 2024/25, will have an adverse impact on the HRA.

·  The Executive Board Member for Culture, Economy and Education emphasised the difficult financial decisions that are having to be made in the current budgetary climate, where often the choices before the council leadership are not palatable and in different circumstances would not be put forward.

·  The Executive Board Member for Resources made concluding remarks in relation to consultation highlighting the Council’s commitment to it and the fact that in past years consultation had led to changes in the proposals being put forward. It was further noted that the financial challenge is unprecedented and none of the choices being made are made lightly or are easy choices.

Resolved:

The Board noted the content of the report and appendices and that a summary of the deliberations of all five Scrutiny Boards during the period of consultation on the Executive Board’s proposed budget will be submitted for consideration by Executive Board on 7 February 2024.