Cabinet Member for Finance
In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 19.3, immediately after any vote is taken at a budget decision meeting of the Council the names of Councillors who cast a vote for the decision or against the decision or who abstained from voting shall be recorded in the Minutes of that meeting.
At its meeting on 8 February 2021, Cabinet considered Paper MCa/20/29, together with an addendum to the General Fund Budget. Paper MC/20/24 now includes all the relevant updated information plus the tax base, precepts and council tax band information at parish level, together with the necessary recommendations.
Proposed amendment from the Green and Liberal Democrat Group also attached.
Minutes:
61.1 The Chairman invited the Cabinet Member for Finance to introduce Paper MC/20/24 and to move the Recommendations within the report.
61.2 Before introducing the paper Councillor Whitehead expressed his sincere thanks to the Finance team.
61.3 Councillor Whitehead introduced the report and highlighted that the focus from Central Government had focused its attention on fighting Covid-9 and generous government assistance had meant that reserves did not have to be used to the extent that was originally anticipated. However, several finance reviews had been delayed making the future beyond March 2022 uncertain.
61.4 Councillor Whitehead PROPOSED recommendations 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 in the report.
61.5 Councillor Morley SECONDED the proposal and stated that due to the careful management of the financial position in recent years under the stewardship of Councillor Whitehead, Mid Suffolk District Council was now seeing the benefits by avoiding many of the financial challenges being faced by other local authorities and that now was the time to use the Councils’ financially strong position to invest back into communities to both stimulate and support swift recovery.
61.6 Councillor Field PROPOSED the Amendments which were detailed in the agenda reports pack.
61.7 Councillor Warboys SECONDED the Amendments and said that the Amendments supported the Mid Suffolk District Council’s six strategic priorities and would help enable the Council to achieve its goal of being carbon neutral by 2030. They had also been scrutinised by the Section 151 Officer and were achievable without compromising the budget or increasing council tax or rents.
61.8 The Chairman asked Councillor Whitehead if he accepted the Amendments or any elements of the Amendments.
61.9 Councillor Whitehead stated that it was clear that the opposition had spent time and diligence in putting the Amendments together. However, at the last Cabinet meeting it had been announced that there were four pots of £1 million to be allocated for economy, housing, communities and wellbeing and it was intended for cross party discussions to decide how this money should be allocated. Councillor Whitehead asked if Councillor Field and the Opposition would be willing to withdraw the Amendments and take part in cross party workshops to work together to allocate the significant sums of money to the benefit of the Council’s residents and communities.
61.10 To provide confidence to the Opposition around the cross party working, Councillor Whitehead suggested adding additional wording to Recommendation 3.1 so that it would now read ‘That the General Fund Budget proposals for 2021/22 and four-year outlook set out in the report be approved, and that recommendations to Cabinet be prepared, using a balanced, cross-party approach, for the allocation of the additional £4m of funding for investment in our local economy, housing, the wellbeing of our residents and in our communities. This cross-party approach would also give consideration to the budget amendments proposed in 2020/21 and 2021/22.’
61.11 Councillor Field stated that there was a broad area of agreement between both halves of the Council and that a genuine offer to indulge in cross party working was always welcome. Therefore, he would be prepared to withdraw the Amendments.
61.12 Councillor Warboys welcomed the offer of genuine cross party working to deliver on strategic priorities and also agreed to withdraw the Amendments.
61.13 The Chairman asked Councillor Morley as seconder if she agreed to the additional wording to Recommendation 3.1 suggested by Councillor Whitehead.
61.14 Councillor Morley stated that she approved the proposed additional wording to Recommendation 3.1.
61.15 As there were no objections voiced by Members to the proposed amendment the Chairman took this as the meetings consensus and opened up questions on the amended substantive motion.
61.16 Councillor Eburne asked why the report had revealed an increase to the service charge for Endeavour House as staff had not been using the facilities due to the Pandemic. Secondly where in the budget did it show the plans for spending the £18 million currently shown in reserves.
61.17 Councillor Whitehead replied that the increase to the service charge for Endeavour House was a budgeted figure based on agreements made when the Councils first moved to the building. However, it was hoped that negotiations would take place with Suffolk County Council to bring the figure down to reflect the actual usage.
61.18 In reply to Councillor Eburne’s second question, page 16 in Appendix D illustrated an extensive table of reserves earmarked for specific projects.
61.19 The Chief Executive commented that negotiations were taking place to bring down the service charge costs and explained that the reason that the service charge was budgeted to rise was a result of a discount which had been negotiated at the start of the rental agreement but was now due to expire. Also, a reduction in the Councils’ current space in Endeavour House was being explored in terms of relinquishing the Members area and possibly compressing the Councils’ footprint within the building onto one floor plate instead of the current two.
61.20 Councillor Eburne thanked the Chief Executive and Councillor Whitehead for their explanations and asked if all Members could be given an update regarding any reductions in the service charge or space in Endeavour House.
61.21 Councillor Mansel welcomed the £0.5 Million earmarked for the climate change and biodiversity reserve as detailed in Appendix D, page 16, and asked which of the projects were incorporated into the Carbon Reduction Management Plan following recommendations from the Climate Change Task Force.
61.22 Councillor Whitehead stated that he did not have that information and would get more detail outside of the meeting.
61.23 Councillor Mansel also enquired what future projects were being planned to make sure all the money was being spent.
61.24 Councillor Fleming assured Councillor Mansel that the monies available would be put to excellent use and there was a very ambitious programme of Climate Change and Biodiversity works set out in the action plan.
61.25 Councillor Passmore commented that he would be interested to hear how the workstreams for the additional monies would be implemented and any timescales for implementation.
61.26 The Chief Executive replied that it was early days but his initial thoughts involved all Councillors, and that all issues should be dealt with holistically. It required to be driven by evidence and in light of the forthcoming elections, it was anticipated that work would start in earnest in early May for a June or July completion.
61.27 Councillor Matthissen enquired if there were any plans to recruit staff to manage the projects generated.
61.28 Councillor Whitehead agreed that the Assistant Directors had been stretched however, the current administration had no plans to recruit.
61.29 The Chief Executive thanked Councillor Whitehead for his comments and extended the comment regarding Assistant Directors being stretched to all Officers. Whilst he would not refuse the offer of more Officers it was vital to have the right resources at the right times to deploy in the right way.
61.30 Councillor Otton enquired about several issues including CIL Expenditure, Disability Grants, funding in the budget to provide safe elections and provisions being made for people unable to pay their council tax.
61.31 Councillor Whitehead invited the Assistant Director – Corporate Resources to respond to the query regarding CIL Expenditure.
61.32 The Assistant Director - Corporate Resources explained that it was difficult to predict what CIL money was available, but that the figures had been included in the budget for completeness.
61.33 The Chair invited the Chief Executive to answer the query regarding elections.
61.34 The Chief Executive replied that monies were available from the Government to support elections and as the District Council was running the elections for the County Council and the Police and Crime Commissioner, the majority of the costs would be their responsibility.
61.35 Councillor Whitehead invited the Assistant Director - Housing to provide an answer for the query regarding Disability Grants.
61.36 The Assistant Director - Housing gave a broad summary of the history of Disability Grants and announced that the current budget monitoring projections were showing that the budget was due to be overspent by £22,000 and the additional expenditure would be made from reserves.
61.37 Councillor Whitehead addressed the question regarding people who were unable to pay their council tax by stating that the Council had a generous scheme to assist the most vulnerable residents, which would result in them paying no more than 5% of their council tax and that a compassionate approach had been adopted for collection of council tax.
61.38 Councillor Field enquired what the rational was for increasing council tax.
61.39 Councillor Whitehead responded that there was a lot of uncertainty going forward and the increases were small, but they would generate £104,000, which was being ringfenced to assist with business Covid-19 recovery.
61.40 Councillor Welham asked what allocation had been made in the budget for the provision of community benefit on Gateway 14.
61.41 Councillor Whitehead responded that he would provide a detailed answer outside of the meeting.
61.42 Councillor Welham enquired if the Council would work with Jaynic to investigate ways of providing community benefits on the development.
61.43 Councillor Whitehead responded that they would.
61.44 The Chair thanked the Officers and Councillors involved in providing comprehensive answers to the questions asked and moved into debate.
61.45 Members debated various issues including that:
61.46 The meeting had reached the guillotine deadline and Members agreed to continue by consensus and none spoke against the proposal.
It was RESOLVED:-
That the meeting continue beyond the guillotine deadline until all the business of the meeting was concluded.
61.47 Members continued to debate the issues including that since the Council did not have a need for additional funding as there was a surplus in the budget, some Members therefore opposed the increase in Council Tax.
61.48 Councillor Whitehead summed up the points made by Members, which he had taken a note off and said that he believed that Council Tax increases should be kept to a minimum.
61.49 The Chair advised Members that they would be voting collectively on the substantive Recommendations 3.1 and 3.2, and put these to Members for voting.
By 17 votes for and 16 votes against, 1 abstention.
It was RESOLVED:-
1.1 That the General Fund Budget proposals for 2021/22 and four-year outlook set out in the report be approved, and that recommendations to Cabinet be prepared, using a balanced, cross-party approach, for the allocation of the additional £4m of funding for investment in our local economy, housing, the wellbeing of our residents and in our communities. This cross-party approach would also give consideration to the budget amendments proposed in 2020/21 and 2021/22.
1.2 That the General Fund Budget for 2021/22 is based on an increase to Council Tax of 1.66% which equates to £2.80 per annum (23p per month) for a Band D property.
In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 19.3, the vote was recorded as follows:
For |
Against |
Abstain |
|
|
Oliver Amorowson |
Gerard Brewster |
|
|
David Burn |
|
|
|
Terence Carter |
|
James Caston |
|
|
|
Rachel Eburne |
|
Paul Ekpenyong |
|
|
|
John Field |
|
Julie Flatman |
|
|
Jessica Fleming |
|
|
|
Helen Geake |
|
Peter Gould |
|
|
Kathie Guthrie |
|
|
Lavinia Hadingham |
|
|
Matthew Hicks |
|
|
Barry Humphreys |
|
|
|
Sarah Mansel |
|
|
John Matthissen |
|
Andrew Mellen |
|
|
Richard Meyer |
|
|
Suzie Morley |
|
|
David Muller |
|
|
|
Mike Norris |
|
|
Penny Otton |
|
Timothy Passmore |
|
|
|
Stephen Phillips |
|
|
Daniel Pratt |
|
Harry Richardson |
|
|
|
Keith Scarff |
|
|
Andrew Stringer |
|
|
Wendy Turner |
|
|
Rowland Warboys |
|
|
Keith Welham |
|
John Whitehead |
|
|
TOTAL 17 |
TOTAL 16 |
TOTAL 1 |
61. 50 Recommendations 3.3 and 3.4 as detailed in the report were put to Members for voting.
By 31 votes for and 2 votes against, 1 abstention
It was RESOLVED:-
1.1 That the Flexible Use of Capital Receipts Strategy at Appendix E be approved.
1.2 That the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) be notified of the adoption of the Strategy.
In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 19.3, the vote was recorded as follows:
For |
Against |
Abstain |
Oliver Amorowson |
|
|
Gerard Brewster |
|
|
David Burn |
|
|
|
|
Terence Carter |
James Caston |
|
|
Rachel Eburne |
|
|
Paul Ekpenyong |
|
|
John Field |
|
|
Julie Flatman |
|
|
Jessica Fleming |
|
|
Helen Geake |
|
|
Peter Gould |
|
|
Kathie Guthrie |
|
|
Lavinia Hadingham |
|
|
Matthew Hicks |
|
|
Barry Humphreys |
|
|
Sarah Mansel |
|
|
John Matthissen |
|
|
Andrew Mellen |
|
|
Richard Meyer |
|
|
Suzie Morley |
|
|
David Muller |
|
|
Mike Norris |
|
|
Penny Otton |
|
|
Timothy Passmore |
|
|
|
Stephen Phillips |
|
|
Daniel Pratt |
|
Harry Richardson |
|
|
Keith Scarff |
|
|
Andrew Stringer |
|
|
Wendy Turner |
|
|
Rowland Warboys |
|
|
Keith Welham |
|
|
John Whitehead |
|
|
TOTAL 31 |
TOTAL 2 |
TOTAL 1 |
Note: The meeting was adjourned between 8:27pm and 8:41pm.
Supporting documents: