Issue - meetings

Decision

RESOLVED:

1. That the list of proposed savings as set out in the report are agreed so that a balanced budget can be recommended to full Council.
2. That an alternative option for balancing the budget should be agreed to replace savings not taken if there are any.
3. That any additional funding announced as part of the final Local Government Settlement announcement be transferred to reserves.
4. That new capital bids, as set out in the report, be recommended to full Council for inclusion in the Capital Programme.

Reasons for the decision:

To enable the Council to set a balanced budget.

Cllr L Shires, Portfolio Holder for Finance, introduced this item. She began by saying that she was pleased to present a balanced budget and thanked officers for their hard work in achieving this. She also thanked members for their input, specifically Overview & Scrutiny Committee.

Cllr Shires referred members to section 2.2 of the report, specifically the following:

‘There were 133 out of the 164 District Councils that received a zero per cent increase, with NNDC being allocated £805,000 to bring its increase up to 0.0% i.e. without this the Council would have seen a reduction in funding of this £805,000’.

With that in mind, Cllr Shires said that it was very clear that Government ministers did not understand North Norfolk. There was no mention of the coast and everything was focused on ‘working age’ residents which did not reflect the demographic of the district. She said that given the move towards devolution, it was unlikely that this approach would change.

Cllr Shires went on to refer page 250, line 5, and reassured members that there were no savings to be identified. She then confirmed that deficit projections were significantly reduced compared to this time last year. Regarding savings. She said that she had asked officers to ensure that any future reports clearly set out the savings against the criteria listed in section 8.

In conclusion, Cllr Shires said that she could provide more information on the temporary accommodation borrowing proposals if required.

The Chairman agreed with Cllr Shires’ comments regarding the financial settlement, explaining that it effectively meant 1 pence of additional spending per head of the district’s population. This meant that north Norfolk residents paid considerably more for services than those in northern urban areas. Consequently, the council had had to work really hard to achieve a balanced budget and this was against additional pressures such as the demand for temporary accommodation, with over 80 children in such housing on some nights.

Cllr C Cushing said that he endorsed the comments made by the Chairman and the Portfolio Holder regarding the Government’s approach to rural districts. He said that ministers represented urban areas and had no understanding of countryside matters.

Cllr Cushing referred to the final page of the report and references to public conveniences, specifically the lack of reference to the toilets in Stalham which had previously been put forward as a potential saving. He sought clarification as to whether this meant that it was no longer a savings proposal. Cllr Shires confirmed that this was correct.

Cllr N Dixon referred to the chart on page 249 and said that there should be an additional column stating ‘zero’ for NNDC. This would clearly set out the current position and send a strong message to residents about the Government’s approach to district councils.

He went onto refer to page 255 and the table of reserves. He asked whether the statement at section 3.16 included the reserves used to cover revenue spends on services which was unplanned. Cllr Shires replied  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11