(a)

the Medium Term Financial Strategy was recommend by Cabinet on 31 October 2017 and subsequently approved by Council on 20 November 2017; the strategy addressed the funding gap as of that date for the following three financial years;

(b)

the budget gap reported to Council in November 2017 had been £4.766m; the latest position reflected new savings and efficiencies identified to date, new and emerging pressures, the latest information arising from the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement and the Provisional Local Government Finance Settlement.

(c)

whether the provision for extra care facilities (£4m) would be sufficient for future demands;

(d)

the lack of public/stakeholder responses to the budget engagement exercise and the cost of undertaking such engagement;

(e)

the Council’s approach to the increase in interest rates and the effect this would have on future borrowing;

(f)

how would the £1m of additional monies generated through the Business Rates Retention pilot be used to support the further growth of businesses in the City;

(g)

the impact on next year’s budget if the ‘one-off’ savings were not achieved (ie the savings identified in fleet and garage of £0.607m had not been achieved, would this saving be carried forward);

(h)

a clear understanding of how and where the transformation of services were taking place and where services were either being reduced or removed;

(i)

the use of Section 106 monies in order to support the revenue budget and the risk that this action represented to the Council;

(j)

what measures could be taken to address the legacy pension costs of £1.4m which had been inherited as part of the setting up as Plymouth as an Unitary Authority (since the Education Services Grant had been phased out);

(k)

the use of Bailiffs to recover debt;

(l)

whether the precept for Adult Social Care would remain at 3%;

(m)

concerns relating to the long term use and level of agency staff;

(n)

whether the feasibility of using the Council’s ‘other provisions and reserves’ had been investigated, if a balanced budget could not be achieved;

(o)

concerns relating to the Council’s impact on the environment;

(p)

whether the impact of Brexit had been considered and what measures were being undertaken to secure Government funding (£3bn) for investment in preparations for Brexit;

(q)

reassurance that the issues encountered with last year’s election would not be replicated at the Local Elections in May and that sufficient funding had been allocated to achieve this;

(r)

how the stretch savings target of £0.5m for the service centre would be achieved (concerns that the quality of service would be significantly reduced).

(1)

that the final budget report should explicitly state in plain language how and where the transformation of services is taking place and where services are being reduced;

(2)

that future budget reports should highlight the cost of budget engagement undertaken with the public and other stakeholders;

(3)

regarding business rates retention -

?

highlight within the budget how £1m of additional monies gained through the Business Rate Retention pilot will be used to support the delivery of the further growth of business rates;

?

within the budget or revised Medium Term Financial Strategy, confirm how authorities within the Devon Pool will be stimulating growth in business rates, highlight the role of the South West  Devon Joint Local Plan and the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership;

(4)

regarding the use of Section 106 funding -

?

the Committee notes the current financial difficulties of the local authority and request that Cabinet review the use of Section 106 monies in support of the revenue budget;

?

the budget report should include -

Ø   

a revised risk register which highlights the level of risk this action represents for the Council;

Ø   

a statement on how this flexibility is being exploited across comparator authorities across the UK;

(5)

that Council lobby government for additional financial support to assist with the education pension legacy;

(6)

that a wide review of the environmental impact of the Council is undertaken;

(7)

that regarding the collection of council tax -

?

the Council should adopt a flexible approach, offering residents in financial difficulty affordable payment arrangements as an alternative to imposing a summons or referring a case to Bailiffs where a vulnerable person defaults;

?

that the use of Bailiffs should be approved on a case by case basis by the Portfolio Holder responsible and that this approval be granted on the basis of evidence that a debtor can pay but is unwilling to;

(8)

that the total amount of investment in the Hoe Foreshore and surrounding area should be explicit within the budget report;

(9)

that additional capacity should be built into the Capital Programme Schemes to provide flexibility if further work in support of the scheme is required;

(10)

that the Cabinet should consider building a level of contingency into the budget to anticipate the results of the gully survey;

(11)

that all service directors should have and maintain a service plan which should at a minimum include the resource requirements of the service, staff requirements, discretionary and non-discretionary activities, risks to delivery, savings, dependencies, performance indicators, policy changes, cost and volume data where applicable; scrutiny will not be undertaken without service plans in place;

(12)

that the Council lobby for changes to the Education National Funding Formula to ensure a fair share for Plymouth;

(13)

that performance indicators should be developed to measure the impact of collaborative working in support of the plan for education;

(14)

that the Plymouth Education Board should review how to support Children and Young People with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.