Agenda item

To consider a report of Leader of the Council and the Deputy Leader of the Council (Executive Councillor (Corporate, Customer and Community Services).

At its meeting on 15 July 2014, the Executive received a Medium Term Financial Forecast that indicated a budget reduction requirement of £22.453m for 2015/16, and forecast a cumulative reduction requirement of £39.419m in 2016/17, rising to £64.5m by 2018/19. In response to those forecasts, and in line with its previous deliberations and statements of intent, the Executive agreed the strategic framework for Investing in Stockport (IIS), a single programme of sustainable growth and public service reform in the Borough over the medium term.

At its most recent meeting on 12 August the Executive brought forward a set of proposals informed by the strategic framework and designed to address the budget reduction requirement. Executive Councillors agreed that there should be a report to all scrutiny committees in the next cycle outlining the proposals relating to each committee’s remit. Confirmation of which proposals fall within the remit of which Committee is provided at Appendix 1.

The business case working papers that were made available to the Executive Councillors accompany this report have been updated to include additional information in relation to the potential risks and impacts associated with the proposed changes.

All scrutiny committees are being requested during this cycle of meetings to comment upon the approach being taken by the Executive to address the need to make substantial savings over the next two years, and the specific proposals brought forward for consultation.

The Scrutiny Committee is recommended to comment upon both the overall approach being taken by the Executive and the specific proposals detailed in the accompanying documents, where they fall within the remit of that Committee.

Officer contact: Steve Houston / Laureen Donnan; 0161 474 4000 / 3180 or email: steve.houston@stockport.gov.uk or laureen.donnan@stockport.gov.uk

A joint report of the Leader of the Council and the Executive Councillor (Corporate, Customer and Community Services) was submitted (copies of which had been circulated) detailing the Executive’s proposals to respond to the Medium Term Financial Forecast considered by the Executive in July 2014. At its meeting in August, the Executive endorsed for consultation a set of proposals, in accordance with the Investing in Stockport strategic framework, that sought to respond to the required budget reductions but also to target investment to ensure the best outcomes for residents of the Borough.

The accompanying documents to the report provided further detail on the following Investment in Stockport proposals:-

·         Leisure Facilities

·         Museums and Cultural Attractions

·         Highways and Engineering Services

·         New Model for Regulation

·         Locality Operating Model

·         Solutions SK Operating Model

·         Facilitating Accelerated Growth.

The Business Case Working Papers were an indication of the ‘direction of travel’. Detailed Business Cases would be submitted to the next meeting of the Scrutiny Committee incorporating draft business cases and detailed consultation plans. However, the draft business cases for Leisure Facilities, New Model for Regulation and Facilitating Accelerated Growth would be submitted to the Executive Meeting on 30 September 2014 and feedback submitted to the next meeting of this Scrutiny Committee.

The Executive Councillor (Communities and Sustainability) (Councillor Martin Candler) and the Executive Councillor (Economic Development and Regeneration) (Councillor Patrick McAuley) attended the meeting to respond to Members’ questions. The Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration also attended the meeting to answer questions from the Scrutiny Committee.

The following comments were made/issues raised in relation to the following proposals, as set out in the Business Case Working Papers:-

Leisure Facilities

·         With regard to the proposed transfer of dual facilities from the Council to Bramhall, Hazel Grove, Priestnall and Werneth Schools, negotiations with the schools were in progress, albeit at different stages, and the particular situation with regard to each school was different. It was important that the facilities remained as community facilities which were open during the school holidays. The schools had access to funds to help them take over the ownership and operation of the dual use facilities. The transfer of the dual use facilities to the schools was predicated on there being no revenue subsidy from the Council. In order to facilitate the transfer of responsibility for the facilities, the Council may need to consider a one-off capital sum to bring the facilities up to an acceptable standard.

·         With regard to the proposal to amend and extend existing agreements with Life Leisure to include full repairing and insuring responsibilities for the leisure centres with significantly reduced investment by the Council, it was clarified that there was no ‘plan B’ should the negotiations with Life Leisure fail. The conditions in any new agreement for the transfer of facilities to Life Leisure were set out in the Business Case Working Paper and included limitations on charging rates.

·         Public/service user consultation would not be necessary as it was not envisaged that the proposals would impact on members of the public.

Museums and Cultural Attractions

·         A Member expressed concern that the care and maintenance of museum collections would be reduced, which could compromise accreditation standards and potential for external funding. This had been included in the Business Case Working Paper as a potential risk, but was something that the Council would want to avoid. Discussions would held about the possibility of sharing museum curatorial expertise across Greater Manchester.

·         In response to a Member’s question, the Corporate Director confirmed that a bid had not been received from the ARC to run the Art Gallery. The Council continued to work with all the voluntary arts organisations in the borough.

·         A Member enquired as to the valuation of the artworks owned by the Council. It was agreed that a written response would be sent to all Members of the Scrutiny Committee.

·         In response to a Member’s question, the Corporate Director confirmed that a bid had not been received from the National Market Traders Federation to run Stockport Market.

·         A Member requested that consideration be given to Councillors being represented on the Markets Board.

Highways and Engineering Services

·         A Member expressed the view that the increasing reliance on services being provided at a Greater Manchester level was a return to when the former Greater Manchester Council existed. The Council’s representatives on the Transport for Greater Manchester Committee would ensure that the best deal was obtained for Stockport.

New Model for Regulation

·         A Member expressed concern that there would be a more limited response to complaints from both Elected Members and members of the public. The Business Case proposed that, for example, serious breaches of environmental regulations would be the subject of enforcement and that more minor complaints would not be investigated as thoroughly as they currently aware as a result of reduced resources.

Locality Operating Model

·         A Member expressed concern that the Council could withdraw, fully or partially, from delivering some services in localities and that the community would work with the Council to develop local solutions. The Executive Councillors referred to the scale of the budget reductions facing the Council and pointed out that this was a proposal for 2016/17. This proposal would be the subject of further discussions with the political groups.

·         The Locality Operating Model would depend heavily on every community being represented and there was also potentially significant staffing issues. The Scrutiny Committee was advised that Officers were already starting to consider the issues and an ‘away day’ was scheduled. As far as the Executive was concerned, the process would be Member-led, with different communities reacting in different ways.

·         The extent of the involvement of the third sector in the Locality Operating Model would also need to be considered.

Solutions SK Operating Model

·         Since its creation, Solutions SK had not significantly extended its sphere of work by winning new contracts. One of the principles of the business case was that Solutions SK would have the opportunity to concentrate on certain areas of work.

Facilitating Accelerated Growth

·         A Member wondered how growth could be accelerated when there was a proposed reduction in staff of up to 10 f.t.e as a result of this proposal. The Corporate Director clarified that it was aspects of the strategic housing and economic development functions which were currently undertaken which would be discontinued. The business case was predicated on rigorous prioritisation of areas of work.

·         A Member enquired how the Council would achieve a greater level of private sector involvement given that it had struggled to obtain private sector investment in the town centre. The Council’s intervention in the town centre was a result of it being able to acquire finance on significantly more favourable terms than the private sector. The Council’s direct intervention in the town centre was, therefore, more a function of the regulations regarding local government finance than a failure on behalf of the Council to engage with the private sector. Businesses in Stockport felt that they were well supported by the Council.

RESOLVED – (1) That the report be noted.

(2) That the comments of the Scrutiny Committee be submitted to the Executive for their consideration as part of the feedback on the Investing in Stockport proposals.

(3) That a note on the value of the Council’s Museum assets and collections be sent to Members of the Scrutiny Committee.