Agenda item

(Note: the Chair was of the opinion that this item, although not included on the agenda, should be considered as a matter of urgency in accordance with Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972 in order that the Scrutiny Committee had the opporunity to comment on the reports content prior to the submission of further budget proposals)

The report sets out the Medium Term Financial Plan update which is in two parts:-

·         Medium Term Financial Plan Summer Review

·         Medium Term Financial Plan Cabinet Response: Updating our Medium Term Strategy and Framing our Budget Choices for 2019/20

Officer Contacts: Holly Rae/Jonathan Davies on 0161 474 3014/0161 218 1025 or email: holly.rae@stockport.gov.uk/jonathan.davies@stockport.gov.uk

(Note: The Chair was of the opinion that this item, although not included on the agenda, should be considered as a matter of urgency in accordance with Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972 in order for the matter to be consider prior to the consideration of additional budget proposals by the Cabinet on 2 October 2018).

The Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Policy, Finance & Devolution submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) inviting the Scrutiny Committee to consider two reports previously considered by the Cabinet on 14 August 2018 relating to the forthcoming budget setting process for 2019/20. The first report was a review by the Borough Treasurer of the current Medium Term Financial Plan, with the second report setting out the Cabinet’s response to the findings of the Review.

The Leader of the Council highlighted the key challenges and the principles underlying the Cabinet’s response, including the Cabinet’s intentions with regard to Council Tax.

The Leader and the Borough Treasurer responded to questions from the Scrutiny Committee.

·         Further information was requested in relation to the Fairer Funding for Local Government consultation. In response it was stated that the aim was for any new arrangements to be fiscally neutral, so it was unlikely that the Council would receive any additional resources unless they were attached to additional responsibilities.

·         Clarity was sought on savings from Stockport Together. In response it was stated that there would be no financial benefits realised this year, nor were there envisaged to be, although service users would begin to feel the benefits. The MTFP did not recognise any benefits accrued from Stockport Together as this was a more prudent approach, although the modelling predicted benefits in the future.

·         Further information was requested in respect of the implementation of the Stockport Together new models of care. In response it was stated that both the CQC and Greater Manchester Health & Social Care Partnership had expressed concerns about the pace of change, and that this was reflective of over-ambitious initial plans. There had been a number of changes in leadership at both the CCG and the Council and there was now a renewed focus on implementation, with the Council taking a leading role.

·         Clarity was sought on proposals for the ‘outside bodies’ and wholly owned companies. In response it was stressed that the aim was to ensure value for the money the Council spent with these organisations through ensuring appropriate commissioning and contractual arrangements. This would form part of the proposed Strategic Commissioning Review. It was also commented that there were opportunities to explore sharing more back-off functions to reduce costs. The Chair stressed the importance of these proposals being considered by this Committee.

·         The importance of an inclusive approach to the forthcoming MTFP Business Cases and service redesign was stressed to ensure that those involved had a stake in the process even if they would not benefit directly from any savings. Being able to systematise these discussions, and provide the mechanisms to test the principals without fear of failure was also emphasised. In response it was stated that the approach to the budget differed this year in that there was a move away from service specific business cases to more thematic ones to avoid ‘cost shunting’ and unforeseen consequences, and so some of the proposals would not come forward in their entirety until 2020/21. It was also stated that there may need to be more ‘straight forward’ cuts to budgets to ensure there was no budget shortfall.

·         Clarification was sought on whether the work relating to libraries was a new initiative or the continuation of existing work. In response it was stated that this was a continuation of the work to improve the offer from libraries to include more collaborative working.

·         Involving ward councillors in work to maximise the effectiveness of the Council’s asset and estates was encouraged.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.