Agenda item

In consideration of the Bristol City Councils Savings and Investment Proposals report, the Board received an introduction to directorate savings proposals from the Neighbourhoods, People, Place and Resources Cabinet Members and Strategic Directors.  Each Directorate referred to their responses to advance questions which had been circulated to Committee prior to the start of the meeting; and summarised the following points:

Neighbourhoods

a.      Delivery of discretionary services would be very challenging and require a different relationship with citizens and a recalibration of key neighbourhood services. 

b.      There was a need for business efficiencies, for example working with Bristol Waste Company to reduce cost to the council through proposals for savings in the waste contract. 

c.       A new approach to Neighbourhood Partnerships was needed as it could not be resourced at the current levels. 

d.      Increased income through expansion of licensing schemes.

e.      Housing Delivery would be a growth area for the Council and crossed a number of directorates with savings to be achieved through new service models not reductions.  It was noted that 3 bids for specific homelessness projects had achieved successful bids with match government funding and voluntary sector funding.

People

a.      Added Demographic pressures and Government policy The increased numbers of older people over 85 and the numbers of children, national living wage for home care workers and Deprivation of Liberty assessments were noted as some of the reasons for increased pressure on the People Directorate Budget.  A further £17m had been put into the budget through the social care precept. 

b.      There were efforts to preserve early intervention services., in an effort to reshape services to align with the three tier strategic framework and understand where reductions in discretionary services could tip people into statutory services.

c.       Full cost recovery would be pursued where appropriate and there was a need to develop a good framework to bid for work to take advantage of any government grants that came through.

d.      The Learning City partnership was a driver for partnership working for the Mayor and stakeholders across the city to meet the changing educational landscape. The West of England devolution deal would increase active work with neighbouring authorities.

e.      maximise trading with schools income.

f.        Members were referred to specific targeted investments at Appendices 5 and 6 to meet the rising demand of changing demographics.

Place

a.                  a corporate approach was required to achieve property savings working in a more joined up way.

b.                  Ambition through the business rate team to increase the temporary use of empty shops and encourage pop up entrepeneurs

c.                   The reduction of finance to key arts providers

d.                  Reviewing on street parking and resident parking income ensuring ringfenced for transport and administering the service respectively

e.                  Previous proposed savings for concessionary travel had not been progressed due to the high impact on people with disabilities. 

f.                    There was  a need to sustain renown arts and culture in the city efforts to sustain need more time to get other funding  museums already cut excellent already planning income generation – don’t want to cut so that we don’t have the people to pursue opportunities

g.                  transport supports economic growth. With reference to parking there were tight controls on income generation. concessionary travel schemes  partnership agreement – scope for move towards commissioning smaller operators needed time to make adjustments  - commercial potential – follows banes  model – MCA

h.                  excellent museum service – careful

Resources

a.                  As the organisation changes there is a need to maintain a strong back office function of HR/IT/Finance. Savings are achievable. key risks around– abs restructure.  fair income generation targets.

The Chair thanked Cabinet and sLT comprehensive and helpful presentation.

Overview of the Cumulative Impact Assessment – Di Robinson

•          Duty – process and approach – broader point – concerns equalities impact of work – refer to equalities act – fostering of good relations – who will and how will and how build in mitigation potential impact – reassure both officers and cabinet members – not the first time – conversation running throughout – lots of work as proposals change – dynamic –

•          All being updated – support those at risk and in need – mindful of direct and indirect impacts – minimise on communities throughbudget – proposed – how we reshape and redesign – with equalities impacts in mind – ongoing process – will keep people updated.

Comments from the Chairs of Scrutiny

a.         Neighbourhoods

•          Cllr negus – 2 strands of concern – 1. loss of things fundamental to communities  parks and libraries– concerns about credibility of parks self-financing proposals providing places that will still be somewhere people can use – worried about that – loss of libraries is a loss of important network – fundamental self-sufficient community hubs and for people to settle around– demonstrate local people to manage themselves  - and  NPs ways to work to mitigate again local concerns– credibility that the consideration of risk across whole council been considered – proposed savings  are soft targets – but without consideration of a cumulative approach to understand the cumulative impact.

•          2nd strand HRA – massive business within BCC – implications housing and housing family related to all other sectors to try and make things good – ramifications across everything else we do – don’t see this made clear – or mitigated through proposals – have to understand what the effects will be - not seen clearly in major budget proposals

•          Overall risk – and what is the strategy – must leave just enough to make bigger things happen – at least provide seed corn to coalesce around some ambition

•          Should review headings

Pre-submitted questions feedback and supplementary questions [Circulated summary by division ]