Agenda and minutes

The Chair led welcome and introductions.

Cabinet Members in attendance:

•          Councillor Craig Cheney, Designated Deputy Mayor with responsibility for Finance, Governance and Performance

•          Councillor Asher Craig, Deputy Mayor with responsibility for Communities, Equalities and Public Health

•          Councillor Kye Dudd, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Transport, Energy & New Green Deal

•          Councillor Helen Holland, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Adult Social Care

•          Councillor Helen Godwin, Cabinet Member for Women, Families and Homes (Lead Member for Children’s Services)

•          Councillor Nicola Beech, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Spatial Planning and City Design

•          Councillor Afzal Shah, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Climate, Ecology and Sustainable Growth

Officers in Attendance:

•          Mike Jackson, Chief Executive

•          Denise Murray, Service Director – Finance

•          Michael Pilcher, Chief Accountant

•          Tian Ze Hao, Senior Finance Business Partner

•          Stephen Peacock, Executive Director - Growth & Regeneration

•          Jacqui Jenson, Executive Director Adults, Children and Education

•          Jan Cadby, Risk Manager

•          Tim Borrett, Director: Policy, Strategy and Partnerships

Also, in attendance:

•          Ed Rowberry, Chief Executive at Bristol and Bath Regional Capital

•          Laura Barrow, Finance Director at Bristol and Bath Regional Capital

Apologies were received from Councillor Morris. Cllr Gollop attended as a substitute.

It was noted that Councillor Stevens who had previously been a Member of the Commission had now stood down as a Councillor.

To note any declarations of interest from the Councillors.  They are asked to indicate the relevant agenda item, the nature of the interest and in particular whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest.

Any declarations of interest made at the meeting which is not on the register of interests should be notified to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion.

•          Cllr Gollop stated that he was an independent director of Bristol and Bath Regional Capital and he would therefore withdraw from the meeting for the City Funds item. 

•          Cllr Cheney said that he was a City Council representative of the Bristol and Bath Regional Capital and he would withdraw from the discussion for the City Funds item.

•          Cllr Alexander said he was a Council appointed Director of Gorum Homes.

To agree the minutes of the last meeting as a correct record.

The Committee Resolved:-

(i) To agree the minutes of the last meeting as a correct record.

To note the progress of actions from the previous meeting.

The Committee noted the progress of actions from the previous meeting.

·       There were two outstanding actions from the previous meeting regarding the Collection Fund Surplus/Deficit 2020/21 Report.  The Scrutiny Coordinator said she would contact officers about this again.

Up to 30 minutes is allowed for this item

Any member of the public or Councillor may participate in Public Forum.  The detailed arrangements for so doing are set out in the Public Information Sheet at the back of this agenda.  Public Forum items should be emailed to democratic.services@bristol.gov.uk and please note that the following deadlines will apply in relation to this meeting:-

Questions - Written questions must be received 3 clear working days prior to the meeting.  For this meeting, this means that your question(s) must be received in this office at the latest by 5pm on Friday 29th January.

Petitions and Statements - Petitions and statements must be received on the working day prior to the meeting.  For this meeting this means that your submission must be received in this office at the latest by 12.00 Noon on Wednesday 3rd February.

Register to Speak - If you would like to ‘virtually’ attend the meeting to speak to your statement or ask your questions, your intention to attend must be received no later than 2 clear working days in advance. For this meeting this means that your intention to attend must be received in this office at the latest by 5pm on Monday 1^st February.

The Public Forum submissions will be uploaded here prior to the start of the meeting on the 28^th January.

A Public Forum Statement was received from David Redgewell (South West Transport Network and Railfuture Severnside) who attended the meeting and spoke to his statement.  The full statement can be found here Public Forum - Resources Scrutiny Commission 4.2.21

To note any announcements from the Chair

The Chair explained to everyone how the meeting would be run.

This item refers to papers related to the Cabinet meeting on 26^th January 2021. Papers can be viewed here: Budget Monitoring Outturn Report P8 - Papers

Michael Pilcher - Chief Accountant briefly took Members through the report and provided an overview of the current budget for the forthcoming Full Council meeting and the financial position of the Resources Directorate.

General Fund: when reporting officers had split down the cost and financial impact of pandemic from separately from ongoing base services.

•          The Covid related financial impact was then estimated at £81M.  This was an increase since the previous Monitoring Report and was mainly due to a loss of fees and charges, loss of income and increased expenditure.

•          Non-Covid related finances; forecast £6m overspend.  The Cabinet Budget Report included a request for approval for officers to draw down general reserves due to insufficient time to implement mitigating measures at this point in the year.

Ring Fenced Budgets:

·       Housing Revenue Account (HRA): forecast a £3.3m underspend due to the Council not being able to undertake repairs and maintenance. There were also some pressures caused by Covid such as loss of rental income and additional costs of making the housing stock Covid secure.

•          Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG); forecast a £8.6m in-year deficit predominantly in the High Needs Block which leads to an £11.4m carry forward.

•          Public Health (PH) Budget was forecasting no variation with a small draw-down to cover some of the pressures within Leisure Services.

Resources Directorate: Officers previously forecast a £5.5m overspend impact from Covid. This is due to additional expenditure and income losses.  And on on-going costs the Resources Directorate was forecasting a break-even position.

The Chair asked if the Adult Social Care (ASC) budget overspend had been predictable and if officers had any comment on the budging process that set the figures? Officers said that the Scrutiny Finance Task and Finish Group had raised concerns and these were also raised at a Full Council meeting. The Chair asked if the Council should not just increase the budget for this? Officers said there was a need to get balance right but that Bristol City Council was a high spending local authority (LA).  Services were being transforming but this was a very difficult year. But the Council needed to continually challenge itself about reducing the costs of those services.

Councillor Holland said that there were difficult circumstance every year but they would have clearer assumptions next year.  If the Council was a high spender and provided a gold service that was one thing but she questioned that was the case.  She added that she was more confident that the budget that had been set out this year portrayed a more realistic figure. But there were savings targets to reach every year.

The Executive Director for Adults, Children and Education said she agreed with what had previously been said.  There were a number of initiatives being implemented such as Help to Help Your Self to support independent living and provide better outcomes for people.  The Transformation Plan was very good Plan; it was achievable and they were driving real efficiencies in the system. Without Covid  ...  view the full minutes text for item 93.

This item refers to papers related to the Cabinet meeting on 26^th January 2021. Papers can be viewed here: Budget Recommendations to Full Council - Papers

Questions on the proposals raised by members and written responses provided by Officers will be provided as a supplementary paper in due course.

Cllr Cheney, Designated Deputy Mayor with responsibility for Finance, Governance and Performance highlighted how difficult the budget process had been this year due to lockdowns and moving from one tier to another.  However, amongst many current societal problems such as redundancies and loss of incomes, they had produced a steady budget that would not involve cutting front line services.

The Director of Finance provided Members with an overview and clarity of the key points within the Budget Recommendations to Full Council Report that had also been published for the Cabinet meeting on the 26^th January.

The topics highlighted below refer to concerns or queries raised by Commission Members regarding the budget recommendations contained within the published report. References are made to the papers published for the Cabinet meeting (available here), and to questions submitted by Members prior to the meeting for which written responses were received from finance officers and relevant Cabinet Members. The questions and responses are also published with the minutes as Appendix A.

Capital Programme Overview

In the Cabinet meeting of 26^th January 2021, the Capital Programme budget for the years 2021/22 to 2025/26, totalling £907.6 million, was discussed. This included the Housing Revenue Account and Transport Capital Programme, both of which were discussed within the Resources Scrutiny Commission (see below). It was confirmed that the Capital Programme was set within the longer-term parameters of the Medium-Term Financial Plan.

Prior to the meeting, one of the issues that was raised by members was the budgeting within the Capital Programme for the Bristol Beacon. Officers responded that the current budget for the Bristol Beacon is £48.8 million, and the Capital Programme (£907m) contains a corporate general fund contingency of £60m, intended to accommodate the potential for overruns and new cost associated with existing projects. During the meeting concerns were raised around the transparency of this project where exact figures are not yet known. Councillor Cheney, the Deputy Mayor with responsibility for Finance, Governance and Performance stated that as decisions had not yet been formally made the current planning involved provisions only. It was noted that a Scrutiny Briefing on Bristol Beacon was anticipated in the near future.

Housing Revenue Account

Members noted the forecast underspend of £3.3m on the Housing Revenue Account (HRA). Officers explained that an underspend of £6.3m had arisen due to delays in the maintenance programme caused by COVID. Combined with the forecast £3.0m spend on Covid-19 related pressures for which no government funding had been provided, this resulted in the total net underspend of £3.3m. This will be transferred to the HRA reserve at year-end to address the backlog of repairs.

In response to member’s queries, it was noted that applying a 1% uplift to current rents would increase annual revenue to the HRA by £1.1 million each year. In light of this, Members queried the decision not to increase rents. Members were concerned that there would be serious pressures on the HRA reserve in three to four  years’ time and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

This item refers to papers related to the Cabinet meeting on 26^th January 2021. Papers can be viewed here: Dedicated School Grant (DSG) 2021/22 Budget Proposals

This item was taken as part of the above Item: 9 Budget Recommendations to Full Council.

This item refers to papers related to the Extraordinary meeting of Cabinet on Wednesday, 3rd February 2021 2.00 pm.

Papers can be viewed here when the Cabinet papers are published on the 28^th January : Housing Revenue Budget Proposals 2021-2022

This item was taken as part of the above Item 9. Budget Recommendations to Full Council.

To follow

The Risk Manager briefly highlighted to Members some changes that had been made in the report such as unplanned investment and financial investment and also improvement around devolution, and deterioration around the Corporate Strategy.

The Chief Accountant provided some background and further clarification about the changes outlined above by saying that previously on the Risk Register under CRR1 - Major Capital Projects and Commercial Investments including the companies.  In light of recent events and the Value for Money Review by Grant Thornton they had now split that risk into three separate components.  So, the Growth and Regeneration Directorate Risk Report now contained the information about long term capital projects and the potential risks to the Capital Programme.  The Resources Directorate Risk Report now contained the unplanned investments in subsidiary companies and losses associated and the financial investments.

The Director for Policy, Strategy and Partnerships then explained the changes to how devolution was reported in Risk Reports.  He said this was really a technical correction on potential impacts based on the potential financial value of any further devolution deal.

The Chair thanked officers for their time.

To note the work programme.

The work programme was noted.

The Chair reminded everyone at this point, that the Impact Report would betaken in open session and the Annual Report would be taken afterwards in a separate closed session.

Ed Rowberry, Chief Executive of Bristol and Bath Regional Capital and Laura Barrow, Finance Director at Bristol and Bath Regional Capital (BBRC) both attended the meeting to present information on the Impact Report and answer questions from the Commission.  Members were told that BBRC is a partnership between the two local authorities and Quartet Community Foundation for the City Funds.  Over the past year and as part of the response to the Covid-19 pandemic and the One City approach, £2.4m of key investments had been committed to the local social economy that was helping to create economic, community and environmental resilience in Bristol.  As part of the Build Back Better approach and economic renewal it was using an investment strategy that fills a financial gap for social enterprises to solve local, social and environment challenges.  As one of the first funds of its kind in the UK the Impact Fund brings together grants, volunteering and local authority support in a coordinated, placed based approach to investment.

A Member said he thought this was a remarkable initiative and he was excited about one of the tallest wind turbines in the UK being built in Avonmouth and Lawrence Weston and he was very appreciative of the investment locally. 

Another Member said this was the first time she had heard of this initiative and asked if it could be explained how they were managing the return on investment?  Ed Rowberry explained that the first principle was to create a sustainable and revolving funding solution.  When a social enterprise takes on an investment they are taking on a repayable investment and then utilise the revenue model for example, the wind turbine has the potential to create revenue so the money comes back into the pot and revolves in that way. 

The same Councillor asked what the timescales were for ‘return on investment’ and what methodology was being used to quantify it, for example financial and / or social impacts?  Ed Rowberry said that in terms of timescales it was 10 years with a potential to extend a further two more.  They offer risk tolerant grant funding and use triple bottom-line accounting to create positive social and environmental change and use the Thriving Places Index methodology.

The Chair congratulated Ed Rowberry and Laura Barrow for what he said was an aptly named an ‘impact’ investment fund. He said in his view the ‘partnership’ aspect was a key to its success and long may that continue. He asked that it be noted that there was overwhelming support from the Commission for this investment funding to continue.

That under s.100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item(s) of business on the grounds that it (they) involve(s) the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of schedule 12A of the Act.

That under s.100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item(s) of business on the grounds that it (they) involve(s) the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of schedule 12A of the Act.

This item was held in an exempt session.  The minutes for this item are therefore not publicly available.