Issue - meetings

Report by the Chief Executive.

39.1     The Chair introduced report and noted the response to the Committee’s recommendations. The Committee did not suggest any improvements to the RPPR process and noted that there were items on the Committee’s work programme related to areas of proposed savings in the Medium Term Financial Plan for 2018/19.

39.2     The Committee asked how much additional money had been allocated to East Sussex for pot hole repairs that was announced in the autumn statement.  The Director of CET outlined that the County Council will receive around £2.2m from the National Productivity Investment Fund (NPIF) and a further sum for pothole repairs, which the Assistant Director, Operations will confirm following the meeting.

Following the meeting the Assistant Director Operations confirmed that ESCC will receive:

·              a one-off grant from the Department for Transport (DfT) of £2,133,000 from its National Productivity Investment Fund. The Council is awaiting publication of the DfT guidelines for what this funding can be used for, but in the Budget the Chancellor said: “Transport – Autumn Statement 2016 announced £1.1 billion from the NPIF to support local transport and £220 million to address pinch points on the national road network, improving productivity by making it easier for people and goods to move within and between towns and cities”.  The County Council is required to publicise how it intends to spend this grant, which it will do so in due course.

·              a one-off grant of £846,000 from the DfT National Pothole Fund and ESCC will use this money to carry out preventative patching to prevent the formation of potholes, as we have in previous years. It is a DfT requirement that we publish on the ESCC website where this money is spent.

Report by the Chief Executive

58.1     The Chief Executive introduced report and highlighted that it was the Committee’s opportunity to review the Reconciling Policy, Performance and Resources (RPPR) process.

58.2     The Committee discussed the RPPR process, which they thought was a useful exercise and that it was helpful to look outside of savings plan. The Committee commented that it was a difficult process when the level of cuts were as significant as they are, but the changes to the budget debated at Cabinet and County Council were only smaller changes on the periphery of budget and perhaps the process could be streamlined.

58.3     The Committee considered that it was important to focus two to three years ahead on the savings plan, and that it could have a more constructive influence on medium term plans in relation to value for money and opportunity costs. The Committee made three points about the RPPR process:

·          It would continue to look 2-3 years ahead in terms of examining the proposed savings, value for money and opportunity costs;

·          It would look at service areas outside of the savings plan for areas of potential savings; and

·          The Committee was not sure the Portfolio Plans materially help the discussion on savings and perhaps these could be streamlined.

58.4     The Chief Executive welcomed the Committee’s focus on examining proposed savings in the medium term and looking for other areas for savings outside of the savings plan. However, the Portfolios Plans are helpful to set the scene and to hold Officers to account on service plans and delivery.

Property Investment Strategy

58.5     The Committee asked about progress on the Property Investment Strategy. The Chief Operating Officer responded that an update report will be presented to Committee in July. There a number of examples of successes that can be shared with the Committee and the report will also outline the principles of operating the strategy.

58.6     Some of the Committee Members outlined their concerns about investment in commercial property and acting as an investment company. They commented that it is not the Council’s role to decide how to invest Council Tax payers’ money and would be more comfortable if the Property Investment Strategy is linked to the public services that the Council and its partners provide (e.g. investment in the provision of primary care centres).

Coroner’s Service update

58.7     The Committee asked if there was an update on the Government proposals for changes to the Coroner’s Service. The Chief Executive explained that the Government has deferred the implementation of the changes. There is likely to be a cost associated with the changes, and the Committee will be updated when more detail is available.

58.8     The Committee RESOLVED to:

1)           Continue to focus on medium term savings proposals and service areas outside the savings plan as part of its RPPR work; and

2)      Note the response to the RPPR Board’s comments on the budget.

34.1     The Director of Adult Social Care and Health updated the Committee on national Budget announcements in relation to Adult Social Care:

·         £2bn of additional funding has been allocated to Local Authorities across England over the next three years, including £1.01bn in 2017/18, £674m in 18/19 and £337m in 19/20.

·         The Council has not yet received further information regarding the breakdown by area or the formula which will be used to allocate the funding. If allocated according to the Better Care Fund or needs-based formula East Sussex could receive around £9 to 10m additional revenue funding next year.

·         It is likely that there will be requirements to target funding on certain priorities, such as Delayed Transfers of Care, and additional monitoring of the use of the funding.

·         Further information will be circulated to Members once there is more clarity.

34.2     In response to a question about what difference extra funds could make in addressing shortages in the care market, the Director indicated that the department is targeting fee increases on areas of the market which are struggling i.e. nursing and domiciliary care and is looking to increase Care Home Plus beds to 200 over 18 months. In addition, the results of a bedded care review due shortly will inform the future direction. It may be possible to make short term interventions but the longer term issues will take time to address in terms of growing community capacity.

34.3     The Committee considered the 2016/17 RPPR process and any improvements which could be made for future years. The following points received general support:

·         Members would welcome more opportunity to discuss and influence how the whole Council budget is distributed between departments.

·         Members would welcome more opportunity to consider and influence potential savings and investments at earlier stage and a wider range of options from which to make choices.

·         Members wished to be more hands-on in looking at potential savings at an earlier stage than the RPPR Board, for example holding an awayday to look at the budget in detail and consider potential savings.

34.4     The Director confirmed that the Committee’s views, and those from other scrutiny committees will be fed into the design of the future process.

34.5     RESOLVED to:

(1)  Note the report;

(2)  Forward the Committee’s feedback for consideration as part of the wider review of the RPPR process.