Agenda item

23        RECONCILING POLICY, PERFORMANCE AND RESOURCES (RPPR)

23.1     The Chief Finance Officer introduced the report which provided the Committee with an opportunity to consider the current position of the services within its remit and identify any information required ahead of the Committee’s December RPPR Board. As the Autumn Statement was being announced on the day of the Committee’s meeting, the Chief Finance Officer committed to circulate a briefing to all councillors on the implications of the Autumn Statement for ESCC.

23.2     The Committee asked questions on the following areas:

·                     Use of County Hall – a question was asked on whether financial analysis would be undertaken of the impact of alternative use of County Hall on future years of RPPR. The Chief Finance Officer responded that while the papers presented to the Committee provided an overview of the current position for service budgets and portfolio plans, to inform consideration of information the Committee required ahead of its RPPR Board, any ideas or options to mitigate future budget pressures would be considered through the RPPR process for 2023/24 onwards. The Chair of the Committee also advised that consideration of the Council’s property strategy would be a matter for Place Scrutiny Committee. The Lead Member for EISEND confirmed that Cabinet had discussed with the Corporate Management Team how to make best use of the Council’s office accommodation post-COVID, so the matter was under consideration.

·                     Budget sustainability – recent press coverage of the challenging financial position facing county councils in the South East was noted and assurance sought that ESCC was not facing similar challenges. The Chief Finance Officer responded that much like other local authorities, in the medium term, ESCC faced a significant deficit and would not be able to present a balanced Medium Term Finance Plan without additional sources of funding. The current position did not, however, generate the scale of concerns other councils had reflected publicly recently.

36.   

·                     One Council working – a question was asked on how well Directors felt they were able to achieve their services’ priorities given, what could be seen as, conflicting priorities and demands in other areas of the Council. The Director of ASCH responded that they recognised and saw a One Council approach in the way services and priorities were planned and delivered at ESCC. First and foremost, the Council’s priorities and the way Departments worked together was informed by the range of statutory responsibilities the directorates were responsible for delivering. Beyond that, where there were opportunities to work more flexibly on delivering broader priorities there was a corporate, One Council approach used, particularly through the RPPR process which provided a mechanism to ensure the Council effectively used its resources to deliver on a range of priorities and agendas. The Lead Member for EISEND added that the limitations on resources meant that there were often challenging decisions to be made around prioritisation of resources, and that the RPPR process enabled the Council to plan its budgets and priorities considering demands as a whole. The Director of Children’s Services added that the RPPR process provided a fair opportunity to consider the priorities, and pressures, in Children’s Services.

23.3     The Committee RESOLVED to note the report.