Agenda item

12.1     The Chief Executive introduced the report which continues the Committee’s consideration of the Reconciling Policy, Performance and Resources (RPPR) process. The Chief Executive highlighted that the situation the Council faces is extremely significant. There are two reports that Cabinet is due to consider on 26 September 2024, one is about the in-year performance which indicates the Council is facing a significant overspend. The other report details the implications for planning for the next financial year (2025/26), which is the report the Committee is being asked to consider. Cabinet is not being asked to make any decisions at this stage but is being asked to agree to go out to public consultation on a number of savings proposals, in order that as much information as possible is available on the savings proposals.

12.2     The Committee was invited to consider and comment on the report and identify if there was any further information the Committee would like to help in their consideration of the RPPR process. There will also be a Whole Council Forum on the afternoon of Wednesday 25 September 2024 to allow all councillors to consider in detail the information contained in the Cabinet RPPR report.

12.3     The Committee discussed the report, and a summary of the comments and questions raised is given below.

Impact of savings proposals

12.4     Committee members commented that the savings proposals affected some of the most vulnerable people in the community and would like to see an assessment of the impact on individuals of the proposed changes to services. The process of making savings needs to be fair and transparent. Committee members also commented that the Council would need to be careful not to have a knock impact on the District and Borough councils by increasing their costs (e.g. through changes to housing support) and it would be important to understand the reasons behind the proposals, why those services were selected, and the impact of the proposals in their entirety.

12.5     The proposed changes to services may also increase future demand for other East Sussex County Council (ESCC) provided services such as care services (e.g. changes to the drug and alcohol service). It may also lead to the increased ‘gatekeeping’ of care services and the departmental impact of changes to service will need to be understood.

12.6     The Chief Executive outlined that work had been done on the impact of the proposals on individuals, partners and services. The public consultation will add more detail to this work. Officers have been talking to the District and Borough councils and ESCC is acutely aware of the pressures on housing services. The provision of housing support is not a statutory requirement under the Care Act.

12.7     The Council would not normally be advocating changes to the services covered by the savings proposals, but they are the least worst option. The Council is aware that the proposals, if they go ahead, will likely lead to increases in demand for services in the medium term.

Council Tax

12.8     The Committee noted that the planning assumptions included in the report were that the maximum increase in Council Tax of 4.99% would be applied. Some Committee members commented that allowing Council Tax to rise was not the solution, given that it is a regressive tax and will impact those on lower incomes. The Chief Executive commented that after the Budget Statement on 30 October 2024, the potential scenarios for Council Tax will be updated in the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP).

Asset disposals and support for the revenue budget

12.9     The Committee asked what further action could be taken on asset disposals to help support the revenue budget. The Chief Executive responded that options for the future use of County Hall are being considered and there is a report later on the agenda to consider this. Officers are also looking at debt recovery, fees, charges and other income to support the revenue budget.

Use of Technology and Artificial Intelligence (AI)

12.10   The Committee commented that it agreed with the approach being taken to introduce new technology and AI into the Council’s operations, and that it should adopt a ‘fast follower’ and not ‘leading edge’ approach. However, there will be a need to look at measures for those who are digitally excluded in the use of new technologies. In terms of the cost of introducing innovative ways of working, if the Council does not have money from Government to invest, can it afford not to take risks.

12.11   The Chief Executive agreed with the comments the Committee had made on the adoption of a ‘fast follower’ approach. The Council will also ensure people can still access services if they are digitally excluded. Every service has faced change and innovation. It was clarified that the comment in the report around risk relates to AI and the risk to cyber security and data security.

Reserves

12.12   The Committee noted that the Council was using reserves in order to mitigate the spending pressures in the current financial year. It asked if there was any provision to help maintain and contribute to future reserve balances.

12.13   The Chief Executive outlined that the Council had needed to use £14.3 million of reserves to balance last year’s budget (2023/24). Another £9.4 million had been allocated from reserves for this financial year (2024/25). This leaves around £10 million in general reserves and there is no provision to add to reserves. There are two types of reserves: a minimum reserve of £10 million and two ring-fenced reserves for Waste Disposal and Self Insurance. Everything else held in reserves is other organisations’ money.

Waste disposal booking system

12.14   Committee members commented that in their view the proposal to introduce a booking system at Household Waste Recycling Sites would not save money and would increase fly tipping. It also did not appear to encourage recycling. The Director of Communities, Economy and Transport (CET) responded that similar schemes introduced by other councils had proven positive for people, with less queuing and more assistance available on site. The savings for this proposal come from recycling and could be more than £50,000. The consultation will provide residents’ views on the proposal, and it is helpful to have the Committee’s views on this.

Summary

12.15   The Chief Executive summed up by saying that after the October Budget Statement, the Council will know more about the likely financial position for the Council. The savings proposals will need to be balanced against this, but it needs to be borne in mind that at present the Council does not have a plan that completely bridges the forecast budget gap in the MTFP.

12.16   The Committee RESOLVED to:

(1) Note the information in the attached RPPR Cabinet report of 26 September 2024(appendix 1); and

(2) Identify any further work or information needed to aid the scrutiny committee’s contribution to the RPPR process or as part of the committee’s ongoing work programme.