Agenda and minutes

A webcast of the meeting can be viewed here.

To note that Mrs. D. Taylor CC has been appointed Chairman of the Scrutiny Commission in accordance with Article 6.05 of the County Council’s Constitution.

RESOLVED: 

That it be noted that Mrs D. Taylor CC has been appointed Chairman of the Scrutiny Commission for the period ending with the Annual Meeting of the County Council in 2026 in accordance with Article 6.05 of the County Council’s Constitution.

It was moved by Mr C Smith and seconded by Mr J Poland:

“That Mr Michael Mullaney be elected Chairman for the period until the next Annual Meeting of the Council.”

It was moved by Mr A Innes and seconded by Mr B Piper:

“That Mr J Bloxham be elected Chairman for the period until the next Annual Meeting of the Council”.

The Chairman informed members that both candidates had been duly proposed and seconded.  In accordance with item 4 of Standing Order 27 a secret ballot would therefore take place.

The Chief Executive announced the results of the ballot, as follows:

The motion “That Mr Michael Mullaney be elected Chairman for the period until the next Annual Meeting of the Council” was carried unanimously.

The minutes of the meeting held on 10^th March 2025 were taken as read, confirmed and signed.

The following question, received under Standing Order 34 of the County Council’s Constitution, was put to the Chairman of the Scrutiny Commission:

Question asked by Mr Stares

“Given that the Council’s new leadership has pledged to bring in outside auditors to audit the council’s finances, does the council have a projection for how much this service is likely to cost, and is there money set aside for this in the current 2025/26 budget?” 

Reply by the Chair

“The Budget for 2025/26 was set in advance of the recent County Council elections, hence it is not possible for any new initiatives to be specifically incorporated at this stage.  Leicestershire County Council has a significant savings challenge, and expenditure will continue to be required, on an invest to save basis, to investigate and implement efficiency initiatives. If new approaches such as the use of external auditors are proposed they will either replace or complement existing activity with the aim of meeting the savings challenge and would need to be commissioned through the Council’s decision making process.”

Mr Stares asked on the response to his question whether the final part of the answer meant that, so far, there hadn’t been a proposal for the use of external auditors.” 

At the invitation of the Chairman, the Assistant Director of Corporate Resources responded “No, there was no current proposal for the use of external auditors.”

The Chairman thanked Mr Stares for his questions.

The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5).

There were no urgent items for consideration.

The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to declare any interest in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting.

No declarations were made.

There were no declarations of the party whip.

The Chief Executive reported that no petitions had been received under Standing Order 35.

The Commission considered a report and a supplementary report of the Director of Corporate Resources the purpose of which was to set out the provisional revenue and capital outturn for 2024/25 and to seek members views which would be presented to the Cabinet at its meeting on 17 June.  A copy of the report and supplementary marked ‘Agenda Item 10’ is filed with these minutes.

Arising from the discussion the following points were made:

(i)               Members raised concerns regarding the current forecasted gap of £90m in the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) by 2028/29 and questioned how this would be addressed. It was noted a number of savings initiates were already being developed but these were not yet sufficiently detailed to be factored into the MTFS.  Work to identify further efficiencies and income sources was also taking place across all departments. Once fully developed these would then need to be considered by the Cabinet for inclusion in the next iteration of the MTFS. 

(ii)              The Council’s budget for 2025/26 had been approved and balanced with the use of some reserves (£4.7m).  Immediate action was, however, necessary to identify savings that would ensure delivery of a balanced budget for 2026/27. 

(iii)            The Director reported that there was no single solution to address the financial gap, the magnitude of which was not dissimilar to that faced by other councils.  The Council’s funding position was difficult and complex given the number of statutory services it had to deliver.  A varied approach had always been adopted to both reduce demand, lobby government to increase grant funding, as well as locally seeking to increase income including increases in council tax. 

(iv)            A Member emphasised that the Council’s budget was dictated by demand and growth in demand was caused by factors outside its control.  As it had a statutory responsibility to deliver certain services its financial position would not improve significantly without more funding from Government.

(v)             A member commented that recent publications regarding Reform UK’s proposed Doge-style scheme had questioned the efficiency of procurement in local government and suggested that improvements in this area could yield further savings. The Director explained that around 75% of Council spend was through contracts with third parties and this would therefore always form part of the Council’s future savings plans. However, this would not just be targeted toward procurement efficiencies but also challenging how and why the Council procured those services in the first place.

(vi)            At the request of the Chairman, the Leader commented that he did not think the County Council would receive a visit from Reform UK’s Doge-style scheme. He confirmed that careful planning was needed and therefore consideration would be given to involving a professional, external body to assist the Council in identifying future savings opportunities. It was acknowledged that this would come at a cost to the Authority. The Leader provided assurance that he and his Cabinet were working at pace to consider this but said he could not give a specific timeframe for when external consultants would be instructed. However, he undertook to keep members informed.

(vii)          The Government’s spending review was expected to provide some insight into the Government’s funding priorities.  Additional grant funding for local government was, however, looking unlikely.  A member raised concern that the Government’s focus on deprivation as part of future funding reform proposals would likely further disadvantage Leicestershire.

(viii)         A member questioned the impact local government reorganisation (LGR) and potentially transferring land to the City might have on the County Council’s MTFS, suggesting this would be detrimental, reducing the County’s council tax base and therefore its  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The Commission considered the draft Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report which summarised some of the key highlights of scrutiny work undertaken during 2020/21.  A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 11’ is filed with these minutes.

At the Chairman’s request, Mr Mullaney, the previous Chairman of the Scrutiny Commission, welcomed the report and thanked officers and the previous Scrutiny Commissioners, Mrs Page, Mr Bannister and Mr Hunt, along with the past Chairmen and Vice Chairman of each of the standing overview and scrutiny committees for their input during the year.

RESOLVED:

That the draft Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2024/25 be approved for submission to the County Council in July 2025.

The next meeting of the Commission is scheduled to take place on Monday, 8^th September 2025 at 10.00am.

RESOLVED:

It was noted that the next meeting of the Commission would be held on 8^th September 2025 at 10.00am.