Venue: Goscote Committee Room, County Hall, Glenfield
Contact: Miss. H. Millward (Tel: 0116 265 6038) Email: hmillward@leics.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Appointment of Chairman Minutes: That Mr D R Parsons CC be appointed Chairman of the Constitution Committee for the period ending with the date of the Annual Council meeting in May 2007 Mr D R Parsons CC –
in the Chair |
|
Appointment of Deputy Chairman. Minutes: That Mr N J Rushton CC be appointed Deputy Chairman of the Constitution Committee for the period ending with the date of the Annual Council meeting in May 2007 |
|
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting of the Constitution Committee
held on |
|
Question Time. Minutes: The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been asked under Standing Order 35. |
|
Questions asked under Standing Order 7(3) and (5). Minutes: The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been asked under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5). |
|
To advise of any other items which the Chairman has decided to take as urgent. Minutes: There were no items of urgent business. |
|
Declarations of Interest. Minutes: Dr. M. O’ Callaghan, CC and Mr. M. B. Page, CC declared personal non-prejudicial interests in respect of the item entitled Statement of Accounts 2005/06 (minutes 50 refers) as non-executive members of PCTs. |
|
Statement of Accounts for 2005/06. Additional documents:
Minutes: The Committee considered a report of the Director of
Resources presenting the Statement of Accounts for 2005/06. A copy of the
report marked ‘B’ is filed with these minutes. The Head of Finance in his
introduction highlighted some minor changes to the accounts arising from
further work completed on the new Arising from discussion, the following points were raised: (i) Job Evaluation The Committee was
advised that the Statement of Accounts would be amended in light of the outcome
of the recent Court of Appeal decision against the County Council in relation
to the implementation of Job Evaluation. Members queried
whether the provision of £4.5m would be adequate to meet the costs of
implementing the Tribunal decision. The Committee was advised that there was
some uncertainty as to how this should be calculated and it was felt that the
provision of £4.5m would be sufficient to cover the worst case scenario. (ii) Landfill
Allowance In response to a question, the Committee was informed that landfill allowances were issued to local
authorities to allow waste to be put to landfill. In 2005/06 Leicestershire
County Council had been allocated an allowance of £3.7m and it was anticipated
that £3m of this would be utilised. The balance of £700,000 had been set aside
and was presented on the balance sheet as a non cash
backed reserve. Over time landfill
allowances would reduce whilst at the same time it was expected that waste
production would increase. It was expected that with the reserves there would
be sufficient allowances up to 2008/09 but there would be a major problem for
2009/10 unless action was taken. (iii) Members sought clarification as to the adequacy of the level
of Members queried what sort of risks the Authority needed to take into account in this calculation and were informed that the biggest financial risk that the Authority faced was in regard to demand led budgets, particularly in respect of Learning Disability services. Other risks which might lead to a shortfall included pooled budgets with health authorities and savings not being achieved. (iv) Pooled Budgets Members queried risks surrounding pooled budgets with the NHS and were informed that in respect of last years accounts contributions had been agreed and no major problems were expected. Moving forward joint arrangements with the NHS was considered a risk and would be kept under review. (v)
Borrowing Members questioned the large increase in long term borrowing and were informed that advantage had been taken of historically low interest rates to borrow for the 2006/07 programme. When deciding to borrow the County Council took advice from its Treasury Management advisor, SECTOR. There was no negative impact in respect of the Authorities revenue account as the advance borrowing would earn interest until it was utilised. A query was raised about whether the County Council’s average long term borrowing rate was favourable compared with other authorities. It was explained that this was difficult to assess because interest rate statistics ignored premia on debt rescheduling. The view from SECTOR was that our debt portfolio compared favourably with their ... view the full minutes text for item 8. |