This session is
scheduled to finish at
·
Key
priorities;
·
Key
policy challenges expected in the coming months; and
·
The
financial outlook going forward.
The Leader of the
Council will be supported at this session by the Deputy Leader and the Cabinet
Lead Member for Resources.
Minutes:
The Commission
welcomed the Leader and Deputy Leader of the Council to discuss the Leader’s
first months in office and the Council’s financial position.
The Leader
delivered a brief statement at the start of the session which included the
following key points:
·
The
opening months of his term had been challenging with some Group disciplinary
issues. The Conservative Group was now committed to a new Disciplinary Strategy
which it was hoped all political groups would commit to. He felt that restoring
the reputation of the County Council was of paramount importance;
·
He had
re-introduced Group Leaders’ meetings in an effort to increase collaboration
and the sharing of cross-party ideas;
·
The
biggest challenge going forward would be the requirement to identify efficiency
savings, balanced against the need to maintain frontline services;
·
He had
met or was scheduled to meet all leaders of neighbouring local authorities and
district councils and local MPs;
·
He
wished to focus his energies solely on Leicestershire and would only engage in
meetings in Whitehall when there was a tangible benefit to the residents of
Leicestershire;
·
He was
fully committed to the “6Cs” (three cities (Leicester, Nottingham and Derby)
and three counties (Leicestershire, Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire)) approach
and working with neighbouring LEPs, which he felt would be the most effective
route through which the County’s economy would be enabled to grow.
Arising from the
ensuing debate, the following key points were noted:
Medium Term
Financial Strategy (MTFS)
·
There
was a commitment to freeze council tax for the life of the Council. The MTFS
would be re-opened following the Local Government Finance Settlement, (which
was expected on 19 December) and the changes that had been made nationally in
respect of council tax benefits and business rates;
·
The
four year programme to identify efficiency savings of £74 million was on track.
There would be ongoing pressures on the budget, such as the increased demand
for Adult Social Care services arising from a growing elderly population and
the loss of funding as a result of the academies programme;
·
The
Council’s move to being a “commissioner” of services would become an
increasingly important way of identifying efficiency savings, though service
standards would need to be closely monitored to ensure that they continued to
be of a high quality;
·
The
ongoing transfer of the Public Health function from the Primary Care Trust to
the County Council had been a success and one that the Council was viewed as
leading on nationally. Resources had been allocated in the budget to deal with
any shortfall when the transfer was concluded in April 2013.
Key Policy
Challenges
·
The
Council’s “Supporting Leicestershire Families” programme was viewed as a key
policy challenge. The success of the Programme relied heavily on the support of
other authorities and agencies and therefore the cultivation of robust
relationships would be key to the successful delivery of the Programme;
·
It
would be an ongoing challenge to deliver the required savings in respect of
concessionary and home to school transport, the matter having been deferred by
the Cabinet in May 2012. The Cabinet would be taking a fresh look at the
proposals within the context of the MTFS in light of the Local Government
Finance Settlement;
Overview and
Scrutiny
·
The
Leader was willing to negotiate a revised approach. He was particularly keen to
place greater emphasis on the scrutiny of the Health Service functions, which
it was felt had placed some pressure on the workload of the Adults and
Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee. Much of this extra workload was
felt to be as a result of the Joint Health Scrutiny Committee not having met
for a long period of time whilst under the management of the City Council. The
Leader intended to raise this issue with the City Mayor;
·
Arising
from the late announcement of the Local Government Finance Settlement, there
would be a tight timescale for consideration of the MTFS by Overview and
Scrutiny, though every effort would be made to ensure that enough time was
given to scrutiny of the proposals.
RESOLVED:
That the Leader and
Deputy Leader of the Council be thanked for their attendance.