Agenda item

To approve:

·         the level of the council tax precept for 2013/14; and

·         the revised treasury management strategy, including the borrowing and operation limits (prudential indicators) for 2013-18, the policy for the provision of the repayment of debt (minimum revenue provision (MRP)), and the treasury management policy.

 

The report of the meeting of the Cabinet to be held on 5 February 2013

will be circulated separately after that meeting.

 

The Chairman said that the papers for this item were included in the agenda, together with the revised pages 21 and 22 (Appendix A) and the Addendum (Appendix B) emailed to Members and tabled today. A typo in Annex 1, Appendix B5 on the Moody’s FSR figure for Bank / Building Society was amended from ‘C’ to ‘C-‘.

 

On the motion of the Chairman, seconded by the Vice-Chairman, Standing Order 18 was suspended to allow the minority group leaders five minutes each for speeches on the Budget proposals.

 

The Leader presented the report of the Cabinet on the Revenue and Capital Budget 2013/14 to 2017/18, the Council Tax Requirement and the Treasury Management Strategy and made a statement in support of the proposed budget.  A copy of the Leader’s statement is attached as Appendix C.

 

The Chief Finance Officer presented her report to Council. A copy of her statement is attached as Appendix D.

                             

Each of the Minority Group Leaders (Mrs Watson and Mr Harrison) spoke on the budget proposals. Copies of Mrs Watson and Mr Harrison’s speeches are attached as Appendices E and F respectively.

 

Key points made in the debate were:

 

·         A request for the Leader to set out what measures the County Council was taking to reduce the cost of living for residents and whether it would off-set the council tax increase.

·         An offer to arrange a Member’s seminar on Finance to explain the differences between cash balances and reserves.

·         Confirmation that no surplus cash was floating around the organisation.

·         Other options for savings could include reducing paying for external legal advice and /or reducing the number of policy staff.

·         The electorate would have an opportunity to make their support, or not, for the budget known at the ballot box in May.

·         The importance of considering the overall budget when going forward and setting the budget - that two-thirds of the budget was demand led in Adults and Children’s Services.

·         Residents could register for the Switch and Save Scheme – these savings could be off-set against the council tax increase.

·         That the Chief Finance Officer had confirmed that the Council’s budget was robust and sustainable. However, Members were mindful of the risks and issues ahead that would need to be dealt with.

·         Surrey County Council had been nominated for Council of the Year.

·         A reference to the Budget Public Survey which set out the views of Surrey residents.

·         Disputing whether residents had been listened to – some residents earnings were just over the threshold for help with their bills.

·         Reference to the increasing number of older people who would require care and whether the £42m savings for next year’s Adult Social Care budget were achievable.

·         The Government had cut Surrey’s Grant by £20m so the Council had to set aside resources to deal with this.

·         The modest rise in council tax was necessary.

·         Members and officers would need to work hard to achieve more savings in future years.

·         Properties may become difficult to let if the superfast Broadband was not rolled out across the county.

·          Acknowledgement that the cost of living was going up.

·         The Liberal Democrat proposals were a ‘wish list’ for their election literature.

·         Reference to A46 in Annex 1, section A re. localisation of council tax support and thanks to the County Council for the assistance made available to District and Borough Councils.

·         Since 2009 no extra funding had been given to Children’s Services, despite a huge increase in demand for services and specific examples were highlighted.

·         A suggestion that the Council cancelled any future off-site awaydays.

·         Waste issues were not mentioned in the Leader’s Budget speech.

·         Emphasising that the County Council was a local government organisation and whilst acknowledging the improvements over the last four years, a recognition that there were more improvements to be made.

·         Surprise that the Leader of the Residents’ Association / Independent Group did not support the Broadband proposals.

·         That the contingency fund was essential.

·         Recognition of the Schools Basic Need programme and the provision of additional school places.

After the debate in which 24 Members spoke, the Leader confirmed that the Budget proposals would be taken as one recommendation.

 

Mrs Watson requested a recorded vote and 10 Members stood in support of this request.

 

The following Members voted for the Budget proposals:

 

Mrs Angell, Mr Barker, Mr Bennison, Ms Bowes, Mr Brett-Warburton, Mr Carasco,

Mr Chapman, Mrs Clack, Mr Ellwood, Mr Few, Mrs Fraser, Mr Frost, Mr Furey,

Mr Gimson, Mr Gosling, Dr Grant-Duff, Dr Hack, Mrs Hammond, Mr Harmer,

Ms Heath, Mrs Hicks, Mr Hodge, Mr Ivison, Mrs Kemeny, Mrs Lay, Ms Le Gal,

Mrs Marks, Mr Marlow, Mr Martin, Mrs Moseley, Mr Munro, Mr Norman, Mr Pitt,

Mr Renshaw, Mrs Ross-Tomlin, Mr Samuels, Mr Skellett, Mr Sydney, Mr Keith Taylor, Mr Townsend, Mrs Turner-Stewart, Mr Witham and Mr Wood.

 

The following Members voted against the Budget proposals:

 

Mr Beardsmore, Mr Cooksey, Mr Forster, Mr Goodwin, Mr Lake, Mr Lambell,

Mrs Nichols, Mr Orrick, Mrs Searle, Mrs Smith, Mr Colin Taylor, Mrs Watson and

Mrs White.

 

There were six abstentions:

 

Mr Harrison, Mr Hickman, Mr Kington, Mr Mallett, Mrs Mason and Mr Phelps-Penry.

 

 

Therefore it was:

 

RESOLVED:

 

1.     That the Chief Finance Officer’s statutory report on the robustness and sustainability of the estimates and the adequacy of the proposed financial reserves (Annex 2 to the submitted report) be noted.

2.     That dispensation had been sought for all county councillors to ensure their eligibility to vote on the recommendations in this report without any risk of non-compliance with the Localism Act 2011.

3.       That the council tax requirement for 2013/14 be set at £550.4m; (Annex 3, paragraph 3.5 in the submitted report).

4.       That the 2013/14 council tax increase be fixed at 1.99%.

5.       That the basic amount for 2013/14 council tax at Band D be set at £1,172.52 (Annex 3, paragraph 3.7 in the submitted report).

6.       That the council tax for each category of dwelling in its area will be as follows:

Valuation band	£
A	781.68
B	911.96
C	1,042.24
D	1,172.52
E	1,433.08
F	1,693.64
G	1,954.20
H	2,345.04

 

7.       That the payment for each billing authority including any balances on the collection fund will be as follows:

 

Billing authority	£
Elmbridge	72,006,449.04
Epsom & Ewell	36,475,032.68
Guildford	62,826,924.47
Mole Valley	45,734,318.52
Reigate & Banstead	67,241,707.44
Runnymede	36,534,059.00
Spelthorne	42,621,728.41
Surrey Heath	42,836,092.97
Tandridge	42,424,545.82
Waverley	60,868,055.95
Woking	45,859,725.46
TOTAL	555,428,639.76

 

8.       That the payment for each billing authority including any balances on the collection fund to be made in ten equal instalments on the dates, already agreed with billing authorities as follows:

 

29 April 2013	18 October 2013
24 May 2013	22 November 2013
28 June 2013	3 January 2014
2 August 2013	11 February 2014
6 September 2013	14 March 2014

 

9.     That the Council Tax rate set above be maintained and powers be delegated to the Leader and Chief Finance Officer to finalise detailed budget proposals following receipt of the Final Local Government Finance Settlement.

10.  That the County Council budget for 2013/14 be approved.

11.  That the capital programme proposals be approved, specifically to:

·      fund essential schemes over the five year period, schools and non-schools, to the value of £695m including ring-fenced grants;

·      seek to secure capital receipts over the five year period to 2017/18 of £50m; and

·      make adequate provision in the revenue budget to fund the capital programme.

12.  That Strategic Directors and Senior Officers  be required to maintain robust budget monitoring procedures that enable Cabinet to monitor the achievement of efficiencies and service reductions through the monthly budget monitoring Cabinet reports, the quarterly Cabinet Member accountability meetings and the monthly scrutiny at the Council’s Overview & Scrutiny Committee.

13.  That an approved business case for all revenue invest to save proposals and capital schemes be required, before committing expenditure.

14.  That the Cabinet will begin the process of reviewing the revenue budget and capital programme set out in the MTFP (2013-18) immediately after the first quarter of 2013/14.

15.  That the final detailed MTFP (2013-18) will be considered and approved by Cabinet on 26 March 2013, following scrutiny by Select Committees.

Treasury management and borrowing:

16.  That the Treasury Management Strategy for 2013/14 be approved and that their provisions have immediate effect. This strategy includes:

a.  the investment strategy for short term cash balances;

b.  the prudential indicators (Annex 1, section B, Appendix B1 to the submitted report);

c.   the treasury management policy (Annex 1, section B, Appendix B8 to the submitted report);

d.  the minimum revenue provision policy (Annex 1, section B, Appendix B7 to the submitted report).