Agenda item - Medium Term Financial Strategy, General Fund Budget 2019-20 (including Council Tax setting), Housing Revenue Account Budget 2019-20 (including housing rents), Capital and Investment Strategies and Treasury Management Strategy (Cabinet, 6 February 2019)

Cabinet

RECOMMENDED THAT COUNCIL

Revenue and Capital – GF

(a) Approve the revenue estimates for 2019-20 as shown in the GF BSR Section 5 at Appendix 1 to this report.

(b) Approve the precautionary items for the GF, GF BSR Appendix B, Appendix 1 to this report.

(c) Approve the GF revenue forecasts as set out in GF BSR Section 6, Appendix 1 to this report.

(d) Instruct the Executive Management Team to identify additional income / cumulative savings of £3m for the 5 years from 2019-2024.

(e) Authorise that the use of the earmarked reserve for Business Efficiency initiatives is delegated to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Lead Member for Finance, and that £1m is transferred into this reserve from the General Fund reserve. As at the end of 2017-18 financial year, the General Fund reserve stood at £7,751,000.

(f) Authorise £500,000 of Planning earmarked reserves, budgeted to support the shortfall in income in the year 2018-19, but not required due to sufficient over budget income levels being achieved, to be budgeted to use towards Business Transformation programmes in Planning in 2019-20.

(g) Approve the GF capital programme and associated funding up to the year ended 31 March 2024, as set out in GF BSR Section 7, at Appendix 1to this report.

(h) Set the Council Tax Requirement for 2019-20 at £9,092,962.

(i) Set the amount of Council Tax for each of the relevant categories of dwelling in accordance with Section 30(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 on the basis of the District Council Tax for general expenses on a Band D property of £145.31 plus the relevant amounts required by the precepts of the Parish Councils, Cambridgeshire County Council, the Cambridgeshire Police and Crime Commissioner and the Cambridgeshire Fire Authority, details of those precepts and their effect included with the formal resolution attached at Appendix 6.

Revenue – HRA

(j) Approve the HRA savings, increased income, unavoidable revenue pressures, bids and reduced income items, as summarised in Section 4, and detailed in Appendix G (1) of the HRA Budget Setting Report at Appendix 2 to this report.

(k) Approve the non-cash limit adjustments, as summarised in Section 4, and detailed in Appendix G (1) of the HRA Budget Setting Report at Appendix 2 to this report.

(l) Approve the resulting HRA revenue budget as shown in the HRA Summary Forecast 2018-19 to 2023-24 in Appendix I of the HRA Budget Setting Report at Appendix 2 to this report.

(m) Approve the retention of the balance of the 4-year efficiency savings target of £95,000 per annum from 2020-21 included as part of the 2018-19 HRA Medium Term Financial Strategy, and the corresponding Strategic Investment Fund for the same value.

Review of Rents and Charges

(n) Approve that council dwelling rents for all social rented properties be reduced by 1% for the final year, in line with legislative requirements introduced as part of the Welfare Reform and Work Act, with effect from 1^st April 2019.

(o) Approve that affordable rents are reviewed in line with rent legislation, to ensure that rents charged are no more than 80% of market rent, with this figure then reduced by 1% as with social housing. Local policy is to cap affordable rents at the lower level of Local Housing Allowance, which will result in rent variations in line with any changes notified to the authority in this level, effective from 1^st April 2019.

(p) Approve inflationary increases of 2.2% in garage rents for 2019-20, in line with the base rate of inflation for the year assumed in the HRA Budget Setting Report.

(q) Approve the proposed service charges for HRA services and facilities provided to both tenants and leaseholders, as shown in Appendix B of the HRA Budget Setting Report, at Appendix 2 to this report.

Housing Capital

(r) Approve the latest budget, spend profile and funding mix for each of the schemes in the new build programme, as detailed in Section 5 and Appendix E of the HRA Budget Setting Report at Appendix 2 to this report, recognising the most up to date information available as each scheme progresses through the design, planning, build contract and completion process.

(s) Approve earmarking of the required level of additional funding for new build investment between 2019-20 and 2023-24 to ensure that commitments can be met in respect of the investment of all right to buy receipts currently retained or anticipated to be received by the authority for this period. This expenditure will either take the form of HRA new build, with the 70% top up met by other HRA resources, acquisition of homes on the open market, or could alternatively be a grant made to a registered provider, where the registered provider will provide the 70% top up to build new homes.

(t) Approve the capital budget proposals, detailed in Appendix G (2) of the HRA Budget Setting Report at Appendix 2 to this report.

(u) Approve the capital amendments, detailed in Appendix H of the HRA Budget Setting Report, which include the capital proposals in Appendix G (2) of the HRA Budget Setting Report, at Appendix 2 to this report, along-side re-profiling of investment, increase and re-allocation of resource for new build schemes.

(v) Approve the revised Housing Capital Investment Plan as shown in Appendix J of the HRA Budget Setting Report at Appendix 2 to this report.

Capital and Treasury Management

(w) Approve the Capital and Investment Strategies 2019-20 to 2023-24, Appendix 3 and 3A

(x) Approve the borrowing and lending strategies for the year to March 2020, as included in the Treasury Management Strategy Statement in Appendix 4.

(y) Approve the prudential indicators required by the Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities for the year to 31 March 2020, included in Appendix 4.

(z) Approve any unspent New Homes Bonus money allocated to the Greater Cambridge Partnership to be rolled into 2019-20.

(Notes:

1. Appendix 1A contains restricted information as defined in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended). Paragraph 3 relates to “Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).” If Members wish to discuss the restricted information in the appendix it will be necessary to consider excluding the press and public from the meeting.

2. Members are asked to note that Appendix 6 to the Budget Setting Report – Formal Council Tax setting resolution for 2019-20 is TO FOLLOW)

(1) Council AGREED to:

(a) Approve the revenue estimates for 2019-20 as shown in the General Fund (GF) Budget Setting Report (BSR)Section 5 at Appendix 1 to the report.

(b) Approve the precautionary items for the GF, GF BSR Appendix B, Appendix 1 to the report.

(c) Approve the GF revenue forecasts as set out in GF BSR Section 6, Appendix 1 to the report.

(d) Instruct the Executive Management Team to identify additional income / cumulative savings of £3m for the 5 years from 2019-2024.

(e) Authorise that the use of the earmarked reserve for Business Efficiency initiatives is delegated to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Lead Member for Finance, and that £1m is transferred into this reserve from the General Fund reserve. As at the end of 2017-18 financial year, the General Fund reserve stood at £7,751,000.

(f) Authorise £500,000 of Planning earmarked reserves, budgeted to support the shortfall in income in the year 2018-19, but not required due to sufficient over budget income levels being achieved, to be budgeted to use towards Business Transformation programmes in Planning in 2019-20.

(g) Approve the GF capital programme and associated funding up to the year ended 31 March 2024, as set out in GF BSR Section 7, at Appendix 1 to the report.

(h) Set the Council Tax Requirement for 2019-20 at £9,092,962.

(i) Set the amount of Council Tax for each of the relevant categories of dwelling in accordance with Section 30(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 on the basis of the District Council Tax for general expenses on a Band D property of £145.31 plus the relevant amounts required by the precepts of the Parish Councils, Cambridgeshire County Council, the Cambridgeshire Police and Crime Commissioner and the Cambridgeshire Fire Authority, details of those precepts and their effect are as set out in the statutory resolution at (2) below..

(j) Approve the HRA savings, increased income, unavoidable revenue pressures, bids and reduced income items, as summarised in Section 4, and detailed in Appendix G (1) of the HRA Budget Setting Report at Appendix 2 to the report.

(k) Approve the non-cash limit adjustments, as summarised in Section 4, and detailed in Appendix G (1) of the HRA Budget Setting Report at Appendix 2 to the report.

(l) Approve the resulting HRA revenue budget as shown in the HRA Summary Forecast 2018-19 to 2023-24 in Appendix I of the HRA Budget Setting Report at Appendix 2 to the report.

(m) Approve the retention of the balance of the 4-year efficiency savings target of £95,000 per annum from 2020-21 included as part of the 2018-19 HRA Medium Term Financial Strategy, and the corresponding Strategic Investment Fund for the same value.

(n) Approve that council dwelling rents for all social rented properties be reduced by 1% for the final year, in line with legislative requirements introduced as part of the Welfare Reform and Work Act, with effect from 1^st April 2019.

(o) Approve that affordable rents are reviewed in line with rent legislation, to ensure that rents charged are no more than 80% of market rent, with this figure then reduced by 1% as with social housing. Local policy is to cap affordable rents at the lower level of Local Housing Allowance, which will result in rent variations in line with any changes notified to the authority in this level, effective from 1^st April 2019.

(p) Approve inflationary increases of 2.2% in garage rents for 2019-20, in line with the base rate of inflation for the year assumed in the HRA Budget Setting Report.

(q) Approve the proposed service charges for HRA services and facilities provided to both tenants and leaseholders, as shown in Appendix B of the HRA Budget Setting Report, at Appendix 2 to the report.

(r) Approve the latest budget, spend profile and funding mix for each of the schemes in the new build programme, as detailed in Section 5 and Appendix E of the HRA Budget Setting Report at Appendix 2to the report, recognising the most up to date information available as each scheme progresses through the design, planning, build contract and completion process.

(s) Approve earmarking of the required level of additional funding for new build investment between 2019-20 and 2023-24 to ensure that commitments can be met in respect of the investment of all right to buy receipts currently retained or anticipated to be received by the authority for this period. This expenditure will either take the form of HRA new build, with the 70% top up met by other HRA resources, acquisition of homes on the open market, or could alternatively be a grant made to a registered provider, where the registered provider will provide the 70% top up to build new homes.

(t) Approve the capital budget proposals, detailed in Appendix G (2) of the HRA Budget Setting Report at Appendix 2 to the report.

(u) Approve the capital amendments, detailed in Appendix H of the HRA Budget Setting Report, which include the capital proposals in Appendix G (2) of the HRA Budget Setting Report, at Appendix 2to the report, along-side re-profiling of investment, increase and re-allocation of resource for new build schemes.

(v) Approval of the revised Housing Capital Investment Plan as shown in Appendix J of the HRA Budget Setting Report at Appendix 2 to the report.

(w) Approve the Capital and Investment Strategies 2019-20 to 2023-24, Appendix 3 and 3A

(x) Approve the borrowing and lending strategies for the year to March 2020, as included in the Treasury Management Strategy Statement in Appendix 4.

(y) Approve the prudential indicators required by the Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities for the year to 31 March 2020, included in Appendix 4.

(z) Approve any unspent New Homes Bonus money allocated to the Greater Cambridge Partnership to be rolled into 2019-20.

(2) Council AGREED the following statutory resolution in respect of the Council Tax for 2019-20:-

That the following amounts be now calculated by the Council for the year 2019-20 in accordance with Sections 31 to 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992:

(a)	£96,766,406	being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A (2) (a) to (f) of the Act (gross expenditure including parish precepts, the Housing Revenue Account and additions to reserves)
(b)	£82,055,655	being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A (3) (a) to (d) of the Act (gross income including the Housing Revenue Account and use of reserves)
(c)	£14,710,751	being the amount by which the aggregate at (a) above exceeds the aggregate at (b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31A (4) of the Act, as its council tax requirement for the year (net expenditure to be met from council tax) being the district amount of £9,092,962 and the parish precepts of £5,617,789
(d)	£235.09	being the amount calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31B of the Act, as the basic amount of its council tax for the year (average council tax for a band D property for the District including parishes)
(e)	£5,617,789	being the aggregate amount of all special items referred to in Section 34(1) of the Act (parish precepts)
(f)	£145.31	being the amount calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(2) of the Act, as the basic amount of its council tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which no special item relates (average council tax for a Band D property for the District excluding parishes), the amounts being for each of the categories of dwellings shown below in Table 1
(g)	In accordance with Section 34(3) of the Act, the basic amounts of Council Tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which a special item relates are shown by addition of the amounts for Band D for the District Council in Table 1 and Appendix A of the supplement submitted to Council.
(h)	In accordance with Section 36(1) of the Act, the amounts to be taken into account for the year in respect of categories of dwellings listed in different valuation bands are shown by adding the amounts for each band in Table 1 and AppendixA of the supplement submitted to Council.

That it be noted that for the year 2019-20 Cambridgeshire County Council, Cambridgeshire Police and Crime Commissioner, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Fire Authority and the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority have stated the following amounts in precepts issued to the Council, in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, for each of the categories of dwellings as shown in Table 1:

Table 1	Band A £	Band B £	Band C £	Band D £	Band E £	Band F £	Band G £	Band H £
County Council	874.74	1,020.53	1,166.32	1,312.11	1,603.69	1,895.27	2,186.85	2,624.22
Police & Crime Commissioner	148.44	173.18	197.92	222.66	272.14	321.62	371.10	445.32
District Council	96.87	113.02	129.16	145.31	177.60	209.89	242.18	290.62
Fire Authority	47.16	55.02	62.88	70.74	86.46	102.18	117.90	141.48
Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00

(i) That the Council, in accordance with Section 30(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, hereby sets the amounts set out in Appendix B of the supplement submitted to Council as the amounts of Council Tax for the year 2019-20 for each of the categories of dwellings shown in Appendix B of that supplement.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION IN RESPECT OF SETTING THE COUNCIL TAX

Including the precepts from the County Council, the Police and Crime Commissioner, Fire Authority and all of the parishes, the formal Council Resolution would produce a Council Tax for an Band D property of:

		£	Change from previous year
District Council	General Expenses	145.31	+3.56%
	Special Expenses for Parish Precepts (average)	89.78	+2.15%
County Council		1,312.11	+4.98%
Police & Crime Commissioner		222.66	+12.05%
Fire Authority		70.74	+2.88%
Combined Authority		0.00	0.00%
Total		1,840.60	+5.45%

On these figures the council tax would range from £1,167.21 for Band A to £3,774.72 for Band H before any discounts or benefits.

Appendix C of the supplement submitted to Council shows the General Fund summary (£‘000’s) including Parish precepts and the final Formula Grant figure (£Nil)

Councillor John Williams, Lead Cabinet Member for Finance, presented the recommendations of the Cabinet which invited the Council to approve the financial strategies and budgets as detailed in the submitted report and appendices.

In introducing the report, Councillor John Williams highlighted the following points:

· The Business Plan changed the direction of the Council and so the General Fund Budget and Housing Revenue Account and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) had also changed course and would include opportunities for income generation, partnerships and delivering a bigger programme.

· The proposals supported delivery of a more responsive and productive organisation fit to tackle the challenges over the coming five years.

· There was now no budget shortfall expected at the end of the financial year and more funds were available to increase the General Fund reserve in readiness for the Government’s Fair Funding Review and Brexit.

· The need to borrow to lend to Ermine Street Housing and the Ice Rink had been avoided.

· There had been some good fortune, such as the abandonment of the negative Revenue Support Grant and receipt of extra money to support expenditure on elections.

· The Executive Management Team had done a sterling job in keeping costs down whilst maintaining frontline services. This had enabled the Council to go beyond the one per cent pay award previously budgeted to help make working for South Cambridgeshire District Council more attractive.

· As the Council transformed over the coming five years, it was expected that more income would come from commercialisation to offset the loss of Government funding and the expected diversion of some Business Rates away from district councils. This would enable a more diverse investment portfolio that was aligned to the Business Plan to support spending on services to grow to over £20m by 2024.

· Notwithstanding the positive position, there could be no let up on identification of savings and in order to build up reserves, a £3m savings target had been set over the life of the Medium Term Financial Strategy.

· In return for the 10p a week increase in South Cambridgeshire’s Council Tax for households in an average property, it was planned to:-

o Have more resources to support Universal Credit claims;

o Increase resources to tackle fly tipping;

o Spend more on building homes that were affordable;

o Spend more on green initiatives to achieve the zero-carbon goal;

o Support wellbeing and healthy living;

o Provide capital funds to diversify income; and

o Bring staff pay up to competitive levels.

· The adoption of an investment strategy would ensure that the Council’s investments were aligned with the Business Plan, delivered value for money and put in place robust governance arrangements.

The Lead Cabinet Member for Finance thanked the Finance team, led by Bob Palmer, Interim Executive Director, for their hard work in preparing the Budget and HRA.

The Lead Cabinet Member for Finance accordingly proposed the recommendations, together with the statutory Council Tax Resolution that had been circulated in a supplement.

Councillor Tony Mason seconded the proposal.

During discussion:

· Councillor Tom Bygott commented that a healthy balance of £6.751m had been inherited at the beginning of the financial year. He sought further information about how the £3m required savings would be achieved; what the purpose of the Business Efficiency Reserve was and how the £1m for that reserve would be funded.

· Councillor Ruth Betson noted that it was helpful to start the budget process with a sound baseline and audited accounts but in that context was concerned that the previous year’s accounts had not yet been signed off. She questioned how the Council could be assured that the budget was sound in the absence of the approved accounts.

· Councillor Nigel Cathcart spoke about the need for a long term strategy for Council house rents.

· Councillor Nick Wright indicated that he found it difficult to have confidence in the budget submitted. He particularly highlighted concerns around spending on agency fees for planning staff; performance of the planning service; the proposal to implement the new Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and the use of Council land for self building plots, rather than building affordable housing. Councillor Wright also sought further information about the Council’s transformation plans.

· Councillor Graham Cone was cautious about whether the aspiration to generate 25% of Council spending from investments could be achieved, citing what he regarded as the Administration’s previous negative attitude to investment in Ermine Street Housing.

· Councillor Mark Howell asked whether a guarantee could be given that Right to Buy receipts would be spent within the specified timescale and would not have to be returned to the Government; what was being done to address the high levels of rent arrears amongst former tenants and why the mobile warden budget appeared to have decreased by half.

· Councillor Bunty Waters noted that initial contributions to the A14 upgrade costs had been due to be funded from any surpluses from the New Homes Bonus, however the report now indicated that no surpluses were forecast and another source of funding was needed to provide the remaining £1.326K for the Council’s contribution. She asked how that shortfall would be met to ensure the A14 contribution of £5m from the Council.

· Councillor Peter Topping was concerned at the apparent lack of definition around the Business Efficiency Reserve. He referred to the original earmarking of £50k in respect of the costs of management consultants undertaking the organisational review and noted that he had not had the opportunity to meet with those consultants despite earlier indications that opposition Members would have the chance to do so. He also expressed reservations at the earmarking of funding for the engagement of consultants in the planning service which he considered to be a risk. Councillor Topping did not believe that the Investment Strategy had sufficient substance and indicated that he was unable to support it.

In response to points raised, the Lead Cabinet Member for Finance commented that:

· The Council did not previously have an Investment Strategy and that now all investments could be reviewed objectively against the criteria in that strategy;

· Ermine Street Housing was the Council’s only trading company, so rather than having all the Council’s “eggs in one basket”, the opportunity was now being taken to diversify the Council’s investment portfolio;

· The Council was seeking to keep its options open on implementing CIL hence inclusion of the reference to it in the Capital Strategy;

· Council land was disposed of at the market rate so that the receipts could be used for Council housing;

· The Council was in the final year of imposed rent reductions of 1%. The Housing Strategy was out for public consultation and would indicate the proposed direction of travel for the service. It was hoped that there would be more headroom to review the strategy for rents going forward;

· The accounts which had yet to be signed off related to the previous financial year and reflected, in part, problems experienced with the Financial Management System;

· A programme of transformation and service reviews would be developed to ensure the Council was fit for the 21^st century and an earmarked reserve was needed to take forward this work. However it was anticipated that some of the work proposed would be cost neutral; and

· No savings were required in the next year but a £3m savings target was being proposed over the life of the MTFS to bolster reserves in readiness for the Government’s Fair Funding Review.

As an amendment to the motion, Councillor Heather Williams moved:-

“That recommendation (w) be amended by the addition of the following words shown in italics:

(w) Approve the Capital and Investment Strategies 2019-20 to 2023-24 Appendix 3 and 3 A, subject to amendment of Appendix 3A (Investment Strategy) on page 342 – paragraph 4, second paragraph by the deletion of “for approval” at the end of the paragraph and the substitution by ”for review. Any investment opportunities that PIGB wishes to pursue would be presented to a Scrutiny Sub-Committee (who will have fulfilled the same training requirements as those of PIGB members). The recommendations of the Scrutiny Sub Committee will be made to the Executive Director in conjunction with the Lead Member for Finance.”

In moving the amendment, Councillor Heather Williams indicated that she was uncomfortable with the governance arrangements for the Property Investment Governance Board (PIGB) proposed in the Investment Strategy which effectively appeared to place responsibility for approving significant investments in the hands of four people. She therefore supported the establishment of a Scrutiny Sub Committee of Members whose role would be to review proposed investments. Whilst appreciating the commercially sensitive nature of the information and the need for swift decision making, Councillor Heather Williams believed that involving a Scrutiny Sub Committee would increase the openness and transparency of the decision making process.

Councillor Grenville Chamberlain seconded the amendment.

During discussion on the amendment:

· Councillor Dr. Aidan Van de Weyer, the Deputy Leader of the Council, referred to the comments of Councillor Heather Williams on decisions about investments being in the hands of a small number of people and drew a parallel with the governance of Ermine Street Housing, but noted that no investment strategy was in place to guide decision making there nor any opportunity for Scrutiny and Overview Committee to review decisions. Turning to the amendment, he indicated his concern that introducing a sub committee to pre-scrutinise decisions would both slow down the decision making process and undermine the role of the PIGB and noted that in a commercial environment it was necessary to move swiftly in order to secure investments.

· In response to a question from Councillor Steve Hunt, the Executive Director outlined the nature of the training being provided to PIGB members.

· Councillor John Williams, the Lead Cabinet Member for Finance, did not support the amendment. He pointed out that criteria against which investments could be measured were set out in the Investment Strategy and again emphasised the importance of swift decision making. He did not believe it was practical to have a sub committee. Councillor John Williams was also disappointed that the opportunity had not been taken to raise the amendment at the Scrutiny and Overview Committee or Cabinet when the budget report had been discussed. He suggested that Scrutiny and Overview Committee could perhaps review how the new process was working in due course.

· Councillor Pippa Heylings cited the renewable energy project as an example of the value of having in place an Investment Strategy with criteria against which the project could be measured. At the time at which the Council had needed to evaluate the project, no criteria had been in place to guide a quick decision. The proposed strategy would be available to guide future decision making and ensure that investments aligned with Council priorities.

· Councillor Peter Topping supported the amendment which he regarded as a modest proposal that would improve accountability and transparency of the governance associated with decision making.

· Councillor Nick Wright spoke in favour of the amendment and felt that pre-scrutinising decisions would reduce risks. Referring to earlier comments comparing the position with Ermine Street Housing, he pointed out that Ermine Street Housing was a private company and thus the situation was not directly comparable.

· Councillor Bill Handley was against the amendment and emphasised that investment decisions had to be made quickly in order to be successful. Having to take decisions via a sub committee would slow down the decision making process and would be impractical.

· Councillor Grenville Chamberlain, in seconding the motion, spoke in support, arguing that the proposal would bring greater transparency to the decision making process. He noted that the investments could involve spending significant amounts of tax payers’ money and that such decisions therefore merited pre-scrutiny.

· Councillor Heather Williams, in summing up, referred to earlier comments about not having raised the proposal at Scrutiny and Overview Committee or Cabinet and emphasised that her motive in bringing the amendment was to promote openness and transparency in the decision making process. She reiterated that Ermine Street Housing was a separate company and therefore did not bear a direct comparison but observed that the loan to Ermine Street had been discussed by Scrutiny and Overview Committee and full Council.

Upon being put to the vote, votes were cast on the amendment as follows:-

In favour (13):

Councillors Ruth Betson, Dr Shrobona Bhattacharya, Tom Bygott, Grenville Chamberlain, Gavin Clayton, Graham Cone, Sue Ellington, Mark Howell, Deborah Roberts, Peter Topping, Bunty Waters, Heather Williams and Nick Wright.

Against (26):

Councillors Philip Allen, Henry Batchelor, John Batchelor, Anna Bradnam, Dr. Martin Cahn, Sarah Cheung Johnson, Dr. Claire Daunton, Clare Delderfield, Neil Gough, Jose Hales, Bill Handley, Philippa Hart, Geoff Harvey, Dr. Tumi Hawkins, Pippa Heylings, Steve Hunt, Alex Malyon, Tony Mason, Peter McDonald, Dawn Percival, Bridget Smith, Hazel Smith, Dr. Ian Sollom, Dr. Aidan Van de Weyer, John Williams and Eileen Wilson.

Abstain (2):

Councillors Dr. Douglas de Lacey and Brian Milnes.

The Chairman accordingly declared that the amendment was lost.

During further discussion on the original motion:-

· Councillor Heather Williams referred to the savings requirement of £3m over the next 5 years and to the indication given in the budget report that considerable levels of risk and uncertainty remained. She questioned whether it would be possible to deliver the further £3m of savings required, citing the reference on page 175 of the report to the difficulty of identifying and delivering further savings and efficiencies. If those savings were not forthcoming, Councillor Heather Williams argued that the Council’s investments would need to generate a high return to produce the income required and the only way to achieve that would be to increase the risk around the investments. She noted that both the Government and CIPFA had raised concerns over local government borrowing for investments in commercial schemes and was concerned at the reliance on borrowing. Councillor Heather Williams further observed that if the savings or additional income required were not achieved, there was a potential for the Council’s reserves to fall well below the minimum recommended level of £2.5m which she regarded as irresponsible. She hoped that the Audit and Corporate Governance Committee, which had not met since September, would be given the opportunity to monitor the Council’s financial position. In her view, a high risk appetite was needed to approve the submitted budget.

· Councillor Deborah Roberts echoed earlier expressed concerns about using Council land for the purpose of self build schemes and argued that where the Council had spare land, it should be used for the provision of Council housing. She also referred to concerns regarding the planning service and felt that the budget did not focus sufficiently on that service, suggesting that there was a need to review the shared planning service.

· Councillor Sue Ellington had concerns around the additional number of support staff proposed in the budget, referring, in particular, to the proposed role of Cabinet Support Officer. She remarked that the Cabinet had previously managed with the support of existing administrative and professional staff and felt that the expenditure was unnecessary.

· Councillor Pippa Heylings challenged any suggestion that it would not be possible to generate a return of around 2 – 2.5% return on investments, citing the return that would be generated by the green investment project. Once Government funding for local government ceased it would be essential to maintain such income streams and it was disappointing that the Council had not taken advantage of this investment opportunity much earlier.

· Councillor Gavin Clayton commented that in view of earlier expressed concerns around risks associated with investments and the speed of decision making required, there was a need to include an addendum on page 349 to list all unethical investments.

Councillor Peter Topping moved an amendment as follows:

“That recommendation (a) be amended by the addition of the following words shown in italics

(a) Approve the revenue estimates for 2019-20 as shown in the GF BSR Section 5 at Appendix 1 to this report, subject to inclusion of the following additional items and the making of the necessary consequential changes to the Medium Term Financial Strategy and the Capital Programme:

(i) Flytipping

£120k in revenue (vehicle plus two staff) and £100k capital for a new vehicle together with £30k with on costs for an additional investigation officer.

To enable the Council to respond to and clear away fly tipping within two working days and increase its ability to investigate and crack down on fly tipping offenders.

(ii) Drone costs

£50k

To enable the Council to use drone technology accurately to identify reports and verify with complainants. The Council would commit to a new protocol with Cambridgeshire Constabulary to share resources and information to secure prosecutions.

(iii)Street cleaning

£90k revenue (vehicle plus driver) and £120k capital for a new vehicle.

To enable the Council to carry out street sweeping in the major villages every quarter and in all other villages three times a year.

(iv)Community environment initiatives officer

Establishment of a new post of community environment initiatives officer to be established in place of the proposed additional policy officer to support the Climate Change and Environment Advisory Committee.”

In moving the amendment, Councillor Topping commented that the proposal had been discussed at the meeting of Scrutiny and Overview Committee held on 20 February 2019. He noted that the Committee had expressed some reservations regarding the part of the amendment relating to drones and indicated his willingness to withdraw that aspect, if the remainder would find favour with the Council. Councillor Topping expanded on the rationale behind his motion, referring in particular, to the increase in fly tipping in the District. He commented that he had supported the motion at the previous Council meeting to transition to zero carbon by 2050 and hoped that the Council would be able to agree the amendment now presented.

Councillor Nick Wright seconded the amendment.

Speaking on the amendment, Councillor Neil Gough, Lead Cabinet Member for Environmental Services and Licensing, acknowledged that fly tipping was a blight on the District but drew attention to a number of initiatives already contained in the new Business Plan to tackle fly tipping. He reported that officers were also reviewing processes and procedures with a view to “working smarter” and changing the approach for dealing with fly tipping. He did not feel that simply providing more equipment was the solution for tackling fly tipping and therefore did not support the amendment.

Councillor Nick Wright, as seconder of the amendment, did not feel that improved processes would result in a faster response to fly tipping. He pointed out that the amendment proposed additional staffing and felt that approving it would enable achievement of a quick win and an improvement in the quality of life of residents in the District.

In summing up, Councillor Peter Topping encouraged Members to vote in support of his amendment which was designed to achieve an improvement in the cleanliness of the villages in South Cambridgeshire.

Upon the amendment being put to the vote, votes were cast as follows:

In favour (12):

Councillors Ruth Betson, Dr. Shrobona Bhattacharya, Tom Bygott, Grenville Chamberlain, Graham Cone, Sue Ellington, Peter Fane, Mark Howell, Peter Topping, Bunty Waters, Heather Williams and Nick Wright.

Against (28):

Councillors Philip Allen, Henry Batchelor, John Batchelor, Anna Bradnam, Dr. Martin Cahn, Sarah Cheung Johnson, Gavin Clayton, Dr. Claire Daunton, Dr. Douglas de Lacey, Clare Delderfield, Neil Gough, Jose Hales, Bill Handley, Philippa Hart, Geoff Harvey, Dr.Tumi Hawkins, Pippa Heylings, Steve Hunt, Tony Mason, Peter McDonald, Brian Milnes, Dawn Percival, Bridget Smith, Hazel Smith, Dr. Ian Sollom, Dr. Aidan Van de Weyer, John Williams and Eileen Wilson.

Abstain (0):

The Chairman declared that the amendment was lost.

Councillor John Williams, the mover of the original motion, then summed up. He believed that the budget was robust, would enable delivery of the objectives in the Business Plan and would meet the needs of South Cambridgeshire in the 21^st Century. He therefore commended the budget to the Council.

Councillor Mark Howell, noted that his questions asked earlier in the meeting had not received a response and requested that he be provided with a written response.

As required by the Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2014 and Council Standing Order 16.6, a recorded vote was taken by means of the Council’s electronic voting system. Votes were cast as follows:

In favour (28):

Councillors Philip Allen, Henry Batchelor, John Batchelor, Anna Bradnam, Dr. Martin Cahn, Sarah Cheung Johnson, Dr Claire Daunton, Dr. Douglas de Lacey, Clare Delderfield, Peter Fane, Neil Gough, Jose Hales, Bill Handley, Philippa Hart, Geoff Harvey, Dr. Tumi Hawkins, Pippa Heylings, Steve Hunt, Tony Mason, Peter McDonald, Brian Milnes, Dawn Percival, Bridget Smith, Hazel Smith, Dr. Ian Sollom, Dr. Aidan Van de Weyer, John Williams and Eileen Wilson

Against (11)

Ruth Betson, Dr. Shrobona Bhattacharya, Tom Bygott, Grenville Chamberlain, Graham Cone, Sue Ellington, Mark Howell, Peter Topping, Bunty Waters, Heather Williams and Nick Wright.

Abstain (0)

The Council

(1) RESOLVED to: