Agenda item

Report CSD14003

 

The Committee considered the following reports on the part 1 agenda for the meeting of the Executive on 15^th January 2015.

 

(5) Draft 2014/14 Budget and Update on Council’s Financial Strategy 2015/16 to 2017/18

Report FSD14001

 

The report presented the initial draft 2014/15 budget and set out actions to reduce the Council’s medium term “budget gap.” The views of PDS Committees would be sought before the Executive at its meeting on 12^th February made final recommendations to Council on the 2014/15 Council Tax levels and Budget. In education, there had been a welcome increase in the Basic Needs Assessment, but full details were still awaited on elements of the schools budget settlement, and these would be reported to Education PDS Committee later in the month.

 

Asked about the future of local government, the Director of Finance stated that a recent report said that a tipping point would be reached for most authorities by 2015/16 or 2016/17 and the role of the state would be the fundamental question in the coming years. Ring-fencing of health and education budgets increased the pressure on local government. It was likely that district councils, without critical mass and a full range of services, would be forced to merge, although a Member questioned whether large organisations would necessarily be more efficient than small ones. Bromley was in a better position than many authorities, having taken a medium term approach, being lean and debt free and retaining reserves, but there were substantial challenges to be faced.  Further reductions in the government’s welfare budgets, such as reducing housing benefit support for young people under 25, were likely to have consequential impacts on other social service budgets. Homelessness was one of the biggest challenges facing the borough in the coming years. 

 

The recent changes announced to council tax freeze grant, whereby the 2014/15 grant would now be included in base funding in future years, represented a late concession from the Government, following substantial lobbying. Bromley’s 2014/15 grant would be £1.38m; compared with a Council Tax rise of 2%, accepting the grant would mean foregoing £1.08m of ongoing income.

 

The Director of Finance explained that the Collection Fund (paragraph 11.7.1 in the report) related to money collected by the Council on behalf of the GLA. A surplus built up which was released every few years

 

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported.

 

(6) Section 106 Agreements: Update

Report DRR14/001

 

Members received an update on Section 106 Agreements and on progress made to purchase residential properties using the £1m housing payment in lieu (PIL) monies agreed in July 2013. It was proposed that authority to draw down a further £120k of affordable housing PIL money to acquire residential properties be delegated to the Director of Regeneration and Transformation in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Resources. 

 

The amount of PIL monies was related to viability, and the Chief Planner confirmed that with market conditions improving developers would now be expected to provide larger contributions, whereas in recent years they had used market conditions as a reason to seek to pay reduced contributions. With planning permissions usually taking five years to expire legal agreements usually contained indexation clauses to give some protection to the Council’s interests.

 

The Committee discussed the use of education contributions. The Government usually provided funding for new schools, but if the Council provided a site then it lost any potential receipt and the Council would argue that this could be paid for from education contributions. All types of contributions were set out in Supplementary Planning Guidance. The Council collected Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on behalf of the GLA, and retained 5% administration allowance. 

 

Councillor Nicholas Bennett asked for clarification of the table at appendix 4. Further details of the S.106 agreements had been placed in the Members’ Room.

 

The Chairman called for PIL contributions to be maximised and the calculations to be reviewed. The Chief Planner assured Members that actual contributions were independently assessed at the expense of the applicant and Supplementary Planning Guidance was kept up to date.

 

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported.

 

(7) Procurement Strategy for Tenancy Support Services for Homeless People

Report CS3051

 

The report sought agreement for the proposed procurement strategy for tenancy support services for homeless people living in hostel accommodation. This service was currently being provided by Riverside ECHG under a contract expiring on 30^th June 2014. 

 

Questioned about the quality of service provided by Riverside ECHG, the Director of Education, Care and Health Services commented that performance had been variable, with staff turnover being a major issue, but outcomes had been exceptional. The aim was to support adults to live independently and maintain their own tenancies. The Director informed the Committee that the latest survey of people living on the streets in the borough had found nine individuals, and there was no evidence of any increase in numbers. 

 

It was noted that there was a minor error in the report at paragraph 3.4 – the gateway review had been considered by the Executive in October 2012. 

 

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported.

 

(8) Better Care Fund (BCF) – Formerly the Integration Transformation Fund

Report CS13054

 

The former Integration Transformation Fund had recently been rebranded by the Department of Health as the Better Care Fund. A two year local plan had to be approved locally by the Council and the Clinical Commissioning Group and then submitted to NHS England by 14^th February 2014. It was proposed that the Executive should approve the proposals and delegate confirmation of the detailed work to the Health and Wellbeing Board on 30^th January 2014.

 

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported.

 

(9) PRoMISE Programme: Draw-down of NHS Funds 

Report CS13052

 

The report provided an update on the Bromley Clinical Commissioning Group’s PRoMISE programme and sought the release of funds totalling £7.499m for the period 2013/14 to 2014/15.

 

The Committee discussed the rise in type 2 diabetes, including childhood diabetes, and noted that good work had been done on prevention and diet in the United States and in Scotland. Cllr Pauline Tunnicliffe informed Members that the Care Services PDS Committee would shortly be receiving a report on diabetes.

 

Members also noted that there was a need to encourage people not to attend A&E when other services or self-treatment were more appropriate. Part of this was closer working between care and health, with staff secondments and a single professional being responsible for each client.

 

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported.

 

(10) Learning Disability Section 75 Agreement

Report CS13053

 

It was proposed that the Council would enter into an agreement with Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust for the provision of adult learning disability assessment and care management services. Oxleas would be the lead provider for the Council’s learning disability functions through an agreement under section 75 of the National Health Service Act 2006, and a pooled budget would be established to deliver the service. 

 

 

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported.

 

(11) Developing Bromley’s Local Plan – Draft Policies and Designations for Consultation

 

In line with the Local Development Scheme approved by the Executive in October 2013, consultation on the Local Development Scheme was scheduled for early 2014. The report included, at Appendix 1, the Draft Policies and Designations document for the Executive to agree for public consultation, having considered the recommendation of the Development Control Committee on 7^th January 2014. It was noted that Oxleas now provided a range of community services and was a very effective provider. The proposals would involve a single management structure for staff and a single point of contact for clients.  

 

Asked whether it would be useful to include a section in the Plan on fracking, the Chief Planner stated that this was possible, but the issue was already covered in some detail in national policy.

 

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported.

 

(12) Business Improvement District Strategy for Town Centres 2014/15

 

Following the successful establishment of the Orpington 1^st Business Improvement District (BID) the Executive was being asked to consider the feasibility of extending the BID approach to other town centres in the borough, specifically Bromley and Beckenham. It was recommended that the formation of a Bromley BID be supported, but that the BID process should not be started immediately for Beckenham but should be reconsidered before the end of 2014.  An addendum to appendix 4 in the report had been circulated setting out the different stages of the project plan and the attendant costs.

 

Members queried whether the boundaries of the BID area as shown in the report were fixed, as there were a number of locations that should potentially be included. It was noted that the discussions on developing the proposals would include the detailed boundaries, and these would not need to be fixed until the project reached the ballot stage. The boundary would have to be considered very carefully as including areas where businesses might not be in favour could undermine a successful ballot. Councillor Ian Payne informed the Committee that experience in Bexleyheath was that businesses that had been excluded from the BID now wanted to be included.

 

Consultation and discussion were essential to the development of a successful BID, and although the Council had a facilitating role it was important that the process was business-led. A Bromley stakeholder group was being formed to create an over-arching group for the town centre. It was noted that businesses in the Glades/Intu were already paying a service charge, but there were ways to mitigate this – in Orpington, a discount had been negotiated for Walnuts Centre tenants.

 

The Committee inquired about the Orpington BID – officers were not aware of any complaints having been received from the businesses that had not supported the BID, and income was on target at about 90%.  

 

Officers confirmed that there was no restriction on establishing a BID covering more than one town centre, and there might be opportunities for sharing back-office costs, but this would also involve considerable challenges.

 

RESOLVED that the recommendations be supported.