Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors’ Allport, Bettley-Smith, Lawley, Parker and J Tagg.

There were no declarations of interest stated.

To consider the Minutes of a previous meeting.

The Minutes, on several occasions, made reference for information to be supplied.  It was asked if all of the information had been supplied.  Officers would check this and provide and outstanding information.

Resolved:     That, subject to the request regarding the supplying of

information, the Minutes of the meeting held on 8 December, 2022 be agreed as a correct record.

This item includes a supplementary report at page 85.

The Committee considered the Revenue and Capital Budget and Strategies - Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2023/24 to 2027/28; Flexible Use of Capital Receipts Strategy; draft Capital Strategy; draft Treasury Management Strategy; and draft Investment Strategy.

The results of the budget consultation would be reported to Cabinet on 7 February 2023.

A report was submitted by the Labour Group outlining five concerns and proposals.  These were outlined on pages 85 to 88 of the agenda pack. The concerns related to:

(1)         The level of borrowing proposed to meet capital expenditure.

(2)         Volatility in UK financial markets.

(3)         Value of assets proposed for disposal.

(4)         Costs associated with proposed new multi-storey car park in Newcastle town centre.

(5)         Removal of the financial allocation to support legal action regarding regulation of the abatement notice at Walleys Quarry.

The following queries and issues were raised:

·         What impact would the Labour groups’ proposal to use the 3x multiplier have on the Capital Programme?   The next year would probably be alright but no forecast could be given for the following year.  As it was for a ten year period it had to be looked at as a whole and any unspent money would have to be returned to the Government.   

·         The level of borrowing was predicated on the asset disposal of capital receipts and land sales but there was no indication of what those were.  Clarity was requested on what the sites were.  A confidential report was requested setting out the information.

·         Regarding the figure of £20.9m assumed from capital asset sales, it was requested that this figure be broken down and reported to Members.

·         How much had the Council raised from the sale of capital assets over the last five years?  This was approximately £8.5m.

·         Regarding curbs on funding and how a loan would be structured, how would that be achieved?  The report mentioned the Public Works Board (PWB).  This Council wanted to move away from the PWB and work with Local Authorities.  How could the Council be assured that the same rigorous rules were in place when borrowing from the County Council or from the PWB?  Borrowing now had to have more of a regenerative purpose and was enforced by the Public Works Loan Board.

·         An explanation was requested for the assumption for estimating future spending and income within the budget.

·         Details were requested on how the budget had taken the results of any public consultation into account.  The Consultation was now finished and the results showed that the priority areas were Street Scene, Town Centre and general cleanliness of the Borough. The results of the consultation could be discussed at the next meeting of this Committee or at the end of the Full Council meeting in February.  It was asked if the consultation included the building of a car park?  The consultation was regarding residents’ concerns and the car park was not a particular item on it.

·         What were the recommendations of the Finance Efficiency Board?

·         Regarding the £400,000 recouped from Walleys  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

The Committee considered the proposed list of fees and charges. The Committee was informed that the Medium Term Financial Strategy assumed an average increase of 4% across all fees and charges.

At the previous meeting concerns had been raised in regard to the cemeteries  and potentially introducing new charges.  This report included charges for the internment of minors?  The report mentioned a Children’s Fund which was available to help with those costs.  It was asked, how much the Council would benefit from introducing those costs and would the Children’s Fund be means tested?  It was not means tested.  The Fund was a national one provided by the Government and was set up so that it would be the funeral directors, private company or the Council carrying out the funeral who did the claim, not the family.  It was up to each individual Council whether they quoted that in a public document or kept private.  This Council had made the decision to make it public and the amount was claimed on behalf of the family and was a standard procedure carried out across the County.   There was no charge to parents who had lost a child. The Council had to have a figure in order to claim the money back from the Government.

Assurance was sought that, should the Children’s Fund disappear, that charge would be eliminated?  The Fund had been set up by the Government and would not disappear.

Regarding the woodland burials and Keele Cemetery, why was there an increase in charges for woodland burials and could it potentially deter uptake of them?  Also, the increase in charges  for the use of the room, had there been any modelling to see if this would decrease use of the room?  A review of the charges had been carried out and discrepancies had been found between woodland burials and grave burials which both took space, both had to be dug so had been brought into line with each other.

On the taxi-licensing fees, there was a reduction in the charges for DBS checks.  What would the cost to the Council be on that reduction in charges?  The Council’s taxi licensing was not allowed to make a profit and had to break even.  The actual fee was set by the DBS so there was the same budget for both income and expenditure and the charges would have a net nil impact on the Council.

Confirmation was sought on the hire of the Chapel and Community room facility being an increase of 40%.  The increase was more to cover the Council’s costs than to make money and was a 40% increase.

Resolved:     (i)         That the fees and charges proposed to apply from 1 April

2023, as set out in Appendix 1 be noted.

(ii)          Note that fees and charges in relation to Bereavement Services come into effect from the 16 February 2023.

Watch the debate here

The Committee considered the Work Programme.

Resolved:     That the Work Programme be received. 

Any member of the public wishing to submit a question must serve two clear days’ notice, in writing, of any such question to the Borough Council

There were no members of the public present.

To consider any business which is urgent within the meaning of Section 100B (4) of the Local Government Act 1972

There was no urgent business.

To resolve that the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following reports, because it is likely that there will be disclosure of exempt information as defined in the paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A (as amended) of the Local Government Act 1972.

Resolved:     That the public be excluded from the meeting during

consideration of the following matter because it is likely that there will be disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act, 1972.

Resolved:     That the report be noted.