Agenda item

Capital Strategy (2019/20) and Four- Year Capital Programme (2019/20 -2022/23)

To receive the report of the Director of Finance asking Council to agree the Capital Strategy 2019/20 and set the four-year Capital Programme (2019/20 – 2022/23).                                             (Report No:  163A)

(Key Decision Reference:  KD: 4828)


Members are asked to note that this report was considered by Cabinet on 13 February 2019 and recommended to Council. 


Councillor Maguire moved and Councillor Stewart seconded the report of the Director of Finance on the Capital Strategy 2019/20 and the four-year capital programme (2019/20 – 2022/23) (Report No: 163A). 




1.            The report had been considered and recommended on to Council for approval by Cabinet on 13 February 2019. 


2.            The comments made by Councillor Maguire in moving the report:


·         The report set out the four-year capital programme and next year’s capital strategy.

·         This was a new requirement as part of the update of the prudential code.  Its purpose was to give an overview of the how the Council’s capital expenditure contributed to the delivery of its objectives and to ensure effective investment of the Council’s capital resources.

·         The Council was in the process of refreshing its Asset Management Strategy to ensure that capital assets continue to be of long-term use.  A major review is taking place.

·         In the four years of the strategy the Council is planning capital expenditure of £343,498m financed from council borrowing and grants. 

·         Income was being generated through the Council companies, Enfield Innovations, Energetik and Housing Gateway. 

·         Ambitious building programmes including at Meridian Water, (the station and the 725 homes planned), estate regeneration plans, school improvements, increasing places in the borough for SEN pupils, Reardon Court, independent living grants.

·         ICT improvements were also planned to enable smarter working. 


3.            Response from Councillor Laban


·         Support for some of the proposals in the strategy including support for Forty Hall and libraries but concern about other parts including Energetik.  She felt that not all households offered the opportunity wanted to sign up to receive heating from the company. 

·         Concern about the future of the Meridian Water project, if houses were not built soon.

·         Concern that Housing Gateway had only bought 4 houses last year and that more was not being done to house people outside the borough. 


4.            Comments from the Majority Group:


a.    In 2019/20 it was proposed to spend £81m to build the local economy including improving town centres, highways and street scene. 

b.    The Council was working closely with local communities to help make Enfield a successful place to live, to provide good homes in well-connected neighbourhoods and in carrying out place based change.

c.    The Council were investing in people in Enfield including £1.5m for mental health and wellbeing including new tennis courts.  Despite the challenges the Labour administration was investing the borough. 

d.    The Council were determined to improve housing and provide good children’s services.  Spending was ambitious, but it was spending with a purpose to regenerate estates such as Ladderswood, to provide a new autism unit at Garfield School and a new extra care facility at Reardon Court. 

e.    That the private sector were not interested in developing projects such as Reardon Court. 


5.            Comments from the Opposition


a.    Whilst acknowledging the need for investment in roads, schools and in IT to improve customer service, there was also concern about the money spent on consultants and on buying land at Meridian Water.

b.    Concern that the capital interest costs might mount up and the Council may have to pull out of the Meridian Water project.

c.    Concern about the money invested in the Housing Gateway and Energetik companies.

d.    Concern that the Council was too ambitious and that economic circumstances might change. 

e.    The view that the administration was misguided to bring the Reardon Court procurement in house, because of a history of mismanagement and ill-conceived plans. Concern about unsecured loans, which would take at least 20 years to pay back when the new facility could only last about 25 years.

f.     The view that the Reardon Court property should have been sold to a specialist extra care provider.

g.    Concern about the amount of section 106 money that was not being used. 

h.    Pleased that things were moving forward on Broomfield House.


6.            Councillor Ergin Erbil moved and Councillor Caliskan seconded a motion that the question now be put.  (Part 4 Para 13 (j) of the Constitution) This was agreed without a vote. 


The recommendations in the report were then put to the vote with the following result:


For: 40

Against:  14

Abstentions: 0




1.         To approve the 2019/20 Capital Strategy

2.         To approve the Capital Programme for 2019/20 to 2022/23 as set out in Appendix 2-Table A, including new projects arising from revenue savings. 

3.         To note the projects in the approval cycle as detailed in Appendix-2 Table B, which will be added to the 2019/20 Capital Programme pending approval

4.         To note the projects in the pipeline as detailed in Appendix-2, Table C.

Supporting documents: