Agenda item
2021/22 Budget and 2021/22 to 2025/26 Medium Term Financial Plan
To receive the report of the Executive Director of Resources, presenting for approval the Budget for 2021/22 and Medium-Term Financial Plan 2021/22 to 2025/26.
Members are asked to note that Cabinet considered the report at their meeting on 3 February 2021 and recommended it to Council.
Minutes:
NOTED
1. The report and recommendations had been considered at Cabinet on 3 February 2021and recommended on for Council.
2. The following key points highlighted by Councillor Maguire, Cabinet Member for Finance and Procurement, when moving the report.
a. In setting the budget the following principles had been followed: balancing the books; protecting the most vulnerable; making achievable savings; and setting realistic income targets.
b. Thanks to the Executive Director Resources and all the officers who had worked so hard to put the budget reports together.
c. This was a time of great uncertainty following on from over ten years of austerity and the last year of the pandemic. The pandemic had had a huge financial and personal impact on so many people. Unemployment in Enfield had increased by 163% and 21,000 people were furloughed. Many furloughed workers and local businesses faced great uncertainty.
d. The Government had failed to provide long promised fairer funding, the review of adult social care, the business rate reset or to give Council’s financial certainty over 3 years. This year’s budget would still only cover one year.
e. There were so many areas were figures were uncertain including in adult social care, children’s services, temporary accommodation and the council tax collection rates
f. The Council was looking to the Government to see if any extra help would be provided in the budget on the following day.
g. Table 2 in the report set out a summary of the current financial position. Without the £29m budget gap which had arisen as a result of Covid, the Council’s finances would have been in surplus. Tough decisions had had to be taken, despite the ability to roll forward this year’s deficit over 3 years.
h. Enfield residents were having to make up the deficit through a higher council tax. Government measures had made it necessary for the Council to increase the tax by 4.99% (1.99% general increase and 3% for adult social care) plus the GLA precept.
i. The increase worked out at £1.91 a week, a total of £1,795 for a Band D council tax-payer. This was set out in table 4 together with information on the medium term financial plan, the schools budget, fees and charges and risks and reserves.
j. This had been a painful year for everyone, but the Council had managed to set a balanced budget and was able to allocate funding for its priorities including £83m for adult social care, £44m for children’s services, £40m to protect the poorest and most vulnerable, £11.6m on freedom passes, £5.6m on keeping the streets clean, £16.9m on rubbish collection, £3.5m on the environment, £3.9m on the borough’s 130 parks and open spaces, £2.9m on libraries, museums and web services.
k. The Council was presenting a balanced budget, which would have been in surplus, without the pandemic, doing this through the use of reserves and making extra savings. The administration was investing in the borough, putting Enfield first.
3. Councillor Lemonides, on behalf of Community First moved and Councillor Levy seconded the following amendment which had been circulated before the meeting:
· Regarding the previously agreed £36k increase in SRA costs (referred to here: https://governance.enfield.gov.uk/documents/s81874/Members%20Allowances%20Report.pdf-) to reduce SRA spend to fit within the pre 2018 envelope of £300,618.
· To delete the post and associate budget of £46k for the PO1 post of Cabinet Support Officer.
· To further invest money in resources to improve the Council’s financial management, which currently is wasting residents’ money.
4. In moving the amendment Councillor Lemonides highlighted the following:
· The council should go back to the pre-2018 envelope of special responsibility allowance costs. Any increases in any individual increase of allowances should have been balanced by a decrease in the amount each individual received.
· At a time when front line services were under pressure, it was wrong to create a new post of Cabinet Support Officer. Money could be saved to support the financial pressures of the Council.
5. Councillor Caliskan, Leader of the majority group, in opposing the amendment highlighted the following:
a. Special allowances were allocated to support members who took on extra responsibilities. Unless the Council only wanted to be served by those who were independently wealthy or retired it was necessary to give members those members who took an extra responsibility an allowance.
b. The councillors objecting to the extra allowances had received allowances themselves in the past.
c. The Cabinet Support Officer role had been evaluated using set Council criteria.
d. It was unfair to target a relatively junior officer in this way and it went against trade union principles to arbitrarily suggest the deletion of a post.
6. Councillor Rye, responding to the amendment, for the majority opposition, highlighted:
a. That he felt that the additional Cabinet Support Officer post was unnecessary. There were other highly paid officers within the Council who could provide this support.
b. Support for the concern expressed about the increase in the envelope for special responsibility allowances and for the view that this money should be invested in Council resources.
7. Comments of the majority group opposing the amendment:
a. Disbelief that when faced with huge cuts in support to the Council and a huge rise in unemployment that the minority opposition were focusing on a proposal to sack a member of staff and remove special responsibility allowances.
b. That no Councillor was obliged to accept a special responsibility allowance if they did not want to.
c. Removing a council officer, without consultation, was against trade union principles.
8. Comments of the majority Opposition Group in support of the amendment:
a. The view that the additional special responsibility allowances and Cabinet Support Officer role was a waste of money
b. That Cabinet Members ought to be able to manage their own workload, without the need for a dedicated officer.
9. Comments of the minority opposition group in favour of the amendment:
a. The group reiterated their view that the PO1 post should be deleted and the special allowances budget be taken back to the 2018 envelope.
10. The summing up on the amendment from Councillor Lemonides thanking the Conservative opposition for their support.
After a vote, with the following result, the amendment was not agreed. In accordance with standing order regulations 2014, the vote was recorded in relation to the amendment:
For: 20
Councillor Maria Alexandrou
Councillor Daniel Anderson
Councillor Dinah Barry
Councillor Anne Brown
Councillor Lee David Sanders
Councillor Clare De Silva
Councillor Chris Dey
Councillor Alessandro Georgiou
Councillor Elaine Hayward
Councillor James Hockney
Councillor Stephanos Ioannou
Councillor Joanne Laban
Councillor Dino Lemonides
Councillor Derek Levy
Councillor Andy Milne
Councillor Terence Neville
Councillor Lindsay Rawlings
Councillor Michael Rye
Councillor Edward Smith
Councillor Jim Steven
Against: 35
Councillor Huseyin Akpinar
Councillor Mahmut Aksanoglu
Councillor Kate Anolue
Councillor Tolga Aramaz
Councillor Guner Aydin
Councillor Ian Barnes
Councillor Mahym Bedekova
Councillor Chris Bond
Councillor Sinan Boztas
Councillor Yasemin Brett
Councillor Nesil Caliskan
Councillor Alev Cazimoglu
Councillor Mustafa Cetinkaya
Councillor Katherine Chibah
Councillor Birsen Demirel
Councillor Guney Dogan
Councillor Elif Erbil
Councillor Ergin Erbil
Councillor Susan Erbil
Councillor Achilleas Georgiou
Councillor Margaret Greer
Councillor Charith Gunawardena
Councillor Christine Hamilton
Councillor Ahmet Hasan
Councillor Rick Jewell
Councillor Nneka Keazor
Councillor Tim Leaver
Councillor Mary Maguire
Councillor Ayfer Orhan
Councillor Ahmet Oykener
Councillor Sabri Ozaydin
Councillor George Savva
Councillor Claire Stewart
Councillor Doug Taylor
Councillor Mahtab Uddin
Councillor Hass Yusuf
Abstentions: 0
11. The comments of the of the Leader of the Opposition in opposing the budget report:
a. Outrage that the Labour administration, after 11 years in power were proposing to increase the Council tax.
b. The view that the gap in funding could have been filled by using the Council’s £3m reserves and that more savings could have been made.
d. Concern that the completion of the Council accounts had been late for the third year in a row.
e. Concern that over £200,000 had been wasted on drafting strategies and
f. Concern that too much money was being spent on debt interest payments and security measures.
g. Concern about the lack of information provided for the decision to remove the proposal for a new crematorium from the budget report.
12. The comments of Councillor Levy on behalf of the minority opposition group:
a. The current government had let local government down. The Government Austerity Programme had served the country poorly and many had suffered.
b. The Labour administration claimed that their budget was robust, resilient and sustainable but he did not feel that the papers justified these claims.
c. The Council’s approach to borrowing was a financial risk.
13. The comments of the Majority Group:
a. Residents should be reassured that the Labour administration was committed to setting a responsible budget.
b. This Council had several headline projects which would benefit the environment including the work at Walbrook House, the Chase Restoration project and improvements to street lighting.
c. The administration had managed to achieve large amounts of extra funding to invest in environmental works such as lamp post charging schemes, retrofitting buildings and other decarbonisation projects to help with the aim of achieving carbon neutrality.
d. The view that it was irresponsible to deplete the budget further in this most difficult of years which had been a challenge for all local authorities who had suffered from severe cost pressures and loss of income.
e. Investing in the future was investing for local residents, to meet future needs, to ensure those that were in need are not left behind.
f. The Council has spent money to support those most in need, during the pandemic, including on grants for PPE, covid testing, delivery of prescriptions and support for those shielding.
g. Every year, for the last 10 years the Council had set a balanced budget, despite the austerity and the current covid situation.
h. This was a good and fair budget but the Council should have had more funding. The Government owed the Council £30m in covid related expenditure, which it had previously promised to refund,
i. The Government had recently increased their borrowing by £231 billion and increased the national debt to £2.13 trillion, more than 99% of GDP. This had not happened since the 1960s. They had also frozen the pay of public sector workers who were overdue and deserved a pay rise at this time.
j. Concern that the Government had still not addressed the huge issue of funding for social care. Because of the huge cuts made by previous Conservative Governments the Council had only been able to meet social care needs by making difficult decisions in other areas.
k. Health and social care staff were exhausted and demoralised and there had been no mention of any support for those working in social care in the recent NHS White Paper.
l. The need to support Enfield’s diverse communities which had been adversely affected by Brexit and the pandemic, to tackle crime, to increase the number of CCTV cameras, to support the police and enable a continuation of the serious youth violence pilot project. Safety of local residents remained paramount.
m. The need to acknowledge that the finalising of the Council accounts had been delayed due to skills shortages and sickness.
n. The need to recognise the work being done by officers in the Place Department in maintaining and keeping open the parks, delivering the LED street lighting project, making the streets safer and lighting more energy efficient, attracting match funding for projects such as the wetlands and flood alleviation scheme in Albany Park and increasing biodiversity.
o. Thanks to all members of staff who had worked so hard in such challenging times.
p. To acknowledge that, despite the pressures, additional funding had been found for schemes for young people and in health and adult social care including for the summer university and additional safeguarding measures.
q. To acknowledge the extreme difficulties for public health staff at this time, after 10 years of austerity, but who had managed to meet so many recent public health challenges including helping to ensure that 83,000 people had already received a first dose of the Coronavirus vaccine.
r. The suggestion that the two oppositions should be willing to work with the administration to lobby government for greater financial support including to persuade the minister to sign off the private landlord licensing scheme which was so necessary to improve the quality of rented accommodation in the borough.
s. To celebrate the work that the Labour administration had done over the last ten years for the Eastern Corridor of the borough which had previously been badly neglected by the Conservatives when they had been in power.
t. To recognise the work that the Council had done with projects like the Felix project in setting up foodbanks to ensure that young people in the borough did not go hungry.
15. The following comments from the majority Opposition Group:
a. To acknowledge that the Conservative Government had invested huge amounts of money in Enfield, injecting over £170m into the local economy and protecting over 21,000 jobs through the furlough scheme.
b. The Labour administration was spending too much on agency staff and not enough on flytipping and waste collection, or on listening to the views of residents on issues such as low traffic neighbourhoods.
c. The view that increasing fees on funerals and graves at this time was insensitive.
d. The view that there had been 11 years of financial management by the Labour administration and that borrowing was out of control, representing a poor return on taxpayers money.
e. The view that social care could be affordable, but for the incompetence of the Council and the mismanagement of Transport for London.
f. The Government had provided finance to support Enfield residents, including money for schools as well as through the furlough scheme. There had been a significant improvement of £6.4m for schools which would be an increase even after paying for the 3% increase in pay.
g. Concern that there was no reference in the Statement of Robustness to the fact that interest rates would rise in the future and that the yield on guilts was already rising.
h. Concern about the £230,000 spent on drafting strategies, installing bike hangers and that the change to fortnightly bin collections which had led to an increase in flytipping and poor recycling rates.
i. Concern about the increase in the Mayor of London precept which was the biggest increase in the history of the Greater London Authority.
j. Concern about the failures in the distribution of grants to local businesses and to the failure to deliver other projects and targets driving up costs.
16. The comments from the minority opposition group:
a. Concern about the ambitious capital programme and the large amounts of borrowing entailed: borrowing of £2billion would cost £60m a year. Although it was currently a good time to borrow, because interest rates are very low, this will not always be so. Large amounts of borrowing could affect the Council’s credit rating, would take away from the safety net and could impact on future spending. The Council was being exposed to significant financial risk and a debt burden would be left behind for future residents.
b. Concern that for the third year in a row the amount in the reserves had been reduced.
c. Acknowledgement that the Council had lost over half their funding since 2010 and that only a small proportion 10% of Council funds was raised through Council Tax. The Council relied heavily on Government funding.
d. That there was a lack of detail in the budget and too many broad brush statements.
e. The view that the budget was too ambitious and unaffordable; it was unlikely that everything could be delivered.
f. Concern about the increase in grave fees.
17. Councillor Maguire summed up by thanking her Labour colleagues for their support and recommending the robust and resilient budget set out in the 250 pages of the report. The Council had been well managed and the budget was good and fair, with additional money allocated to adult social care and children’s services. Without the additional costs of Covid, which the Government had failed to cover despite promises, the budget would have been in surplus. Treasury advisors had judged that the budget was robust. It was unfair to compare Enfield’s situation with Croydon which was very different. Many Conservative boroughs were in a worse position and had already received bailouts.
During the debate the time allowed for discussion of reports was extended on two occasions for two periods of 45 minutes. The motions to extend were proposed by Councillor Stewart and seconded by Councillor Caliskan. They were both agreed unanimously without a vote.
The budget report was then agreed following a roll call vote detailed below:
AGREED
1. To note:
i. The budget is in a balanced position, however, the forecast costs of Covid-19 have been offset by the underlying budget position which is a surplus of £7.071m
ii. The total cost of Covid-19 in 2021/22 is estimated to be £28.868m; funding levels do not fully meet this gap which totals £10.259m and therefore will need to be funded in part from the Council’s reserves
iii. Government funding assumptions continue to rely on council tax as a key source of funding for Adult Social Care through the Precept
iv. The continuation of the London Business Rate pool was dependent on Government response to London Councils and safety net; this will not proceed in 2021/22 and the impact on Enfield in 2021/22 is a £0.425m reduction in income.
2. To approve:
i. With regard to the Revenue Budget for 2021/22 to set the Council Tax Requirement for Enfield at £133.108m in 2021/22; and
ii. To set the Council Tax at Band D for Enfield’s services for 2021/22 at£1,431.81, being a 1.99% general Council Tax increase and a 3.00%Adult Social Care Precept.
3. To approve the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP), including:
i. The non Covid-19 pressures set out in Appendix 1 totalling £29.426m in 2021/22, which includes
a. £3.466m for Demographic pressures within Adults and Children’s Social Care and SEN Transport to reflect growing demand in these areas.
b. £5.885m of Inflation and pay award funding
ii. £1.819m investment in transformation funded by the flexible use of capital receipts.
iii. full year effects of prior year savings and income generation totalling£3.374m set out in Appendix 2a of the report.
iv. the savings of £7.748m and income generation proposals of £1.875m in 2021/22 set out in Appendix 2b of the report.
v. adopt the key principles set out in the Medium term Financial Plan section below (paragraphs 190 to 195).
vi. note the £2.709m for Capital Financing included within the pressures figure to invest in proposals to deliver long term benefits to the Borough.
4. To approve the planned flexible use of capital receipts in 2020/21 being £1.864m and approve the planned flexible use of capital receipts in 2021/22, being £1.819m (paragraphs 157 to 162 and Appendix 3).
5. To approve the Schools Budget for 2021/22 (paragraphs 163 to 183 and Appendix 4).
6. To approve the changes in Fees and Charges for 2021/22 as set out in paragraphs 138 to 156 and Appendices 11 to 14 and to approve the December Cabinet recommendation to Council to delegate authority to Executive Directors and Directors to negotiate discounts and make in year amendments where appropriate.
7. To note the gap remaining in the MTFP for 2022/23 of £13.685m; and of £36.812m for the period 2022/23 to 2025/26 and the actions being taken to address this challenging position.
8. To approve that the New Homes Bonus funding of£0.608m is applied as a one-off contribution to the General Fund in 2021/22.
9. To note the feedback from the Budget Engagement at Appendix 5a and minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Budget Meeting on 4 February 2021 which are set out in Appendix 5b.
10. With regard to the robustness of the 2021/22 budget and the adequacy of the Council’s earmarked reserves and balances:
i. to note the risks and uncertainties inherent in the 2021/22 budget and the MTFP (paragraphs 196 to 200) and agree the actions in hand to mitigate them;
ii. to note the advice of the Executive Director of Resources regarding the recommended levels of contingencies, balances and earmarked reserves (paragraphs 201 to 208 and Appendix 8a) and have regard to the comments of the Director of Finance (paragraphs 225 to 227) when making final decisions on the 2021/22 budget; and
iii. to approve the recommended levels of central contingency and general balances (paragraphs 201 to 208).
In accordance with standing order regulations 2014, the vote was recorded in relation to the above decisions.
For: 38
Councillor Huseyin Akpinar
Councillor Mahmut Aksanoglu
Councillor Kate Anolue
Councillor Tolga Aramaz
Councillor Guner Aydin
Councillor Ian Barnes
Councillor Dinah Barry
Councillor Mahym Bedekova
Councillor Sinan Boztas
Councillor Yasemin Brett
Councillor Nesil Caliskan
Councillor Alev Cazimoglu
Councillor Mustafa Cetinkaya
Councillor Katherine Chibah
Councillor Birsen Demirel
Councillor Guney Dogan
Councillor Elif Erbil
Councillor Susan Erbil
Councillor Ergin Erbil
Councillor Ergun Erin
Councillor Achilleas Georgiou
Councillor Margaret Greer
Councillor Charith Gunawardena
Councillor Christine Hamilton
Councillor Ahmet Hasan
Councillor Rick Jewell
Councillor Saray Karakus
Councillor Nneka Keazor
Councillor Tim Leaver
Councillor Mary Maguire
Councillor Gina Needs
Councillor Ayfer Orhan
Councillor Ahmet Oykener
Councillor Sabri Ozaydin
Councillor George Savva
Councillor Claire Stewart
Councillor Doug Taylor
Councillor Mahtab Uddin
Councillor Hass Yusuf
Against: 20
Councillor Maria Alexandrou
Councillor Daniel Anderson
Councillor Dinah Barry
Councillor Anne Brown
Councillor Lee David Sanders
Councillor Clare De Silva
Councillor Chris Dey
Councillor Alessandro Georgiou
Councillor Elaine Hayward
Councillor James Hockney
Councillor Stephanos Ioannou
Councillor Joanne Laban
Councillor Dino Lemonides
Councillor Derek Levy
Councillor Andy Milne
Councillor Terence Neville
Councillor Lindsay Rawlings
Councillor Michael Rye
Councillor Edward Smith
Councillor Jim Steven
Abstentions: 0
Supporting documents:
PDF 4 MB