Agenda item

Cabinet, at its meeting on 5 February 2016, considered the report of the head of finance on the draft revenue budget 2016/17, and the capital programme to 2020/21.

Cabinet resolved to agree that the Cabinet member for finance, in conjunction with the head of finance, may make minor adjustments to the report and prudential indicators should they prove necessary prior to submission to Council. Any adjustments will be reported to Council.

The report of the head of finance, considered by the Cabinet on 5 February 2016, was circulated to all councillors.  Hard copies are available on request. 

The Scrutiny Committee will consider this report at its meeting on 11 February 2016. Any views or recommendations will be reported to Council.

RECOMMENDATION: to

(a)  set the revenue budget for 2016/17 as set out in the appendix A.1 to the head of finance’s report to Cabinet on 5 February 2016;

(b)  approve the capital programme for 2016/17 to 2020/21 as set out in appendix D.1 to the head of finance’s report, together with the capital growth bids set out in appendix D.2 of the head of finance’s report;

(c)  set the council’s prudential limits as listed in appendix E to the head of finance’s report;

(d)  approve the medium term financial plan to 2020/21 as set out in appendix F.1 to the head of finance’s report; 

(e)  authorise the head of finance, in consultation with the cabinet member for finance, to issue an efficiency statement to government in order to secure a four year settlement, if this is considered to be beneficial to the council.

The chairman referred to regulations that require councils to record the names of those councillors voting in favour, against or abstaining from any vote on the budget, including amendments, and the council tax. In accordance with the regulations he would call for a named vote on each of these matters at this meeting.

The chairman reminded councillors that they were not entitled to vote on any issue affecting the level or administration of the council tax or other decisions which might affect the making of any such calculation such as the budget, if they were over two months in arrears with their council tax payments. Where such circumstances applied, councillors were under a statutory obligation to disclose the restriction placed on them and refrain from voting at the relevant meeting. No councillor made any such declaration.

Council noted the report of the chief finance officer, appendix G to the budget report, on the robustness of the budget estimates and the adequacy of the reserves.

Councillor Barber moved and Councillor Cox seconded a motion to approve Cabinet’s recommendations as follows:

That Council:

1.         sets the revenue budget for 2016/17 as set out in the appendix A.1 to the head of finance’s report to Cabinet on 5 February 2016;

2.         approves the capital programme for 2016/17 to 2020/21 as set out in appendix D.1 to the head of finance’s report, together with the capital growth bids set out in appendix D.2 of the head of finance’s report;

3.         sets the council’s prudential limits as listed in appendix E to the head of finance’s report;

4.         approves the medium term financial plan to 2020/21 as set out in appendix F.1 to the head of finance’s report; and

5.         authorises the head of finance, in consultation with the cabinet member for finance, to issue an efficiency statement to government in order to secure a four year settlement, if this is considered to be beneficial to the council.

Councillor Hoddinott moved and Councillor Johnston seconded an amendment to the above budget to provide a video webcasting system for Council and committee meetings held at Milton Park and The Beacon at a cost of £20,000 for each of the six years of the medium term financial plan to be funded by the cancellation of the growth bid in Cabinet’s budget proposals to fund car park expansion.

Those councillors who spoke in support of the amendment were of the view that a webcasting system would improve access to meetings and communication with the public, encourage the public to become more involved in the democratic process and take part in local government, increase the accountability of local councillors and potentially increase the pool of potential candidates.

Those councillors who spoke against the amendment stated that the benefits would not justify the cost. The number of viewers would be low, decisions were already published and available on the council’s website and, whilst webcasting may increase passive participation, it would not increase the level of active participation by members of the public getting involved in local democracy and attending meetings.

The chairman called for a recorded vote on the amendment which was

lost with the votes recorded as follows:

Councillor Hannaby moved and Councillor Smith seconded an amendment to Cabinet’s budget to hire a full time officer to carry out a feasibility study and promote affordable self-build houses in the Vale at a cost of £75,000 for three years, with a capital provision of £1.5 million to purchase land as necessary, to be funded by the cancellation of the growth bid in Cabinet’s budget proposals to fund car park expansion.

Those councillors who spoke in support of the amendment were of the view that the proposal would increase housing supply, provide more affordable housing for those unable to afford commercial houses, tap into the potential for significant numbers of self-build houses as demonstrated by a successful scheme in Cherwell and had the support of developers.

Those councillors who spoke against the amendment stated that, whilst self-build houses had a place in the delivery of housing for a minority, the proposal was premature prior to clarification of the government’s policy on this matter and consideration of potential amendments and modifications to the Local Plan. Sufficient housing was coming forward and consideration should be given to compulsory purchase order powers to increase land supply. 

The chairman called for a recorded vote on the amendment which was

lost with the votes recorded as follows:

Councillors supporting the Cabinet’s revenue and capital budget proposals supported the view that the council continued to manage its financial matters sensibly while maintaining services and continuing its capital programme with no increase in this council’s element of the council tax in 2016/17. The budget would increase car parking capacity across the district, introduce a deep cleanse of streets across the district and support market towns.

Other councillors supported the view that Cabinet’s budget was not balanced focussing too much on economic issues at the expense of social and environmental issues.

The chairman called for a recorded vote on the budget which was

carried with the votes recorded as follows:

RESOLVED: to

1.         set the revenue budget for 2016/17 as set out in the appendix A.1 to the head of finance’s report to Cabinet on 5 February 2016;

2.         approve the capital programme for 2016/17 to 2020/21 as set out in appendix D.1 to the head of finance’s report, together with the capital growth bids set out in appendix D.2 of the head of finance’s report;

3.         set the council’s prudential limits as listed in appendix E to the head of finance’s report;

4.         approve the medium term financial plan to 2020/21 as set out in appendix F.1 to the head of finance’s report; and

5.         authorise the head of finance, in consultation with the cabinet member for finance, to issue an efficiency statement to government in order to secure a four year settlement, if this is considered to be beneficial to the council.