Agenda and minutes

1.1  Apologies were received from Cllr Billington and Cllr Lynch (Chair of Audit Committee). Cllrs Joseph, Conway and Hayhurst attended the meeting virtually.

2.1  There were no late items and the agenda was as published.

3.1  There were no declarations.

4.1  Members gave consideration to 4 reports as follows:

Draft index for the Council’s Constitution

Part 2 of the Constitution - Article 7

Part 4 of the Constitution - O&S Procedure Rules

Part 4 of the Constitution- Call-in procedure rules.

4.2  The Chair stated that the purpose of the time was to discuss and collate the views of Panel Members to present to the Constitution Committee for consideration as part of its review of the Constitution.  She welcomed for this item:

Dawn Carter-McDonald (DCM), Director of Legal, Democratic and Electoral Services 

Louise Humphreys (LH), Head of Legal and Governance

4.3  DCM introduced the reports and LH gave an overview.  She explained that a major focus was to ensure use of plain english.  The Committee had Members from all parties as well as officers from legal and governance. They were not changing how the Council operated and not proposing substantive changes to the Committees, nor were they seeking to amend issues around balance of power. The focus purely was on amending wording to improve clarity and increase public accessibility. The timetable was for the revised Constitution to be adopted in July of this year, preceded by a public engagement. She added that this timeframe was tight but was achievable in their view. A key task relevant to Scrutiny was their intention to extract the O&S procedure rules on Call In, for example, and to make that available in a more accessible and public friendly format as the public would benefit from greater clarity on how ‘call-in’ works.

4.4  The Chair commented that the Panel needed to look at how the document makes the Scrutiny function more accessible to the public and to consider how it assists Scrutiny to work more collaboratively.  She explained that there continued to be a vacant position as Vice Chair of the Scrutiny Panel which had remained vacant for 6 years as it had not been taken up by the Main Opposition Group. She noted that the members of the, now, Second Opposition Group were present at this meeting and she welcomed Cllr Garbett and Cllr Binnie-Lubbock.

Questions from Members of Scrutiny Panel

4.5  Members agreed that a separate document on Call In would really assist and the issue was one of presentation particularly about how easy it was to access on the Council’s website. Members agreed that this is where the focus needed to be.

4.6  Members asked whether Health in Hackney Scrutiny Commission’s formal powers to refer an issue to the Secretary of State was delegated to HiH or if it was a reserved power by Full Council, noting that changes to a Statutory Regulation had altered this in the past. DCM undertook to come back on this.

ACTION:

Director of Legal, Democratic and Electoral Services to clarify whether the formal powers to refer a health matter to the Secretary of State sits with Health in Hackney or is a reserved function of Full Council.

4.7  The Head of Scrutiny and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.1  The Chair stated that Council’s budget update was a standing item on the agenda and at this meeting there would also receive and overview of the proposed Council budget for 2023/24. The latter was being tabled because of the tight timelines involved and it would be going to Cabinet and Full Council for approval the following week.

5.2  Members gave consideration to the following three reports

Overall Financial Position - Nov 2022

Capital Update and Property Disposals and Acquisitions Report - Sept 2022

TABLED slide presentation ‘Scrutiny Finance Update’

5.3  The Chair welcomed for this item:

Ian Williiams (IW), Group Director Finance and Corporate Resources

Jackie Moylan (JM) Director of Financial Management

Cllr Robert Chapman (RC), Cabinet Member for Finance, Insourcing and Customer Service

5.4  IW took Members through his presentation in detail. The slides covered:

General Fund forecast 2022/23

2022/23 HRA position

The Council’s capital programme and borrowing

Economic context

Local government settlement 2023-24

Disparity in council funding  (spending power comparisons 15-16 to 23-24)

London spending power increases

London spending power (real term reduction of 18% since 10/11)

What the LGFS meant for the Council’s 23-24 budget

Budget Report - Introduction

Budget Report Overview - Council Tax

Budget Report Overview - Revenue Budgets

Budget Report Overview - S151 officer’s statement

Budget Report Overview - Capital programme £1.1bn (22-23 to 25-26)

Budget Report Overview - Capital programme financing £1.1bn

Budget Report Overview - Medium Term Financial Plan

HRA Budget

HRA Business Plan - Budget gap going forward

Cost of living response - recap

Cost of living response - the Money Hub

Cost of living response - financial support provided

5.5  IW explained that the budget papers had just been published and would be going to Cabinet and Full Council for approval the following week. They were forecasting an overspend of £9m in the General Fund but wished to contain that as much as possible in spite of cost pressures and the now high inflation, including the pay award. Overspends were driven by ASC and CYP directorates and by the impact of the cyber attack. The HRA was under considerable pressure due to delays in procurement.  On the Capital Account the real challenge in the market was trying to get contractors to hold prices steady. The cost of borrowing and unfavourable gilt yield rates were also a factor.

Questions from Members of Scrutiny Panel on S1 of presentation

5.6  Are there going to be delays in building works? IW replied that they had struggled with getting the building maintenance contracts to a better place and what they have been investing in was growing the DLA. There had been significant challenges in Procurement such as trying to get the relevant trades people, Brexit also had an effect on the availability of labour and much longer lead times were required. He suggested he could bring this issue back to Living in Hackney when they were able to update.

5.7  Re contract management in HRA, to what extent was the Council holding  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.1  The Chair explained that the Scrutiny Panel set up the Council Tax Reduction Scheme (CTRS) Task and Finish Group to review the CTRS model in Hackney.  It had looked at the options and costs to the Council to reduce the liability of council tax contributions for relevant working age adults and the cost implications of implementing a zero based CTRS model in Hackney. Also present for this item were:

Ian Williiams (IW), Group Director Finance and Corporate Resources

Jackie Moylan (JM) Director of Financial Management

Cllr Robert Chapman (RC), Cabinet Member for Finance, Insourcing and Customer Service

6.2  Members gave consideration to a TABLED presentation from the Chair ‘CTRS Task Group’.  The Chair took members through the presentation which covered:

Task Group objectives

Contributors to the review

Background to the review

Council Tax as a % of local authority funding

Input from Child Poverty Action Group and Institute for Fiscal Studies

Admin; income changes, banding

Council Tax Reduction Scheme caseloads by borough

Hackney CTRS Scheme

CTRS in Camden

CTRS in Lambeth

CTRS in Tower Hamlets

Collection rates in Hackney

Hardship Fund in Hackney

View of the local CAB

View of Deaf Plus

View of Age UK in Hackney

Key Finding from the Review

Recommendation Areas

Next Steps

6.3  The Recommendation Areas from the review covered: Communication and Consultation; engagement with advice services, equalities data; hardship fund; the money hub - advice and support to residents; and Care leavers. As regards next steps it was noted that it was the ambition of the Council to provide low income households with a 90% discount on council tax by 2026 and a full discount by 2030.  The proposal will be subject to consultation and eligibility will still be means-tested.

6.4  JM commented that the uptake on the discretionary Hardship Scheme had historically been low, the fund however had been topped up by £400k and there had also been an improvement in its uptake. They had also included foster carers in the exempted list. She added that the plan was to go to a 90% discount by April 2024. Cllr Chapman added that they would go out to consultation this spring on the future of the scheme and to make provision for this in the 24/25 budget.

Questions from Members of Scrutiny Panel

6.5  Would it be possible to target those on the lowest incomes with a lower capital threshold sooner e.g.  savings of just £6k rather than £16k before support kicked in. IW replied that anyone with savings of less than £16k would be eligible for some reduction. They were going out to consultation in the spring on the rates and the savings thresholds and were looking at the underlying drivers here. Benchmarking other councils had revealed that, while at first other councils’ schemes appeared to be more generous, when their rules were applied to Hackney’s various cohorts, they had found that many of our residents would end up worse off, so it all depended on the finer detail of the scheme.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.1  Members gave consideration to the minutes of the meeting held on 3 October 2022.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 3 October 2022 be agreed as a correct record.

8.1  Members gave consideration to the work programme for the remainder of the municipal year 2022/23.

8.2  The Chair stated that the Mayor had been unable to attend for ‘Mayor’s Question Time’ session at this meeting but would attend instead in July. It was noted that the April meeting would include a session on the Poverty Reduction Framework.  She added that they were looking to develop further a plan for finance and budget scrutiny and that they were also looking at additional training for Members’ on the operation of council finances. A Member asked if there could be an update on the in depth work done the previous year on Climate Change. The Head of Scrutiny replied that a report which draws that work together would come to the Panel. 

RESOLVED:

That the updated work programme be noted.

9.1  There was none.