Please contact: Lydia Hall
Please email: lydia.hall@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Please direct dial on: 01263 516047
07 March 2016
A meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee of North Norfolk District Council will be held in
the in the Council Chamber at the Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer on Wednesday 16 March 2016
at 9.30am.
At the discretion of the Chairman, a short break will be taken after the meeting has been running for
approximately one and a half hours.
Members of the public who wish to ask a question or speak on an agenda item are requested to arrive
at least 15 minutes before the start of the meeting. It will not always be possible to accommodate
requests after that time. This is to allow time for the Committee Chair to rearrange the order of items on
the agenda for the convenience of members of the public. Further information on the procedure for
public speaking can be obtained from Democratic Services, Tel: 01263 516010, Email:
democraticservices@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Anyone attending this meeting may take photographs, film or audio-record the proceedings and report
on the meeting. Anyone wishing to do so must inform the Chairman. If you are a member of the public
and you wish to speak on an item on the agenda, please be aware that you may be filmed or
photographed.
Sheila Oxtoby
Chief Executive
To: Mrs S Butikofer, Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds, Mrs J English, Ms V Gay, Mrs A Green, Mr M Knowles,
Mr P Moore, Mrs M Prior, Mr E Seward, Mr B Smith, Mr D Smith and Mr N Smith.
All other Members of the Council for information.
Members of the Management Team, appropriate Officers, Press and Public.
If you have any special requirements in order to attend this
meeting, please let us know in advance
If you would like any document in large print, audio, Braille, alternative
format or in a different language please contact us.
Chief Executive: Sheila Oxtoby Corporate Directors: Nick Baker & Steve Blatch
Tel 01263 513811 Fax 01263 515042 Minicom 01263 516005
Email districtcouncil@north-norfolk.gov.uk Web site northnorfolk.org
AGENDA
1.
TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
2.
SUBSTITUTES
3.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
To receive questions from the public, if any
(page 4)
(9.30 – 9.35am)
To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny
Committee held on the 17 February 2016.
4.
MINUTES
5.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
To determine any other items of business which the Chairman decides should be considered as a
matter of urgency pursuant to Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972.
6.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members are asked at this stage to declare any interests that they may have in any of the
following items on the agenda. The Code of Conduct for Members requires that declarations
include the nature of the interest and whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest.
7.
PETITIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
To consider any petitions received from members of the public.
8.
CONSIDERATION OF ANY MATTER REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE BY A MEMBER
To consider any requests made by non-executive Members of the Council, and notified to the
Monitoring Officer with seven clear working days’ notice, to include an item on the agenda of the
Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
9.
RESPONSES OF THE COUNCIL OR THE CABINET TO THE COMMITTEE’S REPORTS OR
RECOMMENDATIONS
To consider any responses of the Council or the Cabinet to the Committee’s reports or
recommendations.
10.
CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP (CCG)
To receive a presentation from the CCG on their work in North Norfolk.
11.
BUDGET MONITORING REPORT 2015/16 – PERIOD 10
(attached – p. 20)
(10.40 – 11.00)
(Appendix A – p.31) (Appendix B – p.32) (Appendix C – p.35)
Summary:
This report summarises the budget monitoring
position for the revenue account and capital
programme to the end of January 2016.
Options considered:
Not applicable
Conclusions:
The overall position at the end of January 2016
shows an under spend of (£1,765,761) to date for
the current financial year on the revenue account,
this is currently expected to deliver a full year
variance of (£876,500).
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
1) Cabinet note the contents of the report and the
current budget monitoring position;
2) Cabinet note the updated Capital Programme
and financing for 2015/16 to 2018/19 as detailed
in Appendix C;
3) Cabinet Approve the capital budget virements
as requested within the report;
4) Cabinet approve the additional capital budget
requirement of £35,000 in relation to the North
Walsham regeneration scheme, to be funded
from capital resources.
Cabinet
Decision
Reasons for
Recommendations:
Cabinet member(s):
Ward member(s)
Contact Officer, telephone
and e-mail:
12.
To update Members on the current
budget monitoring position for the Council.
Councillor W Northam
All
Karen Sly
01263 516243
karen.sly@north-norfolk.gov.uk
THE CABINET WORK PROGRAMME
(page 42)
(11.00 – 11.10)
To note the upcoming Cabinet Work Programme.
13.
OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY WORK PROGRAMME AND UPDATE
(page 45)
(11.10 – 11.20)
To receive an update from the Scrutiny Officer on progress made with topics on its agreed work
programme and to receive any further information which Members may have requested at a
previous meeting.
14.
EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC
To pass the following resolution, if necessary:
“That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be excluded
from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely
disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph _ of Part I of Schedule 12A (as
amended) to the Act.”
15.
TO CONSIDER ANY EXEMPT MATTERS ARISING FROM CONSIDERATION OF THE PUBLIC
BUSINESS OF THE AGENDA
Agenda item no._______4_______
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY
Minutes of a meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 17 February
2016 in the Council Chamber, North Norfolk District Council, Holt Road, Cromer at
9.30 am.
Members Present:
Committee:
Mr P Moore (Chairman)
Mrs S Butikofer
Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds
Mrs J English
Ms V Gay
Mrs A Green
Mr M Knowles
Ms M Prior
Mr B Smith
Mr D Smith
Mr N Smith
Mr A Wells (Sub)
Officers in
Attendance:
The Corporate Director (SB), the Corporate Director (NB), the Head of
Finance, the Head of Assets and Leisure, the Policy and Performance
Management Officer, the Democratic Services Team Leader and the
Democratic Services Officer
Members in
Attendance:
Mr J Rest, Miss B Palmer, Mr P W High, Mrs A Moore, Mr N Pearce, Mr R
Reynolds, Mrs P Grove-Jones and Mr G Williams.
106. APOLOGIES
Mr E Seward.
107.
SUBSTITUTES
Mr A Wells for Mr E Seward.
108.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
Beach Huts
PUBLIC SPEAKER: Mrs J Belson
Mrs J Belson told Members that she had a beach hut in Mundesley which cost £450
a year before car parking and insurance and that including all costs, the beach hut
cost £645. She said that not all costs were due to the Council but they were all
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
4
17 February 2016
necessary. Mrs Belson said that she had to provide her own hut of 6 foot by 8 foot
and that it was only available for 6 months of the year as it had to be uplifted and
stored. She said that with the proposed future charges it would cost at least £945 a
year and that she could rent a static caravan for six weeks for this amount. Mrs
Belson said that the difference in price between other resorts and Mundesley was
£10.00 but that the other resort beach hut owners could use their huts all year round.
Mrs Belson said that she used her beach hut regularly and supported local
businesses whilst in the village.
Mrs Belson went onto say that she had been number 55 on the waiting list and then
people ahead of her did not want a beach hut any longer. She said that many beach
hut owners were not aware of the proposed changes and that she and others would
be priced out of the market. Mrs Belson said that the increase over the time period
proposed would be over 100%.
PUBLIC SPEAKER: Mrs M Isherwood
Mrs M Isherwood said that she was also a beach hut owner in Mundesley and asked
what the justification for the increase was – she asked whether it would be used on
improvements for the beach hut users. She said that she also had a space of 6 foot
by 8 foot but that the tap didn’t work and that there were only two toilets nearby.
Mrs Isherwood said that she would be priced out of the market and that friends and
family visited and they spent time in Mundesley spending their money locally. She
said that she had informed another beach hut owner of the charges and she had
been horrified. She said that people were not aware of all of the costs involved.
The Head of Assets and Leisure clarified the proposed increases:
2016/17 £30.00 increase for Mundesley, Cromer, Overstrand and Sheringham
Followed by a range of charges over the following 3-4 years that would be for
Members to consider:
2017/18 £50.00
2018/19 £100.00
2019/20 £100.00
The Head of Assets and Leisure acknowledged that the charges would double over
the next four years. He said that the storage charges had been increased by the
operator and that this was unfortunate.
The Head of Assets and Leisure said that there was a £1.9m deficit and that the
Council had to look at efficiencies and asset commercialisation to generate more
income for the Council.
Mr B Smith, Member for Mundesley Ward said that due to financial pressures on the
Council Mundesley would suffer; with a car park increase and a beach hut increase.
He said that they should be encouraging people to visit the coastal villages and that
the charges were excessive for the facilities there. Mr B Smith said that that he
wanted the charges to be reviewed.
Mr A Wells asked whether any work had been done as to whether the charges
reflected provision in other parts of the country. The Portfolio Holder, Mr J Rest said
that a comparison had been undertaken and that charges for beach huts in North
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
5
17 February 2016
Norfolk were significantly lower than elsewhere in the country.
The Head of Assets and Leisure agreed that local charges were below comparable
sites. He said that the cost of the operation of Foreshore and public conveniences
were all additional costs and charges that needed to be covered.
The Head of Assets went onto say that there were two toilets and a café which were
owned by NNDC and that there had always been a £10 difference between
Mundesley and other sites.
The Corporate Director (SB) said that the car parking season tickets allowed access
at less than 60p per day.
Ms V Gay asked whether an assumption was being made that demand for beach
huts was fluid. The Head of Assets and Leisure replied that analysis showed this and
once the charges were agreed by Council they would write to the beach hut owners
and those on the waiting list to make them aware. Ms Gay queried why this had not
been done prior to the proposal. The Head of Assets and Leisure replied that at
present the only proposal for consideration was next year’s increase of £30.00.
The Chairman asked whether the beach hut owners and those on the waiting list
would be informed of all of the proposed future charges. The Head of Assets and
Leisure said that this would be made clear and that the further proposals would need
to be agreed in future years by Cabinet and Full Council.
Mr D Smith said that he was not concerned by the £30.00 increase but that the
proposed increases in the future were high. He asked how many people were on the
beach hut waiting lists and whether it varied depending on location. The Head of
Assets and Leisure said that the list was not broken down but that there were 250
people waiting for a beach hut. He said that some people had been on the waiting list
for over five years as the turnover was low.
Mrs S Butikofer asked whether people would be charged £25.00 for being on the list
each year. The Head of Assets and Leisure said that the charge would enable them
to manage the list more effectively and alleviate the estimates on demand. He said
that they had researched the fee and that other councils did this. He said that this
would be made clear to people.
The Head of Assets and Leisure explained that there were a number of resorts and
that people went on each list but that they only needed one beach hut and that the
lists were not a clear reflection of how many people were waiting. He said that
someone could be at number 30 on the list and still be expecting to wait a couple of
years when a hut becomes free and the people ahead of them no longer want a
beach hut so it could be within weeks.
Mr D Smith asked how many sites there were and the Chairman asked whether more
sites could be put in. The Head of Assets and Leisure said that there were a number
of issues including access and suitability, but that they were constantly reviewing
sites. He said that there were 250 beach hut sites following the renovation of
Cromer’s West Promenade.
Mr A Wells asked what the analysis of the list had shown. The Head of Assets and
Leisure said that there were 6 waiting lists and that the introduction of a charge to be
on the list would help with the analysis and that they would have a better estimate as
to how long people could expect to be on the waiting list.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
6
17 February 2016
Mr Wells asked if a degree of affordability had been analysed. The Head of Assets
and Leisure said that the proposals and the history of interest of the sites increases
and that the market would take them. He said that there was no other analysis.
Mr B Smith commented that people would drop off the lists who weren’t able to afford
the charges. He said that people would be forced off of the lists who couldn’t pay as
much and that it seemed unfair.
Mrs S Butikofer asked whether the list analysis had shown whether the people were
local, second home owners or businesses. The Head of Assets and Leisure said that
there weren’t any businesses as sub-letting was prohibited.
Mrs Butikofer said that she was concerned that it would deter people holidaying
locally. The Head of Assets and Leisure said that you didn’t need a beach hut to
enjoy the beach.
The Chairman said that beach huts were an iconic feature of the British seaside
holiday.
Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds said that there were strandkorbs in Germany and asked
whether these could be purchased for the purpose of renting out.
Mr J Rest said that they would look at having beach huts that people could rent out
for the day and as spaces became available they were looking as a more effective
service. He said that it was not a highly profitable service provided by the Council.
Mr B Smith said that they used to rent out beach huts but that they were sold off
through local estate agents.
Mrs Claussen-Reynolds clarified that the stradkorbs were not beach huts but baskets
on the beach and were an alternative.
Mrs Belson said that having a beach hut was not simple and that it was crammed
with the things her family needed to enjoy the beach. She said that Mundesley was
not as popular a destination as Cromer and that the pricing shouldn’t be the same.
She said that she had a parking permit which allowed her to park for 3 hours. She
added that if people paid £25 to be on the list that they were unlikely to leave it as
they had paid and would just stay on the list as people currently did.
The Corporate Director (SB) said that beach huts enhanced the area but that the
budget was very different than it had been and that they were a discretionary service.
He said that there was a wider debate concerning the tourism offer in North Norfolk
and that there was a significant cost involved in providing the tourism infrastructure
including beach cleansing, litter picking, public conveniences and parks. The
Corporate Director said that these costs were borne across the Council.
The Chair asked for clarification as to whether the £25 to be on the waiting list was
an annual charge or a one-off. The Head of Assets and Leisure said that the
proposed charge was.
The Corporate Director (SB) explained that the cost was essentially an administration
fee.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
7
17 February 2016
109.
MINUTES
The minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 13 January 2016
were accepted as an accurate record with the amendment that in regards to the
carrier bags public question, the gentleman had written to his MP and received a
response and had written a second time and was awaiting a further response.
110.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None.
111.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Mr A Wells and Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds made non-pecuniary interests in owning
second properties.
112.
PETITIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
None.
113. CONSIDERATION OF ANY MATTER REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE BY A
MEMBER
None.
114.
RESPONSES OF THE COUNCIL OR THE CABINET TO THE COMMITTEE’S
REPORTS OR RECOMMENDATIONS
None.
115.
CROMER WEST PROMENADE REVITILISATION PROGRAMME
Mrs S Butikofer commented that the Council had been too late to receive £200,000
funding from the FLAG fund the previous year and asked how the proposals related
to this.
The Head of Assets and Leisure said that they had been unable to draw down the
FLAG funding as once the site was handed over to contractors it was difficult to have
another contractor working on the same site. He said that they had drawn down
£50,000 from another funding source as well as insurance.
Mrs Butikofer asked why they had been unable to do it previously. The Head of
Assets and Leisure explained that the contractors needed to have control of the
entire site otherwise the work could take longer. He said that the storm surge
significantly impacted the works and that the work should have ended one year ago
but that the work had stopped for the summer period. He said that there could not
have been other contractors on site.
The Committee NOTED the report.
116.
EGMERE BUSINESS ZONE PROJECT
Mrs A Moore said that the project involved a large resource and asked whether it was
being used speculatively or whether an interested party was involved.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
8
17 February 2016
The Corporate Director (SB) said that there were two elements to the request:
1) Speculative with road and utilities and renting from the Walsingham estate
2) Building a premises for commercial lease, but that the conversation was ongoing
and that the move was financially prudent for the Council
Mrs Moore asked whether a specific client was in mind. The Corporate Director said
that for one plot of land this was the case. He said that it was an investment
opportunity for the Council and that there was a shortage of business land for
companies to move into.
Ms V Gay said that a good deal of work was involved and asked what the estimated
return would be. The Corporate Director said that he would need to obtain a written
answer for Ms Gay’s question.
Mr R Reynolds said that he agreed with the Corporate Director and that they should
look at the long term. He said that it was their duty to cooperate and that the Northern
Distributer Road (NDR) would attract businesses and that that NNDC were right to
proceed in this manner.
The Committee NOTED the report.
117.
MANAGING PERFORMANCE QUARTER 3 2015/16
Mr A Wells asked what a Destination Management Organisation (DMO) was intended
to achieve. The Corporate Director (SB) said that they promoted North Norfolk for
tourism purposes. He said that this had been previously carried out by the Council
with an annual holiday guide and website but that the view had been taken that this
service would be better led by the private sector.
Mr Wells asked whether it was measured by the businesses involved. The Corporate
Director (SB) said that there was evidence of holiday bookings and information and
that they had seen a significant increase in Norfolk’s tourism. He said that he could
not confirm that this was due to the DMO or the dualling of the A11, fears around
flying, etc, but that tourism continued to perform strongly.
Mr Wells asked whether there was evidence to link this to the DMO. The Corporate
Director (SB) replied that the tourism increase was a trend nationally, but that people
had a choice to holiday in Devon, Yorkshire or in Norfolk and said that Norfolk’s
holiday offer was compared favourably at a national level.
Mr Wells said that fewer affordable homes had been built than hoped and asked how
many people were on the housing list. He then asked how many houses had been
sold under the Right to Buy Scheme and asked whether the Council tracked how
many affordable houses there were in North Norfolk. The Corporate Director (SB)
said that there were three housing lists. He said that there were 2,532 at the end of
January 2015 with 326 in the highest band of most need and by the end of January
2016 there were 2,259 people waiting with 297 in most need. He said that he could
make a written answer available.
Mr Wells asked whether the expectation was for the Right to Buy Scheme to increase
or decrease in housing. Mr J Rest said that the criteria had not been published and
that it would be unfair to speculate.
Mr Wells asked how long it took to convert the sale of one house into the building of
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
9
17 February 2016
a new house under the Right to Buy Scheme. The Head of Finance said that the
Council received a capital programme fund and that it was not specifically for
individual houses. Mr Wells asked what the time was between the money being
received and being spent. The Head of Finance said that this detail was unavailable.
The Chairman asked how many affordable homes had been built in the last year. The
Corporate Director (SB) said that 36 houses had been completed since April and that
a further 64 had been consented to but had not yet been built. The Head of Finance
said that the New Homes Bonus for 2016/17 was a premium based on 79 properties.
Mr Wells asked how many fixed penalty notices for dog fouling had been issued in
the current year. The Corporate Director said that one had been issued since April,
but none in 2016 as far as he was aware but he said that he would have to check.
Mr Wells asked how many staff were allocated to dog fouling. The Corporate Director
(NB) said that no one was specifically assigned to dog fouling and that it was a part
of the work of the Environmental Protection Team. He said that unless the actual
fouling was witnessed then a fixed penalty notice could not be issued. He said that it
had always been difficult to prosecute and that he had been informed of one that
week.
Mr Wells said that the Council wanted to encourage people to report incidents and
said that the website stated the difficulties and asked whether this put people off
reporting dog fouling. The Corporate Director (NB) said that it was an issue of being
there and that they needed people to complain and report incidents so that they
could target work in particular areas of concern. He said that promotional work could
be effective.
Mr Wells asked whether the Council planned on sharing good practice with Great
Yarmouth Borough Council who had street wardens tackling dog fouling. The
Corporate Director (SB) said that the Chief Executive had asked the Head of
Environmental Health to look into this.
Mr D Smith said that when discussing the building of affordable homes that the
Council did not own or build the houses. The Chairman said that this was correct but
that they were involved with the planning side and that if affordable houses were not
being built then it was the Council’s role to ensure that they were.
Mr Wells said that the report stated that the Council no longer funded the DMO but
that they were currently funded by NNDC. The Corporate Director (SB) said that they
were in their final year.
Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds said that there were 55 activities on track with 9 completed
and that this was very positive. She asked why the Revenues and Benefits issue was
still on hold as it had been on hold for a long time. The Corporate Director (SB) said
that it was not a correct description and that they had jointly procured a system in
2011/12 with West Norfolk and King’s Lynn Borough Council and proposed to move
to a shared management arrangement. He said that they had experienced significant
technical issues regarding the data held at West Norfolk and how flexible it could be
over two sites and after one year, the data came back to NNDC. The Corporate
Director said that both authorities were now preforming well and that the savings had
been taken out of the service budget. Mrs Claussen-Reynolds said that this was
further good news on performance.
Mrs S Butikofer said that under delivering strong governance arrangements that
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
10
17 February 2016
there was information on delays and had been rates as important and urgent by
internal audit. The Head of Finance said that urgent meant that it needed to be
implemented on time and that the time scales had been overly ambitious. She said
that there were assurances around the urgent implementations and that it was due to
be discussed at Audit Committee the following month.
The Committee NOTED the report.
118.
ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
The Corporate Director (SB) said that the Annual Action Plan showed the key issues
to be taken forward over the next 12 months from April and were from the Corporate
Plan for 2015-2019.
Mrs A Moore, referring to the second part of the plan on page 2 of 5, said that the
target for visitors to the parks and countryside events had been reduced although
they were usually well attended and asked why there had been a reduced target
attributed. The Head of Assets and Leisure said that they wanted to shift the focus to
quality and that the targets previously had not been reflective of the quality of the
events hosted and that it would include a measure of customer satisfaction.
Ms V Gay said that there were no targets at all for the arts and that there had been
targets for disabled facilities grants but that there no longer was. She asked why this
was the case. The Corporate Director (NB) said that the disabled facilities grants
were entirely demand led and that there was in-depth monitoring at the time for the
application [process in terms of the number of referrals to NNDC. He said that they
were reliant on Norfolk County Council (NCC) for the Occupation Health (OH)
assessments and they ensured that they worked efficiently where they could. Ms Gay
said that she understood the disabled facilities grants process but that there were no
distinct ambitions.
The Corporate Director (SB) said that he would ask the Head of Economic and
Community Development to provide an answer to the arts question.
Mrs S Butikofer asked for clarification on the ‘deep history’ concept on page 6 of the
report. The Corporate Director (SB) said that North Norfolk had a pre-historic coast
with the West Runton Mammoth bones and the footprints at Happisburgh and that
they wanted to create a tourism offer around these similar to the Jurassic offer in
Devon, from Hunstanton down to Great Yarmouth, and that this was recently
assessed. Mrs Butikofer said that she would like to be kept informed on the project.
Mrs Butikofer expressed her concerns on addressing countryside on page 8 in
relation to areas of outstanding natural beauty (AONB) and asked whether an
amendment could be made to protect them. The Corporate Director (SB) said that he
would take the suggestion back to Cabinet. Mr R Reynolds said that in Development
Committee they placed a good deal of weight to AONBs and that as a Member of that
Committee Mrs Butikofer should be aware of that.
Mr G Williams asked whether the redevelopment of Cabbell Park was included and
he had missed the information in the papers. The Corporate Director (SB) said that
the leisure strategy regarding indoor sport referred to a Cromer hub facility and that
this was for a project team for Cabbell Park to consider. He said that no planning
application had been submitted by Cromer GP Surgery as they were awaiting NHS
funding to move to a bigger premises. The Corporate Director said that this would
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
11
17 February 2016
then enable works to begin on re-locating the football pitch and that they were as
ready as they could be. It was not expected that this work would be undertaken as
part of the Annual Action Plan for 2016/17.
Mr A Wells asked what proportion of procurement was spent with local businesses.
The Corporate Director (NB) said that any procurement of services had to show best
value for money and that he would provide a written answer to Mr Wells’ question.
The Head of Finance said that they carried out work analysing local suppliers and
that this went through Audit Committee.
Mr Wells asked whether the advice gained from Saddles was the only firm
considered or whether a local property firm was contacted. Mr J Rest said that the
contract was put out to tender and that 3 or 4 companies responded. He said that
Saddles use local people.
The Corporate Director (NB) said that the procurement value influenced how they
proceeded and that they were increasingly expected to consider Small and Medium
Enterprises (SMEs). He said that it was difficult to consider local SMEs without
breaking procurement rules. The Corporate Director said that local companies were
used on an internal retainer basis and what was needed from the service was
reflected in who was approached.
Mr Wells asked about the action points regarding capitalisation and budgets. The
Corporate Director (SB) said that a further addition was needed for completion.
Mr Wells said that the Council had no targets for outstanding claims for the disabled
facilities grants and that this was within NNDC’s power. The Corporate Director (NB)
explained that there were so many variables in the process and that over a third of
the applications were not completed through reasons like a change in circumstances
for the applicant. He said that there were too many variables in the individual process
and that they were currently experiencing a larger number of applications than
expected. He said that these may become a trend with an ageing population. The
Corporate Director confirmed that the process was monitored by managers at a
strategic level and that the monthly performance data showed what work was
outstanding.
The Committee NOTED the report.
The meeting breaked from 11.15am to 11.25am.
119.
2016/17 BUDGET REPORT
The Head of Finance introduced the report to the committee and said that it
explained the budget position and that council tax in the district had been frozen.
The Chairman reminded Members that they could put forward recommendations to
Full Council.
Mr A Wells, referring to pages 156 and 157 of the report, said that CIPfA advised
local authorities that each earmarked reserve should have a clear protocol including
a review and said that he could not find this information. The Head of Finance said
that the commentary in the reserves statement outlined the purpose of each
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
12
17 February 2016
earmarked reserve. She said that they would fluctuate and that the business rates
were earmarked as there were sensitivities and risks. The Head of Finance said that
the benefits of £0.5m was for a subsidy claim of £30m and that errors could impact
on NNDC. She said that some details were not in there but that they were under
constant review.
Mr Wells asked where the document that contains the information was. The Head of
Finance said that it was in the policy framework around council tax setting, etc and
said that there was nothing more detailed.
Mr Wells asked whether all of the reserves were necessary. The Head of Finance
said that they we recommended as part of the budget and that there was flexibility in
the reserves and that they were not treated in isolation. She said that NNDC was in a
healthy position and that with the future forecast of deficit they would be able to
deliver services.
Mr Wells asked whether it was accurate on how the reserves would be spent to
2020. The Head of Finance said the forecasts reflected the budget position.
Mr Wells said that 2020 expected to see reserves of £11.5m against the recognised
general reserve of £1.75m. The Head of Finance said that it was part of considering
projects over the short to medium term and that budgets could be adjusted but that
there were no detailed plans to spend it.
Mr Wells said that if the Council made no increases to car parks, beach huts and
council tax that the Council would be in a secure financial position in 2020 and that
they were sitting on money. The Head of Finance advised that it would not deliver a
sustainable budget.
Mr Wells asked were the equity for the proposed property company was in the
budget. The Head of Finance said that this had not been factored in.
Ms V Gay said that there would be a surplus of £900,000 and asked whether this
would have been projected two years ago and would it have been so large. The
Head of Finance replied possibly not.
Ms Gay asked about the disabled facilities grants and said that there had been
significant financial slippage and that she had noted what the Corporate Director
(NB) had said earlier. Ms Gay said that they expected further demand of the service
and that there were underlying issues and asked whether there was anything to
address this need. The Corporate Director (NB) said that the Council could employ
an Occupational Therapist. He said they were statutory provisions for the responsible
authority of adult social services and that they undertook the assessments. He said
that Broadland District Council had carried out a pilot with additional external funding
and employed an occupational therapist to carry out the low level work with the
permission of the County Council to accept the assessments in the grant process.
The Corporate Director said that they would need County Council's approval for the
information to be accepted. He said that there were obstacles to overcome but that it
was possible; the biggest obstacle was the availability of occupational therapists as
vacant posts were not being filled.
Ms Gay said that the wording on page 110 of the report suggested that there were no
allotments made for this in the future. The Corporate Director (NB) said that the
Council had received funding from the Better Care Fund for the disabled facilities
grants and that it was a joint decision between Norfolk County Council and the
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
13
17 February 2016
Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG). He said that they needed to ensure there was
enough funding for the grants they were expecting and said that the Council didn't
know whether the Better Care Fund would increase from Central Government, but
that they had enough for the current year. The Corporate Director said that there was
a possibility that any underspend could be rolled over to the following year but that
this was speculation.
Ms Gay asked for a further explanation as to why there were no future projections.
The Corporate Director (NB) said that they didn't know what would be given year on
year and that the County Council and CCG influenced how much each district was
given and therefore it was impossible to say but that the expectation was that they
would receive the same amount.
Mr D Smith asked how much the Tidal Surge had cost NNDC. The Head of Finance
said that the cost to the Council was quite small thanks to the grants available and
that the surge cost a gross of £2.9m and cost £429,000 for NNDC.
Mrs A Moore, referring to restructuring and invest to save in the budget, asked
whether the funds were for one off redundancies and whether there were any plans
for further redundancies. The Head of Finance said that services were restructured
and that redundancies were funded from this reserve.
Mrs A Green asked whether the £2,000 a year lease on the Gypsy and Travellers
sites outlined on page 111 were profitable. The Head of Finance answered that they
were originally funded from an external grant and that the lease payments were
funded by grants but that there was a nominal income.
Mrs S Butikofer said the Housing Act 2004 stated that people had to move on if the
land was occupied. She continued that in having the facilities available, NNDC could
react in a positive way and that it allowed for improved relationships with the
community and parish councils and was not about recovering costs. She believed
that they would need to consider how the facilities would be retained and operated
once the funding ended. The Chair requested that an update on Gypsy and
Travellers sites was provided for the Committee.
Mr G Williams said that the Tourist Information Centres (TICs) had received a drop
down in the budget on page 132 of the report and that on page 150 there was a
review of the TICs operations and asked for an explanation of the process. The Head
of Finance said that the savings were factored in and that it reflected these savings
with the transfer of the Sheringham TIC to North Norfolk Railway - that there was a
figure movement. She said it was the biggest reduction in relation to Sheringham.
The Corporate Director (NB) added that North Norfolk Railway had taken on
Sheringham TIC with the provision of including the public toilets. He said that the
service would be operational by April.
Mr Williams said that page 150 outlined the approach proposed for Holt TIC with a
prediction of savings of £17,000 before a review had been carried out. Mr Williams
also asked about the tourism and marketing saving on £12,000 on page 149. The
Corporate Director (SB) said that this was the contribution to the DMO website and
that it was a transitional arrangement.
Mr Williams asked whether there was a budget attached to developing the Deep
History project. The Head of Assets and Leisure said that there was not a separately
identifiable budget but that it was part of the West Prom Scheme.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
14
17 February 2016
Mr Williams said that Cromer Museum promoted the areas deep history and that they
had received annual funding from NNDC but that this was not in the budget. The
Head of Finance confirmed that it had been a one-off payment. Mr Williams said that
the museum had received funding for the past five years. The Head of Finance said
that she would find out and Ms Gay asked for a written response.
The Head of Assets and Leisure said that the Deep History project was a concept at
the present time and that budgets would be identified later. He went on to say that
officers were progressing a World Heritage bid with discussions on how feasible this
was.
Mrs Butikofer also voiced her concerns that the mammoth was linked with the West
Prom in Cromer when it was a key reason to visit West Runton. The Head of Assets
said that he would take Mrs Butikofer's concerns on board.
Mrs Butikofer asked which five public conveniences were being disposed of as
referred to on page 113 of the report. The Head of Assets and Leisure said that they
were not specifically disposing of sites but looking at a variety of options.
Overstrand - progressing discussions of handing over the facilities to the
parish council. Part of this proposal to make a reducing contribution to the
running of the facility.
Wells-next-the-Sea - re-provision on the quay - trying to regenerate the site
and enhance environmental aspects and generate income.
Fakenham (Highfields) - facilities revitilisation.
Cromer (Melbourne Slope) - Pier toilets are award-winning and repositioning
toilets to nearer the slope - toilets underneath will become surplus regenerating the site to produce an income to contribute to the conveniences
costs.
Sheringham (Lushers Passage) - brand new facilities at Station Approach
Stalham - poor state of repair.
Mrs Butikofer said that two of the facilities had no running hot water (at West Runton
and at Holt Country Park) and requested that this was looked at.
Mrs P Grove-Jones asked how many conveniences were in North Norfolk and said
that they were looking to lose five. The Head of Assets said that there were 39 public
conveniences and that it was being reviewed.
Mrs Grove-Jones said that Stalham had lost their banks and now would be losing
their toilets. She said that this had repeatedly come up and that the District Council
had asked the Town Council to take on the responsibility of the toilets. She said that
there were no other facilities apart from in the Tesco supermarket or when the Town
Hall was open. She hoped the review would include the Town Council and the two
District Members.
The Chairman said that it was a statutory responsibility to provide public
conveniences. The Head of Assets and Leisure said that it cost £670,000 to operate
the toilets in the district and that they supported the tourism infrastructure. He added
that some authorities charged and that they were trying to reduce their costs.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
15
17 February 2016
The Corporate Director (SB) said that the facilities in Stalham were poor, that they
were near to Tesco and that people were exercising choice. He said that they were
not withdrawing the facilities but looking at suitability with re-location as a possibility.
Mrs Grove-Jones said that the Town Council had looked at having facilities at the
library as the toilets were in a very poor place. The Corporate Director (SB) said that
they wanted to make better use of public buildings for services in areas.
The Head of Assets and Lesiure said they were exploring many possibilities including
an agreement with cafés as part of a 'comfort scheme'. He said that this would give
additional hours in remote locations. He went on to say that alternative provisions
were being looked at and that the challenges moving forwards including the number
of assets.
Mr B Smith said that he had concerns with the toilets at North Walsham; both at New
Road and Vicarage Road and asked whether the Council owned them and whether a
charge would mean a better standard. The Head of Assets and Leisure confirmed
that NNDC owned both sites and said that some of the challenges faced were
keeping facilities to an expected standard whilst reducing the costs. He said that the
sites were monitored regularly like city facilities and that the charging option had
been discussed but that a capital investment was required.
Mrs Butikofer said that the cost to put in hot water at the site at West Runton had
been deemed too high.
Ms Gay said that North Walsham was the population centre of the District and that
any administration looking to close public conveniences would not be looked kindly
upon. She added that Breckland District Council had subsidised the maintenance in
Swaffham and that the toilets were closed within one year.
Ms Gay asked about the economics with Environmental Health on page 150 and
asked why £86,000 had been removed from the budget and asked whether it was in
connection with the Broads waste bins. The Corporate Director (NB) said that the
cost was for a vehicle including a year's running costs but that the waste service
could not be expanded and so the budget had been removed. Ms Gay asked for
confirmation that it was not in connection with a loss in service and that they were
vehicle related costs. The Corporate Director (NB) confirmed that this was the case.
Mr Wells commented that when previous ground maintenance savings had been
made they had to spend money reintroducing the service. The Corporate Director
(NB) said that they worked with Members and contractors to see where savings
could be made and that the danger was taking too much out. He said that the wet
summer of the previous year had meant that the grass had to be cut more regularly
and that the cost of reinstating the service had been taken out of the savings and that
they were looking at ground maintenance issues.
Mr Wells asked for clarification that the issue regarding the Broads waste bins were a
delegated decision and had been made. The Democratic Services Team Leader
confirmed this and said that the Committee had not reverted the decision and that the
outcome of the debate had been that NNDC would work with councils regarding the
cost implications. The Corporate Director (SB) said that a number of sites were on
private land and that the services were being withdrawn and had been abused by
local businesses and residents.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
16
17 February 2016
The Committee NOTED the report.
120.
CAR PARK FEES & CHARGES
The Head of Assets and Leisure introduced the report with option 3, as outlined on
page 176, was the preferred option; a 30p increase to exclude standard car parking.
He said that the standard fees and season tickets had been frozen. The Head of
Assets and Leisure said that direct debit payments would make the season ticket
more affordable.
Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds said that direct debits were the way forward and that she
was pleased that the cost of the season ticket had been frozen and that Fakenham
would not see an increase in parking fees.
Mrs S Butikofer said that the coastal car parks had been dealt with in one lump and
that although this had been done historically, it could be changed. She asked what
the justification could be to price the car parks in Mundesley, Runton and
Happisburgh the same as Cromer and Sheringham and that the facilities were
significantly different and she was disappointed.
Mr A Wells said that the purpose was to raise money and that he had worked out that
an elderly person using a coastal car park twice a week to shop locally would see a
£30 increase per year in their parking costs and that a young couple using the car
park once a week, assuming that they mainly shop at supermarkets, would
experience a £15 increase. He asked whether it was fair on residents. The Corporate
Director (SB) said that the season tickets were very good value and would encourage
people to purchase them.
Mr Wells asked what assumptions the Government had made in respect of Councils
raising more funds and asked whether the assumption had been an increase in
council tax. The Head of Finance said that there was a table showing this on page 99
of the report.
Mr Wells supposed that the assumption was that councils would increase council tax
but that NNDC had decided to increase car parks fees instead. He said that people
on limited means were protected against council tax increases but that this was not
available with car parks and asked whether an assessment of fairness had been
carried out. The Head of Assets and Leisure said that the Council was right to charge
all subsidies but that the council tax affected everyone in the district whereas people
did not have to use the car parks owned by NNDC. He said that it was only right that
visitors and tourists contributed to the costs and not just residents and that the
season ticket was good value for money but that no separate assessment had been
carried out.
Mr D Smith said that Norfolk County Council were implementing the initial policy on
parking metres in Sheringham and Cromer and that it was likely they would vote in
favour of the scheme. The Head of Assets and Leisure said that the proposals were
being drawn up by NCC and that they would have to carry out a TRO (Traffic
Regulation Order) and town councils would be engaged with. He went on to say that
the free parking would continue but that people would have the option to pay after the
first 45 minutes and stay longer.
The Democratic Services Team Leader said that she had contacted NCC following
the Councillors Call for Action on parking in January 2015 and put forward the
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
17
17 February 2016
Committee’s recommendation that the NNDC representative on the Parking
Partnership would be able to vote but that she had received no response.
Mr J Rest confirmed that he was the representative on the Parking Partnership and
there was no right to vote; he was invited to listen and to give NNDC’s point of view.
He said that the decision would not be taken at the next meeting of the partnership
and that it would take a while as there was a lot of opposition to the scheme. Mr Rest
said that if NNDC didn’t comply that NCC would likely levy a charge on NNDC for not
taking part.
Mr D Smith said that it was originally to part pay for the enforcement of parking as
well as NNDC’s car parks. The Head of Assets and Leisure explained that the
Parking Partnership was established following the transfer of highways from the
police to the County Council and that it was an economies of scale. He said that
Norwich were not in the partnership, but that the other councils in the County were.
The Head of Assets and Leisure clarified the role of the Norfolk Parking Partnership
Joint Committee. He explained that some of the partners such as Great Yarmouth
Borough Council and Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council made a financial
contribution.
Mr N Pearce spoke about concerns in his ward of Suffield Park regarding the
proposals to introduce charges for on-street parking in Cromer. He said that he
planned to raise concerns via the Norfolk Parking Partnership Joint Committee. Mr J
Rest, the Councils appointed representative to the Joint Committee, said that he was
aware of the concerns.
Mr B Smith commented on-street parking would only benefit NCC. He did not agree
with increasing coastal village car park charges and that holiday makers were
unlikely to purchase season tickets. The Head of Assets and Leisure said that there
were other season tickets available apart from the annual one and that shorter period
ones were available and may be more beneficial to other car park users. He said that
the on-street parking would be considerably higher than the off-street parking
available.
Mr N Pearce said that if they set up the scheme enforcement would be required and
that it was nothing more than a cash cow and that it should be opposed at all levels.
Mr N Smith reminded Members that the decision on parking by NCC had not been
made.
Mr D Smith said that it could mean that NNDC have to enforce something that they
don’t agree with.
The Chairman encouraged Members to lobby their County Councillors to share their
views.
The Committee NOTED the report.
121.
TREASURY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY STATEMENT 2016/17
The Committee NOTED the Cabinet Work Programme.
122.
PROPERTY INVESTMENT STRATEGY – ESTABLISHMENT OF PROPERTY
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
18
17 February 2016
The Democratic Services Team Leader informed Members that the resolution had
changed and that the Chief Executive would be preparing a business case to be
considered at Full Council.
Mr J Rest said that a robust business case was being written by the Chief Executive
and that this report would go through to Cabinet, to the Overview and Scrutiny
Committee and then to Full Council.
123.
THE CABINET WORK PROGRAMME
The Democratic Services Team Leader said that the work programme had changed
and that there were two items going to the March meeting; Highfields and the
Communications Strategy.
The Committee NOTED the Cabinet Work Programme.
124.
OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY WORK PROGRAMME AND UPDATE
The Democratic Services Team Leader informed Members that the Clinical
Commissioning Group (CCG) would be attending the March meeting and requested
that questions were submitted in advance.
The Democratic Services Team Leader said that she would be circulating information
previously requested regarding the recycling of textiles.
The Committee NOTED the Overview & Scrutiny work programme.
The meeting concluded at 13.07pm
_____________________________
Chairman
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
19
17 February 2016
Agenda Item No____11_______
BUDGET MONITORING REPORT 2015/16 – PERIOD 10
Summary:
This report summarises the budget monitoring position
for the revenue account and capital programme to the
end of January 2016.
Options considered:
Not applicable
Conclusions:
The overall position at the end of January 2016 shows
an under spend of (£1,765,761) to date for the current
financial year on the revenue account, this is currently
expected to deliver a full year variance of (£876,500).
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
1) Cabinet note the contents of the report and
the current budget monitoring position;
2) Cabinet note the updated Capital Programme
and financing for 2015/16 to 2018/19 as
detailed in Appendix C;
3) Cabinet
Approve the capital budget
virements as requested within the report;
4) Cabinet approve the additional capital budget
requirement of £35,000 in relation to the
North Walsham regeneration scheme, to be
funded from capital resources.
Reasons for
Recommendations:
To update Members on the current
monitoring position for the Council.
budget
LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS AS REQUIRED BY LAW
(Papers relied on the write the report and which do not contain exempt information)
System budget monitoring reports
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Cllr Wyndham Northam
Contact Officer, telephone number and email: Karen Sly, 01263 516243,
Karen.sly@north-norfolk.gov.uk
1.
1.1
Introduction
This report compares the actual expenditure and income position at the end
of January 2016 to the Updated budget for 2015/16. The Original Base
20
Budget as agreed by Full Council in February 2015 has been updated for inyear virements and roll forwards from previous periods.
1.2
The base budget for 2015/16 included savings and additional income totalling
£222,000 to be delivered in the year. Section 3.1 of this report includes the
latest position on both of these areas.
1.3
The report also includes an update on the current capital programme and
starts to highlight where scheme budgets will be reprofiled to the 2016/17
financial year.
2.
Budget Monitoring Position – Revenue Services
2.1
The General Fund Summary at Appendix A shows the high level budget
monitoring position at 31 January 2016 which shows a year to date variance
of (£1,765,761) underspend. Of the underspend against the profiled budget,
£1,784,859 is in relation to the service variances and £49,427 is in relation to
the treasury management position. Details of these variances are included
within sections 2.3 and 4.1 respectively in the report. Appendix B provides
further details of the individual service variances.
2.2
Variances are reported against the updated budget in Appendix A. Any
budgets and reserves affected will be updated accordingly.
2.3
The following table shows the over/under spend to date for the more
significant variances compared to the updated budget and those that are
forecast to have a year-end variance.
Table 1 – Service Variances
Over/ (Under)
Spend to Date
against
Updated
Budget
£
Assets and Leisure
Car Parking – The favourable variance to the end of
period 10 largely reflects income from pay and display
ticket sales above the profiled budget. Although the
full year effect of the additional income is likely to be
reduced by a reduction in income from excess charge
notices. As this service is demand led and seasonally
influenced the level of income will continue to be
closely monitored. At the current time a full year
variance of (£132,000) is forecast.
Estimated
Full Year
Variance
Against
Updated Budget
£
(138,894)
(132,000)
Industrial Estates – The variance to date is mainly
due to reduced rental following vacation of premises
during the year.
23,043
13,000
Administration Buildings Services – £14,968
additional repairs and maintenance costs resultant
from further tenancies within office buildings, this is
offset by rental income. There is also additional costs
in relation to the canteen from the use of agency
staffing and the purchase of goods for resale which is
partly offset by additional income.
11,901
10,000
21
Table 1 – Service Variances
Over/ (Under)
Spend to Date
against
Updated
Budget
£
Property Services – The anticipated full year
variance of (£20,000) mainly relates to employee
savings generated from vacancies in year. A one off
redundancy payment has been made following a
service restructure, this will be funded from
Restructuring and Invest to Save Reserve.
Estimated
Full Year
Variance
Against
Updated Budget
£
4,163
(20,000)
Foreshore – The variance to period 10 relates to a
reduction in repairs and maintenance expenditure
although there is not anticipated to be a full year
effect.
(33,641)
0
Leisure Complexes – The main variance year to
date relates to (£13,776) - reduction in repairs and
maintenance costs and (£2,020) reduction in grounds
maintenance costs. There is not currently anticipated
to be a full year effect.
(18,054)
0
Investment Properties – The majority of the variance
to date reflects a shortfall of income against the
profiled budget, mainly in relation to the Grove Lane
Depot and also where insurance claims are
outstanding.
61,384
57,500
20,498
0
(109,988)
0
(491,588)
0
CLT and Corporate
Legal Services – Higher employee and mileage costs
which will be fully offset by income. No full year effect
is expected.
Community, Economic Development and Coast
Housing Strategy – The year to date variance relates
to VAT Shelter Receipts received from Victory
Housing Association. This money is ring-fenced to
fund capital expenditure and will be transferred to an
earmarked reserve at the year-end and will have no
effect on the forecast revenue position.
Community and Localism – The underspend reflects
grant funding which has not yet been drawn down
including some in relation to 2014/15. It is likely that
there will be a significant balance at the end of the
Financial Year and this will be earmarked for
allocation in future years, when we no longer receive
second homes funding from Norfolk County Council.
In addition the Council has received a number of
grants for which no budget exists, the most notable
being £100,000 in respect of the Coastal Revival
Fund. This money needs to be spent by the end of the
current Financial Year.
22
Table 1 – Service Variances
Over/ (Under)
Spend to Date
against
Updated
Budget
£
Coastal Management – Salary and on costs
associated with a vacant post which is currently being
advertised. There will be a request to roll any
underspend forward at year-end for related coastal
management spend.
Customer Services
IT Support Services – Of the variance against the
profiled budget to the end of period 10 (£45,603)
represents an underspend on employee expenditure
due to vacant posts. A full year saving of (£25,000) is
currently anticipated after taking account of reserve
movements due to digital transformation staffing.
(£12,060) and recoverable works carried out at
Fakenham.
Tourist Information Centres – The variance to date
relates to a number of areas including stock
purchases for resale and computing and telephone
budgets although the majority of this will be spent
before the end of the financial year.
Environmental Health
Waste Collection and Disposal – The under spend
to date is made up of a number of variances within the
service against the profiled budget, which are
summarised as:
 £165,817 underspend against the profiled budget
relates to invoices to Norfolk County Council for
Commercial waste disposal not yet received;
 A vacant post which has recently been appointed
to and therefore a part year saving of £10,634 has
accrued;
 A provision made in the 2014/15 accounts which
was less than anticipated of £11,614;
 Additional fee income from garden, bulky and trade
waste customers totalling £62,140;
 The level of contamination within the recycling
materials continues to be monitored to identify any
in year financial implications, although the forecast
position allows for £50,000 in respect of this;
 The full year effect includes £90,000 for a payment
to Kier towards the cost of a trade waste vehicle
which was included in the budget but is not now
required.
Civil Contingencies – Surplus grant income in
respect of Business Support grants received from the
23
Estimated
Full Year
Variance
Against
Updated Budget
£
(21,501)
0
(63,038)
(25,000)
(20,322)
(4,000)
(281,878)
(120,000)
(18,335)
(15,000)
Table 1 – Service Variances
Over/ (Under)
Spend to Date
against
Updated
Budget
£
Estimated
Full Year
Variance
Against
Updated Budget
£
DCLG.
Financial Services
Local Taxation – Employee savings relating to the
Visiting officer post which has been held vacant
pending a review of the wider enforcement role within
the council.
(29,607)
(20,000)
Benefits – The variance to date is mainly due to
vacancies and staff turnover within the team, the full
year saving has been reduced slightly by the use of
overtime with the service.
(78,550)
(60,000)
Benefits and Revenue Management – Employee
savings due to a vacant post pending further review.
(62,300)
(50,000)
Corporate Finance – Employee savings due to a
vacant post pending further review of options to fill the
post. This has been partially offset by the use of
external technical support.
(52,570)
(35,000)
Corporate and Democratic Core – The variance to
date includes some outstanding provisions from
2014/15 for which the invoices have not yet been
received for the external audit. The full year effect is in
relation to bank charges for the year.
(41,077)
(25,000)
(20,370)
(10,000)
(37,045)
(15,000)
38,305
0
(49,432)
0
Organisational Development
Human Resources and Payroll – Income received
for staff supplied on secondments and joint working
partially offset by additional travelling costs.
Insurance and Risk Management – The main
reasons for this service variance are (£7,610) Salaries
and on costs are lower as a result of staff vacancies.
(£14,460) Savings on public and employers' liability,
and vehicle insurance premiums. (£11,938)
Professional fees relating to Insurance support and
tender advice.
Registration Services – The variance to the end of
period 10 reflects costs relating to electoral
registration and the conduct of the election in May
2015. Grant income is due and further funding has
been requested to cover all costs.
Planning
Development Management – The favourable
variance showing at the end of period 10 reflects
24
Table 1 – Service Variances
Over/ (Under)
Spend to Date
against
Updated
Budget
£
Estimated
Full Year
Variance
Against
Updated Budget
£
income received compared to the profiled budget. To
date additional income of (£207,749) has been
received above the budget to the end of January. This
has been offset by additional employee related costs
for temporary staffing and agency. The overall position
continues to be monitored, although it is currently
anticipated that there will be a full year net
underspend (after allowing for additional income
received in the year) in the service of £70,000 This will
be requested to be rolled forward to smooth future
growth associated with the service restructurings.
Building Control – Of the variance at the end of
period 10, (£8,092) relates to transport cost savings
due to service efficiencies. The remainder relates to
income received above the level budgeted. Overall
there is currently expected to be a full year favourable
variance of (£30,000) although this will be allocated to
the earmarked reserve in line with the ring-fencing of
surpluses for the service.
(26,974)
0
Property Information – The budget allowed for the
transfer of elements of the land charges service to the
Land Registry during the year. The timescales for the
national project have now slipped for which there will
be a resulting full year effect. As the service continues
to be provided solely by the Council this has resulted
in income being received in the year above the
budget. This is expected to be around (£100,000) for
the year. As with other cost recovery services any
surplus should be ring-fenced and considered when
setting new fee structures. The current year variance
also includes £92,953 for a New Burdens grant which
has been received in respect of the Legal challenges.
(218,220)
(10,000)
(1,654,090)
(460,500)
TOTALS
3
Budget Monitoring Position – Savings and Additional Income
3.1
The budget for 2015/16 included savings and additional income totaling
£222,000 within the service areas. Table 2 below summaries the current
position for each service heading.
3.2
The 15/16 budget assumed a £7,000 saving from overtime, the actual to date
on overtime is above the original budget, although this has been funded from
salary underspending, for example where a post has not yet been filled.
25
Table 2 – Savings and Additional
Income 2015/16
Corporate Savings
2015/16
Base
Budget
£
101,000
2015/16
Movement
from the
Updated
Budget at
P10
101,000
0
2015/16
Updated
Budget
£
Finance
96,000
96,000
0
Environmental Health
25,000
25,000
0
222,000
222,000
0
Total
4
Non Service Variances – Investment Interest to period 10
4.1
The interest budget for 2015/16 anticipates that a total of £430,610 will be
earned from treasury investments and interest on loans to Broadland Housing
Association. Overall an average balance of £19.6m is assumed, at an
average interest rate of 2.2%.
4.2
At the end of period 10, a total of £410,393 had been earned, resulting in a
surplus against the year to date budget of £49,427. The rate of interest
achieved was 1.53% from an average balance available for investment of
£31.9m. A further £14,159 has been received in various other interest
receipts giving an overall surplus £62,919. By the year end an overall surplus
of £70k is anticipated for all interest income.
4.3
The loans to Broadland Housing Association under the Local Investment
Strategy are now anticipated to be made in 2016/17. This will mean the
interest rate achieved in 2015/16 will be below the budget figure. However,
interest in total will exceed the budget as investment balances have remained
well above budget this year.
4.4
The LAMIT pooled property fund continues to perform well and an income
return of 6.0% is anticipated for the year. Further investments have been
made in covered bonds and at the end of period 10, more than 30% of the
portfolio was invested in these securities. Covered bonds are a secure form
of investment and are exempt from a bail-in of investors, should the
investment counterparty get into difficulties, thereby preserving the invested
sum.
5
Funding Variances – Retained Business Rates
5.1
A surplus of £346K is currently forecast to be achieved on the Business Rates
Retention Scheme at the year-end. This is due to the following factors:

A reduction of £66k in the amount of Section 31 grant the Council expects
to receive from central government for loss of income resulting from
changes in successive Autumn Statements. Additional grant of £32k is
expected in compensation for additional mandatory reliefs being granted,
but this is off-set by £98k reduced grant due to applying a cap on the
amount of the tariff paid to the business rate pool. The purpose of making
Section 31 grant payments is to ensure the Council is in the same
financial position it would have been if the Autumn Statement measures
had not been made. Because the tariff is capped and is lower than it
would otherwise have been, an adjustment to the grant is made.
26
 The levy payment paid to the Business Rates Pool is anticipated to
reduce by £254k due to a net reduction in the amount of retained
income in 2015/16 of £1.3m.
 The additional income of £158k from renewable energy schemes in
2014/15 which will be accounted for in 2015/16.
5.2
The business rate income is anticipated to be lower than budget this year due
to a higher level of mandatory relief being granted (mainly small business rate
and charitable occupation relief), and making a large provision for appeals
relating to purpose built health centres.
5.3
The reduction in income will result in a deficit on the Collection Fund which,
under the operation of the business rates retention scheme, will be taken into
account in the following year when determining the income shares. An
earmarked reserve has been established to mitigate any significant in-year
impact on the budget of surpluses and deficit to avoid significant fluctuations
year on year. It will therefore be recommended that the surplus is transferred
to the earmarked reserve to mitigate the fluctuation in 2016/17 onwards.
6.0
Budget Monitoring Position – Summary
6.1
The following table provides a summary of the full year projections for the
service areas along with an updated use of reserves figure where applicable.
Table 3 - Summary of Full Year Effects 2015/16
Service Areas (Table 1)
Treasury Management
Retained Business Rates
Total
Estimated
Movement
From
Updated
Budget
£
(460,500)
(70,000)
(346,000)
(876,500)
6.2
The overall position will continue to be monitored and the overall outturn
position will be reported in June which will include recommendations on the
allocation of the year end surplus.
7.0
Budget Monitoring Position – Capital
7.1
An update of the capital programme was presented to members in February
as part of the budget report.
7.2
Appendix C shows the latest position against the current 2015/16 approved
programme, and provides details of expenditure up to the end of period 10.
The appendix also highlights two schemes where virements of remaining
budgets are requested, together with additional slippage in relation to a
further six schemes.
7.3
Public Conveniences (Plumbing and Drainage) – There is currently a
budget balance of £2,077 available in relation to this scheme. It is requested
27
that the unspent balance is vired to the Public Convenience Water Heater
Improvements scheme, to increase this budget to £12,077 in total.
7.4
Fakenham Connect Roof Works – In order to proceed with the works to the
Fakenham Connect office building, it was necessary to undertake some works
to the roof of the building to make it water tight. A separate budget of £20,000
was allocated for these works, however the expenditure was incurred within
the overall capital scheme for Fakenham Connect and Cromer Office Works.
As such it is requested that a virement of the budget for the roof works be
undertaken to this scheme, to reflect the expenditure incurred in order to
facilitate the tenancies for the Department of Work and Pensions and the
Early Help Hub within the building.
7.5
Cromer Pier and West Prom Refurbishment Project – Phase one of this
scheme is being progressed and some works have been undertaken. It is
however, anticipated that the expenditure in the current financial year will only
be £150,000 by the end of March. The balance of budget in the 2015/16
financial year is therefore requested to be slipped into 2016/17.
7.6
North Lodge Park – It is not anticipated that this budget will be spent within
the current year, and as such the balance of £196,268 is requested for
slippage to 2016/17.
7.7
Victory Swim and Fitness Centre – Some works have been undertaken in
relation to this scheme, but nothing further is anticipated by the end of the
financial year. The remaining budget of £38,019 is therefore requested to be
slipped to the new financial year.
7.8
Steelwork Protection to Victory Pool and Fakenham Gym – Due to staff
vacancies these works are not currently being progressed. It is unlikely that
these works will be undertaken by the year end, so the balance of budget is
requested for slippage to 2016/17.
7.9
Holt Country Park – This scheme will not be progressed until the new
financial year. It is therefore requested that the budget of £12,500 be slipped
to 2016/17.
7.10
Fakenham Gym – This scheme will not be progressed in the current year.
The budget of £15,000 is requested for slippage to the new year when the
works will be undertaken.
7.11
Further to these requested adjustments there are three further schemes
where members are asked to note and / or approve amendments to the
budgets.
7.12
Cabbell Park – All budgeted works in relation to this scheme have now been
completed. However, further works have been identified associated with the
provision of changing facilities on the school site, together with potential
works to the pitch, floodlighting and barriers. Once the position has been
28
finalised, Members will be updated and the additional costs associated with
these works will need to be considered.
7.13
North Walsham Regeneration Scheme – The current budget available in
relation to this scheme is £83,116; however a further budget requirement of
£35,000 has been identified in order to complete the works. Members will be
aware that this scheme covered the purchase and landscaping of the site at
4a Market Street. The additional budget is requested due to the eventual
purchase price for the site being higher than originally anticipated following
the independent valuation assessment. In addition to this, as the site is in a
Conservation Area, following stakeholder consultation, and further
consideration, it was felt that it would be best to have a York stone finish on
the site, in keeping with the existing town centre street scheme. Consequently
the additional purchase costs and higher specification landscaping have
resulted in the additional budget requirement.
7.14
Fakenham Connect and Cromer Office Works – In order to accommodate
the DWP and Early Help Hubs within the Fakenham Connect and Cromer
office buildings, an original budget of £156,000 was to be made available to
complete the required works.
7.15
The revised forecast for the capital expenditure on the scheme is now
£245,000 in total, resulting in additional expenditure of £89,000. The majority
of the additional cost is due to extra works required by the DWP at both
premises, and their total contribution updated to reflect the additional works.
After allowing for the existing capital budgets the additional cost to the Council
is £30,000. This additional expenditure has however, enabled the Council to
improve facilities within the Fakenham Connect building (the disaster recovery
room, former CCTV office and an additional ground floor office space) which
should generate further income in the region of £15,000 to £20,000 per
annum in addition to the income generated by the agreements with the DWP.
8
Conclusion
8.1
The revenue budget is showing an estimated full year under spend for the
current financial year of £876,500. The overall financial position continues to
be closely monitored and it is anticipated that the overall budget for the
current year will be achieved.
9
Financial Implications and Risks
9.1
The detail within section 2 of the report highlights the more significant
variances including those that are estimated to result in a full year impact.
9.2
The Original base budget for 2015/16 included service savings and additional
income totalling £222,000; these are still on target to be achieved. The
progress in achieving these is being monitored as part of the overall budget
monitoring process and where applicable corrective action will be identified
and implemented to ensure the overall budget remains achievable.
9.3
The estimated outturn shown in Table 1 will continue to be monitored during
the year and where applicable will be transferred to reserves.
29
10
Sustainability - None as a direct consequence from this report.
11
Equality and Diversity - None as a direct consequence from this report.
12
Section 17 Crime and Disorder considerations - None as a direct
consequence from this report.
30
Appendix A
General Fund Summary P10 2015/16
Name
Full Year
Updated
YTD Budget
YTD Actuals
YTD
Variance
Commitments
Remaining
Budget
£
£
£
£
£
£
Net Cost Of Services
Assets & Leisure
Clt / Corporate
2,252,321
1,534,081
1,386,507
(147,574)
1,099,430
(233,616)
0
42,440
62,160
19,720
19,318
(81,478)
5,816,795
1,823,413
1,227,294
(596,119)
302,020
4,287,481
624,761
535,742
413,064
(122,678)
78,705
119,061
Environmental Health
3,877,714
2,644,015
2,328,031
(315,984)
1,228,662
321,020
Finance
3,298,602
3,152,557
2,904,398
(248,159)
96,103
298,101
Organisational Development
1,050,957
895,985
841,255
(54,730)
16,941
192,761
Planning
1,466,866
1,212,807
893,470
(319,337)
59,530
513,865
18,388,016
11,841,039
10,056,180
(1,784,859)
2,900,710
5,417,195
1,760,520
1,760,520
1,760,522
2
0
3,521,042
Capital Charges
(2,096,742)
(1,747,290)
(1,747,290)
0
0
(3,844,032)
Refcus
(3,533,954)
0
0
0
0
(3,533,954)
0
0
87
87
0
87
(426,390)
(361,633)
(424,528)
(62,895)
0
(850,918)
56,000
0
0
0
0
56,000
1,123,952
0
0
0
0
1,123,952
Community, Econ Dev & Coast
Customer Services & ICT
Net Cost Of Services
Non Service Expenditure/Income
Precepts Of Parish Councils
External Interest Paid
Interest Receivable
Minimum Revenue Provision
Revenue Financing For Capital
Retirement Benefits
289,815
0
0
0
0
289,815
15,561,217
11,492,636
9,644,971
(1,847,665)
2,900,710
2,179,187
Capital Projects Reserve
Asset Management
Benefits
Big Society Fund
(712,190)
(16,751)
(184,882)
(10,000)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(712,190)
(16,751)
0
0
0
0
(184,882)
(10,000)
Business Rates Reserve
(187,855)
0
0
0
0
(187,855)
Coast Protection
(194,662)
0
0
0
0
(194,662)
Common training
2,000
0
0
Economic Development & Tourism
(25,000)
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,000
(25,000)
Elections
(90,000)
0
0
0
0
(90,000)
Enforcement Board
(36,516)
0
0
0
0
(36,516)
(5,000)
0
0
(88,150)
(10,670)
(51,728)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(5,000)
(88,150)
(10,670)
(51,728)
New Homes Bonus reserve
284,800
0
0
Organisational Development
Planning Reserve
(76,963)
(94,340)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
284,800
(76,963)
(94,340)
Restructuring/Invest to Save
Contribution to /(from) General
Reserve
Amount to to met from
Government Grant and Local
Taxpayers
(60,367)
0
0
0
0
(60,367)
331,710
0
0
0
0
331,710
14,334,653
11,492,636
9,644,971
(1,847,665)
2,900,710
952,623
Parish Precepts
Council Taxpayers
(1,760,520)
(5,307,073)
(1,566,865)
(4,723,299)
(1,566,865)
(4,723,299)
0
0
0
0
(193,655)
(583,774)
Business Rates Retention
(3,121,466)
(2,988,083)
(2,906,058)
82,025
0
(215,408)
Central Government Grants
Council Tax Freeze Grant 2015/16
New Homes Bonus
(2,403,933)
(57,912)
(1,683,749)
(2,112,408)
(57,912)
(1,683,749)
(2,112,371)
(58,070)
(1,683,749)
37
(158)
0
0
0
0
(291,562)
158
0
Income from Government Grant
and Taxpayers
(14,334,653)
(13,132,316)
(13,050,412)
81,904
0
(1,284,241)
0
(1,639,680)
(3,405,441)
(1,765,761)
2,900,710
(331,618)
Net Operating Expenditure
Contributions To/From
Earmarked Reserves:
Environmental Health
Grants
Housing
Local Strategic Partnership
Surplus/Deficit
31
Appendix B
Service Area Summaries P10 2015/16
Assets & Leisure
Cost Centre Name
Car Parking
Markets
Industrial Estates
Updated
Budget
£
Property Services
YTD Variance
£
Budget
Remaining
£
Commitments
£
(1,278,453)
(1,417,347)
(138,894)
263,617
66,301
25,118
27,177
2,059
6,920
32,204
(15,683)
(26,371)
(3,328)
23,043
1,529
(13,884)
3,320
2,770
(4,988)
(7,758)
0
8,308
(5,223)
4,560
(1,930)
(6,490)
0
(3,293)
5,399
(7,651)
(11,346)
(3,695)
9,396
7,349
107,490
111,009
122,910
11,901
96,878
(112,298)
Parklands
Administration Buildings Svs
YTD Actuals
£
(1,209,835)
Surveyors Allotments
Handy Man
YTD Budget
£
(56,105)
12,768
14,413
18,576
4,163
12,234
(18,042)
Parks & Open Spaces
461,746
368,188
361,444
(6,744)
148,544
(48,242)
Foreshore
193,832
163,692
130,051
(33,641)
9,457
54,325
20,396
16,938
15,469
(1,469)
161
4,766
Sports Centres
291,834
175,110
183,076
7,966
105,581
3,177
Leisure Complexes
647,427
515,025
496,970
(18,054)
76,556
73,901
Other Sports
112,299
163,774
154,651
(9,123)
31,195
(73,547)
10,389
7,971
8,217
246
2,102
70
Pier Pavilion
103,300
99,850
97,758
(2,092)
83,260
(77,718)
Foreshore (Community)
400,159
329,071
327,872
(1,199)
85,191
(12,904)
Woodlands Management
198,742
165,440
162,817
(2,623)
66,441
(30,516)
70,949
63,252
47,331
(15,921)
7,682
15,936
Public Conveniences
669,317
551,030
543,201
(7,829)
80,944
45,173
Investment Properties
95,726
59,595
120,979
61,384
7,319
(32,571)
0
30
(2,773)
(2,803)
4,425
(1,652)
11,668
9,720
9,720
0
0
1,948
2,252,321
1,534,081
1,386,507
(147,574)
1,099,430
(233,616)
Community Centres
Recreation Grounds
Cromer Pier
Leisure
Cctv
Total Assets
Clt / Corporate
Cost Centre Name
Updated
Budget
£
YTD Budget
£
YTD Actuals
£
YTD Variance
£
Budget
Remaining
£
Commitments
£
Corporate Leadership Team
0
0
(778)
(778)
3,261
(2,482)
Legal Services
0
42,440
62,938
20,498
16,058
(78,996)
Total CLT & Corporate
0
42,440
62,160
19,720
19,318
(81,478)
Community, Economic Development and Coastal
0
Cost Centre Name
Health
Arts & Entertainments
Museums
Updated
Budget
£
YTD Budget
£
YTD Actuals
£
YTD Variance
£
Budget
Remaining
£
Commitments
£
0
0
(11,061)
(11,061)
0
11,061
112,981
104,310
121,561
17,251
1,012
(9,592)
20,000
20,000
20,000
0
0
0
General Economic Development
443,648
353,900
372,599
18,699
31,059
39,990
Tourism
124,278
97,896
90,241
(7,654)
11,921
22,116
0
0
8,628
8,628
717
(9,345)
Nnflag Project
Coast Protection
1,198,262
904,860
917,479
12,619
235,549
45,234
Regeneration Management
(107,584)
(89,577)
(93,725)
(4,147)
150
(14,009)
(3,397)
Comm & Econ Dev Mgt
Housing (Health & Wellbeing)
Housing Strategy
Community And Localism
Coastal Management
Community, Economic Development
and Coastal
0
0
3,397
3,397
0
256,784
173,790
163,017
(10,773)
0
93,767
3,626,243
105,125
(4,862)
(109,988)
20,286
3,610,819
137,696
149,372
(342,216)
(491,588)
0
479,912
4,487
3,738
(17,763)
(21,501)
1,326
20,924
5,816,795
1,823,413
1,227,294
(596,119)
302,020
4,287,481
Customer Services & ICT
32
Appendix B
Service Area Summaries P10 2015/16
Cost Centre Name
It - Support Services
Updated
Budget
£
YTD Budget
£
YTD Actuals
£
YTD Variance
£
Budget
Remaining
£
Commitments
£
12,000
22,110
(45,928)
(68,038)
22,330
21,667
Tic'S
244,510
207,610
187,288
(20,322)
12,135
45,087
Homelessness
368,251
305,328
297,792
(7,536)
34,494
35,964
Customer Services Housing
0
(1,416)
(12,492)
(11,076)
356
12,136
Graphical Info System
0
2,080
2,011
(69)
0
(2,011)
Media & Communications
0
10
(7,908)
(7,918)
257
7,650
Customer Services - Corporate
0
20
(7,700)
(7,720)
9,132
(1,432)
624,761
535,742
413,064
(122,678)
78,705
119,061
Total Customer Services & ICT
0
Environmental Health
Cost Centre Name
Updated
Budget
£
YTD Budget
£
YTD Actuals
£
YTD Variance
£
Budget
Remaining
£
Commitments
£
Commercial Services
471,640
390,581
388,998
(1,583)
4,648
Rural Sewerage Schemes
370,675
370,615
365,837
(4,778)
0
4,838
Travellers
99,960
114,780
116,991
2,211
7,645
(24,676)
Public Protection
90,319
65,690
48,438
(17,252)
1,277
40,603
Street Signage
33,562
22,561
15,820
(6,741)
2,165
15,577
Pest Control
16,572
13,850
13,160
(690)
71
3,341
549,803
454,195
473,818
19,623
16,649
59,336
60,304
49,040
44,721
(4,319)
4,338
11,245
0
20
(641)
(661)
5,504
(4,863)
1,349,151
523,825
241,947
(281,878)
1,037,869
69,335
638,723
473,818
470,794
(3,024)
146,846
21,083
29,147
25,125
29,659
4,534
1,550
(2,062)
Environmental Protection
Dog Control
Env Health - Service Mgmt
Waste Collection And Disposal
Cleansing
Environmental Strategy
77,994
Community Safety
21,973
18,315
15,224
(3,091)
0
6,749
Civil Contingencies
145,885
121,600
103,265
(18,335)
100
42,520
3,877,714
2,644,015
2,328,031
(315,984)
1,228,662
321,020
Total Environmental Health
Finance
Cost Centre Name
Local Taxation
Benefits
Discrectionary Payments
Non Distributed Costs
Updated
Budget
£
YTD Budget
£
YTD Actuals
£
YTD Variance
£
Budget
Remaining
£
Commitments
£
593,599
639,923
610,316
(29,607)
23,244
(39,961)
1,215,109
1,203,960
1,125,410
(78,550)
11,356
78,343
95,051
94,621
94,272
(349)
0
779
290
222,873
234,320
11,447
0
(234,030)
Benefits & Revenues Mgmt
0
0
(62,300)
(62,300)
0
62,300
Corporate Finance
0
0
(52,570)
(52,570)
6,293
46,277
Internal Audit
6,000
(41,092)
(40,683)
409
41,904
4,780
Central Costs
0
940
955
15
0
(955)
Corporate & Democratic Core
1,388,553
1,031,332
994,677
(36,655)
13,307
380,569
Total Finance
3,298,602
3,152,557
2,904,398
(248,159)
96,103
298,101
33
Appendix B
Service Area Summaries P10 2015/16
Organisational Development
Cost Centre Name
Human Resources & Payroll
Updated
Budget
£
YTD Budget
£
YTD Actuals
£
YTD Variance
£
Budget
Remaining
£
Commitments
£
60,273
54,433
34,063
(20,370)
12,734
13,476
0
25,580
(11,465)
(37,045)
0
11,465
Insurance & Risk Management
0
(20)
(8,071)
(8,051)
0
8,071
Registration Services
433,722
351,820
390,125
38,305
365
43,232
Members Services
556,962
464,162
455,651
(8,510)
3,843
97,468
0
10
(19,048)
(19,058)
0
19,048
1,050,957
895,985
841,255
(54,730)
16,941
192,761
Policy & Performance Mgt
Web Team
Total Organisational Development
Planning
Cost Centre Name
Updated
Budget
£
YTD Budget
£
YTD Actuals
£
YTD Variance
£
Budget
Remaining
£
Commitments
£
Development Management
518,124
432,289
382,857
(49,432)
29,156
106,111
Planning Policy
266,624
212,052
194,129
(17,923)
1,000
71,496
Conservation, Design & Landscape
225,038
187,540
180,087
(7,453)
1,800
43,151
Major Developments
185,991
154,990
155,643
653
290
30,058
87,930
73,280
46,306
(26,974)
212
41,412
Planning Support
2,000
1,696
333
(1,363)
852
816
Head Of Planning
0
(10)
1,367
1,377
0
(1,367)
Building Control & Access
Property Information
Total Planning
Total Net Cost of Services
181,159
150,970
(67,250)
(218,220)
26,222
222,188
1,466,866
1,212,807
893,470
(319,337)
59,530
513,865
18,388,016
11,841,039
10,056,180
(1,784,859)
2,900,710
5,417,195
34
Appendix C
GENERAL FUND CAPITAL PROGRAMME - 2015/16
Scheme
Scheme Total
Current Estimate
Pre 31/3/15 Actual
Expenditure
Current Budget
2015/16
Actual to P10
2015/16
£
£
£
£
Variance to
2015/16 Current
Budget
£
Updated
Updated
Budget 2016/17 Budget 2017/18
£
£
Updated
Budget in
Future Years
£
Jobs and the Local Economy
North Norfolk Enterprise Innovation
Centre
50,000
10,295
39,705
0
(39,705)
The first stage of this scheme is
due to be completed by the end
of the financial year.
0
0
0
Rocket House
77,084
36,485
40,599
492
(40,107)
Works on this property are
currently on hold.
0
0
0
Public Conveniences (Plumbing and
Drainage)
15,000
12,303
2,697
620
(2,077)
The balance of budget on this
scheme is requested for virement
to the sheme for Public
Convenience Water Heater
Improvements.
0
0
0
Mundesley Road Car Park Resurfacing
70,000
615
69,385
59,695
(9,690)
The works in relation to this
scheme have been completed.
0
0
0
North Norfolk Enterprise and Start Up
Grants
135,000
35,454
99,546
85,516
(14,030)
This project has progressed with
payments under the grant
scheme approaching completion.
0
0
0
This scheme is being reviewed
for tender. It is possible that
some works will commence
before the end of the financial
year.
0
0
0
It has been requested that the
£2,077 currently unspent on PC
Plumbing and Drainage be vired
to this budget.
0
0
0
Car Park Refurbishment 2015/16
53,108
0
53,108
10,781
(42,327)
Public Convenience Water Heater
Improvements
10,000
0
10,000
553
(9,447)
Egmere Business Zone (Subject to Full
Council Approval)
1,445,000
0
0
0
0
1,445,000
0
0
Better Broadband for Norfolk
1,000,000
0
0
0
0
1,000,000
0
0
2,855,192
95,152
315,040
157,657
(157,383)
2,445,000
0
0
35
Appendix C
Scheme
Scheme Total
Current Estimate
Pre 31/3/15 Actual
Expenditure
Current Budget
2015/16
Actual to P10
2015/16
£
£
£
£
Variance to
2015/16 Current
Budget
£
Updated
Updated
Budget 2016/17 Budget 2017/18
£
£
Updated
Budget in
Future Years
£
Housing and Infrastructure
Disabled Facilities Grants
Annual programme
0
450,000
359,185
(90,815)
Housing Associations
Annual programme
0
403,635
0
(403,635)
3,500,000
0
3,500,000
0
(3,500,000)
Housing Loans to Registered Providers
Parkland Improvements
Grant payments under this
scheme are ongoing.
644,247
1,054,890
0
An invoice is awaited for this
scheme relating to 80% of the
total budget, as the scheme first
milestone has been reached.
100,908
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
745,155
1,054,890
0
40,000
42,000
104,583
Tendering for the works will be
undertaken through the Norfolk
County Framework Contract.
The works will follow this process
once the licencee consultation
exercise has been completed.
100,000
4,437
95,563
6,376
(89,187)
3,600,000
4,437
4,449,198
365,561
(4,083,637)
1,409,000
1,184,417
38,000
0
(38,000)
40,023
37,671
2,352
0
(2,352)
0
0
0
1,418,631
1,304,161
114,470
17,411
(97,059)
0
0
0
79,500
69,533
9,967
615
(9,352)
There are oustanding issues
concerning the effective working
of the lights on the prom.
0
0
0
Phase 1 of the scheme is
progressing although it is
anticipated that only £150k will
be spent by the end of the
financial year. The balance of
budget is requested for slippage
to 2016/17.
650,000
0
0
0
0
0
Coast, Countryside and Built Heritage
Gypsy and Traveller Short Stay
Stopping Facilities
Sheringham Beach Handrails
Cromer Pier Structural Works - Phase 2
Sheringham Promenade Lighting
Cromer Pier and West Prom
Refurbishment Project
Refurbishment Works to the Seaside
Shelters
1,465,000
42,062
772,938
79,913
(693,025)
149,500
109,184
40,316
8,918
(31,398)
36
This scheme is ongoing.
Some minor works have been
undertaken and the balance of
budget is still required.
Appendix C
Scheme
Cromer Coast Protection Scheme 982
and SEA
Scheme Total
Current Estimate
Pre 31/3/15 Actual
Expenditure
Current Budget
2015/16
Actual to P10
2015/16
£
£
£
£
Variance to
2015/16 Current
Budget
£
Updated
Updated
Budget 2016/17 Budget 2017/18
£
£
Updated
Budget in
Future Years
£
10,400,000
3,447,172
2,357,116
873,410
(1,483,706)
4,595,712
0
0
1,967,015
1,683,217
18,798
0
(18,798)
265,000
0
0
122,000
91,486
30,514
0
(30,514)
0
0
0
90,000
16,678
0
0
0
73,322
0
0
1,176,000
852,105
263,249
60,655
(202,594)
The scheme is progressing
although it is possible that there
will need to be further slippage to
2016/17 by the end of the year.
60,646
0
0
804,000
279,957
319,119
105,246
(213,873)
The scheme is progressing.
204,924
0
0
2,221,000
307
968
660
(308)
2,219,725
0
0
Sheringham Gangway
136,737
46,570
90,167
73,655
(16,512)
The scheme is almost complete.
0
0
0
Repairs and Renewals Grants - Flood
Protection Works
368,294
368,294
0
239,782
239,782
The final grant payments have
been made under this scheme,
with full funding being available
from grant to the Council.
0
0
0
Ostend Targeted Rock Placement and
Coastal Adaptation
55,000
0
220
220
0
54,780
0
0
Cromer Pier - External and Roofing
Improvements to Pavilion Theatre
20,000
0
0
999
999
0
20,000
0
21,921,700
9,532,814
4,058,194
1,461,483
(2,596,711)
8,164,109
62,000
104,583
Pathfinder Project
Cromer to Winterton Scheme
Coastal Erosion Assistance
Storm Surge
Sheringham West Prom
Mundesley - Refurbishment of Coastal
Defences
37
Preliminary works have been
undertaken in relation to this
scheme which is to be
progressed in full in 2016/17.
Preliminary works have been
undertaken in relation to this
scheme which is to be
progressed in full in 2016/17.
Appendix C
Scheme
Scheme Total
Current Estimate
Pre 31/3/15 Actual
Expenditure
Current Budget
2015/16
Actual to P10
2015/16
£
£
£
£
Variance to
2015/16 Current
Budget
£
Updated
Updated
Budget 2016/17 Budget 2017/18
£
£
Updated
Budget in
Future Years
£
Localism
North Lodge Park
North Walsham Regeneration Schemes
(Including Market St North Walsham)
Victory Swim and Fitness Centre
Play Areas
Splash Roof Repairs
Steelwork Protection to Victory Pool
and Fakenham Gym
Cabbell Park
North Norfolk Railway
197,000
102,045
732
18,929
196,268
0
83,116
79,695
(196,268)
It is not anticipated that this
budget will be spent within the
current year, and as such the
balance of £196,268 is requested
for slippage to 2016/17.
0
0
0
(3,421)
Works in relation to this scheme
have been completed, although
the budget is anticipated as being
overspent due to higher purchase
costs and higher specifications
for the works being required.
0
0
0
0
0
0
54,370
12,535
41,835
3,816
(38,019)
It is not anticipated that any
further expenditure will be
incurred against this project in
2015/16, and slippage is
therefore requested to the new
financial year.
100,000
86,190
13,810
12,737
(1,073)
This scheme is now complete.
0
0
0
73,630
9,563
64,067
184
(63,883)
This scheme is progressing
although alternative solutions are
being considered.
0
0
0
(14,967)
Due to staffing issues these
works are not currently being
progressed. It is unlikely that
these works will be undertaken
by the year end, so the balance
of budget is requested for
slippage to 2016/17.
0
12,500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
27,500
33
14,967
0
64,000
7,915
56,085
58,496
2,411
All budgeted works have been
completed, although there will
need to be a further update to
members regarding further works
that have been identified.
178,500
0
178,500
55,844
(122,656)
The first grant payment in relation
to this scheme has been made,
with all others due before the
year end. The new facilities are
due to open April 2016.
38
Appendix C
Scheme
Scheme Total
Current Estimate
Pre 31/3/15 Actual
Expenditure
Current Budget
2015/16
Actual to P10
2015/16
£
£
£
£
Variance to
2015/16 Current
Budget
£
Updated
Updated
Budget 2016/17 Budget 2017/18
£
£
Updated
Budget in
Future Years
£
Holt Country Park
12,500
0
12,500
0
(12,500)
This scheme will not be
progressed in the new year.
Slippage is therfore requested for
the budget to 2016/17.
Fakenham Gym
62,500
0
15,000
0
(15,000)
This scheme will not be
progressed in the new year.
Slippage is therfore requested for
the budget to 2016/17.
Splash Pool - Steelworks
35,000
0
0
0
0
0
35,000
0
907,045
135,897
676,148
210,772
(465,376)
30,000
47,500
17,500
Trade Waste Bins/ Waste Vehicle
272,700
254,666
0
0
0
18,034
0
0
Personal Computer Replacement Fund
205,583
162,603
42,980
0
(42,980)
0
0
0
Waste Management & Environmental
Health IT System
226,332
226,332
0
0
0
0
0
0
Asset Management Computer System
75,000
63,190
11,810
540
(11,270)
0
0
0
317,312
198,214
119,098
0
(119,098)
0
0
0
33,000
21,506
11,494
0
(11,494)
0
0
0
250,570
172,301
78,269
7,615
(70,654)
Tenders are back in relation to
the emergency lighting and fire
alarm works to be undertaken at
the Cromer Office. Estimated
value of the works is £35k.
0
0
0
Cash Receipting System Upgrade
10,000
0
10,000
9,892
(108)
This scheme has been
completed.
0
0
0
Planning System (Scanning of Old
Files) - Business Transformation
Programme
100,000
0
100,000
10,078
(89,922)
Discussions are underway on
how to approach this scheme,
with 2 part time scanning posts
being funded for scanning of old
records.
0
0
0
0
0
0
30,000
0
17,500
Delivering the Vision
Procurement for Upgrade of Civica System
e-Financials Financial Management
System Software Upgrade
Administrative Buildings
39
Several orders have been placed
for the purchase of new
machines which will be received
before the end of the financial
year.
This scheme is progressing with
handheld computers to be
purchased before the end of the
financial year.
Appendix C
Scheme
Scheme Total
Current Estimate
Pre 31/3/15 Actual
Expenditure
Current Budget
2015/16
Actual to P10
2015/16
£
£
£
£
Variance to
2015/16 Current
Budget
£
Updated
Updated
Budget 2016/17 Budget 2017/18
£
£
Updated
Budget in
Future Years
£
Telephony Procurement
90,000
7,933
82,067
59,886
(22,181)
The scheme is in progress and
will be completed by September
2016. Partial slippage of the
budget to the new financial year
may be required.
Web Infrastructure Upgrade
71,500
647
70,853
39,097
(31,756)
The scheme is in progress and
will be completed by September
2016. Partial slippage of the
budget to the new financial year
may be required.
0
0
0
New Print Solution - Multi Function Devices
60,000
53,599
6,401
0
(6,401)
The scheme is to be completed
by the end of the current financial
year.
0
0
0
The works are complete with
new tenants in both properties.
The overspend relates to works
to the roof which were subject to
a separate £20k budget below,
together with additional works
requested by the tenants.
0
0
0
The scheme is to be completed
by the end of the current financial
year.
0
0
0
Fakenham Connect and Cromer Office
Works - DWP
0
0
0
126,000
0
126,000
223,114
97,114
GIS / Web Based Mapping Solution
20,000
0
20,000
19,117
(883)
Recording and Audio Equipment
20,000
0
20,000
0
(20,000)
The scheme is subject to delay,
but it is anticipated as being
completed within the 2016/17
financial year.
0
0
0
Upgrades to Accolade and Idox Business Transformation Programme
25,000
0
25,000
7,600
(17,400)
This scheme is currently on hold
but to be progressed before the
end of the financial year. It forms
part of the overall Business
Transformation programme.
0
0
0
Wheeled Bins (Purchased from Kier)
66,750
0
66,750
64,173
(2,577)
The scheme has been completed
and final invoices are awaited.
0
0
0
Wheeled Bins
40,000
0
35,000
29,050
(5,950)
This scheme is progressing and
further purchases will be made
before the end of the financial
year.
5,000
0
0
150,000
0
150,000
0
(150,000)
0
0
0
Environmental Health IT System
Procurement
40
Appendix C
Scheme
Scheme Total
Current Estimate
Pre 31/3/15 Actual
Expenditure
Current Budget
2015/16
Actual to P10
2015/16
£
£
£
£
Variance to
2015/16 Current
Budget
£
Updated
Updated
Budget 2016/17 Budget 2017/18
£
Fakenham Connect Roof Works
30,000
0
20,000
0
(20,000)
Stonehill Way Fire and Security System
15,000
0
0
0
0
Document and Records Management
System
60,000
0
60,000
4,547
(55,453)
Web Content Management System
44,000
0
44,000
9,425
IT Back Up and Storage System
52,000
0
52,000
2,460,747
1,260,991
31,744,684
11,029,291
A request is being made to vire
the budget to the Fakenham
Connect and Cromer Office
Works budget to finance the roof
works which formed part of the
overall scheme.
£
Updated
Budget in
Future Years
£
10,000
0
0
0
15,000
0
The project is currently in
progress and will be completed
within the 2016/17 financial year.
0
0
0
(34,575)
The project is currently in
progress and will be completed
within the 2016/17 financial year.
0
0
0
51,963
(37)
The back up and storage system
has been procured within budget.
0
0
0
1,151,722
536,097
(615,625)
33,034
15,000
0
10,650,302
2,731,570
(7,918,732)
11,417,298
1,179,390
122,083
7,497,775
450,000
0
161,554
1,000,000
2,307,969
0
11,417,298
42,000
0
0
0
0
1,137,390
0
1,179,390
104,583
0
0
0
0
17,500
0
122,083
Capital Programme Financing
Grants
Other Contributions
Asset Management Reserve
Capital Project Reserve
Invest to Save Reserve / Broadband Reserve
Capital Receipts
Internal / External Borrowing
TOTAL FINANCING
3,431,501
447,965
3,983
877,116
122,853
4,842,453
924,431
10,650,302
0
41
North Norfolk District Council
Cabinet Work Programme
For the Period 01 March 2016 to 30 June 2016
Decision Maker(s)
Meeting
Date
Subject &
Summary
Cabinet
Member(s)
Lead Officer
Cabinet
07 Mar 2016
Highfields car park,
Fakenham
John Rest
Duncan Ellis
Head of Assets &
Leisure
01263 516330
Cabinet
07 Mar 2016
Budget Monitoring
Period 10
Wyndham Northam
Scrutiny
16 Mar 2016
Karen Sly
Head of Finance
01263 516243
Cabinet
07 Mar 2015
Compulsory
Purchase of five
long-term derelict
properties
Judy Oliver
John Rest
Sue Arnold
Nick Baker
Corporate Director
01263 516221
Inward Investment
Strategy
Nigel Dixon
Michelle Burdett
Economic Growth
Manager
01263 516233
Agenda Item 12
Status / additional
comments
March 2016
Exempt appendices
Exempt appendices
April 2016
Cabinet
11 Apr 2016
Scrutiny
20 Apr 2016
Council
27 Apr 2016
Key Decision – a decision which is likely to incur expenditure or savings of £100,000 or more, or affect two or more wards. (NNDC
Constitution, p9 s12.2b)
* Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (As amended by the Local Authorities (Access to Information) (Exempt Information) (England) Order
2006)
42
North Norfolk District Council
Cabinet Work Programme
For the Period 01 March 2016 to 30 June 2016
Decision Maker(s)
Meeting
Date
Subject &
Summary
Cabinet
Member(s)
Lead Officer
Cabinet
11 Apr 2016
North Norfolk Big
Society Fund
Annual Update
Nicola Turner
Housing Strategy &
Community
Development
Manager
01263 516 222
Cabinet
11 Apr 2016
Street Naming &
Numbering – fees
and charges and
review of policy
Rachel Parkin
Property Information
Team Leader
01263 516013
Status / additional
comments
*affects all wards
Cabinet
09 May 2016
Scrutiny
18 May 2016
Council
25 May 2016
Cabinet
06 Jun 2016
Scrutiny
15 Jun 2016
Council
22 Jun 2016
Housing Strategy
John Rest
Nicola Turner
Team Leader –
Strategy
01263 516222
Karen Sly
Head of Finance
01263 516243
Out-turn report
Key Decision – a decision which is likely to incur expenditure or savings of £100,000 or more, or affect two or more wards. (NNDC
Constitution, p9 s12.2b)
* Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (As amended by the Local Authorities (Access to Information) (Exempt Information) (England) Order
2006)
43
North Norfolk District Council
Cabinet Work Programme
For the Period 01 March 2016 to 30 June 2016
Decision Maker(s)
Meeting
Date
Subject &
Summary
Cabinet
08 Jun 2016
Scrutiny
15 Jun 2016
Performance
Management –
Annual Report
Cabinet
06 Jun 2016
Scrutiny
15 Jun 2016
Council
22 Jun 2016
Cabinet
06 Jun 2016
Scrutiny
15 Jun 2016
Council
22 Jun 2016
Cabinet
06 Jun 2016
Cabinet
Member(s)
Status / additional
comments
Helen Thomas
Policy & Performance
Management Officer
01263 516214
Debt Management
Annual Report
Revenues & Benefits
Manager
01263 516081
Tony Brown
Technical Accountant
01263 516126
Treasury
Management
Annual Report
Communications
Strategy
Lead Officer
Tom FitzPatrick
Sue Lawson
Communications &
PR Manager
01263 516344
Key Decision – a decision which is likely to incur expenditure or savings of £100,000 or more, or affect two or more wards. (NNDC
Constitution, p9 s12.2b)
* Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (As amended by the Local Authorities (Access to Information) (Exempt Information) (England) Order
2006)
44
Agenda item 13
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE WORK PROGRAMME 2015/2016
Period March – July 2016
March
Clinical Commissioning Group:
Ageing population – Mark Taylor
Budget Monitoring – Period 10
Requested by Committee
Wyndham Northam
Karen Sly
Cyclical
Inward Investment Strategy
Nigel Dixon
Michelle Burdett
New item
Housing Strategy
John Rest
Nicola Turner
New item
Outturn Report
Wyndham Northam
Karen Sly
Wyndham Northam
Helen Thomas
Wyndham Northam
Revenues & Benefits Manager
Wyndham Northam
Tony Brown
Cyclical
Tom FitzPatrick
Sean Kelly
Wyndham Northam
Karen Sly
Cyclical
April
May
June
Performance Management Annual
Report
Debt Management Annual Report
Treasury Management Annual
Report
Cyclical
Cyclical
Cyclical
July
Business Transformation update
Financial Strategy
45
Cyclical
TBC
Asset Strategy
Dementia and related mental
health issues
Regulation of Investigatory
Powers Act- Policy
Road Casualty Reduction Team
Norfolk Coastal Partnership
Public Transport
John Rest
Duncan Ellis
Nick Baker
Angie-Fitch Tillett
46
Date tbc – policy under
review
Outcomes and Actions
Norfolk Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee (NHOSC)
25 February 2015
Agenda Report Title
Item
Number
6.
NHS South Norfolk CCG –
changes to policies and
services in 2015-16
Outcomes and Actions
7.
West Norfolk CCG to provide details of what is involved in the Quality
Innovation Productivity & Prevention (QIPP) initiative ‘QEH
Psychology Provision’
CCG commissioning
intentions and plans for 201617
Action By Whom
NHOSC noted the South Norfolk CCG representatives’ answers to the
questions in the report and their assurance of ongoing active
engagement with the committee.
Aidan Fallon
NHOSC noted the CCG representatives’ assurances of ongoing active
engagement with the committee.
8.
Continuing healthcare
Rachel Peacock to provide data on the number of live appeals against
continuing healthcare decisions (i.e. appeals against decisions on
eligibility and appeals against decisions on the type of care provided).
Rachel Peacock
NHOSC agreed to return to the subject of Continuing Healthcare in 12
months time.
9.
Children’s mental health
services in Norfolk
Agreed the areas for scrutiny and the timescales set out in the report:Stage 1 – 21 July 2016
Stage 2 – after a full year of operation under the Local Transformation
Plan changes (i.e. in April 2017)
Maureen Orr
10.
Forward work programme
Agreed the following additions to the forward work programme:-
Maureen Orr
47
14 April 2016
IC24’s NHS 111 and GP Out of Hours service
Initiatives to address NHS workforce issues in Norfolk
21 July 2016
Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Trust – unexpected deaths
23 February 2017
Continuing healthcare in Norfolk
Regarding the potential proposal to relocate St James Surgery, King’s
Lynn, NHOSC agreed to await further information from NHS England
or West Norfolk CCG before deciding whether it should be included on
the forward work programme.
Regarding the ‘Policing and Mental Health’ item postponed from
today’s agenda, NHOSC agreed that it was not necessary to
reschedule. Members to receive a copy of the UEA evaluation of the
pilot whereby mental staff work in the police control room, when the
evaluation document is available.
Regarding a potential piece of work by Broadland councillors on the
cost : benefit value of the Broadland handyman service, NHOSC
agreed that the Democratic Support and Scrutiny Team Manager
could assist by signposting Members to NHS contacts and
information, should Broadland District Councillors decide to go ahead
with the work.
Copied to:-
48
Representatives attending the NHOSC meeting for NHS / other organisations
District Council Members of NHOSC
Member Support Officer - Christine Byles
CCG engagement contacts (x5)
Health and Wellbeing Board support officer – Linda Bainton
Healthwatch Norfolk – Chris MacDonald
49
Norfolk Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee
2016
Item no
Norfolk Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee
ACTION REQUIRED
Members are asked to suggest issues for the forward work programme that they
would like to bring to the committee’s attention. Members are also asked to
consider the current forward work programme: whether there are topics to be added or deleted, postponed or brought forward;
 to agree the briefings, scrutiny topics and dates below.
Proposed Forward Work Programme 2016
Meeting
dates
Briefings/Main scrutiny topic/initial review of
topics/follow-ups
14 Apr 2016
Service in A&E following attempted suicide or self-harm
episodes - an update to the report presented in April
2015 by Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust and
the three acute hospitals.
Administrative
business
IC24’s NHS111 and GP Out of Hours service – a report
on progress with the action plan to address various
issues regarding the service.
Initiatives to address NHS workforce issues in Norfolk –
an update from Norfolk and Suffolk Workforce
Partnership / Health Education East of England on the
initiatives reported to the committee in July and October
2015
26 May 2016
21 July 2016
Children’s mental health services in Norfolk – scrutiny of
the implementation of the Local Transformation Plan
Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Trust – unexpected deaths – a
report on the outcome of the Verita review and resulting
actions.
8 Sept 2016
NOTE: These items are provisional only. The OSC reserves the right to
reschedule this draft timetable.
50
Provisional dates for report to the Committee / items in the Briefing 2016-17
13 Oct 2016 – Ambulance Response Times and Turnaround Times in Norfolk – an
update from East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust, Norfolk and Norwich
University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and North Norfolk CCG (follow up to the
reports in October 2015).
13 Oct 2016 – Stroke services in Norfolk – an update on progress with the 2014
NHOSC recommendations and the outcome of the Review of Stroke Rehabilitation
in the Community, November 2015.
23 Feb 2017 – Continuing healthcare in Norfolk – an update on the implementation
and evaluation of the new policy introduced by North Norfolk, South Norfolk,
Norwich and West Norfolk CCGs (following on from the report to NHOSC on 25
February 2016)
Main Committee Members have a formal link with the following local
healthcare commissioners and providers:Clinical Commissioning Groups
North Norfolk
-
M Chenery of Horsbrugh
(substitute Mr David Harrison)
South Norfolk
-
Dr N Legg (substitute Mrs M Stone)
Gt Yarmouth and Waveney
-
Mrs M Stone
(substitute Mrs M Fairhead)
West Norfolk
-
M Chenery of Horsbrugh
(substitute Mrs S Young)
Norwich
-
Mr Bert Bremner
(substitute Mrs M Stone)
NHS Provider Trusts
Queen Elizabeth Hospital, King’s Lynn NHS
Foundation Trust
-
M Chenery of Horsbrugh
(substitute Mrs S Young)
Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
(mental health trust)
-
M Chenery of Horsbrugh
(substitute Mrs S Bogelein)
Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS
Foundation Trust
-
Dr N Legg
(substitute Mrs M Stone)
51
James Paget University Hospitals NHS
Foundation Trust
-
Mr C Aldred
(substitute Mrs M Stone
Norfolk Community Health and Care NHS
Trust
-
Mrs J Chamberlin
(substitute Mrs M Stone)
52
1 Mill Close
Aylsham
Norfolk
NR11 6LZ
Tel: 01263 738100
E-mail: mark.taylor25@nhs.net
adhesi@nhs.net
23 February, 2016
Dear Stakeholder,
North Norfolk Clinical Commissioning Group: financial position for 2016-17
A year ago, we wrote to you to outline the financial challenge we faced.
As you may recall, under the national funding formula used by NHS England, North Norfolk CCG was
assessed as having already received more than its fair share of the NHS budget.
This left us facing a financial shortfall on our budgets of £9.2m in 2015-16 – around 4pc of our annual
allocation and equivalent to £54 for every person living in North Norfolk.
We believed that this did not accurately reflect the two biggest challenges facing North Norfolk CCG –
the complex needs of our older population and our rural geography – and we remain concerned that
these are still not given sufficient weight within the national funding formula. However, this is not set to
change for the foreseeable future.
To ensure we met our legal obligation to remain within our allocated spending limit in 2015-16, we
began a thorough review of all the services we commissioned and a two-year plan was drawn up to
identify potential efficiencies and cost-savings – a process that remains very much ongoing.
As a result of this work, we have so far saved £6.5m and we aim to increase this figure by the end of
this financial year. But as you will be aware, the NHS faces huge financial challenge over the next
decade and the drive to operate in a more efficient, sustainable way remains a priority.
In November, the Chancellor George Osborne announced that he was giving the NHS an extra £3.8bn
in 2016-17. While this financial support is very welcome, most of this money will ultimately be spent on
existing hospitals and provider trust services, as nationally the tariffs – or prices – paid by CCGs to
providers have been increased from 1 April. This recognises the large deficits of many providers,
which are estimated to be of the order of £2bn nationally.
NHS England has now announced CCGs’ financial allocations for 2016-17 and North Norfolk CCG is
to receive the equivalent of 3% growth (£6.7m). However, funding national initiatives will cost us an
additional £1.6m, meaning that our real rate of allocation growth is 2.33%, and:

The prices we pay providers for our services have gone up by £4.5m
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Working together for excellent healthcare in North Norfolk and Rural Broadland
Chair: Dr. Anoop Dhesi
Chief Officer: Mark Taylor
www.northnorfolkccg.nhs.uk
53

Increased activity linked to population growth/demographic factors will cost an extra £6.4m

Meeting the gap between our 2015-16 savings and our original target will cost £1.3m
Once these additional cost pressures are taken into account, the CCG is left with a further budget
shortfall of between £9m and £11m in 2016-17. Inevitably, in such a difficult financial environment, this
means we will face more tough decisions as we strive to stay within our spending limit.
Over the last 10 months, we have been working to review and reshape the services we commission.
This has included:




reviewing our care pathways to make them more efficient for patients and clinicians
continuing to develop our integrated care programme to ensure people receive the care they
need at home or in the community
reviewing our use of certain procedures with limited clinical value
reducing our prescribing costs, for example by switching where possible to less expensive
generic brands of medicines, stopping the provision of gluten-free foods, and asking GPs to
stop prescribing low-dose painkillers in small quantities.
By taking these decisions, and transforming the way care is planned and provided, we have sought to
deliver benefits for patients while making the best possible use of ‘the North Norfolk Pound’.
To help us achieve this, we established a Community Engagement Panel to allow our stakeholders
and patients to play an active role in the decision-making process. The views of the panel – and those
of the public – have been vital as we drew up our plans for the services we have continued to
commission and identified those that we would regrettably have to stop providing.
If this is something you would like to get involved in – or if you would like to join our panel – please
contact us using the address above, or by emailing us at nnccg.contactus@nhs.net.
In the next financial year, we will seek to build on this work, and the views and comments received
from panel members will continue to shape our planning. But we are under no illusions that, with the
cost pressures outlined above, it will be even more difficult to meet our financial targets.
With limited funding and growing demand for services, we will be guided by clinical evidence but will
need to consider more radical and far-reaching changes in the way we plan and provide care.
We also recognise that it will be impossible to keep doing everything we do now.
Our challenge, therefore, is to ensure that we continue to commission high-quality, integrated and
locally-accessible healthcare services while meeting the financial targets demanded of us.
We remain determined that, no matter how difficult the decisions we face, we will continue to provide
the best possible care for the people of North Norfolk and rural Broadland.
Yours sincerely
Mark Taylor
Chief Officer, NHS North Norfolk CCG
Dr Anoop Dhesi
Chairman NHS North Norfolk CCG
54
March 3rd, 2016
MIND helpline and NHS mental health spending
Overview
Clinical Commissioning Groups in Norfolk are among the highest investors in mental
health in England.
The NHS in Norfolk continues to invest in priority mental health services. However,
there are many competing priorities for the money available.
The job of the county’s CCGs is to plan and buy services for everyone in Norfolk and
this sometimes involves making difficult decisions to ensure the NHS budget is spent
in the most effective way possible. This is at a time when the NHS is facing very
significant financial challenges – nationally and locally (see below).
Dr Tony Palframan is a GP in Poringland and is a member of South Norfolk Clinical
Commissioning Group Governing Body. He said: “Mental Health Care in Norfolk has
always been a high priority. We are working with the Mental Health Trust to develop
care for patients with mental ill health that is of the highest quality”
NSFT is commissioned to provide mental health services to people who may be in
crisis or experiencing clinical anxieties. Its services already include:

The Crisis Resolution Home Team has a 24/7 helpline for its patients

The Norfolk and Waveney Wellbeing Service follows national best practice
and has a helpline for patients within the service. It was launched in
September 2015 and serves a much larger patient cohort than the earlier
‘talking therapies’ service for people with severe anxieties/depression.

Dedicated and additional interventions at A&E
In addition there are a range of voluntary organisations that provide services and
support to people with mental ill health, such as Samaritans, listed on NHS Choices:
http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/stress-anxiety-depression/Pages/mental-healthhelplines.aspx
Health and wellbeing is not just the business of the NHS. If the helpline run by
MIND Norfolk is to be available, we invite partners to consider the
responsibilities of the wider community in a broader context and look at other
potential sources of funding.
55
Background
MIND was given short-term, non-recurrent money from national mental health
resilience funds to provide a telephone helpline across Norfolk from January 2015 to
July 31st 2015. This funding was always going to expire and the CCGs made clear in
the spring of 2015 they could not find additional money to continue this helpline.
NSFT provided funding from July 31st 2015 to keep the service running to March
31st 2016. The Trust stated this could only be funded for a short period of time and
no further funding was guaranteed. The Trust recently wrote to MIND serving notice.
Financial pressures
The CCGs are facing significant financial challenge and cannot justify spending
additional money (recurrently) on a service that duplicates much of what already
exists.
With the need to make collective efficiency savings of more than £40 million to make
the NHS budget meet demand in 2016/17, Norfolk CCGs would plainly be forced to
reduce services elsewhere if they spent money the helpline.
Nationally, the NHS is facing immense financial pressure. The national NHS savings
requirement has been calculated as £22 billion, to be delivered by 2020/21. We are
part of this. For local CCGs, every year there is a gap between our annual budgets
and the increasing cost of providing healthcare to the people of Norfolk. Efficiency
savings are required to close this gap. This is not new, efficiencies have been
‘business as usual’ in the NHS for many years – delivering best value for money,
within the resources we have available.
However the pressure is increasing:





South Norfolk CCG is forecast to end 2015/16 with a planned £6m deficit
having had to make £5.6 million in QIPP savings. It must make £14 million in
QIPP savings in 2016/17.
North Norfolk CCG is forecasting making nearly £8m savings in 2015/16. The
savings requirement in 16/17 is £9.2m with no investment funding set aside.
Norwich CCG is forecasting QIPP savings of £7.3 million in 2015/16 and a
further £9.7 million required in 2016/17.
West Norfolk CCG expects to make £5.5 million in QIPP savings in 2015/16
and forecasts a further £10 million required in 2016/17.
NSFT is currently forecasting a £9.4 million deficit.
56
Continued investment in mental health
The map below is extracted from the NHS Five Year Forward View for Mental Health.
It graphically demonstrates the commitment of both local NHS commissioners and
providers to supporting patients: Norfolk is already among the highest spenders on
mental health in the country.
The CCGs have continued to invest in mental health:





Increasing funding for mental health in line with Parity of Esteem guidance
About £2m planned for 2016/17 to transform the local child and adolescent
mental health service. The CCGs expected additional funding for this but
have since been informed they must fund it from their baseline allocation.
Expanding an early intervention service for adults with psychosis in 2017/17 –
subject to negotiations with NSFT
The new and successful Wellbeing Service which is helping thousands of
local people deal with depression and anxieties since launch in September
2015.
Enhanced psychiatric support to A&E
57
In 2014/15, Norfolk CCGs placed significant additional investments in NSFT in
excess of £1.8 million including:

£557,000 non-recurrent funding to support the Child and Adolescent Mental
Health Service Intensive Support Team, patient transport services and shortterm beds to help reduce the number of out-of-county placements

£828,000 to help NSFT deal with increased pressures, and to invest in A&E
Liaison and Gender Dysphoria services

£478,000 recurrent funding for Section 136 suites and to expand NSFT’s
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder service.
The above list represents only some of the additional investments made in recent
times.
The CCGs and NSFT remain committed to Parity of Esteem and provision of
good mental health care – and will continue to work with the wider community
to understand what should be core services and which services could be
supported by the wider community.
ENDS
58