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