To seek the Committee’s views on three year strategic budgets and associated service outputs and outcomes, which will form the basis of the Corporate Plan 2007-10 so that they can be taken into account by Cabinet in its recommendations to Council.

The Committee’s views were sought on three year service proposals and associated service outputs and outcomes which would form the basis of the Council’s Corporate Plan 2007-10, so that these could be taken into account by Cabinet in its recommendations to Council.

The Head of Policy and Performance presented the report.  He updated paragraph 4 of the report to indicate that, rather than the figures given in the report, the capacity for cumulative increased spending in 2007-08 would be £3.6 million, and in 2008-09 £3.9 million.

He then drew attention to paragraph 9 of the report.  This noted that within the baselines set out in the Financial Resource Model, Directors and the Head of Human Resources had developed core proposals for the next three years with a view to securing specified star ratings as used in the Commission’s Comprehensive Performance Assessment, as set out in the report, which, taken together would give the Council an overall 3* rating.  Highlights of the core proposals were set out in paragraph 10 of the report, indicating what was considered deliverable within the financial constraints.

He also referred to appendix 1 to the report which set out spend to save proposals over the three year period, appendix 2 which set out spend to mitigate proposals, appendix 3 to the report which summarised proposals not regarded by senior managers as deliverable within the baseline provision in the Financial Resource Model, and appendix 4 which summarised proposals where the financial implications and affordability within the Financial Resource Model baselines were still under consideration.

In the course of discussion the following principal points were made:

·          A question was asked about the allocation of capital receipts generated by the sale of properties, 50% of which had to date been returned to the Directorate that had released the asset.  This was in the context of proposals to reduce the overspend on learning disabilities in the adult social care budget by disposing of some assets but then reinvesting the receipts into other areas to improve and modernise services and generate efficiencies.  The Director of Resources replied that assets were now to be treated as a corporate resource.  Any receipts would be held centrally and allocated in line with corporate priorities.  Corporate working would help to ensure that the Council’s asset base was appropriate across all service areas

·          It was noted that the core proposal for adult and community services referred to achieving “some increase in the numbers of vulnerable people helped to live at home”.  In reply it was noted that a report was in preparation on future needs and services for older people and adults with learning disabilities which would contain detail on the increase envisaged.  It was also noted that in part there was an issue over how to report the proposal, recognising that there was a need to work closely with service users and carers in discussing possible changes to service delivery.

The Committee had no further observations to make at this stage and noted the report.