Committee Report NSC

[JG1] 

              North Somerset Council            6.1

 

REPORT TO THE Planning and Economic Development Policy & Scrutiny Panel

 

Date of Meeting: 11 December 2006

 

Subject of Report: Budget Working Group Report - Follow up

 

Town or parish: N/A

 

Officer/Member presenting: Chairman

 

Key Decision: No

 

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

 

The Working Group proposes that the Panel recommends no reduction in staffing levels in the Strategic Projects Group or Economic Development Team, but supports on going efforts to replace agency staff with permanent posts where this can be shown to have a positive saving.[J2] 

 

1.                Summary of Report

 

This report summarises the findings of the Strategic Planning and Economic Development Budget Working Group.  Members have held four budget working group meetings with officers to discuss the priorities and possible areas for savings on areas within their remit. Appendix A provides a full overview of services provided in the Strategic Projects Group. Appendix B provides a full overview of services provided in the Economic Development Team. Appendix C provides the interim report from the Budget Working Group discussed at the last panel meeting on 21 November 2006

 

 

2.                Policy

 

Setting the 2007/8 budget relates directly to the Corporate Aims as identified in the Corporate Plan 2005-2008[J3] 

 

3.                Details

 

The SPED Budget Working Group held a further meeting on December 6th to meet with senior management and discuss the Strategic Projects Group and Economic Development Team. A full and frank discussion took place before members finalised their recommendations in private.

 

Regarding the Strategic Projects Group members noted the broad sweep of work carried out, most of which is clearly essential to the success of ongoing regeneration and planning - linked developments in the District. Members noted that staff are working long hours to keep up with demand and that any cuts in the section would severely impact on the existing workload.

 

Consideration was given to sharing some duties with other authorities but it was concluded that this is not practical as the work load does not allow for any spare time to allocate elsewhere. The group already contributes to arrangements, such as the West of England and North Somerset Partnerships. It was noted that we do employ some agency staff in the Transport Development Section, which has led to issues of` continuity in the past. However members were assured that where practical, the Directorate is opting for permanent staff to fill such posts. The Working Group was therefore unable to identify any new savings that could be made in this D & E sector. Please see Appendix A for a full statement of services provided in this area.

 

Discussions around the Economic Development Team centred on the output and contribution made by the team towards inward job creation and investment. It was noted that, following the cuts made last year, the work output has slowed due to a shortage of staff, however the team is still handling an average of 30 enquiries per week from companies wishing to expand or move into North Somerset. Despite probing, the Working Group are unable to justify closing the section down or making any further cuts .It was however felt that over the next year work should be done on raising the level of advertising in the Business Directory in order to make it self financing. This would save approx £5500 per annum. Last year a saving of £10,000 was made by deleting the hard copy of Business Matters, a decision based on necessity which has not been entirely well received by customers. Please see Appendix B for a full statement of services provided in this area.

  

The Working Group went on to discuss other D & E budget issues but concluded that as this is one of the few areas that is able to generate positive income for the Authority into the area, in the shape of attracting business, tourism and additional funding/grants, any further cuts would be misplaced. Members of the group also reiterated the need to protect the frontline services that are in the public eye ,as previously recommended [J4] 

 

4.                Consultation

 

No direct consultation other than discussions with officers representing the areas under discussion[J5] 

 

5.                Financial Implications

 

As detailed above[J6] 

 

6.                Equality Implications

 

The work of the working group is based on a commitment to treat all people equally and respect diversity[J7] 

 

7.                Corporate Implications

 

Budget principles are line with Council’s Corporate Plan priorities[J8] 

 

8.                Options considered

 

As detailed above[J9] 

[J10] 

Author

 

Councillor Elfan Ap Rees on behalf of the SPED Budget Working Group[J11] 

 

Background Papers

 

[J12] 

 [JG1]To switch the display of comments off select View/Markup

Page: 1
 [J2]The Recommendation must be clear and complete in itself, so it can be understood without needing cross reference to another document, and can be copied directly into the minutes.

Page: 1
 [J3]Summarise the part of the Corporate Plan, Directorate Business Plan or other plan or policy document that supports the report.

Page: 1
 [J4]The detail of the report should not exceed four pages in addition to the standard paragraphs 4 – 9 and any appendices.  Additional paragraph headings 4.2, 4.2 etc can be added as required.

Page: 1
 [J5]Summarise who has been consulted internally and externally eg., statutory, trades union, parish councils, ward members, other.  List response received.

Page: 1
 [J6]Give the revenue and capital cost of the proposal, and whether it is in addition to existing approved budget.

Page: 1
 [J7]State any implications for equality in either employment or service provision.  Consider how your report could affect sections of the community in terms of race, sex, disability, sexual orientation, religion or other belief, age, social exclusion and other groups.

Page: 1
 [J8]List any cross service implications, eg for Children, Sustainability, Legal, Human Resources, Property, Human Rights, Proportionality, Crime and Disorder, etc. and include comments on any which are relevant.

Page: 1
 [J9]Give the revenue and capital cost of the proposal, and whether it is in addition to existing approved budget.

Page: 1
 [J10]List all other options which have been considered in making the recommendation, with a brief explanation of why they have been rejected.

Page: 1
 [J11]Give the name, job title and telephone number of the person who actually wrote the report.

Page: 1
 [J12]All background papers significantly used in preparing the report must be listed, together with an official departmental file reference.  Directors are responsible for ensuring that background papers can be accessed by the public for up to six years.