Decision details

The Chair welcomed Richard Hothersall, Head of Service Programme Office, to the meeting. A copy of the LCC Savings Programme presentation, which was given to the Budget Scrutiny Working Group when it met on 12January, was provided for the Scrutiny Committee.

The combined savings approved by Cabinet covered more or less every area of the Council. It was pointed out to the Group that a new way of working was required. The track record of delivery was not as good as it should be. The immediate hurdles to tackle were:

·  Timescales – LCC needed to hit the ground running with immediate savings to manage  and minimal time to plan;

·  Scope – there were 114 different projects of historic savings and just approved savings;

·  Mobilisation – there was lots of activity across LCC so the savings programme needed coordination and management.

The Savings Programme was owned by Management Team. There were dedicated Management Team meetings held every 2 weeks but additional meetings around savings had been added. Portfolios were owned by Directors and there was a specific agenda item at their monthly meetings. The projects for savings were owned by the Heads of Service and they were held to account for the delivery of these projects. The Programme was managed by the Programme Office and it assigned Programme and Project Managers and they worked closely with the Finance Team.

Each saving decision was classed as a project and grouped into the Director portfolios. The Project Managers were assigned to a series of projects. The Programme Managers were assigned to both manage some of the savings projects and also be responsible for oversight of complex portfolios. The Programme Office was a dedicated resource to ensure delivery of the savings.

The Group was informed that there was monthly reporting against:

·  Activity

·  Financial delivery

·  Forecast based on delivery plans and also actuals through finance monitoring

·  Report on all but focus discussions on exceptions

The Savings Programme was RAG rated on value and time. Green was for no outstanding issues which threatened delivery, and, Red was when there were outstanding issues which threatened delivery. The Group enquired who actually scrutinised the RAG reports. It was Richard Hothersall from the Programme Office who scrutinised the RAG reports from a Head of Service perspective. The Leader and Deputy Leader were briefed on this. The Group felt it was unfair for one officer to scrutinise.

Regarding the current position the delivery rate of savings equated to 93% and the forecast of less reserves needed was £21m.

There was a reduced delivery in savings for transport for people going to day centres, and, a non-delivery in savings for accommodation and facilities management.

There were delays in the Savings Programme regarding Museums and the Savings Programme Team was in discussions with third parties over this. There were also a delay with the Knott End Ferry due to contractual timescales. The Group was informed that the ferry would probably continue with no financial input from LCC. The Team was also in negotiations over delays with Public Health re-commissioning. This was due to complexity in delivery.

There were risks with Adults savings mitigated by Newton Europe and LCC was working with Newton Europe over this. Regarding library reductions, there was a reduced scope of around £2m. There were cost neutral concerns around bus stations, and, there were community asset transfer costs around Countryside Services.

The Savings Programme Team was working closely with Finance, HR and Zero Based Budget Review colleagues and was also attending fortnightly meetings with Management Team. The Savings Programme Team would ensure robust and honest reporting and continue to work with services to deliver savings. The Team would also attempt where possible to bring forward savings to offset delays to others.

Questions and comments by the Committee in relation to the report were as follows:

·  The Committee requested a more detailed list of delays to the Savings Programme.

·  It was noted that the national minimum wage was having an impact on the financial situation of LCC. The County Council's income was unsustainable. LCC could not continue for more than 2 years without another settlement from Central Government.

·  The Committee was informed that the statutory obligations had been laid out clearly at the Budget Scrutiny Working Group. Some of the obligations were difficult as a lot of the non-statutory services were necessary to make the statutory ones work.

·  Regarding delays in the Savings Programme with museums, and, Public Health Re-commissioning, a follow on update report would be presented at the March meeting of the Committee.

Resolved:

1.  The Scrutiny Committee noted and commented on the report

2.  The Scrutiny Committee requested an update report on the delays with museums, and, Public Health re-commissioning.