Agenda and minutes

To agree the Council’s procedure rules for remote meetings.

RESOLVED –

THAT the remote meeting procedures set out in the agenda be agreed.

To note the Committee’s Terms of Reference as set out below:

1.     To scrutinise the strategic and corporate policies and performance of the Council.

2.     To assist the Cabinet in the development of the Council’s annual budget (capital and revenue) and to review and scrutinise the Council’s performance in relation to overall budgetary management.

3.     To scrutinise the provision, planning, financing, management and performance of central council services (Departments of Organisation Development and Finance, Legal Services and Customers, Strategy and Performance), including support services, and any other Council functions not otherwise addressed by any other Scrutiny Committee.

RESOLVED –

THAT the Terms of Reference set out in the agenda be noted.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Luisa Porritt; Councillor Tom Simon attended as a substitute.

Members will be asked to declare any pecuniary, non-pecuniary and any other interests in respect of items on this agenda.

There were no declarations made.

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair to announce the following: ‘In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that this meeting is being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for six months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available upon request.

If you have asked to address the meeting, you are deemed to be consenting to having your contributions recorded and broadcast, including video when switched on, and to the use of those sound recordings and images for webcasting and/or training purposes.’

Any other announcements

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair announced that the meeting was being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and could be viewed on the website for six months after the meeting.  After that time, webcasts were archived and could be made available upon request.  Those who had asked to address the meeting were deemed to be consenting to having their contributions recorded and broadcast and to the use of those sound recordings and images for webcasting and/or training purposes.

Other announcements

The Chair announced that Kathy Freeman, who had been the Director of Finance at Camden, had started a new job in a new authority. Members thanked Kathy for the work she had done for the Committee and the Council and wished her well in her new role at Lewisham.

The Members also welcomed Nigel Mascarenhas in his new role as Interim Director of Finance.

There we no deputations.

There was no such business.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 11 June 2020.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 11^th June 2020.

RESOLVED –

THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 11^th June 2020 be approved as a correct record.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation.

This report provides a perspective on the management of investments of £297m and debt of £329m worth of Council resources (as at the end of March 2020) through 2019/20 and an update on the 2020/21 Treasury Management Strategy.

This report is coming to Cabinet because it provides an update on external factors that can impact the future financial plans of the Council.

Consideration was given to the report of the Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation.

The report was introduced by the Interim Director of Finance. In response to member questions he made the following comments:

·       Internal borrowing continued to be a good strategy as long the substantial gap between the interest rates of the investment portfolio and the debt with the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) remained.

·       If the two interest rates were to converge, it would be advisable for the Council to reconsider its borrowing options.

·       The Council could still rely on reserves to avoid external borrowing options.

·       The main concerns at the start of the pandemic was liquidity, council tax and business rates income dropped from around £31million to around £21million. To assist local authorities with this gap in cash flow in the short term, Central Government introduced initiatives and grants.

·       The impact on Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) was that the contributions made in, would have reduced. Officers would look at how the full impact on the programme.

·       The Community Investment Programme (CIP) had paused as the pandemic hit but work had resumed, including projects for the Town Hall and Agar Grove. 

·       Capital values had reduced with increased costs, some instances. This report is not intending to explore the impact of the pandemic on these programmes there would be a knock on effect to financing the Capital programme

Some members raised concern that the reports being brought to the Committee did not necessarily show the full impact of the pandemic on council programmes. The Chair indicated that he would want more meetings of the Committee in order to further scrutinise more broadly. He agreed with the Interim Director of Finance to follow up on this outside of the meeting.

ACTION: the Interim Director of Finance

The Interim Director of Finance continued to answer Member questions:

·       It was important to identify any impacts or delayed savings on the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS). The next MTFS also needed to be considered.

·       Camden were looking to avoid redundancies.

·       £100 million had been borrowed on behalf of the North London Waste Authority (NLWA) and they were looking to borrow further amounts in March.

A Member asked for a breakdown of the figure of £113million in Table 2. They wanted to know the proportion from capital receipts, capital grants and how much was coming from reserves.

ACTION: the Interim Director of Finance

·       Some of the loans the Council holds date back to 1993, interest rates on the loans held could be as high as 7.8%, these were not bad rates at the time the loans were taken out

·       Refinancing under the lower rates of interest that were now available came with additional costs. Camden regularly considered whether the cost of refinance was the better deal.

RESOLVED –

THAT the report be noted.

There was no such business.