There were no apologies for absence.  Councillor Counter had forwarded apologies as she was delayed in traffic.

There were no disclosures of interest.

The minutes of the meeting held on 1 December 2015 to be submitted and signed. 

Copies of the minutes of this meeting are usually available seven working days following the meeting.

(All minutes are available on the Council’s website.)

The minutes of the meeting held on 1 December 2015 were submitted and signed.

The update on actions is attached for the Panel’s comments and for sign-off where completed.

The Committee reviewed the update on actions from the previous meeting. 

RESOLVED –

that Budget Panel notes the update on actions and signs off those which have been completed.

This report informs the Budget Panel of the expected financial position at the end of the financial year, based on the actual performance at the end of November 2015 (Period 8).

The Panel received the latest Finance Digest, covering the period to the end of November, by the Finance Shared Service.  This showed the expected financial position at the end of the financial year, based on the actual performance at the end of November 2015 (period 8).

The Director of Finance highlighted aspects of the digest.  She advised that some of the previously reported overspend would be covered by reserves, an increase in the Council Tax base and improved collection of Council Tax.  Once all figures had been collated there appeared to be an underspend but this was due to the use of reserves.  The variation to the budget had improved since the last report presented to Budget Panel.  The current rental income had some reductions built in.  She agreed to ask the Head of Regeneration and Development for details of the forecast of income from Charter Place. 

In response to a question from Councillor Williams about debtors, the Director of Finance explained that further information was provided on page 26 of the report.  A number of invoices had been completed since the report had been published. 

Following a question about the unfavourable variance related to back scanning planning files, the Director of Finance informed Members that this was in connection to the upgrade to Uniform.

Councillor Joynes was concerned about the cost of agency staff, as this had an impact on the budget.

The Director of Finance advised that agency staff were being used in some services to cover the gap between the appointment of permanent staff, for example the Interim Housing Section Head, or to cover maternity leave.  As levels of staff were reduced it became difficult to cover the gaps between permanent appointments.  These agency staff were therefore covering for posts already included within a service budget.

RESOLVED –

that Budget Panel notes the content of the Finance Digest.

This document will be circulated separately.

The Panel received a report of the Director of Finance which would also be presented to Cabinet on 18 January.  Details of the proposed fees and charges were circulated prior to the meeting.

Fees and Charges

Housing

The Head of Community and Customer Services informed the Panel that the housing income of £1,390,000 was not the net figure.  There was a matching expenditure which could be seen in budget report.  In response to a comment from Councillor Derbyshire, he confirmed that the income included housing benefit received for those living in temporary accommodation. 

Cemeteries

The Chair noted the large increases for burial fees for Watford residents and asked for an explanation.

The Head of Corporate Strategy and Client Services advised that a cemetery review had taken place.  It was recognised that the availability of land in the cemetery was running out.  Officers had developed a Cemetery Strategy which would be presented to Cabinet at its February meeting.  Officers had been tasked to consider how the Council could manage demand, particularly from non-residents.

The Head of Corporate Strategy and Client Services informed Members that a benchmark exercise had been carried out.  This had incorporated other Hertfordshire local authority cemeteries and the Carpenders Park cemetery managed by Brent Council.  It took into account the potential demand there could be for the Watford cemeteries.  The results had shown that it was necessary to impose a significant increase.  Any increase in income would be used to cover the staffing resources required as a result of the Cemetery Strategy.  Officers would continue to monitor the fees charged by other authorities; however, it was a similar picture across the country.  The high initial increase would bring Watford into a better position when compared with neighbouring authorities.  Dacorum and Carpenders Park were the nearest cemeteries to Watford.

The Chair commented that he was concerned about the potential impact for certain members of the community.  He asked whether an impact assessment had been carried out.

The Head of Corporate Strategy and Client Services advised that an Equality Impact Assessment had been carried out on the complete cemetery review.  She would ask officers to look at the area referred to by the Chair.  She added that as an example, the walled graves were an option of choice for individuals and not a requirement of a specific section of the community and therefore there would be no impact on one sector of the community compared to others.

Councillor Derbyshire asked for confirmation that the Council had a duty to bury those whose families could not pay for a funeral.  He questioned whether this would increase with the higher fees.

The Head of Community and Customer Services reported that the Council carried out between three and seven burials per year.  A respectful service was provided.  The Council possibly paid less than a family may pay to bury a family member.  He would provide Members with details of how many had been carried out in the last year and information about  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

·               23 February 2016

·        23 February 2016