Agenda and minutes

The Joint Executive Advisory Board (EAB)

RESOLVED

that Councillor Angela Goodwin be elected as Chairman for this meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Christopher Barrass, Steven Lee and Fiona White.  There were no substitutions.

In accordance with the local Code of Conduct, a councillor is required to disclose at the meeting any Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI) that they may have in respect of any matter for consideration on this agenda.  Any councillor with a DPI must not participate in any discussion or vote regarding that matter and they must withdraw from the meeting immediately before consideration of the matter.

If that DPI has not been registered, the councillor must notify the Monitoring Officer of the details of the DPI within 28 days of the date of the meeting.

Councillors are further invited to disclose any non-pecuniary interest which may be relevant to any matter on this agenda, in the interests of transparency, and to confirm that it will not affect their objectivity in relation to that matter.

There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Joint Executive Advisory Board held on 20 September 2021.

The minutes of the meeting of the Joint EAB held on 20 September 2021 were confirmed as a correct record, and would be signed by the Chairman at the earliest opportunity.

Having received an introductory presentation from the Resources Director and supporting comments from the Lead Councillor for Resources and the Leader of the Council at its meeting held on 11 November 2021, the Joint Executive Advisory Board (EAB) considered the General Fund Draft Budget 2022-23 and Medium Term Plan 2022-23 to 2025-26 report.

The following points arose from related questions, comments and discussion:

1.           The Resources Director was familiar with the draft budget of Waverley Borough Council (WBC) and regularly liaised with her equivalent colleague at that Council.  The main differences between the budgets of this Council and WBC were that the latter outsourced many of its services, resulting in high non-staff contract costs, whilst Guildford provided more in-house services, leading to greater direct employee salary costs.  Guildford also provided more community and cultural services and its budget reflected this.  A specific budgeting difference between the Councils was that Guildford did not show the percentage of Benefit Subsidies received from the Government to fund benefits paid to claimants as this was passported to claimants and not retained by the Council.  However, the Council did receive a benefit administration grant of approximately £230,000 from the Government.

2.           Although the pre-planning application advice service had been suspended owing to staffing pressures resulting from a significant increase in the number of householder planning applications received, the Planning Team had now been strengthened and consideration was being given to resuming the service as it provided an income stream and led to an improvement in the quality of applications submitted.  In common with other district and borough councils across the country, Guildford found that the planning service did not cover its costs and needed to be subsidised by other services.  Government lobbying on a national scale was taking place with a view to securing reform to allow councils greater freedom and flexibility to raise fees to recoup costs.

3.           The pay claim received by the Council from Unison requesting a 10% increase in pay over a 3 year period to address the pay restraint in the public sector over the last decade was supported to overcome recruitment issues, particularly in the light of the Future Guildford programme.

4.           With regard to G Live and the Spectrum, both venues had re-opened fully in line with the Government’s Covid-19 roadmap.  The contract in respect of G Live had been extended for a further three years and a reduction of approximately £300,000 in the management fee paid by the Council had been negotiated.  At the expiry of the contract in 2024, when the market was expected to have recovered, a full tendering process would be pursued with a view to improving the Council’s financial return.  The Spectrum contract, which expired this year, had been extended for two years to October 2023 resulting in a reduction in the Council’s management fee income in the region of £260,000.  A range of future delivery models, including a possible joint procurement with WBC or the establishment of a Guildford leisure management trust,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.