Agenda item

To receive questions from members for the Executive and committee chairs.

The Chair invited Councillor Khan to ask his urgent question to Councillor Hargreaves, Portfolio Holder for Budget and Finance, regarding Council Services over the next five years and remarks made by senior officers and the Leader in respect of deteriorating finances.

In response to the urgent question, Councillor Hargreaves said that there was no inconsistency between remarks made by officers and the administration, and that the Council was in a “tough, but manageable” financial position which was better than many other Councils. He was unable to offer any guarantees as they could not predict how the rate of inflation would go, or how much government funding the Council would receive both in the short and long term. He felt that it was disappointing that experienced opposition members were not offering any support with the plan to manage finances over the next few years.

He said that the question was also comforting as the opposition parties usually ignored the administration before an election and the question assumed that the administration would win the next election. The opposition had raised nine questions all criticising Council finances but at the same time, raised a costly Council motion.

In response, Councillor Khan said that he was looking for clarity in whether there was a contradiction between statements made by the administration in the recent Cabinet meeting and the professional advice given by Officers. Councillor Hargreaves had chosen not to answer but to provide a stock response from his political party.

In response to a question for further clarification from Councillor Sell, Councillor Sutton said that the answer given seemed adequate and that they were constantly reviewing. Councillor Hargreaves also responded that the Voluntary Support Grants were continuing, and the Voluntary Support Grants Committee were currently in the process of allocating the £310,000 budget for the next financial year.

In response to a question for further clarification from Councillor Loughlin, Councillor Freeman said that he had initially voted against the policy of the Council making investments. However, it had turned out well and the situation which the Council currently finds themselves in was much less difficult than it would have been if others had followed his previous instinct. Whilst he couldn’t see how the future would turn out, the Council had statutory requirements which they would try their best to meet as well as a lot more besides.

Councillor Loughlin replied that he had not provided an answer to her question.

In response to a question from Councillor Khan on protecting the Housing portfolio, Councillor Coote said that he would fight to get as much as he could for the revenue account to ensure that it was correct. It was not within his gift to be able to say how much the service would need, if there would be an increase in repairs or how much they could rely on funding from central government; but he stood by the record of both the administration and himself in supporting social housing.

In response to Councillor Khan’s request for a report detailing how many damp issues had been rectified by ward, Councillor Coote said that Uttlesford Norse had been under pressure to give the Council many reports, including on their performance, and he had found at times that the data provided didn’t collate with what they were finding out.  He explained that he was unable to provide figures currently as they were working on them, and members and residents would be provided with the facts as soon as possible. The Council were also contacting Housing Associations for their figures to make sure that it wasn’t just the Council’s Social Housing which was being addressed and the Council would do its best to protect anyone in social and rented accommodation.

In response to a question for further clarification from Councillor Isham, Councillor Evans said that the generic answer was applicable, but in terms of his Portfolio, one of the greatest problems was with staff recruitment, particularly the headcount in Planning. This was not unique to Uttlesford and the Director of Planning was meeting a representative from DLUCH officials to discuss these issues.

In response to a question from Councillor Fairhurst regarding secrecy by the administration, the Leader of the Council said that there was no secrecy, and the relevant meetings were being convened to discuss issues such as investments and the Local Plan. She explained that members needed clarity and understanding as the cost-of-living crisis was making everyone a bit unsure and reiterated that the current budget was fine and next year’s budget would look at addressing the finances. Whilst the administration would set the budget, members needed to work together and if any members needed any clarification or workshops on the finances, this could be arranged.

The Chair confirmed that those Councillors who did not have the opportunity to ask their question of clarification due to lack of time, could send a written question of clarification after the meeting.