The Committee is asked to consider the Financial Management Report - First Quarter.

The Chairman welcomed the Chief Accountant to the meeting.

The Chief Accountant introduced the report which set out the revenue and capital projected outturn for 2014/15, as at the end of period 3, covering the period from April to June 2014.  He advised that the revenue underspend was projected at £406,000. 

Members made comments and the Chief Accountant responded to their questions.

A Member made the following comments:  concern with the items on Table 1 which assumed no under or overspend; needed to keep a better hold on what was expected to happen by the end of the year; with regard to Table 3, concern that only 10 per cent of funding had been allocated; and concern that there was still a lot of outstanding debt (£70,000) older than three years.

Questions:

Was it reasonable that two thirds of services would be spot on budget at the end of the year?

The Chief Accountant acknowledged that there was significant underspend last year, so the departments with larger variances were concentrated on in the first quarter.

Could more be done to inform individual Councillors as to how Improvement and Regeneration Funds may be accessed?

The Chief Accountant advised that each fund had its own bidding and approval process and he acknowledged that this could be made more available for Members.

How much of the £70,000 was likely to be recovered, and how much can be got back or should it be written-off?

The Chief Accountant advised that overall the debt had reduced; older debt often was a charge on property but this was being reviewed with Legal.

A Member stated that some Regeneration Funds were for Swale Borough Council (SBC) officers to bid on, not members of the public.  He advised that the Local Loan Fund was for members of the public to bid for, but the take-up was disappointing.  He considered there was a failure of the Council to attract interest in the funding opportunities.

Was it typical to have such wide variances in the budget set each year, compared to the outturn reports, especially with reference to the Waste Contract?

The Chief Accountant advised that the Council’s external auditors had reported that SBC had strong financial management, and quarterly reports showing the variances were forwarded to Members and the Cabinet and there were monthly reports to the Senior Management Team.  He confirmed that he would forward a response to the Committee concerning the variance in the Waste Contract figures.

Were there plans to plough the underspend back into street cleansing, as this service was poor, despite best efforts by officers?  The Member requested that the Cabinet Member for Finance responded to this question.

What can be done about the loss of the customer use of the CCTV service, resulting in a £12,000 overspend?

The Chief Accountant agreed to forward a response to the Committee.

What was the explanation for the £3,000 overspend in relation to a local community hall when figures were likely not to be high in the first instance?

The Chief Accountant agreed to forward a response to the Committee.

Was the Staying Put overspend because of an offset figure or was it incorporated in the grants?

The Chief Accountant advised that it was after the off-set being included.

Was charge on a property debt increased by interest?

The Chief Accountant advised that in some cases interest would have been added.

A Member considered it important to determine whether each individual department genuinely expected to achieve a nil variance.

The Chairman thanked the Chief Accountant for attending the meeting.

Resolved:  That the Financial Management Report, April – June 2014 be noted.