Agenda item

The Committee considered the report of the Corporate Director of Resources that provided Members with an updated work programme for 2022/23 (for copy of report see file of minutes).

The Overview and Scrutiny Officer was in attendance to present the report and advised Members that the Ofsted Inspection Report of Durham County Council’s Children Social Care would be included on the agenda for the next scrutiny meeting on 23 September 2022.

The Overview and Scrutiny Officer highlighted that in order to deliver the work programme two additional special meetings would be required, a workshop that had been highlighted earlier in the meeting and a visit. Members were advised that should they wish to carry out task and finish work in relation to identifying further efficiencies or areas of income generation. This work would impact on the committee’s intention to carry out review activity.

The Finance Manager (CYPS) was also in attendance to deliver the presentation outlining the process of development of MTFP (13), the suggested role for overview and scrutiny and the timeframes (for copy of presentation, see file of minutes).

Prior to the presentation, Councillor Gunn indicated that she did not believe that any scrutiny committee should have any part in any savings options and believed was the responsibility of Cabinet and did not wish to participate in looking at savings options that were cuts to the budgets of Children and Young People’s Services. She stated as pointed out by the Overview and Scrutiny Officer if significant work was generated by this process of this committee identifying cuts to the budget, they may need to prioritise other planned scrutiny work which she disagreed with given that the committee had an agreed work programme and wished to exclude herself from this part of the meeting.

The Chair advised Councillor Gunn that the work programme had not been agreed at this stage.

Following the presentation, the Chair asked Members to discuss the draft work programme. He then indicated that the task and finish groups may wish to produce a range of high-level options for Cabinet to consider so it was putting proposals forward, but Cabinet would make the decisions.

Members asked if the process was not just about cuts, and they could ask for further funding which the officer confirmed was the case.

Councillor Walton referred to task groups and sought confirmation that these groups did not already exist, and the work programme had flexibility built into it that was confirmed.

Mrs Gunn referred to the language used such as savings which were often when roles were not recruited which was a financial saving but not in deliver terms. She indicated that she would like to see some of the drivers behind the costs to understand what was driving it and the strategy behind it to generate efficiencies in the areas by the strategic decision made and gave an example of transport costs and SEN provisions. She commented that the committee could input into these strategies rather than cut the number of jobs.

The Finance Manager responded to the term savings was used by the council and was also used nationally. He then indicated that the exercise was looking for efficiency and income generation and staying away from reducing services. The deep dive areas were part of the task and finish groups.

Mrs Gunn indicated if they understood how the processes worked and how accurate the numbers were, and officers could guide the committee on areas where scrutiny could be helpful.

The Finance Manager responded that he would be cautions on giving guidance on areas of scrutiny.

Councillor Currah indicated that it would be helpful to look at the insource and outcome strategy particularly around children’s homes.

The Principal Overview and Scrutiny Officer responded to Mrs Gunn on the question of deep dive and advised that quarterly budget reports were brought to this committee with the next report in September and the contextual information that she had alluded to would be contained in that report. He indicated that potentially there may be a couple of areas that warranted that deeper dive, and the starting point of this process was what the committee was asked to consider. It may be that there were not any areas to be identified for inclusion in the MTFP development for February next year but that’s not to say they would not warrant a further investigation for subsequent years budget. The budget report in September may inform the committee’s deliberations further.

Resolved: That the work programme for 2022/2023 be agreed.