Brent's
2017-18 budget comes under scrutiny at the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny
Committee on Tuesday January 9th. The Task Group's report appears to have been
written before the Communities Secretary's announcement that larger local
authorities could raise Council Tax by 5.99% in 2017-18 if 3% was earmarked for
social care services. At present the Council intends to raise the tax by 2.99%
- the maximum previously allowed without a referendum.
The
Task Group, on the basis that the 2017-18 was largely decided last year, makes a
number of recommendations on a longer term basis:
1. Brent
should dedicate some time and intellectual space to mapping out the potential
consequences of Brexit for the borough, particularly in the areas of
population, housing and manufacturing exports.
2. Brent
should advocate a form of sub regional investment for the “strategic investment
pot” produced in the London business rates pool, if the arrangement becomes
permanent. The West London Alliance could deliver investment in our region of
London.
3. The
criteria Brent should adopt for strategic investment are as follows:
· That the capital investment should have a spend to
save rationale, and, in some way, reduce Brent’s
anticipated revenue spending in forthcoming years.
· That the investment aligns with the Council’s
political priorities.
· That the investment should represent a sound long-term
financial
decision.
· That the money spent makes a significant positive
impact on the lives of the most vulnerable in Brent.
4. Brent
should leave no stone unturned in attempts to grow the local private sector.
Two ideas it should specifically look at are appointing a business champion and
using the procurement system to support local businesses.
5. A
report on progress in delivery of the new sexual health services for the
borough should come before Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny in six months’
time.
6. The
Council should always give due consideration to ensuring a geographical spread
when strategically purchasing property.
7. The Council should set a target to
keep bulky waste collection requests low in order to reduce costs and the
amount of materials finding their way into landfill.
8. The special collection service page
of the Brent website should be re- designed to give maximum exposure to
alternative and sustainable options which residents can use to dispose of bulky
waste, particularly charity retailers in the borough. Helpline staff should
also be trained to offer alternative options in the first instance.
9. The Council should look to develop
sustainable ways for people to dispose of mid-sized waste items as a way of
reducing illegal rubbish dumping.
11. The Council should look into the
possibility of hiring an external partner to find more advertising space in the
borough on a no-win no-fee basis.
12. A review of pavement licencing in
Brent should be carried out to see how much we could generate from this source.
This should take particular account of price and enforcement.
Brexit could reduce the population
of Brent as EU citizens return home and thus reduce the Council Tax base as
well as impact on local industry, particularly building, and reduce the number
of pupils in local schools, creating falling school rolls.
The Task Group go into the issue of
Business Rates in some detail as this is likely to be a major source of income
in the future. For a trial period there will be a pool system for London
boroughs, the 'London Investment pot' led by the City of London, to distribute
the monies. At the commencement there will be a one-off windfall of approximately
£4.9 million for the borough and the Task Group suggest:
One potential investment which would meet these criteria (see 3 above)
would be the building or purchase of more properties for use as temporary
accommodation. The Council currently spends significant sums on rents in the
private sector for those in Brent who are homeless. Running more of our own
properties would reduce this annual revenue cost as per our criteria above.
The properties would also not be subject to
Right-to-Buy legislation which currently makes it so difficult for local
authorities to build true social housing, as they cannot hedge their investment
over a long period of time, knowing that
they may be forced to sell any of their properties at a rate below
market value just three years after building it. This idea would also have a
clear advantage for the most vulnerable people in our borough.
The Task Group acknowledge
that the Council's initiative to raise cash through selling advertising space
on its buildings has had very limited success, raising only £62k rather than the £300k anticipated. They advocate the
Council fund an external partner to seek out such space.
The Task Group note that many Brent residents do not have cars and recommend that the Council introduce collection points for recycling mid-range range goods. The Recycling Centre is not accessible by pedestrians:
One recommendation that may be
controversial is 12 above. The Task Group remark that there is a lack of
enforcement on shops and bars that spill displays and tables out into pavement space and suggest
that income could be generated through a pavement licensing system. Businesses
on streets such as Ealing Road and Kingsbury Road would be particularly affected.
Who are the 'task group'?
ReplyDeleteThe Budget Scrutiny Panel was comprised of representatives from each of the Council’s three scrutiny committees, and chaired by Cllr Matt Kelcher as chair of the Resources and Public Realm Committee. Cllrs Kelcher, Ketan Sheth, Long and Nerva participated in three formal meetings at the Civic Centre where they were able to question the relevant officers and lead members. The chair also carried out interviews with front line officers and external experts.
DeleteMartin, can you explain please ...what is pavement licensing?
ReplyDeleteShops would pay a fee to Brent Council for use of the pavement outside their premises for displays of goods, seats and tables etc - not sure if they will also charge for signs that are a hazard for people with sight disabilities.
ReplyDelete