Agenda item

A report of the Head of Finance and Property Services.

A report of the Head of Financial Services was submitted reporting to the Committee the Council’s Treasury Management, Investment Management and Prudential Code Outturns for the year 2020/21 (item 14 on the agenda filed with these minutes).

It was noted that:

·         In Capital Expenditure the budget on the General Fund was £57.8 million against a spend of £30 million with an underspend of £27.8 million.

·         There was a slippage request of £25.4 million that left a balance of an underspend of £2.4 million that would go back into the Capital Plan.

·         The slippage report would go to Cabinet on 1^st July.

·         The HRA budget was £9 million with a balance of £5 million and a slippage request of £2 million.

·         The HRA underspend of £3 million would fall back in to the HRA financing fund.

·         Regarding the Investment Outturn Report, the interest earned for the financial year was £342,000 against a revised budget of £300k. In the 2019/20 financial year the outturn had been £562,000.

·         Rates had dropped low and there was a good return on external property funds of £182,000 with internally managed funds of £160,000.

·         The budget for next financial year had been set at a level of £300,000.

·         The Loughborough Town Deal had been approved and £17 million should be added to the Capital Plan.

The Chair noted that slippage in terms of capital expenditure was to be expected in the current climate.

A document detailing the slippage figures was circulated (appended with these minutes).

The Committee were advised in response to questions that:

·         There were two areas of underspend.  Underspend on Revenue would go back into the General Fund Balance.  Regarding underspend on Capital, there would be some projects that would not progress as quickly as hoped and there were project management lessons to be learned.  There was a clear rationale to carry forward and numbers would reflect the Council’s commitment with regards to projects such as the £15 million Enterprise Zone. Schemes with the Leicester and Leicestershire Enterprise Partnership (LLEP) were eligible for forward funds.  Some of the Town Deal regeneration budget would be spent against this and there was another £10 million available to spend this financial year.  It was possible that not all of the money would be spent by 31^st March 2022.  It was added that there was a Capital monitoring process three times a year as well as the outturn.

·         Section 106 monies were monitored internally with a team of officers in conjunction with external parties such as the NHS and the Police.  Many schemes were project managed in conjunction with Parish Councils.  It was not thought that the Council had needed to pay money back to developers that had not been used in time.

·         There was a 5-year overriding rule that investments did not hit the bottom line.  Valuation losses were accounted for.  Unusable reserve accounts did not hit the General Fund reserve balances.  This information was included for transparency purposes and good returns had been taken on them.  Money taken out of reserves would be a line in the Statement of Accounts.

·         Negative cost figures in the HRA were more obvious as there was lost debt.  Negative figures were due to interest receivable being higher than interest payable.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

Reason

To acknowledge the Committee’s consideration of the matter.