Agenda item

Report number: COU/WS/21/016

 

A.      Referrals from Cabinet: 9 November 2021

 

1.       West Suffolk Gambling Act 2005: Statement of Policy 2022 to 2025

 

Portfolio holder: Councillor Andy Drummond

 

2.       Council Tax Base for Tax Setting Purposes 2022 to 2023

 

Portfolio holder: Councillor Sarah Broughton

 

3.       Proposed Incubation Units: Suffolk Business Park, Bury St Edmunds

 

Portfolio holder: Councillor Susan Glossop

 

(See agenda item 12 below for the exempt appendix relating to this item.)

 

B.      Referrals from Cabinet: 7 December 2021

 

(These referrals have been compiled before the meeting of Cabinet on 7 December 2021 and are based on the recommendations contained within each of the reports listed below.  Any amendments made by the Cabinet to the recommendations within these reports will be notified to members in advance of the meeting accordingly.)

 

1.       Arrangements for Appointment of External Auditors

 

Portfolio holder: Councillor Sarah Broughton

 

2.       Delivering a Sustainable Medium Term Budget

 

Portfolio holder: Councillor Sarah Broughton

 

3.       Treasury Management Report (September 2021)

 

Portfolio holder: Councillor Sarah Broughton

 

4.       West Suffolk Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme (LCTRS) 2022 to 2023

 

Portfolio holder: Councillor Sarah Broughton

Council considered the referrals report of recommendations from Cabinet, as contained within report number: COU/WS/21/016.

 

A.      Referrals from Cabinet: 9 November 2021

 

1.      West Suffolk Gambling Act 2005: Statement of Policy 2022 to 2025

 

Approval was sought for the West Suffolk Statement of Gambling Policy 2022 to 2025, which had been revised following a period of consultation with key stakeholders. If approved, this statement of policy was anticipated to remain current until its next review in 2024 for re-adoption by 31 January 2025.

 

Councillor Andy Drummond, Portfolio Holder for Regulatory and Environment, drew relevant issues to the attention of Council, including that the West Suffolk Statement of Gambling Policy set out how the Council, in its role as licensing authority, would carry out its functions under the Gambling Act 2005. It recognised the importance of responsible gambling within the entertainment industry, while seeking to balance this with the key objectives of the Act. The objectives were:

 

·         Preventing gambling from being a source of crime and disorder, being associated with crime or disorder or being used to support crime

·         Ensuring that gambling was conducted in a fair and open way

·         Protecting children and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited by gambling.

 

Members noted the purpose and content of the Statement of Gambling Policy and the proposed minor revisions which had been subject to consultation and had broadly been supported. One further minor alteration had been made following consultation.

 

The policy’s associated Local Area Profile (LAP) had also been updated. A LAP was an assessment of the key characteristics of West Suffolk in the context of gambling-related harm. The Council’s approach was based on the possible risk to gambling-related harm, in adherence to the objectives set out in the Act. Some or many of these matters, many of which were summarised in the report, would have been considered and addressed by existing premises.

 

On the motion of Councillor Drummond, seconded by Councillor Mike Chester, it was put to the vote and with the vote being unanimous, it was

 

Resolved: That

 

1.       the revised West Suffolk Gambling Act 2005: Statement of Policy for the period 2022 to 2025, as contained in Appendix B to Report number CAB/WS/21/048, be agreed.

 

2.       The revised West Suffolk Local Area Profile, as contained in Appendix C to Report number CAB/WS/21/048, be agreed.

2.      Council Tax Base for Tax Setting Purposes 2022 to 2023

 

Approval was sought for the council tax base for tax setting purposes for the 2022 to 2023 financial year.

 

The council tax base was the total taxable value at a point in time of all the domestic properties in the council’s area. It was a yearly calculation and represented the estimated number of chargeable dwellings after allowing for exemptions and discounts, projected changes in the property base and after applying an estimated collection rate. The council tax base was used in the calculation of council tax, further details regarding which was set out in Report number: CAB/WS/21/050.

 

Councillor Sarah Broughton, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Property, drew relevant issues to the attention of Council.

 

On the motion of Councillor Broughton, seconded by Councillor David Roach, it was put to the vote and with the vote being unanimous, it was

 

Resolved: That

 

1.       The tax base for 2022 to 2023, for the whole of West Suffolk be 57,406.34 equivalent band D dwellings and for each of the predecessor areas be: Forest Heath 19,455.81 and St Edmundsbury 37,950.53, as detailed in paragraph 2.6 of Report number CAB/WS/21/050.

 

2.       The tax base for 2022 to 2023 for the different parts of its area, as defined by parish or special expense area boundaries, be as shown in Appendix 3 of Report number CAB/WS/21/050.

 

3.       The Director (Resources and Property) be given delegated responsibility to make changes to the tax base figures, as a result of any government announcements pertaining to local council tax support or any data updates relating to significant claimant increases, as detailed in paragraph 2.5 of Report number CAB/WS/21/050.

 

3.      Proposed Incubation Units, Suffolk Business Park, Bury St Edmunds

 

Approval was sought for a number of recommendations in connection with the proposed provision of incubation units on land at Suffolk Business Park, Bury St Edmunds.

 

The West Suffolk Strategic Framework 2020 to 2024 set out three strategic priorities, including the Council’s commitment to focus its energies and resources on the “Growth in West Suffolk’s economy for the benefit of all our residents and UK plc”.  This proposed project was a key example of how the Council could support and invest in its communities and businesses as it provided incubation space for new and developing companies that would not otherwise be provided.

 

Councillor Susan Glossop, Portfolio Holder for Growth, drew relevant issues to the attention of Council, including that authority was sought for the development of 40,000 square feet of start-up/incubation space, as phase one, for companies mainly in the advanced manufacturing and engineering (AME) sector and its supply chain.  The costs of borrowing to fund this development through prudential borrowing, would be covered by the business rates that were forecasted to be retained locally, as a result of the Enterprise Zone at Suffolk Park, Bury St Edmunds.

 

A full business case for phase one was attached as Appendix A to the Cabinet report (CAB/WS/21/052), which included Exempt Appendix 2, which for ease of reference, had been attached to the Council referral report (COU/WS/21/016). The business case was supported by a risk register (Appendix 1) and a high-level project plan (Appendix 3).  Additional business case(s) would be required to bring forward phase two. 

 

The Phase One Business Case set out the strategic, economic, commercial, financial and management cases for this development.  It detailed the project objectives and concluded that the case was made for the proposal to be supported and delivered in line with the high-level programme.  The project required the allocation of approximately £12.1 million of capital funding which was assumed to be funded through prudential borrowing from the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB).  The financial case explained the assumptions that had been made to determine the capital cost, revenue implications, cash flow projections and the unique arrangement for financing the debt over 17 years, along with the retention of the ‘Pot B’ business rates received from the Enterprise Zone on Suffolk Business Park which would be used to pay for the costs of borrowing, with support from the New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) and Suffolk County Council (SCC).

 

This project provided the opportunity to deliver on the Council’s original vision for the employment allocation at Suffolk Business Park.  It built on the commitment shown by the Council, New Anglia LEP and SCC to funding/developing the Eastern Relief Road (now Rougham Tower Avenue) and also reflected the intent behind establishing the Enterprise Zone on Suffolk Park.  The intention was that, once built, the centre would be run by a leading provider of business support to the AME sector.  This would be a first for West Suffolk and a significant achievement.   The aim was to provide space for start-up or growing businesses in a supported/flexible environment, with access to high quality business advice and networking opportunities.

 

A detailed discussion was held and whilst being mindful of the risks involved but acknowledging the proposed mitigation measures and safeguards in place, members considered this was an extremely exciting and positive scheme, which accorded with the Council’s vision for the economic growth and prosperity of the district.

 

Councillor Glossop placed her sincere thanks on record to members, officers and partners involved for enabling the proposal to come forward.

 

On the motion of Councillor Glossop, seconded by Councillor John Griffiths, it was put to the vote and with the vote being unanimous, it was

 

Resolved: That

 

1.       The business case (Incubation Units at Suffolk Business Park), attached as Appendix A to Report number CAB/WS/21/052, be approved and the project objectives be endorsed. 

 

2.       The purchase of 6.8 acres of net developable land to enable the project to be delivered, be approved.

 

3.       The development of 40,000 square feet employment space (phase one) on Zone 3 of Suffolk Business Park in accordance with the details contained in the business case, be approved.

 

4.       A £12.1 million capital budget for phase one only, funded through the Investing in our Growth Fund through prudential borrowing, with the revenue impact in line with the financial case section of Appendix A to Report number CAB/WS/21/052, be approved.   

 

5.       It be agreed for officers to proceed in line with the Council’s agreed Scheme of Delegation.  However, where necessary agreement, be sought for delegation to the Director (Resources and Property) and the Director (Planning and Growth), in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Resources and Property and with the Portfolio Holder for Growth, to make changes to the proposal to reflect the need for the project to evolve as time moves forward and to enable the project to be delivered in accordance with the finance case and the programme.

 

6.       It be agreed for the Council’s Section 151 Officer to make the necessary changes to the Council’s prudential indicators, as a result of recommendation 4. above.

 

(Councillor Simon Cole left the meeting during the consideration of this item.)

 

B.      Referrals from Cabinet: 7 December 2021

 

Following the publication of the agenda and papers for this meeting which took place before the Cabinet meeting was convened, confirmation was given that the Cabinet made no changes to the recommendations contained in the referral report provided.

 

1.      Arrangements for Appointment of External Auditors

 

Approval was sought for the appointing process for external auditors, which would take effect from the 2023 to 2024 financial year.

 

At the conclusion of the transitional arrangements for the appointment of external auditors, as explained in the Council referral report, the Council had agreed to continue to use the Public Sector Audit Appointments Limited (PSAA) (Report number: COU/SA/18/010 - Appointment of External Auditors) as its route to select its external auditors Ernst and Young for the remaining term of the five years from 1 April 2019 (ending the financial year 2022 to 2023). 

 

The Performance and Audit Scrutiny Committee had considered three options for the appointment of external auditors, which would commence with responsibilities for the financial year 2023 to 2024, as summarised in the Council referral report.

 

Councillor Sarah Broughton, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Property, drew relevant issues to the attention of Council, including thanking the Performance and Audit Scrutiny Committee for their thorough consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of each of the three options available, as set out in Report number: PAS/WS/21/021.

 

The Cabinet had supported the recommendation of the Performance and Audit Scrutiny Committee and agreed to recommend to full Council that the Council should continue to ‘opt-in’ to the sector led body (Public Sector Audit Appointments Limited (PSAA)) for the independent appointment of the Council’s external auditor.

 

Council was also supportive of the approach.

 

On the motion of Councillor Broughton, seconded by Councillor Carol Bull, it was put to the vote and with the vote being unanimous, it was

 

Resolved:

 

That it be agreed to continue to ‘opt-in’ to the sector led body (Public Sector Audit Appointments Limited (PSAA)) for the independent appointment of the Council’s external auditor, beginning with responsibilities for the financial year 2023 to 2024.

 

2.      Delivering a Sustainable Medium-Term Budget

 

Approval was sought for proposals for inclusion in the medium-term financial plans.

 

On 18 November 2021, the Performance and Audit Scrutiny Committee (PASC) considered proposals for delivering a sustainable balanced budget for 2022 to 2023 and for developing the medium-term plans. This included a number of key budget assumptions proposed and the rationale behind those assumptions, as set out in section 2 and Table 1 of paragraph 3.6 of Report number: PAS/WS/21/024.

 

The recommendations, which had been endorsed by Cabinet on 7 December 2021, were now presented for approval by Council. These, together with any further recommendations emanating from PASC and Cabinet in the coming weeks, would be incorporated into the budget setting process, the composite report for which would be considered by Cabinet and Council in February 2022.

 

Councillor Sarah Broughton, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Property, drew relevant issues to the attention of Council.

 

Having considered the process and approach to setting the Council’s 2022 to 2023 budget and the principles and challenges faced in achieving this, Council supported the recommendation of the Performance and Audit Scrutiny Committee and subsequently Cabinet.

 

On the motion of Councillor Broughton, seconded by Councillor Patrick Chung, it was put to the vote and with the vote being unanimous, it was

 

 

Resolved:

 

That the proposals as detailed in Section 2 and Table 1 at paragraph 3.6 of Report number: PAS/WS/21/024, be included in the medium-term financial plans to 2026.

 

3.      Treasury Management Report (September 2021)

 

Approval was sought for the Treasury Management Report for the first half of the 2021 financial year.

 

Councillor Sarah Broughton, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Property, drew relevant issues to the attention of Council.

 

On the motion of Councillor Broughton, seconded by Councillor Diane Hind, it was put to the vote and with the vote being unanimous, it was

 

Resolved:

 

That the Treasury Management Report (September 2021), as contained in Report number: FRS/WS/21/005, be approved.

 

4.      West Suffolk Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme (LCTRS) 2022 to 2023

 

Approval was sought for proposed changes to the West Suffolk Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme.

 

Each year the Council was required to review its Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme (LCTRS). Cabinet Report number: CAB/WS/21/058 provided an annual review of the 2021 to 2022 scheme and proposed to make changes to the scheme for 2022 to 2023, having been subject to preceptor, stakeholder and public consultation, as required by the relevant regulations when amendments to the scheme were proposed.

 

Councillor Sarah Broughton, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Property, drew relevant issues to the attention of Council, including that the proposed changes to take effect from 1 April 2022, were as follows:

 

If implemented, these changes would affect:

 

1.   the threshold for how much capital a customer could own (for example, savings) and still be entitled to a council tax reduction

2.   the impact that living with non-dependent adult friends or family members had on the council tax reduction that a customer received

3.   the relationship between the application processes for Universal Credit and for Local Council Tax Reduction

4.   the way in which fluctuations in a customer’s earnings were taken into account in the LCTRS

 

Each of the proposed changes were detailed in turn within section 2 of the Cabinet report.

 

In response to a question, Council was informed that the proposal to lower the ‘capital threshold’ for council tax reduction from £16,000 to £10,000 and to remove the requirement to pay a tariff on savings over £6,000 (as summarised in paragraph 4.9.2 of Report number: COU/WS/21/016), was not a central government initiative and had been proposed locally for implementation under the West Suffolk LCTRS. The proposed changes had been formulated to ensure the scheme benefitted those most in need and consultation had been undertaken on all proposals prior to their presentation for approval.

 

Having considered the proposed revisions, their potential impact and the outcomes of the consultation, the majority of members were supportive of the amended scheme, agreeing that the proposals were pragmatic and proportionate.

 

On the motion of Councillor Broughton, seconded by Councillor Sara Mildmay-White, it was put to the vote and with the vote being 33 for the motion, two against and no abstentions, it was

 

Resolved: That

 

1.       the Local Council Tax Reduction (LCTRS) Scheme for 2022 to 2023, as outlined in Report number: CAB/WS/21/058, be reviewed.

 

2.       The changes to the scheme outlined in section 2 of Report number: CAB/WS/21/058, and as detailed in Appendix C, be agreed.