Agenda item

Councillor D.J.R. Bartlett declared an interest In that he is President of the Carmarthenshire branch of the National Union of Teachers.

The Committee considered the Revenue Budget Strategy 2016/17 to 2018/19 (Appendix A) which had been endorsed by the Executive Board for consultation purposes at its meeting on 16th November 2015. It was advised that Welsh Government (WG) had announced the provisional settlement on the 9^th December and that Carmarthenshire would see a 1% cut in budget rather than the 3.3% on which the Strategy was predicated. WG had included within the settlement £35m to support education and £21m additional support for social care on an all Wales basis. This equated to £2.1m and £1.3m respectively for Carmarthenshire. If this equivalent funding was pass-ported down to the schools budget, this would reduce the £5.5m efficiency savings required on the schools budget in 2016/17. Currently not all specific grants had been notified and there was still a possibility that some may be included in to the final settlement as opposed to being a specific grant.. There had been no indication for the settlement in future years. In summary, the shortfall in efficiency savings identified for 2016/17 might not now be required, however delivery of the £13.6m identified savings was essential.

The following issues were discussed during consideration of the report:

Clarification was requested in relation to school budgets. The Director of Corporate Services advised that school budgets had been validated to take account of teachers superannuation, changes to national insurance and pay inflation. This amounted to just over £3m. If the £2.1m protection was passed in full to schools, this would reduce the efficiency savings required next year to £3.4m      therefore schools would be getting nearer the same level of funding in cash terms.

            Concerns were expressed that schools were currently working on plans to make the savings as originally planned which could involve staff redundancies. It was asked when schools would be given confirmation of their budget position following the provisional settlement. The Director of Education & Children stated that it was difficult as there was no firm information about the level of protection from WG. The Director of Corporate Services added that he had two concerns namely; the detail in relation to the settlement and protection of education which was not yet clear as well as how this Council would act when they were confirmed.

            Concerns were expressed that the uncertainty and timing of the final settlement in March just before the Council meeting on the 11^th gave Members no time to give the budget due consideration. The Director of Education & Children advised that his department still had to deliver the efficiency savings as identified in the report and it was important for Members to express their views as part of the consultation process. The Director of Corporate Services added that the Council needed to set the budget in February on the basis of the provisional settlement and it was likely that there would only be minor amendments following the final settlement.

            It was asked if the teachers’ unions were being consulted with in relation to school budgets. The CEO/Head of Education Services advised that teachers’ unions were represented on the School Budgets Forum. In response to an additional question regarding potential school staff redundancies resulting from the savings required, he stated that a group of headteachers and school business officers had been considering ways of reducing costs through changes in business and administration. The Group had been collating ideas and looking at measures to protect smaller schools in particular. The Group would be sharing its ideas early in the New Year. The Director of Corporate Services added that the position regarding protection for schools would also be clearer in January.

            Clarification was requested regarding the financial implications of the 1% cut for this Council. The Director of Corporate Services stated that this equated to an improved forecast budget of approximately £7.5m which includes the protection for schools and social care totalling £3.4m. However upon the completion and feedback of the budget consultation members would need to consider how the additional funding is to be utilised, taking account of the additional pressures, the protection requirements, consultation feedback, the efficiencies proposed and any specific grant changes.

            It was asked whether or not any education grants were at risk. The Director of Education & Children advised that Local Government had been lobbying WG to reduce the number of grants because of the administrative burden. 11 grants had been amalgamated into the Education Improvement Grant (EIG) last year however WG had also reduced the overall total by approximately 14%. Some of the grants that had been confirmed had not been reduced, such as Flying Start, however some had, such as Families First which had been reduced by 11% and would mean cuts in services to support vulnerable families. The Director of Corporate Services added that WG had confirmed 33 out of the 44 specific grants that existed last year in the settlement so far, with an overall reduction of 5%. Potentially 1 or 2 of the remainder could move into the RSG. The Group Accountant stated that the Pupil Deprivation Grant had been confirmed for the next year and WG had indicated that post 16 funding would remain at the same level as this year however there could be a reduction in the overall EIG.

            The proposal to reduce the average time for free school breakfasts was referred to and it was asked if this could be varied dependant on the situation in the school. Johnstown CP School was cited as an example of a school with 200 pupils receiving the free breakfast with a canteen that only caters for 150. The Strategic Development Manager confirmed that this was being looked at on a site by site basis and in terms of demand. It would also be done in agreement with headteachers and school governing bodies.

            Further information was requested in relation to the proposal relating to Statements of Special Education Needs. The CEO/Head of Education Services advised that Statements lasted until the individual left secondary school. The proposal was that the funding released would be considered a saving to the department. In response to an additional question, he confirmed that the Authority had been involved in a pilot of an alternative way of working since 2008 and it would be a further 2 years before the new SEN Code of Practice would be confirmed.

Concerns were expressed about the new policy proposal to reduce the scale of specialist provision for out of school hours respite for disabled children and young people. It was felt that there was insufficient detail about the potential impact. The Head of Children’s Services clarified that the proposal was to reduce grant funding by £50k next year to 3 organisations in 3 areas of the county. The organisations would have to raise their funds from elsewhere. The one based in Llanelli was a large organisation however there was a real concern that the service might not be there going forward. The Carmarthen Breakthro play scheme was the only playscheme in the county with a hoist and therefore some children with complex physical disabilities would find it difficult to be catered for elsewhere.

RESOLVED:

6.1       That the report be received.

6.2       To request that the Executive Board reconsiders the new policy proposal to reduce the scale of specialist provision for out of school hours Short Breaks/ Respite for Disabled Children & Young People.

6.3       To endorse the Charging Digest for the Education and Children Department.