Agenda item

Council Budget Position

It was moved by Councillor Julie Dore, seconded by Councillor Harry Harpham, that this Council:-

(a)

reconfirms its anger and dismay at the Council’s budget position which is now significantly worse than was previously estimated because the Government are making additional unfair cuts to Sheffield as a result of their failure to grow the economy and notes that, even without the additional cuts, the Council was already facing an unprecedented level of cuts, which will have a massive impact on Council services in Sheffield;

(b)

notes that the Council has a £50 million budget gap for 2013/14 and this is in addition to the £140 million that has been reduced from the Council’s budget over the past two years, meaning that future cuts will unavoidably have a bigger impact on Council services that are valued by local people;

(c)

is appalled that despite the Council having to set its budget on 1st March, 2013, the Local Government Finance Settlement was not given until the week before Christmas and believes that this demonstrates a complete disregard for local government;

(d)

regrets that the Government provided inaccurate figures to the Council and the public on the Settlement which were used to create an inaccurate and grossly misleading representation of the reductions facing local authorities and believes that this demonstrates their incompetence;

(e)

continues to oppose the unfairness of the cuts which see councils with the highest levels of deprivation receiving the majority of the cuts whilst some of the wealthiest areas in the country receive almost no cuts at all;

(f)

notes recent research from Newcastle City Council which indicates that Sheffield will receive a cut of nearly £200 per person between 2010/11 and 2014/15, wealthy areas are receiving significantly less cuts with Guildford receiving a cut of just £24.14 per person, Wokingham £26.53 and Epsom and Ewell just £15.18;

(g)

believes that the Deputy Prime Minister continues to betray and fail the people of Sheffield and is shocked that the main opposition group continue to support the unfair cuts that the Government are making to Sheffield; 

(h)

regrets that due to the Deputy Prime Minister’s complete inability to offer any plausible defence for the decisions his Government is making to impose unprecedented cuts to Sheffield City Council at the same time as wealthier councils receive just a fraction of the cuts, the Deputy Prime Minister and main opposition group have resorted to spouting factually inaccurate untruths about Council spending;

(i)

instructs the Chief Executive to write to the Deputy Prime Minister and Leader of the Main Opposition Group to explain recent inaccuracies and misrepresentations recently propagated by the Deputy Prime Minister and main opposition group;

(j)

expects that in the future these inaccuracies will not be included in any statement or material issued by the party of the Deputy Prime Minister and the main opposition group;

(k)

notes that unfortunately many other councils across the country are facing significant reductions in services and this is reflected in the letters written to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government by all Core City Leaders explaining the impact that the cuts will have on their cities;

(l)

further notes that in the past two years, the Council has made £140 million of budget reductions and as far as possible has done so limiting the impact on front line visible Council services, however, recognises that the Government have continued to cut to a level that will mean it is no longer possible to avoid significant reductions to front line services;

(m)

further notes that proposals to balance the 2013/14 budget are now subject to consultation and impact upon areas across the Council, including sports and leisure, health and care, youth services, early years, and Community Assemblies, acknowledging that, with the exception of child protection, no area of the Council will be unaffected by the cuts;

(n)

further notes that the proposals are still subject to consultation and the budget will be approved at Full Council on 1^st March, 2013; and

(o)

confirms the present Administration’s determination to protect services as far as possible, focusing on the long term and recognises the Administration’s focus on protecting services for the vulnerable.

Whereupon, it was moved by Councillor Shaffaq Mohammed, seconded by Councillor Simon Clement-Jones, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the deletion of all the words after the words “That this Council” and the substitution of the following words therefore:-

(a)

laments the previous Government’s inability to handle public finances, increasing the national deficit year-on-year from 2001 onwards, reaching a total of £43bn prior to the economic crash;

(b)

notes that the previous Government built up a record national deficit, where £1 in every £4 the Government spent was borrowed, leaving the current Government to clean up the mess they had created;

(c)

reminds Members of the commitment of the previous Government to halve the deficit by 2014, by pledging £82bn worth of cuts;

(d)

deplores Her Majesty’s Opposition, who despite making this pledge, have refused to provide any credible plans of how they would have cut the national deficit in Government;

(e)

however, notes the comments of the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Chancellor who have refused to commit to reinstate funding for local government if elected;

(f)

regrets that the Administration continue to hypocritically scare-monger about Council budgets, in a desperate attempt to deflect blame for their own decisions and incompetence;

(g)

notes that while Sheffield will see a 3.9% reduction in its adjusted Formula Grant (including Early Intervention Grant and other funds), Wokingham will see a reduction of 5.6%, while Epsom & Ewell and Guildford will see reductions of 9.4% and 7.8% respectively;

(h)

further confirms that Sheffield City Council will have a spending power of £2,273 per dwelling next year compared to £1,845 for Wokingham, £306 for Epsom & Ewell and £284 for Guildford;

(i)

furthermore, thanks the Government for the overwhelming investment in Sheffield including the commitment to a High Speed Rail Station, £1.2bn for the Streets Ahead programme, £9.9m for a University Technical College, over £100m through the Regional Growth Fund and millions of pounds in Sheffield’s trains, trams, buses and cycle routes;

(j)

believes it is a shame that the current Administration continue to use Sheffield as a pawn in a political game, instead of working constructively with the Government;

(k)

in particular, regrets that the current Administration have taken an axe to front-line services, while they continue to waste money on vanity schemes and pet projects;

(l)

confirms the following facts:

(i)

the Council’s Statement of Accounts, signed off by the Chair of the Audit Committee, reported “usable reserves” of £167m;

(ii)

the Council’s 2012/13 Capital Programme earmarked £2.2m for “Town Hall Meeting Rooms” in the 2013/14 financial year;

(iii)

the Council spent £475,000 a year on full time trade union officials, in addition to 61 members of staff performing trade union duties on a part time basis;

(iv)

from December 2011 to November 2012, the Council recorded £4.7m of “consultancy” fees in payment to supplier documents;

(v)

the Administration approved £2.5m to be spent at Park Hill; and

(vi)

that a Cabinet Advisor twice proposed a pilot investigating i-pads for councillors;

(m)

is not surprised, that having attempted to silence opposition voices in this Council Chamber, the Administration are now attempting to use the Council as a tool to silence opposition voices outside of the Council;

(n)

believes also, that it is ironic for the Administration to talk of “factually inaccurate untruths” given their “6-month budget” claim in 2011, which was in no way justified by the facts;

(o)

furthermore, notes the Fair Deal for Sheffield campaign, launched by the local Labour Party, contains false claims about NHS funding, which Labour councillors were forced to retract in this Chamber due to their inaccuracy;

(p)

is pleased to see that the Fair Deal for Sheffield was boycotted by all opposition parties on this Council, who truly recognised the ploy as nothing more than a party-political stunt;

(q)

sincerely hopes that not a single penny of taxpayers’ money is wasted on this party-political stunt; and

(r)

believes that if the Administration were serious about standing up for Sheffield, they would stop their petty party political games, eliminate the excessive waste within the Council and ensure much needed funds were directed towards front-line services.

On being put to the vote, the amendment was negatived.

It was then moved by Councillor Robert Murphy, seconded by Councillor Penny Baker, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the addition of new paragraphs (p) to (s) as follows:-

(p)

notes the proposed reduction of over £2m to the 2013/14 levy for the South Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority;

(q)

understands that any decision to reduce the levy is made by the Integrated Transport Authority which includes 5 elected members from Sheffield;

(r)

believes that at a time of economic hardship and rising fuel prices, public transport is vitally important to prevent social exclusion and allow access to opportunities for all members of our communities; and

(s)

calls on all Sheffield members of the Integrated Transport Authority to oppose any reduction to the levy for 2013/14 and invest any budget savings in improvements to South Yorkshire’s public transport network.

On being put to the vote, the amendment was negatived.

It was then moved by Councillor Bryan Lodge, seconded by Councillor Stuart Wattam, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the addition of new paragraphs (p) to (r) as follows:-

(p)

notes that whilst the present Administration have taken full responsibility for their budget proposals whilst dealing with an unprecedented level of Government cuts, regrets that the main opposition group have opposed numerous proposals without presenting the full details of their budget outlining the alternative cuts that they would make;

(q)

believes that the main opposition group have acted irresponsibly through presenting factually inaccurate untruths about Council spending in an attempt to suggest that the Government’s cuts can be made without impacting upon local services and believes that this is an attempt to mislead local people; and

(r)

therefore calls on all opposition groups to present details of their budget to the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee on 13^th February, 2013, remembering that when they were the ruling group, the main opposition group stated “it would not be open or honest for any political group to present their proposed budget on the morning of Budget Council day”.

On being put to the vote, the amendment was carried.

The original Motion, as amended, was then put to the vote and carried, as follows:-

RESOLVED:  That this Council:-

(a)       reconfirms its anger and dismay at the Council’s budget position which is now significantly worse than was previously estimated because the Government are making additional unfair cuts to Sheffield as a result of their failure to grow the economy and notes that, even without the additional cuts, the Council was already facing an unprecedented level of cuts, which will have a massive impact on Council services in Sheffield;

(b)       notes that the Council has a £50 million budget gap for 2013/14 and this is in addition to the £140 million that has been reduced from the Council’s budget over the past two years, meaning that future cuts will unavoidably have a bigger impact on Council services that are valued by local people;

(c)        is appalled that despite the Council having to set its budget on 1^st March, 2013, the Local Government Finance Settlement was not given until the week before Christmas and believes that this demonstrates a complete disregard for local government;

(d)       regrets that the Government provided inaccurate figures to the Council and the public on the Settlement which were used to create an inaccurate and grossly misleading representation of the reductions facing local authorities and believes that this demonstrates their incompetence;

(e)       continues to oppose the unfairness of the cuts which see councils with the highest levels of deprivation receiving the majority of the cuts whilst some of the wealthiest areas in the country receive almost no cuts at all;

(f)         notes recent research from Newcastle City Council which indicates that Sheffield will receive a cut of nearly £200 per person between 2010/11 and 2014/15, wealthy areas are receiving significantly less cuts with Guildford receiving a cut of just £24.14 per person, Wokingham £26.53 and Epsom and Ewell just £15.18;

(g)       believes that the Deputy Prime Minister continues to betray and fail the people of Sheffield and is shocked that the main opposition group continue to support the unfair cuts that the Government are making to Sheffield; 

(h)        regrets that due to the Deputy Prime Minister’s complete inability to offer any plausible defence for the decisions his Government is making to impose unprecedented cuts to Sheffield City Council at the same time as wealthier councils receive just a fraction of the cuts, the Deputy Prime Minister and main opposition group have resorted to spouting factually inaccurate untruths about Council spending;

(i)         instructs the Chief Executive to write to the Deputy Prime Minister and Leader of the Main Opposition Group to explain recent inaccuracies and misrepresentations recently propagated by the Deputy Prime Minister and main opposition group;

(j)         expects that in the future these inaccuracies will not be included in any statement or material issued by the party of the Deputy Prime Minister and the main opposition group;

(k)        notes that unfortunately many other councils across the country are facing significant reductions in services and this is reflected in the letters written to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government by all Core City Leaders explaining the impact that the cuts will have on their cities;

(l)         further notes that in the past two years, the Council has made £140 million of budget reductions and as far as possible has done so limiting the impact on front line visible Council services, however, recognises that the Government have continued to cut to a level that will mean it is no longer possible to avoid significant reductions to front line services;

(m)      further notes that proposals to balance the 2013/14 budget are now subject to consultation and impact upon areas across the Council, including sports and leisure, health and care, youth services, early years, and Community Assemblies, acknowledging that, with the exception of child protection, no area of the Council will be unaffected by the cuts;

(n)        further notes that the proposals are still subject to consultation and the budget will be approved at Full Council on 1^st March, 2013;

(o)       confirms the present Administration’s determination to protect services as far as possible, focusing on the long term and recognises the Administration’s focus on protecting services for the vulnerable;

(p)       notes that whilst the present Administration have taken full responsibility for their budget proposals whilst dealing with an unprecedented level of Government cuts, regrets that the main opposition group have opposed numerous proposals without presenting the full details of their budget outlining the alternative cuts that they would make;

(q)       believes that the main opposition group have acted irresponsibly through presenting factually inaccurate untruths about Council spending in an attempt to suggest that the Government’s cuts can be made without impacting upon local services and believes that this is an attempt to mislead local people; and

(r)        therefore calls on all opposition groups to present details of their budget to the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee on 13^th February, 2013, remembering that when they were the ruling group, the main opposition group stated “it would not be open or honest for any political group to present their proposed budget on the morning of Budget Council day”.

(Note: Councillor Robert Murphy voted for paragraphs (a) to (o) and abstained on paragraphs (p) – (r) of the Substantive Motion and asked for this to be recorded.)