Councillor Gates substituted for Councillor Berardi.

To confirm and sign, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 10 July 2024.

The minutes of the meeting held on 10 July 2024 were confirmed and signed as a correct record.

There were no apologies for absence.

Members are invited to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests or other registrable and non-registrable interests in items on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

The treasury management activity for the first quarter of the financial year was presented to Committee, where it was confirmed that the Council had complied with all legislative and regulatory requirements.

A scheduled loan repayment of £289k had taken place, with a further £10m loan to be repaid by the end of the year.  The Council were temporarily not borrowing until interest rates came down or stabilised.

The Council had achieved an interest rate of 5.27% on its investments, which compared favourably with benchmark rates.  Annual investments remained in line with the annual investment strategy.

Officers agreed to a request from a committee member to explore the provision of comparative information on performance of investments from similar sized authorities on a future iteration of the report, although caution was urged about comparisons given the likely variation in policy, risk appetite, and level of cash reserves, along with Runnymede’s alignment with CIPFA recommendations on emphasising security and liquidity over yield.

The committee were updated on the capital value of the investment property portfolio for the year ending March 2024, which had previously been part of the treasury management report but was now separated to ensure that the Committee had appropriate scrutiny over property investments.

As this was the inaugural iteration of the report it was highlighted that the key performance indicators could change due to data updates, however the asset valuations would remain unchanged as valuations were only undertaken annually.

Following a request from a committee member it was agreed to include the value of the assets at the time of purchase in future iterations of the report, however caution was urged on the reliability of such figures on the basis that the Council had moved from a gross to net valuation position, whilst the value of some properties would be impacted by the considerable shortening of leases.

Officers reported back on the work undertaken since the previous meeting, which included a survey of the other Surrey district/borough councils to understand the organisation of their sustainability workstreams.

The majority of the Councils contacted responded to the survey, and it was felt that it had been a useful exercise in improving the Council’s short-term approach to sustainability, with the actions highlighted in the report supported by the Committee.

A list of draft questions had been produced and relevant officers identified.  The questionnaire would go out to officers over autumn and the results fed back to a future meeting.

The Committee were supportive of the action taken by officers and highlighted the importance of the workstream in the context of the Council declaring a climate emergency.  Furthermore it was felt that monitoring how the Council was performing against the climate change strategy and ensuring elected members had sufficient oversight of the process should be a key consideration when the Committee considered possible recommendations at the conclusion of the workstream.

It was resolved that Overview & Scrutiny Select Committee

1. Noted the findings from the interviews carried out with other Surrey District and Borough Councils.

2. Agreed that sufficient work had been carried out by officers to discharge point 1 of the approved motion.

3. Agreed the proposed next steps to progress point 2 of the motion which relates to Corporate Head and officer engagement as described in section 2 of the report.

Following committee approval at the previous meeting around response times to resident enquiries occupying a committee workstream, officers set out the existing ongoing body of work in order to avoid a duplication of effort.

This included the recently approved Customer First Strategy, Digital Transformation action plan, the recently completed service review around customer complaints handling and the upcoming access channels review.

Furthermore, it was confirmed that in addition to all corporate KPIs being reported to Corporate Management Committee, twice yearly reporting of KPIs and progress against Service Area Plans would be reported across all Committees from 2025/26 to ensure consistency.

Officers would report back to Overview & Scrutiny Committee as the ongoing work progresses with a view to providing data for the Committee to make some initial recommendations by the end of the municipal year.

An update was presented on progress towards savings and efficiencies to achieve financial sustainability for the Council over the medium term. 

The service reviews had so far identified around £125k in savings in addition to efficiency benefits, and savings had only been banked once they had received committee approval or there was certainty on their delivery.

The next set of service reviews were at an early stage, but the community buildings review was cited as a crucial piece of work in order to review usage and cost, as well as informing the Council’s decarbonisation plans as it seeks to achieve net zero by 2030.

Other savings and efficiency work identified included budget challenge sessions, a full review of the staffing list and the development of an all-staff ideas’ forum.  Total savings achieved to date from the whole programme stood in excess of £3m. It was confirmed that the service transformation reserve had so far required minimal drawdown as initiatives had been relatively easy to achieve, however it was anticipated that there would be a drawdown requirement to a greater extent as initiatives became more challenging.

A committee member asked for more information on the Chertsey Museum service review.  It was confirmed that this initially formed part of the community buildings review but would be a standalone review due to practical issues to be addressed around leases and storage.