Issue - meetings

To receive the Treasury Management Outturn 2020-21 report.

The Committee considered the Treasury Management Outturn report 2020-21.

During the discussion of this item the following points were made:

·       The Assistant Director Governance commented that the Treasury Management Outturn Report had been included in the Council agenda which had been published earlier that day.  However, he assured Members that should the Audit Committee decide to reject the report or amend the recommendations, this could be tabled at the Full Council meeting.

·       Councillor Gee was of the opinion that the report’s inclusion in the Council agenda prior to its consideration by the Audit Committee, questioned the Committee’s independence.  She suggested that the report be withdrawn from the Council agenda.  Councillor Shepherd-DuBey felt that its inclusion was not good governance.  Councillor Sargeant indicated that there would usually be more time between the Committee meetings and that if the Outturn report was not considered at the September Council meeting, it would not be considered until November.

·       Members suggested that in future there be a greater gap between the Audit Committee and Council meetings that the Treasury Management Outturn Report was considered.  Councillor Sargeant reminded the Committee that typically the report was considered earlier in the year but that there had been a delay due to work pressures.  Councillor Shepherd-DuBey stated that it was not the first time that timing had meant that the Committee had had insufficient time to fully consider reports prior to their consideration by Council. 

·       The Assistant Director Finance commented that the Outturn Report highlighted the outturn position as at 31 March 2021.  It contained a summary of operations throughout the year and highlighted the balances at the year end.

·       In response to a question from Councillor Sargeant regarding the internal funded borrowing move between the Mid Year and the Outturn report, the Assistant Director Finance stated that the Council was not allowed to borrow for revenue purposes other than short term cashflow reasons.  He explained that the Capital Financing Requirement (CFR) changed from that what had been budgeted and predicted for at the Mid Year point.  Services had slipped a large amount of capital budget at that point in time.  Borrowing had been against the original CFR.  In addition, towards the end of the year, a significant amount of developer contributions had been received earlier than expected.  These had been used to fund capital projects and to reduce the Capital Financing Requirement.  The Assistant Director Finance went on to refer to advance deals. 

·       In response to a question from Councillor Loyes, the Assistant Director Finance explained that the HRA was ring fenced.

·       Councillor Shepherd-DuBey questioned the decrease in asset valuation.  The Assistant Director Finance responded that the commercial property valuations were shown in the report.  The valuations as of 31 March had been used.  There may be a change in valuations once the Statement of Accounts was audited.

·       Councillor Shepherd-DuBey asked how potential depreciation would be planned for, and was informed that the Council would apply depreciation across all its buildings.

·       Councillor Gee questioned how the Committee could  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30