Report and appendices attached.

The Chief Operating Officer advised that £19m of savings had been put forward but that a further £8m was still required to be found. The impact of Covid-19 had made budget setting difficult although extra funding received had meant the deficit had been reduced overall from £13m to £10m. It was unclear at this stage if further Covid support funding would be provided by the Government next year.

There was an expected shortfall of £7m on savings delivery and officers were looking at which savings were still likely to be deliverable in 2021/22. It was accepted that it would be a challenge to deliver the savings required although Havering had a low unit cost compared to its benchmarking authorities.

Most proposed savings were in Adult Social Care although it was felt these could also lead to better outcomes. Revised commissioning arrangements should also lead to savings in children’s services and housing (via Mercury Land Holdings). Other savings would be achieved via improved service delivery and efficiency in the Neighbourhoods directorate and via increased use of digital services. The increased use of Smarter Working by Council staff would also lead to savings.

There would be an electronic consultation on the budget proposals. Risks to the budget included an increase in the demand for adult social care and the impact of business failure. The requirement to maintain social distancing in facilities such as leisure centres would also impact on revenues.  It was confirmed that the level of the Greater London Authority precept was unknown at this stage.

A report on the future use of Mercury House was due to be taken to Cabinet in January 2021. Officers that the building was very dated and that increased levels of working from home could mean the building would no longer be needed. Negotiations on the future use of the building were currently in progress with the landlord.

It was felt that the increased use of technology would allow further efficiencies to be introduced. It was hoped to received around £4m from the Government in view of the loss of income to the Council but officers added that fees and charges could be in excess of this.

It was confirmed that consultation would take place on any extension to the School Streets Scheme. The Better Living Scheme, which aimed to promote independence and keep people in their own homes was now generating larger savings. Staff working from home had been found to be more productive and communication between staff was now easier.

Officers did not feel that their use of the word ‘pandemic’ in the report was inappropriate. It was the responsibility of the Council to keep its residents as safe as possible. Officers were also optimistic that the stated savings could be delivered and felt that there had been a reasonable level of funding from the Government, albeit with parameters on how the money could be spent.

The Government was covering 75% of 95% of Council losses due to the pandemic. Staff reductions would be principally among agency staff and redeployment would also be used as necessary.

Efforts were being made to take pressure off the Council’s reserves by making savings. Tier 2 funding from the Government had been £3 per head but this had been a one-off. During the lockdown period, there had been funding of £8 per head for all boroughs to control the Covid outbreak.

A Member raised the position with the Brunswick Court supported housing scheme and whether this would have a warden. An update on this could be given outside of the meeting.

Housing Revenue Account costs had not been hugely impacted by the pandemic and good collection rates had meant this area was only showing a small overspend.

The Board noted the update report.