Agenda item

Sarah Pickup, Deputy Chief Executive, introduced the report which updated Members on progress of the LGA’s work related to business rates retention and the Fair Funding Review, and in particular included the LGA’s draft response to the Government’s consultation on assessment of relative needs as part of the Fair Funding Review.

Members noted the work and discussions which had recently taken place at the Business Rates Retention LGA / MHCLG steering group, the Fair Funding Review technical working group, and the LGA’s Business Rates Task and Finish Group. There had also been a series of regional workshops to allow councils to have their say on the Fair Funding Review consultation.

Responses to the Fair Funding Review consultation were due by 12 March 2018, and a draft response had been prepared, subject to the views of the LGA Leadership Board and the LGA Executive. In particular it was highlighted that the draft responses to questions 8, 10, and 20 would potentially constitute new LGA policy: the response to question 8 called on the Government to consider population density (where effects were over and above deprivation, daytime and student populations; the response to question 10 suggested that cost pressures which were material for a small number of local authorities, but not a significant part of local government spending at a national level, should be dealt with outside of the Fair Funding Review; and the response to question 20 suggested that the results of any statistical analysis should be sense-checked by service delivery experts as well as a wider independent assurance process on the working of the model.

The response also highlighted that there was a need for a new Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR), as the current spending review period and four year settlement offer both expired from April 2020, so current financial planning beyond 2021 was uncertain. It also highlighted the need for transparency, as well as simplicity and accuracy.

In the discussion which followed Members made the following points:

·         The report and the consultation response provided positive ways in which concerns of different types of council could be addressed, but the current level of funding was not commensurate with the level of demand for funding of front-line services. The LGA should collectively ensure that the new system was evidence based and would allow for sensible growth.

·         Members discussed various methods of making the case to the Government, including the possibility of making the argument that the overall quantum of funding was insufficient before continuing discussions on Fair Funding. The comments on the quantum could be strengthened in the response, but the LGA continued to lobby on the funding gap, and the importance of services which could be lost without full funding.

·         The LGA should be lobbying on the next CSR as a priority to ensure there was an appropriate level of funding for the sector as a whole, alongside discussions on how to distribute money through the system. Work in particular service areas had already begun, and the LGA continued to work with partner organisations across the sector.

·         The LGA could do some additional media work and work in Parliament on why valued front-line services need more funding. This would be a more relatable and engaging message to the Government and to the public.

Decision

The LGA Leadership Board:

a)    Noted the report;

b)    Approved the LGA’s response to the Government’s consultation on the Fair Funding Review, subject to comments above and the views of the LGA Executive; and

c)    Agreed the final sign-off procedure as set out in the report.

Action

Comments from the LGA Leadership Board and the LGA Executive to be taken into account in the final draft of the consultation response.