Meeting documents

Meeting of the Isle of Anglesey County Council 

Minutes of the meeting held on 5th March, 2009

_________________________________________________________________________________

The meeting was opened by a prayer offered by Councillor E.G.Davies.

     Councillor O.Glyn Jones declared an interest with regard to any matter that might relate to the                 employment of his wife and daughter in the Social Services Department.

The Chair congratulated Secondary School pupils following their success in South Wales last weekend. Pupils from North West Wales would now be representing Wales at a Sports Championships to be held in Birmingham at the end of this month.

He congratulated Mr.Greg Evans, Site Manager for Magnox Wylfa and Maentwrog Power Stations, who had been presented with an award for Leadership in Business for companies with more than 250 employees at the ‘Leading Wales Awards.’

Sympathy was extended to the family of Mr.Jim Ostler(former Council Language Tutor) who had passed away before Christmas aged 58 years. He was a very popular tutor with the rare ability of being able to convey to his pupils his own enthusiasm for the language.

The Chair also took the opportunity of referring to the terrible accident that had happened at Menai Bridge last week when three youngpeople were killed - one man from Anglesey. He conveyed the Council’s sympathy to the families and friends of those involved. He also thanked the Emergency Services, the Police, Ambulance Service and Fire Service who had to deal with such a horrific accident. He thanked them for their work under very tragic circumstances.

Sympathy was also extended to Mrs.Peggy Owen and the family of Mr.Leslie Gordon Owen who passed away last week. Mr. Owen had a political career spanning over 50 years and it would be a sad loss to the community of Holyhead to lose someone who had been so active in local matters for such a long period of time.

He also referred to the death of the Rev. Edgar Jones, Llanfachraeth. Everyone had a good word to say about the excellent work that he done over so many years and it was very sad to hear of his loss.

The Chair also took the opportunity of sympathising with any member of staff who had suffered a bereavement.  

     Chair - “You’re comments are duly noted Miss. Ball.”

     Councillor K. Evans - “Mr. Chairman. I am the longest serving Councillor here. I show great respect to the Chair. I behave myself in meetings. I think we are on very dangerous ground now. I’ve said this at other meetings as well, the future of this Council is at stake at this very time. This is far more significant than 10 years ago. We are in real danger of depriving our people of the service that they expect. Our electors have put us here. We have had a dire warming from the Auditor’s today to behave ourselves, to get our act together, and you are making it worse today by stifling a discussion on the most important document that has come before this Council for years. Mr. Chairman, I implore you to ask your colleagues to think again. Let’s have a healthy, reasonable, sensible debate and let’s try to find a way forward. I have tried as a fairly independent member of the Audit Committee, to give my Chairman support to try to sort the problem out here. To meet members behind closed doors if you like, to see whether we can knock heads together, to save our skins for the sake of the people out there. We are on very dangerous ground here and I do implore all the Council, look at the odds, the odds are stacked against us and this just makes it worse.”

     Chair - “Thank you Councillor Evans. Councillor Penri Williams?”

     Councillor J. Penri Williams - “In view of the legal advice, I withdraw the fact that I’ve seconded it, and in the interests of debate.”

     Chair - “It was that the motion be put Councillor Williams, that you seconded.”

     Councillor Everett - “You are the Chair, Aled.”

     Chair - “Councillor Everett, I always take my own decisions , as you well know. The motion has already been put, and it has already been agreed that there will be a recorded vote, so we will proceed with the vote. All those in favour, would you please stand.”

     Under the provisions of Council Rule 18.5, a recorded vote was taken on the matter (i.e. to accept the report and that it be referred to the Executive for decision):-

     For: Councillors E. G. Davies, L. Davies, J. Evans, P. M. Fowlie, Ff. M. Hughes, K. P. Hughes,

     R. Ll. Hughes, T. Ll. Hughes, W. I. Hughes, A. M. Jones, E. Jones, G. O. Jones, O. Glyn Jones,

     T. Jones, C. McGregor, B. Owen, J. V. Owen, R. L. Owen, G. O. Parry, MBE, R. G. Parry, OBE,

     E. Roberts, J. Penri Williams, I. Williams, J. Williams.         

     TOTAL: 24

     Against: Councillors W. J. Chorlton, K. Evans, C. L. Everett, R. Dylan Jones, H. Eifion Jones,

     R. Ll. Jones, Raymond Jones, J. A. Roberts, G. W. Roberts, OBE, P. S. Rogers, H. W. Thomas.

     TOTAL: 11

     Abstention: Councillor Rhian Medi

     TOTAL: 1

     Councillor Everett - “Point of Order, Mr. Chairman. Why did the Executive vote here and they haven’t actually come to the Audit Committee and they haven’t come to the Audit Committee the other day?”

     Chair - “Overruled.”

     Councillor Everett - “Is the Council Leader prepared to respond?”

     Chair - “Please sit down. The motion is carried 24 to 11 with one abstention. This matter will now be dealt with by the Executive.”

     Councillor H. W. Thomas - “I am no longer prepared to take part and am leaving the Chamber.”

     Councillor G. W. Roberts, OBE - “I believe that the history is of one person leading, in my opinion, and destroying the Council.”

     (At this juncture, Councillors W. J. Chorlton, C. L. Everett, Raymond Jones, R. Dylan Jones,

     J. Arwel Roberts, G. W. Roberts, OBE and H. W. Thomas left the Chamber for the remainder of the meeting).

     Councillor Rhian Medi wanted to explain to Council why she had not voted. She was unhappy as to the behaviour of the Councillors. She was not talking about the Chair. She was aware that discussions over the last 4 years had been stifled in the Council. She did not think that the members who walked out were in a good position, since it was they who stifiled debate in the past. There had also been mention today that the Council was in a worse state than it had been at the end of the 1990’s. As a former member of Llais y Bobl she disputed this claim. The problems in the Council at that time were awful, people were suffering, bullying was taking place and the members who were creating those problems then, were still here today. She was also unhappy to receive the Auditor’s report because she was unhappy as to what had happened at Graigwen. There were more and more questions that needed answering. Financially, it was a political matter for this Council and the rate payers of Anglesey if the Council decided to move ahead with any action and not one for the Auditors.

     RESOLVED that the report be accepted and that it be forwarded to the Executive for consideration.

Submitted and confirmed as a true record, the minutes of the County Council held on the following dates:-

(i) Minutes - 11 December, 2008.

Arising thereon-

Item 9 - School Meals Contract

(The Chair declared an interest in this matter and left the Chamber. The Vice-Chair took the Chair)

Councillor P.S.Rogers referred to the statement made by the Leader in the fourth paragraph that “all meat was now local produce.” He did not think that this could possibly be correct and that it was misleading.

He then went on to refer to the Leader’s statement that following their presentation to the Education Overview Committee, “Eden would leave the meeting and members would then have the opportunity to discuss the report of the Corporate Director.” At that Overview Committee, he stated that he had been denied the opportunity by the Chair to discuss the report.

Councillor Ff.M.Hughes, Chair of the Education Overview Committee stated that an invitation had been extended to all members of the County Council to be present at the meeting. However, so long as she remained the Chair of that Committee she would not be extending an invitation again to all members to attend because of the behaviour of one particular Councillor. Whilst Eden were in attendance, the behaviour was exemplary and she had thanked members for this at the end of the meeting. Once Eden had left the meeting there was an attack upon a member of staff of the Education and Leisure Department. Staff were the backbone of this Authority and she was not prepared to allow any Member to make such an attack upon a member of staff.

Councillor P.S.Rogers in reply stated that there was no reference to any attack upon a member of staff in the minutes of that Committee. The minutes did not refer to any contribution that he had made at that meeting and the words that he had used were “bungling incompetent,” not against an Officer of this Authority but against the Portfolio Holder who had failed miserably to present any support or defence of the chaos of the school meals contract.

He did not believe that bungling incompetence was a reason to stop his contribution to the debate. It was he that had done more work on the school meals than anybody else and he had been denied an opportunity to speak. He was therefore challenging the entry in those minutes and he would also like to bring to the attention of members the unfairness of the minutes as published. He would never be given the opportunity to challenge those minutes again because he was not a member of that Committee. Minutes were originally brought to full Council for acceptance. That no longer took place. He asked the Chair of Council to check those minutes to see if there was anything appertaining to what the Chair of the Overview Committee was trying to say about his behaviour. It was an absolute disgrace as to the way the Chair had ran that meeting on that day on a very serious issue.

Councillor Ff.M.Hughes stated that she did not want this to become a public argument today. She would always remain quiet when another member spoke in the Chamber She was prepared to give more than one opportunity to members. However, this particular member had been given more than one opportunity. At one particular meeting of this Council, the Chair had asked her to provide a prayer at the beginning of the meeting and she had given a purposeful prayer at the time. That particular member had failed to behave at that meeting also. As a matter of courtesy, she had gone to the trouble of translating the prayer and had posted it to Councillor Rogers’ house. He had however, not taken any notice of that. So, when one had the same Councillor misbehaving at the particular meeting she was trying to Chair, in a dignified manner, she did find it very difficult. She could not agree with the point that he had made that he was the Councillor that had done the most for school meals since becoming a Councillor.

Councillor Tom Jones, made the point that the Council were dealing with the accuracy of the minutes before it today. He thought that Councillor Rogers was right in that it was not said that all meat was being sourced locally. It was a percentage figure but that it was higher than the figure under the old contract. As regards the second point raised by Councillor Rogers, the Council minute was correct. What Councillor Rogers was referring to was the minutes of the Overview Committee.

Councillor E.G.Davies, Portfolio Holder, stated that his recollection of events at the Overview Committee was that Councillor Rogers was referring to the bungling incompetence of the Education Department. Fair enough, if it was his intention to point the finger at the Portfolio Holder, he could live with that. It did not matter at the end of the day who the Portfolio Holder was, Councillor Rogers would have gone in the same direction. There had been no incompetence on anyone’s part. The matter had been inherited from the previous Executive and there was a need to get everything in place before the commencement of the new school term in September.

The Leader proposed that the minute be amended with regard to all meat being locally sourced and that it was a percentage figure at the end of the day, but that it was still higher than under the previous contract.

RESOLVED to note the amendment.

(ii) Minutes - 30th January, 2009.

Arising thereon-

Item 3 - Ty Mawr, Llanfairpwll.

Councillor J.Penri Williams wished it to be noted that in his speech to the Council, a figure of 188 cars was mentioned. This should read 1800 cars.

RESOLVED to accept the amendment.

     5.1 The Executive’s Final Budget Proposals 2009/10

     Reported by the Portfolio Holder (Finance) - That the Executive’s final budget proposals were contained as follows:-

     Table A - Revenue Budget 2009-10;

     Table B - Medium Term Financial Plan;

     Table C - Capital Budget 2009-10;

     Table Ch - Capital Plan and narrative.

     The Executive had aimed at a low increase in Council Tax mindful of the impact of the credit crunch and the current economic climate. Financial uncertainties in terms of inflation and interest rates affected council finances as well as households.

     The Executive recognised from the increased pressures on social services, housing and benefit support, how deeply the recession affected so many. The Executive were addressing those needs.

     The Business Centre continued to promote the island for business and development. In addition flexible provision was available to take advantage of new projects to strengthen the economy.

     Reserves had been used for this year to achieve the low increase. A mid-term strategy was intended to rebuild that funding.

     The following details were provided within the Portfolio Holder’s report with regard to following the requirements of the Budget Procedure Rules:-

     5.2     Budget 2009/10 - Adoption of Formal Resolution

     Reported by the Corporate Director (Finance) - That in order to adopt its budget for the year 2009-10 and to determine the level of Council Tax for the year, the County Council was required to adopt a formal resolution which dealt in some detail with all connected matters.

     As it considered the Executive’s proposed budget, the Council should also consider and take account of this report from the Corporate Director - Finance. This dealt with matters required under the Local Government Act 2003 (“the Act”) and the Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities (“the Prudential Code”).

     The Corporate Director was required under section 25 (1) (a) of the Act to report to the Council on the robustness of estimates made in the course of drawing up the budget.

     In any financial year there were certain uncertainties which needed to be taken into account in assessing robustness.  This year there were more unusual risks (detailed at Para 2 of the report):-

     The Corporate Director was required under section 25(1)(b) of the Act, to report to the Council on the adequacy of financial reserves.  

     Earmarked reserves had been established to deal with known commitments, plans or risks.  In assessing the level of reserves the Corporate Director had assumed that commitments would be honoured, that plans, if still planned, would be delivered, and the provision for risk was reasonable given its amount and likelihood.  The assessment of general balances considered risks and uncertainty not provided for as earmarked reserves or contingency budget.

     The level of reserves was reviewed regularly.  This assessment drew on his report to the Executive on 8 December, updated in the light of the third quarter budget monitoring report on 2008-09 and developments in relation to the Gallows Point court action.

     The Executive’s proposals reflected his assessment that £1.92 million of reserves could be released.  How and why this could be done, still leaving adequate reserves, was outlined within his report at Para 3.

     In addition to this £1.92m, the Corporate Director had proposed that the Executive sought to access up to £0.5m from General Balances towards staff severance costs. By going beyond the sum of £1.92m, this access, if used in 2009-10, would leave the Council with general balances on 31 March 2010 below the level the Director considered adequate.  In practice, this could be justified at the time if the proposed severance costs led to demonstrable cost savings or efficiency improvements, but in these circumstances he would need to be satisfied that this was indeed the case.

     There was further difficulty in 2010-11. The medium term financial plan was optimistic about inflation falling, but even with projected 4.5% Council Tax increase in 2010 still showed the use of a further £0.5m in 2010-11. On present projections and assessments, that would leave the authority with inadequate reserves on 31 March 2011.  

     The Director would look to use any windfall savings achieved now or in 2009-10 to reduce the amount drawn from reserves rather than to finance additional spending. This must be the approach for the coming period to ensure that drawing on reserves was minimised. Windfalls may come from lower inflation, higher interest earned, debt rescheduling, contract retendering or unexpected income.  In an environment when the Executive would also need to start seeking the following year’s budget savings, any achieved in advance may also be required centrally.

     Also to ensure that service reserves did not build up unnecessarily while central reserves were being run down, the Director proposed to limit the circumstances in which underspends were carried forward. To give budget managers adequate notice of these changes, they would apply on closing down 2009-10 accounts.

     The legislative framework introduced by the Local Government Act 2003 required the Council to have regard to The Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities. The Executive had already affirmed this.The primary requirements of the Prudential Code were that authorities should have regard to affordability and prudence.

     5.3     Treasury Management Strategy 2009/10

     Submitted - A report by the Corporate Director (Finance) on the information required before the beginning of the financial year under the Local Government Act 2003, the Guidance in Local Government Investments issued by the National Assembly for Wales and the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s (CIPFA) codes of practice: The Code of Practice on Treasury Management in the Public Services and The Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities and related guidance.

     At its meeting on 5th March 2002, the Council adopted a new Treasury Policy Statement and adopted new clauses regarding Treasury Management as advised by CIPFA and in preparation for its new Financial Procedure Rules. As a result, the annual Treasury Management Strategy must be presented to the Council. This was consistent with the Prudential Code and with the Legal Authorities Executive Arrangements (Functions and Responsibilities) (Wales) Regulations 2001 which stated that a plan or strategy for the control of the authority’s borrowing or capital expenditure should be formulated by the Executive but adopted by the Full Council.

     Full details were provided within the report on the following matters:-

     Councillor H. Eifion Jones stated “That in the last financial year our total reserves reached record levels  with an overall increase of £2.1m, which recently received praise from the Welsh Audit Office. This time last year we had, after forceful and professional lobbying and visiting the Assembly before Christmas, achieved over £1m extra for Anglesey. We were also able to set the Council Tax increase at 1.5% - the lowest in Wales - through good teamwork between the Executive & Management Team.

     However, this year the picture is completely changed with not just an unsuccessful somewhat feeble attempt for more Assembly cash, Council Tax increase doubling to 3%, but a record raid on reserves by 1.9m. So much so that the Director of Finance cannot support any further reduction. We seem to have gone from boom to bust in only 12 months.

     So how has this happened? Yes there has been an issue with Social Services but this has been covered by under spends in other departments. The reason has more to do with the lack of recognising the financial problems and failure to act early. For example, some 18 months ago, we set up an all group panel to look at modernising our services and it was agreed it would move forward after the elections. However, nothing has happened. With all due respect to the Executive, watching their budget debate was largely uninspiring. There seemed confusion over the difference between balances and reserves and that capital receipts cannot be used to offset revenue costs. There was a belated attempt to understand the staffing position. Perhaps I can enlighten them on what has really happened during the last year.

     At the end of 2007 we had 2068 staff which grew by 80 to 2148 by the end of 2008. The figure had only grown by 1 up until April, the other 79 extra came in the rest of the year - that’s over 10 a month. Taking an average cost of say £20,000 each, then this comes to £1.6m extra per year which perhaps explains why the reserves have been raided.

     The updated Asset Management Plan indicates that over the next 5 years we need £20m on School maintenance, £1.5m on leisure centres and £5m on smallholdings but the Director of Finance tells us we now don’t have the money especially as we can’t sell assets. After the Executive meeting last week, it will now take another two years until the school reorganisation plan is implemented and they still have no real clue how the leisure centre maintenance shortfall will be funded. Also, there is some doubt whether next years budget has sufficient allowance to finish Job Evaluation or enough to cover the still unknown cost of the School Meals Contract and it has nothing available for more Beaumaris Marina legal costs.

     I now turn to an area of real concern which none of us should accept. This year for the first time we are also asked to adopt a Medium Term plan for the following two years as part of the budget framework. This is in fact more a projection rather than a proper plan. This indicates a 4.5% Council Tax increase in each of the following 2 years against forecast national inflation of 1%. However, this requires a further half a million pounds from reserves which is not supported by the Director of Finance, so the Council Tax could rise by 7%.

     If anything I feel these projections are optimistic and risky and don’t include items such as likely Pension Cost increases. I cannot support this especially as we have no real plan of action. We need to accept the financial iceburg is on the horizon and stop being in denial.

     With next year likely public sector and Assembly cutbacks, it will be futile expecting them to help, so we must live within our own means and urgently modernise our services. This calls for leadership, teamwork and using all our resources and talents. Finally, Mr. Chairman, as it is fashionable to quote President Obama may I do the same:- “When people tighten their belts - so should Washington.” I would add - so should Anglesey.”  

     Councillor G.O.Parry,MBE, thanked Councillor Jones for his observations. He thought however, that there was a case of amnesia somewhere in the former Executive’s preparation of the budget last year. Councillor Jones had forgotten about the over spending of £1.2m in Social Services and this did not appear until the new Executive had been appointed following last May’s elections. The Executive were now responding to the needs and were looking at the staffing requirements. They were also looking at putting plans in place as regards capital issues. There was a massive credit crunch currently squeezing the whole country and the Welsh Assembly had stated that it had £5 billion less to spend. There were also losses because interest rates had fallen and this had certainly had an effect on all Councils. The Executive were striving to ensure that next year’s budget would be within reach and within budget.

     Councillor P.S.Rogers referred to the cuts being made to the Home Start Scheme. This was a social service where mothers who had reared their children, voluntarily helped young couples who were having great difficulty in coping with motherhood, getting children to school, discussing family problems, diets, etc. The money this Council provided was towards that service. It was now intended to maintain this service by means of professional staff from within the Social Services Department. These people in his opinion would be unable to communicate with young mothers  facing those difficulties. He questioned how much this would now cost the Council?

     The other problem he had was with the Flying Start Scheme for two year olds, which had been tremendously successful in his Ward. There were 14 young children waiting to start there since last September. He questioned where the money for this scheme had gone? This scheme would assist in preventing the closure of village schools under the Schools Rationalisation Plan.

     Councillor G.O.Parry,MBE, in reply stated that as regards the Home Start Scheme, the Executive when working out the budget had to take advice from all Departments and to look at the pressures from statutory obligations and also those areas which were associated with Social Services, but not necessarily statutory. The Executive had tried to maintain all the partnerships that it was possible to maintain. The Executive, however, had to look very carefully at the value for money from various contributions and whether any service was being duplicated perhaps in some other way within Social Services. As far as Home Start was concerned, it was being funded on the anticipation that the Council would pay for its administration but also in anticipation that Home Start would be acquiring funds from elsewhere.

     Councillor E.G.Davies stated that he was well aware of the success of the Flying Start scheme in Newborough. He would raise the matter of funding with the Head of Service (Education) who was unable to be present at today’s meeting.

     Councillor R.Ll.Hughes stated that very difficult decisions had to be made by the Executive with regard to voluntary organisations where the Council was not statutorily obliged to provide funding. The whole of the Social Services Department had been under review, not just the voluntary services.

     Councillor P.S.Rogers thanked the Portfolio Holder for his response but requested that urgent meetings be held with Home Start to explain the position to them. He also took the opportunity of referring to the differentials between Care Home fees in the private sector and the County Council. Top-up fees had been removed which had resulted in a very fair balance throughout the Care Homes. He implored members to ensure that there would not be any differential again with top-ups being re-introduced, since it had caused bedlam within the system.

     Councillor E.Schofield felt that he had to respond to the earlier comments by Councillor H.Eifion Jones regarding the budget. He thought it was a bit rich of him to take credit for a budget of 1.5%, having regard to the legacy that had been left for the incoming Executive. The reality was that his statement was incorrect to be saying that Social Services were overspent by £1.2m. The true fact was that the Service was under-budgeted by £1.2m and therefore it was easy for him to talk of budgets of 1.5% when the old Executive did not take into account its responsibility. The other factor that dramatically affected it was that the previous Executive built into the budget an increase in pay of 2%. That figure turned out to be 2.7%. Looking back at their capital budget, it appeared to be in tatters. This Executive was now having to face serious problems regarding health and safety aspects at some of it’s Leisure Centres because the previous Executive had totally relied upon expectations of sales of property. The 3% increase in this year’s budget was therefore to be commended having regard to the legacy that had been left and the costs on this Authority.

     Councillor H.Eifion Jones replied that he had not referred to a figure of £1.2m, it was the Portfolio Holder who had quoted that figure. This time last year, the Executive were not aware of any overspend. A report was only received by the Executive at the end of March 2008 after setting the budget. The figure after 9 months was £0.5m he said. However, there was underspend in other Departments and that money had been used to balance the budget out in respect of Social Services.

     Councillor E.Schofield in reply stated that it was the Executive’s responsibility at that time to be aware of the situation.This Executive was now aware of those implications and that was why the Council Tax had to be set at 3%.

     Councillor R.Ll.Hughes referred to the statement made by Councillor H.Eifion Jones. Councillor Hughes drew the Council’s attention to the trends over the years in that in 2003/04 there was £0.5m underspent; 2004/05 £100,000 underspent; 2005/06 £225,000 overspent; 2006/07 £56,000 underspent and in 2007/08 £1.1m overspent. In early 2007, the Corporate Director of Finance and the Corporate Director for Housing and Social Services reported to the Executive on the budget situation in which it was reported “that our current budget provision is such we are likely to overspend in 2007/08.” Only £377k of the £652k, a deficit of £275k was passed on to Social Services, which had been identified by WAG for priorities. Also there was a predicition in that  monitoring report on the revenue budget, that the 1st Quarter was overspent by £500k, the 2nd Quarter by £578k, the 3rd Quarter by £734k and the 4th Quarter by £1.1m. With respect, he did not  think that Councillor H.Eifion Jones and the Executive were not therefore fully aware of the position.

     It was proposed and seconded that the Council Tax for 2009/10 be set at 3%.  

     Under the provisions of the Council Rule 18.5 it was agreed that a recorded vote be taken on the matter.

     For the proposal (i.e to accept the report):-

     For: Councillors B. Durkin, E. G. Davies, L. Davies, J. Evans, K. Evans, P. M. Fowlie, Ff. M. Hughes, K. P. Hughes, R. Ll. Hughes, T. Ll. Hughes, W. I. Hughes, A. M. Jones, E. Jones, G. O. Jones, O. G. Jones, R. Ll. Jones, T. Jones, C. McGRegor, Rhian Medi, B. Owen, J. V. Owen, R. L. Owen,G. O. Parry, MBE, R. G. Parry, OBE, E. Roberts, P. S. Rogers, E. Schofield, I. Williams, J. Williams,J. Penri Williams.

     TOTAL: 30

     Against: None                                              TOTAL: 0

     Abstention: Councillor H. Eifion Jones                                TOTAL: 1

     RESOLVED

     5.4     Council Resolution

     The draft Council resolution on setting the Council Tax for 2009/10 covered all matters on which a decision was required arising out of the Executive’s proposals and this report.

     (a)     Pursuant to the recommendations of the Executive to adopt a revenue budget for 2009/10 as           shown at Table A .

     (b)     Pursuant to the recommendations of the Executive to adopt a medium term financial plan as           shown at Table B.

     (c)     Pursuant to the recommendations of the Executive to adopt a three year capital plan as shown      at Table Ch and the associated narrative.

     (ch)     To adopt a capital budget for 2009/10 with commitments into following years as shown at Table C.

     (d)     To delegate to the Executive Committee for the financial year 2009/10 the powers to transfer           budgets between headings as follows:-

     (i)     powers to spend the sum of £31,229k in Table A on schools budgets;

     (ii)     unlimited powers to spend each budget heading (not including forecasted inflation) in                column B of Table A against the name of each service except schools, on the service                to which it relates;

     (iii)     a limit of nil on virement between services in Table A;

     (iv)     unlimited powers to vire from the sum of £947k forecasted inflation and the General                and Contract Contingency of £610k, and power to allocate the corporate savings not                yet allocated of £110k, to service budgets;

     (v)     powers to vire from the Performance Incentive contingency budget for the purpose of                performance improvement, for addressing high risks identified in the improvement                plan,for delivering on improvement agreements and for systems to modernise the                authority and facilitate performance management;

     (vi)     powers to vire from new or increased sources of income;

     (vii)     powers to vire from the Leisure Improvement Reserve in support of proposals which                maintain or enhance the leisure service’s assets or develop strategic sporting                     facilities;

(viii)     powers to vire up to £0.12 million from the Building Maintenance service’s reserve for           any purpose.

(dd) To delegate to the Executive Committee in respect of the period to 31 March 2012, the following powers:-

     (i)     powers to make new commitments from future years’ revenue budgets up to the limit                of £1.2m each year in Table B, and consistent with the budget framework;

     (ii)     the power and the duty to make plans for achievement of revenue budget savings                implied     by Table B, and consistent with the budget framework;

       (iii)     the power to release a further £500k from general balances to finance staff severance            costs in order to achieve future savings or efficiency;

     (iv)     powers to transfer budgets between capital projects in Table C and to commit                     resources in following years within the amounts indicated in the Capital Plan at Table                Ch and      consistent with the budget framework.

     (e) To delegate to the Pay and Grading Panel for the Financial Year 2009-10 the power to vire from the Job Evaluation and Employment Cost Provision, and if necessary to seek access to sums for later years delegated to the Executive at (dd)(i) above.

     (f) To confirm that items (a) to (e) become part of the budget framework.

          Prescribed Class A      Nil Discount

          Prescribed Class B     Nil Discount

          Prescribed Class C     Nil Discount

     a)     29,235.65 being the amount calculated by the Executive, in accordance with regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) (Wales) Regulations 1995, as its council tax base for the year.

     b)     Part of the Council's area:

          being the amounts calculated by the Executive, in accordance with regulation 6 of the                Regulations, as the amounts of its council tax base for the year for dwellings in those                parts of its area to which one or more special items relate.

being the amount given by adding to the amount at 7(e) above the amounts of the special item or items relating to dwellings in those parts of the Council's area mentioned above divided in each case by the amount at 6(b) above, calculated by the Executive, in accordance with Section 34(3) of the Act, as the basic amounts of its council tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one of more special items relate.