Agenda item
FUNDING FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT REORGANISATION (LGR)
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR – RESOURCES
To seek agreement on how the LGR funding will be allocated, including decision making processes.
Decision:
RESOLVED: That Cabinet:
(1) Approved that up to £1 million of the available funding be allocated to county-wide costs. Any contribution will be based on a fair share from each Council and can be approved by the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Executive Member for Devolution and Local Government Reorganisation and Executive Member for Resources.
(2) Approved that up to £1 million of the available funding be allocated to additional staffing costs, noting that £450k has already been allocated. Any spend can be approved by the Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader of the Council, Executive Member for Resources, Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and political Group Leaders, except where the Constitution already requires different approval processes.
(3) Approved that up to £200k of the available funding can be spent on additional training costs. Any spend can be approved by the Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader of the Council and Executive Member for Resources.
(4) Approved that any spend is subject to cap of £1 million in 2026/27 and £2 million overall.
REASON FOR DECISIONS: This is intended to provide a practical framework for agreeing LGR costs. It aims to allow timely reactions in what will need to be a fast-moving project.
Minutes:
Audio recording – 58 minutes 55 seconds
The Chair invited Councillor Jon Clayden, as Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, to present the referral on this item. Councillor Clayden advised that:
· Some discussion had taken place on staff training costs and the balance between training for new and existing staff.
· A query regarding how county-wide costs would be allocated had been answered by the Director – Resources.
· Discussion over transparency on decision-making and where projects needed to be scaled back as they moved to Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) had also taken place.
· An amendment had been made to recommendation 2.2 in the report to include that any spend can be approved by the Chief Executive in consultation with the Chair of the Overview of Scrutiny Committee and political Group Leaders in addition to the Leader of the Council and Executive Member for Resources.
N.B. Councillor Daniel Allen left the Council Chamber at 20:31.
The following Members asked questions:
· Councillor Donna Wright
· Councillor Mick Debenham
· Councillor Daniel Allen
In response to questions, Councillor Val Bryant advised that she, as the Leader of the Council, and the Executive Member for Resources were the only Members with a coherent view on staff training due to their attendance at ongoing meetings.
N.B. Councillors Daniel Allen and Tamsin Thomas entered the Council Chamber at 20:33.
In response to questions, Councillor Jon Clayden advised that neither he nor the political Group Leaders would have the decision-making power on spending, and that they would just be consultees along with the Leader of the Council and Executive Member for Resources.
In response to questions, Councillor Laura Williams advised that training plans across all 11 authorities in Hertfordshire had already been agreed by the Herts Leaders Group.
Councillor Ian Albert, as the Executive Member for Resources, presented the report entitled ‘Funding for Local Government Reorganisation’ and advised that:
· A delegated decision had allocated £450K for four HR and IT posts to address significant LGR workload pressures, and recruitment for those was ongoing, which meant that the full funding allocation might not be needed.
· £1M of total funding for the 2026/27 financial year and £1M for the 2027/28 financial year had been agreed.
· Spending related to staff backfill and county-wide costs would likely be made through delegated decision notices.
· Spending on learning and development would be allocated in tranches due to the low amounts and existing training budgets, and monitoring would take place on this through quarterly reports.
· Officer time spent on LGR was already significant and would only increase.
· A balance for spending on training for new and existing staff was recognised.
· Transparency on spending would be important to ensure scrutiny from the Overview & Scrutiny and Finance, Audit and Risk Committees.
· A huge number of important projects were taking place, and staff were being stretched in different directions, so there was a need to manage priorities.
· They were happy to accept the amendment suggested by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee with the recognition that decisions would be made quickly and irregularly as £450K had already been allocated to staffing costs this year.
The following Members asked questions:
· Councillor Daniel Allen
· Councillor Donna Wright
In response to questions, Councillor Ian Albert advised that:
· Given the importance of LGR, they were happy to include additional parties in the consultation process for spending on LGR related staffing costs.
· Decisions on staffing costs would not need to be made as quickly as those on county-wide costs, and no recruitment was planned in the near future.
In response to questions, Councillor Val Bryant advised that:
· They would be happy to listen to views from the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny and political Group Leaders, but there would be limited time for responses due to deadlines.
· An appropriate way of communicating with consultees on these matters would be considered.
In response to questions, Councillor Laura Williams advised that there was complexity on decision-making around LGR due to the number of authorities involved and the introduction of joint committees in the interim before the formation of shadow authorities.
In response to questions, the Director – Resources advised that the Chief Executive would have the delegated authority to make the decisions on LGR related spending and other parties listed would be consultees only.
Councillor Ian Albert proposed the recommendations with the amendment to recommendation 2.2 to include that any spend can be approved by the Chief Executive in consultation with the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and political Group Leaders in addition to the Leader of the Council and Executive Member for Resources, and this was seconded by Councillor Laura Williams.
The following Members took part in the debate:
· Councillor Sean Nolan
· Councillor Daniel Allen
Points raised during the debate included:
· It was pleasing to hear that they could continue to support staff with training.
· The next couple of years would be taxing for staff, and it would be important to support them through this.
Having been proposed and seconded, as amended and, following a vote, it was:
RESOLVED: That Cabinet:
(1) Approved that up to £1 million of the available funding be allocated to county-wide costs. Any contribution will be based on a fair share from each Council and can be approved by the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Executive Member for Devolution and Local Government Reorganisation and Executive Member for Resources.
(2) Approved that up to £1 million of the available funding be allocated to additional staffing costs, noting that £450k has already been allocated. Any spend can be approved by the Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader of the Council, Executive Member for Resources, Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and political Group Leaders, except where the Constitution already requires different approval processes.
(3) Approved that up to £200k of the available funding can be spent on additional training costs. Any spend can be approved by the Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader of the Council and Executive Member for Resources.
(4) Approved that any spend is subject to cap of £1 million in 2026/27 and £2 million overall.
REASON FOR DECISIONS: This is intended to provide a practical framework for agreeing LGR costs. It aims to allow timely reactions in what will need to be a fast-moving project.
Supporting documents:
PDF 164 KB