Issue - meetings

The Council resolved:-

(i)             to note the feedback collated from officers and elected members on the Budget Protocol in its first year of operation, summarised in the report;

(ii)           to instruct officers to develop budget options and Integrated Impact Assessments during Quarter 1 as the basis for (1) elected member engagement; (2) Phase 1 engagement with the public both online and face to face; and (3) a second phase of engagement during quarter 3 after the Medium Term Financial Plan was reported to Council; and

(iii)          to note that the Protocol formed part of the Scheme of Governance and as such would be reviewed by the cross-party Governance Reference Group in April and May and submitted to Council in July for approval of any proposed revisions, including giving effect to the improvements outlined at (ii) above.

The Council had before it a report by the Executive Director - Corporate Services on the application of the Budget Protocol which included public engagement on officer budget saving options within the 2024/25 budget and which identified any lessons learned or proposed revisions for applying the protocol to the 2025/26 budget. The report also responded to instructions from the Council budget meeting in respect of engagement and consultation.

The report recommended:-

that the Council -

(a)          note the feedback collated from officers and elected members on the Budget Protocol in its first year of operation, summarised at Appendix A;

(b)          instruct officers to develop budget options and Integrated Impact Assessments during Quarter 1 as the basis for 1) elected member engagement; 2) Phase 1 engagement with the public both online and face to face; and 3) a second phase of engagement during quarter 3 after the Medium Term Financial Plan was reported to Council; and

(c)          note that the Protocol formed part of the Scheme of Governance and as such would be reviewed by the cross-party Governance Reference Group in April and May and submitted to Council in July for approval of any proposed revisions, including giving effect to the improvements outlined in (b) above.

Councillor McLellan moved, seconded by Councillor Yuill:-

            That the Council approve the recommendations.

Councillor Kusznir moved as an amendment, seconded by Councillor Cross:-

            That the Council -

(1)      notes the feedback collated from officers and Elected Members on the Budget Protocol in its first year of operation;

(2)       considers that the Budget Protocol was only implemented because of the SNP - Liberal Democrat Administration’s disastrous 2022/23 Budget, which defunded Big Noise Torry, closed 6 libraries, precipitated the closure of Bucksburn Swimming Pool and subsequent and multiple Judicial Reviews; and

(3)       agrees therefore to cease further work on the public engagement, beyond what’s necessary for officers to ensure due regard in relation to protected characteristics element of the Budget Protocol because of:

·           cost: both in terms of (a) financial and (b) officer time;

·           uptake: responses to Budget Consultation Phase 2 represent just over 1% of Aberdeen’s population. Multiple responses from the same IP address were allowed;

·           balanced budget: this was not a requirement of public consultation yet is a legal obligation of Elected Members. A consultation cannot be credible if it does not replicate the Budget framework in which decisions will be made; and

·           tax: the consultation process focused predominantly on raising taxes and fees/charges as a means of meeting the Budget deficit. The public were  provided with a limited number of other options.

Councillor Malik moved as a second amendment, seconded by Councillor Watson:-       

            That Council -

Note the feedback collated from officers and some elected members on the Budget Protocol in its first year of operation.

Note 3.13 of the report Stage 6 - Public Engagement Phase 2 notes “What worked well” versus “what could have been better” noting every other stage was presented as “what worked well” versus “what  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14