Supplementary memorandum from the
Audit Commission (LAI 37A)
The Communities and Local Government Select
Committee have asked for information on the level of reserves held by English
Local Authorities. This information is collected by the Department for Communities
and Local Government which has provided a response directly to the Committee.
This note adds some commentary.
Growth in reserves
The DCLG response notes the increase in
local authority reserves in the period since 2002. There is a range of factors
leading to the increase in reserves. The need to make provision for single
status pay systems is one factor. There are a small number of cases when
appointed auditors have commented on authorities' arrangements for determining
and maintaining levels of reserves and, in some cases, authorities have increased
the level of reserves in line with revised arrangements. Ultimately it is for
authorities to set the reserves at the level they consider appropriate.
However, incentives for authorities to
ensure they have adequate reserves are not due mainly to audit commentary on
arrangements. There are now also
specific statutory requirements:
· Under section 25 of
the Local Government Act 2003, the chief financial officer is required to report
to the council on the adequacy of proposed financial reserves when setting the
budget for the year. Section 28 then requires an authority to review its budget
periodically throughout the year and take any action considered necessary to
correct a deterioration in its financial position.
· Section 26 of the
Local Government Act 2003 introduced a concept of 'minimum reserves'. The
Secretary of State or the Welsh Assembly Government are given a reserve power
to make regulations identifying specified reserves as 'controlled reserves' and
setting out how a minimum balance for these reserves should be calculated. To date no such regulations have yet been
issued and no reserves have been designated as 'controlled'. However, the
Government has undertaken to apply the power only to individual authorities in
the circumstances where the authority does not act prudently, disregards the
advice of its chief financial officer and is heading for serious financial
difficulty.
Deposits and reserves
As the DCLG note points out, the
relationship between reserves and cash deposits is not direct. Funds received
from other bodies need to be banked before they are spent. In addition, there
are two factors related to borrowing. First, it is arguably consistent with the
prudential framework for authorities to borrow in anticipation of planned
requirements, on a reasonable and prudent basis, but not to borrow specifically
to invest or for speculative purposes. Second, as the Committee recognises,
authorities may not repay debt and have a matched cash deposit.
In our work for our review of treasury
management, we have been unable to make a quantitative assessment of the
contribution to cash deposits from drawing down loans ahead of need or from not
repaying debt despite having the cash to do so. However, we have some evidence
that both of these factors are contributing to the level of cash on deposit.
Several authorities, in particular, have highlighted the cost of repaying debt
to the Public Works and Loans Board as a reason for holding cash deposits.
The Commission report is likely to comment
on both of these factors.
27
February 2009