Meetings

Commissioners were notified of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) Scrutiny of Accounts 2017-18. The Committee has reported on its annual scrutiny of the accounts and annual reports of various publicly funded organisations.

The final report contains 40 recommendations, nine of which relate to the Commission. Commissioners noted the report and agreed for the Commissioner with responsibility for Budget and Governance to draft a response to the Public Accounts Committee, which will be circulated to Commissioners before being sent to the Committee.

The Commission’s ‘Annually Managed Expenditure’ (AME) budget for 2017-18 was set at £1.2million in November 2016. This is predominantly the accounting adjustment (non-cash) for the Members’ Pension Provision. The actual costs will not be known until after the 2017-18 year-end when the actual calculation is done by the Actuary.

This means that for the purposes of budgeting, the costs must be estimated. A recent estimate from the Actuary states that the estimated Pension Finance cost for 2017-18 (Members’ Pension Scheme) is likely to be around £1.744million, substantially higher than the approved budget. This amount cannot be accommodated by an underspend within the Commission’s operational budget.

Commissioners questioned the cause of the difference and requested additional narrative within the note to Finance Committee. Commissioners agreed to request the supplementary budget detailed, and that the necessary documentation be published in line with Standing Order requirements.

Oral update/paper to follow

Claire Clancy first noted, with appreciation, that the Finance Management Report for January 2017 had been produced on 1 February. Nia Morgan then presented the Board with expenditure details for the current financial year and for 2017-18.

Nia outlined the current budgetary pressures and actions to mitigate the risks at year end, and those pressures going forward.

In relation to 2017-18 budget, the Investment and Resourcing Board would be scrutinising several large and variable costs, with a view to prioritising and ascertaining where cost efficiencies could be made and the impact of capacity planning. IRB had agreed not to submit a supplementary budget this year, to provide time to give more accuracy to figures that were estimated at present.

ACTIONS: Service Heads were asked to

·                keep the budget team informed of any day to day changes to their forecast spend for the current year to ensure that informed decisions could be made regarding planned project expenditure.

·                provide Directors with information on items earmarked for inclusion in the 2017-18 budget, in terms of timing, priority and risk associated with not proceeding.

The Commission would be considering the 2017-18 budget at a future meeting.

The Commission received information about the progress of the Commission budget process, including scrutiny by the Finance Committee. Commissioners welcomed the constructive approach that had been taken by the Finance Committee and that the Committee had recognised the uncertainties surrounding funding levels for future years.

The Commission agreed its response to the recommendations raised by the Finance Committee and that the final budget document will be laid on 9 November 2016.

Commissioners considered the draft budget strategy document that had been prepared in line with the newly agreed Commission strategy and based on decisions taken by them in the summer.

The document set out the intended expenditure plans for 2017-18 as well as indicative plans and financial requirements through to the end of the Fifth Assembly. Commissioners considered a number of aspects of the budget in detail. Looking forward, Commissioners believe a step change is needed in how Assembly business information is produced, managed and used in order for the Assembly to be regarded as a world class digital parliament that is open, inclusive and easy to engage with, leading to better laws and scrutiny. The Commission will be working to improve the way people engage with the Assembly and how services are delivered to Members.

A budget strategy that modestly increases the Commission’s overall resourcing levels will be needed if the Commission is to maintain the delivery of excellent services to Assembly Members. The longer term financial plans could be subject to change as a result of a need to respond to the challenges that emerge over the next four years but, based on current assessments, Commissioners consider the proposals to be set at levels that are fair and prudent.

The Commission agreed that the draft budget should be laid on 30 September. Finance Committee scrutiny is expected to take place on 5 October. The plenary Budget Motion debate is planned for 16 November.