Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
55 Treasury Management Half Yearly Update Report 2018/19 PDF 205 KB
Minutes:
Matter for Decision
The Council had adopted The Chartered
Institute of Public Finance
and Accountancy
(CIPFA) Code of Practice on Treasury Management (Revised 2017).
The Code required as a minimum receipt by full
Council of an Annual Treasury Management Strategy Statement – including the
Annual Investment Strategy and Minimum Revenue Provision Policy – for the year
ahead, a half-year review report and an Annual Report (stewardship report)
covering activities in the previous year.
Decision of the Executive
Councillor for Finance and Resources
Recommend
Council to:
i.
Approve the report to
Council, which included the Council’s estimated Prudential and Treasury
Indicators 2018/19 to 2021/22.
ii.
Approve a £5m limit
on secured bonds with local businesses subject to due diligence as highlighted
in paragraph 8 of the officer’s report.
iii.
Update the Minimum
Revenue Provision (MRP) Policy to state that no MRP will be required if this
bond is secured, but this would be reviewed at least annually.
iv.
Agree the principle
of investing up to £5m in a bond issued by Allia
Limited, and delegate to the Head of Finance the final decision on the
appropriateness of this investment, once detailed due diligence has been
completed as set out in paragraph 8.9 of the Officer’s report;
v.
Increase the
counterparty limit for Barclays Bank Plc by £10m to £35m; and;
vi.
Reduce the Money
Market Fund (MMF) counterparty limit by £10m to £5m for each fund, with a total
MMF limit of £20m (and to continue using MMFs that are rated AAA).
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the
Officer’s report.
Any Alternative Options Considered and
Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny Considerations
The Committee received a report from the Head
of Finance. She updated the Committee with reference to paragraph 8 of the
report that investment in local bond and money market reforms there were
proposals for reducing the level of investment in these and counteract this by
investing in Barclays.
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:
i.
Allia Limited looked like a positive investment and asked whether there was
any way to measure community investment or benefit to Cambridge.
ii.
Saw that Allia Limited had approached the Council, and asked whether
the council could advertise to other companies who might want to undertake this
approach.
iii.
Commented that there
was a detailed opportunity with Allia Limited and
asked for the advantages and disadvantages of the two investment options.
iv.
Referred to the £5 million
contained in recommendation 2.4 and queried whether this was a limit or the
scale of the investment.
The Head of Finance made the following
comments in response to Members’ questions:
i.
There was a community
benefit with the Allia Limited investment and there
were ways of measuring social value.
ii.
Each investor would
have their own investment needs this approach may not suit other investor’s
needs.
iii.
With regards to the Allia Limited investment, the re-financing option had a
slightly lower risk compared with the redevelopment option, therefore would
expect the redevelopment option to have a higher return due to the higher risk
involved.
iv.
The council would
only be looking to invest up to £5 million and therefore would not be the sole
investor as Allia was looking for twice this amount.
Consideration would need to be given to who the other investors were.
Executive
Councillor for Finance and Resources commented that Allia
Limited had a record for enabling employment, this was
not a long term investment but was a 5 year plan which he wanted to explore and
fulfil.
The Committee
resolved unanimously to endorse the recommendation.
The Executive Councillor approved the
recommendation.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.