The Committee considered a report which provided the current forecast outturn for the financial year 2024/25 based on the Council’s income, expenditure and known commitments as at the end of July 2024. It also identified actions that were being taken to address adverse variances to urgently address the Council’s financial sustainability.
The Council was forecasting an additional in-year pressure of £26.5m - this was before the application of any exceptional financial support. The Highways & Infrastructure were reporting an underspend of £0.5m against a net budget of £16m.
The overall reasons for the £26.5m pressure were outlined in the report.
The key reasons for the underspend were outlined in the report and included additional income.
The Committee noted the Transport Bus Service Improvement Plan+ (BSIP+) grant, the ear marked reserves for the Committee and the planned use for those items, and the capital programme which was still under review.
The Committee welcomed the reported underspend for the Highways and Transport Service and thanked officers for their hard work. Members expressed frustration in respect of the overspend in other areas which meant that any underspend in the Highways and Transport Service as outlined in the report would contribute to the overall corporate position rather than being earmarked for the Highways budget which was clearly needed.
Members asked questions and sought assurance in relation to
- That officers were building business cases to justify the additional capital spend.
- Whether it was an officer decision or a contractor decision to only provide one weed spray this year.
- Was there an opportunity to look at the weedkilling policy as part of the work programme to allow members to provide input into it rather than it being a wholly officer-based decision.
- What facility did the committee have through the Chair to write to the Chairs of the Adults & Heath Committee and Children & Families Committees in respect of their budget overspends.
In response, officers reported that:-
- Although weedkilling was not a statutory service, treatment for weedkilling was still underway using manual equipment rather than the spray that was previously used as this was not as effective in the inclement weather.
- Although it was ultimately an officer decision in respect of the weedkilling policy, allocation of funding across the wider area would be something that officers could involve members in.
- The Chair agreed to take on board the concerns in relation to the overspend in other areas impacting on the budgets of other services and explained that the Transformation Programme would be focusing on those departments to support them in providing their services but keeping within budget.
RESOLVED: - By Majority
That the Highways and Transport Committee
1. Review the factors leading to a forecast adverse/(positive) Net Revenue financial variance of: Council: £26.5m against a revised budget of £387.6m (6.8%) Highways and Transport: (£0.5m) against a revised budget of £16.0m (3.1%) To scrutinise the contents of Annex 1, Section 2 relevant to services within the committee’s remit, and review progress on the delivery of the MTFS approved budget policy change items, the RAG ratings and latest forecasts, and to understand the actions to be taken to address any adverse variances from the approved budget.
2. Consider the in-year forecast capital spending of: Council: £164.5m against an approved MTFS budget of £215.8m Highways and Transport: £45.8m against an approved MTFS budget of £66.5m due to slippage that has been re-profiled into future years.
3.Note the available reserves position as per Annex 1, Section 5 of the report.
4. Note that Council will be asked to approve Supplementary Revenue Estimate Requests for Allocation of Additional Grant Funding over £1,000,000 as per Annex 1, Section 3, Table 1 of the report.
5. That the Supplementary Capital Estimate above £500,000 up to and including £1,000,000 as per Annex 1, Section 4, Table 3 of the report, in accordance with the Council’s Constitution be approved