Agenda item

Report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services

The Senior Finance Business Partner presented the Q1 Finance Monitoring report for 2025/26 and took the Group through some key points in the report.

The Group were asked to note a couple of clerical errors the first in recommendation c) the project overspend on Special Expenses should read £11.3k and secondly at 4.4 and 4.13 the underspend to support additional costs should read £0.377m.

The Senior Finance Business Partner highlighted the significant variances arising from savings in refuse collection resulting from housing development progressing slower than expected. This is expected to be earmarked for additional cost pressures and financial challenges, mainly to support the Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) and Simpler Recycling.

The Group were advised of a capital budget underspend due to the reduction in expenditure on Warm Homes Grants to match final indicative funding notification.

The Senior Finance Business Partner highlighted the Q1 position of the Special Expenses budget and the expenditure projected to being £11.3k above budget and explained this was due to security improvements at Bridgford Park and responsive works at West Park including repairs to doors and grounds work. Extra costs had also been incurred due to anti-social behaviour patrols at Bridgford Park which has been offset by funding from the Police and Crime Commissioner.

In summarising, the Senior Finance Business Partner advised that the financial position remains healthy but that this can quickly change especially with the challenges of LGR.

The Head of Corporate Services presented the Q1 Performance Monitoring report in line with the Corporate Strategy 2024-27 approved at Council on 7 December 2023.

The Group were advised that there are eight performance measures that have not met target this year. These are primarily community facilities (two performance indicators), Rushcliffe Oaks Crematorium (two performance indicators) and Waste Management (two performance indicators).

The Head of Corporate Services explained that the Communities Scrutiny Group had scrutinised the under-performance of community facilities and the Crematorium, and as a result action plans were put in place, but that it will take some time for any benefits to be realised. With regards to the performance of waste management this is lower than historic levels due to waiting on the Environment Act changes and the introduction of Simpler Recycling to be implemented later this year.

Councillor Plant asked two specific questions relating to Rushcliffe Oaks and whether there were any significant issues with the service and whether there will be a review of the Council’s assets and if this come to a Full Council meeting for consideration. The Head of Corporate Services advised that feedback from the Crematorium continues to be positive and with regards to an asset review this would only come to Full Council if a decision needed to be made regarding an asset’s disposal.

Councillor Plant asked a further question relating to the current position of Disabled Facility Grants. The Senior Finance Business Partner explained there are two pots of funding, Mandatory and Discretionary both and the Council is still in the position to provide both funding streams.

The Chair asked a specific question relating to the security improvements at Bridgford Park and who was providing the extra security patrols. The Head of Corporate Services advised that a private company has been deployed, and this is being paid for by the Police and Crime Commissioner’s office.

Councillor Gaunt commented on the redevelopment of the Ratcliffe on Soar site and requested that further information be provided on its progress, to include a better understanding of the scope and timeline of the development. The Head of Corporate Services advised she would need to check with the relevant officers and report back to the Group.

Councillor Parekh commented on the Councillor Training Plan and what was on the programme. The Head of Corporate Services advised that a there is a plan in progress, and this will be circulated in due course.

It was RESOLVED that the Corporate Overview Group note:

a)    The projected budget efficiency for the year of £0.637m and proposals to earmark this for cost pressures given in Appendix A and paragraph 4.1

b)    The projected capital budget efficiencies of £0.681m including the budget the budget changes in Appendix D

c)    The project overspend on Special Expenses of £11.3k (paragraph 4.7)

d)    The performance exceptions to judge whether further information is required.