Agenda item

The Committee received a report on financial savings monitoring. The Quarter 4 outturn position for 2024-25 was a £4,000 underspend on full year revenue budget of £10.8 million. This was a change from the position at quarter 3 where estimated a revenue overspend of £138,000 on the full year budget.

The departmental savings items were presented. In terms of position at year end of 2023-24, two departmental savings items remained amber (indicating risk to delivery). This related to establishment (service) reviews, where it was found that the spending on establishment salaries and Agency was above budgeted figures and as such there remained a significant risk. The second item related to the Capacity Grid project, recouping old Council Tax and Business Rates debt, which was nearing the end of its allocated time. There was a surplus in the collection fund of £1.004m, of which £0.125m related to

Redditch Borough Council.

The red risk savings item in relation to finance establishment would not be delivered due to the need to bring in additional resource to concentrate on completing all accounts up to the 2023/24 financial year. This task was completed in January 2025 and it was anticipated that through 2025-26 the Council would move back to the correct establishment in the finance department.

The 2024-25 savings position was presented in Appendix A. It was highlighted that the vast majority of savings items linked to increases in grant, agreed increases in tax or items no longer to be delivered until future financial years. The largest savings in recent years was on pension cost which linked to the 2023 triennial revaluation with revised figures up to the end of this financial year. Initial advice from actuaries indicated that these figures would not change in the next revaluation.

The Portfolio Holder for Finance addressed the Committee, noting he was pleased to see the 2024-25 budget delivered without overspend for the first time in many years. The Portfolio Holder explained that there had been significant work to ensure working practices were embedded that allowed the finance team to respond to emerging risks and undertake in-year adjustments where necessary to ensure savings were being delivered.

A Member asked for clarification in relation to reported variations in departmental spending relating to ICT overspend of £25,000 due to telephone costs (in Business Transformation and Organisational Development) and the £31,000 overspend in Democratic Services due to additional Shared Service costs charged to the Council. The Deputy Chief Executive and Chief Finance Officer responded that in relation to shared service item officers were looking to improve clarity in terms of recharges process between the two shared service authorities (Redditch Borough Council and Bromsgrove District Council), which aimed to provide a clearer explanation of how this was calculated within the reports. In relation to the ICT overspend on telephone costs, officers undertook to obtain further information and report back to Members.

The Vice-Chair queried the additional £50,000 spending with Wychavon District Council on the provision of car park civil enforcement function. Members requested more detail on the enforcement work currently being undertaken by Wychavon District Council within the Borough as it was commented that elected members had been receiving numerous complaints from residents about parking and effectiveness of enforcement. Officers undertook to contact Wychavon District Council about this and provide a response to Members.

In relation to the Town Hall hub development, Members were advised that the Council had not secured the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) as a tenant as previously planned. The Council was in the process of approaching other public sector organisations. The works on lower ground floor would be minimised until a tenant had been found for this space, to ensure the space was designed to their requirements. In response to a question, it was stated that the DWP’s change to no longer move into the Town Hall was unrelated to devolution and local government reorganisation.

The rest of the Town Hall hub project had been progressing as planned and was at the RIBA 4 technical design stage at present. A question was asked with regard to what contingency was in place if tenants could not be secured. It was responded that the hub redevelopment would allow the Council’s customer service centre to move back to the Town Hall, and the additional office space capacity would in any case allow other Council assets such as the Greenlands Business Centre and the Oakenshaw Community Centre to be released for other purposes. The Portfolio Holder for Finance added that the risk of not securing tenants was being actively minimised.

It was noted that going forward, savings monitoring would be reported through the quarterly finance and performance monitoring reports, to be considered by the Executive Committee and scrutinised by the Budget Scrutiny Working Group rather than through the Audit, Governance and Standards Committee. This was proposed as it was felt to be more closely aligned with the terms of reference of the respective committees / working groups. Members noted this approach.

RESOLVED that

the outturn position on the 2024-25 Departmental Savings Programme be noted, including any potential implications for future years.