Interactive webcast player

Finance and Performance Scrutiny Sub-Committee
Tuesday, 30th June 2026 at 6:00pm

 

Welcome to Folkestone and Hythe District Council's Webcast Player.

 

UPDATE - PLEASE NOTE, MEETINGS OF THE JOINT TRANSPORTATION BOARD AND FOLKESTONE AND HYTHE DISTRICT AND PARISH COUNCILS' JOINT COMMITTEE WILL BE STREAMED LIVE TO YOUTUBE AT: bit.ly/YouTubeMeetings. 


The webcast should start automatically for you, and you can jump to specific points of interest within the meeting by selecting the agenda point or the speaker that you are interested in, simply by clicking the tabs above this message. You can also view any presentations used in the meeting by clicking the presentations tab. We hope you find the webcast interesting and informative.

 

Please note, although officers can be heard when they are speaking at meetings, they will not be filmed.

 

At the conclusion of a meeting, the webcast can take time to 'archive'.  You will not be able to view the webcast until the archiving process is complete.  This is usually within 24 hours of the meeting.

Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Alan Martin
Share this agenda point
  1. Mr Jake Hamilton
  2. Cllr Alan Martin
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Alan Martin
Share this agenda point
  1. Gavin Edwards
  2. Cllr Alan Martin
  3. Cllr Alan Martin
  4. Cllr Paul Thomas
  5. Cllr Alan Martin
  6. Gavin Edwards
  7. Cllr Alan Martin
  8. Jonathan Smith
  9. Cllr Paul Thomas
  10. Cllr Alan Martin
  11. Cllr John Wing
  12. Cllr Alan Martin
  13. Gavin Edwards
  14. Cllr John Wing
  15. Cllr Alan Martin
  16. Gavin Edwards
  17. Cllr Alan Martin
  18. Gavin Edwards
  19. Cllr Alan Martin
  20. Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly
  21. Gavin Edwards
  22. Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly
  23. Gavin Edwards
  24. Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly
  25. Cllr Alan Martin
  26. Cllr Paul Thomas
  27. Gavin Edwards
  28. Cllr Paul Thomas
  29. Gavin Edwards
  30. Cllr Paul Thomas
  31. Gavin Edwards
  32. Cllr Alan Martin
  33. Cllr Alan Martin
  34. Gavin Edwards
  35. Cllr Alan Martin
  36. Cllr Paul Thomas
  37. Cllr Alan Martin
  38. Gavin Edwards
  39. Cllr Paul Thomas
  40. Cllr Alan Martin
Share this agenda point
  1. Jonathan Smith
  2. Cllr Alan Martin
  3. Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly
  4. Mr Alan Mitchell
  5. Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly
  6. Cllr Alan Martin
  7. Cllr Paul Thomas
  8. Jonathan Smith
  9. Cllr Alan Martin
  10. Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly
  11. Mr Alan Mitchell
  12. Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly
  13. Cllr Alan Martin
  14. Mr Alan Mitchell
  15. Cllr Alan Martin
  16. Cllr Paul Thomas
  17. Jonathan Smith
  18. Cllr Paul Thomas
  19. Jonathan Smith
  20. Cllr Alan Martin
  21. Cllr Tim Prater
  22. Cllr Alan Martin
  23. Mr Alan Mitchell
  24. Cllr Alan Martin
  25. Cllr Paul Thomas
  26. Jonathan Smith
  27. Cllr Alan Martin
  28. Mr Alan Mitchell
  29. Mr Alan Mitchell
  30. Cllr Alan Martin
  31. Mr Alan Mitchell
  32. Cllr Alan Martin
Share this agenda point
  1. Jonathan Smith
  2. Cllr Alan Martin
  3. Jonathan Smith
  4. Cllr Alan Martin
  5. Mr Alan Mitchell
  6. Jonathan Smith
  7. Mr Alan Mitchell
  8. Cllr Alan Martin
  9. Mr Alan Mitchell
  10. Cllr Alan Martin
  11. Mr Alan Mitchell
  12. Cllr Alan Martin
  13. Mr Alan Mitchell
  14. Cllr Alan Martin
  15. Cllr Paul Thomas
  16. Cllr John Wing
  17. Mr Alan Mitchell
  18. Cllr John Wing
  19. Cllr Alan Martin
  20. Cllr John Wing
  21. Cllr Alan Martin
  22. Mr Alan Mitchell
  23. Cllr Alan Martin
Share this agenda point
  1. Jonathan Smith
  2. Cllr Alan Martin
  3. Cllr John Wing
  4. Jonathan Smith
  5. Cllr John Wing
  6. Cllr Alan Martin
  7. Cllr Paul Thomas
  8. Jonathan Smith
  9. Cllr Paul Thomas
  10. Cllr Alan Martin
  11. Cllr Tim Prater
  12. Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly
  13. Jonathan Smith
  14. Cllr Alan Martin
  15. Webcast Finished

Cllr Alan Martin - 0:00:05
So, good evening and welcome to the meeting of the Finance and Performance Scrutiny Subcommittee.
This meeting will be webcast live to the internet.
For those who do not wish to be recorded or filmed, you will need to leave the chamber.
For members, officers, and others speaking at the meeting, it is important that microphones
are used so viewers on the webcast and others in the room may hear you.
Would anyone with a mobile phone please switch it to silent mode as they can be distracting.
I would like to remind members that although we all have strong opinions or matters under consideration,
it is important to treat members, officers and public speakers with respect.

1 Apologies for absence

So good evening everyone and welcome to
the
subcommittee this evening
and we're going to start with apologies for absence.
Mr Jake Hamilton - 0:00:58
Thank you, Chair. We have one apology from Councillor Holgate.

2 Declarations of interest

Cllr Alan Martin - 0:01:02
Thank you, Jake. So, item 2 on the agenda, declarations of interest. So, does anyone
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:01:14
have any declarations of interest? No? Perfect. So, moving on to our first main item then.

3 Q4/Annual Performance Report 2025-26 and KPIs and Targets for 2026-27

So, this is looking at the draught performance report 2025 to 26 Q3. And I believe this is
going to be introduced by Gavin Edwards.
Gavin Edwards - 0:01:31
Great, thank you, Chair, and good evening, members.
This report provides an update on performance
for quarter four, which covers January,
first of January to the 31st of March, 2026,
and the end of year out turns for the 25 -26 financial year.
This report also presents a draught set of KPIs
and targets for monitoring in 26 -27 year.
The corporate housing and performance report
set out in appendices one and two for members.
Both reports show the out turn position
for the 25 -26 year compared with the previous year as well as the quarter four position.
The overall summary of corporate performance is set out in section 2 .1 of the cover report
with 46 of the 61 targeted indicators meeting at year end which represents around 75 % of the indicators.
A further 6 indicators within 5 % of target which equates to 10 % while 9 -15 % were off target.
There's been some strong and consistent performance in the year including council tax collection, housing benefit processing,
information governance, planning applications, lifeline response times, business start -ups
time posted to support, UK SPF household support, volunteer hours in our play parks, high -poor
visitor numbers, miss bin collections, council new builds and acquisitions as well as empty
homes brought back into use.
There are some areas that miss target including household waste recycling, street cleanliness,
food premises compliance, homelessness prevention and relief, rough sleeping, temporary accommodation,
B &B use and affordable homes delivery.
The report provides commentary explaining the reasons for these exceptions in section
4 .1 of the cover report.
The housing landlord service performance is set out in section 3 .1 of the cover report
with 15 of the 19 targeted housing indicators meeting at year -end, representing around 79%.
Three indicators were within 5 % of target, 16%, and five were, one was off target, which
is 5%.
Performance was strong in housing repairs, tenant satisfaction with repairs, properties
with a no need PC and housing landlord complaints.
There were some areas that missed target,
including landlord gas safety records,
electrical safety certificates, decent homes compliance
and the average re -elect times where major works were involved.
Section 3 .4 of the cover report also includes information on overdue
and water safety remedial actions following the recent
regulator of social housing inspection that took place in April.
We've included these as part of the proposed KPIs suite for 26 -27
to monitor as part of one of their recommendations.
For 26 -27 the report proposes, as I mentioned earlier, the change to the KPI suite and associated
targets that members of the committee reviewed and fed back on at their meeting on the 10th
of March this year.
Section 5 of the cover report sets out a summary of those changes and then the full proposed
suite is set out in appendix 3 of the report.
The report and its supporting recommendations once considered this evening will then be
presented to cabinet on the 22nd of July for final approval.
I'm happy to take any questions.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:04:17
Thank you for that Gavin.
I incorrectly introduced that as the Q3 report.
I blindly read that off the piece of paper.
I apologise for that.
So this of course is the interesting one
in that it's our first opportunity to look at
the performance over the full year
rather than the different quarters
as we kind of work our way through.
So I'll open this up then for discussion.
Any councillors?
Paul.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:04:43
Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:04:48
Yes, thank you, Chair. Thank you very much for the report. Again, that with the
appendices, very comprehensive. Just a couple of things to pick up on. In 2 .4, the
targets missed. A couple I'd just like to pick up and look and talk a bit about.
Food premises inspections. When you have a look at why the target was missed, it talks about
long -term sick, holding a vacancy and limited specialist resources available
to go and deliver that.
You know, that's one of the, these inspections are the things
that can, you know, directly impact our residents with regard
to, you know, their health if they go to the wrong place
and they're given dodgy food.
So again, I'm just a little bit concerned about, you know,
what can we do to address that in 26, 27.
So that's my, that's one question.
And my second one, which is a little bit more controversial,
but something I've raised at planning,
affordable homes delivery, 41 out of 80.
Now I know there's a new KPI proposed for this,
which we're going to get to.
And again, it comes down to this thing
about controlling the controllables.
So what can we do to influence that in 26, 27?
bearing in mind, you know, we've had two major housing schemes that have been
approved through planning with no defined affordable housing up front. So I
know there's a potential for, you know, having clawing back some money in the
form of commuted sums from those developments at some time in the future,
But that doesn't help us with dealing with our KPIs
because it would seem that no matter what we do policy wise,
if a developer decides based on affordability,
that those affordable homes, oh sorry, viability,
that those affordable homes can't be delivered,
then we're left holding the baby as it were.
So again, I am concerned about that.
And then in section three under housing,
landlord performance, the average re -let times
associated with major works, you know,
slightly out, a couple of days out.
So again, I think the question there is why?
Do we understand, you know, what's driving that in any way?
So they're the things I would like to have some
further comment on, please, if that's okay.
Thank you.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:07:33
Thank you Paul. Gavin, would you like to respond please?
Gavin Edwards - 0:07:39
OK, thanks. Thank you, Councillor Thomas, for those series of questions there.
With regards to obviously your first question on the food premises there as well,
in terms of the resourcing around that and noting point that it is an area of concern obviously with the premises etc,
I will obviously speak to the team on where they are in terms of the resourcing on that.
Obviously that was a position we took in the report.
I can get some more detail on that and where they are with the recruitment on that.
With affordable homes again, obviously I think we've noted previously,
obviously you've got the supporting line below which shows obviously that the affordable homes
delivered there as well.
Obviously it's around 64 years today, it's still under where it should be in terms of the cumulative position as well,
we note that.
There are obviously developers who are obviously relying on that
and I think that's been noted in some of the previous conversations that we've had as well.
But I do take your point on what is the control reports from our side of things on that.
I would probably have to speak to the housing strategic manager on that
and to get a bit more of a detailed explanation with regards to that one.
And obviously, on the average,
relet times, these were the ones with major works on the final point.
There are obviously areas where there are sometimes a couple of properties
that will push that relet time, particularly out,
you know, in terms of voids, et cetera, around that as well.
And we obviously we know any of that particular position in the commentary there as well in the report.
But yeah, I'm happy to say if there's any further explanation around that, happy to take that back.
But yeah, noted all points.
Jonathan has some comments.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:09:07
Thank you, Chair.
Jonathan Smith - 0:09:10
So, Councillor Thomas, yes.
I'm just picking up one very specific point regarding the affordable homes.
It's touched upon in the housing revenue account out term, which is slightly later.
Paragraph 2 .2 .3 of that report does deal with the part
of the explanation in terms of there have been delays
on some of the developments.
Specifically, obviously these are developer -led,
and it requires completion.
Those are due to obviously complete, I think, imminently.
I believe over the summer that many of those schemes
that were delayed from the end of 25, 26 are due to complete
in the next few months.
But yes, I mean, part of that is sort of picked up
in the housing revenue account report, paragraph 2 .2 .3.
But yeah, the affordable homes specifically.
The other thing to mention is obviously the target
which was set in the business plan
that was agreed in December 2023
was obviously 20 homes per year.
That was what the business plan allowed for specifically.
That was the, certainly for the 18 years
of the business housing HRA business plan's life,
it was to deliver 20 homes a year on average
as that's the target that was built in.
Yeah, thank you very much for that.
Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:10:28
So again, my point, one of the reasons for raising that
as well was the fact that, you know,
is this something that year on year,
we're not achieving because we're being
let down by developers?
So again, you know, what's our track record
with regard to being able to achieve that?
because we changed our policy in planning from 30 % affordable,
didn't we, down to 22 % a couple of years ago.
So we're already lowering the bar with respect
to what we're expecting from developers.
But then even with that lower bar,
we're still not getting what we should
be getting to meet the needs of our residents.
But thank you very much for the explanation.
That's great, thank you.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:11:18
Anyone else?
John.
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr John Wing - 0:11:26
My first point, I'd like to agree with my colleague here.
My slight concern is that we're not reaching
a housing target for this year,
so we're passing onto next year.
So I think about next year's housing targets,
so they're gonna be double next year,
then of course with LGR, but we won't talk about that tonight.
So I've got slight concern,
My concern is, and I've been sitting on this committee
a long time, we are still not doing homeless.
Every time you get these reports, it's always more and more.
But I'm pleased to see in page 10, it says,
with the BMB, households in BMB,
as raised again, there's no family being in more
than six weeks, which is great.
But I do get concerns.
I mean, also, I notice in the report,
just mentioned about the new house at Rainbow Centre building for homeless. I understand,
what we read about Christmas time now, as far as I know that's my latest and of course
they were going to use what was the United Reformed Church in Sandat Road. Now that's been
squashed as well, which my concern is we're not actually getting anywhere with homeless targets
or anything and my concern is, I know it's a national thing and it's a national problem,
but I would like to see us do more action without what we can do to help relieve homelessness.
And I understand at that time the accommodation, we're doing what we can around there, but also got delays in that as well.
But that is one of my main concerns. It's been my concern in this committee for a long while now, and we don't seem to be getting anywhere on grade.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:13:03
Thank you, John. Did anyone want to respond to that? Gary?
Gavin Edwards - 0:13:07
Thank you, Councillor Lee. I'm again happy to note those comments and obviously speak to housing
colleagues if there's anything that we can do to provide some type of response to that.
But note your comments.
I appreciate that. Thank you.
Cllr John Wing - 0:13:20
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:13:21
Any other questions or comments?
So I had a couple.
I also, similar to Paul, I had some questions around the food premises inspections.
Paul's covered most of it.
I guess I was thinking if we're struggling to resource that, whether there's an opportunity
to outsource that in some way, I don't know whether businesses exist that perform that
type of operation.
I assume we charge premises for assessing them.
But well, maybe that's another question.
Did you want to take that one first or yeah?
I mean, sorry, thank you Chair.
Gavin Edwards - 0:14:17
Obviously with regards to what you mentioned now
and obviously again, as part of Council Thomson's
original question there again, I will go back
and have a conversation with the relevant offices
with regards to the resourcing of that
and where they are with that on that.
But obviously noted the point there on that as well.
And obviously on the other question that you have as well.
Thank you.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:14:35
And then my other two.
So we had the regulators inspection
and they highlighted those concerns
around the fire and water risk assessment.
So we've now got those as KPIs.
I'm assuming that we've always had those KPIs running,
so we've not reported on them at this meeting,
but I assume somewhere within the organisation
we've had those KPIs in the past,
and it made me wonder whether we should have a way
of escalating KPIs to this meeting,
where they are sort of running a red signal.
Clearly we don't want to go through everything every time, but if we have something which,
you know, for at least a quarter or two is running red, I wonder whether we should escalate
them in the same way that you have now that they've come out of the report.
Again, thank you for your comments there, Chair.
Gavin Edwards - 0:15:35
I mean, with regards to the regulator of social housing's visit, I wouldn't say just as a
context, not a concern, a recommendation of those two remedial actions, obviously to improve
transparency in terms of the reporting there as well.
The housing compliance team do have a very, very extensive data set up in terms of what
they monitor.
They are very thorough in that, in terms of that, and we have a raft of information with
regards to the compliance of our stock and our properties that we manage and maintain
on that.
But yeah, so that was part of the recommendation from them as part of the transparency, not
as a concern, as a transparency part, just for context on that.
And yeah, of course, obviously, annually we do review KPIs and targets.
We do that and we review those obviously with managers and chief officers as well in terms
of what they can do within the business as well.
So they are reviewed annually there as well.
And obviously if there are things that do come up that are statutory and regulatory
things that we need to introduce, then we will of course look at those in the appropriate
and then make those necessary changes where needed.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:16:42
Thank you, Gavin.
Abin, I think you've got a point.
Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly - 0:16:46
Yes, I did have my hand up in regards to that, actually,
because you sort of answered my question,
but for me, for example, and I think for most people,
Legionella and fire risks are major risks.
So you're saying that it's within your remit
that some of them are overdue at certain points,
and you were aware of them.
I'm wondering what percentage is viable to be overdue
and for it not to be a concern,
because you were saying that you were given some guidance,
but it wasn't something which was seen as urgent.
Thank you, Councillor Cooper -Kelly.
Gavin Edwards - 0:17:24
No, what the position I mentioned was,
was that as part of the inspection,
they, as part of a particular point of reporting,
as part of one of the recommendations,
was to introduce those measures as a part of a transparency,
as part of the reporting to show that, you know, as a transparency point, to show the compliance there as well.
With the team on monitoring it on a regular basis in terms of the saying,
I think they've got a very comprehensive data set in terms of monitoring setup for the maintaining,
you know, the maintenance of our stock.
It wasn't a point of a concern, it was a point of actually, it's an improvement,
you could add those in as part of a transparency measure there as well.
We will provide enough data going forward into the new year, so you as a committee will get to see that
along with any of the overdue actions there as well,
and commentary supporting that as well.
So there'll be a level of scrutiny on that as well,
and that's part of what we will provide
to the Committee and to Cabinet as well.
So it's a level of transparency as well
for providing scrutiny as well.
Oh no, I totally understand that,
Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly - 0:18:22
but obviously I just want to understand
what percentage is usually overdue,
because I'm sure there's something
which you see as a viable percentage which is overdue.
Thank you again for your comments.
Gavin Edwards - 0:18:34
with regards to the technicality of the percentage you're asking for now, I will
obviously speak to the compliance team on that, if that particular threshold, if that's what
you're asking for, I can speak to that and provide a response to the
committee on that.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly - 0:18:47
But we have another point.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:18:48
Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:18:53
If I may, on the same subject actually. So again, is the decision in terms of ranking which
premises are visited, is that intelligence led?
So you go for the ones that are the lowest ranked,
so maybe only three stars or four,
two, three or four stars or whatever,
rather than the five star ones,
is that the way that they would do that?
So the ones we're leaving behind are the lowest risk ones,
that's what I'm trying to get to really, thank you.
Thank you, Councillor Thomson.
There is obviously, I think, a degree of risk base in that
Gavin Edwards - 0:19:26
in terms of when they're respecting that, in terms of the actual detailed reporting schedule and the criteria for that,
then I'm happy to find that out and provide that response back.
Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:19:40
One more, if I may, just on Appendix 3, on the draught KPIs for next year.
Many of the proposed changes, we've talked in previous meetings about why we were going to go and move some of the KPIs.
The one I'm not happy about,
and I'm gonna lead Councillor Martin in on this one as well,
is WS05, where we've gone from average days
to move fly -tip waste once reported
to number of fly -tip waste received in the period.
So we're going from an action to a number counting,
which is not delivering benefit for residents.
You know, residents want to know, having flagged this up,
When is it going to go?
I mean, the fact that we've got lots of them,
I mean, I think as somebody who drives around the marsh,
I know Councillor Martin will be the same.
You know, we see these things all the time.
I think what residents are looking for is resolution
and not number, thank you.
Could we revisit that?
Because I think that's a very weak KPI
because it is just, you know, just a number, thank you.
Gavin Edwards - 0:20:53
Thank you again for your comments there, Councillor Thomas. I think the original proposal for
looking at that one, particularly in terms of the days there, was obviously it was a
consistent one day. We wanted to obviously give a little bit more, instead of giving
you just an average day, we wanted to actually give a look at actually the volume of what
the flight tip was as well. And that's why that one was initially replaced and that was
part of the conversations that was had with officers around that. I think it's actually
to give a bit of the volume as well, because actually giving you a one day, given the committee
to one day, I think it's just, you know, it's an average day.
But actually, we want to actually make sure we can give you some type of idea
of the volume of what was going on.
I think that's part of the reason why it was changed to a numerical number
rather than having it as a solely just an average day.
But I do take the point you make about obviously resolution on that point.
So I do see it from that side as well.
But I think it was, as I say, we wanted to make sure as well
we could give in terms of the volume of what the flight it was as well.
So if there was a trend, you know, if it's low in certain points in a year
or higher in certain points in a year, then you'd be able to
that you'd be able to see that
and maybe have a bit more scrutiny over it.
I think that was part of the rationale
and the thinking on that as well.
Yeah, go ahead Paul.
We're not, I'll join you on this topic in a second.
Okay, sorry.
Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:21:59
So again, I understand that,
if that's the numbers we're talking about,
talking about 1 ,300, I mean,
we're looking at three, four a day, aren't we?
And again, maybe residents don't realise that on average.
which that's the kind of number that we're dealing with.
I mean, those people who see it when we're out and about,
we do see those things.
But I just wonder if there could be something in there
which is a little bit firmer in terms of
what we've actually done.
So maybe it's, the total number is,
this is the number we've received,
and these are the ones that we've completed, because presumably, and I don't know if this is what I'm asking,
presumably there is some kind of measure in the waste management contract which talks about what VEOLA have to do
to manage our expectations with regard to fly tipping and how that's managed.
That's it, thank you very much.
Gavin Edwards - 0:23:09
Thank you again, Councillor Thomas. On that particular last point, happy to know those
comments and have those conversations with officers and respond back.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:23:16
So on fly tipping, and I feel a bit sorry for Gavin here, because the reason why that
new KPI there is partly because I've been bashing his ears every meeting for the last
18 months on this. But I also agree with the point that you're making, Paul. So the reason
One way I've been quite passionate about making sure that we show the total number of reports
is that the KPI that's being removed historically has always been green.
It's always shown that we've removed fly tipping within the appropriate time.
But the number of cases that applies to is an absolute fraction of that 1 ,352 that are
because the majority of fly tipping is on private land,
not public land, and it aggravates me
when I'm driving around the marsh,
and I see fly tipping that has not been picked up
within this KPI, but it doesn't need to be picked up
within this KPI because it's on private land.
And so, my request was that we show a KPI
that gives us an indication of the magnitude
of fly tipping, makes people aware of the amount
that fly tipping that's been done.
And then there is an opportunity for us to think about
enforcement, CCTV cameras, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera,
and actually try and bring that number down.
Because that 1 ,052 is the number of fly tipping incidents
that our residents see, and the KPI that we had previously
was saying that we were doing a cracking job
on fly tipping, and yet we were basically focusing
on a tiny fraction.
But I also get your point, Paul, and I wonder whether,
I don't know whether we need both.
I'm not sure, but I personally would like to keep
the new one, because for me that's the one
that I'm more interested in.
And for us as a council to take a view as
what we can do to get that overall figure down.
and the other one felt pretty superficial in practise.
I don't know Paul,
do you want to come back on that one Gavin?
No, no.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:25:34
I was actually going to thank you for adding
a new KPI for fly tipping, but I'll let that go.
I don't think we're changing this one.
We have discussed this before,
so I won't go into it again too much,
but I do have a question in my mind
around this, us including garden waste
in our recycling percentage.
I'm assuming the intention of the original KPI
was to make sure that we're not throwing
too many plastic bottles into the general waste
and to make sure that we were recycling as much as possible.
And it just strikes me that it kind of completely clouds
that picture by us including grass cuttings
within what we consider to be recycling.
I also seem to remember that Tim said
that we get this data from KCC
and we don't have too much control over what we receive.
But I would be interested in at least having a split,
if that was possible, because I'm assuming
the two collections go in different directions.
So it must be that they're added together
to give us this KPI.
But I don't know, obviously, so Gavin?
Gavin Edwards - 0:26:48
Thank you, Chair, and for those comments on that. We can potentially look, can have a
conversation again with the Waste Services Manager on that. We can look to see if there's
any narrative we could add into the report to make that a little bit clearer in terms
of that when the recycling rate is produced, obviously, in the reports coming up throughout
this year. Obviously, with regards to data, yes, it does come from KCC, so there is sometimes
a lag in terms of when we get that data to provide to you, hence in this report as well,
it's been set out in the commentary,
we've only got up to Q1 to Q3,
we are waiting for the final verification on that as well.
But noted comment, and I'll look into that.
Lovely, thank you.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:27:25
And Paul, you have one more?
Just find out.
I've just gone back and had a look
Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:27:30
at what I've written in my notes from March
when we discussed this last.
And as you quite rightly say,
we talked about fly tipping, split the numbers
so we know private, public.
And the other, we had in there,
We said about enforcement, I mean, private we can't do anything about.
But we said about recording the number of CPNs that were issued associated with this.
So again, I think it's, this is the measure that people are looking for.
Where's the penalty for flight shipping?
There's been a lot in the news over the last week, including today actually,
about the derisory level of fines for these,
for people who are flight -hipping on an industrial scale.
And there's nothing we can do about that.
But I just think for those things that we can trace
and that we can do something about,
I think people would welcome the knowledge
that we are following these things up
and we are issuing these notices
and people are being penalised for it.
As I say, it's well up there in terms of the topics
that are being discussed locally and on local radio
and TV at this moment in time.
Not least with the wooded area,
they've just moved 30 ,000 tonnes of waste in Ashford.
So that's it, thank you, Chair.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:28:57
Yeah, Paul, and in actual fact, there is a KPI earlier
that covers CPS successful prosecutions
for things like fly tipping.
And I think the conversation we had at the last meeting
was, I think, were we asking for them to be split out?
And so, for instance, all the fly tipping information
was sort of all in one place.
So you could see a complete view of the problem
rather than have it split out at different points
across the report, I think.
Thank you, Chair, and thank you,
Councillor Thomas for those comments there as well.
Gavin Edwards - 0:29:32
We can look to provide some narrative
in the report going forwards on that.
I can have a conversation with the Environmental Protection
team on that again and see what we can do on that.
Yeah, if I may, it is about visibility, isn't it?
And I think, you know, people come to have a look
Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:29:47
at these reports.
I'm sure they're well viewed online
for that particular issue for those people
who are particularly focused on, you know,
making sure our district is as clean and tidy as it can be.
So, thank you very much, and I really appreciate
if you could do that.
Thanks, Gav.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:30:07
Great, that's excellent. Before we move on are there any further comments or questions?
No?
Ok, so we're asked to look at the following three recommendations to receive and note
the reports, to note the corporate performance report Q4 and the end of year
out turns in appendix 1 and to note the housing performance report Q4 and end of year
So can I have a proposer?
So John and a seconder?
Paul, Abin?
Paul?
And is everyone agreed?
That's great, thank you.
So moving on to item four of the agenda,

4 General Fund Revenue Provisional Outturn 2025/26

this is the general fund revenue provision
in out -turn 2526, and this is going to be introduced by Jonathan Smith.
Jonathan Smith - 0:31:11
Thank you, Chair. So this report is the provisional out -turn for the General Fund revenue account
for 2526 and reports on the full year financial performance. There are three recommendations
which are set out in the report. Section 1 provides an introduction and summary of the
out -turn for the services with key figures such as those in paragraph 1 .4 and 1 .6, and
and this ties into Appendix A,
which is provided with the report.
Appendix B provides more detail on service movements,
which are above 40 ,000 pounds in variance.
Section 2 summarises the out turn in more detail,
highlighting to members the key movements of note,
with sections 3 and 4 highlighting the favourable
and unfavourable other areas to highlight for information.
The reserve's position is detailed at section 5
and linked to Appendix C that's attached to the report,
and Appendix D lists the budget carry -fors,
which have been approved by the Section 151 and the corporate leadership team to address
operational needs and budget caps in the future. It's important to highlight that this out -turn
is provisional. Finance have published draught accounts which remain subject to external
audit. I'm happy to take any questions.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:32:21
Thank you, Jonathan. So, any questions? Abena?
Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly - 0:32:27
This is in relation to this discontinued Kent County Council scheme.
So there's a loss of 2 .404 million from the budgeting.
And I just wanted to know, when did you know that this money was going to be taken out?
And what plans did you make towards that?
and I can see that you are going to use the reserves.
I assume that that amount of money has to be spent,
and that's why it was there.
So how are you going to sort of recuperate
or fill in that hole that's been created
by the loss of 2 .4 million in future
if you can't take from the reserves?
And should I ask another question or do you want to answer that one?
Mr Alan Mitchell - 0:33:30
So obviously you're referring to the 2 .4 in paragraph 2 .2.
So that's obviously by a number of different issues.
So that's more about the rent, the subsidy gap, so in the amount of money that we get
from the government for temporary accommodation to the amount that it costs us to charge.
So that's a significant amount of that,
is in relation to that loss of income.
So we've, in the budget for this year, for 2026,
there's a number of provisions in that,
in terms of increasing the budget provision,
as well as looking at bringing more properties online
to reduce that subsidy gap.
In terms of the loss of income from KCC,
that was around 400 ,000,
and we knew about that last year,
and we built that into our forecast at that point.
So that was kind of a notification of that,
but that 2 .4 isn't solid right into KCC,
there's a number of factors in that.
I have another question,
Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly - 0:34:31
but I would rather somebody else ask a question.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:34:36
We'll come back to you.
Anyone else?
John, Paul.
Everyone's very polite today.
Paul.
Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:34:47
Thank you, Chair. So here's my stuck record bit. 2 .3 of the report, regulatory and community services, favourable variance.
So we've got income from car parking, $694 ,000, higher than we were expecting.
We took a report, didn't we, at OSC about car parking and the cost of giving 20 minutes free parking.
And there were some figures in there which we challenged at the meeting.
And so I just think that this is not, this figure, this theory is above that that we budgeted for.
So I think when we have the discussion, which is when that paper comes back,
we need to make sure that the money that we're talking about in terms of the cost to the council of the additional,
of having 20 minutes free, is well understood in this context, the fact that we're 694k over.
The other point I made in the meeting, which again is related to that,
is the fact that we've got, we've made changes to our car parking arrangement for coastal destinations
where we've moved it from six o 'clock is the free period to eight o 'clock and
that does have an impact on local residents, quite significant impact.
So again I think it's just a comment maybe that going forward when we have
the discussions at a future SE because that paper will be coming back to us, we
remember how this final end -of -year position is and we take that into
consideration with regard to the decisions that we make regarding changing to car parking
in the future.
So that's the first bit.
And the second one in the same area in 2 .3, extended producer responsibility grants, EPR,
what does that actually mean?
I'm being, maybe I'm being a bit thick here.
If you could just tell me what that, I didn't know what that meant.
Thank you.
Jonathan Smith - 0:36:58
So the extended producer responsibility or the EPR grant relates to waste services.
So it's the grant money which is given to us by government for recycling and specifically
for recycling and it's part of that waste.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:37:17
Yeah, go ahead, Paul.
So, yeah.
John?
This is another question about reserves.
Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly - 0:37:31
So it might be that I've misunderstood.
It's in regards to Princess Parade
and the money that we're taking
from financial resilience reserve
to cover the write -off of 3 .4 million.
So what does this do to the council's resilience
because we've taken that money out.
Mr Alan Mitchell - 0:37:55
Thank you for the question, and through you, Chair.
So, in terms of the overall resilience,
so obviously we undertake a review each year
to understand what our demands are coming up,
what our pressures are,
everything that we look at.
Prince of Pray, I think the allocation of those reserves
into the financial stability reserve
happened a couple of years ago,
and it was purposely done to enable that right off to occur.
So that was built into our budgeting and immediate term financial strategy as well,
so that was a known entity, it was more about the timing issue of the planning coming to a conclusion.
But in terms of our overall financial stability, we're still in a very good position,
the out -term has been very positive for this year
and we've been able to crystallise a number of issues,
or not issues, crystallise a number of benefits around business rates.
So that's put us in a fortuitous position as well as putting money aside for LGR.
So in terms of our overall reserve position, despite having this write -off,
it's still in a very healthy position.
Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly - 0:39:09
Okay, I'm glad to hear that you were planning for this, so it was already there.
Okay, thank you.
If I can just hop on that.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:39:14
I had an almost identical question actually about the resilience reserve, but maybe then
a more general question for our understanding.
Would you normally, so would you only put specific items into the financial resilience
reserve?
You wouldn't ever keep an allocated buffer.
you would always have it as an allocated reserve, would you?
Mr Alan Mitchell - 0:39:40
So it is a general reserve. We've named it Fones for Stability Reserve to allow that flattening
out and in this case it was utilised for this specific purpose. There is a slight balance in
there still which is unallocated but in the majority of our reserves, in my reserve particularly,
they are there to fund specific things that are allocated. So for example when we're looking at
the environmental reserve and we're looking at business rate reserves, carriacal reserves
that were there for specific reasons and those funds will be utilised for the purpose of
that reserve setup.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:40:16
Lovely, thank you.
Any other questions, comments?
Paul.
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:40:25
In section 2 .6 of the report, there's an item there, non -service related government grants,
1 .42 million favourable.
It says following LGR review,
it's got historic balances on collection fund
business rates.
What does that actually mean?
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
So,
Jonathan Smith - 0:40:48
this basically, what we did is,
ahead of LGR, we've engaged with some specific experts
on the collection fund.
The collection fund is the two sort of taxes
that we collect.
they are business rates and council tax,
and that creates a collection fund.
Now, without going into too much technical detail,
the collection fund also has entries
on both our balance sheet,
which is basically the balances that we hold,
and what had happened was we performed a review
with our professional advisors,
and they've identified certain balances
that we can clear from the balance sheet
and bring those back into revenue use, as it were.
as a very, very rudimentary way of explaining it,
but basically we have identified some historic balances
that were sitting on our balance sheet,
which we were able to clear off the balance sheet
and put into the business rates reserve
in a nutshell, if that explains.
It does, thank you very much.
Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:41:45
So again, are there other opportunities
through LGR review that where, you know,
there might be opportunities for similar favourable balances.
We'll be looking at it. Thank you.
Thank you, Chair. And thank you, Councillor Thomas.
Jonathan Smith - 0:42:02
It's less likely, because this was a...
The thing about, for example, this particular item,
the collection fund is a very, very technical area,
and we also have quite a challenging and complicated chart of accounts
that sort of underpins our accounts.
So this was part of this review was to sort of go through
that sort of technical, very technical area and identify.
You know, it's not a normal case that you might find
balances that need to be cleared like this.
This is just purely the nature of this particular item,
I'd say.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:42:37
Tim just wants to add a comment there, Paul,
and we'll come back.
I was actually gonna come back on the point
about resilience and the reserves.
Cllr Tim Prater - 0:42:44
I thought table one actually identifies
that resilience quite well in the main body of the report.
So it shows the balances that we had in reserves
at the beginning of the year and at the end of the year.
And you can see that it's gone up about 500 ,000 pounds
in total across earmarked and non -earmarked reserves.
And that includes the Prince's Parade write -off.
So I think that demonstrates that some of the resiliency
is there at this stage.
We budgeted for it, we knew it was coming.
The money was put into a reserve waiting for it.
That's now been gone through in this year.
So it has, it is something we prefer not to have done.
We prefer not to have hatched away, write off, waste money on a project
that we didn't want it to happen and then hasn't happened.
But it has been managed through that process.
And as a part of that resilience,
you will see that the earmarked reserves themselves have gone up in that year.
as part of the number of the roll forwards that have been made in this budget.
So for instance, where we identified in the budget, I said it pretty much out loud like this in February,
that this year's budget is okay, but the next two years are difficult.
They don't balance yet.
There is a gap in the next two years' budgets, the next two years, and we don't know where that money is.
We now do know where that money is.
It's in that earmarked reserve to deal with that shortfall in the next two financial years,
which gives us again that resilience.
Not only could we see that there was a gap there,
we've actually got, we can actually earmark the money
in place to make sure that that doesn't mean
that we have to cut something else
in order to make that budget balance.
So a lot of work has gone in terms of this role for you
in terms of that resilience.
If I could, sorry, go.
If I can just ask Tim a follow up question
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:44:33
and we'll come over to you in a second.
So I think you've answered one of the questions
I was gonna ask actually, Tim, in terms of,
So when you look at the overall results,
so there's a relatively significant overspend of 654 ,000,
and a good amount of that comes from things
that we don't have a lot of control over.
So we had quite a few discussions in the last year
around the rebates and housing benefits issue,
which is a problem, not easy to handle.
And we're balancing the books this year
with a change to MRP, which I completely agree with,
by the way, and then obviously we've got carry forwards
into those, I think, largely earmarked reserves.
I think I'm right in saying.
So the question I had was just in terms of how we feel
about the next few years and the extent to which
we're, our kind of budget is looking artificially good
because of those kind of one -offs.
we can't change MRP every year and get the same kind of impact again.
So it was just looking to, I guess my question was going to be how resilient do we think we are going
into the next couple of years, but I'd be interested if anyone else wanted to add some meat on that.
Mr Alan Mitchell - 0:45:53
Yeah, thank you, Chair. So I think, you know, even though you're quite right in terms of the 654 in
in terms of the head service.
However, there are a couple of the budgets
that are shown within the top part,
but actually the income comes in the second part,
so it's a bit disjointed in that sense.
But the MRP, you're absolutely right,
it's a single year.
That's built into this year,
but also we built it into the budget for 26, seven,
so that benefit is already built into that financial year
and going forward.
but also when we've looked at the we did a full review of reserves as well and part of the benefit
that you see from this year the good financial good out -term position that we've got from this
year is where we've undertaken the review of reserves identified waiver where we can utilise
them where they've not used to being utilised previously and then cleared those out as well so
we've done quite a big review.
And as part of the carry forward,
we obviously do a medium term financial strategy
and for the next two years, the budget gap,
as Tim said, the budget gap that was identified,
effectively we have put money aside
to meet both those two years worth of gaps.
So obviously those are estimates, things change,
things are gonna come out in terms of new demands
and pressures and we will obviously deal with that.
But in terms of the financial resilience,
having that those reserves in place to meet that the two years worth of next
budget gaps puts us in a really good position and it's continuing on. In terms
of things like temporary accommodation we've increased the baseline budget so
we've taken account of what the overspend was this year 1 .04 and we've
increased the baseline budget to deal with that as well as putting strategies
in place that look to reduce that subsidy gap so it's multifaceted
where I'm just assuming a singular thing
and relying on one -offs,
because that's what I don't want to do.
So I wanna have the resilience there,
should we need it,
but also then put things in place
to mitigate that risk in the first place.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:48:06
That's great, thank you.
Paul, I owe you a question.
I was just gonna say,
Tim's response actually answered the question
I was gonna ask,
Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:48:15
because it's got the bottom two lines on that table.
So that makes perfect sense now, thank you.
I did have another question, if I may.
So in Appendix B, online 1561 rent rebates,
we've got the variance there of 1114.
One item on there, lower DWP income of 326K,
is that just a timing issue or is there something else
that sits behind that that we need to know about,
and if it is, then what could we do about that?
I understand the other bits about recovery payments,
you know, that's part of a normal process.
We've got adverse variance due to higher non -HRA rent rebates,
which is the biggest proportion,
but it's got lower DWP income by 326K.
So it's really understanding that,
and to say, is it a timing issue,
or is there something else behind it which we can influence in some way?
Because that's a big figure. It dominates the rest of that table, doesn't it? Thank you.
Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Councillor Thomas.
Jonathan Smith - 0:49:32
So looking at that specific item, I think the DWP income, it's all -encompassing for that particular area.
It's to do with the subsidy gaps. Obviously, we received the rebates and the income from the DWP
in relation to the claims that we make.
It wouldn't be a timing issue necessarily
because a timing issue would be dealt with via an accrual
and that would still be reported in the out -turn.
So it wouldn't be a timing issue,
but it's more to do with the fact
that the subsidy gap effectively,
that's what this is talking about,
but just probably in a bit more detail
in breaking it down into the claims that are made
versus the cost.
that's their cost.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:50:12
John Robina, do you have any further questions?
No, perfect, okay.
I just have one last one.
So in Appendix C,
I think it might be just from my understanding actually,
but so in Appendix C we've got the carry forward section
and it struck me there's an awful lot of stuff
going on in that line
and lots of comments.
And I guess I was expecting lots of
carry forward items in there,
but we're also talking about a number of drawdowns.
So I guess my first question is just explaining
what's happening kind of in that box.
And then I had a specific question around
the 75 ,000 that we were drawing down
in relation to
Folsom's swimming pool,
which I assume isn't to do with the new grant
because I'm guessing that would go through this year.
So I was just wondering what it was.
Mr Alan Mitchell - 0:51:12
Mr Alan Mitchell - 0:51:15
So the Centre for I think that relates to last year.
So that was the grant payment that was already paid out.
So that's why it's that one.
And in terms of drawdown, so a lot of the purpose of a carry
forward reserve is that it's there to fund specific things.
So we're saying that we're going to take budget from this year
and move it into next year to specifically fund certain exos.
Not general, we don't ever purchase 100 grand
and then fund whatever specific things.
So as those particular activities happen,
we then draw down the money from the reserve to fund them.
That's great, thank you.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:51:49
And then looking ahead, so when we pay the grant
to Fokston Swimming Pool, could you just explain
where we would expect to see that going through
the budgets this year as we make the payments?
Mr Alan Mitchell - 0:52:12
So in terms of the 2 .4 million,
so that's through the capital programme, isn't it?
So that grant, as we take these stage payments,
there's obviously requirements on them
to have undertaken certain works,
and as it goes through, and those are signed off
and approve, then you'll see that come through the Council's programme.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:52:34
So if there aren't any other questions or comments,
we can take a look at the three recommendations for members.
The first, which is to receive and note the reports.
The second, which is to note the provisional
out -term surplus of £90 ,000.
And to note the carry forward of £5 ,468 million
of unspent 25 -26 budgets to earmarked reserves.
So if I can ask for a proposer, that'd be Paul.
And a seconder, that's John.
Has everyone agreed?
Thank you.
So we move on to the fifth item.

5 General Fund Capital Programme Provisional Outturn 2025/26

So this is the General Fund Capital Programme,
Provisional Out -Turn 25 -26.
And again, this will be introduced by Jonathan.
Jonathan Smith - 0:53:24
Thank you, Chair. So this report presents the capital outturn for 2526, and the capital
outturn section 2 contains the key information which shows a £3 .6 million underspend. There's
one recommendation with this report for cabinet. The reasons for the underspend are set out
in paragraph 2 .2 of the report with further information explaining the remainder of section
Section 2. The borrowing position and capital financing is dealt with at Section 3 of the
report with the relevant appendices, and Appendices 1 and 2 provide the out -turn summary and the
categorised variance analysis. A capital receipts position at the end of 2526 is set out in
Appendix 3. And finally, the top five notable projects are outlined in Appendix 4. I'm happy
to take any questions.
Thank you Jonathan.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:54:13
Just let people absorb that.
I'm sure there will be some questions.
Whilst people are absorbing that, I'll try and make sense of my own question which
was on Appendix 1
and I think it was item 22, so Lander Otterball Lane.
So first of all, I was struggling a little bit
with this appendix because I couldn't always tell
what item the comments were referring to.
But the question I had was around,
so in the comments we talk about the delays to Otterpool Park
and additional staff costs.
I couldn't work out where in the,
where we were showing those additional staff costs,
which I assume aren't the one and a half million pounds
that are in there. But yeah, maybe you can clarify that for me.
Jonathan Smith - 0:55:42
Thank you, Chair. There are a number of multiple related items on the capital programme. So
obviously you've got item 22, you also have item 25, the further investment, and the staffing
costs will be captured within, I believe, item 25 in terms of the costs and obviously
being a project that's sort of ongoing, you can capitalise those costs and those costs
would be former parts of the capital programme probably, but they will be coming out of,
I believe, item line 25.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:56:15
Is it possible to get a breakdown of that, of those items? And I mean, I was particularly
interested to see what the increased staff costs were.
But I think generally with this appendix, I was maybe I was a bit curious, I don't know,
but I couldn't quite find the answers that were coming to mind when I was looking at
that.
And I think a breakdown of some of those items that have the bigger variances would be quite
helpful for members, I think.
Mr Alan Mitchell - 0:57:00
So I'm sorry, I was just quickly trying to look back through the report just to see where
mentioned about the staff overspend, that was all. But in terms of, yeah, in terms of
breakdown, then yeah, absolutely, we can look to provide a bit more clarity around that
stuff.
Lovely, thank you. Jonathan?
Jonathan Smith - 0:57:22
The capitalised staff cost, is that the overspend you mentioned? Was that?
Mr Alan Mitchell - 0:57:38
If I may, what I think I'll ask the team to do is just go away and make the appendix a
little bit more easy to look at.
Some lines in there.
Unlikely.
I think the glasses aren't getting struck any week, unfortunately.
So we'll look at how we can make that a little bit more easy to read.
Lovely.
Thank you.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:57:58
And I'll also have a look to see where I got that comment relating to Otterpool.
So it could be a, I might be reading across the wrong lines, but I thought I did see that
Mr Alan Mitchell - 0:58:10
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:58:11
it was due to the project with Holmes England taking longer than anticipated yet.
Mr Alan Mitchell - 0:58:17
I can't actually see where it says that now.
There isn't a staff overspend, as far as I'm aware.
Obviously I go through the management accounts of the Otterfall every month.
So there actually isn't a note to spend in terms of staffing.
There is a delay in terms of Homes England and there was a,
obviously we had the first collaboration agreement and then we got into the planning collaboration agreement.
And that's taken longer to start and as such we've had a
reprofiling of that budget, but neither are overspent.
Thank you.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:58:52
I have looked in the report, I can't see in the report either.
Mr Alan Mitchell - 0:58:54
So if there is a section that says that I'm really interested to see where that is.
Yeah, okay.
I'll take a look.
Thank you.
Cllr Alan Martin - 0:59:02
Any other questions or comments?
Paul.
Yeah, thank you, Chair.
Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:59:12
Again, just in relation to Appendix 2, the item 1, recrofiling between 25 and 26 and
26, 27.
So those items are identified there between financial system
down to minor variances.
They're all, they're carried forward
into the next financial year, aren't they?
Okay, I just, it's just terminology, that's all.
I'm just clarifying that.
That's all I care.
John.
I guess more for clarification,
one of the things I picked up,
Cllr John Wing - 0:59:43
when you talk about high swimming pool,
It says Fable variants based on lower gas prices and electricity.
I'd like to know if they get lower gas prices in the present moment.
I mean, we've been talking about overviewing a lot about high swimming pool because we're going to redo it.
And we're told that the gas is incredible and we're not making no money out of it.
I'm just curious how we've managed to provide lower gas and lower electricity.
Have we changed the price or something?
Gone into battle to tell us or?
Mr Alan Mitchell - 1:00:20
So for me, so that's compared to budget. So during the year we I think we
undertook a new laser contract. So we actually had the price we received were
lower than we budgeted. So it's not that we're getting cheap, we're just getting
cheaper than we budgeted for.
We've changed supplies.
Cllr John Wing - 1:00:38
Cllr Alan Martin - 1:00:42
Cllr John Wing - 1:00:45
Cllr Alan Martin - 1:00:55
I think you're correct.
So if you look at the block of text
that starts with second collaboration agreement
to longer than anticipated balance
carried forward to 26, 27,
I've read that complete block
as a block that is actually referring
to three separate projects.
So I think going back to your original point,
if we can show that more clearly with some lines,
I think that would help.
But as John just mentioned,
I think it would be nice for some of those bigger projects
to see a bit of a breakdown so it's a bit clearer
what's going on within them.
Yeah, we're concerning Brian and Berta Clarity.
Mr Alan Mitchell - 1:01:44
Cllr Alan Martin - 1:01:46
Any other comments or questions?
Great, thank you.
We have one recommendation then,
which is simply to receive and note the report.
So if I can ask for a proposer, that's John,
and a seconder, that's Paul, and are we all agreed?
Agreed, thank you.

6 Housing Revenue Account Revenue And Capital Provisional Outturn 2025/26

So the final item then is item number six,
the HRA revenue and capital provision out turned 2526,
which again will be introduced by Jonathan.
Thank you, Chair.
Jonathan Smith - 1:02:23
So this final report, the HRA report, provides a combination of both the revenue and capital
draught out -term position for the HRA for 25 -26.
There are two recommendations for cabinet with this report.
Section 2 of the report deals with the HRA revenue out -term, which shows an underspend,
and the reasons behind that revenue underspend are dealt with throughout section 2 .1 of the
report.
The capital out -term position is dealt with at section 2 .2 of the report, and the large
under spend reported whilst it looks unusual. It's predominantly related to some large capital
schemes slipping into 26 -27, but most of which should complete in this financial year, particularly
around the new bills and acquisitions. But I'm happy to take any questions you may have
on the report.
Cllr Alan Martin - 1:03:10
Thank you, Jonathan. So any questions or comments?
John?
Cllr John Wing - 1:03:20
In section 223, it talks about additional five million added to the budget for interim
accommodation, which hasn't been spent.
Is interim accommodation same as temporary accommodation, or am I getting confused about
something?
Thank you, yes, that's correct.
Jonathan Smith - 1:03:38
That's being used to fund or purchase some of the temporary units that we have been purchasing.
Cllr John Wing - 1:03:48
Okay, just so I know. And the other thing is, is really a positive thing in 2 .211, it
talks about the underspend of the carbon look, the project, and I think we've done really
well, we've actually underspend on the project and got 30 extra homes done. So I think, I
think this committee would like to send a well done, because I think that's very important.
The, you know, reducing people's bills, especially in the winter time. And I think that's very
and you've done well and I think we deserve the team,
sorted it out, deserve a pat on the back,
shall we say, that's all.
Cllr Alan Martin - 1:04:21
Paul.
Yeah, thank you, Chair.
Just one thing for me, in appendix three,
Cllr Paul Thomas - 1:04:28
we've got the capital item there associated with
what we're doing, sorry,
Most of the items on there in the capital have got capital slippage, being the thing that has dictated the carry forward.
Now, the new builds, and we talked about that before, because that is a timing issue, so understand that.
That's what actually got in.
In terms of some of the other work identified on there, you know, so Sange Flats, for example,
EICR remedial items that featured in the KPI,
didn't it, to say that we were outside of our target
for some of that.
So just in terms of the recovery of that,
how are we going to make sure that we deliver
going into 26, 27, and we're not left with,
I would say, year on year carry forwards
in particular areas?
Thank you.
Jonathan Smith - 1:05:39
Thank you, Chair. I mean, I'll have to take that particular question back to our housing colleagues who obviously went into the
maintenance, plan maintenance, but I can certainly come back to you on that. But obviously, yeah, there are a number of items that are listed as capital slippage, as you say.
First, the first one was to being new builds, which are due to complete obviously this year. Carbon improvement works, capital slippage.
I think it's described in the reports partly to do with the sort of capacity of the team,
because obviously we were also working on the social housing decarbonization fund works,
which is the same theme.
It deals with the same sort of reduction in carbon and use of the properties, and so they
just reach capacity once they'd obviously, and we have now completed that social housing
decarbonization wave project.
Those works are complete with the, obviously, the additional 38 units that were reported
above the original plan target 300.
Yes, so again, so my question really is about,
Cllr Paul Thomas - 1:06:40
and I think you've partly answered it,
is about recovering the position to make sure
when we are delivering what we said we're gonna deliver,
going into 26, 27, and we're not having
the same discussion next year,
maybe in the same areas, I don't know,
but you've answered that.
If you could, yeah, that's fine, thank you very much.
Cllr Alan Martin - 1:07:02
Before I bring Tim in, did you want to respond to that?
Jonathan, so will you?
No?
No, Tim?
Yeah, if you're going to use the word sandgate
during a meeting, I'm going to respond to it.
Cllr Tim Prater - 1:07:11
So, I can, the sandgate flats, it was a delayed project,
but I can tell you that the people are on site at the moment
and that balcony is pretty much removed,
the new balcony is on site.
They're currently removing some dust,
which is of concern, wearing hazmat.
but it should all be finished in the next couple of months.
So it genuinely was a project,
that was a project which went longer,
took longer than it wanted to.
Some of the roll forwards are just things
that you would have expected.
When we put the five million extra in
for temporary accommodation,
it was very, and we did that six months ago,
it was very unlikely we were going to be able to find
20 suitable properties to buy and complete
by the 31st of March at any stage.
It was pretty much not going to happen.
and we know we've now secured eight of them,
and we've said, well, there they are on there.
And somebody tried to explain to me,
we'd spent 5 million pounds on eight properties as well.
It's just like, that's not how this works.
We've spent money on eight properties,
the rest of the money is there,
and we're searching the market for them,
but you actually need a specific type of property
to come up with a specific type.
You can't buy something which doesn't exist.
And where we've done that,
where we have bought stuff which doesn't exist,
you can't say when they're going to complete,
and therefore when you're actually gonna have money
for the property and it's gonna be available.
So unfortunately slippage happens all of the time
in some of these things.
Some of those things we build in, it's structural.
We'd like that five million quid.
If you can drop that on the budget in the last four months,
it's almost certain you're gonna roll some of that forward.
Some of it's just things take longer than you want to.
Sandgate Flats, though just a slow project.
And some of it's just about any project
where you're gonna spend X million pounds
over the course of 12 months.
almost inevitably that's always going to roll a bit over the boundary.
It's been a frequent bugbear of all of us that capital projects do not run within their own financial year
because stuff happens and unfortunately stuff is going to continue to happen in terms of delivering these, I think.
Abena.
Cllr Abena Akuffo-Kelly - 1:09:17
I'm wondering if you've sort of answered this because I wanted to ask about the dwelling
rents and the overestimation in regards to when you did your budget setting.
So why were dwelling rents overestimated and how will future estimates be made more accurate?
And is that, I'm wondering if that's because of things not happening according to plan.
And then I just wanted to know when are the 44 Risborough barracks homes now expected to be completed and start to generate rent?
Jonathan Smith - 1:09:55
Thank you, so the in terms of the Risborough barracks, yes quicker and easier one, I believe they're due to complete
this summer
So that was the latest I've heard on it. I don't believe that's changed, but it's due to complete this summer
In terms of the rents, that was dealt with actually
at quarter one, so we brought this committee
to explain the reason behind that.
It's actually quite a technical item
relating to something that happens every seven years.
As it were, we have an additional week of rent
that we charge, and it was just a case of
that additional week not being removed
from our calculations.
It was a simple one -off that we dealt with.
We certainly raised, it was dealt with actually
in the quarter one report brought to this committee.
Cllr Alan Martin - 1:10:44
Any final questions or comments?
Okay, great. So that concludes item number six.
So in terms of recommendations we are asked simply to receive and note the report.
So if I can ask for a proposer.
John and a seconder, Paul.
And is everyone agreed?
Agreed.
Great, so that concludes the meeting.
Thanks Jonathan and Gavin for introducing the items
so well and all the effort going into the reports.
Members for turning out and Jake taking the minutes.
And of course Tim.
So wish you a nice,
wish you a lovely evening when you get home.
Thank you.