Agenda item

Members gave consideration to a report which presented the Medium-Term Financial Plan (MTFP) for 2025/26 onwards, alongside the 2025/26 Budget and the Capital Programme from 2025/26 to 2029/30.

The Leader made the following budget speech to Council in presenting the report:

“This report sets out the medium-term financial plan for 2025-26 onwards. The purpose of the medium-term financial plan is to set out robust overall framework for the Council's financial strategy and spending plans over the next five years in support of delivering the corporate plan. The report sets out the revised financial plans with the financial analysis for changes in government funding, the economic environment, local engagement and the priorities of the council. The plan reflects the revisions to previous estimates and covers the period of 2025-26 to 2029-30. The medium-term financial analysis includes the budget for 2025-26 for approval. A balanced budget for 2025-26 is proposed without the requirement to support it with funds from the general fund balance.

The final local government finance settlement was delivered in February, which announced a further five years new homes bonus in 2025-26, which will be put into the growth reserve. The reset of the business rates and the wider review of the local government funding were not announced, and they are now expected during 2025. It is likely that these will result in a reduced funding for the council.

The referendum limit for council tax has been set for district councils at up to 3% or £5 whichever is the higher. For 2025-26, the West Lindsey part of council tax is increased by 2.98%. This equates to a rise of £7.21 for a Band D property. The 2025-26 budget totals £21.155 million and is fully funded and represents a balanced budget.

The capital programme totals £13.79 million over a medium-term financial plan and is fully funded. During 2025-26, plans will be developed and expanded in the capital programme to deliver the priorities on leisure and wellbeing and improve access to health services whilst addressing inequalities. As and when these plans are developed, these will be shared with Members at the earliest opportunities.

Also included in the medium-term financial plan are the risk register, at appendix 2, and the Pay Policy Statement and Human Resources Statement in appendices 13 and 14 respectively.

Our engagement with the peer challenge review process in January highlighted that it would be beneficial for us to have a greater level of direction and clarity on our priorities in the Executive Business Plan in order that these progress and can be quickly achieved in terms of delivering our priorities. It would not have made sense to present one plan only to present a refreshed version in a few weeks' time. So common sense has prevailed, and this will be presented to Members in June and it will include:

1.    an extension of the work around health and wellbeing through high level work with partners to facilitate improved GP provision across Gainsborough and the district.

2.    to improve opportunities for increased access to leisure and preventative help opportunities through a refurbishment of the West Lindsey Leisure Centre, and improvements to Market Rasen Leisure Centre, and improved access to a green space and woodland on both Leisure Centre sites, and in Gainsborough and Market Rasen, and to include improved swim and changing facilities and the provision of an indoor bowls area.

3.    to consolidate the work around the excellent cinema and heritage projects in Gainsborough through the provision of further grant funding opportunities to support property owners and businesses to enable them to deliver high quality retail and hospitality opportunities and attract new businesses in the town.

4.    we will be continuing with the community grants programme, a scheme that has enabled communities across the district to access funding to improve their local facilities and increase social activity in their areas.

5.    to bring Gainsborough in line with Market Rasen, we’ll be introducing two hours free car parking to support businesses in the town.

I, therefore, Chairman, move the paper and the recommendations.”

The Leader of the Opposition, in responding, raised concerns regarding the delay of the Executive Business Plan. He recognised the comments of the Leader in relation to the peer review, however suggested that the delay with the Plan could lead to a lack of detail coming forward which could impact the finances related to project delivery. He welcomed the budget paper as a true and accurate reflection of current finances, a balanced budget, and future estimates, but questioned whether it would remain so when considered alongside the Executive Business Plan.

By right of reply, the Leader reiterated the purpose of the peer review being to improve, to listen, and to learn, and that a key recommendation had been relating to the Executive Business Plan. He accepted the timing had not been ideal, however offered assurance to the Leader of the Opposition and all present that the work on the Plan was being undertaken in a timely manner and would be an improved version, taking on board the feedback received from the peer review and subsequent discussions.

Having had the recommendations contained within the report seconded as written, the Chairman opened the debate.

Members of the Committee praised the work which went into the preparation of the budget, MTFP and associated workstreams, recognising the efforts of Officers at a time of local and national change and uncertainty. Further concerns were raised regarding the delayed Executive Business Plan, however the explanations provided by the Leader were appreciated.

Members voiced support for continued funding for community projects which benefitted the district as a whole, recognising that the support offered to local communities created opportunities for grass root involvement. In accepting that the rate of Council Tax was increasing, Members highlighted the lack of clarity regarding funding from Central Government, and reiterated previously voiced concerns that Lincolnshire had been, and continued to be, chronically underfunded. In view of this, the funding streams available to local communities was evermore important.

Councillor L. Rollings, as Deputy Leader, reiterated the importance of community funding, noting that a map had been developed showing the spread of funding across the district. With regard to the projects underway in the market towns, she highlighted the ongoing challenges of retaining retail outlets in town centres, stating a desire for a renewed focus on attracting retailers to the towns and supporting the improvement works underway, for example the development in Gainsborough. With regard to health and wellbeing, she noted the disparity in access to services, and recognised the interaction between activity levels and wellness. She highlighted work which was already underway and the desire for the council to work with other sectors in order to improve service provision in the district, including ways of using the leisure centres to improve access. The co-ordinated use of green spaces, for example for walking clubs or simply as an accessible space, was also seen as a way to connect people across the district with options for improving health and wellbeing. It was anticipated that the availability of grant funding for the communities would further support these efforts, by enabling local people manage their own areas and activities.

The Chairman, in summarising the debate and bringing it to a close, highlighted the need for Members to support and champion their communities, whether that be by supporting with funding requests, or spreading the word of community events. He thanked Members for their comments and, having had the recommendations proposed and seconded, highlighted it was to be a recorded vote as per regulations.

On being put to the vote, votes were cast in the following manner:

For: Councillors Bailey, Barrett, Bierley, Boles, Bridgwood, Brockway, Brown, Bunney, Carless, Clews, Darcel, Dobbie, Flear, Fleetwood, Key, Lawrence, Lee, Morris, Mullally, Palmer, Patterson, Pilgrim, Rodgers, Rollings, Smith, J. Snee, M. Snee, Swift, Velan, Westley, and Young (31)

Against: Nil (0)

Abstentions: Nil (0)

With a total of 31 votes in favour, no votes against and no abstentions it was

            RESOLVED that

a)    the external environment and the financial challenges which the Council could face in the medium to longer term depending on the outcome of future government policy be recognised; and

b)    the Statement of the Interim Director of Finance and Assets (Section 151 Officer) on the Robustness of Estimates and Adequacy of Reserves at paragraph 1.10 be ACCEPTED; and

c)    the Medium-Term Financial Plan 2025/26 to 2029/30 be APPROVED and Members be aware of the risks associated with it as detailed at appendix 2; and

d)    the formal Council Tax resolution as detailed in Appendix 8, this proposes a Band D equivalent amount of £248.76, be APPROVED; and

e)    the Revenue budget 2025/26 detailed at paragraph 1.4 be APPROVED; and

f)     the movement in earmarked reserves detailed at paragraph 1.6 be APPROVED; and

g)    the level of fees and charges for 2025/26 as detailed at appendix 3 be APPROVED; and

h)    the Capital Investment Strategy at Appendix 4 be APPROVED; and

i)     the capital Programme 2025/26 – 2029/30 and financing as detailed at Appendices 5 and 6 be APPROVED; and

j)     the Treasury Management Strategy 2025/26 be APPROVED and the Treasury Investment Strategy, the Borrowing Strategy and the Treasury and Borrowing Prudential Indicators detailed at Appendix 7 be ADOPTED; and

k)    the Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) Policy as contained in the Treasury Management Strategy at Appendix 7 be APPROVED; and

l)     the 2025/26 Pay Policy Statement at appendix 13 be APPROVED; and

m)  delegation be given to the Corporate Policy and Resources Committee to approve any change to an existing Fees and Charges required during the year, which are required after the budget is set.