Agenda and minutes

Apologies noted above

Members of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee are asked to consider whether they have an interest in any matters on the agenda and, if so, to formally declare that interest.

There were no declarations of interest.

A period of 30 minutes has been set aside for members of the public to ask questions on matters considered at the last meeting and set out in the minutes or on the agenda for tonight’s meeting.

There were no public questions.

Questions are invited from Elected Members about items on the agenda. 15 minutes will be set aside for Member Question Time, if required.

Councillor Bernstein submitted a question in advance of the meeting, along with Councillor M Smith attended and asked a question

Councillor Bernstein raised concerns about the deteriorating financial position, particularly the variance between Quarter 3 and Quarter 4. In response, it was acknowledged that there is indeed concern regarding the outturn position.

However, members were assured that work is actively underway to address the issues. Actions are being implemented through the Finance Board and the Member Assurance Group, with support from external partners. Cabinet will also be receiving regular updates. While the concern is valid, measures are in place to mitigate the risks and improve the financial outlook.

Councillor Smith asked about the accuracy of quarterly forecasting and what steps are being taken to improve it.

It was acknowledged that there have been issues with financial reporting in previous quarters. Members were reassured that improvements are being made to enhance both the confidence in and accuracy of forecasting, and further detail on these improvements will be provided. Neil added that the introduction of a zero-based budget revision is placing the council in a stronger position to balance both in-year and future budgets more effectively.

A follow-up question was raised regarding which services are currently at risk and how confident members can be in the accuracy of savings projections.

In response, it was noted that while some services are under pressure, the revised budgeting approach and enhanced forecasting processes are expected to provide greater accuracy and confidence in identifying and securing savings. The council is now in a better position to manage risks and protect key services.

Minutes from the meeting held on the 4^th June are attached for approval.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 4^th June 2025 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair. The minutes were approved, however an action taken from the previous meeting a response is below.

This related to a question asked by Councillor Birchmore around the sale of Humphrey House. It appears that there no social rent apartments delivered on the site. It is proposed that Humphrey House will be sold at market value to a developer for the delivery of a Build to Rent (BtR) scheme comprising 74 residential apartments, including 15 affordable private rent apartments (20%), which will be allocated to applications registered on the Council’s Affordable Housing Scheme.

Report from the Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation Councillor Sean Thorpe attached

The meeting began with Councillor Thorpe, Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation, presenting an overview of the Outturn Report. He highlighted a 2% overspend on the revenue budget, with a significant £3.6 million overspend in Adult Social Care (ASC). He acknowledged that while some of this was mitigated by savings in other departments (£6.3 million), concerns remained about the sustainability of the budget, especially with reserves running low and a forecast funding gap for 2025/26.

Councillor Moss raised concerns about the recurring nature of the Adult Social Care (ASC) overspend, questioning whether the issue was likely to continue. Councillor Thorpe responded that the recurrent element had already been reduced and that savings models were being developed. He attributed part of the problem to implementation challenges with the Controc system, a lack of best practice, human error, and the impact of local-level budget reductions.

Will Blandamer added that although ASC had broadly balanced its budget over recent years, the size and complexity of the overall budget made it difficult to track changes accurately. He explained that the issue stemmed from how joint care packages were recorded and reconciled between systems, and noted that training had been delivered to address this.

Adrian Crook highlighted that new data control checks had been introduced and that significant efficiencies had been identified over the past few years. He assured the committee that a robust savings programme was in place, supported by external consultants.

Councillor Marsden asked whether the issue was recurrent. Neil Kissock confirmed that the £4 million gap was current and recurrent, but the specific error was not expected to recur due to system improvements. Councillor Thorpe emphasized that the reporting had been inaccurate, but a thorough diagnostic had been conducted, and new oversight mechanisms were now in place.

Councillor Rydeheard asked how confident the team was in delivering the required savings. Neil Kissock responded that savings delivery was now a standing agenda item and that significant savings were expected from SEND transport reforms. Councillor Birchmore questioned whether the ASC overspend would affect other council services. Councillor Thorpe reassured members that the overspend had already decreased and that regular reviews were in place to maintain oversight.

Councillor Pilkington inquired about school transport innovation. Councillor Thorpe acknowledged the pressure but noted that the council was exploring more efficient delivery models. Neil Kissock added that route optimization was being reviewed in collaboration with Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM).

Councillor Moss asked about the insurance fund reserve. A written response clarified that the reserve is used for self-insurance and managing liabilities, with actuarial advice from Gallagher’s and oversight from external auditors.

Further questions from Councillor Moss and others explored whether all directorates were under pressure to deliver savings. Councillor Thorpe confirmed that savings were being sought across the council, with a focus on consistency and best practice.

Councillor Rydeheard raised concerns about planning fee increases and their impact on residents and businesses. Neil Kissock explained that the increase was intended to boost capacity and was in line  ...  view the full minutes text for item OSC.60

Any other business which by reason of special circumstances the Chair agrees may be considered as a matter of urgency.

There was no urgent business.