Issue - meetings

Following scrutiny, the report was noted.

Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack.

In relation to the levelling up fund, members noted that there was no reference to the Port Talbot and transport project. Members queried if there had been any funding spent in relation to the project.

Officers confirmed that there has been a limited spend on projects, in particular the Port Talbot project. In relation to the bridge project, it was confirmed that the authority are still waiting for the offer letter. It is likely that the recent general election has caused a delay in certain items from central government.

Members referred to the overall capital budget, and expressed their confusion with regards to how certain items outlined within the report fall under a capital budget. The council’s website provides some narrative in terms of what falls under the capital budget however the report outlines some items which fall under it which members consider do not fall under the definition of capital budget. The example of free school meals was considered. Member suggested that there should be more of an explanatory comment outlining what investments are.

In relation to Free School Meals grants that are received and identified in the capital budget, officers confirmed these tend to relate to the infrastructure projects i.e. new school kitchens, which are being funded by the grants.

Members noted their concern where the report referred to ‘other investment.’ This does not clearly identify what the funding relates to. Officers acknowledged this concern and agreed to provide further detail in future reports.

Members queried, given the significant underspend of the £6.156m of the Capital Programme for 2023/24, what lessons have been learned concerning the planning and execution of capital projects and will these lessons be used to inform future projects and capital project timelines to ensure an increase in accuracy in forecasting. Officers noted that there were often third parties involved in projects, and the authority cannot control the actions of the third parties. It was considered that the authority has good methodology in terms of capital project management, but there are often delays in grants and supplementary grants coming being received by the authority.

Following scrutiny, the report was noted.