Purpose

To note the outturn position for the year and approve carry forward requests.

Decision

RESOLVED that the Cabinet:

·       Notes the 2025/26 capital programme outturn position, subject to completion of the external audit of the Council's accounts as summarised in Annex A.

·       Approves carry-forwards of £45.329m from the 2025/26 capital programme into 2026/27, subject to the scheme-level review and commentary set out in the annexes to this report. The largest carry forwards are summarised in Annex B

·       Approves those carry forwards for schemes in Annex C which require Cabinet approval in accordance with the council’s financial regulations.

·       Notes the financing of 2025/26 capital expenditure and the resulting impact on the Council's capital financing requirement.

·       Notes the delivery analysis included in the report and supports the proposed approach to improved capital programme management, including clearer classification of schemes, more realistic profiling of expenditure and further challenge of schemes with low or no in-year delivery.

·       Recommends to Council the approval of the supplementary capital approval of £180k to fund the outstanding retention works on Binfield Community Hub as outlined in paragraph 6.20.

Reasons for the decision

The recommendations allow the Council to close the 2025/26 capital monitoring cycle, confirm the outturn position and ensure that expenditure incurred during the year is financed in accordance with statutory requirements and the Council's approved financial framework. The approval of carry-forward budgets is necessary where schemes remain approved, committed or otherwise required to continue into 2026/27.

The recommendations also respond to the wider delivery pattern within the programme. The outturn position indicates that a significant proportion of the approved budget has not been spent in the year in which it was profiled. Approving carry-forward allows necessary schemes to continue, but the report also recognises that the Council needs stronger management information to distinguish between expected multi-year delivery and avoidable slippage. The revised delivery classification analysis is intended to support that improvement.

The analysis in this report groups schemes by delivery characteristics. This distinction matters because carry-forward on a major multi-year project, or on a scheme dependent on government grant conditions, planning consent, school delivery timetables or partner-led activity, has a different implication from carry-forward on an approved scheme that has not progressed beyond feasibility or initial review.

Alternative options considered

Cabinet could decide not to approve some or all of the carry-forward requests. This option is not recommended where schemes are committed, legally or contractually required, grant-funded, part of an approved multi-year programme or required to meet Council priorities. In those circumstances refusing such carry-forwards would risk stopping schemes that remain valid and may create financial, operational or reputational consequences.

A more selective approach to carry-forward could be appropriate where schemes are no longer aligned with Council priorities, remain at an early feasibility stage without a clear delivery route, or have not demonstrated sufficient progress. The report therefore recommends approval of the overall carry-forward position while also highlighting the need for continued review of schemes with limited or no in-year delivery. This gives Cabinet assurance that carry-forward is not being treated as automatic, but as part of a more disciplined capital programme management process.