The New Forest District Council Cabinet met to discuss the financial monitoring report and the ongoing issues with the new waste collection service. The Cabinet approved noting the latest budget forecasts for the General Fund, Housing Revenue Account (HRA), and Capital, and recommended that the council continue with the planned roll out of the new waste collection service, despite a motion to suspend phases 2 and 3. They agreed to continue to work on a business case to extend the behind gate policy beyond the pannage¹ period.

Waste Collection Service

The Cabinet addressed a motion to suspend phases 2 and 3 of the new waste collection service, but ultimately decided to proceed as planned with the roll out. Councillor Jill Cleary, Leader of the Council, clarified that the item was included on the agenda as a matter of urgency, following an Extraordinary Council meeting held on 28 August 2025, due to the upcoming phase two roll-out and the need to conclude the matters raised by the motion at the Council's next ordinary meeting on 15 September 2025.

Councillor Wade, who proposed the motion at Full Council, highlighted the need for a fit-for-purpose service for residents, noting the numerous complaints and pending responses from customer services. Councillor Wade expressed concerns that the roll out had not been properly planned, resulting in unbudgeted expenditure, and requested a pause to address these issues before continuing with future phases.

Councillor Heron declared a non-pecuniary interest as he had been a practising commoner, his brother was the Official Verderer and that he was a member of the New Forest Association.

The Cabinet acknowledged the disruptions experienced during phase one and offered apologies to residents. They recognised the need to resolve issues swiftly while also acknowledging the advantages of the new service. The Strategic Director – Place, Operations and Sustainability reported that missed collections were decreasing and crews were adapting to new routes.

The Cabinet agreed to a change in approach to food waste collection during the pannage period, asking residents within the perambulation² to keep food caddies behind gates. They also gave an in principle agreement to extend the behind gate policy beyond pannage, subject to a business case, and the Waste Programme Board will retain oversight of implementation, receiving a Phase 2 plan and updated risk assessment.

The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Corporate estimated that delaying the roll out could cost around £2.5 million, and that a short pause would not resolve ICT issues and would impact contractors. Concerns were also raised about potentially missing the deadline for food waste collection, which could put government grants at risk.

The Cabinet supported further engagement sessions for ward councillors throughout the phased roll out to support their role within their local communities.

Financial Monitoring Report

The Cabinet reviewed the Financial Monitoring Report, which provided an update on the General Fund, HRA, and Capital budgets for the 2025/26 financial year. The report highlighted a need for an additional £258,000 within the General Fund, a balanced position within the HRA, and an increase of £2.093 million in the capital programme, mainly due to rephasing of 2024/25 activity.

Councillor Jeremy Heron, Portfolio Holder for Finance and Corporate, presented the report, noting that it was the first financial monitoring report of the financial year. He highlighted rephasings from the previous year, including £896,000 from the General Fund, £1.931 million for the capital programme, and £60,000 within the HRA.

Other variations related to the refuse and recycling service, including the council utilising an additional £151,000 grant from DEFRA to support the new service. An additional £150,000 had been agreed by the Section 151 officer³ to allow the service to start planning and commence a trial of food caddies behind gates in areas within the perambulation where there were free roaming animals.

The Assistant Director of Finance, Paul Whittles, highlighted that the pay award had been agreed with an increase of 3.2%.

A non-Cabinet member questioned the behind the gates trial, asking why the expenditure had not been budgeted for. Another member felt that a more comprehensive audit prior to the introduction of the new service would have identified the need for this expenditure.

Councillor Heron responded that the council had sufficient reserves to draw upon for the service change, and that it was understandable that changes and adaptations would be required to address issues.

The report noted that grant funding of £151,000 from DEFRA would be received to support the new waste service roll out. Additional costs for the refuse and recycling service included:

• £25,000 for operations administration due to additional agency cover.
• £67,000 for drivers, as they are being appointed earlier than budgeted.
• £59,000 for a narrow access round to stabilise collections at properties requiring narrow access resources.
• £88,000 for waste transition, including waste advisors, a customer services officer, and extended programme support.
• £150,000 for a trial period for collection of waste from behind property gates.
• £19,000 for an additional waste supervisor.

The report also noted that the council anticipates a favourable interest receivable position compared to budget, and that just over £100,000 of the £500,000 Devolution and LGR Reserve has been spent or committed to date on preparations for Local Government Reorganisation.

Leader's Announcements

Councillor Cleary reported that the 'Case for Change' had been published, representing joint work by the 12 Hampshire councils to develop the future of local government across Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. The Case for Change draws on evidence and engagement with residents and partners to ensure community views are reflected. The council will consider the Case for Change through the Overview and Scrutiny Panel and Council discussions. Councillor Cleary stated that the ultimate decision about local government reorganisation rests with the government, not with New Forest District Council.