Kent County Council's budget plans: why the small print matters
County Hall's risk register paints a gloomy scenario if things go wrong
There has not been a great deal to cheer about at County Hall in the last few months and the gloomy mood continued when county councillors met to decide the authority’s budget for 2025-26.
While all parties shared in the pain, the Conservative administration had decided there wasn’t much point in trying to gloss over the financial carnage and another increase in council tax bills.
It was particularly galling for the Tory-led administration to outline the consequences of its spending plans without the cover it may have hoped for - even expected - in the form of an exciting new devolution venture.
The government had pulled the rug on Kent and Medway council’s plea to be among councils joining the first “priority” wave of those keen to grasp some of the devolution cake.
That might have helped sugar the pill of a budget squeeze which will mean more pain and less gain and for those with strong constitutions, the council’s budget risk register gives you a flavour of what will happen if the plans unravel.
KCC’s register is several pages long and a bit like the “terms and conditions” attached to contracts or deals - hurriedly passed over with the usual caveats about the company being blameless if things should go awry. It’s no surprise to see that the care of vulnerable people tops the list, with the register detailing in a pretty blunt way how the market in the social care sector is in a slump with many deciding to give up:
“The more providers that exit in this unplanned manner further depletes choice and capacity to meet need, which can create pressures in the system regarding throughput and discharge from hospital thus potentially increasing price.”
This issue is nothing new, of course. We’ve had endless circular arguments about who is to blame, but progress on this seems painfully slow. On a scale of 1 to 5, the ranking for this sector is 4 —considered likely to happen.
Then there is the ongoing cash crisis affecting the care of school children with special needs, with the numbers identified as having high-need support rising alarmingly - but no extra cash available.
It’s a familiar picture for the council’s role in disposing of household rubbish: the growth in population has led to increased demand and the council says it needs to refurbish existing sites and build two new ones at a cost of £50million - but that is money it does not have.
The all-too-familiar theme continues with what is identified as a:
“new risk of highways failures due to inadequate provision for inflation in DFT grants and KCC capital borrowing, leading to reduction in real terms value of grant funding to the quantum of asset.”
The register says the £700m - yes, that’s right - backlog of road repair work will increase exponentially. The risk represents the level of annual inflation required to mitigate this risk or accept that the asset will deteriorate.
Overall, the potential risks associated with the budget total an eye-watering £129m and are rated at level four - second highest - likely to happen.
What does that mean for Kent County Council?
Put plainly, if existing plans to balance the books, implement savings and generate income fail to address the shortfall, then they will need to look elsewhere. That could be “temporary unbudgeted funding from reserves” - a sensitive area given the need for councils to retain a certain level of “rainy day” money.
Of course, KCC can claim to have set a balanced budget but that is merely a budget in which a council’s revenue must equal its expenditure.
It is not open to councils to do otherwise; if they try to, they run the risk of being taken over and can be threatened with a Section 114 notice, effectively making it bankrupt.
So, the continuing pall of gloom over County Hall is hardly surprising but coming in an election year, is a particularly challenging one to present to sceptical voters.