Agenda item

The purpose of this report is to present the final accounts of the Basingstoke Canal for the year ended 31 March 2021, the forecast outturn for the year ending 31 March 2022 as at September 2021, and the Forward Budget for the year ending 31 March 2023 to the Joint Management Committee for approval.

Declarations of interest:

None

Officers:

James Taylor, Strategic Manager – Basingstoke Canal 

Key points raised during the discussion:

1.    The Chairman noted that the purpose of the report was to present the final accounts of the Basingstoke Canal for the year ended 31 March 2021, the forecast outturn for the year ending 31 March 2022 as at September 2021, and the Forward Budget for the year ending 31 March 2023 to the Joint Management Committee for approval. The Strategic Manager made the following points:

a.    That there was a £32,000 surplus, including £1000 interest, which was largely due to slipped works not carried out during the year.

b.    The net financial impact due to COVID was fairly small.

c.     Staffing costs were underspent due to there being a number of vacancies.

d.    Canal maintenance was significantly underspent due to slipped works.

e.    Income was under budget due to lost bookings and shop sales. This was offset due to the increase in boat licencing.

f.      The revised budget for the present financial year reflected the slipped works from the previous year. 

g.    A budget for a Tree Officer post had been moved from the staffing budget to the maintenance budget to allow Surrey County Council’s Arboriculture Team to undertake works on a contract basis. It was noted that works had been completed in the Surrey area and were beginning in the Hampshire area.

h.    The forecast budget for 21/22 was generally on budget.

i.      Restrictions had continued to affect bookings and that a wet summer had caused limits in camping.

j.      Income budget had been increased to reflect the increase in boat licences which was expected to continue.

2.    The JMC had a short discussion on the dredging of the canal. It was noted that there were different types of dredging, spot dredging and systematic dredging. Spot dredging funding would come out of the maintenance budget and ideally would be undertaken but the Canal’s dredger but noted that it was currently broken. If unable to be fixed going forward, officers stated that contractors may need to be brought in to complete works. Systematic dredging had not been completed since 2002 and was a very complicated subject with positives and negatives attached. Members noted that there was no maintenance provisioning the budget and that provision in the capital budget had been relocated to other projects.

3.    A Member asked whether any grants had been received throughout the pandemic. Officers stated that the canal was local authority funded an mostly ineligible for grants.

4.    The JMC noted that there was no current plans for signposting work on the canal due to other matters taking priority.

5.    The Strategic Manager explained that there was no disbenefit in drawing on the expertise of Surrey County Council’s Arboriculture Team when required in comparison to having a specific Arboriculture post in the canal’s team. There was still a cost to using the service but it was usual practice to have an arrangement like this with one of the partner authorities.

Actions/ further information to be provided:

None.

Resolved:

It was agreed:

1. That the final accounts for the 2020/21 financial year be approved by the Committee.

2. That the Committee approves the revised budget for the 2021/22 financial year.

3. That the Committee notes the forecast outturn for the 2021/22 financial year.

4. That the Committee approves the forward budget for the 2022/23 financial year.