BCP's £4.6 Million Overspend May Not Be the Biggest Financial Concern

The Bournemouth Echo has reported that BCP Council ended the 2025/26 financial year with a £4.6 million overspend, largely driven by increasing demand in Children's and Adult Social Care. That figure has understandably attracted attention. However, after reading the financial reports being considered by BCP's Overview and Scrutiny Board, it is clear that the overspend may be only part of a much bigger financial picture.

The report confirms that Children's Services overspent by £9.1 million during the year, while Adult Social Care overspent by £5.6 million. It also reveals that the number of children in care increased from 556 to 643 in a single year, a net increase of 87 children compared with an increase of just 17 the previous year.

Nobody should underestimate the pressures this places on local government. Supporting vulnerable children and adults is one of the most important responsibilities any council has However, residents are entitled to ask whether the council's financial planning remains sustainable if these trends continue.

The SEND Challenge

One of the most significant long term issues highlighted in the report relates to Special Educational Needs and Disabilities. BCP's accumulated Dedicated Schools Grant deficit now stands at approximately £180 million. The report further forecasts that SEND-related expenditure could exceed available funding by a further £200 million over the next two years. The Government is currently considering options to address these historic deficits nationally and proposals could see around 90% of the accumulated deficit removed. While that would be welcome news, BCP would still need to find approximately £36 million itself.

That raises an obvious question: where will that money come from?

A Growing Concern About Council Assets

Another section of the report reveals a concern that has received far less public attention. BCP's Chief Finance Officer warns that the condition of council assets is becoming an increasing risk following years of underinvestment in repairs and maintenance. The report states that funds have been set aside to deal with immediate issues affecting a number of assets considered to pose significant risks. It also proposes a full condition survey of the council's estate, alongside new maintenance and inspection programmes.

Perhaps most notably, the council has chosen not to make additional debt repayments that had previously been budgeted. Instead, those resources are being retained because of concerns about the condition of some council buildings. These are not routine observations. They suggest that the scale of the maintenance challenge may be significant.

Do The Numbers Stack Up?

The Medium Term Financial Plan also refers to delivering future capital receipts through asset disposals. In principle, there is nothing wrong with selling surplus assets where it makes financial sense to do so. However, residents may reasonably ask how a strategy reliant on future asset disposals sits alongside warnings that parts of the council's estate require significant investment following years of underinvestment.

The council is also pursuing investment in Civic Hubs as part of its longer-term accommodation strategy. Supporters will argue that this will create efficiencies and reduce running costs in future years. The question residents are entitled to ask is whether the expected savings and capital receipts are sufficient to offset the significant financial pressures identified elsewhere in the report.

Questions Residents Deserve Answered

The current administration will rightly point out that many of these pressures are national in nature and that councils across the country face similar challenges. However, the administration has now been responsible for BCP Council for more than three years and has set multiple budgets during that period.

Residents have faced significant council tax rises and have repeatedly been told that difficult decisions were necessary to place the council's finances on a sustainable footing.

It is therefore entirely reasonable to ask:

• Were the social care pressures adequately anticipated?
• What is the long-term plan for managing the SEND deficit?
• What is the true scale of the council's maintenance backlog?
• Which assets are considered significant risks?
• How much borrowing and how many asset disposals will be required in the coming years?
• Are BCP's finances genuinely becoming more sustainable?

The £4.6 million overspend may be the headline but the bigger story emerging from the council's own financial reports may be the combination of rising social care costs, a substantial SEND funding challenge, growing concerns about council assets and a financial strategy that depends heavily on future savings, investment and asset disposals.

Those are the issues that deserve the closest scrutiny.