Disheartening news has recently emerged from our Cabinet and Finance Officers. The so-called “balanced budget” of this February now predicts a £8.9 million deficit by the end of the fiscal year, writes Reform UK councillor Andrew O’Neil.

At the recent All Member Briefing and Financial Stability Working Group meetings, Members learnt that the vital, statutory provision of Children’s and Young People’s Services has been ineptly mismanaged. Cabinet Members and Officers had budgeted for expenditure for far fewer places in Residential Care than needed and the number this year, to date, has risen well beyond the forecast number. Consequently £6.2 million that should have been ring-fenced, in our opinion, and set aside as a reserve fund is now a shortfall.

Basic statistical analysis by the Reform UK Group of councillors of the data the Finance Officers have of the year ending February 2026, and available at the time the budget was set, clearly shows that the now current number of children’s residential care places could have been correctly forecast in advance for the 2025/26 year and therefore should have been correctly budgeted for.

We arrived at our retrospective projection by constructing a statistical-control chart for the Finance Officer supplied data of the number of children in care monthly for the ten months prior to February this year (when the budget was set). The control chart is simply the monthly number of care placements plotted as a scatter graph with a horizontal line showing the mean number of placements and upper and lower limits about the mean based on the scatter about this (i.e. the dispersion or standard-deviation). Using 3 standard deviations for the scatter we found that a likely upper limit for the number of places to budget for (rounded up to the nearest whole number) to be exactly the number we now have of children in care and therefore certainly a far more accurate number than that used in the budget setting.

Statistical control charts such as Reform UK Group’s are relatively easy to construct and are widely used in industry and also in finance. This therefore begs the question: why was such statistical analysis not performed by our finance officers?

Added to this, has been another incorrect estimate of the income from our Council-run secure home for girls aged between 10 and 17 years: Clare Lodge. This provides the Council with income but the forecast revenue from this was overly ambitious. Fewer placements taken up this fiscal year is forecast to see £2.7 million less in income than anticipated.

It would appear that in setting the budget, for Children’s and Young People’s Services, Cabinet and Finance Officers select the amounts to budget for expenditure, perhaps to suit the prevailing agenda, often underestimating the real cost and overestimating the forecast income. But from a commercial perspective, doing this is a recipe for disaster.

The risk is that we will see Officers borrowing more money to fund the £8.9 million shortfall, in creasing our Council’s already monumental debt, which will leave as lasting legacy yearly increases

in Council Tax to repay the compound interest and capital (MRP). Alternatively, our community assets, such as libraries, could be further put at risk of disposal to cover for this ineptitude.

In the private sector, those responsible for similar mismanagement would likely be held account able, provided with a cardboard box and escorted off-site. Why is it the case at Peterborough City Council that Cabinet Members and Council Officers can make such poor financial decisions and then simply shrug them off and make statements along the lines of ”things will get better” the following fiscal year.

At our last Full Council Meeting on 14th October I questioned the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People’s Services, Cllr Katy Cole, about the forecast budget deficit and asking for the Cabinet Members and Officers responsible for the forecast deficit of £8.9 million to show leadership and accountability – to act with honour and integrity by resigning. However, my question about the budget shortfall was met with a highly politicised reply and personal criticism.

Residents rightly wish to see more accountability, transparency and better financial management from our Council.