Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Freeman, Dwyer-McCluskey & Sharp.

There were no declarations of interest declared at the meeting.

His Worship, The Mayor, reported that there were no urgent items of business for consideration this evening.

His Worship, The Mayor, informed Council that there would be a Fish & Chip Charity Quiz Night, on Friday, 20 March 2026, in the Assembly Room, Town Hall and that all Members, family and friends would be most welcome to attend.

The Leader of the Council reported that after the recent Norfolk County Council (NCC) meeting held last Tuesday, that it would be appropriate for him to update Council in regard to Devolution and Local Government Review (LGR) this evening.

The Leader reported that he was not supportive of LGR for Norfolk, and he had been vocal to this effect on many occasions, and that there were Members across the Chamber who shared his view. However, he was in favour of Devolution and the monies that it would bring to Norfolk & Suffolk over 30 years with an elected Mayor. The Government had said that as part of the Priority Programme, Councils in those areas would have to reorganise and all two tier authorities would be abolished by the end of this Parliament.

This Council agreed on 24 September 2025 to submit, together with Breckland, Broadland, Kings Lynn & West Norfolk, North Norfolk & Norwich City, a joint proposal for 3 Unitary Councils for Norfolk. There were two other submissions, one for a single unitary and for a two unitary.

On 4 December 2025, the Government said that the Mayoral elections due to be held in May 2026 would be pushed back to 2028, but LGR would continue and Norfolk & Suffolk would form a CCA under the current legislation. This meant that the funding and powers for Norfolk and Suffolk would be considerably less than anticipated.

The Leader further reported that after consulting with the CEO, Monitoring Officer and the LGR Working Group, a letter was sent, detailing that this Council firmly recommended that the county elections should go ahead in May 2026. All Members were sent a copy of the letter which was also shared with his fellow Norfolk Leaders.

However, an order was laid before Parliament cancelling the elections in 30 areas with Norfolk being one of those areas. On 16 February 2026, the Secretary of State wrote to all Leaders informing them that he had withdrawn his decision to postpone the Council elections, again which was shared with all Members.

In the meantime, Monitoring Officers had been working on the Statutory Change Order (SCO), in consultation with both the CEO and Leaders in regard to their response. Once again, this went through the LGR Working Group where our response was agreed and this was submitted to MCHLG yesterday.

The Leader explained that on Thursday of last week, he had joined a Norfolk Leaders meeting where they discussed the latest developments.The Leaders of Broadland and Kings Lynn & West Norfolk did not attend. All the Leaders present agreed to send in the response to SCO as agreed. They also agreed to continue to work together to procure a strategic partner, no preferred partner had been identified at yet, but hopefully, a decision will be made in the next couple of weeks, with work starting possibly in April.

The Leaders were expecting to get the" minded-to decision" in mid- March with elections now taking place in May as originally planned. This impacts on the delivery timetable and this work cannot start till after the May elections, once new Members and quite possibly, new administrations have had time to get to grips with their local service delivery responsibilities. This means that work will most probably start in late June/early July 2026 or possibly even later.

Local Authorities across the country have told MCHLG and Ministers that additional funding was required to deliver LGR, however, Central Government have not recognised this.

There has been lots of feedback across the political divide about the deliverability of LGR on its current timetable. We need to continue to work together to deliver what are the right outcomes for the people of Great Yarmouth and Norfolk.

If Government is to proceed with the current timetable with the SCO being laid before Parliament in September, there needs to be urgent consideration of adequate funding and progress on enabling reform to ease the burden.

The Leader did not know what the next steps would be in what seemed to be an ever changing landscape. However, the Leader wanted to send a message to all of the staff and his fellow Members, that he would keep them all informed of any developments which occurred but he stressed the vital need to have a seat in those discussions to make sure the voice of Great Yarmouth was heard.

Proposer: Councillor Smith

Seconder: Councillor Plant

That the minutes of the Council meeting held on 29 January 2026 be confirmed as a true record.

CARRIED.

Council received and considered the report from the Executive Director - Resources.

The Leader reported that Section 38 of the Localism Act 2011 requires the Council to produce an annual pay policy statement for the start of each financial year.  It is a legal requirement that Full Council formally sign off this statement and the responsibility cannot be devolved to any other person or committee and must be approved by the end of March each year.  The Pay Policy Statement has therefore been updated for the 2025-26 financial year.

The Pay Policy Statement meets the statutory requirements of the Localism Act and the Leader therefore proposed that Council approve the recommendations, as detailed on page 15, of the agenda report. 

Proposer: Councillor Smith

Seconder: Councillor Wainwright

That Council:-

(i) Adopt the attached Pay Policy Statement for 2025-26 which shall be published on the Council’s website; and


(ii) Approve the recommended changes to the pay and grading structure as outlined in the report to be adopted from the 1 April 2026.

CARRIED.

Council received and considered the report from the Financial Services Manager.

The Leader presented for approval the Council’s Capital Strategy, Investment Strategy and Treasury Management Strategy Statement for 2026/27. 

These strategies provide a framework that gives a high-level overview of how capital expenditure, capital financing and treasury management activity contribute to the provision of local public services along with an overview of how associated risk is managed and the implications for future financial sustainability. 

They also highlight how the Council’s decisions on capital spend has financial implications for the future and the financial planning of the Council.


The Capital Strategy for 2026/27 is attached at appendix 1 and covers capital expenditure and financing, treasury management and commercial activities. It reflects how previous capital investment decisions and those taken as part of the 2026/27 budget setting have ongoing implications for the Council and its financial position in the future. 

 
The Investment Strategy for 2026/27 is attached at appendix 2 and focuses on how the Council can support local services by making service or commercial investments. 


The Council is required to determine annually its Treasury Management Strategy (TMS). The TMS for 2026/27 financial year is attached at appendix 3 and includes the following:- 
• Annual Treasury Investment Strategy 
• Operational Boundary and Authorised Limits 

The strategies presented are in line with the 2026/27 budget as presented for approval. As decisions are made in the year, this may impact on the strategies and the respective decision making and recommendations will consider the strategies and recommend changes to them as applicable.

The Leader proposed, that Council approve the recommendations on page 24 of the agenda report.

Proposer: Councillor Smith

Seconder: Councillor Wainwright

That Council:-

(i) Approve the Capital Strategy for 2026/27

(ii) Approve the Investment Strategy for 2026/27; and 

(iii) Approve the Treasury Management Strategy Statement for 2026/27, including:

a. The Treasury Investment Strategy (section 4) 

b. Prudential Indications (section 5); and

c. Operational Boundary and Authorised Limits (Appendix D).

CARRIED.

Council received and considered the report from the Executive Director - Resources (Section 151 Officer).

The Leader proposed that Standing Orders be suspended for himself and Councillor Wainwright for this one item only. This motion was seconded by Councillor Wainwright and following a vote, it was CARRIED.

The Leader presented the 2026/27 budget for the General Fund and Housing Revenue Account for approval including the capital programme for both. The report was approved for recommendation to Council by Cabinet and was considered by Scrutiny Committee at their meeting on the 10th February 2026. 

The 2026/27 medium term financial strategy was presented to Members in December 2025 and at that time set a savings/income target of £0.6 million for the 2026/27 financial year, with a further £0.5 million target in 2027/28. This together with a reliance on the use of reserves over the short term was part of the financial strategy to produce a balanced budget for 2026/27. This was the position ahead of the announcement of the finance settlement and the detailed work on the service budgets.  

The provisional Local Government Finance settlement for 2026/27 was announced on 17 December 2025, this saw the most significant re-allocation of resources for local government for over 3 financial years taking into account the outcomes of The Fair Funding Review 2.0 and the Business Rates Reset. More details on the outcome of these are included in section 2 of the agenda report, together with the funding impact.

The final settlement was confirmed on 9 February 2026 which saw a reduction to the business rates baseline funding and homelessness funding, with compensating adjustments to the grants to ensure no Local Authority were worse off compared to the provisional settlement. 

Overall, despite the reallocation of resources to address deprivation and resources, the final settlement has resulted in an increase in Core Spending Power from 2024 to 2028/29 of 14.7% which compared to the national average of 24.3% and as an authority in the top 10% of most deprived within England, is still woefully inadequate and does not address the significant under funding. 

The detail of the budget has been produced by joint working between the service areas and the finance team, informed by operational plans for example for the provision of services by GYS, assumptions of income from demand led services to co-ordinate the detailed service budgets which are presented in more detail at Appendix A (summary statement) and Appendix B for the detailed service budgets.

The 2026/27 budget for the HRA reflects the current revenue requirements for repairs and maintenance service, housing management and capital programme investment on housing.

The report also presented the capital programme for the coming year which sees the continuation of the significant investment programme from the town deal, levelling up fund and Pride in Place Projects. 

The Council must present for approval a balanced budget each year. Despite the slightly improved finance settlement for 2026/27 above the level previously forecast, the budget is still reliant on the use of reserves as it would be in the medium term. This is not a sustainable position for the long term.

the Leader advised that whilst the report presented a budget for 2026/27 for approval only it does flag a funding gap of £1.6 million in 2027/28 after assuming a forecast savings target of £1.25 million for which early work will commence on addressing this gap in 2026/27.

The Leader further reported that the Council was disappointed that our settlement, though better than others, did not reflect the challenges that Government recognised, as the Council was one in the top 10% of most deprived council areas.

The Government had stated that our reforms meant that the top 10% of most deprived authorities would see an average increase in core spending power per head of 24% from 2024/25 to 2028/29.

The Council, when everything was taken into account, was receiving an actual reduction in spending which is at odds with the above statement.

Councillor Wainwright & the Leader had sent a joint letter to Alison McGovern MP on 29 January in regard to our allocation, but as yet, we had not received a response.

The Leader was pleased to announce that Members will again receive a £2k ward budget to help those organisations across the Borough with financial support in challenging times. 

There is also £500k ring-fenced for LGR and this will only be spent when required, and all Councils have had to set aside a sum to assist with this.

The Leader reported that he would like to thank the Executive Director - Resources, and her finance team for their hard work, especially as once again,we had received our settlement figure in the last week of December. He also thanked the Cross Party Working Group for their input into the budget. 

Councillor Wainwright thanked Karen Sly, Lorna Snow and the Finance Team for their work on the budget, which he knew had been a testing time, as they have also been working on the 2024-2025 final accounts and LGR, in addition to their day jobs.

Councillor Wainwright commented that Local Government Finance over the last 14 years had been under serious pressure. Looking at the General Fund Summary over the next 3 years, things were set to get a lot worse with savings needed of £1,250,000 in 2027/28 and 2028/29, even if these savings were achievable, we are still looking at a deficit before the use of reserves of £1,478,174 for 2027/28 and £1,743.556 for 2028/29. In addition to this, he commented that the Council would also need to find additional transition costs for LGR, which at the moment, had not been budgeted for, apart from the £500k in this 2026/27 budget.

He advised that the Council's core spending power 3-year settlement of 14.7% was to be welcomed, although he noted that the Council had fell far behind Norwich which received 21.4% over the 3 years. Councillor Wainwright commented that he felt perhaps if the local MP had intervened with the Treasury, things might have looked better for GYBC.

Councillor Wainwright further commented that this 2026/27 budget would be the last budget that GYBC had full control over, although, we would set the 2027/28 budget in February 2027, the new unitary council elected in May 2027 would have oversight and input into this, and restrictions on GYBC would apply.

Hopefully, in March 2026, the Government would agree to the 3 Unitary Model Council for Norfolk, and with LGR and Devolution, the finances of Local Government moving forwards would be on a more stable footing, as quite clearly, things cannot continue as they are.

Councillor Wainwright and his group was pleased to see that the budget included a provision for Ward Budgets of £78k for Members to use to maximum effect in their wards.

The Labour Group would not be moving any amendments to this budget, which would be the first time in many years. However, they would be closely monitoring the cost centre budgets over the next 12 months.

Councillor Candon reiterated that various governments had underfunded Local Authorities but that it was imperative that all Members worked together to leverage the best deal for the residents of the borough.

Councillor Wainwright reported that we used to have a MP to champion our needs, in the past this had been carried out by Brandon Lewis and Tony Wright, and questioned where our champion was now and whether our current MP was lobbying government for the best deal for the residents of Great Yarmouth, who deserved to thrive and not just survive.

Councillor Plant reported that Norfolk would be loosing out on millions and millions of mayoral funding for two years as the mayoral election had been put back until 2028 which was unacceptable in his eyes. The ratepayers of the borough had put aside £500k for LGR costs which is money the Council did not have.

Councillor A Wright thanked Karen Sly and her team for all their hard work to produce a balanced budget for the coming year. He informed Council that he was glad that his political career was coming to an end as he neared retirement. The last government reorganisation had taken place in 1972 and we now faced the challenge of the next reorganisation after 50 years and we should continue to work cross-party to put the needs of the residents of the borough first and foremost.

The Leader hereby summed up, he thanked all Members for their cross-party support and for Councillor  A Wright who had copied him into his budget queries which he had addressed to the Section 151 Officer and that there would be many difficult budget-based decisions for Council to make moving forwards.

The Leader reported that there was an amendment to the recommendation number 3, Parish Precepts, the figure should read £896,695 and he proposed the recommendations on page 65 of the agenda report with the amendment.

Proposer: Councillor Smith

Seconder: Councillor Wainwright.

That Council:-

1. Approve the 2026/27 general fund revenue budget as detailed at Appendix A;

2. Approve the Council Tax for 2026/27 for the Borough Council tax be £198.25 (for an average Band D);

3. Agree that the demand on the Collection Fund for 2026/27 be:
(a) £6,350,397 for the Borough Council purposes;
(b) £896,695 for Parish Precepts (to be updated for final precepts when confirmed);

4. Approve the updated fees and charges as detailed in Appendix H;

5. Approve the reserves statement and movement on the reserves as detailed at Appendix E and within section 4 of the report;

6. Approve the Policy framework for reserves as detailed at Appendix F;

7. Approve the updated Capital Programme and financing for 2025/26 to 2028/29 as detailed at Appendix G and within section 6;

8. Approve The Minimum Revenue Provision Statement 2026/27 as included at Appendix I;

9. Approve the housing revenue account budget as detailed at Appendix J;

10. Approve the housing revenue account capital programme and financing for the revised forecast 2025/26 position and 2026/27 – 2028/29 as detailed at Appendix K; and

11. Approve the increase to social and affordable rents at CPI + 1% (4.8%) and changes to service charges as set out in report and appendices.

Council hereby were reminded that a recorded vote would be taken on the proposal and the vote was as follows:-

FOR: Councillors Annison, Bensly, Boyd, Candon, G Carpenter, P Carpenter, Flaxman-Taylor, Galer, Grant, Hammond, Lawn, Mogford, Murray-Smith, Plant, Smith, Stenhouse, Thompson and Wells.

AGAINST: None

ABSTENTIONS : Councillors Borg, Capewell, Cordiner-Achenbach, Green, Jeal, Martin, McMullen, Pilkington, Newcombe, Robinson- Payne, Upton, Wainwright, Waters-Bunn, Williamson, T Wright and B Wright.

CARRIED.

Council received and considered the report from  the Executive Director - Resources (Section 151 Officer).

His Worship, The Mayor, flagged up a typographical error in the report, the wording should read the "Police and Crime Commissioner" and not the "Police and Crome Commissioner"

The Executive Director - Resources presented for resolution the statutory calculations for the Council Tax Setting for 2026/27 in accordance with the Local Government Finance Act 1992. The report also includes the Chief Finance Officer’s report on the robustness of the estimates and adequacy of reserves.

This report should be considered alongside the budget report as presented to Cabinet on 3 February 2026 (for which the recommendations are included in the agenda report).

Having approved the Budget for 2026/27, as detailed in the earlier agenda item, (Cabinet Budget Report item and as outlined at Appendix A) and considered the Chief Financial Officer’s report on the robustness of the estimates and the adequacy of reserves, Council is then required to make the statutory calculations for the determination of the Council tax for 2026/27.

The Leader reported that Council is recommended to approve the recommendations as detailed on page 127 of the agenda report.

Councillor Plant referred to paragraph 3.12(a) of the report which referred to car park income and explained that Car Park Income is generated from the provision of parking across the Borough which in turn supports the delivery of other services across the Council. As a demand-led service which is influenced by external factors, such as the weather, tourism and visitors and it was regularly monitored.

Councillor Jeal highlighted that the majority of car parks in Great Yarmouth were "pay and display" but the car parking along Marine Parade in Gorleston was free which he felt was unfair.

Proposer: Councillor Smith

Seconder: Councillor Wainwright

That Council approve, with the amended wording:-

(1) That the Council Tax Base for 2026/27 be noted (4.6);



(2) That the amounts be calculated for 2026/27 in accordance with Sections 31 to 36 of the Local Government Finance Act (4.7);



(3) That the precepts for Norfolk County Council and the Office of the Police and Crome Commissioner be noted (4.8);



(4) The Council Tax for 2026/27 be set (4.9); and



(5) That the Council’s basic amount of Council Tax for 2026/27 is not excessive (4.10 and 4.11).

Council hereby were reminded that a recorded vote would be taken on the proposal and the vote was as follows:-

FOR: Councillors Annison, Bensly, Borg, Boyd, Candon, G Carpenter, P Carpenter, Capewell, Cordiner-Achenbach, Flaxman- Taylor, Galer, Grant, Green, Jeal, Hammond, Lawn, Martin, McMullen, Mogford, Murray-Smith, Pilkington, Newcombe, Robinson-Payne, Plant, Smith, Stenhouse, Thompson, Upton, Wainwright, Waters-Bunn, Wells, Williamson, A Wright and B Wright.

AGAINST: None

ABSTENTIONS: None

CARRIED.