Issue - meetings
Draft Treasury Management Policy Statement; Draft Treasury Management Strategy Statement, Minimum Revenue Provision Policy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy 2026/27; and Treasury Management & Investment Management (Non-Treasury) Principles and
Meeting: 19/01/2026 - Audit & Governance Committee (Item 49)
(A report by Russel Stone, Director of Finance (S151 Officer))
Additional documents:
- Appendix 1 Treasury Management Policy Statement 2026-27, item 49
PDF 72 KB
- Appendix 2 Draft Treasury Management Strategy MRP Policy and AIS 2026-27, item 49
PDF 810 KB
- Appendix 3 Treasury Management Practices 2026-27, item 49
PDF 414 KB
Minutes:
The Committee received the suite of draft Treasury Management documents for the 2026/27 financial year, comprising the Treasury Management Policy Statement, Treasury Management Strategy Statement, Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) Policy Statement and the Annual Investment Strategy. These documents were presented, by the Treasury and Investment Manager (PSPSL), as part of the Council’s annual cycle of financial governance and pre?decision scrutiny.
It was explained that the documents had been prepared in accordance with the CIPFA Prudential Code and the CIPFA Treasury Management Code, and that they formed a key component of the Council’s overall financial framework, governing the management of borrowing, investments, cashflow, and financial risk. Members were reminded that the papers were being presented in draft form pending completion of the wider budget setting process, after which Cabinet and Full Council would consider the finalised versions.
The Committee was informed that the Treasury Management Policy Statement itself remained unchanged from the previous year. The focus of this annual review was therefore on the Strategy, which detailed how the Council planned to manage its borrowing requirements and investment activity for 2026/27, including prudential indicators, borrowing and investment limits, and the Council’s overall approach to risk.
Members noted that the Council continued to operate an under?borrowed position, meaning internal resources were being used to finance capital expenditure where feasible, thereby avoiding external borrowing at higher interest rates. The draft documents also set out proposed changes to prudential borrowing limits, reflecting the Council’s projected Capital Financing Requirement (CFR) and major capital commitments planned across the medium term. These included proposals to increase the Operational Boundary for borrowing from £15m to £35m, and the Authorised Limit from £18m to £38m.
Finally, Members noted the proposal to increase the maximum permitted investment in the Council’s main Money Market Fund from £7.5m to £10m, to provide additional short?term liquidity flexibility during periods of peak cashflow activity.
The Committee undertook an extended review of the draft Treasury Management documents, examining the prudential indicators, borrowing strategy, investment criteria and MRP policy in technical detail.
Members explored the rationale behind the significant increase in the Operational Boundary and Authorised Limit for external borrowing. It was clarified that these higher limits did not signal an intention to borrow immediately, but instead provided the statutory headroom required to meet future borrowing needs if market conditions became favourable. Members were reminded that the Council’s CFR was expected to rise due to planned capital expenditure, and that the revised limits reflected these projections.
The Committee noted that the Council had chosen, in recent years, to meet borrowing needs through internal resources, but that this position could not be maintained indefinitely as reserves diminished through use.
A detailed explanation was provided regarding the forecast borrowing requirement for 2026/27, estimated at approximately £7.7m, arising largely from capital programme commitments. Members reviewed the classification of expenditure that contributed to the CFR, including historic unfinanced expenditure, refuse fleet replacement, property fund investments, and other capital projects.
The Committee also scrutinised the Council’s under?borrowed ... view the full minutes text for item 49