Strategy, Policy and Finance Committee
24 April 2025
Expenditure off-set by income

1. At the Council meeting on 10 April, Councillor Roberts enquired why bank
interest and cemetery fees were set-off against the SPF and Burial Grounds
budget respectively instead of merely being accounted for as income and
falling into reserves. The matter was referred to this committee for further
consideration.

2. For several years the SPF and Burial Grounds budgets have contained an
anticipated level of income from these two items thereby ensuing that the
income accrued is used for committee purposes rather than falling into
reserves which is beyond the committees’ immediate ability to use. Taking this
income into account enables the committees to request a lower level of
budget and contributes to enabling the Council to levy a lower precept.

3. In the budgets for 2024/25, Burial Ground anticipated cemetery fees of
£10,000 enabled the committee to keep the budget down to £10,635 instead
of £20,635. At the year end the cemetery fees income totalled £11,665 so the
committee received a windfall of £1665, but only due to one burial of a non-
resident which attracted quadruple fees of £3,460 instead of £865. In the
budget for 2025/26 a similar sum of £10,000 has been anticipated against a
budget of £9,120.

4. For SPF the anticipated bank interest of £2,000 was hugely exceeded and at
the year end £12,350 had been amassed. This was due to two reasons, the
increase in interest rates throughout the year, but primarily the substantial
increase in reserves as a result of the CIL payments from Babergh DC in the
region of £600,000. The committee’s overspend of £1596 would have been
£10,000 greater had it not been for the bank interest. For 2025/26 the
committee has anticipated interest of £7,500.

5. There was one other set-off in 2024/25 which was in the contingency heading
where £10,840 had been spent on the new cemetery mower to replace the
stolen one. The insurance settlement of £7,185 was set-off against the
expenditure thereby reducing the contingency fund expenditure quite
substantially.

6. The auditors have been satisfied with the set-off practice so there is no
pressure to change the methodology, and for 2025/26 the budgets have been
set with the set-offs built in. However, if the committee wishes this practice
can be dispensed with for 2026/27 and the income paid straight into reserves
but with the budgets increase correspondingly.

Graham White
Parish Clerk
15 April 2025