Councillors’ frustration at repeated project overspend

Council overspending has become so frequent that members can no longer recall when a project last came in on budget.

Shetland West member Liz Peterson highlighted her growing frustration with the repeated requests for extra cash during Monday’s policy and resources committee meeting.

Asset manager Robert Sinclair had outlined four projects in the current asset investment plan in need of further finances.

They ranged from £21,000 to complete boat store recommissioning work, through to £1.5m for a vehicle replacement programme.

Perhaps the biggest undervaluation in recent years involved the demolition phase of the old Anderson High School, which was initially estimated at £1m but required members to agree a further £2.4m in 2021.

Councillors were asked to agree a further £500,000 for the Knab project during a private meeting in February.

But it was the Hillhead railing replacement that came in for the most heated discussion on Monday.

The council had already approved £48,000 for the work – but overspent by £20,000 due to “unforeseen retaining wall requirement and increased constructions costs”.

Mr Sinclair’s report said there had also been a delay “waiting for bespoke railings” for the steps to Lower Hillhead and end posts for the main section.

Ms Peterson said it seemed to be a “ridiculous amount of money” and questioned why the council needed the “bespoke” poles, when a fencepost could do the job.

“I just don’t understand why nearly every job that we take on to do comes in over budget,” she said.

“I can’t mind ever hearing of something that’s been completed under budget.”

Shetland Central member Catherine Hughson was of a similar view.

“I would love to ken how many business cases we’ve actually done that have come in on budget and on time and without having to come back for additional money,” she said.

“Coming from 20 years from a sector where if I went back to a funder and said ‘excuse me, I’ve overspent by £21,000’ they’d tell me to get on my bike and go back and look at our budget again.”

Mrs Hughson said the council needed to get “smarter” and factor in realistic costs at the outset of projects.

Depute leader Gary Robinson said the way to avoid overspends was to do effective surveys at the start and not make changes during the works – which he said the council had been guilty of in the past.

In particular, he noted the Shetland College extension, which saw “endless requests to change the project” requiring the council to “stick to its guns” to avoid additional costs.

He said the railing concerns were at the “lower end of the scale”.

Ms Peterson said she would have liked to turn down the funding requests – but then the projects would not get finished.

“We are given a price for a project, which we agree and then lo and behold, for almost every project we then get a report saying that actually we need extra money to do whatever it is that needs to be sorted out,” she added.

“We can’t stop something halfway through, so we have to finish the project even if it’s going to cost us extra money and even if we had known that at the beginning we might not have agree that cost.”

Lerwick South member John Fraser questioned why this particular project had attracted a “disproportionate amount of controversy and focus over the years”.

“I certainty would not be  fan of just driving in an old fence post so I will dismiss that straight away,” he added.

Mr Fraser moved that the council approve the extra funding, which was passed.

Mr Sinclair said the railings were a “heritage” project – and he would provide an update on the work by email.