Somerset this week: 28 February 2025
This week a Symphony out of tune, more on car parking in Langport and Somerton, why Somerset Council's books still don't balance, some good news from Minehead and bother about Bridgwater's tax.
Dear readers
Today’s news update is for all our readers. We do believe in trying to provide a free news service. The only way we can offer you a free news service, is by providing a paid for service alongside it. Without the paid for bit, the free bit could not exist.
So can we tempt you?
To sign up for a paid membership for a year would cost you £30 - that’s 58p a week. What will we give you for that?
To start with at least 48 extra articles, investigative or analytical pieces
Access to our entire back catalogue. It is a pretty large back catalogue these days and you can find material by using the search function in substack.
The ability to comment on our articles
The pleasure of supporting one of Somerset’s last and most innovative independent news outlets
If that sounds interesting, please do join us. You can sign up here:
Thank you
Andrew Lee - editor
Symphony out of tune
Symphony Healthcare Services Limited (Symphony) was set up by Yeovil District Hospital to take over Somerset GP practices that were struggling. Since the merger of Yeovil District Hospital with Musgrove and the mental health service in Somerset on 1 April 2023, it has been owned by Somerset NHS Foundation Trust.
The idea behind Symphony was that it would be able to generate economies of scale with back office functions and use a collective buying power to get better deals on purchases. It would also be able to offer a range of opportunities for GPs wanting to enter practice.
The latest accounts for the year to 31 March 2024, recently published, show that it made a loss of £167,381 after tax for that year. The company has made losses after tax for each of the past two years.
Given that one of the main purposes of Symphony was to provide economies of scale, especially with back office functions, and thereby return struggling practices to profit, it looks to us as if the model simply isn’t working.
It has already had over £5m of loans made to the company by Somerset NHS Foundation Trust written off. On top of that, Symphony has accumulated losses of £4.9m as at 31 March.
We wanted to know why, so we approached the Trust for a comment. They told Somerset Confidential®: “Many of the practices that Symphony Healthcare Services model has taken on had been experiencing difficulties, both in financial terms or performance terms (such as poor Care Quality Commission inspection results). Joining Symphony ensured that that primary healthcare for patients served by these practices continues to be available locally.
NHS Somerset is collaborating with Somerset NHS Foundation Trust and Symphony Healthcare Services to implement a cost improvement programme aimed at ensuring a sustainable model for general medical service provision. While this work is ongoing, the ICB has allocated system funding to support Symphony’s resilience. Requests for resilience funding from all general practice providers in Somerset are considered on a case-by-case basis as needed. Importantly, any additional investment in general practice remains unaffected by resilience funding commitments.”
Which begs so many questions it is difficult to know where to start. But let’s begin with why did the company wait until it had £4.9m in accumulated losses to get around to “collaborating” on a “cost improvement plan”. Surely this should have been in place several years ago?
The good news is that given that Symphony have yet to work out how to stem the tide of losses, there are currently no plans to take on more GP practices over the next 12 months.
We have other questions too. We would also like to know more about a further £5.8m of anticipated losses for 2024/25 that the ICB appears to have committed to funding. Like where is this money coming from? Does the ICB have the funds to do this in terms of increased funds from central government? If not, does that mean an increase in funds for Symphony come at the expense of other health services? If so, then which ones?
a further £5.8m of anticipated losses for 2024/25
All NHS Somerset (the ICB) will say is to repeat the answer they gave us before: “the ICB has allocated system funding to support Symphony’s resilience. Requests for resilience funding from all general practice providers in Somerset are considered on a case-by-case basis as needed. Importantly, any additional investment in general practice remains unaffected by resilience funding commitments.”
Readers may think that this is fair comment. As far as we read it our core question remains unanswered. It does not tell us if extra funding is coming from central government nor does it tell us if the cost of funding extra costs in general practice comes at a price to other non-GP services.
If NHS Somerset has enough money spare to shell out nearly £6m to Symphony, residents of Yeovil might ask why it does not have enough money to continue funding the now viable Hyper Acute Stroke Service in Yeovil.
These seem like reasonable questions to us, but it has become clear we won’t get a clear answer to them.
Finally, we were surprised to see that only 37% of Symphony staff feel their pay is fair. We wondered what, if anything, Symphony can do to mitigate that? The Trust told us: “While this is a low number, it’s in line with similar organisations, including NHS organisations, across the country (i.e. for 2023 the satisfaction of staff pay was 31.2% in the whole NHS and 36.4% for Somerset NHS Foundation Trust).”
So that’s all right then? It seems a very casual approach to take to some very poor numbers and one can only wonder why someone is not drilling down into the detail to:
Find out why, and
Do something about it.
They also told us “we do have health and wellbeing initiatives in place for colleagues at Symphony Healthcare Services, and we have taken part in the national NHS Staff Survey over the last few years to gain a better understanding of the feelings across our workforce.”
The evidence from the latest survey suggests that this has not improved matters. The numbers remain poor and the fact that they happen to be poor throughout the whole NHS is surely nothing to be proud of?
No parking changes?
Last week we reported on proposals to raise parking charges across Somerset, generating somewhere in the region of £1.5m extra for Somerset Council. That’s quite a lot when the council are looking to a “capitalisation directive” of £43m just to balance the books.
However, two town councils that will not be impressed are Langport and Somerton. Over the past two decades there have been various moves by first South Somerset District Council (SSDC) and latterly Somerset Council to impose parking charges. To date all have been resisted.
In Somerton, where ownership of the main town centre car park is split, the late Dean Ruddle negotiated a deal with the then SSDC under which the council paid for the resurfacing of the town centre car park north of the library and the Co-op store. In return, Somerton Town Council pay a £9,000 a year lease and have the right to keep car parking in the town free.
the Town Council owns a ransom strip across the entrance to the town centre car park
In the case of Langport, it is because the Town Council owns a ransom strip across the entrance to the town centre car park. So, although the district and now Somerset Council own the car park, cars cannot actually enter the car park without authority and agreement from Langport Town Council.
This is something that may yet cause some embarrassment for Somerset Councillor Richard Wilkins who is one of two Somerset Councillors for Langport and Curry Rivel. He is also Somerset Council’s Lead Member for Transport and Waste, in which capacity he introduced these car park charging plans.
Meanwhile Cllr Wilkins’s proposals are facing a rocky ride. On Monday they went before Somerset Council’s Scrutiny Committee - Corporate and Resources. The proposals did not go down well. There was cross-party opposition from Greens, Conservatives and Labour, but some LibDems voiced their concerns too.
Labour’s councillor on the Scrutiny Committee is Brian Smedley (Bridgwater North & Central). He told us: “The proposal will now go to the ‘all-Lib Dem’ Executive Committee but they’re very unlikely to support it now. If they do they will clearly look desperate to get this unpopular and unworkable measure passed. It’s not often that there’s unanimous cross-party opposition to proposals so this was clearly one of their worst.”
The LibDem Executive must now make a decision.
We asked Somerset Council what would happen if the rise in parking charges was not approved. They told us: “Parking charges form part of the council fees and charges report appended to the budget. They remain proposals however, subject to consultation. If changes have to be made to the proposals which impact on the budget we would need to address any potential funding gap another way.”
In other words, the council have put the money in the budget, whether the charges are approved or not.
As a result, if the increases do not go through, as Cllr Smedley suggests, there will be a funding gap which will have to be met some other way.
With the recommendation from the Scrutiny Committee not to proceed, the Executive faces some difficult choices.
The art of balancing books
Last week we explained that Somerset Council would only be able to balance the books for 2025/26 through a capitalisation directive. This is a piece of financial engineering that allows the council to capitalise expenses and borrow against them (you can read a detailed explanation of this here (“To make it balance”). The borrowing would provide the funds needed to ensure the council had the resources to spend on service delivery for the next year. However, it needs to be approved by Government. And, without that approval, Somerset Council will be, to all intents and purposes, bankrupt.
This week the Scrutiny Committee of the council got an update from the s151 officer (like a Finance Director for the council). There was some good news. The Government says it is minded to agree the capitalisation directive. That ensures Somerset Council will survive another year.
the amount borrowed …… must be repaid within 20 years
But it comes with conditions attached. Most importantly that the amount borrowed against that capitalised expenditure must be repaid within 20 years (this is what is known in local government circles as Minimum Revenue Provision).
Somerset Council will also be unable to sell off community heritage assets to finance the repayments. Though we suspect residents will see this as a good thing.
The next piece of good news is that the s151 officer has given the council an opinion on the 2025/26 budget (as she is legally obliged to do). That opinion is that the budget is sound and lawful.
Unfortunately, the outlook is neither sound nor good. In her paper to the Scrutiny Committee, the council’s S151 officer, Maria Christofi, states the forecast budget gap for 2026/27 is £101.384m rising to £190.041m by 2029/30. Something she warns is unlikely to be sustainable. And of course adding to the budget gap will be the costs of repaying this year and last year’s capitalisations of some £80m, plus interest, over 20 years.
A cost which you would expect to add £4-£5m a year to the council’s outgoings.
But, for now, that cost is the cost of survival.
Minehead good news
Last year we reported on a project to bring a co-operative run swimming pool to the town of Minehead. At present the seaside town does not have a public swimming pool.
In August last year Minehead Swimming and Leisure (MSL) launched a public membership programme and over 50 people have signed up for it. MSL is a Community Benefit Society being run as a co-operative.
In another big step forward, MSL has recently been awarded £6,000 from The Reach Fund. The Reach Fund exists to help charities and social enterprises raise investment. The idea being to put together the sort of financial information that potential investors need to see before they can invest.
The £6,000 will enable MSL to start a business planning and analysis exercise prior to getting ready for a first major round of investment later this year.
That investment is to provide a full-sized, indoor, public swimming pool in Minehead. If you’d like to support this project then you can and you don’t have to wait for the investment round. Residents can support the project by becoming a member of MSL. You can do this by buying one or more shares (worth £1 each). You then become a member and shareholder of the Society. You can buy as many shares as you like, but every member gets one vote!
If you’d like to do that – or just find out more information, then you can do that here
Minehead not so good news
Somerset Confidential® learned this week that the Tourist Information Centre in Minehead which is currently closed for winter, will not reopen for this year’s tourist season. The centre, which is run by volunteers and has existed only because of the support from the YMCA, has been run from The Beach Hotel for several years now.
We contacted Minehead Town Council who have, sadly, confirmed that our information is correct. The Council also gave us a statement which is comprehensive and is worth reproducing in full: “Minehead Town Council notes with regret the announcement that Minehead Information Centre (MIC) will not be reopening at its Beach Hotel location for the foreseeable future.
The Town Council has enjoyed an open and transparent relationship with MIC and recognises the vital role the centre has played in supporting tourism and local businesses. We thank the directors, staff, and volunteers for their dedicated service.
We acknowledge the funding challenges faced by the Information Centre despite the generous support of the YMCA and other partners, making the current business model increasingly difficult to sustain.
Minehead Town Council is committed to working with MIC directors and stakeholders to explore sustainable alternatives for visitor information services.
The Town Council will examine various support options, which may include financial assistance. However, any financial investment will only be directed toward a sustainable model determined through stakeholder consultation.
any financial investment will only be directed toward a sustainable model
We remain dedicated to working with partners to promote Minehead as a premier Somerset coast destination and ensuring visitors receive comprehensive information to enjoy everything our beautiful town has to offer.”
It is, as the town council hint, a real shame that the seaside town will be without a Tourist Information Centre in any form this year. It certainly won’t help local business. The fact that the existing service offered a Facebook page, email and phone contacts and an array of brochures including guides on where to stay, was undoubtedly a testimony to a lot of hard work, volunteering and co-operative working.
But what now?
In some towns, notably Taunton, the town council has been able to step in and fund the Tourist Information Centre itself. In that case, the centre would have closed without the town council’s support.
But in Yeovil the well-used Tourist Information Centre at the Cartgate roundabout was also closed for lack of funds at Somerset Council and that has not reopened. That had been a useful way of diverting tourists and their cash heading west along the A303, to spend some of their tourist pounds in Yeovil.
Minehead Town Council are being cautious. Whilst considering helping out financially, who can blame them for wanting to be sure of the robustness of any scheme they contribute to?
Councils across the Somerset Council area are increasingly stretched as they bail out Somerset Council by taking on work that the council used to do, without any funding or support. Sometimes funding a service like a Tourist Information Centre, however important, can be one service too far.
Bridgwater bother
Following our various pieces articles about council tax, Cllr Diogo Rodriques, the Conservative Councillor for Bridgwater on Somerset Council wrote to us expressing his view on the town council tax rise (precept) for Bridgwater. This has increased from £1.15m for 2023/24 to £4.29m for 2025/26.
In our article we suggested the issue was not that Bridgwater Town Council tax had risen, because it had taken a large list of services from Somerset Council and was doing much more. Rather that the issue was why had Somerset Council tax not fallen, when it was doing significantly less and charging more in council tax.
Cllr Rodrigues suggested the following: “An argument recently put forward by the leadership of Bridgwater Town Council is that they've had to hike council tax because new responsibilities were forced upon them due to cuts at the county level. They have also claimed that they were not provided with correct figures for the costs associated with these assets and services. I put this to Somerset Council for a response, as I felt some clarity was needed.
Chris Hall, Executive Director Community, Place & Economy at Somerset Council, in response, made it clear that devolution has been carried out in collaboration with town, city, and parish councils. He said that many of the assets and services in question were long-standing frustrations for local councils, which had actively sought greater control. Chris pointed out that the only instance where Somerset Council explicitly withdrew a service was with CCTV, as part of a budget decision last year. In that case, several councils voluntarily stepped forward to fund its continuation. He also clarified that Somerset Council provided the most accurate figures available based on its own operating costs, but if a town or parish council chose to expand or modify a service, that was their own financial decision.
Then came the intervention from Val Keitch, Associate Lead Member for Localities at Somerset Council. She recalled a meeting from two and a half years ago where Bridgwater Town Council presented an extensive ‘shopping list’ of services and assets they wanted to take on. She stated, "I came to the conclusion, in fact, I made the comment at the time it looked as though they were actually setting up a new District Council." She further added, "For them to now be saying they've been forced into taking things, I actually have to refute that because their original shopping list was absolutely enormous." Her words directly refute the notion that devolution was imposed upon Bridgwater. On the contrary, Bridgwater Town Council actively sought a substantial number of responsibilities.
The leadership at Bridgwater Town Council cannot have it both ways. They campaigned to take on a number of services, yet now claim they were burdened against their will, using this claim to justify their huge increase in council tax. The reality is, they were not forced—they asked for it.”
We asked Bridgwater Town Council Leader Cllr Brian Smedley what he thought of that and offered him the chance to respond. Here’s what he had to say: “Bridgwater Town Council (BTC) was and is at the forefront of devolution and always wanted to take services and assets on.
Somerset Council have cut or reduced services (there’s more on that here and a BBC report on the tax rises here) and indeed gave a clear indication they were going to in letters from Bill Revans.
When we set our devolution budget last year and again this year, I have constantly said we need a transition period to find what services were available to us, what the costs were and how they worked when under Town Council control. Our Finance officer advised us that costs are not easy for Somerset County to disaggregate and indeed we have altered service delivery to achieve a better outcome.
Bridgwater’s long-term ambition has always been to restore the boundaries and powers of the old Bridgwater Borough Council. Our town’s decline can be dated from its abolition and replacement by Sedgemoor District.
We did not support the Unitary project. It’s far too big. But we did and do support the devolution opportunities that came with it.
We spoke with Fothergill’s Tories in the run up to Unitary and were promised positive devolution with funding streams (car parks, as per the One Somerset Business Case) and we spoke to the new Lib Dem administration, including a meeting with Val Keitch in the room and my memory is totally different to hers. At no point was a shopping list presented. The main problem in fact revolved around the foot dragging by certain Somerset Council officers over the transfer of the named parks which formed part of the pilot scheme which BTC was selected to be part of.
It’s also very important to note that Somerset Council were looking at major savings for instance with CCTV where there was a real danger of the service being mothballed unless the 3 main towns took the cameras on. That was a large part of the second year’s increase.
The 2-year transition period is over. Tax bills for Bridgwater Town Council can go back to no large increase and services will be better run, more local and more accountable.”
We’ll leave it to our readers to judge the merits of each side of the argument!
Somerset Confidential® is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Why not gift a subscription as a present for a friend or family member? You can do that here: