Leicestershire councillors have raised "major concerns" over whether necessary savings can be found before next year's looming budget deadline. 

The Reform UK leader of Leicestershire County Council announced last month that it had agreed a £1.4 million contract that will see consultant firm Newton carry out a deep dive of the authority's books in a bid to reduce costs. But opposition councillors remain unconvinced that those savings will be found in time for the authority to sign off on its budget for the coming years – typically done in February.

The cash-strapped council needs to plug an expected £90 million gap in its day-to-day spending by 2029 – something it is legally bound to do. It also has an £80 million shortfall in money set aside for projects and an £118 million deficit in its special needs budget.

Liberal Democrat councillor Simon Galton said he had "major concerns" about what the Reform group is attempting to do with the review. He added: "First is the timescale. It's a real tall order to produce anything by the time we have to set a budget in late February that could in any way make a contribution to closing the gap in the budget this year. 

"It seems to me that this is a much longer timescale thing. Although they say they will produce some findings and a report, we know that having ideas to start with or possible savings, that is the beginning of the process. 

"It can take years to put those into action through service transformation and so on. Probably longer than this authority has got left."

He also said he feared the "low hanging fruit has long gone" when it came to areas where the council could make savings.

Leader of the council's Lib Dems Michael Mullaney echoed these concerns, saying the around £280 million in savings already made by the authority since 2010 begs the question of "how much more savings there are to be found without cutting into the essential services the council provides".

He added the group would not support something that "did serious damage to services". 

Conservative leader of the opposition Deborah Taylor said she was willing to keep an "open mind" when it came to the review. However, she added: "But I don't think it will deliver much before we have to set a budget for next year, which concerns me greatly with the budget gap that we are still showing going forwards."

Labour leader on the authority Jewel Miah also raised issue with the £1.4 million price tag for the review, saying it would pay for a "lot of staff time to deliver services".

Cllr Taylor also pressed leader Dan Harrison on the free DOGE-style audit promised by the national party in the run-up to the May local election, asking if the council had ever received a "formal" offer for the team to visit.

Cllr Harrison confirmed that this had not happened in Leicestershire. He further said his administration had not themselves invited the DOGE team to visit the council. 

He added: "I felt the appointment of an external consultant would be the best approach to address the high level of savings that the County Council was required to deliver. This is what the Administration ultimately decided to approve."

Responding to opposition concerns, lead member for resources Harrison Fowler said he was "happy" with the "early indications" from the efficiency review and had "full confidence" in Newton.

He added: "Yes it is ambitious, especially with the timescale. 

"We are constrained on time when it comes to the budget. I'm fully aware of that and I'm not going to try to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. 

"But ultimately we have been working with Newton for a couple of weeks, and it's still early stages, but we have confidence that they will be able to deliver the savings. 

"Yes, it's not going to fix the problem overnight and yes it's going to be a long-term thing [but] that doesn't mean that savings can't be delivered quickly". 

He further acknowledged that the £1.4 million sum "seemed stark", but said it was sometimes necessary to "spend money to make money". Newton's payment was "performance dependent", he added.

Newton could end up taking home up to £30 million. This is because once areas have been identified where costs can be cut, the council will need to choose whether to implement those – and if they will need Newton's help to do so. 

Savings initiatives which require support from the firm will be "costed individually" and decisions will be made on a "project-by-project basis".

Cllr Fowler also sought to reassure members that he understood the "delicacy of delivering savings without cutting services". He said: "I assure you that our efficiency review will not put at risk the care residents receive."