Labour's war on Middle England: Rural areas could foot the bill to pay for Rayner's reforms of council tax
Households in the countryside will reportedly be charged at unfairly high levels to pay for residents of cities under the Communities Secretary's 'fair funding' plans.
Last night, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch branded it a 'spiteful' move that will push more cash into traditional Labour areas.
Analysis by the County Councils Network (CNN) found rural and county local authorities will lose close to half a billion pounds in Government cash over the next three years thanks to Ms Rayner's attempt to level up the system.
This will force them to cut vital services and hike bills for hard-pressed residents by the maximum 5 per cent allowed.
The CCN demanded an urgent injection of cash from Whitehall to fill the gap, warning town halls on the brink would otherwise be unable to provide crucial care for the elderly and vulnerable children.
It comes after almost all town halls raised bills by the maximum amount earlier this year to deal with soaring demand and costs, taking the average bill to £2,280.
Chairman of the group, councillor Tim Oliver, said: 'Some 16 county and rural councils will see reductions in grant funding, while the Government's proposals place a disproportionate burden on taxpayers in county areas to fund local services and redistribute funding to urban areas.
'It's vital the Government makes more money available to mitigate the impact of these reforms.'
Ms Badenoch said: 'Yet again the Labour Government is showing utter contempt for people living in rural Britain.
'The family farms tax has been devastating, and scrapping the rural services grant has put rural councils under enormous pressure.
'This latest change will steal more money out of the hands of county councils and send it straight into Labour-run urban areas.'
Under Ms Rayner's Fair Funding Review 2.0, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) will make major changes to how English councils are funded.
Her updated formula will allocate cash based on local areas' needs and their ability to raise council tax compared to others around the country.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies think-tank has already warned it will create big winners and losers, with those in the home counties likely to suffer budget cuts unless council taxes rise.
In its response to the MHCLG consultation, published last night, the CCN said it would mean 16 authorities – including some in the Midlands and North – losing £470million of funding over the next three years.
In total, county and unitary councils' grant funding will rise by just £374million. Unless 33 of the 38 town halls impose the maximum 5 per cent council tax rises, they will see a real-terms cut in funding, according to the CCN.
Metropolitan authorities will get £1.2billion, and a proposal to redistribute £1.6billion in council tax income will benefit urban areas at the expense of the countryside.
An MHCLG spokesman said: 'We do not recognise this analysis. We are taking decisive action to reform the funding system.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
24 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Majority of public back housing and developments in their area
The poll of 2,005 people conducted by Public First in July found that 55% of respondents would 'generally support new buildings or developments or buildings being built in my local area'. The research found that Labour backers (72%) and young people aged 25-34 (67%) were most likely to be 'Yimby' (yes in my backyard). Reform backers (44%) and people in the East of England (44%) were the most likely groups to say that they generally oppose development in their locality, the poll found. Overall, 33% of people said that they would generally oppose development. Sir Keir Starmer has pledged to put 'builders not blockers first' and 'overhaul the broken planning system'. In December, the Prime Minister announced new mandatory targets for councils when it comes to housebuilding. He said at the time: 'Our plan for change will put builders not blockers first, overhaul the broken planning system and put roofs over the heads of working families and drive the growth that will put more money in people's pockets.' In its report, The Quiet Yes, released on Thursday, Public First argued that a 'more representative planning system' is needed. The policy research organisation recommended that councils bring in changes to surveys and research on public opinion on building plans and questions about how residents would want councils to spend certain money earmarked for development. Jack Airey, director of housing and infrastructure at Public First, said: 'Most people instinctively support new development, yet their voices go unheard. 'Our research finds the public understand the housing shortage and back new homes, but the planning system doesn't reflect that reality. 'Councils and Government should build on this majority view, creating a representative planning system that unlocks support for new homes and the infrastructure communities need.' Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary Angela Rayner has said that Labour are 'overhauling the broken planning system'. She said: 'With investment and reform, Labour is delivering the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation, unleashing a social rent revolution, and embarking on a decade of renewal for social and affordable housing in this country.'
Daily Mail
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Lucy Connolly to walk FREE: Tory Councillor's wife who was jailed last year for 'racist' Tweet during the Southport riots is being released from prison in a matter of hours
Lucy Connolly is set to walk free from prison in just a matter of hours after being jailed for writing a racist tweet during last summer's riots. The mother and former childminder has spent more than nine months behind bars after admitting making the inflammatory post on X in the wake of the Southport attacks in July last year. Connolly, who is also the wife of Tory Councillor Ray Connolly, pleaded guilty to a charge of inciting racial hatred and was handed a 31-month sentence in October. The post, which she later deleted, said: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the b******* for all I care... if that makes me racist so be it.' She has been serving time at HMP Peterborough and had an application to have her sentence reduced rejected in May. But, the Daily Mail can now reveal that Connolly is due to be released on Thursday. The news will come as a huge boost to her husband and 12-year-old daughter as well as campaigners calling for her release. Connelly's imprisonment had prompted allegations that she was a victim of 'two-tier justice', with claims that those with right-wing views are treated more harshly than others in the UK. Connolly's X post was made just hours after killer Axel Rudakubana murdered three young girls and attempted to murder 10 others at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class on July 29, sparking nationwide unrest. She was arrested on August 6, by which point she had deleted her social media account. But other messages which included other condemning remarks were uncovered by officers who seized her phone. The Southport atrocity sparked nationwide unrest, with several people - including Connolly - jailed as a result. Her tweet was viewed 310,000 times in three-and-a-half hours before she deleted it. She later pleaded guilty to distributing material with the intention of stirring up racial hatred at Birmingham Crown Court and was sentenced to 31 months in prison in October. In May, she had an appeal against her sentence refused by three Court of Appeal judges at the Royal Courts of Justice. In a written judgment, Lord Justice Holroyde, said: 'There is no arguable basis on which it could be said that the sentence imposed by the judge was manifestly excessive. 'The application for leave to appeal against sentence therefore fails and is refused.' He added that the principal ground of appeal 'was substantially based on a version of events put forward by the applicant which we have rejected'. Connolly argued she had been 'really angry' after the Southport attacks, but hours after posting the rant on X realised it was not an acceptable thing to say, so deleted it. She also said that news of the Southport murders had triggered her anxiety caused when her baby son, Harry, died as the result of a hospital blunder 13 years earlier. At her appeal case, Adam King, representing Connolly, asked if she had intended for anyone to set fire to asylum hotels or 'murder any politicians'. She replied: 'Absolutely not.' Naeem Valli, for the prosecution, told the court the post was a reflection of her attitude towards immigrants. At the time Mr Connolly told of the pain of his wife's long imprisonment, saying: 'The 284 days of separation have been very hard, particularly on our 12-year-old girl.' Connolly's case later became international news, with US officials saying earlier this year they are keeping tabs on developments over their 'concerns' about free speech. A State Department spokesman said in May: 'We can confirm that we are monitoring this matter. The United States supports freedom of expression at home and abroad, and remains concerned about infringements on freedom of expression.' It came after political commentator and Trump ally Charlie Kirk was made aware of Connolly's ordeal after a visit to the UK and vowed to get the US State Department involved in the process. Appearing on GB News, Kirk said: 'I am going to try and get the US State Department involved. I'm going to bring this up to Marco Rubio. I'm going to send him a text.' Kirk had been in the UK for a debate at the Oxford Union on Monday when the case of Mrs Connolly was raised. He later appeared on GB News, during which he said: 'I'm sorry, speaking as a citizen not on behalf of the US government, is this a way that a liberal democracy and ally of the United States acts? Kirk continued: 'I just find it so outrageous that she is now going to jail for two and a half years for a deleted social media post that she apologised for. As you guys (the UK) have birthed free speech to the world, you are now becoming a totalitarian country. 'I'm going to bring this up to Marco Rubio. I'm going to send him a text. This should be mentioned. It's not new.' Connolly's sentence was recently brought under the spotlight again last month after a man who abused a first class cabin crew on a flight from London was jailed for just 15-months. Recruitment tycoon Salman Iftikhar, 37, was flying in first class when he launched a vile tirade of abuse towards Virgin Atlantic staff on a flight from London Heathrow to Lahore in his homeland of Pakistan. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said the sentence was evidence of 'two-tier justice', given Connolly was jailed for more than double his sentence. Mr Philp told the Mail last month: 'Iftikar was sentenced to only 15 months in prison last week for threatening an air stewardess with gang rape and for racially aggravated harassment. Iftikhar has multiple previous convictions. 'Yet Lucy Connolly got 31 months for a far less serious offence - a prosecution Lord Hermer personally authorised. 'This is two-tier justice in action. 'I have today referred the case to the Attorney General Lord Hermer for review under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme. 'We'll now find out if Hermer is willing to take action to fix Britain's two-tier justice problem.'
Daily Mail
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Calls for smacking ban in England grow as 8 in 10 adults say punishment is 'unacceptable'
Demands for a smacking ban in England are growing as a poll revealed eight in ten adults think the punishment is 'unacceptable'. Parents are still allowed to use 'reasonable punishment' against their children despite the practice being outlawed in Scotland and Wales. In both nations, any type of corporal punishment, including smacking, hitting, slapping and shaking, has been illegal for at least three years. Polling for children's charity NSPCC, carried out by YouGov, surveyed 3,800 adults across England – of whom 749 were parents with a child under 18 and 198 were aged 18 to 24. It found 82 per cent of adults aged between 18 and 24 believe it is unacceptable for a parent to use force, however slight, against a child – up from 64 per cent in 2023. And 81 per cent of parents with children under 18 felt the same, a slight increase from 80 per cent last year. Of all adults surveyed, 71 per cent said they believe physical punishment against a child is unacceptable, up from 67 per cent in 2023. Earlier this year, leading health experts urged parliamentarians to give children the 'fundamental right to safety and protection' by backing a smacking ban. Children's doctors and psychiatrists said decades of research showed the 'detrimental effects of physical punishment'. NSPCC chief executive Chris Sherwood said: 'Parents and young people are telling us loud and clear that they don't want physical punishment to be a part of anyone's childhood. File image: Parents are still allowed to use 'reasonable punishment' against their children despite the practice being outlawed in Scotland and Wales 'Parents know their children and what works best for them. It is therefore crucial their experiences and opinions are not ignored or undermined.' In June, as part of debate on the Bill, Conservative peer Lord Jackson of Peterborough warned that introducing a smacking ban in England would be 'disproportionate and heavy-handed'. He argued 'reasonable chastisement' was harmless and it risked 'criminalising good and caring parents, as well as overloading children's services departments'. But in the wake of the murder of ten-year-old Sara Sharif in 2023 by her father – who had claimed in a call to police after fleeing England that he 'did legally punish' his daughter and that he 'beat her up too much' – the UK's four children's commissioners jointly called for a wholesale smacking ban. The commissioners insisted 'loving, well-meaning' parents have no need to be concerned about a change in the law. The Government, which has previously said it has 'no plans to legislate at this stage', was contacted for comment.
