Tory taxpayers to bear brunt of Reeves's squeeze on police
Council taxpayers in Tory areas will bear the brunt of Rachel Reeves's squeeze on police funding, official figures show.
Police forces in rural areas, which are predominantly under Tory control, have to draw twice as much of their budgets from council taxpayers as metropolitan areas, which are largely overseen by Labour police and crime commissioners.
Conservative Surrey funds 57 per cent of its budget through its policing precept on council tax at the top of the table compared with 21.8 per cent for the West Midlands, 24.3 per cent for Merseyside and 27.1 per cent for the Metropolitan Police Service, which are all Labour-controlled, according to official data for 2024.
This disparity means that they can only plug gaps from the Chancellor's police cuts through a disproportionate reliance on their council taxpayers who face an anticipated increase of £14 on their tax bills for Band D properties, or more than five per cent.
The figures come a day after police chiefs warned Ms Reeves that the funding shortfall would mean they would be unable to deliver on the Government's pledges to put 13,000 more neighbourhood bobbies on the beat and halve knife crime and violence against women and girls.
Ms Reeves pledged police forces would get an increase of 2.3 per cent in their spending power, but this included the council tax precept on which rural areas disproportionately rely for their funding.
Police chiefs also maintained it was only a 1.7 per cent increase in reality because of carry-over funding for hikes in National Insurance contributions and pay rises.
Police and crime commissioners from the hardest-hit areas are urging Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, to revise the funding formula, which they claim pushes government grants away from sparsely populated rural areas to more densely populated metropolitan forces.
While the Met, which is overseen by Sir Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, receives £5.11 per head of the population and Merseyside gets £4.58 per head. Meanwhile, Dorset gets £2.10, Surrey £2.11 and Lincolnshire £2.13, according to analysis of police data.
Marc Jones, Lincolnshire's Conservative Police and Crime Commissioner, has previously threatened legal action against the Home Office over the 'unfair' and 'outdated' formula which still relies on population statistics from 2013 and even includes a metric based on pubs per square mile.
David Sidwick, Dorset's Police and Crime Commissioner, said the formula failed to take account of the demands of policing sparsely populated rural areas such as his, which has also seen some 25 million day visitors per year.
'Why should the people of Dorset bear a bigger burden than other areas because they have better grant funding,' said Mr Sidwick. 'What they are doing in a cynical way is saying that if you want extra policing, then the local people have to pay for it.
'That would be fine if we were all starting from a level playing field but we are not. Those forces that do best from the grant are able to have the lowest precept. The money needs to be distributed in a fairer way otherwise it is unjust for people in Dorset.
'It's also unjust police officers who have to deal with 25 million day visitors a year. They have the highest individual demand of every police force.'
Roger Hirst, Essex Police and Crime Commissioner and joint finance lead for the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners, said the police funding was 'disproportionately' based on the policing precept.
'Those areas that are rural, non-urban and largely governed by Conservatives are having to bear the bigger burden of this real term increase in policing relative to urban areas where there is more grant,' he said.
'The precept is a bigger proportion for me than for the West Midlands, Newcastle or Manchester.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Secretary of state rejects DUP 'hapless' claim over legacy
The secretary of state has dismissed claims by the DUP that he is keeping victims and some parties "in the dark" over his government's plans to change how Troubles legacy cases are handled. Hilary Benn was responding to remarks by DUP leader Gavin Robinson, who described his approach as "hapless". London and Dublin have been in talks for some time about trying to find a joint way forward, with the two governments meeting on Thursday during the British-Irish Council to discuss the latest developments. Benn said he made "no apology" for working with the Irish government and others to try and reach a solution. The DUP said by Benn meeting Tánaiste (Irish deputy PM) Simon Harris, he had "dishonoured" victims who were concerned about the Irish government's own approach to dealing with the legacy of the past. Labour intends to retain a new legacy body set up under the legislation - the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR). A number of victims' groups have called for the ICRIR to be scrapped, arguing it is not sufficiently independent to investigate killings during Northern Ireland's decades-long conflict. Dublin maintains a legal challenge against the UK government over the legacy act, but Harris has said he believes a deal can still be reached to allow his government to drop that case. The DUP leader said: "Last night, Hilary Benn disgracefully continued his desire to satisfy the Irish Government, seeking their approval for his actions. "In meeting Simon Harris to negotiate next steps, he dishonours the countless victims in Northern Ireland that I have met over recent months who lament that whilst he may listen, he does not hear." He also accused Dublin of having a "scandalous approach" to legacy. "The Irish continue to ruthlessly defend their sovereign information, yet Hilary Benn concedes their unconstitutional role in determining how the UK deals with ours," said Robinson. "The Irish government have knowledge of and influence upon UK legacy plans, yet Northern Ireland victims, veterans and Parliamentarians are kept in the dark by the secretary of state without so much as a blush on his face." Speaking at the British-Irish Council, Benn said legacy remained "unfinished business" and that all politicians had a responsibility to find a way forward. "We are making good progress... the lesson indeed exemplified by the Good Friday Agreement is that we make most progress when we work together."
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
UK civil servants revolt over ‘Israel's genocide'
British civil servants must stop helping Israel with 'potential war crimes' in Gaza, union bosses have demanded. The Public and Commercial Services (PCS) union, which represents almost 200,000 civil servants across Whitehall, has advised members to 'stop all work within the civil service and its related areas which in any way potentially enables acts of genocide'. It has pledged to support civil servants who refuse to work on Israel and demanded that mandarins be given legal immunity for aiding potential 'war crimes'. Union chiefs want an urgent meeting with the Cabinet Office and have written to officials to 'seek assurances that members are protected from legal liability for any acts carried out by the state of Israel'. The move comes just days after about 300 Foreign Office officials were told to consider resigning after sending a letter to David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, warning against 'complicity' in Israel's actions. The letter cited the killing by Israeli forces of 15 aid workers in March and the blockade on aid into Gaza as examples of concerns. Sir Olly Robbins and Nick Dyer, two of the most senior mandarins in the Foreign Office, suggested that the complainants step down if they disagreed with the Government's policy. The response was said to have been met with fury in Whitehall, with one insider telling the BBC that there was a 'deep sense of disappointment that the space for challenge is being further shut down'. In a letter sent on Friday to Cat Little, the Cabinet permanent secretary, the PCS union said the Government's response to the concerns raised this week by civil servants was 'dismissive and inadequate'. It argued that the Government 'may be putting UK civil servants at risk of liability for crimes committed by the Israeli state and placing them in a position of conflict given their obligations under the civil service code'. Fran Heathcote, the general secretary of the PCS, said the union was 'extremely concerned that the Government continues to ignore our members' concerns that they may be held liable under international law for the war crimes being committed daily by the state of Israel'. Ministers' official line is that Israel is 'at risk' of breaching international law with its actions in Gaza, with 30 out of about 350 arms sales licences to Israel halted in September out of fear that the weapons may be used for war crimes. However, union bosses called on the Government to go further. Ms Heathcote said: 'Given the scale of the death toll and the depth of the destruction to Palestinian society in Gaza, this matter is urgent and government officials need to act quickly.' She argued that it was 'time for the UK Government to wake up and listen to its own workers'. Foreign Office bosses are said to back a 'healthy challenge' to policy, but have argued that it is up to civil servants to deliver the will of the Government. The PCS union has pledged to 'fully back any member facing any sort of disciplinary action for refusing to action or work on any arms export license to Israel'. A Foreign Office spokesman said this week that 'since day one, this Government has rigorously applied international law in relation to the war in Gaza' adding that it is 'the job of civil servants to deliver on the policies of the government of the day and to provide professional, impartial advice'. The Cabinet Office has been approached for comment. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How the fight against Labour's cruel child VAT raid continues
Those hoping for immediate relief from the courts in relation to the Government's imposition of VAT on school fees yesterday had their short-term hopes dashed. But if you read the judgment and examine what is going on in schools, the Government now has a right mess on its hands. The High Court rightly found that, for the 100,000 or so children in private schools with special education needs who are forced to move into the state sector because they have closed or their parents can no longer afford the fees, their fundamental rights have indeed been interfered with. However, it said that Parliament was entitled to do this because it has very broad powers when it comes to raising new taxes. In this case, what was being sought by the claimants was a 'declaratory remedy' which would have sent the legislation back to Parliament to resolve. So, what happens now? The Chancellor Rachel Reeves and beleaguered Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson are no doubt delighted that they have apparently won. But the truth is, like special needs children themselves, they are not out of the woods. They won by a nose and could yet lose in subsequent contests. The first thing to say is that the special needs system is in total chaos. Since the pandemic, there is a huge backlog of children who do not have 'statements', in other words official education health and care plans, who are in a queue or appealing at tribunals hoping to get one. Local authorities are understandably reluctant to award them, in part because of a questionable previous court ruling, which said they have to pay for taxis for special needs children to get to their school. If you talk to a taxi driver, many of them make a fortune providing this service which, in general terms, seems excessive and incredibly costly. Yet now, parents who previously were paying for their own children's school fees and indeed transport, have had it confirmed that their children have a fundamental right to an appropriate education and their legal claims against local education authorities have now been given additional force. It would have been cheaper and simpler if VAT had not been imposed on school fees and they stayed where they were. Second, thousands of parents were waiting for this judgement, having either given provisional notice to leave private schools or waiting to decide whether to embark on that costly journey in the first place next term. So far, 11,000 children have left private schools because of this measure. My guess is that twice that number, will now not turn up next term. Put all this together and the new taxes on education will raise very little money and might even lose revenue. The reality is that Labour have created a giant and costly mess. An appeal is likely. There is no tax on education in any civilised country and, sooner or later, we must hope that a future government will reverse this cruel and costly measure. George Trefgarne is a parent and supporter of the 'Education Not Discrimination' group Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
