Council tax to rise across London as costs mount
All but three of London's local authorities are to increase council tax bills next financial year by just under 5%, the maximum allowed without a local referendum.Barnet Council will increase its council tax by 4.98%, while 28 other London boroughs and the City of London have levied maximum council tax increases of 4.99% from 1 April.Residents in Wandsworth will see their bills rise by 2%, while council tax in Kensington and Chelsea will go up by 4%.Newham Council, which applied for extra support last year due to housing pressures from temporary accommodation, was allowed by central government to raise its bills by 8.99% in 2025-26.
Cap on rises
The 4.99% cap on council tax rises in England, which includes a 2% rise for adult social care, has been in place for the last three years. Usually a borough that wants to raise tax more than the cap has to hold a local referendum to approve the rise, but central government can authorise a higher increase. Seven London boroughs will also receive Exceptional Financial Support loans from the government of more than £418m for the next financial year.London Councils, an umbrella body for the capital's local authorities, said boroughs in the capital received about 28% less in funding per Londoner compared to 2010.It is calling for overall council funding to be restored to 2010 levels by 2028-29, requiring real-terms increases of 4% every year.London Councils said emergency borrowing measures like Exceptional Financial Support put a burden on boroughs of further debts and would not be enough to return them to a stable financial footing.It added a combination of fast-rising demand for statutory services - where boroughs have a legal duty to provide support - and the increasing cost of delivering these services had led to substantial overspends in London council budgets in recent years.
'Consider impact'
A spokesperson for the Local Government Association, which represents councils across England, said councils continued to face "severe funding shortages and soaring cost and demand pressures on local services".They added that councils had to make a "tough choice" about increasing bills to bring in "desperately-needed" funds."However, while council tax is an important funding stream, the significant financial pressures facing local services cannot be met by council tax income alone. "The Spending Review needs to ensure councils have adequate funding to deliver the services local people want to see." A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesperson said councils should "put taxpayers first and carefully consider the impact of their decisions"."That's why we are maintaining a referendum threshold on council tax rises, so taxpayers can have the final say and be protected from excessive increases," they added.Additional reporting by the Press Association
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
29 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Rachel Reeves has made tax rises inevitable
This Wednesday, Rachel Reeves will be in the firing line once again. The event in question will not be a Budget, or even a mini-Budget, but rather a spending review. But such is the pressure on the public finances that the political and economic ramifications will be significant. On the face of it, this review is meant to spell out the details of departmental spending within the overall totals that have already been set to 2028/29 for current day-to-day spending and to 2029/30 for capital spending. Such reviews are not, therefore, meant to be the vehicle for announcing major changes in fiscal policy. There is now supposedly only one major fiscal event for this purpose, namely the autumn Budget, with a subsidiary event, the Spring Statement, which was delivered in March. That said, it would not come as a surprise if the Chancellor increased the spending totals on Wednesday. After all, if defence spending is increased to 3pc of GDP (costing over £17bn per annum by 2029/30) and spending on health increases by 3.4pc in real terms per annum, this would imply that other departments would have to suffer an average real terms reduction in their budgets of 1.8pc per annum out to the end of the review period. Good luck with selling that to the Labour Party. Admittedly, although at one point increasing defence spending to 3pc of GDP was supposedly a 'commitment', more recently it seems to have been downgraded to an 'ambition'.
New Statesman
an hour ago
- New Statesman
Rachel Reeves wants to teach her critics a lesson
Photo by Hannah McKay -. The toughest job in politics is usually said to be the leader of the opposition – an impression that Kemi Badenoch's tenure has done nothing to dispel. But it is arguably rivalled by that of chancellor. Every incumbent since the 2008 financial crisis has faced a version of the same dilemma: the UK is a poorer country than it once expected to be. At last year's Budget, Rachel Reeves escaped her fiscal straitjacket through two manoeuvres: she raised taxes by £41.5bn and loosened her debt rules to increase investment. The Spending Review is the moment at which the Chancellor gets to distribute the bounty that resulted. Reeves has already launched a pre-emptive strike against critics who liken her to the flinty George Osborne. A graph shows how Labour's spending far exceeds that planned by the Conservatives before the election (one aide calls it 'the honesty chart'). This isn't just spin: Reeves intends to increase day-to-day spending by £190bn – the biggest real-terms rise since Gordon Brown occupied the Treasury in 2000 – and capital investment by £113bn. Austerity this is not. But two things can be true. Yes, overall spending is rising by £303bn but some must lose in order that others may win. The latter includes the NHS – which has secured a 2.8 per cent real-terms rise – and defence (even if plenty regard 2.5 per cent of GDP as inadequate). Ed Miliband's energy security department will enjoy a large increase in capital investment including on nuclear power (allies point to the Energy Secretary's long-standing support for the sector as part of 'the sprint for clean energy abundance'). Other departments, however, face average real-terms cuts of 0.3 per cent to day-to-day spending. Hence the fraught negotiations of the last week. Angela Rayner – that former trade union negotiator – reached a settlement with Reeves last night having warned that cuts to affordable housing would render Labour's target of building 1.5 million new homes impossible. Yvette Cooper – who knows her way around the Treasury as a former chief secretary – is still holding out. After public dissent, the police will receive a real-terms increase but this will entail cuts to other Home Office areas. Last week I detailed Andy Burnham's rhetorical fusillades against the government. This week it's Sadiq Khan who is unhappy, with concern inside City Hall that Reeves will announce no new projects or funding for London at the Spending Review (key demands include Docklands Light Railway and Bakerloo line extensions, a tourist/visitors levy and a significant rise in funding for the Met Police). 'We must not return to the damaging, anti-London approach of the last government, which would not only harm London's vital public services, but jobs and growth across the country,' one person close to the Mayor tells me. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Here is further evidence of why some inside government believe that Reeves needs an 'economic reset' – abandoning her tax lock or further loosening her fiscal rules. But the Chancellor will have a message for such critics in her speech, which aides describe as a chance to 're-educate' these errant foes. Rewriting the UK's fiscal rules, Reeves will warn, would not be a cost-free choice, but one that would entail higher borrowing and higher mortgage rates. An ally speaks of a 'terrifying' gap between a commentariat that pleads for more taxes and more borrowing, and a much more sceptical electorate. 'They think we tax too much, they think we borrow too much, and a lot of people probably think we spend too much.' The Chancellor is seeking to pull off a tricky double act – assailing those who accuse her of austerity while reassuring those who fear Labour profligacy. This week will test whether she can keep her balance. This piece first appeared in the Morning Call newsletter; receive it every morning by subscribing on Substack here [See also: Rachel Reeves wants to level up your commute. Does she have the money?] Related
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Minister says spending review will mark ‘end to austerity', as Home Office yet to agree deal
Update: Date: 2025-06-09T08:32:22.000Z Title: Angela Rayner, the deputy PM and housing secretary, settled with the Treasury late last night. Content: Good morning. In theory spending review negotiations can go up to the wire, with the final talks to resolve sticking points taking place late at night, only hours before the final decisions, and documents, are presented to MPs. In practice, it does not really happen like that now, last-minute haggling is no longer routine, and, with two days to go beofre the spending review that will settle government spending until 2019, only one cabinet minister has not yet settled. Here are the key developments this morning on the issue that will dominate the week. The news was broken by Arj Singh from the i, who reports: The i Paper understands that Rayner and Reeves agreed a deal just after 7.30pm after marathon talks on Sunday. But Home Office and Treasury sources were tight lipped on Sunday, in an indication that negotiations over police funding are also going to the wire. That means Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, is the only minister yet to agree a spending settlement with the chancellor, Rachel Reeves. In the Times Chris Smyth says police budgets are expected to rise by more than inflation, but other parts of the Home Office budget may face cuts. He reports: It is understood that Reeves has insisted that policing budgets will rise in each year of the spending review, which sets funding up to 2028-29. However, it remains unclear if the boost will match the more than £1 billion extra officers say is needed to cover existing shortfalls. Cooper is also expected to have to find deeper cuts elsewhere to boost police budgets. The Border Force has warned of longer queues at airports as it faces cuts to its £1.2 billion budget, saying there would be a 'threat to national security' if it lost frontline staff. Two police unions have launched a last-minute bid for extra money. In an article in the Daily Telegraph, Nick Smart, president of the Police Superintendents's Association, and Tiff Lynch, acting chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales, say: Police are being asked to do more with less – again – as pressure mounts on already overstretched budgets. Why? Policing faces a £1.2 billion shortfall. This is before it is asked to deliver the ambitious pledges of the new government. Police forces across the country are being forced to shed officers and staff to deliver savings. These are not administrative cuts. They go to the core of policing's ability to deliver a quality service: fewer officers on the beat, longer wait times for victims, and less available officers when a crisis hits. As a practical lobbying exercise, this is fairly pointless, because it comes too late, but the two unions are making their case to the public. Chris Bryant, the culture minister, has said that the spending review will mark 'an end to austerity'. He told Times Radio: We know from running the government that spending money of itself isn't an achievement. Spending money and getting results is an achievement and that's why we are saying now with this spending review on Wednesday it's an end to austerity … That period of austerity where I think previous governments simply cut all public service budgets just because they believed that was what you had to do is over. But he also said some budgets would be 'stretched'. He said health and defence spending would rise, but added: There are going to be other parts of the budget that are going to be much more stretched and be difficult. Ministers have been promising the end of austerity at least since Theresa May was in office. Labour defend using the term on the grounds that overall government spending is going up in real terms. But there is no agreed definition of 'austerity' and, if spending is falling in certain areas, that may feel like austerity, and so using the term does not contribute a lot to public debate. What it does mean, though, is government not wanting to be associated with George Osborne. Here is our overnight story about the spending review. Here is the agenda for the day. Morning: Keir Starmer gives a speech at a London Tech Week event. 11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing. Noon: Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, gives a speech at Port Talbot in south Wales. 2.30pm: Angela Rayner, the deputy PM and housing secretary, takes questions in the Commons. Also, Starmer is meeting Mark Rutte, the Nato general secretary, in Downing Street today. If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (normally between 10am and 3pm at the moment), or message me on social media. I can't read all the messages BTL, but if you put 'Andrew' in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word. If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @ The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary. I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can't promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
