Budget 2012 and the Local Finance Bill: the case for redistribution?

March 23, 2012 3:41 pm

Budget 2012: it’s hardly going to down in history as a landmark Budget for local government. No big giveaways and no big hits. You may think that Labour councils would be breathing a collective sigh of relief. Afterall, friends in Manchester will be welcoming the announcement of the City Deal for Greater Manchester, which intends to give new powers, including the ability to ‘earn back’ tax generated by investing in infrastructure to boost local growth. DCLG think this could amount to as much as £30 million a year of tax. These City Deals are being negotiated with eight core cities – six of which are Labour controlled councils*. Good news.

But it’s not the Budget that Labour local authorities are concerned about. It’s the financial reforms that are proposed in the Local Finance Bill. The government’s political principles behind the reforms are intended to make local authorities less reliant on state funding and give them more financial autonomy. But if you turn this on its head, actually what you are look at is moving away from, and reducing the levels of redistribution that takes place. Redistribution is a vital part of the finance system for some Labour authorities.

One of the deals in the Bill is to enable local authorities to retain a proportion of the business rates generated in their area. Although the government states that there will be no overnight winners and losers from this; put in very simple terms, councils will get more money from business rates paid by new business and will get less money should businesses close down or move away from the council area. Whilst you can argue that this gives councils the incentive to encourage local economic growth, we know that it’s not that simple.

Some Labour council areas, like Greater Manchester, will be very positive about the potential for growth, but there are other councils that fear they will lose out. And it is easy to see why some Labour councils have cause for concern. When you look at the government distribution of cuts so far, for example in the Grant Settlement for 2011-12, it is clear that the impact has been very uneven. Councils in the north, metropolitan councils and districts have been hit very hard; the bottom 5th of councils in terms of deprivation had the largest cuts.

The measures in the Finance Bill could have a similar effect. The deals are going to benefit those councils where times are already good and there is a risk that the richest councils remain rich, with the greatest ability to attract business and gain additional resource, and the poorest councils remain poor, with limited ability to invest in economic growth locally. And this brings us back to why redistribution is so important.

The principal factors in redistribution are the level of deprivation in an area and the relationship between the ability to raise finance locally, balanced against the demand for services. That is, those areas that have high deprivation and demand for services and limited ability to raise finance locally benefit from funding through redistribution from more prosperous areas. What this tends to have meant is that it has been Labour authorities that have been in receipt of redistribution. When you look at this deal on business rates in the Bill some Labour authorities could potentially lose out. Particularly in metropolitan centres in the north east and north west where redistribution is needed most.**

Some Labour authorities in these areas, with high deprivation and limited ability to generate new business, could be facing a real problem if the redistributive element of funding is cut. These councils will be carefully considering what this looks like for their position and how they are to move forward.

In the short term, councils need to be aided in finding a path through; innovation and risk taking should be supported. In the longer term however, the Party needs to develop a strong policy approach to local economic growth. Some on the Left have already started to look at this – Labour’s Business for example – but it needs to go further. Crucially, Labour in local government needs to be engaged – the area where Labour have power to take local economic policy forward now.

*Leeds, Liverpool, Newcastle, Nottingham, Manchester and Sheffield.

**Looking at employment figures, for instance, the 2010 English Indices of Deprivation tell us that of the top 20 most deprived areas, 18 of them are in the North East and North West. Of these 18, 17 of them are in Labour local authority areas. Regional Economic Performance Indicators published in May 2011, show that places like the North East and North West, predict that as a percentage of the adult population those expecting to start a business within the next 3 years fall below areas in other parts of the country – particularly London.

Laura Wilkes is a Policy Manager at Local Government Information Unit. She writes here in a personal capacity.

  • GuyM

    Anything that means less redistribution subsidy to prop up public sector non job dependent areas is a good step in the right direction.

    I see no reason why people in my area should be endlessly taxed to allow certain northern councils hide from economic realities.

  • Cllr Richard Livingstone

    Laura

    The problem with your argument is that it doesn’t address the issue of the councils who are amongst those hit hardest by the cuts but are well positioned to make gains from the retention of business rates.

    The 2012/13 settlement marks a 25% real terms cut in its total general revenue account budget that Southwark Council has faced since the General Election.  With further cuts coming down the track it is very difficult for Labour authorities like ours not to support something that enables us to at least cushion the impact of those. 

    Why should the benefits from developments like the Shard not contribute towards addressing the needs of a borough that still has severe deprivation in many areas? 

    These developments only breed resentment in areas of high need if it is not clear what benefits they are bringing to the local communities that they most impact on.

Latest

  • Featured Young Labour voted against supporting the free education demo, but the debate on tuition fees has been reopened

    Young Labour voted against supporting the free education demo, but the debate on tuition fees has been reopened

    Last night Young Labour voted on whether or not to come out in support of the free education demonstration set to take place on the 19th November. Reports suggest, they voted against the motion. This result could easily be interpreted as another sign that the argument against tuition fees is dead in the water. In reality, it tells us that opposite is true. The very fact that this was a topic for discussion at Young Labour’s national committee, that there […]

    Read more →
  • Comment The scandal of the care workers who don’t receive the minimum wage

    The scandal of the care workers who don’t receive the minimum wage

    There’s been a great deal of focus on the Minimum Wage recently. Labour pledged an £8 an hour minimum by 2020 (only to get into a war of words with Alan Milburn about whether this was enough). Meanwhile at Tory conference, the odious Lord Freud was questioning whether or not disabled people are “worth” the minimum wage at all – and whether some should work for £2 an hour instead. Understandably, the Labour Party rushed to defend the principle of […]

    Read more →
  • News Stagnant wages forcing Osborne to borrow billions more than he did last year

    Stagnant wages forcing Osborne to borrow billions more than he did last year

    Government borrowing for last month was £11.8bn – £1.6bn more than September of last year. Borrowing for 2014 is now almost £6bn more than it was at this stage a year ago, and experts say the problem is that wages are not rising. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) warned that George Osborne’s forecast for borrowing could rise yet again as a result of these figures, and suggest lack of wage growth is the foremost cause of the Chancellor’s troubles: […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Try to imagine for a moment that you are Jeremy Hunt

    Try to imagine for a moment that you are Jeremy Hunt

    It may be an uncomfortable exercise, but brace yourself and try to imagine for a moment that you are Jeremy Hunt. Now, in your new role ensconced behind a desk at the Department for Health, it’s not difficult to imagine the huge pressures that are heaped on your shoulders at the moment. The English NHS is undergoing the worst year in A&E for a decade, with almost a million people waiting over 4 hours, elderly care is in crisis as […]

    Read more →
  • News Wales Mass Exodus? Figures show number of Welsh NHS patients using English NHS is FALLING since 2010

    Mass Exodus? Figures show number of Welsh NHS patients using English NHS is FALLING since 2010

    The Tories have been trying to use the Welsh NHS as a stick with which to beat the Labour Party, so it wasn’t too surprising to see the Daily Mail parroting Tory attack lines today with this front page splash: Now if you look beyond the (largely anecdotal) stories and carefully selected numbers in Daily Mail piece and look at the complete figures (available here) – they reveal that the number of Welsh patients using the NHS in England is actually falling. Here’s how […]

    Read more →
7ads6x98y