Local Services

[sonyc 5,542]

I'm not sure this subject fits into the Tory leader thread...and though it is probably linked to over a decade of cuts (see the article below) it is a wider problem than mere government policy (e.g.. macro- economic too). The local authority covering our wide geographical area has clearly informed the local press about being on the 'brink of bankruptcy' as a way of getting the news out. Either that, or it's a desperate plea for support or both. I'm expecting the news to become national in the next month  perhaps.

There have been a few going bankrupt and the sense is that a significant percentage of other councils could also declare. Social care, children's services and homelessness are of course statutory duties that authorities must perform amongst a miriad of other environmental and safety responsibilities. The revenue support grant was cut under Osborne - like many other things under Cameron's administration and austerity policy.

What this might mean for everyone ahead I'm unclear but even in the last few years there have clearly been changes where we are - services being run voluntarily, community facilities working less hours, libraries closing, street cleaning not done, drainage repairs not done (resulting in flooding hotspots).

I don't think it's aligned purely to a Conservative/ Labour administration in control nor is it simply a North / South phenomenon (though social.problems are exacerbated by inequalities and have a geographical / demographic dimension).

I wonder what peoples' experience are where you live? If you read some stories the concentration of attack is on poor management, disastrous investment decisions (I read that some authorities bought up retail parks hundreds of miles away as an example) as well as blame on government funding formulas.

A very general outline is provided here:

https://news.sky.com/story/why-are-councils-going-bankrupt-13018122

A better link here with map:

https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/economic-growth/regional-development/2023/11/council-bankruptcy-tracker-local-government-authorities-finances

 

A complex and also worrying trend.

Edited December 15, 2023 by sonyc

[Herman 9,868]

You may be interested in this, which came up on radio earlier. Gove's neck of the woods.

 

[benchwarmer 625]

I used to work in local government admin, and the gradual withdrawal of central government funding from local authorities has been going on for decades.  Council tax rises are also limited for political reasons, hence the growing reliance by LAs on exorbitent parking charges, sale of assets such as land and buildings which used to provide a regular source of income, and half-baked business enterprises.

Edited December 17, 2023 by benchwarmer

[horsefly 4,326]

The government simply wants to disperse the blame for the catastrophic state of essential services onto local councils. Also the most impoverished areas needing greater finance are more likely to be in Labour controlled areas. Political game playing at its most cynical.

[Barbe bleu 837]

On 15/12/2023 at 11:17, sonyc said:

I'm not sure this subject fits into the Tory leader thread...and though it is probably linked to over a decade of cuts (see the article below) it is a wider problem than mere government policy (e.g.. macro- economic too). The local authority covering our wide geographical area has clearly informed the local press about being on the 'brink of bankruptcy' as a way of getting the news out. Either that, or it's a desperate plea for support or both. I'm expecting the news to become national in the next month  perhaps.

There have been a few going bankrupt and the sense is that a significant percentage of other councils could also declare. Social care, children's services and homelessness are of course statutory duties that authorities must perform amongst a miriad of other environmental and safety responsibilities. The revenue support grant was cut under Osborne - like many other things under Cameron's administration and austerity policy.

What this might mean for everyone ahead I'm unclear but even in the last few years there have clearly been changes where we are - services being run voluntarily, community facilities working less hours, libraries closing, street cleaning not done, drainage repairs not done (resulting in flooding hotspots).

I don't think it's aligned purely to a Conservative/ Labour administration in control nor is it simply a North / South phenomenon (though social.problems are exacerbated by inequalities and have a geographical / demographic dimension).

I wonder what peoples' experience are where you live? If you read some stories the concentration of attack is on poor management, disastrous investment decisions (I read that some authorities bought up retail parks hundreds of miles away as an example) as well as blame on government funding formulas.

A very general outline is provided here:

https://news.sky.com/story/why-are-councils-going-bankrupt-13018122

A better link here with map:

https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/economic-growth/regional-development/2023/11/council-bankruptcy-tracker-local-government-authorities-finances

 

A complex and also worrying trend.

Interesting thoughts.

I dont think there is any one answer to the question of why councils are reeling, but there are some general trends:

Poor management is an issue in some authorities, Birmingham for example didn't pay fairly and now everyone three is suffering

Overreach- councillors going for the next shiny object or paying a fortune for a pet rock without a clue how to actually deliver it or pay for it once delivered. 

Grant cuts- central government funding has gone down across the board and most councils are unable to make up the difference in fees, some are unwilling to, but that's probably less of a factor.

Cost of statutory services - demand for and the costs of social services has gone up massively.  We are living longer, but not necessarily in health, we expect much more from our schools than ever before and for some councils housing people when there is no housing is absolutely crippling.

 

Edited December 17, 2023 by Barbe bleu

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

9 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Interesting thoughts.

I dont think there is any one answer to the question of why councils are reeling, but there arwle some general trends:

Poor management is an issue in some authorities, Birmingham for example didn't pay fairly and now everyone three is suffering

Overreach- councillors going for the next shiny object or paying a fortune for a pet rock without a clue how to actually deliver it or pay for it once delivered. 

Grant cuts- central government funding has gone down across the board and most councils are unable to make up the difference in fees, some are unwilling to, but that's probably less of a factor.

Cost of statutory services - demand for and the costs of social services has gone up massively.  We are living longer, but not necessarily in health, we expect much more from our schools than ever before and for some councils housing people when there is no housing is absolutely crippling.

 

The problem is over-employment and under-productivity in the public sector:

In the UK, the public sector staffing levels are clearly out of control. According to figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) this week, the Government now employs 5.9 million people. That was an extra 35,000 people compared with June, the last time the figures were calculated, and 135,000 more than at the same time last year.

The main contributors to that were the NHS, with an extra 84,000 people over the last year, taking the total to just a shade under two million, and the Civil Service with 16,000 extra people compared with 12 months ago.

With total payroll employees in the UK now standing at 30 million, the state directly employs one to six salaried employees, and that ratio is rising with every year that passes.

[Barbe bleu 837]

9 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

The problem is over-employment and under-productivity in the public sector:

In the UK, the public sector staffing levels are clearly out of control. According to figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) this week, the Government now employs 5.9 million people. That was an extra 35,000 people compared with June, the last time the figures were calculated, and 135,000 more than at the same time last year.

The main contributors to that were the NHS, with an extra 84,000 people over the last year, taking the total to just a shade under two million, and the Civil Service with 16,000 extra people compared with 12 months ago.

With total payroll employees in the UK now standing at 30 million, the state directly employs one to six salaried employees, and that ratio is rising with every year that passes.

RTB there may be a discussion to be had about public sector productivity in general, but your figures are not particularly relevant to local authorities. If anything they prove it is not councils that are employing too many people but other areas of government.

Edited December 17, 2023 by Barbe bleu

[sonyc 5,542]

32 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

RTB there may be a discussion to be had about public sector productivity in general, but your figures are not particularly relevant to local authorities. If anything they prove it is not councils that are employing too many people but other areas of government.

Quite correct BB. The numbers have fallen in local government and have increased in central government. Link here...

https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2019/03/record-low-number-local-government-workers

And my original post was about the challenges of providing services at the local level. Your point about costs of services increasing is correct as is your point about speculative ventures failing for some authorities (who were asked to be entrepreneurial in the first instance by government asking them to find creative solutions to rising costs). Government cuts have been a big factor and the chickens are truly coming home to roost. Demand for services in an era of austerity has risen sharply (social care, children's services - especially those with special needs). Inflation hasn't helped either plus people in the neediest areas are not living healthily towards the end of their lives. 

There is a sense of a time bomb.

[sonyc 5,542]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/29/british-politics-local-councils-ministers-town-hall-democracy

 

An extract below from the full article:

 

Every review of Britain 2023 says the same. The country is not being well run. From policing to care homes, from postal services to sewage spills, from youth clubs to potholes, everywhere is failure. Small wonder just 20% of Britons now have any faith in their national politicians, one of the lowest figures in a western democracy.

Nowhere is this decline more evident than in local government. It is going bust. Birmingham, Nottingham, Croydon and four other councils in England have issued section 114 notices since 2020, indicating that their expenditure will exceed income. According to the Local Government Association (LGA), in the coming year, one in five councils expect to fail financially. Commissioners have already been sent to Woking and Slough, effectively suspending their local democracy.

In most of what they do, councils now act as agents of Whitehall instruction – as with children in need, care of elderly people and dispensing housing benefit. Yet the money to do this has been butchered in 13 years of austerity, with a 40% real-terms cut in central grants. Money for anything considered “discretionary” – public libraries, sports facilities, local colleges, the arts, the stuff of community life – has evaporated. The LGA estimates a cash shortfall of £4bn over the current two-year period. This is a fraction of what successive governments have spent on that white elephant, HS2. Rishi Sunak won’t give Birmingham another penny but he will happily speed Brummies to the bright lights of London.

 

 

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

Thanks for this great post sonyc. We don't have to look far to see yje mismanagement and poor decision making. NCC purchased a software computer soft ware called Oraxle cloud, which was supposed to be working better than the previous system in place, for 18 Million. after much trying out, those who had to use it realised that it was complicating their work, making it slower and very confusing to use, there were mistakes happening with late payments for NCC staff and more.

Not much was heard in public about it, but the result was that the powers to be decided to throw another 2 Mio, followed by 8 Mio.

Some staff started looking around the country and realised that bankrupt Bimingham City council has had much similar problem with the same software. It is not fit for purpose.

This is just one of many wastage's. Looking at the redevelopment of the Hay Hill area, going on for almost a year now, the slow speed o fit and City Hall's debt of 3.7Million, its becoming clear that there is much reform to be desired. I had no problems with the look of Hay Hill before this go slow building site started up.How much did it cost Norwich council taxpayers? what of the expensive stone artwork and street furniture, still in expensive storage at present?  are they proposing to sell these off?

just saying...

 

[TheGunnShow 6,121]

On 17/12/2023 at 11:04, horsefly said:

The government simply wants to disperse the blame for the catastrophic state of essential services onto local councils. Also the most impoverished areas needing greater finance are more likely to be in Labour controlled areas. Political game playing at its most cynical.

Exactly this. I tend to say the councils who are best are those where the ruling party of the council matches the one in power. Let's put it in perspective - council tax is higher in Bolton than in wealthy Kensington.

[sonyc 5,542]

5 hours ago, nevermind, neoliberalism has had it said:

Thanks for this great post sonyc. We don't have to look far to see yje mismanagement and poor decision making. NCC purchased a software computer soft ware called Oraxle cloud, which was supposed to be working better than the previous system in place, for 18 Million. after much trying out, those who had to use it realised that it was complicating their work, making it slower and very confusing to use, there were mistakes happening with late payments for NCC staff and more.

Not much was heard in public about it, but the result was that the powers to be decided to throw another 2 Mio, followed by 8 Mio.

Some staff started looking around the country and realised that bankrupt Bimingham City council has had much similar problem with the same software. It is not fit for purpose.

This is just one of many wastage's. Looking at the redevelopment of the Hay Hill area, going on for almost a year now, the slow speed o fit and City Hall's debt of 3.7Million, its becoming clear that there is much reform to be desired. I had no problems with the look of Hay Hill before this go slow building site started up.How much did it cost Norwich council taxpayers? what of the expensive stone artwork and street furniture, still in expensive storage at present?  are they proposing to sell these off?

just saying...

 

I think that poor IT decisions are a thing with lots of companies and certainly local authorities. Each new system is going to solve lots of problems but the system ends up needing to be fed too often and it leads to even more waste, certainly in time. Developers meanwhile are laughing. The NHS is known for having many systems that are often isolated and don't speak to each other. In large organisations like that it is a disaster.

The main overall thrust of that article though (and my thread) is about inadequate resourcing of the stuff that central government needs doing locally. And already services in many areas are pared back to the bone, with many cuts having already been made, to the point now where bankruptcy stories are evolving each month. And it appears not just north or south or who has to get local control. For sure, there are poor management practices but it's a wider systemic neglect by central government. And no longer can it just be a case of asking local authorities to try and be entrepreneurial!

[Fen Canary 916]

On 30/12/2023 at 07:44, sonyc said:

I think that poor IT decisions are a thing with lots of companies and certainly local authorities. Each new system is going to solve lots of problems but the system ends up needing to be fed too often and it leads to even more waste, certainly in time. Developers meanwhile are laughing. The NHS is known for having many systems that are often isolated and don't speak to each other. In large organisations like that it is a disaster.

The main overall thrust of that article though (and my thread) is about inadequate resourcing of the stuff that central government needs doing locally. And already services in many areas are pared back to the bone, with many cuts having already been made, to the point now where bankruptcy stories are evolving each month. And it appears not just north or south or who has to get local control. For sure, there are poor management practices but it's a wider systemic neglect by central government. And no longer can it just be a case of asking local authorities to try and be entrepreneurial!

Ultimately if central governments aren’t going to fund local services then either council tax needs to rise in order to do so or services get cut. You could argue this is one of the downsides to localism as opposed to centralism of services, in that more sparsely populated areas or poorer areas with more people in need of services are going to have to fork out much higher rates of council tax than densely populated or wealthy suburbs.

I also don’t doubt that a lot of money is wasted on pet projects rather than core services, as turnout in local elections is fairly low you tend to get many more ideologues elected than you normally would but that’s another argument 

[sonyc 5,542]

Always was a fan of Marmot and I'm pleased that a local authority has referenced his ideas and put them into action.as the cornerstone of policy. It shows something can always be done at a local level.

https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2024/jan/08/learn-from-us-coventry-marmot-review-fight-inequality?

 

Extract here - the introduction...

 

In 2013, Coventry city council decided to become a self-described “Marmot city”, which meant working in partnership with the Institute of Health Equity at University College London to improve wellbeing and reduce disparities in health outcomes within the local population. Between 2010 and 2012, there was an 11-year gap between life expectancy at birth between men with the highest and lowest incomes, while the inequality between women in those income brackets stood at eight years.

“Coventry is quite a small and compact city, and there is widespread deprivation but there are also pockets of severe deprivation, and it’s a very diverse community,” says Angela Baker, a public health consultant for health inequalities and life chances at the council. “We felt that the Marmot tools, particularly the Marmot review, gave us a good framework.”

Edited January 8 by sonyc

[sonyc 5,542]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68046627

I still think this is a story that hasn't received enough attention in the press. The situation affects so many people. Council taxes are being put up to try and stem the shortfalls and just to pay for existing services at their current levels, let alone responding to much higher levels of need.

 

First paragraph:

Dozens of MPs, including more than 40 Tories, have written to the PM demanding extra funding for councils in England to avoid big cuts to services.

Several former cabinet ministers are among those who have signed the letter.

The group say they are "exceptionally concerned" at the measures many local authorities are planning as they try to avoid going bust, including raising council tax and cutting services.

Other links:

 

 

Edited January 22 by sonyc

[Nik Vawn 164]

 

On 17/12/2023 at 10:04, horsefly said:

Also the most impoverished areas needing greater finance are more likely to be in Labour controlled areas. Political game playing at its most cynical.

More likely to be Labour controlled yes, but of course many areas suffering rural deprivation are not.  Governments of all colours are guilty of massaging the Revenue Support Grant or Housing Investment Program to favour Local Authorities of their own political persuasion.( RSA and HIP may now be outdated terms, but they’re the ones I was used to)

[Nik Vawn 164]

On 15/12/2023 at 11:17, sonyc said:

I'm not sure this subject fits into the Tory leader thread...and though it is probably linked to over a decade of cuts (see the article below) it is a wider problem than mere government policy (e.g.. macro- economic too). The local authority covering our wide geographical area has clearly informed the local press about being on the 'brink of bankruptcy' as a way of getting the news out. Either that, or it's a desperate plea for support or both. I'm expecting the news to become national in the next month  perhaps.

There have been a few going bankrupt and the sense is that a significant percentage of other councils could also declare. Social care, children's services and homelessness are of course statutory duties that authorities must perform amongst a miriad of other environmental and safety responsibilities. The revenue support grant was cut under Osborne - like many other things under Cameron's administration and austerity policy.

What this might mean for everyone ahead I'm unclear but even in the last few years there have clearly been changes where we are - services being run voluntarily, community facilities working less hours, libraries closing, street cleaning not done, drainage repairs not done (resulting in flooding hotspots).

I don't think it's aligned purely to a Conservative/ Labour administration in control nor is it simply a North / South phenomenon (though social.problems are exacerbated by inequalities and have a geographical / demographic dimension).

I wonder what peoples' experience are where you live? If you read some stories the concentration of attack is on poor management, disastrous investment decisions (I read that some authorities bought up retail parks hundreds of miles away as an example) as well as blame on government funding formulas.

A very general outline is provided here:

https://news.sky.com/story/why-are-councils-going-bankrupt-13018122

A better link here with map:

https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/economic-growth/regional-development/2023/11/council-bankruptcy-tracker-local-government-authorities-finances

 

A complex and also worrying trend.

I haven’t looked at this in detail but I wonder how many of the struggling authorities are Unitary?  My suspicion is that the drain on funds is mainly social care provision in its widest sense, something that shouldn’t effect District Councils to the same degree?

[sonyc 5,542]

1 hour ago, Nik Vawn said:

I haven’t looked at this in detail but I wonder how many of the struggling authorities are Unitary?  My suspicion is that the drain on funds is mainly social care provision in its widest sense, something that shouldn’t effect District Councils to the same degree?

I can't speak for all local authorities of course but do know a little about what is happening locally - well, quite a lot I suppose. And I think what is happening about us is replicated across the country. The increasing number of reports (plus that BBC article today I shared) indicates it is a common issue.

It's children's services that are causing huge headaches. As you'll know they are a major area of spend, and issues are worse in deprived areas. Much early intervention work used to take place for children in care, those going into care and trying to prevent them going into residential care. Domestic violence has been a big problem (unfortunately this affects children too). I know from personal experience as a counsellor (now retired). Family counsellor service experts were inundated and that was 4 years ago. Councils use the third sector often. Intervention services are increasingly becoming late intervention in nature (trying to deal with things after a problem emerges). As you know prevention is better than cure.

It's the same with homelessness. Support to charities has fallen. This includes Barnardo's and many others. Community centres also have seen funding cuts. They cannot then provide cooking lessons, counselling, welfare advice and so on... because they can't afford to pay specialist workers. Centres are so important in helping the poorer populations (often on former social housing estates) gain access to getting new skills, adult learning classes and so on.

You'll probably know that 800 libraries have shut for good in the last 13 years. Our local one was originally run by volunteers but that stopped when they couldn't afford the energy costs. So much for Cameron's Big Society (read for that, Big Con...it was aimed at providing a gloss on real cuts. Just repackaged. Just like Johnson's levelling up. A shocking conceit).

Recycling centres here are being closed - think I read 70% of them are. So...imagine what people will do. They will fly tip. The council cannot afford them. There will be numerous job losses. And that's something that's also happened over the last decade. Councils have lost employees. Those that hate Councils will always be critical (you often read stuff like "the Clowncil don't know what they're doing" on Facebook etc). ...but folk don't realise their neighbours are often employed by them. 

You'll have read about the nationwide potholes problem! Well, what would you prioritise? Filling holes or children's services? Or elderly social care (the community caring stuff). Literally, council workers are the last line of support for many disabled people. Community transport has been cut.

Arts centres are the latest to complain (and they often have richer benefactors with deeper pockets, not to mention articulate governors on their boards).

Everything is being done on the cheap. Gone are the days when you knew Tommy and Geoff who were your local grass cutters (storing their tools in local gardens) and who had 'rounds' and schedules. They emptied waste bins too. Those services have dropped off. Bins are often not emptied and overflow with dog waste week upon week - until complaints are made. Gardening services and parks services have been greatly cut.

No longer does someone open up a hut on a Sunday morning for local football teams to use to change. Pitches don't get treated either (junior and senior).

It cannot be solved quickly, even with a new government. The negligence is staggering and yes, it is something that infuriates me. Because it is a dereliction of duty. Nor do I blame councils. That's just a weak thing to do. I know too they've made poor financial decisions but they've been encouraged to play fast and loose by this government in trying to generate their own money. In our local area for example, we have a shopping centre that is owned by a council in Essex! It's fine when rents are paid but when shops go bust, that's the business plan shot.

I wish there would be a Mr Bares and the Local Council ITV programme. It would open so many people's eyes to a national disgrace.

I do feel a fairly isolated figure in raising the matter. It's a kind of unpopular subject area. But, it's peoples' lives. I suppose I've spent too long in public service jobs (charities and third sector) and have a feel for it, having witnessed such a lot first hand.

There is John Harris in the Guardian who is very good at consciousness raising. He is in a way an old fashioned travelling journalist who finds out things by going into communities and asking.

I'm upset too at many former colleagues who are battling to save their organisations (at chief executive and senior levels). The nub of it (I think and believe) is that this present government is just heartless. It is also so distant from northern communities and probably most outside of London (and the shires). There ARE very capable and decent Tory councillors too, also battling. I'm not just making a purely political issue of it. And yet NV, I do place the biggest responsibility at the hands of this terrible government.

Apologies for a long post by the way. I'm typing on my phone and as soon as hit send and see it for a few seconds after I fear it will look lengthy!

Edited January 22 by sonyc

[Nik Vawn 164]

 Not disagreeing with you sonyc, it was just a thought about the two tier system that we have in some areas and Unitaries in others, and wondering if all tiers of LG were suffering to the same degree. Children’s services, social care, libraries, recycling sites etc that you mention are services provided by Unitary authorities or County Councils where the two tier system still exists as you know,  I suspect it’s around social care where the costs have really escalated. Housing of course is a District Council function, a duty to assess housing need in appropriate cases, something which has been stretched beyond breaking point!!

What I struggle with and encounter frequently in work I do atm is the extent to which Authorities ( London Boroughs ) offer massive contracts for housing maintenance which in theory should deliver cost saving but which in practice seem to offer nothing more than an opportunity for Large Private companies to provide shoddy work at hugely inflated prices. Bigger isn’t always better, in my experience it rarely is. I would love to see a system with more local  responsibility and accountability for delivery of services. In the modern world I guess that’s a forlorn wish.

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

There are councils in Europe that have had enough of proprietary software companies providing shoddy services.

https://opensource.muenchen.de/principles.html

[sonyc 5,542]

1 hour ago, Nik Vawn said:

 Not disagreeing with you sonyc, it was just a thought about the two tier system that we have in some areas and Unitaries in others, and wondering if all tiers of LG were suffering to the same degree. Children’s services, social care, libraries, recycling sites etc that you mention are services provided by Unitary authorities or County Councils where the two tier system still exists as you know,  I suspect it’s around social care where the costs have really escalated. Housing of course is a District Council function, a duty to assess housing need in appropriate cases, something which has been stretched beyond breaking point!!

What I struggle with and encounter frequently in work I do atm is the extent to which Authorities ( London Boroughs ) offer massive contracts for housing maintenance which in theory should deliver cost saving but which in practice seem to offer nothing more than an opportunity for Large Private companies to provide shoddy work at hugely inflated prices. Bigger isn’t always better, in my experience it rarely is. I would love to see a system with more local  responsibility and accountability for delivery of services. In the modern world I guess that’s a forlorn wish.

Both tiers affected NV. Ours is a district council. Couple of links for interest.

https://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/governance/396-governance-news/55428-urgent-help-needed-as-district-councils-forced-to-make-9-cost-reduction-savings-dcn-says

 

https://www.countycouncilsnetwork.org.uk/councils-in-significantly-worse-financial-position-after-the-autumn-statement-with-seven-in-ten-now-unsure-if-they-can-balance-their-budget-next-year/

You'll know that councils not only have to demonstrate fairness in awarding contracts but also value for money. Outsourcing has been the main channel for years - and many undercut locally operated services even if some tender. As you say the size of contract rules out local solutions. Shareholders always the key. Agree with your take on housing.

Years ago councils under the Right to Buy legislation could not reinvest the revenues to build new (not allowed then). Further, many councils then siphoned the reserves into other civic areas (and not always into needy causes).

Anyway, a boring subject - but for a few. And I will just shut up about it and let this subject just slide out of consciousness on these pages rather than bumping it. Nothing can be done and I've come to feel that raising consciousness of it on a football forum is perhaps about the biggest waste of time 😄. I have to be brutally honest with myself.

Folk would far rather debate and argue about our midfield. That's fair enough too. I tend to think differently in that respect - but it is a football forum foremost and I think the demise of local councils are about the last concern on a long list of concerns for most (perhaps for at least 9 in 10 people). I wish it were different and there was more debate or an interest. You can see why local democracy bores many. Yet, talking to folk on dog walks, many raise the issue (I don't).

./governance/396-governance-news/55428-urgent-help-needed-as-district-councils-forced-to-make-9-cost-reduction-saviUrgent help needed as district councils forced to ngs-dcn-saysmake 9% cost re

Urgent help needed as district councils fo

 

Edited January 22 by sonyc

[Nik Vawn 164]

Answers my question about district councils and their housing responsibilities, from a broadsheet today 

'Council leaders from across England have urged ministers to urgently uprate funding subsidies for temporary accommodation, warning that soaring levels of homelessness threaten to tip many authorities into insolvency. Local leaders, speaking on Tuesday at an emergency meeting in Westminster, said budgets were being devastated by the exponential cost of keeping vulnerable people off the streets. They called on the government to raise the “housing benefit subsidy”, which supports councils with the provision of temporary accommodation, in line with inflation. The subsidy has been capped since 2011, which has led to a growing gulf between what councils pay to fulfil their statutory duty to help the homeless and the support they receive from central government, as the cost of housing has risen. “They are presiding over the end of local government if they fail to take the urgent action needed,” said Michael Jones, Labour leader of Crawley council in West Sussex. The annual cost of providing temporary accommodation in his district had risen from a manageable £262,000 five years ago to more than £5mn last year, Jones said, and was using up a third of council spending. “It’s the acceleration of the issue that is so concerning,” he added, explaining that an increase in homelessness among asylum seekers in the borough had added to recent pressures. The meeting came after more than 40 Tory MPs, including seven former cabinet ministers, wrote to Prime Minister Rishi Sunak threatening to vote against the local government funding settlement next month, warning that without urgent intervention from Westminster their constituents would pay more council tax for fewer services. Research by Shelter found a record 279,400 people were in temporary accommodation in England and Wales last year. The housing advocacy group also reported a 26 per cent annual jump in the number of rough sleepers in 2023. Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, has committed to raising the cap on “local housing allowance”, a benefit that goes to lower-income households, in May to reflect huge increases in the cost of renting privately. However, Steve Holt, the Liberal Democrat leader of Eastbourne council, said this fell “a long, long way short of what we need to avoid decimating essential frontline services”. He said his council was spending 49p on temporary accommodation for every £1 it raised in council tax, threatening the viability of its finances. The Treasury has now offered to hold a special meeting to discuss the acute pressures facing councils as a result of the housing crisis, Holt said. The Department of Levelling up, Housing and Communities said it was “committed to reducing the need for temporary accommodation,” and was providing councils with £1bn through the “homelessness prevention grant” over three years. “Councils are ultimately responsible for their own finances, but we remain ready to talk to any concerned about its financial position,” it added. '