Budget

Westminster fiddles while local government burns

As the Government prepares for its last Spring Budget before the upcoming general election, it’s easy to assume that all eyes are fixed on Westminster. The reality, however, is that the soldiers in the trenches of our local economies – politicians, officers and activists – are more concerned about their existential future, and are expecting little, if anything, from this Budget – writes CLES researcher, Tallulah Eyres.

Released last week, the LGiU’s annual state of local government finance report argues that the dire state of local government finances now goes well beyond business as usual. The balance has tipped, they say, and the report paints a desperate picture of councils grappling with insufficient funding to maintain essential services, with more than half of local government leaders warning that they now face bankruptcy in the next five years. Despite urgent warnings from the IMF to prioritise public spending, there is scant indication of any fundamental change forthcoming from Westminster.
“crumbs from the masters table”
Instead, the anticipated crumbs to fall from the masters table, including extensions of tax advantages for new Investment Zones and Freeports, are primarily focussed on using various fiscal incentives to attract investment. Admittedly, these place-based approaches are targeted towards disadvantaged communities but, as my colleague Sean Benstead uncovered in his research last year into Freeports, previous experiments with low tax and tariff zones have fallen short in addressing regional economic inequality or stimulating job creation. Instead, they risk extracting wealth and opportunity from hard-pressed communities by diluting workers’ rights, displacing businesses and facilitating tax evasion.

Right place and time for change

This article originally appeared in the Municipal Journal.

This week all eyes will be on the Autumn Statement. While the headlines will likely focus on questions of tax and public funding on the national level, the question of whether local government will receive any relief from more than 13 years of austerity will probably not make the cut.

Yet the systematic defunding and devaluing of local government is – I would argue – one of the reasons why there are growing levels of poverty, hardship and destitution, creating huge vulnerability in places across the UK, generating significant pressure in the NHS and in social care and undermining the potential of local economies. For decades, every chancellor has stood at the dispatch box and argued their plan is the one that will set this country on the path to prosperity for all. That they will deregulate, bulldoze, cut through regulation, look under stones in the pursuit of growth. Few are bothered about the quality of the economy they are nurturing, merely the upward trajectory. Often the most important question is missed: who benefits?
“The gap between those who have least and most is growing”
Take Greater Manchester, for example, where recent CLES research shows the city region’s economy has more than doubled since 1998. Yet a third of children live in poverty, there are 16,000 live applications for social housing and 390 neighbourhoods are among the most deprived in the UK. The wealth of the average Greater Manchester resident, including property and other assets, is around £84,400 while the 11 richest individuals in the city region have a combined wealth of more than £9.3bn. The gap between those who have least and most is growing year-on-year.

Growth = wealth? Not for everyone.

Yesterday the Chancellor of the Exchequer will stood at the dispatch box and argued that his plan is the one that will set this country on the path to prosperity for all. He’s not the first. He almost definitely won’t be the last. And yet here we are.

The climate emergency, austerity, growing inequality and political inertia mean that across the UK and beyond, many people and their families are struggling to make ends meet.  These are not new crises. And yet, for decades Chancellors have set out the ways in which they will deregulate, bulldoze, build, cut through regulation and overturn every conceivable stone in the pursuit of growth. Few are bothered about the quality of the economy they are nurturing, merely the upward trajectory. Often the most important question is missed: who benefits?

Raising Council Tax won’t fix local government

This article originally appeared in Tribune.

A decade of austerity has decimated local authority funding and left many councils in crisis – but hiking regressive Council Tax isn’t a real solution. Ahead of the today’s budget statement, CLES’s Rachel Bentley and Victoria Bettany have written for Tribune explaining why.

This week’s Budget will be make or break for councils across the UK. It’s set to be a true test of whether the government really cares about the poorest in our society, or whether it’s content to continue passing off responsibility entirely to local authorities, whose capacity to help has been diminished by a decade of austerity.

A budget for recovery…but recovery for whom?

Years of successive budgets have been high on rhetoric and low on the content required to fundamentally change our economy. This budget is no different. The budget has continued to shore up spend, but not for local economies, local public services or the climate. In previous times, increased state spending would have benefited public sector workers and enhanced the social protection floor to insure us against poverty and destitution. Not this time.

Within the continued pledge to do “whatever it takes” there are plenty of warm words, bolstered by policies that show concern, but the cold harshness of a fossil fuelled economy of growth, financialisation and wealth extraction remains.

An end to austerity? Not for local government.

This article originally appeared in the Local Government Chronicle

The budget has found the money tree, but not for local economies, local public services or the climate.

We need to look at where the money goes and who has power over it. Big finance, large infrastructure companies and the existing wealth winners all win again. Just and green local economies for all remain as distant as ever.

Wider economic austerity has been abandoned – but let’s be clear, local government public service austerity remains, and so do the systemic economic issues bedevilling great swathes of this land.

The Spring Budget: Robin Hood in Reverse?

In the Budget, wealthy businesses in thriving parts of the country were granted a smoother transition to their new higher business rates bill. This easing-in period for successful businesses will be subsidised by a “fair” increase in National Insurance Contributions by 1% to 10% for the self-employed – raising £145m a year by 2021/22.

Whatever happened to economic development?

Budget day for the Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES) used to be one of intrigue and relative excitement. In the 2000s, the Budget was supplemented by a specific annex focused on economic development and regeneration. Indeed, the Budget was where we saw exciting new renewal initiatives announced; reviews of sub-national economic development formulated; and new duties and funding initiated.

  • BULLETIN

    How places could and should respond to the Chancellor's Budget

    16th March 2016
    This CLES Bulletin details CLES’ thoughts on the 2016 Budget....
  • BULLETIN

    Budget 2015

    30th March 2015
    This CLES bulletin does three things. First, it details announcements in the 2015 budget which relate to economic development and ...
  • BULLETIN

    The Autumn Statement 2014

    17th December 2014
    This bulletin seeks to explore this debate of infrastructure development versus cuts in more detail and highlight what was in the ...