Title

SOCIAL CARE

Time to relax borrowing rules

An Institute for Fiscal Studies report on coronavirus regional variations paints a stark picture for councils’ budgets, says Michael Burton.

Hard on the heels of its report on the geographic variation of the coronavirus, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has this week published a separate study on the variation in the financial impact of the crisis on local authorities. Because there is such a wide variation in needs the IFS recommends that the government relaxes its borrowing rules and allows councils to borrow for day-to-day spending to plug the gaps.

The government has allocated £3.2bn to councils to cope with the financial impact of the coronavirus. Most of the first trance was based on social care needs but the second tranche of £1.6bn was directed more at shire districts after returns from councils suggested the virus had a greater impact on income, such as business rate, charges and parking, than spending. Fees for parking, cultural and leisure services, planning and trade waste schemes, which are likely at particular risk, are equivalent to an average of 29% of shire districts' budgets, compared with 7% for London boroughs and less than 1% for county councils.

Councils were budgeted to raise £26.8bn for themselves (plus almost £5bn for police, fire and other authorities) from council tax in 2019/20, or an average of 51% of non-schools revenue expenditure. Councils reported income of £12.4bn from sales, fees and charges in 2018/19 and were budgeted to retain £16.3bn in business rates revenue in 2019/20. Although fees and charges make uo only 5% of all councils' income, they make up 29% for shire districts.

Even here there is great variation. One in ten shire districts rely on fees from parking, cultural and leisure services, planning and trade waste schemes for less than 9% of their expenditure, while another one in ten rely on them for more than 55%, for instance. Paradoxically councils in deprived areas do better than those in wealthier areas, as the former rely less on income from fees, charges and council tax though this is offset by higher levels of social service health and housing needs. Levels of reserves also widely vary.

Life after lockdown: managing local variations

SOCIAL CARE

Embedding healthy eating within local communities

By Corin Bell | 29 September 2025

Corin Bell explains how a pioneering partnership that makes fruit and vegetables available on prescription in Tower Hamlets is building an evidence base for...

SOCIAL CARE

New towns, new leaders

By Luca Wells | 25 September 2025

With a lot of initiatives being pushed through government, the strain on local authorities is increasing. So now is the time to audit leadership capability, ...

SOCIAL CARE

Stronger devo can solve the London problem

By Patrick Diamond | 23 September 2025

Relationships between the capital and Whitehall may have improved but its underpowered mayoralty requires urgent fiscal and planning autonomy, argue Jack Sha...

SOCIAL CARE

Where will our talent go?

By Pam Parkes | 22 September 2025

Pam Parkes explains how to make reorganisation a reason for talented people to stay and new staff to join the sector on its future journey.

Michael Burton

Popular articles by Michael Burton