Title

FINANCE

We need to resist the creep of pork barrel politics

The 'creep of increasingly overt pork barrel politics into our winner-takes-all electoral system ultimately benefits no-one', says Jessica Studdert.

Conservative leadership candidate Rishi Sunak's recent comments to the Tunbridge Wells party faithful simply voiced a policy that has been operating on the QT for years.

The Conservative party in power has reduced the deprivation weighting in local funding formulas, because they tended to benefit larger urban areas, which are largely Labour-controlled. They see this as reversing a method inherited from Labour's time in Government and re-calculating it to benefit their heartlands. Not that the electorate in the shires particularly noticed, since like everywhere else they too have witnessed significant local funding cuts overall.

But it is a measure in-keeping with the Conservative Government's subsequent bias – through its flagship Levelling Up funds – towards their Red Wall seats, over other deprived areas which are represented by Labour in Parliament. So, what would Labour do if it assumed power at Westminster? Reverse the trend again and channel local funding according to their own electoral calculations?

This creep of increasingly overt pork barrel politics into our winner-takes-all electoral system ultimately benefits no-one. It is a symptom of our fragile local financing system that the principles behind it can be determined more by the whims of the national party in power than the needs of people who rely on local services.

Currently, every type of council can reasonably claim a raw deal. Urban councils have faced disproportionate cuts amidst densely concentrated deprivation. Counties and large unitaries face the opposite problem: significant diseconomies of scale at which they must operate social services for vulnerable groups, which often includes larger elderly populations than younger cities. Meanwhile, many districts have seen their grant reduce to zero.

Before we even get into the question of distribution, resource scarcity overall is the main problem. An independent commission to reach an objective, non-partisan view on local government financing is long overdue. The elusive Fair Funding Review keeps being postponed because no-one can agree what ‘fair' means in the context of not enough in the first place.

The sector should stand together to demand sufficient funding for all parts of the country as a priority, with different dimensions of ‘need' recognised and provided for. Then the residents of Tunbridge Wells, along with the most deprived boroughs and everywhere in between, can feel the benefit from a system that properly responds to their varied circumstances.

Jessica Studdert is deputy chief executive at New Local

@jessstud

FINANCE

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...

FINANCE

AI and tech – the evolution of care

By Simon Guerrier | 22 September 2025

Simon Guerrier examines what AI and technology-enabled care are, the benefits they can bring, the risks and costs to consider, and the lessons from one local...

FINANCE

Councils can't wait for reform

By Joanne Pitt | 22 September 2025

Drawing on assurance work by CIPFA, Joanne Pitt sets out the challenges driving the growing reliance on Exceptional Financial Support and outlines the urgent...

FINANCE

How community power can renew the social contract in local government

By Jessica Studdert | 18 September 2025

Cynicism threatens democracy, but local government can lead renewal, says Jessica Studdert.

Jessica Studdert

Popular articles by Jessica Studdert