It's council tax-setting time again, and we have the usual battle between councils and the Government.

Councils are trying to prepare their taxpayers for an above-inflation increase in tax, laying the blame firmly on the Government for not being realistic about the pressures facing them and giving a cut in funding in real terms.

The Government, in turn, claims to be offering above-inflation increases in funding, and can see no reason why councils are not reducing council tax.

The propaganda war was stepped up when the Government claimed councils could reduce their council tax, if they were more efficient, naming the 10 authorities which could make the biggest savings in tax. This led the public to expect tax cuts next year, and to blame their councils if that did not happen. It also implied that these councils were the least efficient in the  country.

In fact, those councils are there simply as a result of the arithmetic of the local government funding system. The savings equate to the 3% Gershon target, and the tax savings are simply a consequence of each council's tax base. There is no attempt to assess the councils' efficiency or the extent to which they have already achieved savings.

In Surrey, the supposed savings are £17.9m. In fact, our budget next year is based on savings of at least £30m, and that is on top of our savings in earlier years. We achieved our three-year Gershon target in the first two years.

The reason council tax will increase is that our costs and service pressures are rising faster than government funding recognises. (In fact, we are in the ludicrous position where our grant increase is more than swallowed up by the increase in landfill tax next year).

I suppose it's all par for the course, but it really isn't helpful when the information put out is so disingenuous. Meanwhile, the public will still be baffled.

Phil Walker is director of finance at Surrey CC