Recommendations & Conclusions
5 items
2
Conclusion
Second Report - Local authority financi…
Rejected
We agree with the principle of incentivising councils to grow business rates in their area, as a means of making them less reliant on central funding, but we are concerned about the impact on councils that, through no fault of their own, are less able to do this. As our …
Read more
We agree with the principle of incentivising councils to grow business rates in their area, as a means of making them less reliant on central funding, but we are concerned about the impact on councils that, through no fault of their own, are less able to do this. As our predecessor Committee concluded, the Business Rates Retention Scheme is too complex in seeking to both incentivise growth and redistribute funding according to need. We are reassured that the Government remains committed to implementing the Fair Funding Review, which, along with the business rates “reset”, could partly restore the link between funding and need, but in the long term we do not see how the BRRS can be the most sensible means of matching funding to need.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government stated it would not proceed with the implementation of the Fair Funding Review and business rates reset in 2021/22. It confirmed that decisions on the future direction of local government finance reform will be taken at the ongoing Spending Review.
Read full response →
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
4
Recommendation
Second Report - Local authority financi…
Rejected
We recommend that the Government implement the Fair Funding Review and business rates reset as soon as possible, as the quickest way of partly restoring the link between funding and need. The Government should also allow councils to retain 75% of business rates from 2022, but so that this represents …
Read more
We recommend that the Government implement the Fair Funding Review and business rates reset as soon as possible, as the quickest way of partly restoring the link between funding and need. The Government should also allow councils to retain 75% of business rates from 2022, but so that this represents a net increase in funding, we urge it not to impose commensurate cuts to grant funding. The additional funding should then be put towards equalisation in a separate grant designed for this purpose. We also urge the Government to clarify what level of funding equalisation it considers to be appropriate for local government. (Paragraph 26) 40 Local authority financial sustainability and the section 114 regime
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government explicitly rejected the immediate implementation of the Fair Funding Review and 75% Business Rates Retention, stating that decisions on the way forward will be taken at the ongoing Spending Review.
Read full response →
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
5
Conclusion
Second Report - Local authority financi…
Rejected
We are pleased that the allocation of the £300 million grant for social care mitigates the distributional impact of the council tax rises, but we do not think the fairness of the funding model should be reliant on one-off, short-term grants. It is right that certain councils be compensated for …
Read more
We are pleased that the allocation of the £300 million grant for social care mitigates the distributional impact of the council tax rises, but we do not think the fairness of the funding model should be reliant on one-off, short-term grants. It is right that certain councils be compensated for low council tax bases, but this should be done through a more predictable means of funding equalisation. Council tax is also an increasingly regressive tax that again penalises those in more deprived areas. A revaluation is long overdue. In the longer term, one possibility that could be considered is a proportional property tax.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the implied recommendation for council tax reform and revaluation, stating it has no plans for fundamental change. It argues that a revaluation would be expensive, lead to higher bills for many households, potentially penalise those on fixed incomes, and not address disparities …
Read full response →
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
6
Recommendation
Second Report - Local authority financi…
Rejected
The Government should reform council tax by undertaking a revaluation of properties and introducing additional council tax bands, in line with the recommendations of our predecessor Committee. In the longer term, the Government should consider options for wider reform of council tax and business rates, including possibly replacing them with …
Read more
The Government should reform council tax by undertaking a revaluation of properties and introducing additional council tax bands, in line with the recommendations of our predecessor Committee. In the longer term, the Government should consider options for wider reform of council tax and business rates, including possibly replacing them with a proportional property tax.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the recommendation, stating it has no plans to replace or fundamentally reform council tax. It argues that a revaluation would be expensive, lead to bill increases for many households, potentially penalise people on fixed incomes, and not address disparities in council tax …
Read full response →
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
19
Conclusion
Second Report - Local authority financi…
Rejected
The absence of section 114 notices before 2018 is adduced as evidence that the regime has been broadly successful. The consequences for a council of issuing a notice are serious, however, and we are concerned that, rather than concentrating minds, the regime might be hindering good financial management, as it …
Read more
The absence of section 114 notices before 2018 is adduced as evidence that the regime has been broadly successful. The consequences for a council of issuing a notice are serious, however, and we are concerned that, rather than concentrating minds, the regime might be hindering good financial management, as it lacks intermediary measures that councils can use to flag up concerns. Croydon Council delayed issuing a notice for fear of the negative publicity and the statement it would make about its financial position. Northamptonshire Council also delayed. We believe that an intermediary “yellow card” measure that could be applied by the Chief Finance Officer might have forced these councils to confront much earlier the seriousness of the problems facing them.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government defends Section 114 notices as an important and effective part of the finance system, stating they operate within a wider system of checks and balances that should lead to earlier action, thus not committing to an intermediary "yellow card" measure.
Read full response →
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government