Title

BUSINESS RATES

Local government settlement shows Government is not in listening mode

It is clear from the final local government settlement that the Government did not pay attention to the submissions of councils, including districts, says Ian Miller. The consultation with the sector on council tax increases 'seems a sham', he adds.

The final local government settlement brought no cheer. The Government didn't listen to the representations that councils, including districts, submitted. New homes bonus allocations for 2021-22 will be based on housing growth in the 12 months to October 2020, using a 0.4% pre-COVID threshold. No account was taken of the impact of COVID on building during half of that period.

A higher threshold for the Mayor of London apart, there was no shift in proposals for criteria for ‘excessive' council tax increases. The Government presented no compelling reason why the maximum increase for districts should be 2% or £5, a figure that has applied for several years and has not been adjusted to allow for erosion in the value of money. Nor a reason why, in comparison, police and crime commissioners should be allowed to increase by up to £15. In many shires, police council tax has leap-frogged the district share. For councils, the consultation seems a sham. The decisions were taken long ago by the Treasury. The Spending Review on 25 November said ‘the referendum threshold for increases in council tax will remain at 2% in 2021-22' ignoring the statutory requirement to consult and the process for the House of Commons to approve the referendum principles.

The Ministry didn't listen to representations about the name of the new ‘lower tier services grant'. Districts are grateful for it (as are unitary councils who also benefit). It reinforces the Whitehall preoccupation with using unnecessarily hierarchical language. What would have been wrong with community services grant or local services grant?

The ‘request' for billing authorities not to send out business rates bills because of the Budget on 3 March gives the game away: there will be more reliefs, decided centrally. Billing in many councils would otherwise have been under way by then. If the approach devised by the Government requires software changes, there is a severe risk that getting out bills in time for instalments on 1 April will be jeopardised.

As always, Whitehall knows best.

Ian Miller is chief executive of Wyre Forest DC

@IanM65

BUSINESS RATES

Where is fiscal devo going and what is the agenda for Core Cities?

By Paul Marinko | 25 June 2026

Since the chancellor announced plans for devolved income tax the question appears to have happily moved away from ‘if’ to ‘when’. The MJ, Impower and Core Ci...

BUSINESS RATES

EXCLUSIVE: Government reorganisation plan 'on track' despite Starmer resignation, McGovern insists

By Paul Marinko | 23 June 2026

Ministers have insisted they are ‘on track’ to announce the next tranche of reorganisation decisions before the middle of next month despite Keir Starmer’s r...

BUSINESS RATES

Local government reorganisation: What councils must get right

By Elliott Fletcher | 23 June 2026

Most LGR savings assumptions won't deliver without this – what every council must get right before day one.

BUSINESS RATES

Reed defied officials' advice on DPP reorg plans

By Paul Marinko | 18 June 2026

Essex and Norfolk CCs have hit out at ministers ignoring the advice of Whitehall officials over reorganisation plans as the prospect of legal challenges grows.

Ian Miller

Popular articles by Ian Miller