Continuing the conversation from Lewisham Council proposing to use taxpayer money to purchase Catford land for the traveller community
Unlike Bromley, Lewisham spends a third of its funds repaying its own debts.
But still, the disparity is striking.
They have to be auditied to find out, preferably by auditors from the central government.
Bromley has to raise council tax by 4.2%. Lewisham raising it every year! Getting more money than Bromley and spending 30% council tax to pay debts. Seriously?!!
They just cannot manage the money. Labour to go!
As pointed out before, from a financial perspective Bromley is the exception among London councils.
So the questions should be, “What is Barnet, Lewisham, Westminster and many London councils spending all that extra money on?”
You may recall from last year’s debt thread that all local authority expenditures are tracked by the Department for Communities and Local Government. You can scrutinise their financial data here.
For accuracy, Bromley’s council tax rise is 3.99% for this coming year. This is made up of 1.99% the maximum allowable PLUS 2% for adult care. This is the same increase as last year and does match Lewisham and most London borough councils.
Yah, but the funding is different - 46£ millions or 135£ millions
Lewisham received a funding assessment for 2017/18 of £135 million compared with £46.8 million for Bromley.
Surprised no ones mentioned the points made in the article itself, i.e;
Lewisham has a higher level of social care costs than Bromley while taking a lower level of Council Tax receipts - creating a larger deficit to fund.
In 2015 - Lewisham was the 48th most deprived Borough in England while Bromley was 208th.
Hopefully, all that extra money is being spent on ways to make that figure more equitable, after which, I would expect the funding to become equitable also.
I guess it depends on one’s political outlook.
Give a man a fish / teach (and expect) a man to fish?
Is Lewisham simply giving fish after fish, and creating a death spiral of dependency and low aspiration?
I’m all for teaching people to fish, I personally hate being dependent on anyone else for anything - but forcing them to fish elsewhere is also not the answer;
54 per cent of families accepted as homeless in Bromley are moved outside the Borough - in Lewisham the figure is 23 per cent.
Is Bromley simply sending away anyone who can’t fish to become someone else’s costly problem?
Are we talking about fishing now?
Political outlook is everything.
Central Office has assured us forever that budgets are set at an equitably calculated needs basis.
And for sure, Lewisham cannot and does not spend enough.
I doubt Bromley will be sending away anyone if they were given 135£ millions instead of 46£ millions, also to remember Bromley run within budgets.
An interesting piece from a London publication that normally supports the Central Office line.
And even more interestingly led as Editor by one G Osborne - former Tory Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Oh joy upon joy - the report is authored by ex-Conservative treasurer Lord Ashcroft.
More opportunistic spin by Osborne, who’s still bitter about the May govt. The man was a talented chancellor, but an odiously political editor.
Absolutely agree about