Inflexible Local Authority Funding

#17 —

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: The geographical inequity of relying on council tax to provide the majority of funding for adult social care is compounded by an out-of-date adult social care relative needs formula. The Government must update the adult social care relative needs formula …

Gov response: Achieving the high quality, personalised care and support outlined in People at the Heart of Care, starts in the home where people live. Wherever possible, care and support should be in a person’s own home …

Under Consideration

#16 —

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: One-year funding settlements and short-term grants are hampering local authorities’ ability to plan and to deliver value for money, which in turn affects local care markets as it makes it more difficult for local authorities to enter longer term contracts …

Gov response: In developing the People at the Heart of Care white paper, we engaged extensively with other government departments, including the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) and the Department for Work and Pensions …

Accepted

#15 —

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: We recognise the benefits of raising a proportion of funding for adult social care locally. As we have argued in previous reports, we support greater fiscal devolution. In finding the right balance of funding sources for adult social care, however, …

Gov response: In December 2021, People at the Heart of Care was published, setting out the government’s 10-year vision for adult social care. These reforms were to be funded by the announced Health and Care Levy, which …

Accepted

#27 — Review local authority funding and taxation, including land value taxes and fiscal devolution

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: The next Government must embark on a fundamental review of the system of local authority funding and local taxation, exploring all options for removing its current regressive elements and bringing it into the 21st Century. This should include consideration of …

Gov response: 54. The Government is committed, as set out above, to improving the local government finance system in the next Parliament. Any changes to the Settlement or finance system will require significant consultation with the wider …

Not Addressed

#18 — Temporary funding fails to resolve fundamental mismatch in Dedicated Schools Grant and SEND costs.

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: The Government’s use of the statutory override and one-off ‘safety valve’ funding are temporary measures and do not address the underlying mismatch between demand, costs, and annual Dedicated Schools Grant funding. They will not prevent local authorities from accumulating further …

Gov response: 29. The Government agrees that close, bilateral working between DLUHC and DfE is important in tackling issues with the cost of SEND provision. The Government seeks to improve the outcomes and experiences of children and …

Accepted

#15 — Plan a sustainable mechanism to deliver billions in annual funding for adult social care.

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: We reiterate the recommendation we made in our July 2022 report Long-term Funding of Adult Social Care, that the Government needs to recognise the need for more funding to local authorities for delivery of adult social care, in the order …

Gov response: 22.T he Government has recognised the pressures in adult social care and has made available up to £8.6 billion of additional funding over two years to support social care and discharge. This additional funding includes …

Accepted

#9 — Business rates system is outdated, complex, misaligned, disproportionately impacting deprived local authorities.

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: The business rates system is overly complex, outdated and in urgent need of reform. The baselines used in the business rates retention scheme are over 10 years out of date and their continued use is causing a significant misalignment between …

Gov response: 12. Following a manifesto commitment, the Government completed a review of the business rates system in 2021. Parliament subsequently passed the Non-Domestic Rating Act 2023 to give effect to the review’s conclusions, including measures to …

Accepted

#7 — Using capital funding for revenue is unsustainable, risking asset sales and delaying reforms.

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: However, local authorities’ use of capital funding for revenue expenditure is not sustainable and at best it can only be a temporary solution to short-term financial pressures. We have concerns that the Government, if it does grant these additional flexibilities, …

Gov response: 9. On 18 December, the Department launched a call for views to identify and develop options for the use of capital resources and borrowing to support and encourage invest-to-save activity and more flexibilities to use …

Not Addressed

#4 — Urgently reform council tax by revaluing properties and introducing additional bands.

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: We repeat the recommendation made in our July 2021 report, Local Authority Financial Sustainability and the Section 114 Regime, and our November 2023 report, Council Tax Collection: namely, that: the Government must urgently reform council tax by undertaking a revaluation …

Gov response: 5. The Government remains committed to improving the local government finance landscape in the next Parliament. The starting point for this work should be consideration of the purpose and functions of local government. The government …

Not Accepted

#3 — Council tax is outdated, regressive, and disproportionately impacts deprived local authorities' funding.

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: There is widespread agreement that Council tax is outdated, regressive, and long overdue for reform. The Government’s increasing reliance on council tax to fund local authorities is causing a disproportionately negative impact on funding levels for authorities in the most …

Gov response: 5. The Government remains committed to improving the local government finance landscape in the next Parliament. The starting point for this work should be consideration of the purpose and functions of local government. The government …

Not Accepted

#2 — Include additional funding in 2024–25 settlement to bridge local authorities' £4bn gap, outlining prioritisation.

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: The Government must include additional funding in the local government finance settlement for 2024–25 to ensure local authorities bridge their estimated £4 billion funding gap. The Government must set out which local authorities are being prioritised and why for this …

Gov response: 1. As the Secretary of State acknowledged in December, the Department recognises that there are “significant funding pressures facing Local Government”. That is why, having listened to the views of local government, on 24 January …

Partially Accepted

#1 — Local authorities face systemic underfunding and £4 billion gap from demand and inflation.

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: Local authorities have seen significant reductions in their spending power coincide with increasing demand for their services and inflationary pressures exceeding those in the wider economy. Recent funding settlements, while increasing in cash terms, have not kept pace with these …

Gov response: 1. As the Secretary of State acknowledged in December, the Department recognises that there are “significant funding pressures facing Local Government”. That is why, having listened to the views of local government, on 24 January …

Partially Accepted

#17 — Multi-year funding settlement for adult social care remains uncertain for local government.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We challenged the Department on whether we were ever going to see a multi-year funding settlement for local government and if the extra money for adult social care in 2023–24 and 2024–25 would continue into future years. Both the Department …

Gov response: 3.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 3.2 The department is making good progress towards the 10-year vision for adult social care set out in the People at the Heart of Care …

Not Addressed

#15 — Fragmented, uncertain short-term funding stifles long-term planning and investment in adult social care.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We have reported before on the prevalence of short-term, one-off funding for local authorities and recommended that government explore ways to provide greater confidence over long-term funding.31 With regard to adult social care, this lack of financial certainty has constrained …

Gov response: 3.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 3.2 The department is making good progress towards the 10-year vision for adult social care set out in the People at the Heart of Care …

Not Addressed

#3 — Set out spending review preparations and long-term funding certainty for local authorities.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Local authorities are having to plan and commission adult social care services against a backdrop of fragmented and uncertain funding. We have long voiced our frustration at the short-term and multiple funding pots provided to local government and recommended that …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented The department is making good progress towards the 10-year vision for adult social care set out in the People at the Heart of Care white paper. …

Accepted

#22 — Increased asylum decisions burden local authorities with rising homelessness and significant costs.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The National Audit Office reported that the increase in asylum decisions had placed greater pressure on local authorities to support refugees in finding accommodation, and increased the risk of homelessness and rough sleeping.35 We received written evidence from the London …

Gov response: 4.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 4.2 The Home Office will establish a working group with the Local Government Association and Local Authority Chief Executive regional leads to address issues raised …

Accepted

#6 — Mandate DfE to provide support for local authorities to manage long-term sustainable SEN spending.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: In the longer term, the SEN system remains unviable with piecemeal interventions, such as Safety Valve, doing nothing to provide a financially sustainable system. Based on the Department’s current forecasts on the need for SEN support, the annual gap between …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. their SEN-related spending sustainably in the longer term, starting with the publication of the Delivering Better Value in SEND toolkit. As set out in the response to recommendation …

Accepted

#5 — Require central government to involve local authorities in solving critical SEN financial challenges.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Departmental witnesses could not provide any potential solution to the critical and immediate financial challenges facing many local authorities due to persistent and significant SEN-related overspends. The impact of these are being deferred under the temporary “statutory override” scheme, which …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. are putting on local government, and in particular, the impact of the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) deficits on councils’ finances. It will work with the sector on a …

Accepted

#27 — Significant unspent Community Infrastructure Levy funds exist, with potential for transport investment.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Just over half of local planning authorities in England charge a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to fund local infrastructure for new developments.55 This levy can be used to increase the capacity of or to repair existing infrastructure, including transport, flood …

Gov response: 4.4 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Spring 2025 4.5 The Community Infrastructure Levy guidance issued by the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government already emphasises that Community Infrastructure Levy …

Partially Accepted

#26 — Department acknowledges arguments for re-evaluating funding allocation, considering flood risk impacts.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We asked the Department whether it considers where investment could have the greatest impact and why a factor such as traffic volume has not been included.52 The Department said that arguments for including other factors are often made, and that …

Gov response: 4.1 The government disagrees with the Committee’s recommendation. 4.2 The government agrees to review the funding formula that it uses to distribute capital funding to local highways authorities to see whether it can be adjusted …

Not Addressed

#25 — Road funding allocation formula does not consider road condition, traffic volume, or environmental factors.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The Department does not base funding allocation on other information, such as the condition of roads nor on factors that could have led to a deterioration in the condition of roads such as traffic volume, type of traffic or environmental …

Gov response: 4.1 The government disagrees with the Committee’s recommendation. 4.2 The government agrees to review the funding formula that it uses to distribute capital funding to local highways authorities to see whether it can be adjusted …

Not Addressed

#24 — Department's local road funding primarily allocates based on road network length and assets.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Most of the Department’s funding to local authorities over the last decade has been through the eight funding pots that use road network length as the main basis for allocations. The mechanism for these pots uses simple data sets to …

Gov response: 4.1 The government disagrees with the Committee’s recommendation. 4.2 The government agrees to review the funding formula that it uses to distribute capital funding to local highways authorities to see whether it can be adjusted …

Not Addressed

#23 — Short-term funding allocations may drive reactive maintenance despite single funding source perception.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The Department acknowledged that the succession of short-term funding allocations may have driven local authorities to be more reactive.44 However, the Department believes that local authorities treat the funding from the Department as a single source and are not concerned …

Gov response: 5.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Spring 2027 5.2 To ensure the development of a robust and proportionate monitoring and evaluation framework, the department plans to commission a feasibility study …

Accepted

#20 — Department defers providing certainty on future multi-year local road funding to HM Treasury.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We asked the Department when it will provide certainty over the number of years and amount of funding local authorities will receive. The Department told us that it would be a decision for HM Treasury and the Government during the …

Gov response: 3.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Summer 2025 3.2 Long term certainty is determined by the length of the settlement set out by a Spending Review. 3.3 The government is …

Accepted

#19 — Local road maintenance funding predominantly provided annually, lacking longer-term settlements.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The Department has largely provided its funding to most local authorities on an annual basis, instead of via longer-term settlements as in other areas of transport.33 For example, the strategic road network (motorways and some major A roads) is funded …

Gov response: 3.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Summer 2025 3.2 Long term certainty is determined by the length of the settlement set out by a Spending Review. 3.3 The government is …

Accepted

#18 — Department acknowledges current local road funding arrangements are complex and require simplification.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We questioned the Department on the complexity of its current funding arrangements and how well they are currently working. The Department agreed that funding is not streamlined and acknowledged arguments for simplification, recognising that consolidating funding might allow local authorities …

Gov response: 3.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Summer 2025 3.2 Long term certainty is determined by the length of the settlement set out by a Spending Review. 3.3 The government is …

Accepted

#17 — Local road funding has become increasingly complex with twelve different funding pots.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: During the past decade, funding for local roads has become more complex, with the Department providing 12 different funding pots for road maintenance. Each type of funding has different eligibility criteria; eight of the 12 are based on road network …

Gov response: 3.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Summer 2025 3.2 Long term certainty is determined by the length of the settlement set out by a Spending Review. 3.3 The government is …

Accepted

#4 — Revise local road funding allocation considering usage, environment, and explore Community Infrastructure Levy use.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The Department does not allocate funding to local authorities for the maintenance of local roads according to where it is most needed. The Department provides most of its funding to local authorities based on road length, number of bridges, and …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Communities and Local Government already emphasises that Community Infrastructure Levy receipts can be spent on failing existing infrastructure, as well as on its more widely recognised use for …

Accepted

#3 — Simplify local authority road funding, provide long-term certainty, and clarify maintenance monitoring.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The Department’s approach to funding is short-term and fragmented, hindering local authorities from planning more cost-effective work. In the last decade funding for local roads has become more complex, with the Department providing funding to local authorities via 12 different …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. government is reviewing its approaches to evaluating spending on local highway maintenance and the data that it gathers to understand the condition of the local highway network. Once …

Accepted

#28 — MHCLG acknowledges poor coordination of homelessness funding, committing to synthesise multiple grant streams

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We pressed MHCLG on the poor coordination in funding for homelessness caused by the absence of a cross-government strategy. Local authorities need to understand numerous funding streams, from different government departments. MHCLG explained that its November 2024 local government funding …

Gov response: 5.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: after Spending Review 2025 5.2 For 2025-26, MHCLG will be consolidating its main rough sleeping and single homelessness focused grants (Rough Sleeping Initiative, which …

Accepted

#24 — DWP temporary accommodation subsidy remains below full costs; MHCLG's consideration unclear

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: DWP explained that it sets the subsidy level using a rate that has never covered local authorities’ full costs, to incentivise them in their procurement of temporary accommodation. MHCLG added that it considers local authorities’ financial position with regard to …

Gov response: 4.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 4.2 The Department for Work and Pensions wrote to Committee, on 21 February 2025, setting out its justification for the levels of Local Housing Allowance …

Accepted

#23 — Local authorities face rising 'Temporary Accommodation Subsidy loss' from outdated LHA rates

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: LHA rates also impact the amount that local authorities can reclaim as a subsidy from DWP for temporary accommodation costs. The amount that can be reclaimed depends on a number of factors, including the January 2011 LHA rate appropriate to …

Gov response: 4.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 4.2 The Department for Work and Pensions wrote to Committee, on 21 February 2025, setting out its justification for the levels of Local Housing Allowance …

Not Addressed

#5 — Detail how MHCLG's cross-government homelessness strategy will consolidate funding and improve coordination.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Tackling homelessness has long been hampered by the absence of a joined up, cross-government approach. Each of the UK devolved administrations has an overarching homelessness strategy or action plan. By contrast, there is no strategy or target for homelessness in …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. policy in England where appropriate. In particular, the government has been monitoring the implementation and impact of reforms to the private rented sector in Scotland, to inform its …

Accepted

#23 — NHSE's top-down guidance significantly hinders local health systems' intended resource allocation autonomy.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Local areas would value more flexibility about where they can direct their resources to achieve greatest impact, including how they fund measures to prevent ill health. ICBs were supposed to have greater autonomy in determining how to allocate resources locally …

Gov response: 5.11 The department and NHSE recently announced changes to the NHS operating model to move power from the health centre to local leaders. In keeping with this change, 2025-26 Operational Planning Guidance removed many ringfences, …

Accepted

#9 — Discrepant budget timings impede joint strategic planning between local authorities and NHS bodies.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We asked how local authorities and NHS bodies could be expected to work together and deliver a joint strategy when local authorities receive provisional budgets in December, and final ones by February, but NHS 8 C&AG’s Report, paras 1.6 and …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: December 2025 1.2 NHS England publishes planning guidance as soon as funding is finalised and approval is received by Government, in recent years this has …

Accepted

#5 — Define government health prevention spending and increase flexible funding for local systems.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Given the constraints on public spending, it is highly likely that re- focusing attention from sickness to prevention cannot be achieved without re-allocating existing NHS funds in the same direction. Senior ICB leaders report a continued lack of progress with …

Gov response: The government is considering this recommendation. ambitions for the 10 Year Health Plan. Funding for 2026-27 onwards will be determined following Spending Review Phase 2 and will be aligned to support the delivery of the …

Under Consideration

#6 — Set out detailed plans for reducing asylum support spending and clearing the claims backlog.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We are concerned that the Home Office’s work to resolve the asylum backlog may increase costs elsewhere, such as for Local Authorities or the Ministry of Justice. The Home Office has a track record of poor engagement with local authorities, …

Under Consideration

#20 — Ringfencing of Homelessness Prevention Grant funding may detrimentally impact some local authorities.

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: We welcome the Government’s decision to increase homelessness funding for 2025/26, including the £192.9 million uplift to the Homelessness Prevention Grant (HPG). However, the decision to ringfence 49% of HPG funding for activities to prevent and relieve homelessness may be …

Gov response: The Government currently spends around £34 billion annually on housing support including around £12 billion in the private rented sector. Local Housing Allowance (LHA) rates, which set the maximum level of support in the private …

Not Addressed

#31 — Local government reforms and reorganisation present opportunities but begin from a fragile financial position.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Written evidence we received from the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy pointed out that funding reform and local government reorganisation were opportunities to improve sustainability in the sector, but that local government approached these extensive reforms from a …

Gov response: 2.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: by the end of 2025, as part of the upcoming multi-year Local Government Finance Settlement. 2.2 On 20 June 2025, the government published the …

Accepted

#29 — MHCLG acknowledges insufficient funding, aiming for efficiency and demand management amid uncertainties.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We challenged MHCLG as to whether its reforms will put local government finance on a sustainable footing. It acknowledged that there was not enough money in the system, so the aim of the reforms was to use the money available …

Gov response: 2.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: by the end of 2025, as part of the upcoming multi-year Local Government Finance Settlement. 2.2 On 20 June 2025, the government published the …

Accepted

#28 — MHCLG aims to align local funding with needs but acknowledges reform distribution risks.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We asked MHCLG how its reforms will help councils deal with the immense financial challenges they face. It told us it recognised the problems and, through funding reform, it was seeking to align the way funding is distributed much more …

Gov response: 2.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: by the end of 2025, as part of the upcoming multi-year Local Government Finance Settlement. 2.2 On 20 June 2025, the government published the …

Accepted

#27 — Central government acknowledges outdated local government finance system and plans reforms.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Central government acknowledges the local government finance system is complex and outdated, with long-standing plans for reform not having taken place.75 In autumn 2024 government committed to reforms over the medium term. Alongside confirming the reintroduction of multi-year funding settlements …

Gov response: 2.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: by the end of 2025, as part of the upcoming multi-year Local Government Finance Settlement. 2.2 On 20 June 2025, the government published the …

Accepted

#26 — Fundamental reform of the SEND system is essential to address ongoing deficits.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Iain Murray from CIPFA warned that even if these deficits were written off, local authorities would immediately start to accumulate new deficits due to high levels of demand in SEND.71 MHCLG told us that there was huge amounts of work …

Gov response: 5.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: end of 2025 5.2 This government recognises the pressures local authorities are facing because of their Dedicated School Grant deficits. The Department for Education …

Accepted

#25 — Government has not yet presented a solution for managing post-2026 SEND budget deficits.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Many local authorities have seen rises in Special Educational Needs (SEND) demand, and the NAO has previously reported that 101 local authorities overspent their SEND-related budgets in 2022–23.67 Department for Education (DfE) estimates suggest that by the end of 2027–28, …

Gov response: 5.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: end of 2025 5.2 This government recognises the pressures local authorities are facing because of their Dedicated School Grant deficits. The Department for Education …

Accepted

#24 — Exceptional Financial Support is no longer exceptional and lacks long-term funding strategy.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Written evidence we received highlighted that EFS was no longer considered exceptional and there were concerns that some local authorities required measures ‘over and above’ the EFS framework, given the scale of their financial distress.64 MHCLG told us it recognised …

Gov response: 5.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: end of 2025 5.2 This government recognises the pressures local authorities are facing because of their Dedicated School Grant deficits. The Department for Education …

Accepted

#23 — Exceptional Financial Support for councils allows capital asset use for revenue, not new funding.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Central government has introduced measures to help local authorities manage budget overspends. In 2020–21, MHCLG introduced the Exceptional Financial Support (EFS) framework to help local authorities that are in financial trouble.57 Since then, 42 local authorities have received over £5 …

Gov response: 5.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: end of 2025 5.2 This government recognises the pressures local authorities are facing because of their Dedicated School Grant deficits. The Department for Education …

Accepted

#20 — Employer NICs and National Living Wage rises create significant cost pressures for care providers.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Written evidence we received from Mencap, a social care provider supporting over 4,000 people with learning difficulties, indicated that the changes to employer NICs coupled with increases in the National Living Wage, could potentially cost it an additional £18 million …

Gov response: 4.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Autumn 2025 4.2 The government disagrees with the Committee’s conclusion that there was no assessment of increases in NICs on local government. At Autumn …

Accepted

#18 — HM Treasury NICs compensation excludes indirect cost increases passed onto public sector.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: HM Treasury told us that it calculated the level of compensation for public authorities by apportioning the expected increase in direct NICs between the different work forces within the public sector. We were told that this did not account for …

Gov response: 4.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Autumn 2025 4.2 The government disagrees with the Committee’s conclusion that there was no assessment of increases in NICs on local government. At Autumn …

Accepted

#13 — Lack of joined-up working results in competing funding demands for local authorities.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Many departments rely on local authorities to deliver policy initiatives, although lack of joined-up working has resulted in competing funding demands. Our predecessors warned that competition between the Home Office and local authorities for local accommodation was “driving up prices …

Gov response: 2.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: by the end of 2025, as part of the upcoming multi-year Local Government Finance Settlement. 2.2 On 20 June 2025, the government published the …

Accepted

#12 — Numerous ring-fenced grants create administrative burden for local authorities, prompting consolidation efforts.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Outside of the finance settlement, local authorities can receive hundreds of different local grants from several government departments. While there is no official count, Councillor Pete Marland suggested that there are around 300 funding streams coming from central government to …

Gov response: 2.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: by the end of 2025, as part of the upcoming multi-year Local Government Finance Settlement. 2.2 On 20 June 2025, the government published the …

Accepted