By Richard Johnstone | 26 January 2012
The poorest councils in England have been hit hardest by the government’s spending cuts, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation said today.
Research by the charity shows that councils face an overall reduction in income of around 40% over the four-year Comprehensive Spending Review period, once inflation is included.
However, this contraction in spending will be felt differently across England, the report, Serving deprived communities in a recession, says.
Its research shows that the spending reductions will be greater, both proportionally and in absolute terms, in the poorest authorities.
The most deprived council in the country, Liverpool, faces the biggest reduction in spending power in the first year of cuts. The three councils making the largest reductions in 2011/12 are all in the top five of the Index of Multiple Deprivation used to measure poverty.
By contrast, some richer authorities face only ‘mild’ initial reductions. Wokingham, the council in the study with the lowest IMD position, has the smallest reduction in per capita spending power of just £5.
All the authorities surveyed by the charity were managing budget reductions through a combination of back-office efficiency savings, frontline service changes or cuts, as well as attempting to develop the government’s Big Society proposals.The areas most frequently identified for cuts were services for young people and early years, libraries and other cultural services such as sport, leisure and parks.
Report author Glen Bramley said these cuts would hit the poorest as they are less able to supplement the loss of these services with private provision.
‘Despite some services used by all groups being significantly reduced, the impact of service provision cuts will fall more heavily on disadvantaged people who rely on public services,’ he said.
Bramley also warned that the abolition of the Audit Commission, and the reduction of councils’ spending on performance evaluation, would make it difficult to assess the consequences of these reductions.
Only two of the surveyed councils told the JRF that ‘protecting deprived neighbourhoods’ could be a priority.
JRF chief executive Julia Unwin said vulnerable people faced being hit by both the extent of the cuts and a lack of protection.
She added: ‘While we accept that local authorities need to make spending cuts, it is essential that people in communities that are already struggling do not suffer more than others.’
However, a Department for Communities and Local Government spokesman insisted that local government funding was‘fair between different parts of the country’.
He said: ‘Funding is being directed to where it is needed most so councils can protect the frontline services people rely on, shield the most vulnerable places, safeguard the most vulnerable people, and protect taxpayers' interests. For example, the average spending power per dwelling, not including police, in Hackney will be £3,050 compared with £1,537 in Windsor and Maidenhead. The English average is £2,186.’
The JRF research examined in detail how 25 local authorities were managing the spending reductions. It also looked at the councils with the biggest variation in revenue and mapped them against the Index of Multiple Deprivation.
