The Labour Government is reportedly planning to cut council funding in the South to pump more money into the North. They call it fairness. But it is a political raid that rewards failure, punishes well-run councils, and treats taxpayers like a bottomless bailout fund.
Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Angela Rayner, wants to “rebalance” local authority funding, which in her language means taking money from Southeast counties like East and West Sussex and handing it to Labour councils in the North, many of which are in deep financial trouble.
But the truth which Labour will not admit is that many of their councils are badly run and on the brink because of years of poor decision-making, reckless spending, and failed ideology.
I have seen this up close. Look at what happened in Hastings under the then Labour-run borough council, where a significant number of Labour councillors quit the party and became independents (they blamed Labour’s position on Gaza – how convenient), just as the council was on the brink of financial collapse.
The Council was a shambles under Labour. It was slammed by its independent auditors for financial mismanagement, commercial investments that flopped, and gaping holes in its budget.
Labour raiding the south to fund the north is not leadership - it is passing the buck - Sally-Ann HartIt did not go bankrupt in the end, thanks to urgent action by the officers, but it certainly looked like many Labour councillors walked away rather than take responsibility for the mess they helped create. As if a name change would hide the mess they created.
Meanwhile, East Sussex County Council, which has always been a responsible, well-managed Conservative council, is facing immense and growing pressure.
Despite receiving additional government funding last year, including an extra £5.3 million to support adult and children’s social care, its financial position remains extremely challenging.
This is not due to mismanagement, but because of rising demand, an ageing population, increased complexity of need, and chronic under-recognition of the costs faced by coastal and rural communities.
We also have some of the most deprived communities in the country – poverty and disadvantage are in the South as well as in the North.
As MP for Hastings and Rye, I campaigned for a fairer funding formula for councils and schools, but Rayner’s approach does not take any of the issues facing councils like East Sussex into account. Instead of measuring need properly based on demographics, local geography, demand, and performance, Labour’s formula assumes wealth equals resilience and that every council in the South can cope just fine. This is not just lazy policy; it is deeply unfair.
If this goes ahead, councils like East Sussex will be forced to cut back vital services or raise council tax even further. It is an insult to residents who already pay more and get less. They are being told to tighten their belts so Labour can bail out its own failures elsewhere.
Labour’s proposed policy is not about fairness. It is about political convenience. It is easier for Labour to grab cash from councils that are still afloat than to take responsibility for the councils they have run into the ground. It is easier to blame geography than governance. But this is not leadership – it is passing the buck.
A truly fair funding system would reward efficiency, transparency, and good management.
It would recognise that deprivation doesn’t stop at Watford, that need exists in both rural and urban areas, and that coastal communities face unique challenges that require tailored support, not ideological redistribution.
Taxpayers in the South should not be expected to pay more because Labour councils elsewhere have failed. That is not levelling up, it is levelling down.
Most Read
