Union figures reveal most deprived areas face ‘outrageous’ social care cuts while leafy Tory strongholds get millions shovelled into their coffers.
The poorest parts of the UK have had their social care budget has been slashed by a whopping £145million, while the leafy Tory seats of David Cameron and Theresa May have been given a huge cash boost, says GMB.
New figures revealed by the union show the ten wealthiest parts of the country have seen their spending increase by £135million since 2010.
During the same period the ten poorest regions’ budget has reduced by £135million.
Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire’s spending has rocketed by more than £40million each.
Windsor and Maidenhead and Wokingham, which cover the Prime Minister’s constituency, have had a budget increase of almost £10million between them.
And the biggest spending wealthy area, Surrey, has increased funding by a massive £94 million.
Meanwhile Richmond-Upon-Thames, where the Government is set to fight a by-election on December 1, has conveniently been able to better fund social care to the tune of an extra £10million.
Rehana Azam, GMB National Secretary, said:
“These outrageous figures highlight the deep divisions and inequality that exist in this country.
“The idea that the poorest people in the country have their social care funding slashed, while the wealthy get more money is sickening.
“And the fact the constituencies of Theresa May and David Cameron have been given a generous increase looks very much like Tory cronyism.
“As one of the richest countries in the world, the way our old and vulnerable are treated is a national disgrace with a social care lottery wielded by May's Government.
"We urge Chancellor Phillip Hammond to provide fair funding across the country in his autumn statement to try and alleviate this country's social care crisis." 201D[LT1]
Notes to editors
· For more information contact the GMB press office on 07958 156846 or at email@example.com
· Regional breakdown of figures attached
· Local authorities with responsibility for social care are ordered by the councils with the ten highest levels of deprivation on average, and the ten least deprived council areas on average, according to the DCLG's Indices of Multiple Deprivation Rank of Average Ranks measure.
DCLG, English Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2015, 30 September 2015, table 11, 'upper tier local authority summaries,' https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-indices-of-deprivation-2015
· The GMB’s analysis of social care funding is based on totals for 2009/10 and 2015/16 are taken from the DLCG's latest revised local authority revenue outturn data series (2015/16 totals revised on 17 November 2016): https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/local-authority-revenue-expenditure-and-financing
· Future spending power data (which includes central funding and retained taxation) are taken from the DCLG's Core Spending Power: Final Local Government Finance Settlement 2016 to 2017 publications, Core Spending Power: Summary Table, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/core-spending-power-final-local-government-finance-settlement-2016-to-2017
· All historic and projected figures (ie. for 2009/10 and 2019/20) have been converted into real (2015/16) prices using the Treasury GDP Deflator.
· The Institute for Fiscal Studies recently found that since 2010 “the mainly urban and poorer councils among the tenth which are most grant-reliant have had to cut their spending on services by 33% on average, compared to 9% for those richer councils among the tenth which are least grant-reliant.”
IFS, Council funding reform may mean big winners and losers, 26/10/2016, https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/8706
The IFS concluded last year that local authority spending power ‘cuts will be around 7% in real terms over the next four years’ (from 2016/17 to 2019/20).
IFS, Council tax rises to ease the pace of cuts to local government budgets, 18/12/2015, https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/8095