Bristol City Councillors in hours-long 'pantomime' over failed budget
The Full Council failed to agree a budget yesterday (20th February) for the 2024/5 financial year
Bristol councillors have failed to agree a budget for the city next year after an hours-long “pantomime” debate ended in disagreement. Bristol City Council is planning to increase council tax by five per cent from April to partly cover the spiralling costs of providing social care.
Over three hours on Tuesday, February 20, councillors argued over which political party was more to blame for the crisis facing local government, and didn’t vote to approve the Labour mayor’s proposed budget. They will come back to City Hall on Wednesday, February 29, and try again.
Marvin Rees said his eighth and final city budget focused on housing, with a promised 3,000 new council homes planned for construction over the next five years. But he warned whoever takes power after the local elections in May that social care was swallowing up ever more cash.
Mr Rees said: “We’ve seen the delivery of 12,500 new homes. We’ve kept all of our children’s centres and libraries open. We’ve signed the City Leap deal, a global first securing £1 billion of investment into Bristol to decarbonise our energy system. We’ve opened a new recycling centre in South Bristol which continues to go from strength to strength.
“But there are some fundamental challenges for local authorities across the country. There’s an increase in demand for adult and children services, and at the same time the cost of providing those services is increasing. 7,000 adults receive care from the council, costing our taxpayers around £200 million. 800 children receive care packages, costing around £100 million.
“Alongside that we spend £20.4 million on temporary accommodation for an increasing number of people falling on the council for housing, and that number rises every year. If we don’t control the spending in these areas, there will be no money to spend on other priorities and we’ll become a social care provider only.”
The mayor also said the council was investing in a massive new youth club, new train stations, Temple Quarter regeneration project, and had reduced pollution with the Clean Air Zone. However, some children’s centres could close and services move online, as part of this budget, and many libraries have been closing for large parts of the day after the council stopped hiring temporary staff to cover absences.
His budget received 19 votes in favour, 40 against, and one abstention. Next Wednesday, councillors will have little choice but to pass the budget. Another option is for opposition councillors to put forward an alternative financial plan, but this would have to be passed by a two-thirds majority vote which is very unlikely.
More likely to happen is the mayor can either bring the same budget back for a vote next week, or make small changes to win the support of an opposition party. Two years ago the Conservatives secured £1 million to repair a footbridge in north Bristol this way. Councillors have a legal duty to pass a balanced budget, but if this doesn’t happen then the government would likely intervene and the mayor’s proposed budget would go through anyway.
Rising demand for social care is leaving councils across the country facing major financial problems, alongside a massive reduction in funding from the government since 2010. Companies providing care are increasing their costs well above inflation, and more working age adults needing social care than ever before.
Meanwhile children’s care in Bristol is provided by several companies owned by private equity firms. According to the mayor’s figures, average placements for children in care cost £125,000, about 10 times the annual cost of sending a child to Clifton College.
Greens voted against the budget saying that planned savings to social care were “cruel and unrealistic”. But they did not put forward any amendments to the budget to explain how they would balance the books instead. Other parties criticised their failure to do this as “abdicating responsibility”.
Councillor Emma Edwards, leader of the Green group, said: “While this budget pressure is due to yet more Tory austerity, a potential new Labour government hasn’t promised to end austerity either and there is no sign of a fair funding review for local councils. We need more assurance from Labour that they will protect councils from bankruptcy if they form a government.
“We have serious concerns about the squeeze on adult social care, especially at a time of increased demand and how this would affect the most vulnerable in society. The disabled community has concerns about the possibility of being forced into care homes. While we appreciate a review of this is happening, this doesn’t mean the problem has gone away.
“How many past budget amendments have been implemented by this administration? Is it worth rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, when so much needs to change to make this budget fair and without making cuts to vital services?”
Much of the three hours was spent debating the merits of budget amendments. These alternative plans are put forward by opposition parties, costing a few hundred thousand pounds and representing a very small fraction of the council’s overall budget, running over half a billion. There was also frequent laughter among councillors and jokes, including about getting into bed with each other.
Cllr Mark Weston, leader of the Conservative group, said: “This is obviously the highlight of our political year, where no doubt 50 people on YouTube are dazzled by our wit and prose as we indulge in the pantomime that is the budget process. It’s also a day for budget bingo, which is my very favourite. So far I haven’t got a full house, but there’s still some speeches to come so I should be OK.
“We’ve had austerity, which you want to blame everything on and I understand that. We’ve also ‘we need more money’, and I agree. Local government does need more cash, absolutely. The problem is where it’s going to come from. National Labour financial promises these days do seem to change direction with all the rapidity of a weathervane in a hurricane.
“If we look globally at what’s happening now, we’ve got Putin on the march in the east, we’ve got autocracies in the far east, instability across the world. Any spare money we have is probably going to end up in security services, because that’s what we actually need.”