• Home
  • About
  • Subscribe
  • LATIF
  • Conferences
  • Dashboard
  • Edit My Profile
  • Log In
  • Logout
  • Register
  • Edit this post

Room 151

  • 151 BRIEF

    What's New?

  • John Turnbull elected president of the SLT

    May 12, 2022

  • Pension pool identifies biodiversity as a priority

    May 11, 2022

  • TfL latest to face credit-rating downgrade by Moody’s

    May 10, 2022

  • Government proposes ‘fairer, more accurate’ business rates system

    May 10, 2022

  • Queen’s Speech confirms planning reforms

    May 10, 2022

  • 18,000 affordable houses lost through ‘permitted development’

    May 9, 2022

  • Treasury
  • Technical
  • Funding
  • Resources
  • LGPS
  • Development
  • 151 News
  • Blogs
    • David Green
    • Agent 151
    • Dan Bates
    • Richard Harbord
    • Stephen Sheen
    • James Bevan
    • Steve Bishop
    • Cllr John Clancy
    • David Crum
    • Graham Liddell
    • Ian O’Donnell
    • Jackie Shute
  • Interviews
  • Briefs

Councils going bankrupt? Don’t be Scilly!

1
  • by Guest
  • in Funding
  • — 20 Feb, 2017

photo: Public Domain Images/pixabay, CC0

Recent months have seen two councils receive section 24 notices but Chris Game at the Institute of Local Government (INLOGOV) argues there are signs that more could be on the way.

Remember the old London bus joke: you wait for ages, then three come along at once? Well, some local government finance anoraks have been waiting ages for a 114, and now two 24s arrive, almost in mini-convoy.

Not buses, of course — but key sections of Acts of Parliament. Section 114 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 requires a councils’ chief finance officers (CFO) to issue a s114 Notice reporting to all elected members an actual or impending seriously unbalanced budget.

As indicated, they’re infrequent, issued only in what CIPFA terms (p.3) “the gravest of circumstances”: current spending way beyond budget, reserves virtually exhausted, no imminent solution. Their impact too is grave, effectively freezing spending until councillors agree measures to achieve a balanced budget. But, they do keep the crisis in-house.

The alternative — being required to wash your dirty linen in public — is the dreaded Section 24 of the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014. Here, a council’s external auditors append a written s24 “recommendation” to their annual audit letter, “copied to the secretary of state”. The recommending and copying may sound chummy, but it’s the bullet-shaped chumminess of a Mafia “message job”. S24 Notices are very nasty, and happily very rare, or were.

Scilly recommendation

Recently the Isles of Scilly Council received one, which is interesting in itself, since not everyone’s clear what it actually is: not part of the already enormous Cornwall Council, but a sui generis unitary authority — in a class of its own.

It’s considerably smaller than my own authority, Birmingham City Council (bear with me, it’s not that daft a comparison), with one-480th of its population though, interestingly, one councillor for every 109 residents, compared to Birmingham’s post-2018 ration of one for every 10,900. And, as a genuine unitary, it has Birmingham’s major functions, including an airport, plus fire services, water supply, sea fisheries and coastal defence.

Unfortunately, Scilly’s unique status doesn’t exempt it from the austerity pressures and grant cuts faced by all English councils. It’s suffering badly, and its external auditors concluded that, with £3m needed to pay staff and suppliers, no council tax income for the last two months of the financial year, and reserves down to £0.5m, the law required Section 24, “recommending” in terms (p.37) that the council get its whole financial act together, extremely pronto.

Its impact, warning notwithstanding, can be surmised from the reaction of the eminent former Labour leader of the previous council to have received a s24 missive (just last November from coincidentally the same auditors, Grant Thornton). “The most concerning audit letter I have seen in all my [36] years on the council” was Cllr Sir Albert Bore’s verdict – the council being Birmingham, and the equivalent budget black hole not £3m but pushing £38m.

Just as Aristotle’s single swallow did not a summer make, two s24s don’t themselves make a systemic winter crisis. They’re surely, though, a sign, given that not one such report was issued to any council during the whole four-year 2010 spending review period, and we’ve now had two in two months.

Signs

But a sign of what? That’s rhetorical. I’m categorically not a local finance expert, and in this blog’s limited remaining space there are no answers – just three observations.

  1. Why no s114s?

 In the past we’d see them at least occasionally. Now there are rumoured sightings – e.g. in Northamptonshire. Yet, what have materialised are the two s24s, the proverbial nuclear option. It’s been suggested that the (post-1988 Local Finance Act) statutory duties of Social Services Directors mean a s114-prompted total spending freeze could prevent, say, a vulnerable child being placed in care. But CIPFA chief executive Rob Whiteman has rejected this interpretation.

  1. Please, not the B-word

There’s unfortunately no way of avoiding the media headline, but Scilly, Birmingham and probably any financially struggling English councils aren’t about to “go bankrupt” in the sense in which the word is commonly understood. UK councils, unlike US local government or our own national government, are statutorily required to set each year a balanced budget. Running a deficit of the smallest fraction of Detroit’s nearly $400m in 2013 is simply not possible – indeed, a very s(c)illy idea.

3. But watch for those ‘statutory duties’

So, not bankruptcy in the normal legal sense, but there are almost daily signs and public warnings: Conservative Surrey’s seriously contemplated 15% council tax referendum; tax hikes all round of approaching 5%; hitherto protected adult care budgets now being cut; and 13% of responding councils in the MJ/LGIU 2017 State of Local Government Finance Survey reporting “a danger they would no longer have enough funding to fulfil their statutory duties in the coming year”.

Which would mean facing legal challenge for failing to meet those statutory duties and/or declaring “technical insolvency”. Not “bankruptcy”, note; but, as the famous duck test puts it: if it looks like, walks like, and quacks like a duck… .

Chris Game is a visiting lecturer at INLOGOV (Institute for Local Government) interested in the politics of local government, local elections, electoral reform and other electoral behaviour, party politics, political leadership and management; member-officer relations, central-local relations, use of consumer and opinion research in local government, the modernisation agenda and the implementation of executive local government.

This article first appeared on the official blog of the Institute of Local Government (INLOGOV), University of Birmingham.

Share

You may also like...

  • ‘Unknowns’ linger in social care calculations 29th Sep, 2021
  • Dan Bates: Capitalisation directions are not the only tool for rebuilding finances 16th Feb, 2021
  • To Michael Gove: a modest proposal 11th May, 2022
  • Michael Gove signals the end of ‘boring rollover’ settlements 22nd Dec, 2021

1 Comment

  1. Stephen Sheen says:
    2017/02/21 at 17:42

    I would disagree that section 24 notices are necessarily nasty things. They are basically suggestions that authorities should consider sorting themselves out before the auditors might have to take action. They are rare because auditors have been under-using them, not because they are an extreme weapon of last resort. Credit to Grant Thornton for trying to bring them back into fashion.

    Log in to Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  • Register to become a Room151 user

  • Latest tweets

    Room151 6 hours ago

    Bags of capacity – now to housing delivery: HRAs have been freed up and councils are starting to invest, but some remain cautious, writes Steve Partridge. He suggests that a minimum of £10bn of additional borrowing could be[...] dlvr.it/SQDvxk pic.twitter.com/yZmoWzHv6U

    Room151 7 hours ago

    Bags of capacity – now to housing delivery room151.co.uk/treasury/bags-…

    Room151 1 day ago

    To Michael Gove: a modest proposal: Conrad Hall has written an open letter to the levelling up secretary suggesting an unusual (and tongue-in-cheek) proposal to help councils predict next year’s government grant. Dear Secretary of State,[...] dlvr.it/SQ9GpX pic.twitter.com/mSX1xgeL8a

    Room151 1 day ago

    Queen’s Speech: an ambitious plan hampered by omissions: Richard Harbord examines the impact of the government’s legislative proposals on councils, and concludes that local authorities expect and need more from central government. However you view the… dlvr.it/SQ8hmP pic.twitter.com/BsnziyNPIO

    Room151 2 days ago

    Insights and inspiration from LGPS leaders past and present: Four current and former LGPS leaders have recently given powerful and insightful interviews as part of the Fiftyfaces podcast, which showcases inspiring investors and their stories. Hosted by… dlvr.it/SQ53lC pic.twitter.com/IRYMFPxdA2

    Room151 3 days ago

    Rate rise represents ‘fastest increase in borrowing costs in 25 years’: Partner Content: CCLA Investment Management’s Robert Evans analyses the rationale for the Bank of England’s latest rise in the Official Bank Rate and assesses the likely outcome of… dlvr.it/SQ33k3 pic.twitter.com/A81yiS1UgN

    Room151 3 days ago

    The Liability Benchmark, very much unloved at the recent Room151 treasury briefing, receives a much more positive assessment from Jackie Shute. There’s ‘no better tool for treasury portfolio management’, she says. #localgov #finance room151.co.uk/treasury/in-pr…

    Room151 3 days ago

    In praise of the Liability Benchmark: Jackie Shute responds to recent criticisms of the framework used to plan the future borrowing requirements of a local authority. I’m not suggesting that this debate will have the same[...] dlvr.it/SQ2cGf pic.twitter.com/4rqXTpHC9A

    Room151 3 days ago

    Room151 launches survey on IFRS 9 override and MRP impact: Room151 has launched a survey to gauge the sentiment in local government on two important issues: the IFRS 9 statutory override and the consultation on Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP). The[...] dlvr.it/SQ1VT7 pic.twitter.com/ahPEiLoFNC

  • Categories

    • 151 News
    • Agent 151
    • Audit
    • Blogs
    • Business rates
    • Chris Buss
    • Cllr John Clancy
    • Council tax
    • Dan Bates
    • David Crum
    • David Green
    • Development
    • Education
    • Forum
    • Funding
    • Governance
    • Graham Liddell
    • Housing
    • Ian O'Donnell
    • Infrastructure
    • Interviews
    • Jackie Shute
    • James Bevan
    • Jobs
    • Levelling up
    • LGPS
    • Mark Finnegan
    • Net Zero
    • Private markets
    • Recent Posts
    • Regulation
    • Resources
    • Responsible investing
    • Richard Harbord
    • Risk management
    • Social care
    • Stephen Fitzgerald
    • Stephen Sheen
    • Steve Bishop
    • Technical
    • Transport
    • Treasury
    • Uncategorized
    • William Bourne
  • Archives

    • 2022
    • 2021
    • 2020
    • 2019
    • 2018
    • 2017
    • 2016
    • 2015
    • 2014
    • 2013
    • 2012
    • 2011
  • Previous story National infrastructure platform set for post-2018 launch
  • Next story Jonathan Bunt: The threat from ‘right to buy’ hanging over housing innovation

© Copyright 2022 Room 151. Typegrid Theme by WPBandit.

0 shares