Multi-year Local Government Finance Settlement and Fair Funding Review
Alison McGovern Excerpts(2 days, 7 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
Today, the Government have set out details of the first multi-year local government finance settlement in a decade, through which we will deliver the long-overdue fair funding review 2.0 reforms and deliver on our commitment to make the system fairer and more transparent.
The last decade and a half saw local government services slashed to the bone by a misguided programme of austerity. The services people see every day outside their front door were systematically undermined, and people’s lives got harder as a result. We celebrate the hard work of councillors, frontline staff and mayors, who kept vital services running during those hard years, but they did not get the backing they deserved from central Government.
Austerity expected local government to act as caretakers, providing only the most basic statutory services. Our long-term aim is a future where councillors have the freedom to innovate, rebuilding public services, renewing the public realm, and investing in their high streets, youth clubs, and libraries. The past has been written, but the future of local government is up for grabs. This is about providing visible proof that the state can still improve people’s lives and keep its promises. The journey will at times be difficult, but the end result will be a new role for councils as agents of renewal.
This Government believe in treating every area fairly. Some authorities have benefited disproportionately from the unfairness of the current system, something which the previous Government recognised when consulting on funding reform. However, they did not take action. This Government are taking the tough decisions to create a fairer, evidence-based funding system. This means that poorer local authorities that have been unable to generate as much funding through local tax will finally receive the funding they deserve. As a result, areas will be able to rebuild the public services on which our communities rely.
We recognise the challenging reality still facing local authorities, and the sky-rocketing demand for critical services that cannot be overcome by these changes alone, but these reforms are a vital part of getting the sector back on a sustainable footing and ensuring that every pound goes where it is most needed.
The Government are bringing forward a wider reset, which will radically redefine local government in England, making the system fit for the challenges that the country faces in 2025, and making sure that we have strong local leaders and councils, ready to drive economic growth, grow our towns and cities, and raise living standards for working people in every region—the Government’s No. 1 mission. That is why, as well as introducing funding reforms, we remain committed to ending the two-tier system in this Parliament; to focusing on outcomes, over micro-management; and to overhauling local audit, conduct and standards. Yesterday, I launched a series of consultations on local government reorganisation, published on gov.uk.
We also thank local government, interested organisations and members of the public who have engaged with our consultations on reforming the local government funding system over the past year.
The broken system we inherited
The austerity of the 2010s was imposed on every community, but the worst effects were felt by those in the most deprived local authorities. The places which historically had been most supported by Government were left furthest behind, breaking the link between funding and need. Dozens of fragmented funding streams, outdated funding formulas—including those that used data from the 1970s—and short-term settlements contributed to the overall issues in the funding system. As a result, many councils have been pushed to a financial cliff edge, meaning poorer services for residents.
The first steps toward a fairer approach
Undoing this damage will take time, but this Government took immediate steps in our first year to make funding fairer. We made over £69 billion available to local authorities through the 2025-26 settlement. That included a £600 million recovery grant, targeted at areas that suffered most from austerity, and that had greater need and demand for services, and less ability to raise income locally. At the spending review, we announced over £5 billion of new grant funding over the period 2026-27 to 2028-29 for local services, including £3.4 billion of new grant funding, which will be delivered through the multi-year settlement. We have been working closely with the local government sector over the past year. We have consulted twice on our proposals for reform and once on resetting the business rates system, and we now plan to put them into action.
Fairer funding through the 2026-27 multi-year settlement —undoing a decade of damage
This Government believe in treating every council and community in England fairly. We will act where the previous Government did not to target funding to deprived areas, enabling them to deliver vital services for communities up and down the country. We are:
Giving councils more certainty with the first multi-year settlement in a decade, which will allow local leaders to focus on longer-term financial planning and opportunities for ambitious regional growth plans, rather than giving them year-to-year settlements, and an opaque funding system of fragmented pots.
Providing better access to frontline services by closing the gap between local deprivation and council funding. We are using up-to-date data to paint a true picture of councils’ needs and resources—a picture that encompasses population projections, the 2025 English indices of multiple deprivation, cost of service delivery, and demand for services.
Reforming children’s social care, with over £2.4 billion over the settlement to support vulnerable families by focusing on prevention and early intervention. We are updating the children and young people’s services formula, so that it uses the latest index of deprivation affecting children. That will mean that no matter where people grow up, they get the support they need to have the best start in life.
Providing at least £2.4 billion for a new, ring-fenced, combined homelessness, rough sleeping and domestic abuse grant over three years, which includes dedicated funding for councils to invest in prevention. This will move us away from over-reliance on temporary accommodation, which has led to unsustainable costs for councils in recent years.
Undoing the damage of austerity by maintaining the targeted £600 million recovery grant allocations from 2025-26 across the multi-year settlement. We are also introducing a recovery grant funding guarantee to upper-tier authorities in receipt of the grant.
Unlocking the dream of home ownership for more people by boosting incentives for councils to build new homes, as projections on future house builds will be omitted from funding allocations over the settlement, so authorities will benefit from all additional council tax raised for each new home they build.
Improving efficiency and value for taxpayer cash by cutting needless paperwork and red tape by simplifying 33 funding streams, worth almost £47 billion over three years, to provide councils with certainty and more flexibility to invest in community priorities.
Supporting councils through change by providing funding floors, and phasing in new allocations across the multi-year settlement to provide more financial protection for councils and consistency of services for local people.
The recovery we embarked on in 2025-26 is just the beginning for deprived places that suffered most from austerity. We will maintain recovery grant allocations from 2025-26 across the multi-year settlement as a targeted fund to support those worst affected by austerity. We will also provide a funding guarantee to upper-tier authorities in receipt of the grant, which will ensure that they see a more than real terms increase across the multi-year period, except for where a £35 million cap applies.
The Government will maintain core referendum principles as they were in 2025-26 over the multi-year settlement, including core council tax and adult social care precept referendum principles of 3% and 2% respectively. This acts as an additional democratic check and balance, giving taxpayers the final say on council tax increases through a local referendum. The £3.4 billion in new grant funding in the settlement, taken together with these referendum principles, results in a 2.6% real-terms average annual increase in core spending power over the spending review period.
This multi-year settlement will better align funding with deprivation and need, as part of a simplified funding landscape that is fit for the future. By 2028-29, we expect that the 10% most deprived authorities will see a significant increase in their core spending power per head, compared to the least deprived. People living in the places that suffered most from austerity will finally see their areas turned around.
We know there is more to do. There are no quick fixes, and it will take time to deliver the change this country needs. Our reforms will get money to where it is needed most, but we cannot undo a decade of damage overnight. We know some councils will ask for additional help, and we will continue to have a framework in place to support those in the most difficult positions. We made important strides in our first year and, in partnership with local government, we will rebuild a state people can rely on.
More detail on these proposals will be provided in the local government finance policy statement and fair funding review 2.0 response, to be published on gov.uk later today. Proposals for the 2026-27 settlement will be subject to the usual consultation process at the provisional local government finance settlement. This written ministerial statement covers England only. The policy statement will be deposited in the House Libraries.
[HCWS1080]
Local Government Reform: Huntingdonshire
Alison McGovern Excerpts(3 days, 7 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
Thank you, Mrs Harris; I appreciate that. It is, as ever, a pleasure to serve under your experienced and knowledgeable chairship.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty) on securing a debate that is clearly of great importance to his constituency. I think that he asked me two questions, about the place of St Neots and about whether the Government intend to deliver on their defence commitments.
Unfortunately, in relation to the specifics of the proposals, I am in the invidious position of not being able to comment. The hon. Gentleman will understand that while we are in an active process of consultation I must reserve my judgment, so that I am able to take a decision based on the facts as they will be presented to me.
On defence, I am sure that, as the hon. Gentleman said, everyone in this country would expect the Government to do what we need to do to defend our country. Although that is not my specific responsibility in government, the defence of this country is a collective responsibility and I will work very closely with my colleagues in the Ministry of Defence, as I do week in and week out, to make sure that we are able to deliver on our commitments to keep this country safe.
Before I turn to the topics in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency, I will briefly set out why we are reorganising local government and why that process is important to the Government’s overall objectives. Nearly a third of our population—about 20 million people—live in areas with two-tier local government services and functions split across county and district councils. That slows down economic decision making and delivery and leads to fragmentation in our public services.
Even in the short months in which I have been the Minister for Local Government, I have heard that from councillors directly. It is confusing—who does what and who is responsible? In our Department, several Ministers were leaders of councils themselves and so have practical experience of the issue. Through local government reorganisation, we are simplifying local government and establishing single-tier unitary councils everywhere.
We need stronger local councils equipped to make economic growth more likely, improve public services and empower communities. That is the point of reorganisation: so that we have councils that match the real economic footprint of our cities and towns, rather than, in some cases, lines drawn on a map 50 years ago. Councils need to play a much clearer and stronger role in building our economy and making sure that our national growth story includes everyone, everywhere. Local government reorganisation can help to do that. With one council in charge of each area, we will see quicker decisions to grow our towns and cities and connect people to opportunity. Reorganisation will speed up house building, get vital infrastructure projects moving and attract new investment.
There are also social and public services benefits. Bringing services such as housing, public health and social care under one roof means that one council can see the full picture, spot problems early and, for example, support a family in need of housing and then support the children to stay in school. That often does not happen at the moment—we see families who are dealing with the worst type of homelessness being passed from pillar to post.
We have already announced two new unitary councils in Surrey, investing in residents’ futures and putting local authorities there on a sustainable footing. I am also pleased to announce further aspects of the process. This is just the start: we are working with a further 14 areas across England that will benefit from this once-in-a-generation reform, with their proposals due by 28 November.
Ben Obese-Jecty
On putting councils on a good financial footing, there are huge concerns across Cambridgeshire about being partnered with Peterborough city council, because its finances are in such a grave state. Peterborough is already a unitary council. Would the Government consider excluding it from the rest of Cambridgeshire, working out how to do the unitary authorities elsewhere and then taking action at a national level to shore up Peterborough’s dire financial position?
Alison McGovern
The hon. Gentleman rightly raises the fragility of council finances. Everything that we are doing needs to put local authorities on a much firmer footing. The past 15 years have seen town hall finances deteriorate. We are taking steps through the local government finance settlement to address that. More information on that will come shortly. Further local government reorganisation is an opportunity to streamline public services and get councils on a firmer footing.
Unfortunately, I am in the invidious position of not being able to comment on the hon. Gentleman’s specific point, but I assure him that all the actions we are taking in relation to local government change have finance stability at their heart. He mentioned the work of CIPFA; I take the opportunity to pay tribute to CIPFA and the excellent work it does in helping to support councils. We will take more steps shortly to get councils on a firmer footing.
I turn to the hon. Gentleman’s constituency. Local authorities across Cambridgeshire and Peterborough have been developing proposals for unitary local government. That follows the commitment made in the English devolution White Paper last December and the invitation letters sent to areas last February. Decisions on the most appropriate option for each area will be judgments in the round, made with regard to the criteria he mentioned that are in the statutory guidance, the consultation responses received and all the relevant information.
The Government’s criteria for unitary local government set out that new unitary councils should enable stronger community engagement and deliver genuine opportunity for neighbourhood empowerment. We understand the importance of communities having their say on the future of their local public services, so we have been clear about the importance of councils engaging with local residents and organisations as they develop their proposals. I know that the hon. Gentleman led a Westminster Hall debate on these important issues before the summer recess and has been an active part of discussions on local government reorganisations in his area, as we have heard again today.
I am expecting to receive proposals from local authorities in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough by 28 November, and we anticipate that we will publicly consult on final proposals in the new year. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that I am in a challenging position and it would not be appropriate for me to comment at this stage or provide my view on the specifics that he mentioned, because it would pre-empt future decisions that I have to make under the statutory process. There are clearly strong views locally, which were reflected in his speech. When the time comes to launch the consultation, I am sure I will not need to encourage him and his constituents to make sure that they have their say and feed in their views on the future of local government in their area. The Government want to hear them, and I have absolutely no doubt that we will.
The hon. Gentleman mentioned local councillors several times. I am sorry to say that I think being a local councillor has become a bit of a thankless task, whichever party local councillors represent, and our politics has become more fractious. I reiterate what an important job they do in providing people with preventive public services, trying to build our economy and being there for members of the public when they most need it. I will finish by saying a massive thank you to all the local councillors in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency, in my constituency and right across the country. They do a fantastic job.
Question put and agreed to.
Local Government: Unitary Councils
Alison McGovern Excerpts(3 days, 7 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
This Government are determined to streamline local government by replacing the current two-tier system with new single-tier unitary councils. This landmark reform is at the heart of our vision: councils that are close enough to care, but strong enough to reform public services, drive economic growth, and empower their communities. Empowered local government, based on unitary councils and strategic authorities, is the foundation for growth across the country—the Government’s number one mission.
Following the decision on reorganisation in Surrey, we are now looking forward to making progress across the rest of the country. With single councils in charge over sensible geographies, we will see quicker decisions to build homes, grow our towns and cities and connect people to jobs. Cities such as Colchester, Portsmouth and Norwich can drive growth at the national scale, but we need to make sure the structures around them support, rather than hinder, their ambitions.
Strong local government is also key to tackling deprivation and poverty. People living in neighbourhoods high on the index of multiple deprivation, such as in Hastings, Tendring, and Great Yarmouth, deserve responsive and joined-up services that help them reach their full potential. In place of multiple levels of confusing and inefficient structures, one council will take responsibility for what a place needs.
On 26 September, my Department received final proposals from councils in six invitation areas. I would like to thank all councils in these areas for their work in bringing these 17 proposals forward. As per the invitation, these proposals include the areas of existing neighbouring small unitary councils. Some proposals were accompanied by requests for boundary change, whereby existing districts would be split; these will require careful consideration.
Today I am launching consultations on all the below proposals, available on gov.uk, and I will deposit a copy of each in the House Library.
Two proposals from councils in East Sussex and Brighton and Hove:
Eastbourne borough council, East Sussex county council, Hastings borough council, Lewes district council and Rother district council submitted a proposal for one unitary council for the current East Sussex county footprint.
Brighton and Hove city council submitted a proposal for five unitary councils on a pan-Sussex basis.
Wealden district council did not submit a proposal.
Four proposals from councils in Essex, Southend-on-Sea and Thurrock:
Braintree district council, Essex county council and Epping Forest district council submitted a proposal for three unitary councils.
Thurrock council submitted a proposal for four unitary councils.
Rochford district council submitted a proposal for four unitary councils.
Basildon borough council, Brentwood borough council, Castle Point borough council, Chelmsford city council, Colchester city council, Harlow district council, Maldon district council, Southend-on-Sea city council, Tendring district council and Uttlesford district council submitted a proposal for five unitary councils.
Four proposals from councils in Hampshire, Isle of Wight, Portsmouth and Southampton:
East Hampshire district council and Hampshire county council submitted a proposal for four unitary councils.
Basingstoke and Deane borough council, New Forest district council and Test Valley borough council submitted a proposal for five unitary councils.
Winchester city council submitted a separate proposal for five unitary councils.
Eastleigh borough council, Fareham borough council, Hart district council, Havant borough council, Portsmouth city council, Rushmoor borough council and Southampton city council also submitted a proposal for five unitary councils.
All four proposals leave the Isle of Wight unchanged as an existing unitary council. Gosport borough council and Isle of Wight council did not submit a proposal.
Three proposals from councils in Norfolk:
Norfolk county council submitted a proposal for one unitary council.
South Norfolk district council submitted a proposal for two unitary councils.
Breckland district council, Broadland district council, Great Yarmouth borough council, King’s Lynn and West Norfolk borough council, North Norfolk district council, and Norwich city council submitted a proposal for three unitary councils.
Two proposals from councils in Suffolk:
Suffolk county council submitted a proposal for one unitary council.
Babergh district council, East Suffolk district council, Ipswich borough council, Mid Suffolk district council and West Suffolk district council submitted a proposal for three unitary councils.
Two proposals from councils in West Sussex:
West Sussex county council submitted a proposal for one unitary council.
Arun district council, Adur district council, Chichester district council, Crawley borough council, Horsham district council, Mid-Sussex district council and Worthing borough council submitted a proposal for two unitary councils.
The consultations will run for seven weeks until 11 January 2026. The consultation documents are available on the Department’s online platform “Citizen Space" and those responding to the consultations can use this online platform, email or post to submit their views. I welcome views from all councils in these areas as well as neighbouring councils, and specified public service providers, including health providers and the police, and other business, voluntary and community sector and educational bodies. Where boundary changes are requested, we consider it appropriate to consult the local government boundary commission for England.
I would also welcome responses from any other persons or organisations interested in these proposals, including residents, town and parish councils, businesses and the voluntary and community sector.
Once the consultations have concluded, the Government will assess the proposals against the criteria in the invitation and decide, subject to parliamentary approval, which, if any, proposals are to be implemented, with or without modification. In taking these decisions, we will have regard to all the representations received, including those from the consultation, and all other relevant information available.
I will continue to update the House as further milestones are reached in the delivery of this landmark reform.
[HCWS1071]
Standards for Local Authorities in England
Alison McGovern Excerpts(1 week, 4 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
This Government are committed to greater devolution and determined to fix the foundations of local government and build a better future for local politics.
We want local and regional government in England to attract and retain the best possible talent, and for county, town and city halls across the country to promote fair and reasonable democratic discourse, without slipping into cultures which are toxic and intimidating.
In December 2024 the Government launched a consultation seeking views on proposals to strengthen the standards and conduct framework for local authorities in England.
This Government response, informed by the consultation and wider sector engagement, sets out our ambition to introduce a clearer and consistently applied conduct system that will help local elected Members to hold themselves and their colleagues to account in meeting the high standards and conduct their roles demand and the public have a right to expect.
This Government will carry out wholesale reform of the current standards regime, tackling head-on widespread concerns around the inconsistent use of rules on behaviour and the lack of effective sanctions for those who breach their codes of conduct, undermining people’s confidence in local government.
The reforms aim to ensure misconduct is dealt with swiftly and fairly across the country in every type and tier of local government—from the smallest town or parish council to the largest regional mayoral authority. We want to ensure that local government is empowered, fully accountable and deserving of people’s trust.
Councillors and mayors who repeatedly break the rules or commit serious misconduct will face tougher sanctions under proposals published today to clean up local politics and restore public confidence.
The Government response is being published on gov.uk today and will be deposited in the Library of the House.
[HCWS1032]
Local Government Reorganisation
Alison McGovern Excerpts(3 weeks, 4 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
The Government’s ambition is to simplify local government by ending the two-tier system and establishing new single-tier unitary councils. This is a once-in-a-generation reform, and our vision is clear: stronger local councils empowered across local services, equipped to drive economic growth, improve local public services, and empower their communities.
Strong local government will help grow the economy and drive up living standards—the Government’s No. 1 mission. With one council in charge in each area, we will see quicker decisions to grow our towns and cities, and connect people to opportunity. Reorganisation will speed up house building, get vital infrastructure projects moving, and attract new investment, with more people able to buy their own homes and access high-quality local jobs. It will also help reform local public services. Bringing services like housing, public health, and social care under one roof means that one council can see the full picture and spot problems early—for example, supporting a family in need of housing, and then supporting the children to stay in school. Ensuring public services are effective and responsive to their communities will help to improve the health and wellbeing of individuals and communities, and enable people to reach their full potential.
To this end, on 5 February, councils in the 21 areas of England that still have two-tier local government and neighbouring small unitary authorities were invited to submit proposals for unitarisation. Surrey councils were invited to submit their proposals by 9 May, on an accelerated timetable, due to the unique financial context of the area. Today, the Secretary of State has written to the leaders of Surrey councils about those proposals, and I can update the House on those decisions.
I would first like to thank all councils in Surrey for their hard work and commitment. Their dedication and collaboration has been vital for ensuring that quality proposals for new local authority structures, with the interests of residents at their heart, were brought forward.
Two proposals for unitary local government in Surrey were considered: one from Elmbridge borough council, Mole Valley district council and Surrey county council, for two unitary councils; and one from the borough councils of Epsom and Ewell, Guildford, Reigate and Banstead, Runnymede, Spelthorne, Surrey Heath, Waverley, Woking, and Tandridge district council, for three unitary councils. As the House was informed on 17 June, these proposals were taken to consultation, which closed on 5 August. A summary of the responses to that consultation will be published today.
We have now considered the proposals carefully against the criteria set out in the invitation letter of 5 February, alongside the responses to the consultation, all representations and all other relevant information to assess the proposals. In summary, these criteria are: whether the proposal achieves for the whole of the area concerned the establishment of a single tier of local government; whether the councils are the right size to achieve efficiencies, improve capacity and withstand financial shocks; whether the unitary structures prioritise the delivery of high-quality and sustainable public services to citizens; whether councils in the area have sought to work together to come to a view that meets local needs and is informed by local views; whether new unitary structures support devolution arrangements; and whether new unitary structures enable stronger community engagement and deliver genuine opportunity for neighbourhood empowerment.
The Secretary of State has decided to implement the “two unitaries” proposal for Surrey, subject to parliamentary approval. In our judgement, although both proposals met the criteria, the proposal for two unitaries better meets the criteria in the case of Surrey. In particular, we believe it performs better against the second criterion, as it is more likely to be financially sustainable. This criterion is particularly relevant in the unique context of Surrey, where reorganisation is a critical intervention to improve the financial viability of the area’s councils, given unprecedented levels of unsupported debt. Putting Surrey’s local authorities on a more sustainable footing is vital to safeguarding the services its residents rely on, as well as investing in their futures. We will bring to the House, for approval, a structural changes order to implement the proposal for two new unitary councils, East Surrey council and West Surrey council.
I would also like to confirm at this time our commitment to repaying, in principle, £500 million of Woking borough council’s debt in 2026-27. This is a significant and unprecedented commitment, given historic capital practices at the council. It reflects our acknowledgement that, even after the rationalisation of Woking’s historical assets, there is significant unsupported debt held by the council that cannot be managed locally.
The figure of in-principle support we are announcing today is subject to further assurance of the council’s financial position, progress with asset rationalisation, and the local government finance settlement. This is a first tranche of repayment support, and we will continue to explore what further debt support is required at a later point. Any support must take into account value for money for the local and national taxpayer and the council’s continued commitment to reducing debt as far as possible within its local capacity.
Simplifying local government also ensures a strong foundation for devolution. We are committed to working with partners across Surrey, including new unitary authorities once established, to establish a strategic authority for the area in order to ensure that relevant functions held at the county level can continue to be delivered on that geographic footprint where possible, such as transport and adult skills. The establishment of a strategic authority will be subject to the relevant statutory tests being met and local consent. We will also ensure that fire and rescue functions continue to be governed on the same geography.
For the other 20 areas going through local government reorganisation, I would like to emphasise that the decision to implement the proposal for two unitary councils in Surrey does not set any precedent. Decisions will be taken individually, based on the merits of each proposal we receive and the local context.
I will deposit in the House Library copies of the documents I have referred to, which are also being published on gov.uk today.
[HCWS998]
Ending Homelessness
Alison McGovern Excerpts(1 month ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
It is a pleasure to serve, as ever, under your chairship, Mr Efford. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Wavertree (Paula Barker) and the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) for their excellent co-chairing of the all-party group and for bringing this business to the House today. I hope it can be reported back to the Backbench Business Committee that 17 Back Benchers contributed, that hon. Members across the House care deeply about this issue, and that it would be good to have more parliamentary time dedicated to this important subject.
It is clear from this debate that there is appetite across the House to get this right. The APPG’s recent report provides excellent food for thought, as we complete the homelessness strategy, and I am grateful for it. I am going to get into serious trouble, but I have checked my diary for 1 o’clock on 11 November and, as far as I can tell, I am free—my diary manager can hate me later, but I think that is a date. I look forward to spending more time discussing the homelessness strategy with colleagues in the all-party group.
I never fail to feel lucky when I get home to Rock Ferry, where I live, and shut the front door. I have seen the consequences of homelessness on enough people in my life to know the fear it brings. Hon. Members in all parts of the House, as we have heard, care deeply that the Government have a plan to bring down levels of homelessness. I am hopeful that we can all work together on that. In opposition, it took me the best part of a decade to get a small number of new homes built in a derelict part of my constituency. That was not good enough. Things have to change. We can all see the number of people sleeping rough on our streets growing. The last annual count of people sleeping rough, which many have mentioned, was two and a half times higher than it was in 2010. It is not good enough. It has to change.
There is even more homelessness that we cannot see: the record number of people in temporary accommodation. It has been heartening recently to see a small amount of progress in our efforts to reduce the number of families and children in B&B accommodation, with the latest stats showing a drop—but I cannot say anything other than the facts: children living in B&B accommodation has to be brought to an end. Even if we have seen a small drop, it is not yet good enough.
That is why earlier this month the Government announced £84 million additional funding this year for homelessness and rough sleeping, bringing our total investment to record levels—more than £1 billion, and an increase of £316 million on the previous year. Our spending includes more than £644 million for the homelessness prevention grant, and more than £255 million for the rough sleeping prevention and recovery grant. That is a big investment, but, as Members have mentioned, we need a whole-of-Government approach. I will cover that in a moment. but I must also make the point that we will decriminalise rough sleeping by repealing the antiquated Vagrancy Act 1824.
Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)
Throughout this debate the issue of community has been raised repeatedly. A challenge we face in my constituency is the fact that local authorities in other parts of the country often discharge their homelessness duty by packing families into taxis at short notice and moving them hundreds of miles to places where they have no connection with the community. That is bad for the individuals and bad for the communities such as Hartlepool. Does my hon. Friend agree with me that we have to end that practice in order to solve homelessness effectively?
Alison McGovern
That question was raised in the debate, as my hon. Friend rightly says. We are keeping the homelessness code of guidance under review, which includes the issue of out-of-area placements. I am particularly concerned about disruption to children’s education; if any Member wanted to give me specific examples that can feed into the homelessness strategy and demonstrate what is wrong, I would welcome that. I hope that also answers the questions raised about reviewing the guidance.
Separately from the funding that I just mentioned, we are also providing a huge investment in the local authority housing fund, which is there for councils to buy better accommodation and stop using expensive bed and breakfast hotels. That funding, we think, can get us up to 5,000 extra homes. Councils need funding certainty and flexibility to provide appropriate support to those who need it, which is why this Government are providing the first multi-year funding settlement in a decade. We are simplifying our approach to funding local government so that it can work flexibly to deliver on our shared priorities and make sure that people who need accommodation and support get it.
Numerous colleagues asked about multi-year funding. It is absolutely crucial, which is why we are providing it to councils, and I will work with organisations to make sure that we get more stability in the system. Those are the things that are happening already, but I know we have to go further. Later this year we will publish our long-term homelessness strategy.
My predecessor, my hon. Friend the Member for Bethnal Green and Stepney (Rushanara Ali), did a great amount of work, on which I will build. We have heard from colleagues that there is a deep understanding of the importance of prevention, so I want to get this done as quickly as possible. We need to get that strategy out of the door and into the action and delivery phase. I say to colleagues, “Work with me to make sure we can get it done as quickly as possible.”
A couple of colleagues asked about the inter-ministerial group. I have already spoken to some ministerial colleagues on that group. We will meet formally very shortly, and I am sure those meetings will keep going—as colleagues have said—under the chairship of the Secretary of State. There are areas, including the strategy to reduce violence against women and girls, the child poverty strategy and our house building goal, where that homelessness strategy will need to connect with the other bits of work that the Government are doing. I am very seized of that. Colleagues will know that I spent some significant time working on the child poverty strategy, so I feel able to hit the ground running and work with my colleagues, the Safeguarding Minister, the Housing Minister and Health Ministers, to make sure that we get this done in a good way and as quickly as possible.
Liam Conlon (Beckenham and Penge) (Lab)
I welcome the Minister to her place. Part of what she mentioned is subject to the ongoing fair funding review, and the index of multiple deprivation is part of that. Alongside a number of London colleagues, I would like that to fully reflect housing costs and the impact of homelessness. Once housing costs are factored in, London has the highest rate of poverty in the country, with one in four households in poverty. Some good movement has been made on the positive indication of the income domain, but currently the fair funding review would give the same weightings to homelessness as to distance from a post office. Would the Minister meet with me and others—and I know that she has offered time later—to discuss that and to ensure that the formula reflects the cost of housing in London?
Alison McGovern
I thank my hon. Friend for his question. I am sure I will be meeting a lot of hon. Members regarding the fair funding review—he should not worry about that. I hear the point he makes about the indices of multiple deprivation, and we will have more to say about it very shortly. I know the situation in London only too well from my work over the past year. It is important to make sure that children in London do not grow up in poverty. The strategy we will publish on homelessness will get to the heart of the problem, with more homes incorporating all the work that we have done to change planning.
My hon. Friend the Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey) mentioned planning officers. It is crucially important to get investment there so that we get those homes built. We also need to bring the Renters’ Rights Bill into effect, so that we can abolish section 21 evictions and prevent private renters from being exploited and discriminated against. The hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon) mentioned the effect of regulation; I wonder if he would support any regulation, because of the argument that we might reduce supply. Nobody wants over-regulation, but are we really saying that renters in this country are not vulnerable and in need of more protection? Most people think that is not right. I will work with him to make sure that we do all we can to get it right, but we have got to take a balanced approach.
Josh Babarinde
I will be quick. I want to repeat my questions from earlier on the subject of regulation. I asked earlier what the timeline was for out-of-area placement review, whether the Minister would meet me and Eastbourne borough council to discuss it, and whether she will urge Brighton and Hove city council to step up with their responsibilities. Can the Minister address those questions?
Alison McGovern
I did mention keeping the matter under review and, as I said, I am sure that we can meet to discuss it.
Prevention must be at the heart of our strategy. We heard that from the APPG’s report and I agree with it. That is why we are making record investment into prevention services and why the spending review protected that funding for the next three years. We have done work on top of that to increase it, because it is so important and such a crisis at the moment. As hon. Members have said, however, sometimes housing alone is not enough to tackle homelessness; people need support that is appropriate for their needs to sustain that accommodation. For some people, that means supported housing. Good-quality supported housing can prevent further cycles of homelessness and help people to get back on their feet.
I know that we have more to do to make sure that the supported housing system is functioning properly, and we are not stuck with some of the problems that the hon. Member for Harrow East mentioned. We are acting to implement the measures in the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023. We consulted on locally-led licensing and new national supported housing standards for support and changes to housing benefit, and we will publish our report as soon as possible. I look forward to discussing that further—on 11 November, if not before.
We will press forward with the duty for local authorities to produce supported housing strategies, and guidance will come early next year. These strategies will help local authorities to understand how much and what type of supported housing they have, and identify where their unmet need is. A couple of Members correctly mentioned support for victims of domestic abuse and refuge providers. We want to take action on that; I have spoken to the Minister for Safeguarding and we anticipate working together on it.
We know that we cannot fix the housing crisis overnight, and that we have to act now to support people who are facing the worst forms of homelessness. That is why we are ensuring that people in temporary accommodation today are in accommodation that is suitable for their needs. I say again that we still have the underlying causes of homelessness—not enough homes and insufficient incomes—and a real crisis in rough sleeping and long-term rough sleeping, as mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Wavertree. I agree that this is a desperate situation that needs attention through the strategy.
Coming into this role, I have been utterly shocked by the situation regarding the use of B&Bs and our children. That is why we are working with the 20 local authorities with the highest level of bed and breakfast use for homeless families to identify solutions that actually work for their local circumstances. Backed by £8 million-worth of funding, the emergency accommodation reduction pilots will kick-start new initiatives to try to find the best possible way to get families into better accommodation. Whether through local authorities expanding what they are able to provide because of the investment we are giving, or preventing the use of B&Bs in the first place, we are working hard to try to make that happen.
I will finish there, as we will have more opportunities to discuss this issue. I welcome the involvement of all colleagues, and I stand ready to work with everybody on it. The Government inherited a crisis. We have tried to make some progress quickly, and I hope that colleagues will see that I have wasted no time in getting more money to local authorities to help now, while we complete the strategy. In the end, the long-term approach is what we need. I thank again my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Wavertree and the hon. Member for Harrow East for securing this debate and setting out that case.
I look forward to working with all Members in this House on our shared goals. No one in this House can be comfortable while our fellow citizens experience such discomfort. None of us believes that our future is secure while our children live in poverty. I do not think that anybody who has taken part in this debate will rest until those injustices are brought to an end.
Local Government Funding: North-west England
Alison McGovern Excerpts(1 month ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
It is, as ever, a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr Morrison) for initiating the debate on this important topic. He rehearses arguments I heard made in this Chamber and in the Chamber of the House of Commons for 14 long years, as local government funding was slowly undermined by the Tories. The Osborne cuts—I am making myself sound very old, Mr Turner, but you will remember those days—fell on town halls almost more than anywhere else. I have great sympathy with the hon. Member’s argument.
Our country is diverse and all our towns and cities face unique challenges arising from their own economic and social history. As the hon. Member rightly set out, when local government is successful, people experience public services that are specific to them, and every place is given the best chance of growth. He is right to connect dissatisfaction with politics overall with the place of local government. It is in all our interests to see it succeed.
With the UK Government and local government working closely together, we can achieve our collective aims. As the Member of Parliament for Birkenhead in Merseyside, I am more than aware of the challenges and opportunities that our region faces. The Government are committed to making sure that local government in the north-west and across England is put on a sustainable and secure footing. Doing so after 14 years of damage will be complicated, but I believe we can make progress.
The local government finance settlement for 2025 to 2026 made available £69 billion of funding through core spending power, of which £9.4 billion—14% of the total for England—was allocated to the north-west. The settlement marked the beginning of the Government’s commitment to rebuild and stabilise local government. That commitment included introducing a new £600 million recovery grant targeted at those areas with greatest need and demand for services and less ability to raise income locally.
I hear what the hon. Member for Cheadle says about Stockport and the recovery grant. I repeat the comments I just made: it was specifically targeted on the basis of need. In recovering the financial position of local authorities, an important golden thread that runs through all the steps that the Government will take is that we will objectively consider need, deprivation, poverty and inequality to make sure that we are supporting local government to help rebalance our country and provide services in a way that helps everybody to have the best chance of thriving. In the north-west, 78% of councils received an allocation of the recovery grant, totalling £146 million—24% of England’s total. That is the first meaningful step towards funding reform, which was not achieved under the Tories.
Our ambition does not stop at this year’s settlement. The spending review provided more than £5 billion of new grant funding for local government over the next three years, allowing us to move forward with reforms that will reduce the pressure on local government. This year my predecessor embarked on a consultation on the long delayed fair funding review because the outdated way in which local authorities are funded has left some places behind. We intend to redirect around £2 billion of existing funding to the places and communities that need it most, ensuring the best value for Government and for taxpayers.
For the first time since 2013-14, the Government are updating the relative needs formulae that form a key part of how local authorities’ funding allocations are calculated. This year, those reforms will be delivered through the first multi-year settlement in a decade, giving councils the certainty that they have long called for, enabling more spending on prevention and less on paying for the costs of failure. I would be a rich woman if I had a pound for every time somebody in local government, over the past 14 years, had asked me for multi-year settlements to enable forward planning and focus on prevention. Introducing them is an important cornerstone of the Government’s new approach to local government.
The reforms will also change the fragmented local government grant funding landscape. We will consolidate as much revenue funding as possible into the local government finance settlement, bringing funding together into the multi-year settlements so that we do not have such a complex mix of funding. For 2025-26, we consolidated almost £700 million into the settlement. We are going further and faster for 2026-27, and will deliver the biggest programme of funding simplification to date. That frees up resources for public services and helps local authorities to decide for themselves the most effective way to spend money in their communities.
However, funding reform is only one part of the story. As the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) mentioned, we have to change public services to best serve residents and communities. There are areas where we have to consider not just funding but how the services are changing, and how need for them has shifted. The spending review confirmed more than £2 billion over the next three years for children’s social care reform. We are determined to invest in prevention, fix the broken care market and crack down on excessive and exploitative profit making. We will set out further detail on funding for children’s social care reform in the local government finance settlement.
We are also committed to reform the adult social care system, and to build a national care service. We will consider recommendations from phase 1 of the independent commission into social care led by Baroness Casey when she reports in 2026. The Government have made a major step in boosting the wages and working conditions of adult social care workers across England, with an extra £500 million investment into the first ever fair pay agreement for care workers.
For special educational needs and disabilities, we have ensured that funding for schools is increasing by over £4.7 billion a year by 2028-29 compared with the 2025-26 core schools budget that was published at the 2025 spring statement. With that funding, we will reform the SEND system to make mainstream schools more inclusive, improve outcomes and stop parents having to fight for support.
We also recognise the pressures that local authorities are facing because of their dedicated schools grant deficits. In June, we announced a two-year extension to the DSG statutory override, which is now due to end in March 2028. We will set out further details in our plan to support local authorities with historical and accruing deficits through the upcoming local government finance settlement.
The Government have also already taken the first steps to getting back on track to end homelessness, including investing over £1 billion in homelessness and rough sleeping services this year—an extra £316 million compared with the previous year—to prevent rises in the number of families in temporary accommodation and to prevent rough sleeping. That may sound like an objectively good thing to do—which of us thinks that families could possibly thrive in temporary accommodation? —but having looked at the books, I am also extremely worried about the cost of homelessness and temporary accommodation to councils. The aim of the investment is therefore not just to stop the terrible moral stain of homelessness, but to help maintain the structural integrity and funding of our councils.
On top of that, the Government are setting the foundations to deliver on our plan for change commitment to build 1.5 million homes in England this Parliament, and will deliver the biggest boost to social and affordable housing investment in a generation. That investment will also be preventive and help to secure councils’ funding in a better way.
To focus on the north-west, the Government are investing to help revitalise our districts, towns and cities and to foster thriving communities. Through the local regeneration fund, the north-west is benefiting from over £1.5 billion of investment, combining the levelling-up fund, the towns fund and the pathfinder pilot scheme. That reduces the monitoring burden on councils and lets them prioritise how they deliver locally, without micromanaging from Whitehall. In Stockport, that includes a £1.2 million active travel package, £4.4 million for Cheadle eco business park, and £8.2 million for Cheadle railway station.
We have an ambitious programme of reorganisation taking place across England, ending the two-tier system of local government and establishing single tier councils everywhere, including in Lancashire in the north-west. That streamlined approach to local government will also help it to work better.
The north-west, I am very proud to say, has led the way on devolution, as part of the Government’s ambition to see all of England access devolved powers by establishing strategic authorities that can make key decisions to drive economic growth and celebrate our towns and cities. Greater Manchester combined authority and the fantastic Liverpool city region are two excellent and long-standing examples in our region of what can come when devolution happens.
In particular, Greater Manchester has secured a £630 million single funding settlement under its trailblazing devolution deal. That replaces fragmented funding pots and gives the combined authority greater flexibility to allocate funds across priority areas. It has been a pleasure, both in my previous role and this one, to work with Mayor Andy Burnham to bring the vision of city governance for Greater Manchester to life, and to devolve functions from the UK Government to Greater Manchester so that he can integrate services and work with local authority leaders to get the best service for residents.
I thank the hon. Member for Cheadle and everybody who has contributed for the insightful points raised and their ongoing dedication to making sure that local government—our councils—in the north-west have the most powerful voice in this place. We cannot overstate the damage done to the foundations of local government over the past decade and a half. Change has begun and we are ready to listen to all local authorities about how we get this right. I thank the hon. Member for bringing forward this debate.
Question put and agreed to.
Oral Answers to Questions
Alison McGovern Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Emily Darlington (Milton Keynes Central) (Lab)
The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
The Government inherited a homelessness crisis; there were record numbers of people in temporary accommodation, and rough sleeping had doubled. That is why my predecessor got together the inter-ministerial group on homelessness very quickly. It has met four times, and has established the principles of the strategy, having sought full input from across Government. That strategy is on its way, but just last week, the Government announced a further £84 million in this financial year to support people who are sleeping rough or who are homeless.
Mary Glindon
The Minister’s announcement is welcome, but last year, in England and Wales, 18% of the people who were found to be at risk of homelessness or were experiencing homelessness were aged just 16 to 24. That number is far too high. Will the Minister agree to meet the YMCA and the Youth Homeless Chapter Collective to discuss the action needed to support young people and reduce homelessness for good?
Alison McGovern
I congratulate my hon. Friend on sharing those figures with the House, because even though it is quite hard to hear them, it is important that we do not look away from this crisis. I will of course meet her and the charities she mentions.
Emily Darlington
As the Minister may know, Milton Keynes used to be called “tent city”. We reduced the number of rough sleepers down to 16 when I was deputy leader at the council. We were able to do that because we understood that rough sleeping was more than just a housing issue; it was a whole-person issue. Is she willing to meet me and the other officers of the all-party parliamentary group on rough sleeping, as well as Back-Bench Members who have experience in this area, while shaping and delivering the rough sleeping strategy?
Alison McGovern
I am aware of my hon. Friend’s work, and the work of Milton Keynes council and others in the city, to bring down the number of rough sleepers. We will take that whole-person approach in the homelessness strategy. I never knowingly avoid a meeting with an APPG, so I am sure that we will get that arranged shortly.
Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)
Reducing youth homelessness relies on having an effective, working housing market. Of course, my right hon. Friend the Member for North West Essex (Mrs Badenoch) understands that, and that is why she has pledged that a future Conservative Government will abolish stamp duty on primary residences. She has also said that she is happy for the idea to be stolen and adopted by other parties. It would reduce the cost of house buying in Beverley and Holderness by around £3,800—a real boost for young families trying to get on the housing ladder. Will the Minister say to the Secretary of State, and indeed the Chancellor, “Adopt this policy, and do it now”?
Alison McGovern
The party of Liz Truss just doesn’t learn, does it? The Conservatives are happy to make tax policy that is absolute fantasy. People need real homes to live in, not this kind of thing, and the Conservatives simply will not get a hearing until they look at their record and learn to say sorry.
Florence Eshalomi (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) (Lab/Co-op)
I welcome the Secretary of State and his Ministers to their positions. I very much look forward to welcoming them to meetings of the Select Committee; we are a fair and robust Committee. The Minister highlighted the inter-ministerial group, which the former Secretary of State chaired and saw as being very important. The issue cuts across all departmental groups. It is important, because within two months, as we go into the next year, and in the next financial year, we will see over 170,000 young children in temporary accommodation —in homelessness. That should worry all of us. The inter-ministerial group has met four times. Can the Minister confirm that the group will continue to be convened—and if it will, who will chair it?
Alison McGovern
The Chair of the Select Committee makes the case extremely well. If anybody in this Chamber is not worried about temporary accommodation, they are not paying attention; that is how serious this is. It is terrible for our kids, and for the taxpayer, because it is so expensive. I will follow up with her. A lot of work has already been done on the homelessness strategy. We want to get it confirmed as soon as possible. I will engage fully with the Select Committee on the strategy to ensure that we get it right, and we will come back to her shortly with the details of how we will do that together.
Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)
Every night, over 1,000 children are homeless in my city; they are either in temporary accommodation, or even worse off. Does the Minister agree that this is totally unacceptable for a modern society, and that the Government must bring forward its cross-departmental plan to tackle youth homelessness?
Alison McGovern
I refer the hon. Gentleman to what I just said to the Chair of the Select Committee, but let me confirm again that any child in temporary accommodation, particularly B&B accommodation, who has not got enough space to do their homework pays the price—not just through what they are going through today, but in the future. We cannot accept that. We cannot stand for it, and we should work together across this House to bring this to an end.
Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
Thanks to the action of the previous Government and councils up and down the country, 90% of rough sleepers were got off the streets at the beginning of the pandemic, five and half years ago. Tragically, since then, most of those people—young and old—have returned to rough sleeping. In constituencies like mine, street homelessness is not so obvious—people are living and sleeping in woods, ruins and so on—yet the tragedy is still there. What lessons can the Minister and the Government learn from that rapid removal of homeless people from the streets in 2020, so that they can implement it again?
Alison McGovern
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his point. Homelessness can be about rough sleeping, but there is also hidden homelessness. Our forthcoming strategy needs to consider all that in the round. He asks me what lesson I take from what happened a few years ago—and, I would argue, from how we reduced rough sleeping in the past. I would say that politics is about choices. We took the choice last week to invest, in-year, an extra £84 million in preventing and addressing homelessness. That is the right thing to ensure that everybody in this country is safe and has a roof over their head.
Paul Holmes (Hamble Valley) (Con)
I welcome the Minister to her place. Youth and overall homelessness have increased since the Government took office, and charities have been harmed by policies such as the national insurance rises imposed by the Chancellor. We welcome the additional money that the Government have allocated for tackling homelessness this winter, but it is an admission that they have failed in their pledge to reduce homelessness. The former Minister had a novel touch, and sent the figure the wrong way. I will ask this Minister the same question that I asked in the previous Session: does she accept that homelessness has risen under this Government, and will she commit to eliminating it by the end of this Parliament?
Alison McGovern
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his words of welcome. I refer him to the comments that I made to colleagues. The homelessness strategy is on its way. I am afraid that we could not overturn 14 years of wrong choices in the time that we have had in office—that is not realistic—but our strategy on its way. If there is cross-party support for going much further to reduce the use of temporary accommodation and ensure that everyone has a roof over their head, I will happily work with him to do that together.
Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)
Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough and Thornaby East) (Lab)
The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
It is important that we get that right, and we will have further discussions about it shortly. I might disagree with my hon. Friend on the importance of Pride in Place, which will turn around some of the decline created by the Conservative party.
Sir John Whittingdale (Maldon) (Con)
Alison McGovern
Local government reorganisation will create opportunities to improve public services, efficiency and clarity. The final proposals from councils in Essex were submitted by 26 September, and we anticipate launching a statutory consultation in November. I am sure we will discuss the right hon. Gentleman’s points in detail over the weeks and months to come.
Dr Marie Tidball (Penistone and Stocksbridge) (Lab)
Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)
We in Leicestershire have three, if not four, plans for our reorganisation, with no agreement. We also have a county council run by Reform, which has already had not one but two reshuffles, losing its cabinet leads for social services and finance. While 70% of its budget is spent on social services and special educational needs and disabilities, what assurances can the Government give me that my constituents will get those services, and that those services will be protected, when there already seems to be chaos in the council?
Alison McGovern
As I mentioned some moments ago, reorganisation creates an opportunity for simpler and clearer local services. I look forward to working with Members across the House to get it right, particularly in tackling some of the issues that the hon. Gentleman mentions.
Jo White (Bassetlaw) (Lab)
James McMurdock (South Basildon and East Thurrock) (Ind)
The Secretary of State and the other Ministers on the Front Bench have to great fanfare today talked about responsible governance, but Basildon council and its Labour leader have repeatedly failed to meet basic housing standards. Worse than that, its leader has gone live on social media to admit to counting postal votes and using that information to influence a recent by-election. When he is held to account, will Ministers agree to throwing him out of their party?
Alison McGovern
I am unclear about the exact details of what the hon. Member is raising, but if he would like to write to me or the Secretary of State providing details, we will make sure that he receives a swift response.
Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)
South Shore in my constituency is one of the most deprived areas in the country. It has just been named by the Independent Commission on Neighbourhoods, which outlined 34 mission-critical neighbourhoods, as No. 1 for hyper-local need. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss how we can improve South Shore in Blackpool?
Alison McGovern
I responded to the right hon. Member’s colleague from Leicestershire, the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans), just a moment ago, and I refer him to that answer. We have a process under way, and I will be engaging with colleagues right across the House on it. If the right hon. Member would like to get in touch with me directly, I would be happy to receive his representations.
Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)
I am pleased that Everton East in my constituency will receive £20 million in Pride in Place funding. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Pride in Place programme not only talks about devolution, but delivers it?
Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)
The Government have now delayed their decision on local government reorganisation in Surrey. Can the Minister assure me that the Government are using this delay to protect my constituents in Esher and Walton from the Tory debt of neighbouring councils with which they might be grouped? Will the planned elections in May go ahead?
Alison McGovern
As I have said a number of times on different aspects of this policy, the process is under way. If the hon. Member would like to write to me directly, I will make sure that she receives a response.
Josh Fenton-Glynn (Calder Valley) (Lab)
I know that Ministers do not comment on ongoing planning applications, but may I draw the Minister’s attention to an inconsistency? Currently, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is changing its guidance on heather burning on deep peat because of climate change concerns, but there has not been a concurrent change to planning guidance on building on peat. Will the Minister agree to look at that, so that my constituents can be sure that any developments are safe and take account of climate implications?
Alicia Kearns (Rutland and Stamford) (Con)
Residents of Rutland overwhelmingly want to join Stamford, but the council is pressing ahead with an unwanted Leicestershire merger; residents of South Kesteven do not want to join a mega Lincolnshire council, but are being pushed towards it; and in Leicestershire my constituents do not want a Leicester city takeover. What reassurance will the Government give that democracy will not die under these reforms, and that local people’s voices will be heard?
Alison McGovern
I can certainly confirm that democracy will not die. I know that officials in the Department will have heard what the hon. Lady has said, and I will accept her question as representations on the issue of local government.
Homelessness and Rough Sleeping: Additional Funding 2025-26
Alison McGovern Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
I am pleased to announce that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has allocated £84 million in additional funding across four homelessness and rough sleeping grants for 2025-26:
£69.9 million uplift to the rough sleeping prevention and recovery grant, bringing the total funding for this grant to £255.5 million. Up to £12.8 million of this funding uplift is being awarded to councils specifically to deliver and add value to partnerships and services with voluntary, community and faith sector organisations. This additional funding has been made available to 62 local authorities experiencing the greatest rough sleeping pressures, alongside 12 strategic authorities and five London sub-regions. The funding will support a range of services, including for those experiencing long-term rough sleeping, and will enable strategic authorities to put greater emphasis on integrated efforts to end rough sleeping across their regions. It will also support interventions to prevent rough sleeping for those transitioning from the asylum estate.
£10.9 million on supporting children experiencing homelessness. This will be delivered as an uplift to the homelessness prevention grant, bringing total funding for this grant to £644.14 million. This funding has been awarded to 61 local authorities with the highest numbers of children in temporary accommodation, to increase access to support and services for families and make a tangible impact on their quality of life while they remain in need. This will deliver positive benefits for education and health outcomes by funding interventions such as school travel, uniform and equipment, and the provision of specialist support roles.
£3 million uplift for the rough sleeping drug and alcohol treatment programme, bringing the total funding for this grant to £61.7 million. We are allocating additional funding to the rough sleeping drug and alcohol treatment component of the drug and alcohol treatment and recovery improvement grant, known as DATRIG, to provide evidence-based drug and alcohol treatment and wraparound support for people sleeping rough or at risk of sleeping rough, including those with co-occurring mental health needs. This will allow continued service delivery in 83 local authorities.
£200,000 uplift for the voluntary, community and frontline sector grant, bringing total funding for this grant to £3.7 million. This additional funding will support work to develop innovative initiatives within the faith and non-commissioned sector to support those in need.
The Government are committed to getting us back on track to ending homelessness. The additional funding allocated across these grants will enable councils, strategic authorities and the wider sector to support those who are most vulnerable in society, and, ultimately, will help to save lives.
[HCWS950]
Local Government Pension Scheme in England and Wales: Scheme Improvements
Alison McGovern Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
I am today launching a consultation on proposed improvements to the Local Government Pension Scheme in England and Wales.
With 6.7 million members and £400 billion of assets under management, this Government see the vital importance of our role as steward of the Local Government Pension Scheme. We know the impact that changes to the scheme have, not only on individual members but on the country as a whole. Investing in the members that make up the scheme—those who collect waste, serve school lunches, manage libraries, and tend to parks and green spaces—rightly rewards the hard work that they put in to making our communities thrive.
As a first step, in May 2025 we launched a consultation on enhancing member benefits, with a focus on:
Equalising the entitlement to survivor benefits of all eligible survivors of Local Government Pension Scheme members, remedying historical discrimination in the scheme;
taking concrete steps to addressing the gender pension gap;
mandating reporting on opting out from the scheme; and
closing loopholes on current pension forfeiture rules.
This work sat alongside important reforms to investment and pooling, which unlock the investment might of the scheme, due to reach £1 trillion by 2030. These reforms will harness the potential of the scheme as a catalyst of growth while ensuring that it delivers on its primary duty to provide a retirement income for members.
Building on these, the consultation we are launching today covers four areas:
We are proposing to update the normal minimum pension age in the LGPS age to 57, following the Finance Act 2022, and confirm that we will protect members who had scheme membership before 4 November 2021. This gives clarity to millions of members who want to know when they can retire.
We are proposing to recognise the geographical spread of our schools across multi-academy trusts, and simplify the process of applying for a direction to bring together staff into a single Local Government Pension Scheme fund. We are also proposing that the criteria applications are assessed against is put into legislation to provide transparency to employers.
We are proposing to implement long-awaited Fair Deal protections for workers outsourced from local government, ensuring that they have seamless and continued access to the Local Government Pension Scheme. This will in part be achieved by removing the use of “broadly comparable” schemes, which see workers receiving downgraded pensions when they are outsourced.
Finally, we are proposing to restore access to the scheme for councillors in England and extend it to mayors, bringing England into alignment with the schemes in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. As reorganisation and devolution continue to reshape local government, the responsibilities placed on mayors and councillors are expanding significantly, and access to the pension scheme is key to encouraging talented individuals into those roles.
For 14 years, the Conservatives decimated local government, and working people paid the price. The last Government’s “Westminster knows best” attitude saw power centralised in Whitehall, with local budgets cut to the bone. Communities lost their sense of pride and control. Neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition and local champions were locked out of Government. This Government are putting power back in the hands of communities and their local champions. We are rebuilding and streamlining local government so that working people can once again rely on the regular, high-quality local services they deserve.
Efficient and reliable local services are built on a foundation of hard-working, professional and talented local councillors. While the Tories saw councillors as a volunteer, part-time role, Labour will treat councillors with the respect they deserve as dedicated public servants, handing them the rights at work that they deserve. The result will be a streamlined, efficient and more effective local government, with fewer more empowered local councillors. These councillors will be given the proper terms and conditions they deserve—the certainty of financial stability in older age should be a minimum.
I am grateful to the Local Government Association, the Local Government Pension Scheme Advisory Board, the Government Actuary’s Department, and many others for their support.
The next phase in this continued effort to improve the scheme will include the publication, later this year, of the full Government response to the May 2025 consultation.
[HCWS952]