4. Debate on a Statement: Draft Budget 2020-21

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 4:28 pm on 7 January 2020.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mark Isherwood Mark Isherwood Conservative 4:28, 7 January 2020

The increase in the draft local government revenue settlement 2020-21 is welcomed, made possible, of course, by the UK Government's prudent economic management since 2010, when the UK budget deficit was the worst in the G20, behind only Ireland and Greece in the EU. If the UK Government had instead grown the big deficit it inherited, someone else would have owned the UK economy and required bigger cuts.

Last month, I again challenged the local government Minister here over the Welsh Government's local government funding formula, noting that, under this, nine out of 22 Welsh authorities received an increase in the current financial year, with Cardiff up 0.9 per cent and Swansea up 0.5 per cent, but Wrexham down 0.1 per cent, and Flintshire down 0.3 per cent, despite each having equivalent population increases.

Alongside Flintshire, the councils with the largest cuts of 0.3 per cent included Conwy and Anglesey, although Conwy and Anglesey are amongst the five local authorities in Wales where 30 per cent or more of workers are paid less than the voluntary living wage. Prosperity levels per head in Anglesey are the lowest in Wales, at just under half those in Cardiff, and Conwy council has the highest proportion of over-65s in Wales at 25 per cent, compared to Cardiff on 13 per cent, which has the smallest. It is great that more of us are living longer—I'm in my 60s—but this adds to cost pressures in those counties with higher populations of older people.

In her reply, the Minister again stated:

'The splitting up of that pot is done via the democratic processes of the WLGA.'

How does the finance Minister therefore respond to the statement made by the WLGA to Wrexham.com that:

'The WLGA does not play a role in deciding the settlement nor does it have full details of the settlement or authorities' allocations until it is published'?

Lo and behold, four of the—. Mike, yes, certainly, Mr Hedges.