
Exposed: The councils quietly raising tax by more than 300pc
Across the country, householders are facing huge increases in the amount parishes are charging because cash-strapped district councils are stopping funding services they have run for years.
This means parish councils are forced to step in and provide these services, which include vital amenities such as public toilets and parks.
But while the amount that districts can increase council tax is capped, there is no cap for parish councils, meaning some areas have seen eye-watering increases.
In April, a total of 11 parishes increased their council tax precepts by more than 300 per cent.
In Waverley, South Yorkshire, it rose from £63.47 a year in 2023-24 to £288.46 in 2024-25.
The highest parish council tax increase was Wharton in Westmorland, where the precept went up by 1,783 per cent from £1.67 to £31.45.
Elliot Keck, head of campaigns at the TaxPayers' Alliance, said councils were devolving services such as public toilets and CCTV because they could no longer afford to fund them without breaching the council tax cap.
He said the government should impose a cap on parish council tax increases, just as there is for higher bodies.
'Parish precepts are set to be just the latest stealth tax squeezing household budgets, if funding pressures in local government continue,' he said.
'Most town councils are uncontroversial bodies, operating important amenities for what is a small charge on top of council tax bills. But more and more, we are seeing local taxpayers hit by extraordinary hikes in what they're charging, on top of increases at the other levels of local government.
'The government should be consulting on a referendum cap to be placed on parish precept rises to ensure residents aren't hit by surprise bills which they had no say on.'
The charge made by parish and town councils – the lowest tier of local government – is added as a 'precept' onto the district's council tax bills.
County and unitary councils have their bills capped at 5 per cent, while districts cannot increase their bills by more than 3 per cent.
But there is no cap for parish and town councils, which provide services such as allotments, village halls, parks, litter bins and public toilets.
In Somerset, cost-cutting measures have led to sharp increases in parish council precepts.
Facing £35 million in budget cuts, the county council announced the devolution of services to town and parish councils.
They withdrew funding for public toilets, CCTV, visitor centres and other local amenities and asked parish councils to cover the costs.
Yeovil parish council precept rose 90 per cent from £145 to £276, and Taunton's by 173 per cent from £110 to £299 in 2024-25.
Meanwhile, Somerset Council increased their council tax, excluding parish precept, by 4.99 per cent in 2024-25.
Similar cuts were made by Wiltshire in 2019. It had to make £27 million in savings, forcing Chippenham parish council to take on services and increase its parish precept by 40 per cent.
These services included a large historic park, a community and arts centre and some small play areas. The parish also took on more road sweeping duties.
Chippenham was forced to institute a parish precept rise of 38 per cent in 2019-20.
Shadow communities secretary Kevin Hollinrake said: 'The Labour Government is forcing up council tax across the board through their fiddled funding.
'Parish councils have had no compensation at all from Rachel Reeves's job tax, leading to a double whammy of soaring council tax on top.
'Labour's flawed plans for top-down unitary restructuring also threaten to lead to cost shunting from the old councils down to parish level, cooked up in Whitehall but with town and parish councils to take the blame.'
A spokesman for the Wharton parish council said its increase was so high because of an administrative error the year before.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
16 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Super League expansion may put vital partnership with Sky Sports in jeopardy
Super League's long-term partnership with Sky Sports that bankrolls the sport could be jeopardised by plans to expand the competition to 14 teams next season. The existing 12 Super League clubs voted in favour of expansion earlier this week following the recommendations of a strategic review led by the Rugby Football League chair, Nigel Wood, but the Guardian has learned that the plan has yet to be endorsed by their broadcast partner. Under the terms of the current deal, Sky broadcasts every Super League game live, but it is understood that the cost of televising an extra game across 27 rounds next year would be around £500,000. The Guardian has been told Sky is reluctant to pick up the additional cost for matches it did not buy in a tender process that concluded almost two years ago, and has no intention of increasing its rights fees to support two extra clubs. Sky's three-year deal to provide exclusive live coverage of Super League enters its final 12 months next season, and while there is no suggestion of the broadcaster terminating that contract, senior sources have indicated that the expansion could affect negotiations over future deals. RL Commercial officials are understood to have been locked in discussions with Sky since the vote on Monday about what expansion means for the existing contract, and have yet to receive the reassurances they are looking for. Sky has been Super League's broadcast partner since the competition launched in 1996 and around 170 games will be shown live this season, but the value of the contract has dropped significantly in recent years. Officials who were present at the meeting at Headingley that approved expansion have privately admitted that one of their big concerns was how the broadcaster would react to the decision, as well as how the extra games will be financed. Super League clubs are receiving a total of £21.5m from Sky this year compared to £40m in 2021. The comparison with other sports is also alarming, with their £21.5m rights fee less than Sky pays to televise just three Premier League games, while the broadcaster is investing around £20m a year in the Women's Super League from next season in rights fees and production costs. Sky's declining financial backing for rugby league is a major concern for the sport as it prepares to enter the final year of its TV deal, particularly given the limited interest from elsewhere and how reliant rugby league is on its income from the Sky Sports contract. TNT Sports made a speculative offer for the current rights, but it has since spent £200m on a new five-year deal for Premiership Rugby so may not bid again. IMG, the sports marketing agency that manages the grading process which determines Super League membership, are currently leading a tender process for the next broadcast cycle beginning in 2027. Sky declined to comment, but one source at the broadcaster said that rugby league was fighting for its future. In another complication, Sky also broadcasts Australia's National Rugby League, which has held talks about buying a 33% stake in Super League but made clear it sees it as a 10-team competition. Sources in Australia have indicated expansion to 14 teams effectively kills any hope of direct investment into Super League in the near future. With no additional TV money forthcoming following expansion, the Super League clubs have also yet to decide how the extra two teams will be funded next season. A number of clubs are understood to have argued strongly that they will not accept a cut in their own central payments from the Sky deal. Some Championship clubs vying for promotion as part of expansion plans have indicated they would be willing to enter the competition with no central distribution for one season in 2026. Such a move would expose newly promoted clubs to potential financial risk, as well as raise further concerns about the Super League's competitiveness. Financially-troubled Salford were thrashed 82-0 by St Helens at the start of the season, and have conceded 50 points on two more occasions. Sign up to The Recap The best of our sports journalism from the past seven days and a heads-up on the weekend's action after newsletter promotion As reported by The Guardian, Hull FC and Hull KR voted against expansion in a meeting at Headingley on Monday, while Wigan abstained amid confusion over the criteria to be used by the RFL panel who will select the two extra teams for next season's competition.


Telegraph
16 minutes ago
- Telegraph
No 10 orchestrated Savile attack against Farage
No10 orchestrated the Jimmy Savile attack on Nigel Farage, The Telegraph understands. Multiple government sources said Peter Kyle, the Science Secretary, had spoken to Downing Street before appearing on Sky News on Tuesday, when he made controversial remarks about Mr Farage and the notorious paedophile. In the interview, Mr Kyle said the Reform leader was 'on the side' of child predators and extreme pornographers, after Mr Farage pledged to scrap the Online Safety Act if he becomes prime minister. 'Make no mistake about it, if people like Jimmy Savile were alive today, he would be perpetrating his crimes online, and Nigel Farage is saying that he is on their side, not the side of children,' he said. Despite concern from some Labour figures that the attack could backfire on Sir Keir – who was Director of Public Prosecutions when the Crown Prosecution Service declined to bring charges against Savile – other Labour ministers rowed in behind Mr Kyle. Heidi Alexander, the Transport Secretary, repeated the allegation on Wednesday morning, telling Sky News: 'Nigel Farage is, in effect, saying that he is [on paedophiles'] side because he's saying he's wanting to repeal the Online Safety Act. 'In effect, what Nigel Farage is saying is that he's totally happy for there to be a free-for-all on the internet. 'That's not the position of the Labour Government. It's not the position of me. It's not the position of Keir Starmer or Peter Kyle, and that is the point that the Technology Secretary was rightly making yesterday.' Mr Farage has demanded an apology for what he called a 'disgusting' smear against him, arguing that Mr Kyle had become the 'minister for political slander'. However, the fact that No 10 was aware of Mr Kyle's comments before they were issued suggests that Sir Keir's team is willing to launch a major war with Reform on child safety. Reform is currently eight points ahead of Labour in the polls, and has launched a summer campaign on crime that is targeted at Sir Keir's performance on keeping streets safe. Labour has begun targeting Mr Farage personally on the doorstep, releasing leaflets designed to look like scratch cards with the slogan 'don't gamble on Farage'. A Labour source said the Savile debate was 'a fight we're willing to have,' adding: 'Shielding kids from gruesome stuff online should be a no-brainer'. 'It is quite amusing seeing Farage talking about 'disgusting remarks',' the source said. 'He has a distinguished record of making punchy and disgusting remarks in his own right.' Savile last became a feature of Westminster debate when Boris Johnson accused Sir Keir of failing to prosecute him in 2022. The former Tory prime minister later said he had only intended to criticise the CPS, not Sir Keir's actions. There is no evidence that Sir Keir knew about the advice provided to police by the CPS that Savile should not be charged. Richard Scorer, a lawyer who has represented Savile victims, said at the time that Mr Johnson's attack was a 'troubling smear' and he was 'weaponising' their suffering.


BreakingNews.ie
16 minutes ago
- BreakingNews.ie
UK minister doubles down on colleague's claim Farage on side of Jimmy Savile
Heidi Alexander has doubled down on her fellow Cabinet minister's claim that Nigel Farage is on the side of 'people like Jimmy Savile'. The Reform UK leader is 'happy for there to be a free for all on the internet', the Transport Secretary said, as she defended Peter Kyle's comments. Advertisement The Technology Secretary had accused Mr Farage of being on the side of 'extreme pornographers' over Reform's pledge to scrap the Online Safety Act. Asked if she agrees with Mr Kyle's statement, Ms Alexander told Sky News: 'Nigel Farage is, in effect, saying that he is on their side because he's saying he's wanting to repeal the Online Safety Act. 'I think that the position of Reform in saying that they want to repeal the entirety of the Online Safety Act, which is one of the most important pieces of legislation when it comes to the protecting of our children and the safety of young people online, I think that, in effect, what Nigel Farage is saying is that he's totally happy for there to be a free for all on the internet. Heidi Alexander said Nigel Farage is 'happy for there to be a free for all on the internet'. Photo: James Manning/PA. 'That's not the position of the Labour Government. It's not the position of me. It's not the position of Keir Starmer or Peter Kyle, and that is the point that the Technology Secretary was rightly making yesterday.' Advertisement Mr Farage has demanded an apology from Mr Kyle, describing the remarks as 'so absolutely disgusting that it's almost beyond belief'. Speaking to Sky News on Tuesday, the minister had said: 'We have people out there who are extreme pornographers, peddling hate, peddling violence. Nigel Farage is on their side. 'Make no mistake about it, if people like Jimmy Savile were alive today, he'd be perpetrating his crimes online. And Nigel Farage is saying that he's on their side.' Following this, Clacton MP Mr Farage urged people to sign a petition calling for the legislation to be repealed. Advertisement Writing in the Telegraph, Mr Kyle said proposals to overturn the Act 'makes my blood boil', as he argued repealing it would benefit 'disgusting predators who contact children and groom them online'. Technology Secretary Peter Kyle said repealing the Act would benefit predators. Photo: Stefan Rousseau/PA. He added: 'I make no apologies for putting the interests of vulnerable children ahead of the interests of predators and child abusers – and the Reform leader's ego.' Also writing for the newspaper, Mr Farage said 'all of this is of course a deflection from the real problem with the Online Safety Act', as he raised concerns over ID checks. He added: 'In the name of safety, the Act poses the biggest threat to freedom of speech in this country in our lifetimes. Advertisement 'In the name of protecting children, the law aims to regulate what adults are allowed to say or see – while doing nothing to make our children safer.' UK shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti Patel said making statements about overturning the Bill is 'very lazy' and 'not responsible'. Under rules that came into effect on July 25th, online platforms such as social media sites and search engines must take steps to prevent children accessing harmful content such as pornography or material that encourages suicide. Sir Keir Starmer jumped to defend the legislation from its critics when he met Donald Trump on Monday, telling reporters: 'We're not censoring anyone. Advertisement 'We've got some measures which are there to protect children, in particular, from sites like suicide sites.' The UK prime minister added: 'I personally feel very strongly that we should protect our young teenagers, and that's what it usually is, from things like suicide sites. I don't see that as a free speech issue, I see that as child protection.'