logo
Council tax bills set to rise at fastest rate for two decades, economist warns

Council tax bills set to rise at fastest rate for two decades, economist warns

Paul Johnson said that local government in England did 'perhaps a little bit better than it might have expected' out of the Chancellor's statement on Wednesday, but the 'sting in the tail' is the assumption that 'council tax bills will rise by 5% a year' as part of the funding.
The core spending power of councils is set to increase by 2.6% a year from next year, and 'if English councils do choose 5% increases – and most almost certainly will – council tax bills look set to rise at their fastest rate over any parliament since 2001-05', Mr Johnson said on Thursday.
On Wednesday, Ms Reeves said that ministers will not be 'going above' the 5% annual increases in council tax.
She told ITV: 'The previous government increased council tax by 5% a year, and we have stuck to that. We won't be going above that.
'That is the council tax policy that we inherited from the previous government, and that we will be continuing.'
The biggest winner from Wednesday's statement was the NHS, which will see its budget rise by £29 billion per year in real terms.
Ruth Curtice, the chief executive of the Resolution Foundation, has said that Britain is turning into a 'National Health State'.
Overnight, the think tank said Ms Reeves' announcements had followed a recent trend that saw increases for the NHS come at the expense of other public services.
Ms Curtice said: 'Health accounted for 90% of the extra public service spending, continuing a trend that is seeing the British state morph into a National Health State, with half of public service spending set to be on health by the end of the decade.'
Defence was another of Wednesday's winners, Ms Curtice said, receiving a significant increase in capital spending while other departments saw an overall £3.6 billion real-terms cut in investment.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) made similar arguments about 'substantial' investment in the NHS and defence coming at the expense of other departments, although Mr Johnson warned on Wednesday the money may not be enough.
In his snap reaction to the review, Mr Johnson said: 'Aiming to get back to meeting the NHS 18-week target for hospital waiting times within this Parliament is enormously ambitious – an NHS funding settlement below the long-run average might not measure up.
'And on defence, it's entirely possible that an increase in the Nato spending target will mean that maintaining defence spending at 2.6% of GDP no longer cuts the mustard.'
Ms Curtice added that low and middle-income families had also done well out of the spending review 'after two rounds of painful tax rises and welfare cuts', with the poorest fifth of families benefiting from an average of £1,700 in extra spending on schools, hospitals and the police.
She warned that, without economic growth, another round of tax rises was likely to come in the autumn as the Chancellor seeks to balance the books.
She said: 'The extra money in this spending review has already been accounted for in the last forecast.
'But a weaker economic outlook and the unfunded changes to winter fuel payments mean the Chancellor will likely need to look again at tax rises in the autumn.'
Speaking after delivering her spending review, Ms Reeves insisted she would not have to raise taxes to cover her spending review.
She told GB News: 'Every penny of this is funded through the tax increases and the changes to the fiscal rules that we set out last autumn.'
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch described rising health spending as a 'conundrum', with a similar approach having been taken 'again and again' as she spoke at a business conference in central London on Thursday morning.
In reference to a pro-Brexit campaign stunt, Mrs Badenoch said: 'I mean, who remembers the side of a red bus that said 'we're going to give the NHS £350 million more a week'?
'Many people don't know that we did that. We did do that, and yet, still we're not seeing the returns.
'We've put more and more money in, and we're getting less and less out.'
The Government have not explained how and why the NHS will be better as a result of its spending plans, the Tory leader added, and claimed the public know 'we need to start talking about productivity reforms, public sector reforms'.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

STEPHEN DAISLEY: As MSPs head for the beaches, a question... Would we REALLY be any worse off if they just didn't come back?
STEPHEN DAISLEY: As MSPs head for the beaches, a question... Would we REALLY be any worse off if they just didn't come back?

Daily Mail​

time27 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

STEPHEN DAISLEY: As MSPs head for the beaches, a question... Would we REALLY be any worse off if they just didn't come back?

Imagine it is May 2021, a few weeks on from the Scottish parliament election, the sixth such poll held since devolution began. Only this time it's different. This time, Holyrood doesn't reconvene. No presiding officer is elected, no oaths taken, no committee conveners appointed. The parliament lies empty. It goes on like this for weeks, then months, until it becomes apparent that MSPs will never show up. The reason for their absence is unimportant. Maybe they've secured more gainful employment as a travelling circus, a major career change insofar as it would involve travelling. In every other way, however, there is continuity. Schools stay open, the NHS groans on, police still investigate your tweets, and councils empty your 15 wheelie bins sporadically while charging rates that would force the Emir of Qatar into a payment plan. All remains as before, budgets are allocated to services, but the 2021-26 parliament never sits and never passes legislation. Question: can you think of a single way in which you would have been worse off under this scenario? I ask because MSPs have just packed up their offices for summer recess, the last before the forthcoming Scottish parliament election, which must be held by the first week of May 2026. But as the politicians root around for their buckets and spades, I've been digging through the record of this parliamentary year and indeed the entire session, which is what prompted my little thought experiment. Because this parliament is surely the most insubstantial and inconsequential since the dawn of devolution. A do-nothing assembly that, on the occasions when it rouses itself to action, confirms the wisdom of its original instinct. It is this parliament which brought forward the final draft of the Gender Recognition Reform Bill, rammed through Holyrood in a marathon run of late-night sittings shortly before Christmas 2022. Women's rights campaigners and legal scholars cautioned that its plans for self-identified gender changes would fall foul of Britain-wide equalities legislation, not least when it came to single-sex spaces. Parliament would not listen and then received the ultimate slap-down when Scottish Secretary Alister Jack made history and became the first holder of his office to block a Holyrood bill. The Scottish parliament fumed but the Court of Session sided with Mr Jack. MSPs had no cause for pique. Most showed themselves to be singularly incurious when it came to gender legislation, satisfied to regurgitate the dubious talking points of taxpayer-funded lobby groups rather than doing their jobs as legislators. Pursuing self-ID was a Nicola Sturgeon pet project, but it was also necessitated by her reckless decision to bring the Greens into government, handing ministerial power to an anti-capitalist doomsday cult that hitches its yurt to every policy fad on the go. This included the deposit return scheme, a thoroughly reasonable notion in theory, until Lorna Slater got her hands on it and drove it into the ground, alienating small businesses along the way. And in return for the votes of these ego-warriors, sensible, long-standing Scottish Government positions had to be jettisoned. An undertaking to fully dual the A96, a notorious accident blackspot, was diluted down to the weakest water. Despite the inclusion of an environmentalist party in Scotland's government, St Andrew's House missed target after target in its loudly proclaimed quest to cut emissions. Eventually, Holyrood scrapped annual and interim targets altogether. Failure has been a hallmark of this parliament. Take the PISA report confirming that performance in maths, science and reading continues to slump and Scottish schoolchildren lag behind their English counterparts in all three. Take the attainment gap, the closure of which Sturgeon asked to be judged on. It has widened, but that cannot be pinned on the former First Minister alone. It was the duty of parliament to hold her to account, but this parliament could not rise to its obligations. In this session, Holyrood has seen three First Ministers (so far) and neither Sturgeon, nor Humza Yousaf, nor John Swinney could be said to have feared parliament very often. All three warrant a share of the blame for the post-Covid NHS recovery that never materialised. For the habitually missed emergency care and cancer treatment waiting times. For the shame of elderly people forced to part with their life savings to pay for hip and cataract operations. Holyrood, the guardian of the people's interests, has attached no meaningful political price to this dire record. The same can be said of the Ferguson Marine fiasco, a slow-motion catastrophe that a more diligent and effective parliament could have stopped in its tracks. Yet as with so many of the topics at issue, MSPs, and we're talking specifically about Nationalist MSPs, chose to put party before country and keep their mouths shut. They saw their remit as that of parliamentary clapometers, there to make noise but not trouble. Taxpayers, especially those who rely on islands transport, bore the brunt of their cowardly partisanship. That word right there – 'partisan' – might just be a one-word summation of Holyrood's problem. Too many of its members regard themselves as components of a political bloc instead of elected representatives tasked with challenging, scrutinising and checking executive power. Recall how Nationalist MSPs rallied round Michael Matheson after he tried to bill the taxpayer for his holiday iPad use. A more basic test of fidelity, whether it is owed to parliament or exclusively to party, there could not be. And dozens of MSPs failed it. Holyrood is a parliament in which parliamentarians are in the minority. There is very little reason to expect things will improve in the eight months that remain when MSPs return from summer recess. This session will end with as much distinction as it has conducted itself thus far, and of what comes next we can only guess. Donald Dewar promised so much of Holyrood but even if he had been more circumspect, what we've got could only be a source of acrid disappointment. Who can say if things would be better had devolution never happened, but it's hard to imagine they could be any worse. This column began with a thought experiment, and it ends with another. Imagine you were given the opportunity to return to September 11, 1997, the day of the Scottish parliament referendum, retaining full knowledge of what has happened in the quarter century since Scots voted for legislative devolution. You head to your polling station, go into the booth, and poise your pencil over the paper. This time around, you know what's coming. The paucity of ambition, the dearth of delivery, the inevitability of failure. Much will not get better, some things will get worse, and the poor and vulnerable will pay the price. There will be mediocrity, ineptitude and cliquishness. The thinly veiled resentment towards its own people of a provincial elite that yearns only for the approval of international elites. A culture of secrecy, an aversion to scrutiny, and a closed-ranks hostility to anyone who speaks out of turn. This will be a parliament in which truth and conscience are in constant submission to party and power. The ballot before you asks you to choose between two options: 'I agree that there should be a Scottish parliament' or 'I do not agree that there should be a Scottish parliament'.

Can you mix hay fever tablets with medication and alcohol?
Can you mix hay fever tablets with medication and alcohol?

Western Telegraph

timean hour ago

  • Western Telegraph

Can you mix hay fever tablets with medication and alcohol?

Peter Thnoia, superintendent pharmacist at NHS-registered online pharmacy PillTime, is urging the public to double-check medication ingredients. He warns people taking sleeping tablets or tranquillisers, such as diazepam or zopiclone, face a "heightened risk of developing breathing difficulties" when these drugs are mixed with certain allergy treatments. Can you take hay fever tablets with other medications? While the NHS advises that it's generally okay to take hay fever tablets with other medications, it's always crucial to check for potential interactions and side effects. It's also wise to consult with a pharmacist or GP before taking hay fever tablets alongside other medications. Mr Thnoia, from PillTime, said: 'Hay fever is hitting the country hard, but taking these sedating-style tablets is a no-go if you're already taking medication to help you get to sleep. 'Not only will they both combine to sedate you, but it can impact breathing, and make you short of breath. 'It can also lead to dizziness and in extreme cases people could even fall unconscious.' The concern centres around first-generation antihistamines – the older type of hay fever medication commonly sold under brand names such as Piriton and Benadryl. These drugs are known for causing drowsiness, which can become dangerous when combined with other sedatives. How do I know which hay fever tablets to take? Non-drowsy antihistamines, such as loratadine, cetirizine, and fexofenadine, are widely available and generally safe to take alongside sleep aids or tranquillisers. Mr Thnoia continued: 'These are becoming increasingly common on shelves and are less likely to cross the blood-brain barrier, so shouldn't cause the same sedative effects.' Even SSRIs, the most commonly prescribed class of antidepressants - such as sertraline - may carry similar risks, particularly when combined with older-generation antihistamines. Can you drink alcohol while taking hay fever tablets? One of the most commonly mixed substances with antihistamines that isn't a medicine at all – but can have the same dangerous effect when combined – is alcohol. Recommended reading: And it's easy to forget while having a good time in the sun that you've had both in the same day. Mr Thnoia added: 'Alcohol significantly amplifies the sedative effect of first-generation hay fever tablets, which can result in severe impairment and lead to unconsciousness or serious accidents. 'Even non-drowsy antihistamines can occasionally react with alcohol, depending on individual sensitivity, so it's best to avoid alcohol altogether if you're thinking of allergy medication.'

Glastonbury Festival condemns chants of ‘free Palestine' and ‘death to the IDF'
Glastonbury Festival condemns chants of ‘free Palestine' and ‘death to the IDF'

NBC News

timean hour ago

  • NBC News

Glastonbury Festival condemns chants of ‘free Palestine' and ‘death to the IDF'

Palestinian flags waved amid the crowd at the Glastonbury Festival on Saturday as several performers led the audience in chants criticizing Israel's continued military campaign in Gaza. English punk duo Bob Vylan came under fire after appearing to encourage tens of thousands of audience members to call for 'death' to the Israeli Defense Forces during their set. Following chants of 'Free, free Palestine,' singer Bobby Vylan appeared to switch to a different line: 'Death, death to the IDF.' 'From the river to the sea,' Vylan could be seen saying on video shared across social media, 'Palestine must be, will be, inshallah, it will be free.' Emily Eavis, co-organizer of the Glastonbury Festival in southwestern England, shared in a statement Sunday that the festival is 'appalled' by Vylan's statements. 'Their chants very much crossed a line and we are urgently reminding everyone involved in the production of the Festival that there is no place at Glastonbury for antisemitism, hate speech or incitement to violence,' Eavis wrote. She wrote that the organizers stand against 'all forms of war and terrorism' and will always advocate for 'hope, unity, peace and love.' 'With almost 4,000 performances at Glastonbury 2025, there will inevitably be artists and speakers appearing on our stages whose views we do not share,' Eavis added, 'and a performer's presence here should never be seen as a tacit endorsement of their opinions and beliefs.' The incident comes as criticism of Israel grows louder around the world, with many in the U.K., U.S. and elsewhere protesting the state's continual bombardment of the Gaza Strip, where the death toll has surpassed 55,000, according to the Gaza Health Ministry. Israel has also been accused of war crimes by the U.N. Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory. On Saturday afternoon, the Avon and Somerset Police were quick to announce in an X post that officers are assessing video evidence to 'determine whether any offences may have been committed that would require a criminal investigation.' The BBC, which aired the festival, also said that some of Vylan's comments onstage were 'deeply offensive.' 'During this live stream on iPlayer, which reflected what was happening on stage, a warning was issued on screen about the very strong and discriminatory language,' a spokesperson wrote in an email. 'We have no plans to make the performance available on demand.' And in a statement issued by the Israeli Embassy in the United Kingdom, officials denounced speech that they said 'crosses into incitement, hatred, and advocacy of ethnic cleansing.' The embassy wrote that chants like 'Death to the IDF,' and 'From the river to the sea' are phrases that 'advocate for the dismantling of the State of Israel and implicitly call for the elimination of Jewish self-determination.' 'When such messages are delivered before tens of thousands of festivalgoers and met with applause, it raises serious concerns about the normalization of extremist language and the glorification of violence,' the embassy wrote. Bob Vylan did not immediately respond to a request for comment. But the punk group wasn't the only act to land in hot water for its conduct at the festival. Northern Irish rap trio Kneecap — which has stirred controversy before for its vocally pro-Palestinian views — also criticized Israel during its set while encouraging chants of 'Free, free Palestine.' Last month, British authorities charged Kneecap rapper Mo Chara, whose real name is Liam O'Hanna (or Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh), with a terrorism offense after he was accused of displaying the flag of the Hezbollah militant group. He appeared in court earlier this month. On Saturday, the band appeared to kick off its set with a video compilation highlighting the terror charge as well as politicians criticizing Glastonbury's decision to allow Kneecap to play, according to clips that circulated online. 'I don't have to lecture you people. Israel are war criminals. It's a f-----g genocide,' O'Hanna told the crowd. He also called attention to the number of Palestinian flags in the audience, adding, 'The BBC editors are gonna have some job.' He then called on the crowd to join him in the chant, emphasizing the 'difference it makes to people in Palestine when they see people from the other side of the world.' The band also drew backlash earlier this year when it included pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel messaging at Coachella, where it displayed a screen with the words: 'F--- Israel, Free Palestine.' 'The Irish not so long ago were persecuted at the hands of the Brits, but we were never bombed from the ... skies with nowhere to go,' O'Hanna said at Coachella during the band's second weekend performance. 'The Palestinians have nowhere to go.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store