Kent Council, led by Linden Kemkaran of Reform UK, has recently approved its inaugural budget, despite substantial opposition concerns regarding its potential impact on the region’s vulnerable populations. The budget, which includes a 3.99% increase in council tax, has sparked fierce debate over its implications for the council’s financial stability and the well-being of residents.
Budget Details and Controversy
During a council meeting on Thursday night, 48 councillors supported the budget, just under the threshold that would trigger a public referendum on tax increases. This move follows a campaign promise from Reform UK to refrain from raising taxes. Opposition parties have lambasted the decision, with critics asserting it jeopardises the council’s financial reserves, which are now alarmingly low, and exposes it to over £410 million in financial risk.
Antony Hook, leader of the Liberal Democrats, condemned the budget as a “casino budget,” highlighting the discrepancy between pre-election assurances and the current fiscal reality. He presented documentation showing that the council now faces the highest level of financial risk in its history, with an estimated £411 million at stake this year—an increase of 60% from the previous year.
Cuts and Criticism
Hook further accused the council of an “attack on the vulnerable,” pointing to substantial cuts in fostering services, including £1.2 million from general fostering and £700,000 specifically for children with disabilities. He also noted that the static funding for infrastructure fails to account for rising inflation, resulting in real-term reductions to the highways budget that could worsen conditions, leading to more potholes and road failures.
Stuart Heaver of the Green Party echoed these sentiments, asserting that the budget prioritised political optics over the genuine needs of Kent residents. He described the financial assurance report as “alarming,” warning that the council’s stability could be at risk, regardless of Reform UK’s claims of maintaining a lower tax rate than previous administrations.
Justifications from the Council
In response to the backlash, Deputy Leader Brian Collins defended the budget as “carefully thought through,” labelling it a bold move in light of the financial challenges inherited from previous administrations. Collins acknowledged the necessity of the tax increase due to “the dire legacy we inherited” and the unprecedented demand for social care services, which currently pose a £68 million annual risk to the council’s financial resilience.
Kemarakan reiterated the council’s position, stating that while an increase in council tax was not ideal, it was unavoidable given the mounting pressures on services. He described the budget as a “sensible, low-tax budget” designed to balance necessary funding with the council’s commitment to its constituents.
Why it Matters
The approval of this budget not only highlights the tensions within Kent Council but also raises critical questions about the future of local governance under Reform UK. As financial risks loom large, the impact on vulnerable communities may reverberate throughout the region. This situation underscores the delicate balance councils must maintain between fiscal responsibility and the provision of essential services, making it a pivotal moment for Kent and its residents.
