Surrey County Council.
Council with no overall control county. £1247m net revenue. 172 wards across 13 parliamentary constituencies. Comprises 11 districts: Elmbridge, Epsom and Ewell, Guildford, Mole Valley, Reigate and Banstead, Runnymede, Spelthorne, Surrey Heath, Tandridge, Waverley, Woking.
8 Jun 2026
Council chamber, 2-party MP geography.
Surrey County Council is a county with no overall control. Net revenue is £1,247m for 2025-26. It covers 172 wards spanning 13 parliamentary constituencies. The MP geography crosses 2 parties — a heterogeneous setup.
| District | Band D bill | County tax sourced | Wards |
|---|---|---|---|
| Elmbridge | £2,442.92 | £123.4m | 16 |
| Epsom and Ewell | £2,416.84 | £62.7m | 14 |
| Guildford | £2,428.89 | £111.6m | 21 |
| Mole Valley | £2,405.75 | £77.4m | 13 |
| Reigate and Banstead | £2,459.20 | £120.1m | 15 |
| Runnymede | £2,380.06 | £66.2m | 14 |
| Spelthorne | £2,412.78 | £72.1m | 13 |
| Surrey Heath | £2,467.86 | £74.0m | 14 |
| Tandridge | £2,471.62 | £72.5m | 18 |
| Waverley | £2,483.85 | £108.9m | 24 |
| Woking | £2,482.03 | £78.3m | 10 |
Band D is the full household bill (county + district + police + fire + parish). “County tax sourced” is Surrey County Council’s own precept (£1846.35/yr at Band D) collected through each district’s tax base — totalling £967.3m.
Who sits in the chamber.
Councillors — the people.
Councillor data not yet ingested for Surrey County Council.
Where revenue comes from.
This is a high-council-tax councils (county): 78% of revenue from council tax, above the cohort median (66%).
Source · MHCLG — Final LGFS 2025-26 Core Spending Power table · derived (CT exact; grants/rates split from SFA baseline)
Band-D bill.
| Council slice | £1,846 |
Parish precepts apply on top, vary by parish
Use the income slider on My place to see income tax, NI, VAT and council tax against your earnings.
How does Surrey County Council split its revenue across services, compared with peer councils (county)-class councils? Each row is one of the ten standard service buckets. The vertical line at the centre is the cohort median share; the coloured square is where this council sits. Squares to the right of centre mean a bigger share of revenue than the median peer; to the left, a smaller share.
The subtitle on each row (“X% of net spend”) is what share of this council’s revenue goes to that service. The rank (“15 of 61”) is where this council sits within the cohort, sorted by that share descending. The delta (“+26% vs median”) is a relative reading: the council allocates 26% more of its revenue to that service than the median peer would. A small absolute difference can still be a big relative one.
Higher share doesn’t mean waste — it can reflect demographic need (more older residents), rurality, or a policy choice (e.g. keeping a service in-house). Lower share doesn’t mean efficiency — some councils move costs to fees, ringfenced accounts, or grants. £-per-head would be sharper than share-of-revenue; LAD population is pending ingest. Comparisons are within the same council type only.
Every invoice over £500, published under the Local Government Transparency Code. Best-effort, not statutory — counts and totals net negatives (refunds/reversals).
Top by total — last 180 days
| Supplier | Paid | Share | Pmts |
|---|---|---|---|
| RINGWAY INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES LTD | £56.51m | 7.7% | 1,324 |
| REDACTED PERSONAL DATA | £31.89m | 4.3% | 12,336 |
| SUEZ RECYCLING AND RECOVERY UK LTD | £25.38m | 3.4% | 31 |
| NEILCOTT CONSTRUCTION LTD | £10.72m | 1.5% | 39 |
| JOHN GRAHAM CONSTRUCTION LTD | £9.06m | 1.2% | 4 |
| MACRO GROUP LTD | £9.04m | 1.2% | 117 |
| SURREY PENSION FUND | £8.02m | 1.1% | 8 |
| ACHIEVE TOGETHER SERVICES LIMITED | £6.81m | 0.9% | 347 |
| SURREY LIGHTING SERVICES LTD | £6.46m | 0.9% | 68 |
| SURREY & KENT COMMERCIAL SERVICES LLP | £6.23m | 0.8% | 1 |
By service area · top supplier
| Service | Top supplier | Paid |
|---|---|---|
| Highways And Transport | RINGWAY INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES LTD | £32.20m |
| Corporate And Central | NEILCOTT CONSTRUCTION LTD | £10.72m |
| Education | REDACTED PERSONAL DATA | £5.66m |
| Adult Social Care | REDACTED PERSONAL DATA | £3.33m |
Surrey County Council’s territory crosses 13 Westminster constituencies, with 2 MP parties represented. The middle column shows how much of the council each seat carries.
| Constituency | Wards | % of council | Current MP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| East Surrey | 19 | 11% | Claire Coutinho | Con |
| Epsom and Ewell | 19 | 11% | Helen Maguire | LD |
| Guildford | 17 | 10% | Zöe Franklin | LD |
| Godalming and Ash | 16 | 9% | Jeremy Hunt | Con |
| Runnymede and Weybridge | 15 | 9% | Ben Spencer | Con |
| Surrey Heath | 15 | 9% | Al Pinkerton | LD |
| Spelthorne | 13 | 8% | Lincoln Jopp | Con |
| Esher and Walton | 12 | 7% | Monica Harding | LD |
| Dorking and Horley | 11 | 6% | Chris Coghlan | LD |
| Farnham and Bordon | 11 | 6% | Gregory Stafford | Con |
| Reigate | 11 | 6% | Rebecca Paul | Con |
| Woking | 10 | 6% | Will Forster | LD |
| Windsor | 3 | 2% | Jack Rankin | Con |
This council holds 7 Con and 6 LD MPs. That’s an unusually heterogeneous geography for a -controlled county — most weeks one MP is asking the council for something and another is praising it.
Sources, methods & last update
DCLEAPIL v1.0 (historic)
Core Spending Power table · 2025-26
vs 20 other councils (county)
77,996 payments · 3 Dec 2025 – 31 Mar 2026
2023 boundaries
Pending ingest at LAD level