Local Government Finance Report (England) 2026-27
277
Ayes
—
143
Noes
Passed · Government won
227 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
**What happened:** On 11 February 2026, MPs voted to approve the Local Government Finance Report (England) 2026-27, the annual settlement that sets out how much central government funding English councils will receive in the coming financial year. The motion passed by 277 votes to 143, with the government's position carrying comfortably. **Why it matters:** This settlement determines the baseline funding available to English local authorities for 2026-27, shaping their ability to deliver services ranging from social care and waste collection to planning and housing support. Councils that consider the settlement inadequate face difficult choices between raising council tax, cutting services, or drawing down reserves. The vote confirms the government's proposed allocation will stand, meaning councils must now set their budgets for the year ahead on this basis. **The politics:** The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs voted unanimously in favour, providing the government's majority. Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, and the three Reform UK MPs present all voted against, arguing the settlement falls short of what councils need. There were no notable rebels on either side. The vote took place on the same day as a related division on council tax referendum principles -- the thresholds above which councils must hold a public vote before raising council tax -- which also passed, reinforcing the government's overall approach to local government finance for the year.
Voting Aye meant
Support the Labour government's proposed funding allocation for English councils in 2026-27
Voting No meant
Oppose the settlement, likely arguing councils are underfunded or the distribution is unfair to certain areas
420 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 227 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
247
0
115
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
87
29
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0
51
21
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
27
0
15
Independent
3
2
8
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UKWhipped No
0
3
5
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
1
0
4
Green Party of England and Wales
0
0
4
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
0
0
1
Your Party
1
0
—
Defends the settlement as restoring fairness by reconnecting funding with deprivation after 14 years of Tory cuts; announces £740m additional grant funding and £2.6bn recovery grant for most deprived councils.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (3,666 words) →
Opposes the settlement as leaving two-thirds of councils worse off; criticises shift of funding from statutory services to poverty-based allocations and attacks removal of rural services delivery grant.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (3,187 words) →
Welcomes multi-year settlements and SEND deficit relief but cannot support the settlement; criticises removal of remoteness funding and excessive reliance on council tax to balance budgets.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (1,939 words) →
As Chair of Housing Committee, welcomes fairer funding formula and SEND support but urges deeper reform of council tax and fundamental review of mandatory service demand on councils.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,863 words) →
Supports the 31% funding increase for Harrow but highlights ongoing council mismanagement, service failures in children's and adult social care, and continued need for scrutiny and oversight.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,371 words) →
Rejects settlement as failing rural authorities; argues removal of remoteness funding and rural services delivery grant amounts to pork-barrel politics favouring Labour urban councils.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,053 words) →
Questions why food waste recycling costs not met with traditional new burdens funding; highlights unequal treatment between Conservative and Labour council areas in Worcestershire.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (460 words) →
Criticises insufficient support for Shropshire despite inherited Tory mismanagement; notes council tax increases don't offset core funding cuts and rural costs are unaddressed.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (133 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0