Planning and economic: every London borough ranked by spend per resident
33 councils · median £20.66/person · mean £45.76/person. From MHCLG Revenue Outturn 2024-25.
| Rank | Council | Control | Seats | Population | Total spend | Per resident | vs median |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | City of London | Ind | 15,111 | £10.3m | £684.14 | +3211% | |
| 2 | Westminster | Con | 209,996 | £19.4m | £92.45 | +347% | |
| 3 | Kensington and Chelsea | Con | 144,518 | £12.6m | £87.31 | +323% | |
| 4 | Camden | Lab | 216,943 | £15.3m | £70.70 | +242% | |
| 5 | Tower Hamlets | ASP | 331,886 | £21.0m | £63.32 | +206% | |
| 6 | Islington | Lab | 223,024 | £13.7m | £61.39 | +197% | |
| 7 | Southwark | Green | 314,786 | £17.0m | £53.89 | +161% | |
| 8 | Lewisham | Green | 301,255 | £14.7m | £48.81 | +136% | |
| 9 | Lambeth | Green | 316,920 | £13.7m | £43.36 | +110% | |
| 10 | Hackney | Green | 266,758 | £10.2m | £38.09 | +84% | |
| 11 | Greenwich | Lab | 299,528 | £10.6m | £35.52 | +72% | |
| 12 | Richmond upon Thames | LD | 196,678 | £6.0m | £30.55 | +48% | |
| 13 | Kingston upon Thames | LD | 172,692 | £5.0m | £28.88 | +40% | |
| 14 | Barking and Dagenham | Lab | 232,747 | £5.7m | £24.44 | +18% | |
| 15 | Haringey | Green | 263,850 | £6.3m | £23.82 | +15% | |
| 16 | Barnet | Lab | 405,050 | £9.4m | £23.31 | +13% | |
| 17 | Redbridge | Lab | 321,231 | £6.6m | £20.66 | 0% | |
| 18 | Wandsworth | Con | 337,655 | £7.0m | £20.58 | -0% | |
| 19 | Sutton | LD | 214,525 | £4.3m | £19.95 | -3% | |
| 20 | Brent | Lab | 352,976 | £7.0m | £19.87 | -4% | |
| 21 | Croydon | Con | 409,342 | £7.8m | £19.10 | -8% | |
| 22 | Enfield | Con | 327,434 | £6.1m | £18.68 | -10% | |
| 23 | Havering | Ref | 276,274 | £4.7m | £17.18 | -17% | |
| 24 | Bromley | Con | 335,319 | £5.7m | £16.94 | -18% | |
| 25 | Harrow | Con | 270,724 | £4.3m | £15.96 | -23% | |
| 26 | Hounslow | Lab | 299,424 | £4.7m | £15.65 | -24% | |
| 27 | Newham | NEW | 374,523 | £5.8m | £15.61 | -24% | |
| 28 | Waltham Forest | Green | 279,737 | £3.6m | £12.92 | -37% | |
| 29 | Ealing | Lab | 385,985 | £3.7m | £9.48 | -54% | |
| 30 | Bexley | Con | 256,434 | £2.1m | £8.23 | -60% | |
| 31 | Hillingdon | Con | 329,185 | £0.1m | £0.29 | -99% | |
| 32 | Merton | Lab | 218,539 | £-2.3m | £-10.58 | -151% | |
| 33 | Hammersmith and Fulham | Lab | 188,687 | £-22.8m | £-120.58 | -684% |
What this shows. Net revenue expenditure on the planning and economic bucket from each council’s 2024-25 Revenue Outturn (RO) submission to MHCLG, divided by ONS mid-year population. Higher per-head doesn’t imply waste — it can reflect demographic need (e.g. more older residents), rurality, or policy choice (e.g. retaining in-house services rather than contracting out). Lower per-head doesn’t imply efficiency — some councils have moved costs to fees, grants, or a ringfenced account.
Caveats. Councils under MHCLG suppression for 2024-25 don’t appear here (Birmingham, Slough, Cumberland and others — see their council card for the reason). Comparisons across the tier line don’t make sense, which is why this table is filtered to one council type at a time. Source: MHCLG Local Authority Revenue Expenditure and Financing.