The latest Brent Infrastructure Funding Statement showing how Brent Council has used the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) in 2023-24 strengthenss the case for relaxation of the restrictions on spending of the funds raised. £143m of Strategic CIL remains unspent and £15.5m of Neighbourhood CIL.
The Council's 2025-2026 proposes £16m of cuts to council services.
Strategic CIL cannot be used currently for the day to day running of the Council. The Lead Member for Finance in her Forward to the report states that the current shortage of funds for that provision can only be addressed by the Government increasing local government funding.
However, following a suggestion made by Liberal Democrat councillor, Anton Georgiou, Cllr Muhammed Butt and Cllr Shama Tatler have written to the Government LINK calling for more flexibility regarding CIL spending to relieve some of the pressure in the short term:
Easing restrictions does not mean abandoning fiscal responsibility, rather adapting to current realities and the challenges councils are facing. Councils can still practice sound financial management while using CIL more flexibly. Establishing clear guidelines and accountability for the use of CIL funds would ensure that the funds are used effectively and responsibly.
The figures speak for themselves:
CIL spending and allocation:
Neighbourhood CIL allocations and spend are reported in the Brent Infrastructure Funding Report and too detailed to include here but well worth reviewing. See LINK.
Overview of area spending
In addition to CIL Brent can also raise money through Section 106 agreements with developers and these have become significant particularly in housing. Again there is a significant amount of money unspent in the fund:
301 'affordable units' were secured through Section 106 but only four were social rent:
So when a new road or doctors surgery or new class room to support new development isn't provided because the Council has used CIL to plug a totally unrelated budget gap elsewhere, residents will be happy with this proposal?
ReplyDeleteShould be spent on the park and school upgrade in South Kilburn tall building zone (as Brent Cabinet is likely doing), rather than holding onto a sad neglect for total developer 45 ha public land take policy. Residents are angry and confused by car-free tower population growth only regeneration year 23, while City of Westminster, new MP and GLA are all now asking questions too.....
ReplyDeleteAll tall building zones need civic neighbourhood tall building zone masterplans for how they London fit in and for how they are fit and nurturing for human beings to live life well in, car-free/ no gardens housed. Has massively growing populations zoned without delivering any assisted living community infrastructure finally gone out of political fashion? As It is these 'left behind' population growth zones votes rather than conservation area votes that will win the next election for Labour.
But why isn't the money being spent on what is supposed to be spent on???
ReplyDeleteIf the council has no money why are they giving planning permission for all the non council tax paying student accommodation???
No, South Kilburn has the housing re-developments built including on existing public open spaces, education and health facilities. What SK lacks is the upgraded and expanded assisted living infrastructure to support its massive population growth zoned.
ReplyDeleteThe Tories brownfield estates policy was the social, health and green support major investment blocker since 2010. Now Labour are in national power a good growth plan for SK can be and is being re-started.