Councils in the Northern Powerhouse are paying small and local businesses more promptly than those in London according to series of Freedom of Information requests from the Forum of Private Business.
Analysis by the small business and lobby group has shown that London is the slowest payer of any region or major conurbation in the UK, taking 22 days to settle bills.
Figure 1: Ranking of regions on payment speed (mean figures)
| Proportion paid within 10 days | Proportion paid within 30 days | Average time taken to settle bills | ||||
| Percentage | Rank | Percentage | Rank | Percentage | Rank | |
| East of England |
45% |
9 |
91.7% |
5 |
17.59 |
7 |
| East Midlands |
61% |
2= |
94.2% |
1 |
15.51 |
3 |
| London |
66% |
1 |
89.4% |
9 |
22.00 |
9 |
| North East |
58% |
5 |
92.3% |
4 |
16.16 |
4 |
| North West |
59% |
4 |
92.4% |
3 |
14.56 |
2 |
| South East |
50% |
7 |
92.8% |
2 |
16.31 |
5 |
| South West |
56% |
6 |
90.4% |
7 |
17.44 |
6 |
| West Midlands |
61% |
2= |
90.1% |
8 |
14.22 |
1 |
| Yorkshire |
46% |
8 |
91.3% |
6 |
19.59 |
8 |
Tyne and Wear showed the fastest payment terms with 73% of bills settled within 10 days and the average time taken to pay businesses being just over 13 days. Councils within West Yorkshire (Leeds, Bradford etc) paid on average in half the time of London Boroughs. As in 2012, Kirklees was the best performing council in the area.
Figure 2: Payment terms in major conurbations
| Under 10 days | Under 30 days | Average time taken to pay | |
| Greater London |
66% |
89% |
22.0 |
| West Midlands |
60% |
88% |
12.2* |
| Greater Manchester |
52% |
90% |
17.0 |
| Merseyside |
55% |
91% |
16.0 |
| Tyne & Wear |
73% |
94% |
13.2 |
| South Yorkshire conurbation |
58% |
72% |
n/a* |
| West Yorkshire conurbation |
53% |
92% |
11.0 |
* Half of the authorities in question did not hold this information or report it.
Only the West Midlands did not perform as well as the capital, as the 12.2 day is based on a very small number of councils with Sandwell the best performing council locally. In 2012 the best performing council in the region was Bromsgrove.
North West councils were more likely to show faster overall payment terms than in 2012, however payment terms for payment in 30 days dropped albeit not as severely as in London.
A comparison between the rateable values of commercial premises and the time taken to settle bills, shows that London will benefit undeservedly from the Chancellor’s vision to give 100% of the proceeds of business rates back to councils. In contrast the Midlands and North East will be penalized by the proposed policy.
Figure 3: Comparison of time taken to settle bills by potential business rates receipts
| Number of properties | Average rateable value (£) | Total rateable value (£ million) |
Regional rank based on rateable value |
Ranking on average time to settle bills |
|
| East Midlands |
147,582 |
24,716 |
3,648 |
8 |
7 |
| East of England |
184,197 |
28,703 |
5,287 |
4 |
3 |
| London |
306,231 |
54,028 |
16,545 |
1 |
9 |
| North East |
54,360 |
31,279 |
1,700 |
9 |
4 |
| North West |
237,118 |
25,654 |
6,083 |
3 |
2 |
| South East |
285,174 |
31,738 |
9,051 |
2 |
5 |
| South West |
176,536 |
24,731 |
4,366 |
7 |
6 |
| West Midlands |
184,507 |
26,071 |
4,810 |
6 |
1 |
| Yorkshire and the Humber |
190,560 |
25,283 |
4,818 |
5 |
8 |
Source: IFS http://www.ifs.org.uk/budgets/gb2014/gb2014_ch11.pdf
Ian Cass, Managing Director of the Forum stated: “Paying suppliers on time is absolutely crucial to the recovery of the British economy and we are pleased to see that cuts to local government have not dented the professionalism of local authorities in paying their suppliers.”
“The major conurbations of the Midlands and North have generally responded well to the need to support their supply chain in contrast to some larger firms.”
“There are however concerns that some councils are not able to report how many bills are paid in 30 days which may indicate operational issues within these councils. London showed a particularly poor response rates with under half of councils reporting figures on the average time to pay.”
“The Chancellor’s vision to give more business rates to local councils will in effect reward councils in a city which has increased payment terms over the last 3 years. Is this the sort of behaviour that should be rewarded?” concludes Mr Cass.
ENDS
Notes to editors
The Forum has created a report including data from all the Freedom of Information requests that were received in the 20 days.
Figures for major conurbations are shown below:
Major Connurbations
Figure 42: Performance of councils in the West Midlands Connurbation 2012 to 2015
|
|
Under 10 days |
Under 30 days |
Average time |
|||
| Council |
2015 |
2012 |
2015 |
2012 |
2015 |
2012 |
| Walsall |
No data |
n/a |
91.0% |
240= |
12.8 |
67 |
| Sandwell |
88.4% |
14 |
96.9% |
105 |
No data |
n/a |
| Wolverhampton |
85.9% |
26 |
99.6% |
7 |
6.4 |
14 |
| Coventry |
82.0% |
41= |
89.0% |
263= |
No data |
n/a |
| Dudley |
70.4% |
79 |
99.1% |
18= |
9.3 |
33 |
| Birmingham |
59.6% |
117 |
96.3% |
123 |
12.3 |
62 |
| Solihull |
23.9% |
242 |
82.1% |
300 |
No data |
n/a |
| Average |
68.4% |
n/a |
93.4% |
n/a |
10.2 |
n/a |
Figure 43: Performance of councils in Greater Manchester 2012 to 2015
|
|
Under 10 days |
Under 30 days |
Average time |
|||
| Council |
2015 |
2012 |
2015 |
2012 |
2015 |
2012 |
| Bolton |
23% |
No data |
95% |
94.40% |
18.11 |
19 |
| Stockport |
35% |
89.00% |
86% |
99.00% |
21.00 |
30 |
| Trafford |
83% |
75.40% |
96% |
96.00% |
16.60 |
19.6 |
| Oldham |
1% |
64.20% |
92% |
96.30% |
no data |
No data |
| Rochdale |
93% |
62.70% |
87% |
97.30% |
18.10 |
11.5 |
| Bury |
no data |
60.80% |
no data |
90.80% |
no data |
16 |
| Wigan |
69% |
56.20% |
93% |
94.20% |
11.03 |
13.2 |
| Manchester |
60% |
50.00% |
85% |
81.00% |
no data |
23 |
| Salford |
no data |
16.00% |
no data |
92.00% |
no data |
25 |
| Tameside |
no data |
15.00% |
no data |
87.30% |
no data |
18 |
| Average |
52% |
54.40% |
90% |
92.80% |
16.97 |
19.48 |
Figure 44: Performance of councils in Merseyside 2012 to 2015
|
|
Under 10 days |
Under 30 days |
Average time |
|||
| Council |
2015 |
2012 |
2015 |
2012 |
2015 |
2012 |
| St Helens |
no data |
No data |
no data |
93.00% |
no data |
No data |
| Knowsley |
79% |
72.20% |
99% |
98.80% |
14.5 |
No data |
| Wirral |
38% |
43.70% |
84% |
84.60% |
No data |
21.6 |
| Liverpool |
48% |
34.10% |
87% |
96.70% |
17.47 |
15.8 |
| Sefton |
no data |
21.00% |
no data |
81.00% |
no data |
No data |
| Average |
55% |
42.70% |
90% |
90.80% |
15.99 |
18.72 |
Figure 45: Performance of councils in Tyne & Wear 2012 to 2015
|
|
Under 10 days |
Under 30 days |
Average time |
|||
| Council |
2015 |
2012 |
2015 |
2012 |
2015 |
2012 |
| South Tyneside |
57% |
No data |
95% |
No data |
14.33 |
No data |
| North Tyneside |
89% |
No data |
98% |
94.00% |
12 |
12 |
| Sunderland |
92% |
88.80% |
97% |
97.40% |
7.4 |
12 |
| Gateshead |
43% |
56.50% |
83% |
92.40% |
19 |
13 |
| Newcastle upon Tyne |
82% |
50.00% |
96% |
90.00% |
no data |
14.6 |
| Average |
73% |
65.10% |
94% |
93.50% |
13.18 |
12.91 |
Figure 46: Performance of councils in West Yorkshire 2012 to 2015
|
|
Under 10 days |
Under 30 days |
Average time |
|||
| Council |
2015 |
2012 |
2015 |
2012 |
2015 |
2012 |
| Kirklees |
91% |
94.00% |
96% |
99.00% |
5.07 |
No data |
| Bradford |
61% |
71.60% |
90% |
94.40% |
13.00 |
16 |
| Calderdale |
12% |
55.40% |
87% |
97.70% |
7.05 |
9.8 |
| Wakefield |
50% |
31.50% |
93% |
96.40% |
19.04 |
20.3 |
| Leeds |
no data |
29.80% |
93% |
90.20% |
no data |
30 |
| Average |
53% |
56.50% |
92% |
95.50% |
11.04 |
19.02 |
Figure 47: Performance of councils in South Yorkshire 2012 to 2015
|
|
Under 10 days |
Under 30 days |
Average time |
|||
| Council |
2015 |
2012 |
2015 |
2012 |
2015 |
2012 |
| Doncaster |
57% |
No data |
92% |
91.70% |
not held |
No data |
| Rotherham |
67% |
60.30% |
96% |
94.30% |
not held |
No data |
| Sheffield |
29% |
26.00% |
87% |
90.00% |
Not held |
23 |
| Barnsley |
80% |
26.00%ouse |
11% |
83.00% |
10.00 |
50 |
| Average |
58% |
37.40% |
72% |
89.70% |
n/a |
36.5 |
Twitter account – https://twitter.com/The_FPB
Forum blog – https://www.fpb.org/blog
