LibDem Manifesto – into being in Haringey – the specifics

Now I have the specific figures for how Haringey benefits from the LibDem manifesto pledges delivered by the Coalition for this new financial year:

In Haringey:

  • 84000 people are getting a £200 income tax cut – benefiting 23 million people across the country
  • 2900 people (those on the lowest earnings) have been lifted out of paying income tax altogether, with more to come
  • £625million extra has gone to our schools, aimed at the most disadvantaged pupils – rising to £2.5billion a year by 2015 (£4.5million to Haringey).
  • 25500 pensioners have been given an extra £4.50 a week – and those retiring from today will be on average £15,000 better off over their retirement.

And yes – of course there are some really tough decisions that have been made – but these measures are progressive, improving the situation for those with the least, even in the face of the massive deficit left by Labour.


0 thoughts on “LibDem Manifesto – into being in Haringey – the specifics

  1. Dear Lynne

    Can you explain the basis on which to claim that “£625 million extra has gone to our schools”. This is a reference to the ‘pupil premium’ policy.

    But while the Coalition Agreement is clear that the pledge was to give extra money for schools – “”we will fund a significant premium for disadvantaged pupils from outside the schools budget” – this has not happened. Ministers including Education Secretary Michael Gove have acknowledged that the premium is money recycled within the education budget.

    Given Hackney will have more free school meal pupils than average, I would expect that it is likely to be a relative gainer, so you may be able to give the positive local story that you want.

    Nevertheless, it seems that the post as currently drafted is misleading, particularly in citing £625 million of “extra money for schools” nationwide. Would be interested in your response, and any clarification about whether you think the claim about £625 extra money for schools can be defended as accurate.


    This is how the Financial Times has reported the Institute of Fiscal Studies analysis, and its own analysis of the schools budget cuts.

    “The premium will provide £430 for every pupil eligible for free school meals on January 2011 at an estimated cost of £625m in 2011-2012, increasing to £2.5bn in 2014-2015. The premium might have been higher but for an expected rise in the number of pupils registering for free meals from 17.4 per cent of the total in January 2010 to about 20 per cent this year.

    This increase in registrations “implies a 0.75 per cent real-terms cut in funding per pupil on average across schools”, says Luke Sibieta, a senior research economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, a think-tank. “Less deprived schools will see larger cuts, with one in six pupils seeing real-term cuts of 2 per cent or more. Thanks to the pupil premium, more deprived schools will see smaller cuts and some will even see an increase in funding.”

    25.02.2011 Financial Times

    Widespread cuts to hit state schools, Financial Times 12.01.2011

    “Spending on three-quarters of English state school pupils will be cut in the next school year. In some regions, such as the south-east and the south-west, almost 90 per cent will lose out, FT analysis of new government data has revealed”.

  2. Averaged out, Haringey schools have seen a budget increase of 2.8% for the coming financial year including the pupil premium and the abolition of some centrally provided services where the funding has now been devolved to schools. This doesn’t actually keep pace with inflation unfortunately. Although wages are frozen, the employers’ National Insurance contribution has increased.

    It’s also really disappointing that in spite of last year’s detailed review into Haringey funding, the new government haven’t found us a penny of new money. Lynne has just announced another review! This one is supposed to measure whether anybody wants fair funding. Most local residents think they’ve already made their views clear on this and probably won’t bother to respond. Then the Tories will be able to say we’re all delighted with the pupil premium and don’t need to be funded on the same basis as Islington, Hackney and Camden.