JEREMY Corbyn has accused UK Government ministers of agreeing a "sweetheart deal" to ensure a Tory-controlled council dropped plans to raise council tax by up to 15 per cent.
During a rowdy Prime Minister’s Questions, the Labour's leader read out a series of leaked text messages showing how David Hodge, Surrey County Council's leader, had negotiated with the Department for Communities and Local Government[DCLG] to call off a referendum on the local tax rise.
On Tuesday, the council unexpectedly restricted the increase to below five per cent and said a referendum was no longer necessary.
The proposal was politically sensitive for the Government because senior Tories including Chancellor Philip Hammond and Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt have constituencies in Surrey. Any chance that the residents of Surrey would have backed the move would have piled pressure on Theresa May to stump up more money for social care across England.
During PMQs, Mr Corbyn produced a series of text messages from Mr Hodge which Labour believed to have been intended for Nick King, a special adviser to Sajid Javid, the Communities and Local Government Secretary.
One message read: "I am advised that DCLG officials and my director of finance/CE have been working on a solution and that you would be contacting me to agree an MOU[memorandum of understanding.]"
A second text message read: "The numbers you indicated are the numbers I understand are acceptable for me to accept and call off the R"; an apparent reference to the referendum.
The message ended with Mr Hodge saying: "Really want to kill this off."
The texts were sent on February 3, just four days before the 15 per cent tax hike was abandoned.
The Labour leader challenged the Prime Minister, asking: "So how much did the Government offer Surrey to kill this off and is the same sweetheart deal on offer to every council facing the social care crisis created by the Government?"
Mrs May stressed that all councils south of the border with responsibility for social care had the ability to raise council tax by an extra three per cent.
She said of Mr Corbyn: "He comes to the despatch box making all sorts of claims. Yet again what we get from Labour is alternative facts; what they really need is an alternative leader."
Later, a Downing Street spokesman declined to comment on the leaked text messages but declared: “I can assure you there is no sweetheart deal."
Meantime, Mr Hodge insisted: "Surrey's decision not to proceed with a 15 per cent council tax increase was ours alone and there has been no deal between Surrey County Council and the Government.
"However, I am confident that the Government now understands the real pressures in adult social care and the need for a lasting solution."
Downing Street said the texts were never received by Mr King and Mr Corbyn's office refused to comment on reports they were sent in error to Nick Forbes, the Labour leader of Newcastle County Counci, with a spokesman saying only that the messages "came from a source".
Number 10 sources insisted it was routine and "entirely appropriate" for DCLG to have conversations with councils in the run-up to the local government finance settlement.
"As a result of these conversations, there is no extra cash for Surrey County Council," said one source, who stressed the decision on the referendum was for the local authority to take.
But a senior Labour source noted: "Words are interpretable in different ways but it's quite clear there has been discussions about numbers and that's led them to call off the referendum."
Hazel Watson, leader of the Liberal Democrat opposition group in Surrey, noted how the text messages mentioned “'numbers', 'proposals' and 'killing off the R'” but none of this information had been shared with Surrey county councillors at their budget meeting on Tuesday.
"We need to know the precise details of what Surrey has been offered. The culture of secrecy that the Conservatives thrive upon at County Hall must end now," she added.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here