Stand with us. Tell us what matters most

£0

Capacity for assessments, reviews, care planning and arranging support would be substantially reduced, leading to much longer waits 

Home care, day services, respite provision and preventative support would be scaled back significantly 

There would be significant reductions in staffing and commissioned services, requiring major changes to how support is delivered 

The service would have limited capacity to monitor quality, improve performance or respond to problems within the care market 

The service would have much less capacity to manage rising demand, increasingly complex needs and changes in residents’ circumstances 

£0

Assessments and support planning would take longer to complete 

Staffing and commissioned care arrangements would need to be reviewed, with some services reduced or redesigned  

The service would have less capacity to manage backlogs, respond to short-term pressures and maintain current performance levels 

Resources would be redirected towards core statutory responsibilities, limiting service improvement  

£0

There would be fewer options and less flexibility when arranging care and support services 

Vacancies and other staffing pressures would become more difficult to manage, reducing the service’s flexibility 

There would be less capacity for service improvement, staff development and preventative work 

Limited immediate impact on core statutory services, but increased risk of higher demand and poorer outcomes over time 

£0

£0

Capacity for assessments, reviews, care planning and arranging support would be substantially reduced, leading to much longer waits 

Supported living, day opportunities, mental health support and recovery programmes would be significantly scaled back 

Significant changes to staffing, eligibility pathways and commissioned services would be required to achieve savings at this level  

The service would have much less capacity to monitor the quality of care, support the provider market and address performance concerns 

The service would have much less capacity to provide early support, manage rising demand or respond when people’s needs change 

£0

Assessments, reviews and care planning activities would take longer to complete 

Fewer resources would be available for service improvement  

Some services and support arrangements would need to be redesigned, with greater limits on the range of support available  

There would be less capacity for joint work with the NHS, care providers and voluntary and community organisations 

The council would have less capacity to respond to emerging service pressures

£0

Residents may wait longer for some assessments, reviews and decisions about support 

There would be less flexibility when arranging services and support packages 

The service would have reduced flexibility to manage short-term pressures, demand fluctuations and staff vacancies 

The service would have less capacity for staff development, quality assurance and improvement work   

Some smaller contracts and programmes may need to be reviewed, reduced or brought to an end 

Limited immediate impact on core statutory services, but increased risk of higher demand and poorer outcomes over time 

£0

£0

Support would be concentrated on children with the most acute needs, with significantly reduced capacity for early intervention and family support 

Social work caseloads would increase significantly, reducing the frequency of visits and the service’s ability to review children’s needs  

There would be much less capacity to oversee placement quality, support the children’s social care market and work effectively with schools, health services and the police 

The range of placements, support services and local provision available to children and families would be substantially reduced 

£0

Early intervention and family support services would be scaled back, with resources redirected towards statutory responsibilities 

Higher caseloads and reduced staffing capacity would limit the time available for supervision, quality assurance and service improvement  

The service would have fewer options for placing and supporting children locally, increasing its reliance on higher-cost external provision 

Demand pressures would be more difficult to manage, increasing waiting times and reducing the service's ability to respond quickly to emerging concerns 

£0

There would be less ongoing support for children in care and their families 

The service would have less flexibility to manage staff vacancies, short-term increases in referrals and other unexpected pressures  

There would be less capacity for workforce development, quality assurance and partnership work with schools, health services and other agencies 

Some community-based and preventative support services would be reduced as resources are prioritised towards core safeguarding role 

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

Capacity to provide advice, prevent homelessness, assess applications and secure suitable accommodation would be substantially reduced 

Increased demand and longer stays in temporary accommodation would place further pressure on the service and reduce the accommodation available for other households 

The council would have less ability to secure accommodation locally, increasing the likelihood of placements outside London 

Reduced prevention activity would increase the number of families entering temporary accommodation and the length of their stays, placing greater pressure on the service and reducing its ability to limit disruption to children’s education and development 

Reduced capacity would limit the council’s ability to provide housing advice, address poor housing conditions and respond to complex housing issues 

£0

Increased pressure on homelessness services would lead to longer waits for assessments, advice and help to secure accommodation 

Less capacity to prevent homelessness would increase demand for temporary accommodation and reduce the service’s ability to support stable placements that minimise disruption to children’s schooling and wellbeing 

Rising demand and reduced capacity would make it more difficult to respond quickly and provide support tailored to households’ needs 

Housing improvement and prevention work would be reduced, with resources focused on priority statutory functions  

Response times for housing advice, enforcement and other housing support would increase 

£0

The service would have less capacity to provide early help and preventative support, with more resources focused on households in immediate crisis 

Reduced prevention capacity would make it more difficult for the service to resolve families’ housing problems early, potentially resulting in longer stays in temporary accommodation and greater disruption to children’s education and stability 

Reduced staffing capacity would limit proactive work to improve housing conditions and address problems in privately rented homes 

There would be less flexibility to manage changes in demand and short-term pressures across homelessness and housing services 

£0

£0

Reducing collection frequency, staffing or vehicles would not release savings under the existing contract 

The council could review and increase charges for some services, providing additional income and helping to reduce the savings required elsewhere 

Attempts to achieve an overall reduction of this scale would place an unachievable level of pressure on the smaller proportion of expenditure outside the main waste contract, including street cleaning, fly-tipping and graffiti removal

£0

Attempts to make an overall reduction of this size would therefore fall disproportionately on street cleaning, fly-tipping, graffiti removal and other expenditure outside the main contract 

Increasing charges for selected services could contribute additional income, although other significant changes would still be needed 

The council would face a significant risk of being unable to maintain required service standards and meet all its statutory responsibilities 

£0

Reducing recycling or waste-reduction work could increase longer-term costs and potentially place approximately £7 million of annual government funding at risk 

Reductions would need to be found primarily from services outside the main waste contract, potentially affecting responses to fly-tipping, graffiti and other environmental issues 

Changes could include introducing new charging options or adjusting existing fees to recover more of the cost of providing these services 

Street cleaning schedules would be reduced, meaning litter and debris may remain for longer 

£0

Cleaning frequencies would be reduced in selected locations, with resources focused on areas of greatest need 

Responses to fly-tipping and other environmental issues may take a little longer 

£0

£0

Investment in road safety, walking, cycling and sustainable transport improvements would be substantially scaled back or delayed 

Traffic management and network management services would operate at a reduced level, leading to slower responses to issues and fewer improvement schemes

£0

Fewer road safety, accessibility and active travel projects would be delivered each year 

Reduced capacity within transport services would lead to slower responses to concerns, requests and planned improvements 

£0

Some planned improvements to roads, pavements, crossings and safer travel routes would be delayed 

Traffic management services would have less capacity to undertake improvement work and respond to emerging issues 

£0

Some planned maintenance and improvement works would be deferred to future years 

Reduced service capacity would limit the council's ability to progress smaller road safety and sustainable transport initiatives 

£0

£0

Many council-funded events, festivals, arts activities and community programmes would cease, alongside substantial reductions in sports, leisure and learning opportunities 

The service would focus on maintaining a limited core offer, with much less capacity to provide outreach, targeted programmes and community-based activities 

£0

Activities, community programmes, sports development initiatives and cultural events would be substantially scaled back 

Services would prioritise core operations, resulting in fewer programmes, reduced opening hours and less support for local organisations and community groups 

£0

Less-used classes, programmes, community events and library activities would be withdrawn or delivered less frequently 

Planned improvements, new initiatives and support for local community organisations would be scaled back or delayed 

The service may increase charges to maintain priority activities

£0

A smaller number of discretionary events, activities and community programmes would be delivered each year 

£0

£0

Grounds maintenance, cleansing, inspections, repairs and horticultural work would be substantially reduced, leading to a significant deterioration in the condition of open spaces 

Remaining resources would be concentrated on essential safety work and a limited number of priority sites, with most improvement projects and community programmes ceasing 

£0

A number of playgrounds, toilets, sports facilities and park buildings would close, while others would operate with reduced availability 

Planned repairs, tree works and improvements would be prioritised, with non-urgent work deferred and fewer sites refurbished each year 

£0

Selected facilities, such as toilets, playgrounds and sports areas, would have reduced availability or temporarily close where operating and maintenance costs could not be sustained 

Park improvement projects, equipment replacement and community activities would be scaled back or delayed 

£0

Repairs to paths, benches, fences, playground equipment and other park infrastructure would take longer, with work focused on urgent and safety-critical issues 

Fewer small-scale improvements would be undertaken, creating greater variation in the condition and quality of parks and open spaces across the borough 

£0

£0

Many training programmes, employment initiatives and specialist support services would cease or operate on a much smaller scale 

Support for residents facing the greatest barriers to work would be substantially reduced 

The council would have significantly less capacity to support local businesses, entrepreneurs and start-ups, with fewer businesses able to access advice, mentoring and growth support 

£0

Intensive one-to-one support would be reduced and be increasingly targeted at priority groups 

Fewer training courses, employment projects and partnership initiatives would be delivered 

The council would provide support to fewer businesses, reducing access to business advice, networking opportunities and programmes designed to help firms grow and create local jobs 

£0

Some training and employability programmes would be reduced or delivered less frequently 

Support would be increasingly focused on residents with the highest levels of need 

The council would have reduced capacity to support new and existing businesses, particularly those seeking specialist advice or growth support 

£0

More support would be delivered through online, group-based or self-service approaches 

The service would have less flexibility to respond to rising demand and emerging priorities 

The Enterprise Hub would have less flexibility to respond to the needs of local businesses and entrepreneurs, with fewer events, workshops and business support activities available 

£0

£0

£0

Reduced enforcement capacity would mean slower investigations into planning breaches and unauthorised developments 

Less pre-application advice and support would be available to residents, businesses and developers 

Some development and regeneration projects could take longer to progress through the planning process 

£0

Reduced capacity would limit the amount of advice and guidance available before applications are submitted 

Lower-priority enforcement cases would take longer to investigate and resolve 

There would be less capacity to support new development proposals and regeneration activity 

£0

Some discretionary advice and support services would be reduced 

Most applications and inspections would continue to be delivered, but performance would be less resilient to future pressures 

£0

£0

Fewer climate, air quality and sustainability projects would be developed and supported 

Community engagement, partnership working and business support activity would be substantially scaled back 

The council would have less capacity to secure external funding and drive progress against climate objectives

£0

Reduced capacity would limit policy development, project coordination and partnership working 

Support for community organisations, schools and businesses would be scaled back 

Progress on climate and environmental priorities would be slower  

£0

Community engagement and awareness-raising activity would be reduced 

The service would have less capacity to support innovation and external funding opportunities 

Progress against climate and environmental objectives would slow 

£0

The service would have less capacity to support partners and community groups 

A smaller number of initiatives could be progressed each year 

Environmental and climate improvement work would take longer to deliver

£0

£0

Crime prevention, antisocial behaviour work, outreach and support for vulnerable residents would be substantially scaled back 

There would be major reductions in inspections, licensing, investigations and enforcement, with many lower-priority complaints no longer investigated 

Support for people with No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) would be reviewed and tightly focused on meeting the council's statutory duties, limiting the scope for wider preventative or discretionary support 

Preventative work and visible community engagement would be very limited, reducing the council’s ability to address problems before they become more serious 

£0

Fewer preventative programmes, inspections and proactive enforcement visits would be carried out 

Responses to antisocial behaviour, noise, nuisance and concerns about unsafe businesses would take longer 

Vulnerable residents would receive less intensive or shorter-term support, and businesses would wait longer for some licences and regulatory advice 

The council would need to restrict aspects of NRPF support to those cases where there is a clear statutory responsibility, reducing flexibility to provide broader assistance that helps prevent crises and escalation 

£0

Licensing, inspection and enforcement activity would be reduced, with priority given to the most serious cases 

Residents will wait longer for some antisocial behaviour, noise, nuisance and public protection concerns to be investigated 

Some preventative and early support for households with No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) would be reduced, with resources increasingly targeted towards meeting statutory duties and higher-risk cases 

Higher caseloads would leave less time for early intervention, community engagement and advice to businesses 

£0

Some preventative activity, community engagement and proactive inspections would be reduced 

There would be less flexibility within NRPF services to provide early intervention and preventative support beyond the council's core statutory responsibilities 

Businesses would have less access to regulatory advice, and some licence applications or renewals will take longer to process 

Services would have less flexibility to intervene early or respond to emerging concerns 

£0

£0

Financial resilience would be substantially weakened, increasing risks for services across the organisation 

£0

The council would likely need to sell buildings, land or other assets to reduce borrowing and lower these costs 

Services would have less support to cope with rising costs, making it harder to maintain current service levels 

Planned investment in assets, technology and corporate infrastructure would need to be scaled back or delayed 

£0

Services would face greater pressure to absorb cost increases and identify efficiencies 

Financial resilience would reduce, limiting the council's ability to manage emerging budget pressures 

The council would have less flexibility to manage financial risks and respond to unexpected pressures 

£0

Some planned investment and replacement of assets or technology may be deferred 

The council's financial resilience would be modestly reduced 

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0

£0