The local authorityCouncil · district · England · 1 of 164 councils (district)

Babergh.

Green Party of England and Wales-controlled district. £11m net revenue. 24 wards across 1 parliamentary constituency.

Typedistrict
Seats33 councillors · 24 wards
Last election4 May 2023
Net revenue · 2025-26
£11m
Core spending power (MHCLG)
Band-D bill
£2,233
For the council slice (incl. precepts)
Composition
10/33
Green Party of England and Wales 30%
Westminster
1
constituencies overlap · 1 MP party
Dispatch
31 May 2026

Green Party of England and Wales chamber, opposed area.

Babergh is a district controlled by Green Party of England and Wales (10 of 33 seats). Net revenue is £11m for 2025-26. It covers 24 wards spanning 1 parliamentary constituencies.

§ 01Composition.33 seats · last contested 4 May 2023

Who sits in the chamber.

Green 10Independent Berwick Hills Resident 9Con 8LD 5Lab 1

Green Party of England and Wales 30% · last contested 4 May 2023

Councillors — the people.

CouncillorWardElected
Lee Jonathan ParkerLDAssington2023
Bryn HurrenLDBox Vale2023
Alastair McCrawIndBrantham2023
John WardIndBrett Vale2023
Isabelle Anne Lawrence ReeceConBures St Mary Nayland2023
John WhymanLDCapel St Mary2023
Michael John HoltConChadacre2023
Stephen Albert PlumbIndChadacre2023
David BusbyLDCopdock Washbrook2023
Sallie Jean DaviesGrnEast Bergholt2023
Derek Stephen DavisIndGanges2023
Mark David NewmanConGreat Cornard2023
Showing 12 of 33·All 33 councillors
§ 02Revenue mix & Band-D bill.MHCLG — Final LGFS 2025-26 Core Spending Power table

Where revenue comes from.

63%
Council tax
£7.0m · median 61%
26%
Central grants
£2.9m · median 26%
11%
Business rates
£1.2m · median 11%

Revenue mix is close to the councils (district) median: 63% council tax, 26% central grants.

Source · MHCLG — Final LGFS 2025-26 Core Spending Power table · derived (CT exact; grants/rates split from SFA baseline)

Band-D bill.

Council slice£194
County / upper-tier£1,649
Police£290
Fire & rescue£0
GLA precept£0
Parish average£100
Total Band-D£2,233

Parish precepts apply on top, vary by parish

For household tax breakdown

Use the income slider on My place to see income tax, NI, VAT and council tax against your earnings.

§ 03Service spend, ranked against peers.7 buckets · vs 163 other councils (district)

How does Babergh split its revenue across services, compared with peer councils (district)-class councils? Each row is one of the ten standard service buckets. The vertical line at the centre is the cohort median share; the coloured square is where this council sits. Squares to the right of centre mean a bigger share of revenue than the median peer; to the left, a smaller share.

Planning & Economic Development29.8% of net spend · cohort median 14%
6 of 158+106% vs median
Waste & Recycling25.4% of net spend · cohort median 32%
126 of 158-21% vs median
Culture & Leisure17.3% of net spend · cohort median 13%
41 of 158+29% vs median
Housing & Homelessness16.4% of net spend · cohort median 14%
56 of 158+17% vs median
Corporate & Central9.9% of net spend · cohort median 27%
152 of 158-63% vs median
Highways & Transport1.3% of net spend · cohort median -2%
22 of 158
Public Health0.1% of net spend · cohort median 0%
32 of 38-84% vs median
How to read these bars

The subtitle on each row (“X% of net spend”) is what share of this council’s revenue goes to that service. The rank (“15 of 61”) is where this council sits within the cohort, sorted by that share descending. The delta (“+26% vs median”) is a relative reading: the council allocates 26% more of its revenue to that service than the median peer would. A small absolute difference can still be a big relative one.

Higher share doesn’t mean waste — it can reflect demographic need (more older residents), rurality, or a policy choice (e.g. keeping a service in-house). Lower share doesn’t mean efficiency — some councils move costs to fees, ringfenced accounts, or grants. £-per-head would be sharper than share-of-revenue; LAD population is pending ingest. Comparisons are within the same council type only.

§ 04Top suppliers.1,669 payments · £12.7m gross · 3 Dec 202531 Mar 2026

Every invoice over £500, published under the Local Government Transparency Code. Best-effort, not statutory — counts and totals net negatives (refunds/reversals).

Top by total — last 180 days

SupplierPaidSharePmts
SUFFOLK COUNTY COUNCIL£1.41m11.2%46
EQUANS REGENERATION LTD£1.24m9.8%4
ZURICH MUNICIPAL£0.68m5.3%13
FAUN ZOELLER (UK) LTD£0.66m5.2%7
IPSWICH BOROUGH COUNCIL£0.60m4.7%5
SEAGER HOME SOLUTIONS£0.59m4.6%17
T H MOSS AND SONS LTD£0.43m3.4%18
MIXBROW LTD£0.34m2.7%14
RAPID RESPONSE MAINTENANCE LTD£0.33m2.6%48
ORWELL HOUSING ASSOCIATION LTD£0.31m2.4%7

By service area · top supplier

Service-classified supplier data not yet ingested for this council.

§ 05Westminster constituencies — the overlap.24 wards split across 1 parliamentary seat
ConstituencyWards% of councilCurrent MP
South Suffolk24100% James CartlidgeCon
Sources, methods & last update
Method The dispatch paragraphs are AI-generated from the public sources listed below. Every figure links to its source. If we’re wrong, please tell us — corrections within 48 hours.
CompositionDemocracy Club (live)
DCLEAPIL v1.0 (historic)
Net revenueMHCLG Final LGFS
Core Spending Power table · 2025-26
Service spendDerived from MHCLG CSP shares
vs 163 other councils (district)
Band-DMHCLG CSP · precept schedules
Police, Fire, Parish on top
SuppliersCouncil publication under LGTC
1,669 payments · 3 Dec 202531 Mar 2026
Westminster overlapONS Open Geography Portal
2023 boundaries
PopulationONS mid-year estimates
Pending ingest at LAD level