The local authorityCouncil · Unitary · England · 1 of 63 unitary authorities

County Durham.

Labour Party-controlled unitary. £658m net revenue. 58 wards across 6 parliamentary constituencies.

TypeUnitary
Seats117 councillors · 58 wards
Last election6 May 2021
Net revenue · 2025-26
£658m
Core spending power (MHCLG)
Band-D bill
£2,551
For the council slice (incl. precepts)
Composition
50/117
Labour Party 43%
Westminster
6
constituencies overlap · 1 MP party
Dispatch
31 May 2026

Labour Party chamber, Labour Party MPs.

County Durham is a unitary controlled by Labour Party (50 of 117 seats). Net revenue is £658m for 2025-26. It covers 58 wards spanning 6 parliamentary constituencies.

§ 01Composition.117 seats · last contested 6 May 2021

Who sits in the chamber.

Lab 50Con 24Independent Berwick Hills Resident 20LD 14Derwentside Independents 5The North East Party 4

Labour Party 43% · last contested 6 May 2021

Councillors — the people.

CouncillorWardElected
Christine BellIndAnnfield Plain2021
Joan NicholsonIndAnnfield Plain2021
Jim AtkinsonLabAycliffe East2021
Neville JonesLDAycliffe East2021
David Sutton-LloydConAycliffe North Middridge2021
Michael SteadLDAycliffe North Middridge2021
Tony StubbsConAycliffe North Middridge2021
Eddy AdamLabAycliffe West2021
Ken RobsonIndAycliffe West2021
George Morland RichardsonConBarnard Castle East2021
James Michael RowlandsonConBarnard Castle East2021
Richard Andrew BellConBarnard Castle West2021
Showing 12 of 117·All 117 councillors
§ 02Revenue mix & Band-D bill.MHCLG — Final LGFS 2025-26 Core Spending Power table

Where revenue comes from.

46%
Council tax
£300.4m · median 59%
41%
Central grants
£269.1m · median 30%
13%
Business rates
£88.6m · median 11%

This is a grant-heavy unitary authoritie: 46% from council tax vs the cohort median of 59%.

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

Band-D bill.

Council slice£2,031
County / upper-tier£0
Police£282
Fire & rescue£123
GLA precept£0
Parish average£115
Total Band-D£2,551

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.10 buckets · vs 62 other unitary authorities

How does County Durham split its revenue across services, compared with peer unitary authoritie-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.

Education37.4% of net spend · cohort median 36%
24 of 61+4% vs median
Adult Social Care21.8% of net spend · cohort median 27%
58 of 61-20% vs median
Children's Services14.5% of net spend · cohort median 15%
33 of 61-2% vs median
Waste & Recycling6.1% of net spend · cohort median 6%
22 of 61+7% vs median
Public Health5.7% of net spend · cohort median 4%
8 of 61+56% vs median
Corporate & Central4.5% of net spend · cohort median 3%
6 of 61+59% vs median
Culture & Leisure3.8% of net spend · cohort median 2%
6 of 61+73% vs median
Planning & Economic Development2.1% of net spend · cohort median 1%
15 of 61+55% vs median
Highways & Transport2.1% of net spend · cohort median 3%
44 of 61-21% vs median
Housing & Homelessness1.9% of net spend · cohort median 2%
30 of 61+1% 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.

§ 05Westminster constituencies — the overlap.58 wards split across 6 parliamentary seats
ConstituencyWards% of councilCurrent MP
North Durham1322% Luke AkehurstLab
Easington1221% Grahame MorrisLab
Bishop Auckland1119% Sam RushworthLab
Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor1119% Alan StricklandLab
City of Durham1017% Mary Kelly FoyLab
Blaydon and Consett610% Liz TwistLab
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 62 other unitary authorities
Band-DMHCLG CSP · precept schedules
Police, Fire, Parish on top
SuppliersCouncil publication under LGTC
Not yet ingested for County Durham
Westminster overlapONS Open Geography Portal
2023 boundaries
PopulationONS mid-year estimates
Pending ingest at LAD level