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

Middlesbrough.

Labour Party-controlled unitary. £198m net revenue. 20 wards across 2 parliamentary constituencies.

TypeUnitary
Seats49 councillors · 20 wards
Last election4 May 2023
Websitemiddlesbrough.gov.uk
Net revenue · 2025-26
£198m
Core spending power (MHCLG)
Band-D bill
£2,488
For the council slice (incl. precepts)
Composition
26/49
Labour Party 53%
Westminster
2
constituencies overlap · 1 MP party
Dispatch
31 May 2026

Labour Party chamber, Labour Party MPs.

Middlesbrough is a unitary controlled by Labour Party (26 of 49 seats). Net revenue is £198m for 2025-26. It covers 20 wards spanning 2 parliamentary constituencies.

§ 01Composition.49 seats · last contested 4 May 2023

Who sits in the chamber.

Lab 26Independent Berwick Hills Resident 16Con 4LD 2Ind 1

Labour Party 53% · last contested 4 May 2023

Councillors — the people.

CouncillorWardElected
Sheila DeanLabAcklam2023
Tom LivingstoneLDAcklam2023
Antony HighLabAyresome2023
Janet ThompsonLabAyresome2023
Donna JonesIndBerwick Hills Pallister2023
Ian BladesLabBerwick Hills Pallister2023
Julia CookeLabBerwick Hills Pallister2023
Graham WilsonIndBrambles Thorntree2023
Jack BanksLabBrambles Thorntree2023
Stella TranterLabBrambles Thorntree2023
Linda LewisLabCentral2023
Matt StoreyLabCentral2023
Showing 12 of 49·All 49 councillors
§ 02Revenue mix & Band-D bill.MHCLG — Final LGFS 2025-26 Core Spending Power table

Where revenue comes from.

38%
Council tax
£75.9m · median 59%
45%
Central grants
£89.2m · median 30%
17%
Business rates
£32.8m · median 11%

This is a grant-heavy unitary authoritie: 38% 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£2,074
County / upper-tier£0
Police£318
Fire & rescue£94
GLA precept£0
Parish average£1
Total Band-D£2,488

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 Middlesbrough 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.

Adult Social Care28.0% of net spend · cohort median 27%
27 of 61+3% vs median
Education26.8% of net spend · cohort median 36%
56 of 61-25% vs median
Children's Services24.6% of net spend · cohort median 15%
4 of 61+66% vs median
Public Health6.2% of net spend · cohort median 4%
3 of 61+68% vs median
Waste & Recycling5.1% of net spend · cohort median 6%
45 of 61-11% vs median
Housing & Homelessness2.5% of net spend · cohort median 2%
24 of 61+28% vs median
Highways & Transport2.2% of net spend · cohort median 3%
39 of 61-15% vs median
Culture & Leisure2.0% of net spend · cohort median 2%
35 of 61-6% vs median
Planning & Economic Development1.5% of net spend · cohort median 1%
26 of 61+12% vs median
Corporate & Central1.2% of net spend · cohort median 3%
53 of 61-58% 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.12,802 payments · £87.9m 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
COMENSURA LTD£3.19m3.6%17
REDACT PERSONAL DATA£2.78m3.2%1,627
REDACTED PERSONAL DATA£1.53m1.7%1,165
LIVECO LTD T/A VEST CONSTRUCTION£1.44m1.6%8
NORTHERN POWERGRID£1.27m1.4%19
CAMBIAN CHILDCARE LIMITED£1.20m1.4%28
NORTHERN LIFE CARE LTD£1.20m1.4%81
LANE RENTALS SERVICES LTD£1.15m1.3%70
SUEZ RECYCLING AND RECOVERY UK LTD£1.11m1.3%14
EDF ENERGY CUSTOMERS LTD£1.07m1.2%72

By service area · top supplier

ServiceTop supplierPaid
Corporate And CentralREDACT PERSONAL DATA£1.89m
Highways And TransportLANE RENTALS SERVICES LTD£1.15m
Waste And RecyclingSUEZ RECYCLING AND RECOVERY UK LTD£1.11m
Planning And EconomicLIVECO LTD T/A VEST CONSTRUCTION£1.07m
Childrens ServicesREDACTED PERSONAL DATA£0.72m
Culture And LeisureLIVECO LTD T/A VEST CONSTRUCTION£0.22m
§ 05Westminster constituencies — the overlap.20 wards split across 2 parliamentary seats
ConstituencyWards% of councilCurrent MP
Middlesbrough and Thornaby East1260% Andy McDonaldLab
Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland840% Luke MyerLab
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
12,802 payments · 3 Dec 202531 Mar 2026
Westminster overlapONS Open Geography Portal
2023 boundaries
PopulationONS mid-year estimates
Pending ingest at LAD level