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

Rutland.

Liberal Democrats-controlled unitary. £46m net revenue. 15 wards across 1 parliamentary constituency.

TypeUnitary
Seats27 councillors · 15 wards
Last election4 May 2023
Websiterutland.gov.uk
Net revenue · 2025-26
£46m
Core spending power (MHCLG)
Band-D bill
£2,671
For the council slice (incl. precepts)
Composition
11/27
Liberal Democrats 41%
Westminster
1
constituencies overlap · 1 MP party
Dispatch
31 May 2026

Liberal Democrats chamber, opposed area.

Rutland is a unitary controlled by Liberal Democrats (11 of 27 seats). Net revenue is £46m for 2025-26. It covers 15 wards spanning 1 parliamentary constituencies.

§ 01Composition.27 seats · last contested 4 May 2023

Who sits in the chamber.

LD 11Independent Berwick Hills Resident 7Con 6Lab 2Green 1

Liberal Democrats 41% · last contested 4 May 2023

Councillors — the people.

CouncillorWardElected
Hans Zollinger-BallGrnBarleythorpe2023
Tracy Margaret CarrIndBarleythorpe2023
Andrew Bainbridge JohnsonLDBraunston Martinsthorpe2023
Giles CliftonConBraunston Martinsthorpe2023
Abigail Grace MacCartneyLDCottesmore2023
Samantha Jane HarveyIndCottesmore2023
Kiloran Frances HeckelsConExton2023
Nick BegyIndGreetham2023
Karen PayneConKetton2023
Matthew James FarinaConKetton2023
Oliver Charles HemsleyIndLangham2023
Andrew Jonathan BrownIndLyddington2019
Showing 12 of 27·All 27 councillors
§ 02Revenue mix & Band-D bill.MHCLG — Final LGFS 2025-26 Core Spending Power table

Where revenue comes from.

78%
Council tax
£35.8m · median 59%
17%
Central grants
£7.6m · median 30%
5%
Business rates
£2.5m · median 11%

This is a high-council-tax unitary authoritie: 78% of revenue from council tax, above the cohort median (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£2,219
County / upper-tier£0
Police£300
Fire & rescue£87
GLA precept£0
Parish average£65
Total Band-D£2,671

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 Rutland 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.

Education33.0% of net spend · cohort median 36%
34 of 61-8% vs median
Adult Social Care28.8% of net spend · cohort median 27%
22 of 61+6% vs median
Children's Services12.1% of net spend · cohort median 15%
48 of 61-18% vs median
Waste & Recycling8.1% of net spend · cohort median 6%
4 of 61+41% vs median
Highways & Transport5.7% of net spend · cohort median 3%
3 of 61+118% vs median
Corporate & Central3.8% of net spend · cohort median 3%
13 of 61+32% vs median
Culture & Leisure2.6% of net spend · cohort median 2%
24 of 61+21% vs median
Planning & Economic Development2.5% of net spend · cohort median 1%
7 of 61+80% vs median
Public Health2.3% of net spend · cohort median 4%
55 of 61-38% vs median
Housing & Homelessness1.1% of net spend · cohort median 2%
51 of 61-40% 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.646 payments · £2.8m gross · 3 Dec 202531 Dec 2025

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
BIFFA MUNICIPAL LTD£0.26m9.0%4
REDACTED PERSONAL DATA£0.18m6.4%88
ARDALE (OAKHAM) LIMITED£0.16m5.8%38
LEICESTERSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS TRUST£0.12m4.1%2
MATRIX SCM LTD£0.10m3.5%3
ALYSIA CARING£0.10m3.5%52
THE RUTLAND LEARNING TRUST£0.10m3.3%14
NORTH LUFFENHAM C OF E PRIMARY SCHOOL£0.09m3.3%8
UPPINGHAM COMMUNITY COLLEGE£0.08m2.8%4
THE PRIORY FEDERATION OF ACADEMIES TRUST£0.07m2.3%5

By service area · top supplier

ServiceTop supplierPaid
Adult Social CareARDALE (OAKHAM) LIMITED£0.16m
EducationTHE RUTLAND LEARNING TRUST£0.09m
Waste And RecyclingFCC RECYCLING (UK) LTD£0.04m
Corporate And CentralCOVENCO LTD£0.02m
Housing And HomelessnessBOSS STONE MASONRY LIMITED£0.01m
Highways And TransportRUTLAND CABS£0.00m
§ 05Westminster constituencies — the overlap.15 wards split across 1 parliamentary seat
ConstituencyWards% of councilCurrent MP
Rutland and Stamford15100% Alicia KearnsCon
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
646 payments · 3 Dec 202531 Dec 2025
Westminster overlapONS Open Geography Portal
2023 boundaries
PopulationONS mid-year estimates
Pending ingest at LAD level