Cuts planned to public health budgets

Central government cuts have forced councils to reduce planned spending on public health services, a new analysis shows.

The analysis, conducted by The King’s Fund, shows that spending on public health services such as sexual health clinics will be reduced by £85 million. It also shows that councils in England are planning to spend £3.4 billion on public health services in 2017/18. The King’s Fund has estimated that planned public spending is more than 5 per cent less in 2017/18 than it was in 2013/14.

Most services are planned to be cut although figures do show that councils are planning to spend more on some services, including some children’s activities.

Sexual health services will be cut by 5 per cent, tackling drug misuse in adults by more than £22 million and stop smoking services by 15 per cent.

These reductions follow government cuts in public health funding of at least £600 million by 2020/21, on top of £200 million already cut from the 2015/16 budget.

David Buck, Senior Fellow in Public Health and Inequalities at The King’s Fund, said: “These planned cuts in services are the result of central government funding cuts that are increasingly forcing councils to make difficult choices about which services they fund.

“Reducing spending on public health is short-sighted at the best of times. But at a time when the rate of syphilis is at its highest level for 70 years, to cut spending on sexual health services is the falsest of false economies and is storing up problems for the future. The government must reverse these cuts and ensure councils get adequate resources to fund vital public health services.”

Izzi Seccombe, Chairman of the Local Government Association's Community Wellbeing Board, has since responded to the research, saying: "We have long argued that reductions by central government to the public health grant in local government is a short term approach and one that will only compound acute pressures for the NHS and other services further down the line. Councils are clear - the Government needs to look to prevention, not cure, for delivering long-term savings and better services.

"To take vital money away from the services which can be used to prevent illness and the need for treatment later down the line is counterproductive. Interventions to tackle teenage pregnancy, child obesity, physical inactivity, sexually transmitted infections and substance misuse cannot be seen as an added extra for health budgets. Local authorities were eager to pick up the mantle of public health four years ago, but many will now feel that they have been handed all of the responsibility, but without the appropriate resources to do so."