Treasury says Northerners typically receive £2,000 more per year in government services
The Treasury has published figures showing that people in the North of England typically receive nearly £2,000 more per year in government services than those in the South, undermining claims that the region is short-changed by Westminster. The data comes amid Prime Minister Andy Burnham's pledge to shift more power and resources northwards, arguing the North has historically lost out to wealthier southern areas, but the Treasury's own analysis suggests the opposite is true in terms of per capita public spending.
The figures show average public service spending per head across England is £13,134 a year, but this masks significant regional variation: those in the South East receive £12,031 and the South West £12,432, compared with £13,835 in the North West and £14,102 in the North East. The spending covers areas including health, education, public order, transport, housing and economic development. Conservative MP Greg Smith, who represents Mid Buckinghamshire, said the figures exposed the funding system as unfair to southern constituencies, arguing his area's residents were over-taxed to subsidise other regions while facing crumbling local infrastructure such as roads.
In short
- North of England gets ~£2,000 more per head yearly than South
- Figures challenge Andy Burnham's push for more northern funding
- Tory MP says system already unfairly favours North over South
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters of highlighting the figure may argue that it usefully challenges assumptions that northern England is systematically neglected. Higher spending can reflect real needs, including poorer health outcomes, lower incomes, higher demand for public services and the costs of maintaining infrastructure across dispersed communities. On this view, fair public finance should respond to need rather than deliver identical sums to every place.
The case against
Critics may argue that a headline average for the value of services is an inadequate test of regional fairness, especially without a methodology or breakdown. It may include spending that is not directly felt by residents, while obscuring lower investment, weaker transport links, fewer high-paid opportunities or the long-term effects of economic centralisation. On this view, higher current service spending can coexist with an unfair distribution of productive investment and local power.
Explained simply
Public services such as healthcare, schools, transport and policing are funded mainly through taxes and government budgets. Spending per person varies between regions because needs, costs and the distribution of services differ.
The North of England has often been described as receiving less investment and influence than wealthier parts of the South. That argument is part of a wider debate about regional inequality and proposals to give northern areas more control over public money and decisions.
The figures compare average public service spending per person across English regions. They are relevant to claims about which areas receive more funding, but do not by themselves show how well services meet local needs or how much people pay in tax.