Labour is accused of punishing rural England as new analysis shows town and city councils getting three times as much Government money for children's services as shires

Councils in towns and cities are getting three times as much money as the shires to look after vulnerable children, prompting fresh accusations that Labour is punishing rural England. New analysis has found that the average metropolitan borough council is receiving £1,011 per child for children's services this year while inner London boroughs are getting £912. By contrast, central Government grants for county and rural unitary authorities - less likely to be run by Labour - average just £339 per child. In one area of east London, Tower Hamlets, per-child funding of £1,806 is 25 times as high as that in leafy Surrey (£73), the analysis by Pixel Financial Management for the County Councils Network found. The huge disparities have been created by reforms driven by Communities Secretary Angela Rayner that changed how Government grants are allocated to town halls across England. Under the so-called Fair Funding Review that ministers say ends a postcode lottery of local government funding, more cash is being given to deprived parts of the country. But council leaders say they have increasing numbers of children to look after, with almost 31,000 in care in county and rural areas. And they say the Government was wrong to remove 'remoteness' as a factor in their calculations given that it costs more to deliver local services to far-flung towns and villages. Your browser does not support iframes. Communities Secretary Angela Rayner pictured at the No 10 north office in Manchester Cllr Steven Broadbent, Finance Spokesperson for the County Councils Network, said: 'A child in need in a rural and county area is no less deserving than a child in a metropolitan city area.' He went on: 'Over the last decade, the costs and numbers of children in local authority care in county and rural areas has soared, forcing those councils to divert money from prevention into children who have reached crisis point and are in local authority care. 'That task has been made much harder after the Government redistributed money away from counties to urban areas, leaving many county and rural councils with less government funding at a time of major reform to the system. Ministers are asking us to successfully try to implement these reforms when the numbers of children requiring services continues to rise exponentially.' It comes after the Labour government was accused of waging 'class war' by cutting grants and funding for Tory and Lib Dem-dominated councils by £487m this Parliament while increasing cash for Labour town halls by £1.6bn. Shadow Communities Secretary Katie Lam told the Daily Mail: 'It's hard to see Labour's Fair Funding Review as anything other than spiteful and politically motivated. Labour are taking money from vulnerable children in rural areas in a cynical effort to increase funding for Labour councils. 'This Labour Government knows it costs more to deliver services in rural areas. Social workers travel further, placements are scarcer and sadly, far too often, children are sent miles from home because there is nowhere closer. 'A vulnerable child in Herefordshire is worth no less than one in Birmingham. But once again, rural Britain is being punished - and this time, children are paying the price.' The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said the figures do not take into account the extra funding that town halls can provide from council tax revenue. A spokesman said: 'We know rural councils face pressures supporting children and families, but these figures only show government grant funding and do not reflect the council tax funding available to councils for local services. 'We're also targeting funding where it's needed most by giving the most deprived rural areas more funding on average – as well as driving the biggest transformation of children's social care in a generation with the Families First Partnership programme – backed by nearly £3billion investment over four years.'