City AM, on UK Politics, 30 October 2026

6.0out of 10Serious

Revealed: The luxury London pads getting Healey’s energy handout – while poorer areas miss out

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.2 findings

John Healey’s energy bills support package was meant to be targeted. But a City AM analysis has found homes worth millions are in line for a handout, while others in poorer areas will get nothing. John Healey’s maiden fiscal event was nothing if not targeted. Painful tax rises – be they on banks or gambling firms – were “targeted” at industries the Chancellor deemed ripe for a raid. The word “targeted” appeared as many as 30 times in the Budget document published to mark Healey’s big day, as officials sought to play down fiscal significance of their measures.

The biggest of those changes – to help them with their higher energy bills – claimed to be focused on poorer households. But a City AM analysis of council tax data revealed Healey’s reliance on the outdated property tax means his payment will land in the bank accounts of moneyed professionals and retirees in London and the South East. Meanwhile other, less affluent households from elsewhere will miss out.

Council tax bands have not been set nationwide since the early 1990s – meaning they often inaccurately represent current property prices. Some areas, such as in central and suburban London postcodes, have rocketed in value over the past 30 years – while homes in deindustrialised parts of the country have fallen in real terms. That means million-pound homes in some of the swankiest London postcodes – including Notting Hill, leafy Twickenham and Primrose Hill – are in line for the energy handout, while homes in towns with much lower property prices, including Blackpool and Aberdeen, are not.

“Using 1991 house prices to target 2026 support was never going to be a good design,” Arun Advani, a director of the Centre for the Analysis of Taxation (Centax), says. “After the support during Covid and the 2022 energy crisis, it is a sad indictment of government that a more effective way to target relief still hasn’t been created.” The City AM analysis found freehold properties with as many as five bedrooms – in areas like Peckham, Nunhead and Camberwell – will receive the targeted support.

The pocket of south east London was among the most deprived parts of the capital when the government evaluated council tax bands 35 years ago. Since then, however, the area has enjoyed an influx of upwardly mobile professionals looking to snap up affordable large terraced homes within a stone’s throw of central London. In the 25 years to 2019, Peckham property prices rose by over 1,000 per cent, according Land Registry data. That means even the owners of the area’s largest properties will receive £100 from the taxpayer.

Take 130 Ivydale Road, a five-bedroom home sandwiched between the picturesque Nunhead cemetery and a sports ground. Sold last year for £1.26m, it boasts three bathrooms, a well-kempt hydrangea-filled patio garden and a palatial open-plan kitchen. It will also get £100 from the government by January. Cast the net beyond London, and even properties situated in the more salubrious enclaves of the Cotswolds are in line for the bung. Situated just five miles away from the picturesque market town of Burford, The Haven is on the market for £1.3m.

Its estate agent describes it as a “superb home” in the “highly sought-after and quintessentially rural village” of Filkins. It “perfectly marries period charm with modern elegance”, according to Oxford estate agent Penny & Sinclair , with “a generous entrance hall, utility, sitting room with feature fireplace and log burner”. But with the extra £100 for heating, its prospective owner might not need to stock up on as much firewood as feared.

City AM even found smaller flats and homes in parts of prime central London – including Notting Hill and St John’s Wood – that are included in the scheme. Several band-D houses on the picturesque, cobbled St Petersberg Mews are now worth an estimated £1.6m. That means that had John Healey ploughed ahead with a rumoured plan to reduce the mansion tax threshold to £1.5m, those homes would have been liable to both the impending ‘council tax surcharge’, and the ‘targeted’ energy support package.

“A hundred pounds is nice, but the point is it’s extremely badly targeted,” Greg Thwaites, interim chief economist at the Resolution Foundation, told the think tank’s post-Budget press conference. “There are lots of people doing ok, who can probably manage without that money – and probably need to manage without that money – if we’re going to support the people we need to support.” The scheme’s poor targeting means there are also plenty of losers.

Those tend to be focused in Britain’s former industrial heartlands. Places like Aberdeen, Nottingham and Merthyr Tydfil, whose economies were thriving in the early 1990s thanks to Britain’s steel, oil and mining industries. A two-bed semi on Aberdeen’s Cranford Road, pictured above, . That’s despite the property being worth 89 per cent less than the mews houses in Notting Hill and 86 per cent less than the Ivydale Road five-bed.

See also, (below), the south Wales town once known as ‘the iron capital of the world’. Now, nearly 30 per cent of its residents are listed as economically inactive, as deindustrialisation and economic dislocation robbed it of high-skilled jobs and led its property prices to stagnate. John Healey, for his part, has defended the scheme’s structure, hailing it as “real help” when people “need it most”.

He will be glad, no doubt, to have the strident support of Martin Lewis, too. The all-powerful Money Saving Expert boss was fast out of the traps to declare it the “least worst option” for a package of this kind. “If you’re going to do an intervention, I think the mechanism of the intervention is right,” he said after visiting Downing Street ahead of the Budget. A look at predicted energy prices at the start of next year and the reasons to intervene are obvious.

Household bills are expected to jump some 27 per cent in early 2027 – roughly £300 for the average home. But it is also those bleak forecasts that help explain why economists who have run the rule over the scheme and who it will benefit are in an altogether less celebratory mood than Healey and . “It means a lot of cash going going to people that don’t need it,” Centax’s Advani says, “and some people who do need the support completely missing out.”

Read the original article on cityam.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (2)

City AM argues that Healey's £100 energy payment reaches valuable London and Cotswolds homes while poorer homes miss out. Its examples of homes that miss out include ones in Aberdeen and Merthyr Tydfil, which it says lose out because they sit in council tax band E. It never tells the reader that the payment, as the Mirror reported, goes to households in bands A to D in England. It also uses loaded words such as "bung" and "acolyte" in its own voice.

  1. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Serious

    “falls in council tax band E – and thus misses out on the payment”

    Why this matters
    The words "and thus misses out" tell the reader that the Aberdeen semi loses the payment because of its council tax band.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes a cheaper Aberdeen home in band D or below would receive the £100, so the comparison with Notting Hill and Peckham shows the banding alone deciding who gets help.
    The context
    The Mirror reported the payment goes to households in council tax bands A to D in England. Aberdeen is in Scotland. The article never says the scheme covers England, so its starkest example of a poorer home missing out rests on a home that the reported scheme does not cover at all.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “the band-E, £250,000 home in Methyr Tydfil”

    Why this matters
    City AM offers a band E home in Merthyr Tydfil as a second example of a poorer household excluded by the banding, and calls Merthyr a "south Wales town" in the same sentence.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes Welsh households are in the same scheme and that this home misses out only because of its band.
    The context
    The Mirror reported the £100 goes to households in bands A to D in England. The article names the town as Welsh but never tells the reader the payment it describes is for households in England, so the band is presented as the reason for an exclusion it may not explain.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    The Mirror reported the £100 goes to households in council tax bands A to D in England, so homes in Aberdeen and Merthyr Tydfil fall outside this scheme whatever their band. A fair comparison would set London homes against cheaper English homes in band E, such as those in Blackpool or Nottingham.

  2. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “a £2.4bn promise to bung £100 to households”

    Why this matters
    City AM calls the payment a "bung", a word for an improper or shady payment, in its own voice. It repeats the word in S22.
    The impression it gives
    A reader comes away thinking the payment is something underhand rather than a published Budget measure.
    The context
    The payment is an announced Budget measure paid to households in bands A to D. The article's own case is about poor targeting, not impropriety.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “his money saving acolyte”

    Why this matters
    City AM calls Martin Lewis Healey's "acolyte" in its own voice, casting him as a follower of the Chancellor.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes Lewis to be a loyal supporter of Healey rather than an independent commentator who judged the mechanism.
    The context
    The article's own quote from Lewis is conditional and narrow: he called it the "least worst option" and said the mechanism was right if there is to be an intervention.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“If you’re going to do an intervention, I think the mechanism of the intervention is right”

    Show it in the article

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from City AM

  1. 30 OctNext phase of workers rights overhaul risks hammering ‘labour market’3.0
  2. 30 OctBurnham’s former economic adviser gives Budget a four out of 100.0
  3. 30 OctThe OBR is clear: Not a single measure from this Budget will raise growth3.0
  4. 30 OctDrax CEO: Britain needs reliable energy whatever the weather0.0
  5. 29 OctHealey under fire on spending plans as UK faces ‘worst decade for living standards on record’3.0

Everything we scored from City AM