On October 24, 2025, Hillingdon Council shared a five-month-old video from London Councils via social media . The council’s post stated the video illustrates pressures like “rising inflation,” “escalating demands,” and Hillingdon being “severely underfunded.” The video itself talks about these issues developing since 2010 .
However, the timing and content of this communication raise serious questions about its relevance to Hillingdon Council’s specific crisis.
Timing
The council shared this video just one day after its own Cabinet report revealed the financial deficit had ballooned significantly , and three months after receiving a damning Section 24 Statutory Recommendation from its external auditor (EY) . This timing suggests an attempt to frame the bad news using a pre-existing London-wide narrative.
London-wide and National vs. Local Crisis
The London Councils video focuses on long-term, London-wide issues like underfunding and demand growth since 2010. Hillingdon Council’s immediate crisis, however, stems from short-term, internal failures identified by its own auditors:
The Local Warning (February 2025):Before the budget was even approved, the council’s CFO issued a formal Section 25 Statutory Report. This is a rare and damning step. It did not blame national funding; it warned that Hillingdon’s own budget was “not sufficiently robust” and its savings plan was a “significant risk“. This warning was ignored by the political leadership who voted the budget through.
The Section 24 warning from Hillingdon Council’s external auditors in July 2025:
This formal warning did not blame national funding. It blamed “systemic weaknesses” in Hillingdon’s own financial management, “poor data quality,” and the “fundamental” failure of its new “Oracle” finance system . The auditor explicitly stated they were “not confident that the Council has a clear understanding of its current financial position” .
The Real Drivers:
As detailed in other articles, the council’s £31.6 million deficit is almost entirely explained by a £14.1 million historical accounting error and a £15 million (£13.6m + £1.4m) failure in delivering its own high-risk savings plan . These are internal failings, not national trends.
Demand Timescales – A Key Difference
The video talks about demand rising over 15 years. Hillingdon Council’s recent reports, however, blame recent, sharp increases in demand (particularly in homelessness and social care) that have occurred since the budget was set in February 2025. They are problems that the council did not foresee and did not budget for, only a few months ago. What has happened since 2010 in the rest of London has also affected Hillingdon since 2010, but the problems Hillingdon Council has with its finances now are not the same.
While these short-term demand pressures may well be real, blaming them ignores the warnings from February that the budget was already “not sufficiently robust” to cope with expected pressures .
Summary
Sharing this general video, five months after it was produced, appears to be a deliberate communications strategy.
If the council leadership truly believed “severe underfunding” was the root cause of the crisis, residents must ask: Why were they not publicly fighting for better fundingbefore their own high-risk budget collapsed?
It allows the council to use a broad, national narrative about underfunding and long-term demand to distract from Hillingdon Council’s specific, internal crisis, which auditors have confirmed is rooted in accounting errors, IT failures, unrealistic savings plans, and poor data quality.
That last part is worth repeating: EY, the external auditors expressed serious concerns in July about Hillingdon Council’s accounting errors, IT failures, unrealistic savings plans, and poor data quality. They did not raise the points that the London Councils video talks about.