Council scorecard

Tonbridge & Malling Borough Council

Type
borough
Population
134,000 (ONS mid-year estimate, rounded)
Political control
No overall control — Conservative + Independent Alliance coalition (since May 2023)
Next election
6 May 2027 (whole council, all 44 seats)
Council website
www.tmbc.gov.uk

Scorecard

Methodology published 2026-05-18. Pending cells reflect data collection in progress, not methodology uncertainty — they will populate as the underlying data is gathered.

Refuse collection

Missed bin reports, recycling rates, complaint resolution time

66 C

Scored on the two DEFRA-published components — recycling rate and residual household waste, FY 2024-25 final data (England averages: 42.0% / 513.3kg per household) — with the remaining components (missed-bin reports, complaint resolution time, service consistency) pending data ingest. Tonbridge & Malling recycled 48.4% of household waste in 2024-25 — third-best in Kent and well above the England average of 42.0% — though its residual waste (448.7kg per household) is heavier than its recycling rank suggests (England: 513.3kg). Attribution: Conservative + Independent Alliance coalition (Matt Boughton), in office throughout the period.

as of 2026-07-02 · source

Complaints handling

Volume, response times, LGSCO upheld findings

52 D

Small-numbers caveat: district-tier LGSCO investigation counts are tiny (0–4 a year) and a single case can swing the uphold percentage from 0% to 100%, so this score rests on process indicators — upheld volume per 100,000 residents vs the 1.0 district average, remedies offered before the Ombudsman, and compliance with recommendations — across 2025-26 and 2024-25, never on the raw uphold percentage alone. 2025-26 figures precede the LGSCO annual letters (due ~July 2026) and may be revised. 2025-26: 2 investigations, 2 upheld — 1.5 upheld per 100,000 residents vs the 1.0 district average — with no pre-Ombudsman remedy and timely compliance of 50% vs the 75% district average; 2024-25: 1 upheld of 1, compliance met. Attribution: Conservative + Independent Alliance coalition (Matt Boughton) throughout both years.

as of 2026-07-02 · source

FOI response

Average response time, refusal/exemption rate, compliance with 20-day statutory deadline

Pending

Score pending — Tonbridge & Malling publishes no FOI performance statistics (checked 2026-07-03; an FOI & data policy page only), so no component of this metric can be scored from public data. What is known: 2 ICO decision notices in the three years to July 2026 (one upheld, on Environmental Information Regulations handling, June 2025; one not upheld), and ~666 requests via WhatDoTheyKnow (Apr 2025 snapshot) — the lowest volume in Kent. A standardised information request for the missing statistics is planned for the next refresh.

as of 2026-07-03

Financial health & budget discipline

Revenue budget variance, capital programme delivery, reserves + Section 114 risk, external auditor VfM judgment, council tax positioning + trajectory vs national

68 C

Weighted across the six published components: revenue budget variance 25%, capital programme delivery 20%, reserves & Section 114 risk 20%, external auditor VfM judgement 15%, council tax positioning 10%, council tax trajectory 10%. 2024/25 outturn: £119k (0.7%) revenue underspend, with £1.1m contributed to the general revenue reserve; the strongest reserves position in Kent — usable reserves £39.9m ≈ 234% of net revenue spend, GROWING £6.2m in the year; auditor: no significant weaknesses on any criterion (all Amber), with the prior-year procurement significant weakness resolved and accounts certified. Capital delivery is the weak component: £2.9m spent against an original £6.9m programme (58% under, on a small programme, with major projects delayed into 2025/26). Council tax: Band D £252.65, 6th-highest of the 12 Kent districts; 5-yr CAGR 2.85% vs 2.64% nationally, with the 2026-27 rise at the cap. Attribution: Conservative + Independent Alliance coalition (Matt Boughton) throughout.

as of 2026-07-03 · source

Transparency

Open data publication, councillor expenses, contract register, committee paper publication

66 C

Fixed-date website audit (2026-07-03) against the Transparency Code checklist: spending-data currency and format, contracts register, councillor allowances, interests, committee papers, senior pay, open data, FOI disclosure log. Items not individually verified this quarter are scored neutrally and flagged. Monthly spending CSVs current to March 2026 (series from December 2020), councillor allowances, senior salaries, annual pay-policy statement and organisation chart all published on the transparency hub. However the democracy/committee-papers site was unreachable from two independent connections on the audit date — that component is excluded from this score pending a retest, since availability counts toward committee-paper completeness — the contracts register was not verified, and there is no FOI disclosure log or open-data portal. Attribution: audit conducted under the Conservative + Independent Alliance coalition (Matt Boughton).

as of 2026-07-03 · source

Planning

Application approval ratios, appeal-overturn rate, determination time vs statutory targets

54 D

Scored against the England averages (majors in time 91.0%, non-majors 90.8%, major appeal overturns 3.1%) over the 24 months to March 2026 (speed) and June 2025 (appeal quality), from MHCLG designation-regime tables; the enforcement-trend component (15%) is pending and the three measured components are re-weighted pro rata. The national "in time" measure includes agreed extensions of time. 96.2% of major applications decided in time (above the England average) but only 85.3% of non-majors (below the 90.8% England average), and the highest major appeal-overturn rate in Kent at 6.8% vs 3.1% nationally — still well inside the 10% designation threshold, and volatile on 52 major decisions. Attribution: Conservative + Independent Alliance coalition (Matt Boughton) throughout the April 2024 – March 2026 window.

as of 2026-07-02 · source

Education & children's services

SEND/EHCP statutory processing, SEND tribunal LA-loss rate, children's services Ofsted rating, school transport delivery (county + unitary only)

N/A

Education and children's services are not a district/borough function. The county council (or, for Medway, the unitary authority) holds this remit.

Safeguarding & LADO

LADO referral handling, multi-agency safeguarding (MASH) timeliness, Section 47 enquiry compliance, independent safeguarding audit findings (county + unitary only)

N/A

Safeguarding is the statutory function of the county council or unitary authority via the LADO (Local Authority Designated Officer) and multi-agency safeguarding hub.

Manifesto delivery (Trust)

KLN tracks what the controlling party promised at the most recent election vs what was actually delivered. KEPT/PARTIAL/BROKEN/PENDING/OUT_OF_SCOPE categorisation.

50 D

Trust score: 3 categorised public issues (no scoreable pledges yet).

as of 2026-09-29

Top public issues for Tonbridge & Malling residents

This is editorial assessment, not a metric score. Each issue carries an alignment tag — ALIGNED (council in step with residents), MIXED (some action falls short), COUNTERACTING (council against residents on this), or SILENT (no clear position). KLN-curated. Council positions added verbatim where provided. Right-of-reply opens with initial publication.

  1. 🟡Mixed

    Greenbelt protection + development pressure

    Tonbridge & Malling faces sustained housing-targets pressure on greenbelt sites; residents express concern about cumulative loss of green space.

    Council position

    The Conservative-led coalition with the Independent Alliance (no overall control since May 2023) is broadly resistant to large greenbelt releases outside the Local Plan; case-by-case planning decisions.

    KLN assessment

    Statements supportive; greenbelt-release approval rates + Planning Inspectorate appeal outcomes are the action evidence and not yet reviewed under Metric 6. Per the "actions, not statements" principle: MIXED.

  2. 🟡Mixed

    Recycling rates + waste services

    Residents expect strong recycling performance + reliable waste services. T&M has historically claimed strong delivery here.

    Council position

    Conservatives 2023 election material claimed strong recycling rates + tough environmental enforcement.

    KLN assessment

    Claim of strong delivery is a statement; action evidence sits in DEFRA WasteDataFlow returns + enforcement notice volumes, to be reviewed under Metric 1. Per the "actions, not statements" principle: MIXED.

  3. 🟡Mixed

    Council tax + value for money

    T&M residents expect competitive council tax position vs other Kent districts.

    Council position

    Conservatives 2023 election material claimed "best value for money" in Kent.

    KLN assessment

    Claim of best VfM is a statement; verification is Band D council tax positioning + external auditor VfM judgement under Metric 4. Per the "actions, not statements" principle: MIXED.

News from this council's area

How this scorecard works

Each metric is scored 0-100 and banded A through F. We do NOT aggregate to a single overall ranking — combining unrelated performance areas would mislead. See the methodology page for full details, thresholds, and data sources.

Spot an error or have data we should add for Tonbridge & Malling? editor@kentlocalnews.co.uk.