head of rating at shepherd Chartered surveyors

The Barclay Review was never going to please everyone; that was an impossibility. The overall initial impression is that it has been less radical and far-reaching than it might have been. This is not entirely unexpected.

It is fair to say some of the recommendations are entirely welcome, while some are less so. Some opportunities have, it would appear, been missed – for example in relation to empty property relief, while some challenges have been grasped – such as those regarding private schools and universities.

Among the review’s recommendations is that a 12-month delay be introduced before rates are increased following improvements/ extension to an existing building and before rates apply to a new building. This is a welcome and sensible recommendation, although it appears to have been recommended at the expense of increasing levels of empty property relief, which is a missed opportunity.

The recommendation town centres should be supported by expanding Fresh Start Relief is linked to, and effectively paid for by, the suggestion of a selected small number of pilot schemes which, if approved, would allow a council to levy a modest supplement on out-of-town businesses (perhaps retail) or predominantly online businesses (such as distribution centres).

While it appears sensible to recommend that Fresh Start Relief be expanded, and this is a welcome recommendation, we do not see that linking it to a levy scheme is either necessary or welcome.

Barclay recommends that the Small Business Bonus Scheme (SBBS) should be subjected to a substantive review, taking on board the views of ratepayers, with any findings initiated in time for the 2022 revaluation.

It seems only right that SBBS should be reviewed, but we have to ask whether or not the Barclay Review might or should have been expected to make specific recommendations, rather than simply recommend a substantive review.

andy boal