Kent Council Debt 2024–25: Full Borrowing Breakdown for Kent County, Medway and Every District

Across Kent and Medway, council debt has not stood still over the past financial year. Between 31 December 2024 (Q3) and 30 September 2025 (Q2), total borrowing by the 14 Kent local authorities (including Medway) rose from about £2.22 billion to £2.27 billion – an increase of roughly £57.7 million.

Behind that modest net rise, though, the pattern is anything but modest. Kent County Council has been quietly paying down tens of millions of pounds of loans, while Medway and several districts have loaded on substantial new borrowing, often with a marked shift towards the government’s Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) and short-term loans from other councils.

All figures below are in £ millions, rounded from the official debt data (which is recorded in thousands of pounds).

Who’s Borrowing More – And Who’s Borrowing Less

Who’s borrowing more – and who’s borrowing less?

Over the nine months from December 2024 to September 2025:

• Borrowing fell in five councils:

  • Kent County Council: down from about £744.2m to £664.5m (a reduction of £79.7m).

  • Canterbury: down from £195.1m to £159.1m (down £36.0m).

  • Dover: down from £113.7m to £107.0m (down £6.7m).

  • Dartford: down from £28.7m to £25.1m (down £3.5m).

  • Sevenoaks: down slightly from £14.0m to £13.8m (down £0.2m).

• Two councils remained debt-free throughout:

  • Tonbridge & Malling

  • Tunbridge Wells
    Both had zero recorded borrowing at December 2024 and zero again in September 2025.

• Seven councils increased their borrowing:

  • Swale: up from £10.0m to £12.0m (up £2.0m).

  • Folkestone & Hythe: up from £98.8m to £103.9m (up £5.1m).

  • Ashford: up from £243.4m to £250.0m (up £6.6m).

  • Maidstone: up from £45.0m to £65.0m (up £20.0m).

  • Gravesham: up from £154.7m to £182.5m (up £27.8m).

  • Thanet: up from £17.1m to £58.1m (up £41.0m).

  • Medway Towns: up from £552.1m to £633.6m (up £81.5m).

The headline is that Kent County Council is deleveraging, while Medway and several districts are significantly gearing up. Medway alone adds more than £81m of new borrowing – more than the net increase across all Kent authorities once the reductions elsewhere are taken into account.

Where Borrowing Has Fallen – And Which Pots It’s Come Out Of

The question is not just how much debt has fallen, but where the councils have made the cuts: PWLB loans, bank loans, or the increasingly important market in loans between local authorities.

KCC – Cutting Banks & PWLB, Not Shifting Into Other Loans

Kent County Council’s total borrowing drops by around £79.7m over the period, from £744.2m to £664.5m. That reduction is entirely driven by paying down traditional long-term loans rather than switching into other forms of borrowing:

• Longer-term UK bank loans fall by about £50.0m.

• Longer-term PWLB loans fall by about £19.2m.

• Loans from “other financial intermediaries” (typically specialist lenders rather than high-street banks or PWLB) fall by about £10.5m.

Kent does not offset this with extra borrowing elsewhere. There’s no increase in short-term loans from other councils, no new securities, and no short-term bank borrowing. It is a clean reduction in headline debt from conventional longer-term lenders.

For residents, that means the County Council is slowly backing away from its historic pile of loans, particularly those owed to commercial lenders and the PWLB, rather than simply reshuffling the deck.

Canterbury – Paying Down PWLB & Inter-Authority Borrowing

Canterbury manages a significant reduction of around £36.0m, cutting its borrowing from £195.1m to £159.1m.

The fall comes from two places:

• Short-term loans from other local authorities drop by about £27.0m (from £50m to £23m).

• PWLB borrowing falls by roughly £9.0m (from about £145.1m to £136.1m).

There is no evidence in the numbers of Canterbury simply switching into other categories; this is a genuine scale-back of both PWLB and inter-authority debt.

Dover – Trimming Both PWLB & Council To Council Loans

Dover’s total borrowing shrinks by around £6.7m, from £113.7m to £107.0m. It does this by:

• Cutting short-term loans from other councils by about £4.0m (from £47m to £43m).

• Reducing PWLB borrowing by around £2.7m.

Again, no other category grows to compensate, so the council’s overall exposure is modestly lower.

Dartford and Sevenoaks – small but real PWLB reductions

Dartford and Sevenoaks make smaller moves:

• Dartford trims about £3.5m of PWLB borrowing, taking its total debt from £28.7m to £25.1m.

• Sevenoaks shaves roughly £0.2m off its PWLB balance, leaving total borrowing just under £13.8m.

These are incremental rather than transformational changes, but they still point in the direction of cautious debt reduction.

Where borrowing has risen – and what sort of borrowing it is

On the other side of the ledger, seven councils have taken on more debt. The pattern here is very different: in most cases, they are borrowing more from the PWLB and from other councils, while sometimes paying off more expensive or less flexible debts at the same time.

Medway – the biggest mover

Medway Towns is the outlier, with borrowing rising by about £81.5m, from £552.1m to £633.6m. The composition tells the story:

• PWLB borrowing jumps by roughly £78.0m (from about £348.0m to £426.0m).

• Short-term loans from other local authorities rise by about £54.0m (from £9.1m to £63.1m).

• Offsetting this, long-term loans from other councils fall by about £40.5m, and bank loans drop by roughly £10.0m.

So Medway is consolidating and expanding its borrowing: shifting out of bank loans and long-term inter-authority loans into a mix of new PWLB borrowing and much larger short-term council-to-council loans. That combination suggests both new capital spending and some refinancing of existing debt.

Thanet – almost all new PWLB

Thanet’s borrowing more than triples, from £17.1m to £58.1m – an increase of around £41.0m. Almost all of that new debt is:

• New PWLB borrowing, which rises by about £40.9m.

By September 2025, Thanet’s debt is largely a straightforward PWLB position, with negligible borrowing from other sources. That points strongly to big capital decisions in the background – housing, regeneration or infrastructure – being funded the traditional way, via the Treasury’s own lending arm.

Gravesham, Ashford and Folkestone & Hythe – heavier use of inter-authority and PWLB loans

Three districts show a similar pattern of leaning more on inter-authority markets:

• Gravesham

  • Total borrowing up £27.8m (from £154.7m to £182.5m).

  • Short-term loans from other councils rise by £16.0m (from £36.5m to £52.5m).

  • PWLB borrowing goes up by about £11.8m (from £112.2m to £124.0m).

• Ashford

  • Total borrowing up £6.6m (from £243.4m to £250.0m).

  • PWLB loans increase by about £25.2m.

  • Short-term inter-authority loans grow by £13.0m (from £63m to £76m).

  • At the same time, Ashford eliminates a sizeable short-term central government loan of around £34.5m.

• Folkestone & Hythe

  • Overall borrowing up about £5.1m (from £98.8m to £103.9m).

  • Short-term loans from other councils jump by £15.8m (from £14.5m to £30.2m).

  • PWLB borrowing is actually trimmed slightly (down about £0.6m), and longer-term loans from other councils fall by £10.0m.

In each of these cases, the councils are leaning more heavily on short-term money from other local authorities, with PWLB often nudging up too. Some are simultaneously exiting older, less flexible or potentially more expensive arrangements such as short-term central government loans.

Maidstone – more from “other financial intermediaries”

Maidstone’s debt rises by £20.0m, from £45.0m to £65.0m, almost entirely due to:

• An increase of £20.0m in longer-term loans from “other financial intermediaries” – that is, non-bank specialist lenders rather than PWLB or other councils.

PWLB borrowing for Maidstone remains steady at £5m, with no inter-authority borrowing in this period. That suggests a deliberate choice to raise funds from alternative long-term lenders rather than join the inter-authority market or draw further on PWLB.

Swale – swapping PWLB for short-term council loans

Swale is a smaller but very clear example of refinancing rather than simple expansion:

• Overall borrowing rises by £2.0m, from £10.0m to £12.0m.

• At December 2024 Swale had £5.0m in PWLB loans and £5.0m in short-term loans from other councils.

• By September 2025, PWLB is down to zero, while short-term inter-authority loans rise to £12.0m.

In plain English, Swale has paid off its modest PWLB loans and replaced them with a slightly larger pot of short-term borrowing from other local authorities.

The big picture: how Kent’s councils are changing how they borrow

If you add up all 14 Kent and Medway authorities, total borrowing across the area moves from about £2.22bn at December 2024 to about £2.27bn at September 2025 – a net increase of around £57.7m.

But the composition of that £2.27bn matters just as much as the headline total:

• PWLB borrowing across Kent rises by about £115.6m.

• Short-term loans from other local authorities rise by roughly £74.8m.

• Long-term loans from other councils fall by about £50.5m.

• Long-term bank loans shrink by £60.0m.

• Short-term central government loans (non-PWLB) drop by about £31.6m.

• Loans from “other financial intermediaries” increase modestly, by around £9.5m.

Put very simply:

• Kent’s councils are borrowing more from the government’s PWLB and from each other,

• while borrowing less from commercial banks, long-term council-to-council deals, and the central government’s short-term facilities.

In percentage terms, PWLB now accounts for about two-thirds of all local authority borrowing in Kent (up from around 62.5% to about 66.0%). Short-term loans between councils rise from roughly 10% to over 13% of the total, while long-term inter-authority loans fall from about 7% to 4.5%, and the share of bank loans shrinks.

Quarter-by-quarter: a year of churn rather than a straight line

Looking at the intervening quarters, the year is not a smooth ramp:

• Between December 2024 and March 2025, total borrowing jumps by about £113m, as new PWLB and inter-authority loans are taken on.

• By June 2025, the total has fallen back by around £41m, suggesting some early repayments or the expiry of short-term positions.

• Between June and September 2025, there is a smaller fall of about £14.7m, leaving the area still substantially more indebted than at the previous December, but below the spring peak.

From a lay perspective, this is exactly how sophisticated treasury management looks: councils are constantly rolling over, refinancing and reshaping their borrowing, not just adding or subtracting a single fixed sum.

What this means for residents

For residents, three points really matter.

First, Medway’s and Thanet’s borrowing is rising sharply. Medway’s additional £81.5m and Thanet’s £41.0m will be tied to specific capital programmes – housing, regeneration, infrastructure or commercial projects. Those projects may be necessary and worthwhile. But higher borrowing means greater exposure to interest costs and, in the worst case, to project risk if income or savings do not materialise as planned.

Second, Kent County Council is going in the opposite direction, paying down around £79.7m of borrowing, particularly from banks and non-PWLB lenders. At face value, that reduces long-term risk and future interest costs for county-wide services like social care, highways and education. The risk, of course, is that debt reduction can come at the price of deferred investment or deeper spending cuts elsewhere.

Third, the whole system is becoming more dependent on PWLB and the short-term local authority lending market. PWLB is often cheaper and more flexible than commercial bank debt, but it is still debt that taxpayers must ultimately service. Short-term inter-authority loans can be efficient, but they also expose councils to refinancing risk: when loans mature, the money has to be found again, at whatever interest rate the market demands at the time.

As Jim Hacker might observe, looking at these figures, “I thought we were supposed to be paying it back.” To which a Sir Humphrey in County Hall might reply that the debt is being prudently managed – it’s just that everyone else is prudently borrowing more at the same time.

For now, Kent’s aggregate borrowing has risen only modestly, but the internal shifts are substantial: away from banks, towards PWLB and other councils; away from the county, towards Medway and some districts. Those choices deserve careful public scrutiny, because today’s quiet reshuffling of the debt portfolio will shape tomorrow’s council tax bills and the room to manoeuvre on frontline services.

The Shepway Vox Team

Not Owned By Hedgefunds or Barons