Kent’s PWLB Debt Mountain Grows £503m as Medway Surges Past KCC
shepwayvox
Government lending data shows Kent and Medway principal councils’ unpaid Public Works Loan Board principal rose from £1.14bn to £1.64bn in five years. The biggest shift is Medway, where recorded PWLB debt has more than quadrupled since 2021.
There’s a quiet kind of public debt that doesn’t arrive with a ribbon-cutting, a hard hat, or a councillor smiling beside a digger.
It sits in government spreadsheets.
It waits in treasury reports.
It moves through the accounts in language so dry it could dehydrate a cactus: principal balance outstanding, maturity profile, year-end values, refinancing risk.
But behind the municipal fog is a simple public question: how much have Kent councils borrowed from the government’s Public Works Loan Board, and how much is still sitting there?
The answer is big.
Across Kent’s principal councils — Kent County Council, Medway Council and the district, borough and city councils — unpaid PWLB loan principal rose from £1.139bn at 31 March 2021 to £1.643bn at 31 March 2026.
That’s an increase of just over half a billion pounds — £503.17m — or 44.2% in five years.
This isn’t every pound of council debt in Kent. Councils can borrow in other ways. They can use leases, internal borrowing, private placements and other capital-finance arrangements that don’t appear in these PWLB year-end files.
But it is still a very large public money trail.
The Public Works Loan Board is a government lending route used by councils. “Principal Balance Outstanding” means the unpaid loan capital still sitting on the books at year end. In plain English: the part of the PWLB loan that hasn’t yet been repaid.
And in Kent and Medway, that figure has climbed by just over half a billion pounds since 2021.
The line is not subtle.
Kent principal councils had £1.139bn of PWLB principal outstanding in 2021. That dipped slightly to £1.117bn in 2022, then began climbing: £1.171bn in 2023, £1.344bn in 2024, £1.506bn in 2025, and £1.643bn in 2026.
That doesn’t prove the borrowing was wrong. It doesn’t prove it was right either.
A council can borrow sensibly to build homes, repair assets, invest in infrastructure or spread the cost of long-life projects across the people who benefit from them.
A council can also borrow badly, store up pressure, dress risk as ambition, and leave tomorrow’s residents paying for yesterday’s political confidence.
The spreadsheet doesn’t settle that argument.
It tells us where to start asking.
And the first place to look is Medway.
Medway has overtaken Kent County Council
Five years ago, Kent County Council was the obvious heavyweight in the PWLB data.
In 2021, KCC had £449.61m of PWLB principal outstanding. Medway had £123.52m.
By 2026, the picture had flipped.
KCC’s PWLB principal had fallen to £396.83m.
Medway’s had risen to £546.02m.
That means Medway’s PWLB principal increased by £422.50m between 2021 and 2026 — a rise of 342.0%.
KCC, by contrast, reduced its PWLB principal by £52.78m, or 11.7%.
The overtaking moment came in the latest stretch of the data. In 2025, KCC was still just ahead, at £428.55m, while Medway stood at £421.02m. By 2026, KCC had fallen again, to £396.83m, while Medway had jumped to £546.02m.
That isn’t a rounding difference. That is a reshaping of the borrowing map.
The loan-count trail makes the shift even clearer.
Medway had 19 PWLB loan entries in the 2021 year-end file. By 2026, it had 104.
Between the 2025 and 2026 files alone, Medway had 35 new loan entries totalling £175m. At the same time, 10 loan entries totalling £50m dropped out. The net one-year movement was a £125m increase.
That does not automatically mean £175m of brand-new spending. Some borrowing may have refinanced older debt. Some may be part of the council’s borrowing-and-repayment playbook. The PWLB spreadsheet tells us the money moved; it does not tell us the full political story behind it.
But residents should not have to become municipal debt archaeologists to understand what happened.
If Medway’s recorded PWLB principal has risen from £123.52m to £546.02m in five years, the public question is obvious.
What was borrowed?
What did it pay for?
Who approved it?
What future repayment or refinancing pressure now sits inside the budget?
This is not a KCC debt explosion story
The countywide figure is big enough to tempt a lazy headline: Kent council debt soars.
But the data is more interesting than that.
The rise is not being driven by Kent County Council. KCC’s PWLB principal fell over the period.
Canterbury City Council also reduced its PWLB principal, from £183.22m in 2021 to £140.60m in 2026.
Dartford Borough Council fell from £46.96m to £23.34m.
Dover District Council fell from £75.63m to £62.61m.
So this is not a story where every council simply charged together into the debt cupboard and came out wearing a top hat.
It is more precise.
Medway is the dominant driver. Behind it sit Ashford, Thanet, Gravesham and Folkestone & Hythe.
The five-year changes are stark.
Medway rose by £422.50m.
Ashford Borough Council rose by £64.39m, from £106.66m to £171.05m.
Thanet District Council rose by £61.04m, from £19.88m to £80.93m.
Gravesham Borough Council rose by £50.18m, from £75.66m to £125.85m.
Folkestone & Hythe District Council rose by £23.15m, from £53.45m to £76.60m.
Sevenoaks District Council rose by £5.95m. Maidstone Borough Council and Swale Borough Council, which did not appear with PWLB principal in the 2021 file, appeared by 2026 with £5m and £3m respectively.
At the other end, KCC reduced by £52.78m, Canterbury by £42.62m, Dartford by £23.62m, and Dover by £13.03m.
That is why Chart 3 matters.
Medway dominates it because Medway is the story. The chart is not there to look pretty. It is there to make the imbalance impossible to miss.
Thanet’s leap deserves its own spotlight
Medway may be the giant, but Thanet is the district that jumps off the page.
Thanet’s PWLB principal rose from £19.88m in 2021 to £80.93m in 2026.
That is an increase of £61.04m, or 307.0%.
The sharpest move came in the final year. Thanet rose from £32.64m in 2025 to £80.93m in 2026 — up £48.29m, or 148.0%, in one year.
That is not background noise.
Five new Thanet PWLB borrowing lines appear in 2025/26, totalling £50.375m. They were advanced between July 2025 and March 2026, with interest rates between 4.16% and 4.97%, and maturity dates between 2031 and 2037.
That is a proper local accountability trail.
Not because borrowing is automatically bad. It isn’t.
But a 148% one-year rise in unpaid PWLB principal deserves a public explanation that does not require residents to carry a calculator, a CIPFA manual and a packed lunch.
Which capital schemes does it match?
Which reports approved it?
What did councillors say when the decisions were made?
What assets, savings, services or public benefits are residents supposed to get in return?
The spreadsheet tells us the borrowing happened. It does not tell us whether the case for it was strong.
Folkestone & Hythe: the quieter but important local line
For Folkestone & Hythe, the figures are smaller than Medway’s, but they are not small.
The district’s PWLB principal rose from £53.45m in 2021 to £76.60m in 2026.
That is a rise of £23.15m, or 43.3%.
The latest year also moved. FHDC’s PWLB principal rose from £69.32m in 2025 to £76.60m in 2026 — an increase of £7.28m.
Three new FHDC borrowing lines appear in the 2026 file: £4.722m advanced on 11 April 2025, £4m advanced on 24 December 2025, and £5m advanced on 4 March 2026.
One older £4m loan dropped out between 2025 and 2026, which is why the net annual rise is £7.28m, not the full value of those new lines.
That matters locally because Folkestone & Hythe is not short of capital pressures or long-running public questions: regeneration, public assets, housing, leisure facilities, Folca, Otterpool, and the wider problem of keeping services going while the money gets tighter.
The PWLB data does not attach a polite little label saying: “this loan paid for that decision”.
That work has to be done by matching the borrowing dates and values against the council’s treasury reports, capital programme, Cabinet papers, full council reports and accounts.
But this much is clear.
FHDC’s unpaid PWLB principal is materially higher than it was five years ago. Residents deserve to know what the extra borrowing bought, what it is expected to deliver, and how it fits with the council’s wider financial position.
Beware the accounting rabbit hole
There is, inevitably, an accounting rabbit hole nearby.
The government’s PWLB data also gives something called a Year End Value. That sounds as if it might answer the obvious question — how much debt is left? — but it is not quite that.
For this article, we have used the plainer number: Principal Balance Outstanding. That is the unpaid loan principal still sitting on the books at year end.
The Year End Value is a more technical accounting-style calculation. It looks at future loan payments and discounts them back using official rates. Useful for finance officers. Handy for accounts notes. Not the number most residents would reach for when asking: “How much PWLB loan principal is still outstanding?”
So we are not letting the fair-value fog machine take over.
The public-interest point is simpler: Kent principal councils’ unpaid PWLB principal rose by £503.17m between 2021 and 2026.
The missing names matter too
Two Kent councils are notable because they do not appear as PWLB borrowers in the year-end files checked.
Tonbridge & Malling Borough Council and Tunbridge Wells Borough Council do not appear in the 2021 to 2026 PWLB year-end files.
That must be put carefully.
It does not prove they have no debt. It does not prove they have no capital-finance commitments. It means they do not appear as PWLB borrowers in these files.
Still, the absence is worth asking about.
Why do some Kent councils rely heavily on PWLB borrowing while others do not appear in these PWLB records at all?
Is it different capital need, different treasury policy, different asset strategy, different risk appetite, or simply different timing?
Sometimes the most interesting line in a spreadsheet is the one that is not there.
The question that matters
Council borrowing is not a scandal by itself.
A council that never borrows may be failing to invest. A council that borrows heavily may be building assets residents need. Or it may be storing up repayment pressure for future budgets.
The number alone does not convict anyone.
But it does demand answers.
When Medway’s PWLB principal rises by £422.50m in five years, the public should be told what changed.
When Thanet’s PWLB principal rises by £48.29m in one year, the public should be shown the decision trail.
When Folkestone & Hythe’s PWLB principal is £23.15m higher than it was in 2021, the public should be able to see what the borrowing paid for and what benefits residents are meant to receive.
And when KCC reduces its PWLB principal while others increase theirs, that contrast should not vanish into the treasury-management wallpaper.
This story is not about being anti-borrowing.
It is about being anti-fog.
It is about insisting that public debt, public assets and public risk are explained in public language.
The numbers do not finish the story. They begin it.
They tell us where the borrowing rose, where it fell, who now carries the biggest PWLB balance, and which councils need the clearest public explanation.
