Richest and poorest in the UK

Map of the British Isles made out of coins

There are two striking trends from data published this morning on regional gross disposable household income (stay awake) - or how much spending power people have in different parts of the UK.

The first is that London continues to power away from the rest of the UK in respect of its prosperity.

And the second is that Scottish people have not fared too badly from being part of the union since 1997 (the start date for the stats published today - and I immediately add, in deference to the passionate debate over independence, that the past is of course no guide to the future).

So Londoners were on this measure 27.7% richer than the average UK person in 2012, up from 27.6% richer in 2011 and 22.4% richer in 1997.

Or to put it another way, the income gap between London and the rest has been widening.

What is remarkable, perhaps, is that every other part of England (England, not the UK) has become relatively poorer since 1997.

Even South-Easterners became poorer - although they remain 14% richer than the UK average.

The poorest part of England - and the second poorest part of the UK - is the North East, where individuals' gross disposable household income per head is £14,393, compared with £21,446 in London.

That said, there was a bit of a catch up in the North East between 2011 and 2012.

City of London view London is continuing to power away from the rest of the UK in respect of its prosperity

Anyway, perhaps this relative decline of the English regions is another relevant factor in the rise of UKIP.

But when it comes to whether people feel the mainstream UK parties are serving their interests, it is not just longer-run personal income trends that seem to matter.

For example, Scots have become a bit richer per head since 1997 - when their disposable income was 94.7% of the UK mean, compared with 96.9% today.

And although Scots are considerably poorer than Londoners, they are richer than those in every part of England except the East, South East and South West.

But, to state the obvious (as I so often do - sorry), the relative progress of Scotland has not in any sense stemmed rise of the SNP or the appetite of some Scots to break away from the UK.

There has also been a bit of catching up by households in Wales and Northern Ireland - although households there remain in the bottom three for disposable incomes per head.

Shopping bags Spending is more important to people's happiness than their incomes, ONS research suggests

It is also worth looking at the composition of incomes in different places.

In London more than 83% of disposable income comes from what the ONS calls primary resources, which are largely wages and salaries, income from self-employment, income from savings and investments and rents from properties.

Or to put it another way, Londoners have relatively low financial dependence on benefits and transfers from the state; they are relatively financially independent.

What is more, since 1997, Londoners have become self-supporting to a slightly greater extent.

By contrast, pay and the fruits of saving have been a declining proportion of disposable incomes in every other part of the UK; transfers from the state have become more important everywhere apart from London.

In Scotland, for example, primary resources were 76.1% of total resources in 1997, and fell to 73.4% in 2012.

Which implies that Scots have become more reliant on state support - although the extent to which that support has implicitly come from south of the border is hotly debated and changing, and is connected to the varying flows of tax revenues lifted from oil in Scottish waters.

That said, it is difficult to argue that Scots people have derived no income benefit from being part of the UK - although that does not say a great deal about one important question, which is whether there is a culture of financial dependence in Scotland that would be replaced by one of entrepreneurialism by separation.

Here are two other points.

A separate bit of analysis by the ONS indicates that spending is more important to people's "life satisfaction" and happiness than their incomes: what we do with our money appears to matter more to our own sense of wellbeing than what we earn.

And, for those who like league tables, the very richest bit of the UK is "inner London west", where gross disposable incomes per head are £36,963 - which is well over three times the £11,411 they have available to spend in the poorest place, Nottingham.

Robert Peston Article written by Robert Peston Robert Peston Economics editor

How Labour pays for student fee cut

Labour would reduce tax relief for those earning £150,000 or more a year, shrink maximum pension pots to £1m and cut maximum annual pension contributions to £30,000 to pay for a cut to £6,000 in student fees.

Read full article

More on This Story

More from Robert


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • Comment number 642.

    All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

  • rate this

    Comment number 641.

    Guess the number of coins Robert used to make his map of the UK & Eire.

    Closest to the right answer gets to spend all Robert's spare change from his disposable income over the next year

    Spare some change guv?

  • rate this

    Comment number 640.

    "Great Britain is a geographic term and existed well before the countries of the UK came into being."

    I can't believe you felt the need to say that ... I feel so deflated now. There again, I didn't let pseudo statistics get in my way ... life, in every respect, is what you make of it.

  • rate this

    Comment number 639.

    633.Trymachine - Great Britain is a geographic term and existed well before the countries of the UK came into being.

    "yet there is still a whole world of opportunity between the couch potatoes and the multi-billionaires."

    Yes and we are already there, but there are very few opportunities (1 in a several hundred thousand) to even become a millionaire; and due to inflation there's more than ever.

  • rate this

    Comment number 638.

    626.Brian-It doesn't matter how much you try to spin the harsh reality is that most people will never have the opportunity to become multi-billionaires.Very, very few people even have the opportunity to become millionaires.Plus the economy could not support many.The wealth is actually generated mainly by the masses, their production and spending.There could be no rich without the rest.


Comments 5 of 642


Features & Analysis

From BBC Capital


  • A bicycle with a Copenhagen WheelClick Watch

    The wheel giving push bikes an extra boost by turning them into smart electric hybrids

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.