DIRE warnings have gone out that council tax payers will have to pick up the tab for yet another low grant settlement from the government to Surrey County Council. The £2.4m grant increase just announced adds up to a rise of just 0.3 per cent overall. It was this week being describing by the council as a "cash cut", when put alongside demands on the county. Waverley Borough Council, too, has received what it regards as miserly treatment. It will receive just one per cent extra in grant funding in 2008/09 and increases of just 0.5 per cent in 2009/10 and 2011/12. Richard Gates, leader of the Waverley Council, on Tuesday attacked it as "the worst grant settlement that I can remember". He commented: "The government claim to be putting an extra £2.7 billion into local authorities and Waverley is receiving just £60,000. That's not a lot of help to us in providing valuable services for our residents." The county is the highest single contributor of income tax in the South East, yet government will hand back less than £125 towards county council services per resident in Surrey. Nick Skellett, county council leader, said: "The government's decision to give us such a bad deal will inevitable put pressure on council tax." The council's much trumpeted Business Delivery Review, which it claims will lead to efficiency savings of £40m next year, will not cushion it from the pressures of increases in utility prices, road maintenance and increasing demand on social care services. With a total grant of just over £123m, against the council's overall budget of over £600m, council tax rises seem inevitable. The government has confirmed that these should be substantially below five per cent. And despite the low settlement, Waverley leader Mr Gates told borough councillors on Tuesday that the hoped Waverley's relatively small share of the council tax bill would rise by less than 2.4 per cent. Mike Band, Waverley's portfolio holder for finance, spoke of the real challenge to balance the budget. "Currently, we are spending £600,000 more than we receive in income. This cannot continue."