 CORRECTION: In the article " 'Slash and burn' councils spare pet projects" (News, last week), we stated that Manchester city council had spent ?150,000 erecting a statue. The bulk of this money was, in fact, a European Union grant and was spent on a series of sculptures. The title of the "Twitter and Facebook czar" mentioned in the article is "new media communications manager". The same article stated that Haringey council had spent ?2m on its website and ?100,000 on electric-car charging points. The correct figure for the website is ?1.25m, and the cost of charging points was met by Transport for London and central government grants, not by the council. We apologise for these errors.  REBELLIOUS councils are being accused of choosing to make cuts that will embarrass the government while frittering away millions on their own pet projects.  Ministers are studying some of the "slash and burn" tactics to see if they have powers to enforce councils to deliver certain services.  Labour-controlled councils are at the forefront of making politically motivated cuts and price hikes, but even some Tory authorities have found themselves vocally criticising the cuts in their grants from central government.  Lambeth council in south London, a Labour stronghold, has spent ?600 on posters in bus shelters targeting commuters outside Waterloo station. They show a pair of scissors cutting into a blue-coloured ? sign with the message, "The government has cut our money so we are forced to cut services".  The posters have been referred to the district auditor with a complaint that the council is using taxpayers' money for political purposes.  Some of the spin is already beginning to have an effect. Labour-controlled Nottingham city council has almost trebled the price of caring for the elderly in their own homes. Such increases were reflected in front-page headlines last week based on a Which? survey of prices saying "?900 monthly bill for care in your home".  Ministers think council leaders may believe that bad publicity -- such as the opprobrium heaped on David Cameron last week after a mother claimed that he had broken a promise because Tory-run South Gloucestershire council was not increasing respite care for her handicapped daughter -- will put pressure on the coalition to release more money to town halls.  Even Tory-run Birmingham council has been consulting on proposed cuts, which would pare back home help to only the most "critical cases".  The government has encouraged councils to safeguard frontline services by cutting bureaucracy and pay to chief officers. Councils are supposed to list all expenditure over ?500 online by the end of this month. Many have still to comply with this.  Keith Wakefield, the Labour leader of Leeds city council, the second largest metropolitan authority in the country, has claimed that his authority faces cuts "the likes of which have not been seen since the 1930s". The council, which is responsible for delivering more than 600 services to 760,000 people, is facing ?90m cuts in the next financial year. Last week it announced a public consultation on its proposal to close 19 care homes for the elderly and 16 day centres for older people.  at the same time the council is going ahead with a ?30m project to insulate 90,000 homes in Leeds for free. The ?30m insulation is needed to guarantee that two Green party councillors continue to support the minority Labour group.  Camden council in north London has spent ?1,000 on posters that state, "National government spending cuts mean tough decisions for Camden's future".  as part of its cuts, it plans to chop ?3.2m from services to young children and reduce social care services. Meanwhile, it has become the first council in Britain to launch a fleet of vehicles powered entirely by renewable energy.  Manchester city council erected a ?150,000 statue last year, just months before it announced 2,000 job losses. One job that will not be axed is that of its new ?38,000-a-year "Twitter and Facebook czar"..  Barnsley council has announced that "free swimming is to be withdrawn as the effects of the government's comprehensive spending review begin to be felt". But Phil Co 