🏛️ Local Government Reorganisation

• The English devolution White Paper outlines the Government’s plan to devolve power from Westminster and reorganize local government structures for clearer resident accountability and better service delivery.
• On December 16, 2024, councils in two-tier areas and small unitaries were informed about a joint programme combining devolution and local government reorganization.
• Local elections may be postponed upon request, but decisions will only be approved where there is a commitment to both reorganization and devolution.
• A deadline for election postponement requests was set for January 10, and a list of councils requesting delays from 2025 to 2026 has been published, though these are not final approvals.
• The Government aims for wider devolution coverage across England, reflecting their manifesto commitment.
• David Simmonds (Conservative) raised concerns about the costs and uncertainties related to election delays and the impact on council tax for Conservative-run councils.
• Jim McMahon (Minister for Local Government and English Devolution) emphasized the collaborative nature of the reorganization and devolution process, highlighting that local areas self-organize their proposals.
• The Minister assured there would be no top-down imposition of plans and stressed the importance of local identity and efficiency in creating new unitary councils.
• Florence Eshalomi (Labour) sought assurance that service quality and accountability would be maintained during reorganizations, emphasizing the financial strain on councils.
• The Liberal Democrats expressed concerns about the lack of consultation with district councils and questioned the democratic process of the reorganization.
• The Government aims for new unitary authorities to have a population of around 500,000, with flexibility needed for effective devolution.
• Local leaders are expected to show commitment to devolution, and decisions will be made based on credible proposals that enhance local governance.
• The reorganization process aims to address local government debt, though specific details on managing debts like those in Woking are pending.
• Concerns were raised about the potential loss of local identity and the need for consultation with affected communities, as well as the impact on local assets and services.
• The Minister reassured that the aim is to empower communities and enhance local democracy, not just reorganize local government structures.
• The Government is considering various proposals from local areas and will decide based on a balance of identity, efficiency, and devolution.

The session shows a moderate level of disagreement primarily centered around the timing and implications of local government reorganization and devolution plans. Several points of contention include:

1. Election Postponement: There is notable disagreement over the postponement of local elections, with members like David Simmonds (Conservative) expressing concern about the uncertainty this causes for councils and taxpayers. This concern is echoed by other members, such as Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown and James Wild, who emphasize the need for elections to proceed as scheduled.

2. Council Debt and Reorganization: The handling of significant council debts, especially in areas like Woking and Thurrock, is a point of contention. Members like Kit Malthouse and Mike Martin raised concerns about protecting the legacy of well-managed councils that might be amalgamated with those in debt.

3. Local Identity and Voice: There is disagreement on how devolution and reorganization will maintain local identities and voices. Concerns about merging identities and the potential loss of local control are voiced by members such as Adam Jogee and Max Wilkinson.

4. Referendum Requests: Some members, like Neil O’Brien and Mark Francois, advocate for referendums to gauge public support for these changes, indicating a lack of consensus on how to proceed with these plans.

5. Devolution Process and Consultation: There is disagreement on the process of devolution, with members like Caroline Voaden questioning how the government will adjudicate between conflicting local proposals.

Despite these disagreements, there is also a degree of consensus about the need for reorganization and devolution, with members from various parties acknowledging the potential benefits. Minister Jim McMahon’s responses generally emphasize the government’s commitment to working with local areas and addressing concerns through a collaborative process. Overall, the session reflects a balanced mix of disagreement and agreement, warranting a rating of 3.