Council Reorganisation: The not so strange death of two-tier England?
The Government’s new white paper, spearheaded by Angela Rayner, on local government reform and reorganisation is far from a shock – the key details were trailed in advance and, in any case, the voices calling for reform towards a more standardised unitary model in England have been growing for some years. All the same, the proposals would constitute the biggest shake up of English councils since the 1972 Local Government Act (which, of course, created the two-tier system that has been unpicked in a piecemeal manner pretty much ever since).
Labour’s argument is simple; unitary authorities with a population of c.500,000 each will be more financially stable, deliver better joined-up services, and create a more consistent framework for further devolution of powers from Westminster (especially to Combined Authorities). The stimulus is, of course, the acute financial crisis that all authorities delivering social care services are facing as the costs of provision continue to increase well beyond the rate of inflation… and certainly beyond the rate of Council Tax rises. As a rough guide, most top tier councils – whether unitary or county council – are now spending c.70-80% of their net revenue budget on social care.
There have already been councils that have followed the course that the government now envisages as universal – Buckinghamshire and Somerset are, for example, recently created unitaries taking over all functions in formerly two-tier areas. Other areas, like Berkshire, divided in multiple unitary councils at earlier dates and now, as per the emerging vision, may be expected to propose new arrangements that bring ‘undersized’ councils up to the magic half-million population.
On paper, it’s all very radical and, in my view, an overdue reform. But the pace of change remains unclear, and the Government have not yet mapped out a timetable for consideration of reorganisation proposals. Nor is it yet apparent how much flexibility will exist, and I would anticipate a plethora of local fights between rival proposals in any locality. Backbench MPs are likely to get drawn into these, much as they did with the less systematic reforms during the 1990s (although Labour has a vastly more comfortable majority than the Major Governments). What will happen, for example, when the proposed future incarnation of Oxford doesn’t look like it’ll have such a ‘Labour-y’ feel to it? And will decisions be taken too far away from residents in geographically large rural unitaries?
Whatever happens, it’s clear that the devolution agenda isn’t going anywhere, with the Government saying that ‘reorganisation should not delay devolution so we will work closely with areas on complementary plans and we will deliver an ambitious first wave of reorganisation in this Parliament.’ Indeed, new devolution agreements will still be prioritised it would appear, and Rayner has also indicated that further transfer of powers will be forthcoming to Combined Authorities. While the council leaders fight amongst themselves, then, the Mayors may continue to multiply.
