Single Lancashire council sends government specific demand over local authority shake-up

Pendle Council leader Asjad Mahmood has written to local government minister Jim McMahon to tell him his authority wants to see the creation of either four or five new councils after all of the existing ones are scrapped.

It emerged yesterday that all of the county’s council leaders had signed a joint letter to Mr. McMahon in response to a government request for more than 20 local areas across England to submit an “interim plan” for a radical revamp of their current council arrangements.

That document set out options for between one and five new local authorities – or ‘unitaries’ – to cover Lancashire as part of the overhaul.

The inclusion of such a spread of possibilities – and the absence of any specifics about which areas could merge as part of the process – were likely necessary to secure the agreement of all 15 leaders over what is an historically divisive subject amongst Lancashire politicians.

While the government had urged councils in areas affected by the restructure to make “every effort” to come up with a unified – if not necessarily a detailed – position by today (21st March), it acknowledged that it might not be possible to do so. The deadline for formal and final proposals to be submitted for consideration by ministers is 28th November.

In Lancashire, preferred scenarios – and some red lines – for the shape of local government reorganisation have previously been floated by some individual authorities, with others expressed privately. However, most have resisted the temptation to express them directly to ministers at this stage in the process.

Blackpool, Blackburn with Darwen, Burnley, Chorley, Fylde, Hyndburn, Lancaster, Preston, Ribble Valley, Rossendale, South Ribble, West Lancashire and Wyre councils have all told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) that they signed only the joint letter and have not sent any additional correspondence to the government.

Lancashire County Council’s cabinet approved the county-wide document at a meeting on Thursday. Alluding to the range of opinions on the matter, the deputy leader of the authority, Alan Vincent, said a common approach to the government at this point made sense, asking: “If we were to try [to] put forward a plan now, how many plans would we [send]?”

In the supplementary letter from Pendle, Cllr Mahmood said that of the five options listed in the joint letter, his borough believes “only [those] that could create four or five unitary councils in Lancashire would ensure the complex and urgent needs of our community are addressed and that local democracy would underpin the work and decision making of any unitary council”.

He adds: “We believe that these two options will ensure unitaries of the right size, improve existing capacity, withstand financial shocks and deliver efficient and effective local government for our area. We are determined through this process, and based on these two options, we can and will deliver services of the highest quality and sustainability to all within our community.”

As with the joint letter, the correspondence from Pendle swerves the most contentious aspect of the reorganisation process – namely, the exact configurations that will determine which parts of the county will merge with which.

Burnley Council – although not having sent a separate letter specifying this preference – resolved this month that it wants to see a five-council option, designed in such a way that the town is not bound together with Blackburn with Darwen.

Last November, before the government had even officially announced its reorganisation plans, the leaders of Chorley and South Ribble councils proposed to ministers a merger between their two authorities and West Lancashire Borough Council.

While the pair have this week simply rowed in behind the multitude of numerical-only options put forward in the joint letter to the government, Chorley Council last month formally expressed its support for a tie-up with South Ribble and West Lancashire, which would mean at least four new authorities would have to be created across the county.

In a statement to the LDRS after the Lancashire-wide letter was sent to the government this week, Chorley leader Alsiarir Bradley said: “We are continuing to work with authorities across Lancashire in line with the government’s timeline for local government reorganisation.

“Chorley Council’s position is clear – as discussed and agreed by all political parties at our recent full council. We support a four-unitary model for the county. This would see the current two-tier model replaced and a South Lancashire Council set up to cover Chorley, South Ribble and West Lancashire.

“We are committed to finding a way forward that provides value for money, is sustainable and meets the needs of all our communities. The current proposed changes present a great opportunity for both Chorley and Lancashire to benefit from proper devolution that we are currently missing out on and like Manchester and Liverpool we look forward to seeing the exciting proposals unlock economic growth and greater prosperity for our residents.

“Chorley will of course maintain its identity as a historic borough and the ambitions we have can be aligned with our neighbours to maximise the benefits for all.”

Meanwhile, South Ribble Borough Council leader Jacky Alty said: “We are working alongside our colleagues across Lancashire to ensure devolution of powers from central government benefits the communities we serve. We already have a strong partnership with Chorley Council and we will be debating our position on local government reorganisation at council next week.”

Earlier this month, the ruling Labour group on Preston City Council announced that it had agreed which other authorities the city should join, but said it would be keeping its preference to itself until after the joint letter had been agreed.

Speaking of his authority’s position following the submission of the joint letter, Rossendale Council’s chief executive Rob Huntington told the LDRS: “A number of options are being explored, from a single council covering all of Lancashire to multiple smaller councils, but views are mixed. Lancashire is a complex county with a mix of rural and urban areas, strong local cultural identities and different financial challenges. Because of this, we need more time to properly understand what would work best.

“Whatever happens, the most important thing is making sure public services remain high quality and efficient, that local communities are properly represented and that any changes help to bring more investment and opportunity to Lancashire.

“Here in Rossendale, we will continue talking to local people, businesses, and organisations to make sure their views are considered. Our priority is to make sure any changes are right for Rossendale and its people – and we will keep residents informed as this work moves forward.”