This is not a good start to Andy Burnham’s vow to give Britain the circuit breaker it needs.
This looks like more of the same old cronyism and sneaky gamesmanship of Whitehall knows best.
Labour demonstrates it doesn’t understand or care about the countryside, it’s a party of townies. – Owl
Making the LGR announcement “on the last day of term”, does not show “local government the respect it deserves”. – Labour Chair of Commons’ local government committee, Florence Eshalomi. She also said the government “still haven’t provided” the evidence that it will provide significant savings.
DCC Leader, Julian Brazil, who was interviewed by Ewan Davies on BBC Radio 4 “PM” last night (about 1710), confirms his council plans to launch a judicial review. Read on.
Three counties consider LGR judicial reviews
At least three counties are considering legal action against local government reorganisation decisions announced today.
Devon CC leader Julian Brazil (Lib Dem) told LGC his council plans to launch a judicial review and will be sending a letter of intent soon, calling the proposed geographies of the new unitary authorities “ridiculous” and the decision “shocking”.
He said the council has filed freedom of information requests to MHCLG to determine the rationale behind the LGR decision.
He accused the government of “blatant gerrymandering” as the business cases from Labour-run Exeter and Plymouth City Councils were chosen. This option will reorganise 11 councils into four unitaries.
According to Cllr Brazil, previous judicial reviews had been defended by the government under the terms of “place making,” an idea he described as “murky, foggy and grey”.
Cllr Brazil argued that this argument is not suitable for the decision in Devon and Torbay due to the nature of the county. He said that “the people in Exeter and Plymouth probably have no idea what rural Devon looks like”.
Despite this, Cllr Brazil said that he is “not against LGR and the destination” but is concerned about the “journey to get there”.
In contrast, Torbay council leader David Thomas (Con) suggested his authority would not take legal action, saying: “This isn’t the result we wanted but I recognise that government has made their decision and here in Torbay we will embrace this change.”
Hertfordshire CC leader Steve Jarvis (Lib Dem) said the “worst option” was chosen and promised to “explore ways in which we can challenge the government’s decision”.
Cllr Jarvis said: “It will cost the council taxpayers of Hertfordshire more and projections show that one of the new councils will be running in deficit from the day it is created”.
However he said his team will “continue to work with other Hertfordshire councils to prepare for reorganisation and to make our case for a mayor as strongly as possible”.
Reform-led counties
A Reform UK source told LGC “several Reform councils are not happy” with the LGR decisions, and they would not be surprised if “several” opt for legal action but the decision to “spend taxpayers’ money on legal action obviously will require some proper analysis”.
They said Reform leaders see the LGR outcomes as a “political decision rather than a practical one” and shared fears that models put forward by Labour-led cities were favoured over the counties’ preferences.
Reform leader of Leicestershire CC Dan Harrison has publicly declared his intention to “take legal advice on launching a challenge to government”.
He branded the government’s decision to go ahead with Labour-led Leicester City Council’s plan to expand the city as a “disastrous day for democracy”.
Cllr Harrison, who backed plans to combine the county’s footprint with Rutland CC and keep Leicester at its current size, said: “I’m furious, shocked and bitterly disappointed.”
He said: “We’ve always been clear an expanded city would be costly and disruptive. Financially and strategically, this is madness and it’s not the right decision for Leicestershire. ”
He added: “Our professional officers will get on with the job. But this is reckless and we’ll continue to fight for those residents who’ve been let down by the government today. ”
Reform leaders not taking action
However, the leader of the Local Government Association’s Reform group Stephen Atkinson suggested his council Lancashire CC would not pursue legal action.
Cllr Atkinson (Ref) said he has “serious concerns” about the “scale and complexity of delivering such a significant reorganisation,” but will “work alongside” councils in the areas to “deal with the reality in front of us”.
He had previously spoken out against LGR and wrote to the government calling for the plans to be delayed. Today he reiterated his concerns that “larger authorities risk moving decision-making further away from communities”.
But he shared a commitment to work “constructively” with the 14 other councils during the transition into four new unitaries.
However, in a letter seen by LGC, Burnley BC leader Afrasiab Anwar (Ind) told the communities secretary Steve Reed the decision to put his borough with Blackburn is a “serious error of judgement”.
He said the proposed Pennine Lancashire authority “would inherit exceptionally high and deeply entrenched levels of deprivation, bringing together communities that are among the most deprived in England”.
He added: “Unless its creation is accompanied by a substantial, long-term and needs-based government funding settlement, there is a serious risk that reorganisation will entrench disadvantage rather than help overcome it.”
Meanwhile Kent CC leader Linden Kemkaran (Ref) said her team will “take the time needed to review the detail and understand exactly what it means for Kent, including how the new arrangements would be implemented and the timescales involved”.
Lincolnshire CC leader Sean Matthews (Ref) said the creation of a new Lincolnshire unitary authority and the expansion of Lincoln into a separate unitary will be a “significant change”.
He added that it would be a “long-term piece of work to implement” and he would work will all councils “to get the best outcome for residents”.
While Derbyshire CC leader Alan Graves (Ref) did not back the government’s LGR decision for a north/south split for the county, he described the move as a “fresh start and an opportunity to do things differently”.
Cllr Graves said his team is “focused on working with our district, borough and city council colleagues to plan how services will be delivered by two councils in the future”.
Staffordshire CC leader Martin Murray (Ref) said the proposed north/south divide of his county “follows the government’s rules, has clear strengths and is financially viable in the long term”.
He added: “We will work professionally with neighbouring councils to make the change happen safely, with residents’ needs at the heart of the process.”
Working together
The six councils in Warwickshire, nine councils in Nottinghamshire and seven leaders in Worcestershire sent joint statements despite holding differing views ahead of the government’s decision.
The joint statement from North Warwickshire, Nuneaton and Bedworth and Rugby BCs, Stratford-on-Avon and Warwick DCs, and Warwickshire CC acknowledged the “different views on the best structure”.
But they said they “have a history of working well together” and will “remain committed to continuing to work together constructively and responsibly as we move into the next stage of this process”.
Worcestershire CC and the six districts in the county declared the “debate is now over,” and have chosen to “come together to express our commitment to work collectively to make these new arrangements a success for residents, businesses and communities across the county”.
This statement was signed by the leaders of Bromsgrove, Malvern Hills, Wychavon and Wyre Forest DCs, Redditch BC, Worcester City Council and Worcestershire CC.
Meanwhile a similar sentiment was shared in the joint statement by Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Mansfield, Newark & Sherwood and Rushcliffe DCs, Broxtowe and Gedling BCs, Nottinghamshire CC, and Nottingham City Council.
It said: “All nine councils have worked hard to meet the deadlines set by central government and to provide submissions that we believe are best for the residents we serve. We will continue to work together to ensure services continue and that residents and businesses remain our priority.”
Despite this, Gedling BC councillor and MP Michael Payne (Lab) called on the communities secretary Steve Reed to “hold off” on the decisions in Nottinghamshire and Nottingham that would result in his borough being split between the two new unitary authorities.
In the commons’ today, Cllr Payne said it was “bad policy making” to “split communities” against “their will,” adding “I cannot and will not support” the decision.
Concerns over timing
Chair of the Commons’ housing, communities & local government committee Florence Eshalomi (Lab) said the timing of the LGR announcements “on the last day of term”, does not show “local government the respect it deserves”.
Speaking to the Local Government Association’s councillors’ forum this afternoon, she said the consultation for these areas ended in March, so “the government would have known what they were doing before” the “last day of term”.
Ms Eshalomi said the government “keeps saying” LGR will end the “duplication” of services but the government “still haven’t provided” the evidence that it will provide significant savings.
Ms Eshalomi added that the funding the government has promised to cover LGR today is “still not enough”.
She said that LGR will not change the financial position “overnight” so the sector needs to “manage expectations and be realistic” during the transition.
Ms Eshalomi shared her worry that many councils are still “reliant on” exceptional financial support and issues over local government finances “continues to grow”.
East Devon Watch 