Item Policy and Public Initatives Panel 9 9 January 2019
Report of Assistant Director Policy and Corporate Author Andrew Weavers 282213 Title Unitary Authority Status Wards Not applicable affected
1. Executive Summary
1.1 This report informs the Panel of the implications of unitary authority status and recent announcements by Government regarding future policy direction in relation to local authority reorganisation.
2. Recommended Decision
2.1 To note the contents of this report.
2.2 To consider whether the Panel wishes to advise the Cabinet on whether any further work on progressing a case for Colchester Borough Council to seek unitary authority status should be undertaken at this time.
3. Reason for Recommended Decision
3.1 To consider whether the Colchester Borough Council should make a case for unitary authority status.
4. Alternative Options
4.1 For Colchester Borough Council to remain a district council.
5. Background Information
5.1 The Panel at its meeting on 1 August 2018 heard from a member of the public who suggested that the Panel should consider a report on unitary authorities and what the pros and cons could be for Colchester Borough Council. The Panel accordingly agreed that this be included in its work programme.
5.2 Following the last major reorganisation of local government in 1974 and the formation of Colchester Borough Council it has been a district council delivering district council services. Until 2005 it delivered via an agency agreement with Essex County Council (along with most other districts in Essex), highway functions within the Borough. Essex County Council decided to withdraw its agency arrangements across Essex and deliver/procure the service itself.
5.3 The structure of local government in Essex in 1974 was and remains a two tier structure i.e. county council and district / borough councils each being responsible for the delivery of specific services and functions. In addition some areas are parished with town/parish council’s. There were different arrangements for metropolitan areas i.e. major cities.
5.4 In the 1990’s there was a drive by the then Government to simplify this structure with the creation of unitary authorities. This meant that broadly the powers and functions of a non- metropolitan county council and district council were delivered by a single (unitary) authority for that area. During the 1990’s over 40 unitary authorities were created including in Essex; Southend on Sea and Thurrock both of which were created in 1998. These new authorities were mainly created on their existing boundaries.
5.5 The following table summarises which services are delivered by type of (non- metropolitan) principal authority:
Service County District Unitary Council Council Authority Education Housing Planning control Strategic planning Transport planning Passenger transport Highways Fire Social services Libraries Leisure Waste collection Waste disposal Environmental health Revenue (tax) collection
5.6 In 2007 a further review was undertaken by Government which led to the creation of mainly county based unitary authorities such as Cornwall and Northumberland. In 2017 changes were proposed to the county of Dorset which resulted in the creation in 2018 of Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council and Dorset Council as two unitary authorities covering the county area of Dorset. More recently the Government was minded to alter the structure in Northamptonshire following the much publicised financial difficulties regarding Northamptonshire County Council.
5.7 One of the latest unitary authority proposals is for Nottinghamshire where it is proposed to replace the county council and seven districts which have been in place since 1974 with one unitary authority and which it is claimed could deliver £27 million of annual savings.
6. Recent developments
6.1 On 22 November 2018 the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government made a speech regarding the Government’s new devolution framework. James Brokenshire speech - November 2018 . This speech refers to the Government’s track record in devolving power from Whitehall to communities. The Government has highlighted its emerging “neo-localist” agenda policy which will set out a direction for devolution post Brexit. The Secretary of State commented that ‘Our new devolution framework will help local areas take advantage of the opportunities leaving the EU presents and build stronger bonds of kinship between people and communities.’
6.2 Other re-organisations have caused consternation in the proposed localities. The Secretary of State has recently stated that he will only invite new unitary proposals in situations where there is a Northampton County Council type scenario. Furthermore he
expected future reorganisation proposals to require credible geographies and unanimous support. It also appears that the Secretary of State is intending to consult on a new model in which he could invite reorganisation proposals in due course.
6.3 It is clear that the creation of the 1990’s type of unitary authorities are no longer acceptable to Government. If Colchester Borough Council were minded to make a case to Government for unitary authority status on its existing boundaries it would not be successful. The Government is looking for innovation in service delivery and structures that would benefit a wider area. This is underlined by the recent mergers of district councils in Suffolk which have primarily merged to enable financial savings and more cost effective service delivery. If Colchester were to consider making and application for unitary authority status it would most certainly have to do this with one or more of its neighbouring authorities in order to achieve the cost benefits and service delivery efficiencies required.
7. Legal framework
7.1 The process for moving from a two tier system to a unitary authority structure is now governed by the Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016. This Act provides the Secretary of State with the power to make regulations prescribing the governance arrangements, constitution or membership, or the structural and boundary arrangements for local authorities. Essentially this power allows the Secretary of State to make regulations which allows for the moving of electoral boundaries, the creation or abolition of local government areas, the abolition of an existing local authority, and the transfer of functions from district councils to county councils (or vice versa). In essence, they have the power to pass regulations to allow them to deal with all of the practical things that would need to be done in order to restructure an area in to a unitary model.
7.2 As mentioned above any application would need to be wider than on the current Borough boundaries and consequently any decision would need to be made in partnership with other authorities. Some of the key considerations would be: geographical features of the area- as this will have a bearing on potential boundaries. Where are the major economic hubs? How is the area divided in terms or urban and rural areas? How big is the population and how is this divided within the area?
financial effects of the re-organisation. How much is it going to cost to actually conduct the re-organisation? How does this compare to any projected savings that can be made?
political effects of the re-organisation. How much support from other councillors does the idea have? Are the other councils that may be involved on board with the proposal? How do residents feel about the proposal?
7.3 The table below provides a high level analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of pursuing unitary authority status. At its highest level the main driver is rationalisation and cost savings, however this does not mean that this would necessarily cure future financial challenges.
Advantages Disadvantages More financially robust with larger budgets Danger that projected savings a unitary reducing risk, cost savings due to model expected to deliver do not always streamlining, efficiencies and economies materialise and potentially could be of scale in relation to service delivery outweighed by the costs incurred in establishing the new unitary authority Clarity for the public regarding who is Creation of larger authority could lead to responsible for delivery of local services greater separation between the authority and communities served Greater ability for innovation and strategic Proposal could be politically divisive decision-making with fewer local partners
7.4 As one the main drivers for unitary authority status is financial savings, it is worth highlighting that the Dorset proposals are projected to provide savings of over £100 million across the first six years. Following the creation of the Cornwall unitary authority, it was able to deliver £40 million of savings in 2010/2011. Future ongoing savings were attributed to efficiencies by being able to combine ex county council and ex district council functions.
7.5 The Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016 allowed ministers to “fast track structural and boundary changes with the consent of one local authority” in two-tier areas. However, the Act has a sunset clause that withdraws these measures on 31 March 2019. Guidance for councils on what will be acceptable from April 2019 onwards is subject to a consultation which the Government has indicated will be issued shortly.
7.6 Another form of local government structure are combined authorities. These can be established with or without a directly-elected mayor under the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 and the Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016. Combined authorities may be set up by two or more local authorities. They may take on statutory functions transferred to them by an Order made by the Secretary of State, plus any functions that the constituent authorities agree to share. The first combined authority to be established was the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, in 2011. Four additional combined authorities were established in 2014 (North East, Liverpool City Region, Sheffield City Region, West Yorkshire). During 2014-16, the Government negotiated ‘devolution deals’ with several areas. These were mostly delivered via the creation of mayoral combined authorities, in some cases building on the existing combined authority structures. This was done via Orders under the 2009 and 2016 Acts, specifying the functions, powers and constitutional structures of individual combined authorities. The Local Government Association has produced a briefing paper on combined authorities which goes into more detail. https://www.local.gov.uk/topics/devolution/combined-authorities
8. Conclusions
8.1 There are well rehearsed arguments for the creation of a unitary authority particularly in a continuing challenging financial climate for local government. However there are a number of inter-relating factors which would need to be considered before embarking on a proposal for a request for unitary authority status for Colchester. Namely we cannot do this on our own and would require the support of a neighbouring authority in order to demonstrate cost savings and innovation in service delivery which the Secretary of State would be expecting. In addition, as the Secretary of State is due to launch a consultation
on a new devolution framework it is suggested that now is not the appropriate time to be making a case to Government.
8.2 Colchester Borough Council works in partnership with its neighbouring authorities and Essex County Council on several projects. Examples of current partnership working are the North Essex Parking Partnership, Colchester and Ipswich Joint Museum Service and North Essex garden Communities. The Council also works with other non-local authority partners i.e. Police and health organisations on range of initiatives for the benefit of the Borough. These partnerships continue to evolve and future opportunities sought to work closer together to deliver efficiencies and savings.
9. Standard References
9.1 There are no particular references to the Strategic Plan; Financial, Equality, Diversity and Human Rights, Consultation, Health, Wellbeing and Community Safety, Health and Safety and Risk Management Implications consultation or publicity considerations other than those mentioned in this report.