6
SIMULTANEOUS CABINET
Monday 13 November 2017
FURTHER TRANSFORMATION IN EAST SUFFOLK (REP1629)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. 2.
Suffolk Coastal District Council and Waveney District Council agreed in January 2017 to create a new Council for east Suffolk. This was preceded by an intensive period of public consultation in November 2016, the results of which demonstrated that the majority of residents were in favour of one district Council in east Suffolk.
The decision to create a new Council for east Suffolk was both ambitious and ground breaking. A “super district” Council will be formed which will be the largest in England in terms of population. The creation of a new Council follows the successful legacy of both Councils working closely together for many years. Officers of all levels of seniority are shared, a joint Business Plan has been adopted and other key policies such as the Housing Strategy are shared. The Councils already share one website under the “East Suffolk” banner and Councillors from both authorities have attended meetings of each Council’s Cabinets since 2010. Cabinet portfolios are aligned and members have shared representation on various outside bodies.
- 3.
- The creation of a new Council will be a model other authorities follow as they decide how
best to grapple with the significant challenges facing local government. Councils need to be of a scale large enough to face these challenges by having a loud enough voice, a strong bargaining position, a healthy balance sheet and a resilient workforce, yet small enough to feel connected to their residents. The creation of the new Council for east Suffolk will strike that balance.
4.
5.
In February 2017 a request was made to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to authorise the creation of a new Council and a business case in support of that request was provided to him.
Since then, a number of high profile matters including Brexit have diverted the government’s attention away from progressing local government issues, which has meant the Secretary of State’s decision has not yet been received. The Councils and local MPs have since been lobbying the Secretary of State and DCLG which led to key meetings being held with them. These meetings have had the desired effect of firmly placing the Councils’ ambition for the creation of a new Council back onto the Secretary of State’s agenda.
107
6. 7.
It is now hoped that the Secretary of State will commit to making a “minded to” decision imminently, which will trigger the DCLG in to drafting the Order required to create a new authority.
A Member Programme Board comprising of Councillors from both Councils was set up to progress the work around the creation of a new Council. It has so far met on four occasions and has considered a number of key matters, thought to be required for the purposes of the drafting the Order. For instance, the Member Programme Board has given consideration to: the name of the new Council, Council size (i.e. the number of Councillors to be elected to the new Council), ward boundaries and whether to adopt a cabinet or some other model of governance.
8.
9.
This report details the findings of the Member Programme Board and makes a number of recommendations to a simultaneous meeting of each authority’s Cabinet.
These recommendations will be considered by each Cabinet at their simultaneous meeting, and given the significance and nature of the decisions to be made; their decisions will also be referred to each of the respective authorities’ Full Councils.
- 10.
- Should these recommendations be accepted, they will be provided to the Secretary of State
(and Local Government Boundary Commission for England) so that Order can be drafted, if he is so minded, to bring this in to effect, and subsequently, the Order will be laid before each House of Parliament, for consent.
Is the report Open or Exempt?
Wards Affected:
Open All
Cabinet Members:
Councillor Ray Herring - Leader of Suffolk Coastal District Council Councillor Mark Bee - Leader of Waveney District Council
Supporting Officer:
Nick Khan Strategic Director 01502 523606
108
1
INTRODUCTION
- 1.1
- In January 2017, members at Suffolk Coastal District Council (SCDC) and Waveney District
Council (WDC) agreed to progress with the creation of a new single authority for the east Suffolk area.
1.2
1.3 1.4
On 26 January 2017 at the Full Council meeting of Suffolk Coastal District Council, it was resolved:
“That following consideration of the Business Case for the proposals previously (in Reports REP1359 and REP1380), and the public engagement conducted by the Councils, the Council of Suffolk Coastal District Council
(i) approves the proposal to create a new single Council for East Suffolk as their preferred way forward and
(ii) authorises the Chief Executive Officer, in consultation with the Leaders of the Councils, to submit a written request to the Department of the Communities and Local Government to commence the formal process of merger of the Councils, based on the proposal set out in Appendix A to report CL03/17.”
On 25 January 2017 at the Full Council meeting of Waveney District Council, it was resolved:
“That following consideration of the Business Case for the proposals previously (in Reports REP1359 and REP1380), and the public engagement conducted by the Councils, the Council of Waveney District Council:
(i) To approve the proposal to create a new single Council for East Suffolk as their preferred way forward and;
(ii) To authorise the Chief Executive Officer, in consultation with the Leaders of the Councils, to submit a written request to the Department of the Communities and Local Government to commence the formal process of merger of the Councils, based on the proposal set out in Appendix A to this report.”
A Business Case for the creation of the new Council was submitted to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government on 2 February 2017. The Business Case is available on the East Suffolk website:
Creating an East Suffolk Council - full proposal document
2
BACKGROUND
- 2.1
- Suffolk Coastal District Council and Waveney District Council have been working
increasingly closely together since first sharing a Chief Executive in 2008. Simultaneous meetings of the Cabinets have taken place since 2010. This strong and successful partnership culminated in the adoption of a new joint Business Plan, designed to integrate the Councils’ business planning approach for east Suffolk. (Adopted by WDC Full Council on 18 November 2015 REP1285 and by SCDC Full Council on 26 November 2015 CL 28/15).
2.2
2.3
This unanimously supported positive step adopts a more business-like approach to developing financial self-sufficiency, encouraging growth across east Suffolk and enabling communities to develop from within, to maintain their unique quality of life.
Working in partnership has already enabled the Councils to save over £16m since 2010. SCDC and WDC are however committed to building further upon this successful shared services partnership to enhance the quality of life for east Suffolk’s residents. Bringing
109 the Business Plans together was an important part of creating such continuous improvement, within this ground-breaking operational and strategic partnership. The new Business Plan contains the Councils’ long-term joint ambitions for east Suffolk, reflecting their determination to push the boundaries of what they can achieve together. A summary of the vast transformational work undertaken as a result of working in partnership can be found at Appendix A of this report.
- 2.4
- This is also vital as the Local Government world is continually changing and the
Government is committed to further public sector reform. Both Councils face a number of key challenges, including:
The need for investment in growth and infrastructure projects; Addressing increasing housing demand and costs; Growing employment opportunities and wages; Significant reductions in Central Government funding for Councils (both Revenue Support Grant and New Homes Bonus);
Devolution of greater powers from Central Government; Double Devolution transfer of functions & responsibilities from Suffolk County Council; Further alignment and integration across the public sector; Improving education and skills; Better use of technology; Further welfare reform.
- 2.5
- Creating a new District for east Suffolk requires the consent of the Secretary of State for
Communities & Local Government. The Department for Communities & Local Government (‘DCLG’) has established five broad principles that it has adopted for considering proposals. It should be noted however that these are not statutory tests and nor do they form statutory guidance. As such there are no wider definitions or details for the five principles. The principles, which are equally weighted, are that the proposal would provide:
better local/public services; significant cost savings; greater value for money; stronger and more accountable local leadership; and sustainability in the medium to long term
- 2.6
- DCLG has recommended that any proposal for merger by the Councils should be carried
out under the powers created by section 15 of the Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016 (CLGDA). This section provides the primary legislation by which the Secretary of State may, by regulations, make provision about the governance arrangements of local authorities, and their structural and boundary arrangements. The carrying out of functions under s15 of the CLGDA are executive decisions. The necessary regulations to make such decisions ones that are reserved to full Council have not been made. However, given the structural changes involved, the DCLG have indicated that, as part of the process, they would expect the proposals to have the support of the full Councils. Hence the recommendation at 5), below, that the proposals be approved by each Council.
- 2.7
- S15 (5) provides that any regulations made under this section, so far as they include
structural or boundary provisions in relation to non-unitary District Council areas, may only be made with the consent of the local authorities to whom the regulations apply.
110
Whilst the primary legislation exists to allow for this type of structural change, the
“regulations” or secondary legislation referred to above have not been made. In order to
make them, the Secretary of State will need to receive a request to do so. That request was indeed made by the Councils to the Secretary of State on 2 February 2017 and a
“minded to” decision was expected to be made reasonably quickly after that date.
- 2.8
- However, due to Civil Service and parliamentary time being exhausted by a number of
high profile matters – general elections, Britain’s decision to leave the European Union, terrorist attacks and the Grenfell tragedy, the “minded to” decision has not been
received and has consequently pushed back the Councils’ timetable. If the Councils are to meet their objective of creating a new Council by 2019 it is imperative that any delays
are minimised and a “minded to” decision is received as soon as possible. Although
delays in central government are very much outside of the Councils’ control, members, local MPs and officers have been applying pressure on DCLG, the Secretary of State, and other bodies such as the Local Government Association at every given opportunity. This proactive approach to lobbying has yielded results as it led to securing key meetings with DCLG representatives on 8th August and then with the Secretary of State himself on 6th September.
- 2.9
- The meeting with the Secretary of State was attended by the leaders of both Councils,
the Chief Executive and all 3 local members of parliament. The meeting was very positive
and the Secretary of State was encouraged by the unified “front” presented by the
Councils’ leaders and all 3 local MPs, who are firmly in support of the proposal. He was pleased that the Councils had submitted all the key information required, including the full business case in February and he viewed our proposal as being at an advanced stage, when compared to some other Councils pursuing similar ambitions.
2.10 Due to a considerable period of time having elapsed since the Councils’ proposals were first submitted to him, the Secretary of State requested some additional information. He asked for an update on the financial position, namely whether the savings originally anticipated in the business case were still applicable. The Secretary of State also asked for further information on the consultation carried out last year, in particular, how the Councils’ have been dealing with any adverse comments received through that consultation. All of this information was submitted to him within a few days of it being requested.
2.11 At the time of writing the DCLG is preparing a report for the Secretary of State’s consideration, which will hopefully enable him to make a “minded to decision” as soon as possible. If a minded to decision is received, this then sets in train the parliamentary Order making process, which will include the DCLG working with the Councils to prepare the draft regulations required. The draft Order must then be progressed through a
number of parliamentary stages before it can be finally “made” and become law. After
any “minded to” decision is given, the Secretary of State will seek representations on the
councils’ proposals for a “reasonable” period of time, which is likely to be around 6
weeks. He will use this to obtain his own validation as to the level of support for the proposals, although clearly any engagement the councils have already undertaken will be reviewed, considered and taken into account. DCLG have said that the Councils themselves will be consultees during this time, and this being the case, any further support for the proposals can be submitted at the appropriate time.
2.12 If he is minded to support the proposals, the Secretary of State will request the creation of an Order that will dissolve the current Councils and create a new Council, transferring the powers, functions and responsibilities of Suffolk Coastal District Council and Waveney District Council to the new Council on 1 April 2019. The Order must receive the approval
111 of both Houses of Parliament, and be accompanied by a report setting out why the Secretary of State believes it appropriate to create the new Council, and any consultation he has taken into account.
Figure 1 Parliamentary process
2.13 The DCLG has previously indicated that it will take approximately 6-8 months for it to make the secondary legislation to allow the creation of the new Council to take place. Therefore, by using section 15, the Councils will have the period from approximately spring 2018 through to April 2019 to fully prepare for implementation of the new Council. Other formal steps which will be required are that once the DCLG has made the secondary legislation, the Councils will need to consent, formally, to the making of the necessary Order to bring the new Council into existence.
2.14 SCDC and WDC are very much breaking new ground in seeking to create a new Council for east Suffolk. This being the case, the precise details of what an Order should comprise of have not yet been fully clarified by DCLG.
2.15 SCDC and WDC have been advised by the DCLG that there is a need to inform it of the preferred size of the proposed new Council, and its name. In order to consider the proposed size, we need to consider the warding arrangements currently, and how they might work, in future. Also, what model of governance the new Council might adopt, and its structure.
2.16 Following submission of the Business Case in January 2017 approved by SCDC and WDC,
a ‘Member Programme Board’ (MPB) was formed to consider these and other key
matters for the creation of the new Council in preparation for a decision later in the year. The MPB is made up of 10 members, with 5 being from SCDC and 5 from WDC. The MPB is politically balanced with 4 members from the SCDC Conservative group and 1 member representing the opposition parties/independents at SCDC, and 3 members of the WDC Conservative group, 1 member of the WDC Labour group and 1 member representing the other opposition party/independents.
2.17 The MPB has met on 26 April 2017, 26 June 2017, 7 August 2017 and 13th October with further meetings expected. The MPB does not have the power to make formal decisions but will seek to update members on the process and where appropriate make recommendations to Cabinet and Full Council. The MPB has operated in a cross party manner and it has welcomed attendance from non-MPB Members.
2.18 What follows in this report is the MPB’s consideration of various key matters thought to
be required for the purposes of the Order.
112
2.19 Decisions made by Simultaneous Cabinet on the recommendations made in this report will then be proposed to be approved at SCDC’s and WDC’s Full Councils later in November (WDC Full Council on 15th November 2017 and SCDC Full Council on 23rd November 2017).
3
HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO THE EAST SUFFOLK BUSINESS PLAN?
- 3.1
- Both Councils are committed to ensuring that east Suffolk is in the best possible position
to respond to, and take advantage of, these emerging opportunities and challenges. With this in mind one of the planned actions for east Suffolk, as set out in the Joint Business Plan, is to:
“Explore the options for further integration between the partner authorities for more streamlined and resilient district services, and evaluate the potential for greater east Suffolk autonomy”.
4
COUNCIL NAME
- 4.1
- Local authorities are required to conform to certain legal requirements when it comes to
its name. As two councils are proposed to be dissolved and a new, single district Council
created, that new district Council will need a name. “District” is defined in s270 of the Local Government Act 1972 (LGA 1972) as “a metropolitan district or a non-metropolitan
district”. s1 (1) of the LGA 1972 says that for the administration of local government on and after 1 April 1974, England shall be divided into local government areas to be known as counties and in those counties there shall be local government areas to be known as districts.
4.2
4.3
The districts in the non metropolitan counties were specified by orders made by the Secretary of State under paragraph 1 to schedule 3 of the LGA 1972 and had the names given to them by those orders. S2(3) of the LGA 1972 says that “each council mentioned
… shall be a body corporate by the name “the county council” or ”the district council”, as the case may be, with the addition of the name of the particular county or district”.
The MPB discussed the respective merits of 2 names “East Suffolk District Council” and “East Suffolk Council”. It recommended that “East Suffolk District Council” is an appropriate name to be adopted as the new Council’s name for legal purposes and “East Suffolk Council” as the commonly referred to name. This accords with the MPB’s view that “East Suffolk Council” is the name which residents are most familiar with, given the Councils’ shared website and other references to it in day to day matters. Using “East Suffolk District Council” for legal purposes, in formal documents such as contracts,
Orders and the like means the new Council will be compliant with the law pertaining to the naming of local authorities.
5
COUNCIL SIZE
- 5.1
- At the meeting on 26 June, the MPB began work on considering the optimum size of the
new Council, having regard to the guidance of the LGBCE. Members worked through the criteria set out in the LGBCE guidance document on determining Council size, and reached an initial decision on their preferred size for the new Council. The workings and rationale in reaching this provisional number are shown in further detail in this report. A proposal on Council size with supporting evidence will serve the dual purpose of informing the Order and also forming the basis of the information needed for the initial stage of the anticipated electoral review.
113
5.2 5.3
The provisional Council size number was also discussed further at the MPB meeting on 7 August, at which members were able to see how this number would work in practice if used with the county divisions as electoral boundaries, and had the opportunity to review their workings from the 26 June and ensure they were happy with the preferred number they had reached.
After that meeting, all 90 members of both Councils were invited to comment on the proposed Council size so that the simultaneous meeting of each Council’s Cabinet could consider these comments and take them into account when making their respective decisions. Eleven Councillors submitted a response to this invitation, two of which agreed with the conclusions of the MPB on the proposed Council size. The comments received stating that the proposed number of Councillors was too low can be broadly summarised as follows: