Local Government Reorganisation

Question

The Member questions the impartiality of the reorganisation process, citing examples where Labour-controlled councils benefited from proposed boundary changes. He asks how the Secretary of State can claim this is a politically neutral decision.

Question

Criticises the minister for political bias in the boundary changes and questions the integrity of the process, citing examples of Labour councils' influence on new boundaries. He expresses concern over devolution being undermined by imposing a single model from Whitehall, weakening well-run Conservative councils to prop up debt-ridden Labour ones, and increasing the democratic deficit.

Question

Asks why the minister did not make small consequential changes to boundaries in areas like Stoke-on-Trent and questions whether there will be council tax harmonisation, possibly affecting local rates.

Question

Expresses concern over the lack of notice for scrutinising the Department’s decisions and points out the chaotic nature of boundary changes, impacting rural communities in Oxfordshire. He questions the long-term financial viability of proposed unitary structures.

Question

The Secretary of State and I have known each other a long time—we served in local government together—and he knows that I am as passionate as he is about bringing power back closer to people, but I have to say to him, in all honesty, that the decision to split my home community of Gedling borough in half and force communities in Gedling into an expanded new Nottingham city council area against their will is bad for my constituents and bad policymaking. Will the Secretary of State tell me what on earth makes sense about creating two councils for Nottingham and Nottinghamshire, when official figures show that from day one, one of them will be £147 million better off than the other? Will he explain to my constituents why the Government have backed the option that did not adhere to the strict criteria set out by the Government at the start of this process?

Question

One of the poorest wards in the entire country is Gainsborough south-west ward. Why is the Secretary of State splitting West Lindsey in half? Why is he taking Scampton away from Gainsborough? It makes no sense. Why is he loading debt on Lincoln city council—for example, for the Hykeham bypass?

Question

The announcement today and the proposals in it are completely unacceptable. There is nothing in the proposals that reflects the views that I have consistently put to Ministers, or any acknowledgment of the concerns I have heard from thousands of people in Newcastle-under-Lyme. How does the Secretary of State think we can protect the people of Newcastle-under-Lyme from the debt held by Staffordshire county council?

Question

I welcome the moratorium on, and potential saving of, West Sussex, in response to my opposition and that of thousands of residents who did not want our historic county cleaved in two. Now that he has acknowledged that the proposal from the Government was less sustainable than the status quo, will the Secretary of State remove the jeopardy and confirm that he will not be proceeding with the proposal?

Question

The Secretary of State mentioned in his statement that part of the driver of the proposals is that he wants to do something about areas of high deprivation. However, the plans presented today would make East Lancashire one of the most deprived unitary authorities in the country. What will the Government do to support areas like East Lancashire, if these plans are pursued?

Question

The proposals are not the result that I wanted for my constituency or Gloucestershire. However, I am a reasonable man, and I am willing to take the Secretary of State at his word. Will he reassure me that the new Gloucestershire unitary will not end up coming to the Government with a begging bowl on day one?

Question

I welcome the decision to pursue 4B as it is clear that the Government have listened to the calls for smaller communities that are local to councillors, and that keep local identity while having room for growth and jobs. One concern remains about the debt for Kent and Medway councils.

Question

I can see the sense in what the Secretary of State is trying to achieve with this reorganisation, and the target of 500,000 people per unitary authority makes a lot of sense—it brings a lot of people together. But why, after Wyre Forest district council voted for the single unitary, did the Secretary of State deliver a two-unitary solution for Worcestershire?

Question

Unitary authorities have big benefits, but I am angry about the proposals. According to our own statistics, the new East Lancs authority—with Blackburn, and without the Ribble Valley—will create the most deprived unitary authority in the country, with an awful lot of debt already on its books. We are going to need a lot of cash to make it work, and I cannot support it.

Question

Eleven thousand people in Oadby, Wigston and Great Glen recently voted in a referendum against joining the city of Leicester. Ministers know that people do not want this locally, and yet they are forcing it on them anyway.

Question

Reorganisation makes sense. The situation that we have now, with services split across a borough or district council and a county council, causes many issues. If a drain is blocked by leaves that are on top of the drain, it is one council; if the leaves are below the drain, it is another.

Question

What would the Secretary of State say to my constituents in Broxbourne, who never asked for this reorganisation and are concerned that it is just a waste of time and money that will leave them with higher council tax bills and less say over local planning decisions?

Question

I refer the House to my entry on the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I have grave concerns about the Nottingham and Nottinghamshire proposal, under which there will be an extreme deficit of a predicted nearly £150 million.

Question

What a poisoned chalice this Secretary of State is leaving for the incoming Prime Minister.

Question

I thank the Minister for his statement and for delivering the option supported by five out of seven councils in Worcestershire.

Question

The dictionary definition of gerrymandering is the manipulation of boundaries to suit a particular party.

Question

So much has been said across north Staffordshire about local government reorganisation, but it is important that we deal with facts.

Question

The south-west is one of the poorest regions in the country. Instead of urban Labour stitch-ups, should local government reorganisation not align with economic geographies and transport planning to bring investment into rural areas?

Question

The new model of four unitary authorities for Hertfordshire will keep Hatfield and Welwyn Garden City together. Will this simplify local governance and improve service delivery?

Question

Is there a risk of small councils with financial problems merging into one large council that could become financially unstable?

Question

Will Exeter's transition to a unitary authority help drive sustainable economic growth and improve decision-making for the city?

Question

What is the financial viability of the rural rump in Devon resulting from the proposed reorganisation?

Question

Will disparities around tax income in Warwickshire be addressed, ensuring towns and parish councils have proper roles and the role of MPs is protected?

Question

Why is there a delay in determining the optimal option for Cambridgeshire’s local government reorganisation, given the criticism from MPs?

Question

How can we accelerate devolution powers for Kent, particularly for my constituency, which has unique challenges and potential for economic growth?

Question

How does the Secretary of State ensure local successes and robustly evidenced proposals are built upon, rather than irrational gerrymandering?

Question

My role as an MP is to speak up on behalf of my constituents in Peterborough. The mess of local government is not the reason for the announcement today; it is the decade of austerity, cuts and underfunding of places such as Peterborough that has left us in the sorry mess that local government finds itself in.

Question

I live in my patch and I know that there will be genuine local fury at the contempt this Government have shown for my constituents in approving a Leicester city land grab, which has cross-party opposition locally.

Question

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement confirming the outcome for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland. With three very different options on the table, it is inevitable, as we have heard, that there will be opposing views on the outcome.

Question

I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, as I am an East Cambridgeshire district councillor. There will clearly be a great deal of uncertainty across Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.

Question

Local Amber Valley leaders and I support devolution, but we are incredibly concerned about the decision to split Amber Valley between two unitary authorities, particularly because the option selected was not subject to public consultation.

Question

With a stroke of his Whitehall pen, the Secretary of State has just abolished Malvern Hills district council, Worcester city council, wonderful Wychavon district council and Worcestershire county council.

Question

Like many in Cannock Chase, I am glad that this reorganisation, which no one asked for and no one voted for, is finally nearing its conclusion.

Question

It is astonishing that the decision for West Sussex has been postponed yet again. I understand that local council leaders received the information only this morning, in a six-minute phone call during which they were not allowed to ask questions.

Question

I thank the Minister for his statement. The option taken for Nottingham and Nottinghamshire sees Broxtowe borough council split in two; Eastwood and Brinsley will sit in the county and the rest of the borough will form part of the Greater Nottingham authority.

Question

The Secretary of State announced a delay to the decision in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough. What specific issues are causing this delay, and when will the structural changes order be made for Cambridgeshire to ensure elections can proceed as scheduled in 2027?

Question

Hertfordshire will have a new central authority along the A1(M) corridor to benefit local economy and reduce duplication. What review of benefits and challenges will be conducted following reorganisation?

Question

Essex has strong opposition against Labour's plans with more than two-thirds against, yet Essex was not mentioned in today’s statement. When will we know what is happening there? Is it possible to drop the plan given public opposition?

Question

Warwickshire's decision brings an end to decades of indecision. Will financial assessments be done before considering options?

Question

Sussex's decision is unclear with uncertainty around elections, mayoralty, and social care funding. Why have the Department’s proposals changed so much from their initial ones?

Question

North Staffordshire unitary will include Stone rural villages; how can they ensure these voices are heard equally in the larger Southern Staffordshire unitary?

Question

Why is Ribble Valley excluded from proposals despite high deprivation levels? Will the plan work for deprived communities?

Question

Warwickshire will have two unitary councils, what support will the Department provide during reorganisation?

Question

I have long been a proponent of the principles of local government reorganisation, which Lancashire and my constituents have needed for a long time. However, today I criticise the decision made by the Secretary of State regarding the boundaries, as it will leave us with the most deprived local authority area in the country. I ask the Secretary of State to work with me and colleagues to bring in capacity and capability funding that we need to reverse this deprivation and catch up with neighbouring areas like Manchester. Will he meet me and east Lancashire colleagues to drive this forward urgently?

Question

I represent Portsmouth whose local people want their pride reflected in the name of the reorganised local council. Both Portsmouth MPs and, I believe, councils representing over 75% of residents support including Portsmouth in the name. Does the Secretary of State agree that it is time for the Liberal Democrat council to stop playing political games, stop scaremongering and be honest with residents about this process? Will he help me ensure that Portsmouth is indeed included in the new unitary council's name because it is so important?