Alison Bennett discusses the need for local decision-making and accountability in the context of local government reorganisation, emphasising the importance of maintaining close relationships between constituents and their councils. Suggests that the real issue for getting local government in England on a sound financial footing is putting social care on a financial basis so that councils can deliver decent social care to communities.

Calum Miller highlighted the importance of retaining accountability and simplicity in local government reorganisation, advocating for the One Oxfordshire proposal. He stated that this proposal would save over £63 million annually and align with the government's criteria, while also preserving the existing geography and structures of Oxfordshire. Miller criticized the 3Councils proposal for splitting district areas and creating structural complexity, and called for the government to stick to its own guidance. He also raised concerns about transitional funding arrangements, especially for Cherwell district council, and urged the government to meet with him and other MPs to discuss funding issues.

Damian Hinds expressed the importance of local government reorganisation (LGR) and highlighted the need for careful consideration of how areas are divided to ensure effective funding for high-cost items such as adult social care and SEND. He warned about potential encroachment on rural areas due to housing development planning changes and the risk of creating artificial constructs in new unitary authorities. Hinds also discussed the short-term difficulties and cost implications of reorganisation, including potential diseconomies of scale, and questioned the Government's understanding of the data. Asked the Minister to share the anticipated costs of the reorganisation.

David Simmonds discussed the need for local government reorganisation, noting that local councils in the UK are under-represented and centralised compared to other democracies. He highlighted the complexity of issues involving multiple government departments, such as the impact of special educational needs and disabilities funding. Simmonds expressed concern over the lack of clarity and delay in the reorganisation process, which has caused significant financial and operational challenges for local authorities. He also mentioned the over-reliance on social care funding, which now consumes 70% to 80% of social care budgets. Simmonds advocated for more independent financial analysis and modelling to support the reorganisation decisions and emphasised the importance of local decision-making for effective delivery of projects.

Helen Maguire highlights a potential £35 million deficit in East Surrey's three-year financial forecast, criticising the current Whitehall funding settlement for not adequately addressing the financial pressures faced by new unitary councils.

Jim Shannon supports the debate's concerns, citing a case in his constituency where the merger of two councils, Ards and North Down, failed to deliver promised financial savings and resulted in compromised service delivery.

Your apology is noted.

Peter Lamb questions the Treasury's role in allowing the accumulation of public works loan board debt, which constitutes a majority of the debt faced by local councils. Peter Lamb criticised the local government reorganisation policy, stating it lacks financial and political feasibility. He argued that the policy, intended to save £2 billion over five years, is based on merging councils with populations of 500,000 or more, which is unachievable in the south east due to smaller population footprints. He warned that the reorganisation would lead to higher costs, reduced service integration, and reduced democratic engagement, particularly in rural areas. He also expressed concerns about the impact on social care, special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), and temporary housing costs.

Will Forster discussed the local government reorganisation in Surrey, highlighting the dire financial state of local authorities and the lack of accountability following poor financial decisions. He raised concerns about the legacy of debt and the need for further debt write-off and support. Forster also expressed fears about the culture of neglect towards vulnerable children and the end of free school meal vouchers in Surrey, calling for the Government's intervention.

She supports local government reorganisation for simplification but criticises it for being solely about finance. She highlights concerns about the pace of the reorganisation process and the lack of meaningful consultation. She calls for clarity on transitional funding and support for authorities undergoing reorganisation, particularly in light of the financial instability faced by west Surrey. She questions the economic framework and the lack of long-term investment funds for non-mayoral authorities. She also raises issues regarding communication and governance, including the difficulty in obtaining clear engagement from the county council. She expresses concerns about the impact on parish councils and voluntary sector organisations, and asks for support for unexpected electoral costs. She concludes by advocating for fair funding and sustainable multi-year settlements for local government. Noted that foundation authorities do not receive the same funding support as mayoral authorities, asking for clarification on what support is coming.