Report by Local Democracy Reporter – Jon Cooper
A North East Derbyshire District Councillor’s call for the authority to oppose and abandon Local Government Reorganisation plans has been rejected by the council’s Labour administration after the Council Leader argued LGR is ‘necessary’ because the current system is ‘unsustainable’.
Councils have been preparing for LGR with plans to introduce larger unitary councils between 2027 and 2028 so Derbyshire County Council and the county’s eight borough and district councils and Derby City Council could be replaced with two unitary councils – a Derbyshire North Council and a Derbyshire South Council.
But after the Labour Government confirmed the process has been put on hold for 14 councils including NE Derbyshire District Council during a review, Independent District Cllr Ross Shipman called for the authority to oppose and abandon LGR with a motion at a council meeting on November 12.
Cllr Shipman argued the current ‘pause’ represents an opportunity for Derbyshire’s councils to collectively make the strongest possible case against proceeding with the proposed reorganisation.
He told the meeting: “How does creating a larger council covering a greater geographic area automatically offer value for money and bring decisions closer to the people we are supposed to represent?
“Because after all the decision-making, after all the meetings, I have still not heard a convincing answer that backs up LGR as a solution to the issues that this council is facing.”
He said: “I believe we should be putting our concentration on improving frontline services and not pursuing LGR as it currently stands. Bigger does not automatically mean better and change does not automatically mean improvement.”
Cllr Shipman proposed the council opposes LGR with other authorities by calling upon the Government to abandon current proposals and look towards a new cross-council way of working.
He argued LGR should be reconsidered with an alliance between councils especially in light of local elections proceeding as normal in May, 2027, and after Amber Valley Borough Council is taking action over LGR plans to split its area into both the north and south Derbyshire unitary councils.
Cllr Shipman added: “Let’s talk to other authorities and then let’s hopefully come up with a solution that works that does not mean ripping up every single council across Derbyshire.”
The Government has argued that under LGR there will be elected mayors with more powers on planning and transport and it claims changes will create savings, greater efficiency, improved public services, and economic growth.
But critics are concerned about the loss of councils, a reduced number of Derbyshire councillors from 447 to 162, the loss of local control with a risk of greater Government influence, the removal of local decision-making, tax increases, powers taken away from communities and whether the plans will create savings.
Cllr Shipman claims concerns remain regarding the potential cost of reorganisation, disruption to services, the loss of accountability, and the risk of decision-making becoming more remote away from communities.
However, Labour Council Leader Nigel Barker said it is obvious the current two-tier Local Government system is ‘unsustainable’ due to current pressures and because the area already has an East Midlands Combined County Authority Mayor.
He added there is a real opportunity to create a ‘better public service system’ by working together and he has written a paper outlining what he thinks local authorities should look like in ten years’ time.
Cllr Barker foresees a local authority that brings services together with information and resources and that prevents problems and focuses on improving lives rather than managing demand and crisis situations and expecting resident to navigate boundaries.
He said: “That’s why, despite the current pausing, my own view is that LGR remains necessary. We must, of course, respect the review and await its outcome but in my opinion the issue is increasingly one of when, not if LGR happens.
“Whether LGR resumes quickly, happens in a different form or is delayed for a longer period, NE Derbyshire cannot operate in isolation. Decisions affecting our residents are increasingly made across a wider system.”
Cllr Barker also believes district and borough councils have become too reliant on Derbyshire County Council and that the district council needs to be better plugged into the wider system.
Conservative Cllr Alex Dale said in some ways he welcomed the pause of LGR and he does not think the current system works but he is not sure what the best system should be even though he cannot see the Government picking LGR up again before the next General Election.
Cllr Barker said he was originally not the biggest supporter of LGR but it has always been important to have been involved to help shape the proposed changes.
He added that collaborating with others is something the council already does and he believes LGR will strengthen relationships.
Cllr Thacker said everyone accepts Local Government changes are needed but he is against losing civic identity and the communities’ identities with LGR posing risks of higher council tax, inheriting debt from other Derbyshire authorities, a loss of influence for smaller towns and villages and more centralised local services.
He added that he will never vote for the erosion of NE Derbyshire District Council and other second-tier councils.
Cllr Shipman added: “This motion is about striking while the iron is hot and what better time than when LGR has been paused. We can either seize this opportunity or allow it to pass us by.”
However, Cllr Shipman’s motion failed after the council voted by a majority of 63 per cent against the proposal to abandon LGR with only 29 per cent in support of the motion and seven per cent abstaining.
Conservative Cllr Martin Thacker questioned what the impact the LGR pause will have on NE Derbyshire concerning financial implications and service planning after work has been halted or delayed.
Cllr Barker said the LGR pause has not really impacted upon the council’s delivery of frontline services even though there has been an extra burden for council officers.
He added that when the pause was announced the council had incurred £58,000 worth of expenditure for the Derbyshire-wide LGR programme and other costs are still being finalised.
However, Cllr Thacker argued LGR flies in the face of the evidence of those who want grassroots’ representation and that there has been some impact on staff in terms of vacancies.
He urged the council’s Labour Group to consult with all the council’s political groups on LGR, which was agreed to, rather than as he claimed ‘take us like lemmings over the cliff’.
Elections to new shadow authorities under the Government’s previous LGR programme for Derbyshire were originally to have taken place in 2027 and the two new unitary councils were to have been in operation by April 2028 before plans were paused.
Jim McMahon, Minister for Local Government, Devolution and Regional Growth, said effective and sustainable Local Government is vital to meeting ambitions and while the Government recognises a wide range of divergent views on the structure of councils now is the time to pause and reflect.
Angela Rayner, The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, stated the Government is committed to delivering good growth with places able to set their own ambitions and integrate services to meet needs and to achieve that a ‘fundamental rewiring of the state’ with ‘effective and sustainable Local Government’ is necessary.
Derbyshire’s ten main councils include: Derbyshire County; Derby City; NE Derbyshire District; Chesterfield Borough; Bolsover District; Derbyshire Dales; High Peak Borough; Amber Valley District; Erewash Borough; And South Derbyshire District.
