Derbyshire’s district and borough councils have been looking to rubber-stamp initial proposals for a new potential two-layer unitary authority with a north and south split after the Government is preparing for a major reorganisation of Local Government.Amber
Chesterfield Borough Council voted by a majority at a meeting on March 19 inmber Valley favour and, so far, reportedly in agreement with the county’s seven other district and borough councils’ joint initial proposals to be submitted to Government by a March 21 deadline despite Derbyshire County Council’s desire for a single super-council unitary authority.
Cllr Tricia Gilby, Chesterfield Borough Council’s Leader, told the meeting: “At the forefront of our minds has been the need to develop an interim proposal where we put people and places first.”
She added the council has drawn on its delivery of grassroots services proposing a lift to services with better value to economies of scale while sharing good practice with business sectors and partners to promote growth.
The Labour Government’s Local Government Reorganisation White Paper proposals include potentially setting up single, unitary authorities across England with an elected mayor in counties by merging or scrapping councils in two-tier authority areas like Derbyshire that operate county, and then district and borough councils.
Proposals from Derbyshire’s eight district and borough councils for a two-layer system include one option where Amber Valley Borough Council would be part of a northern unitary council alongside High Peak Borough Council, Derbyshire Dales District Council, Chesterfield Borough Council, North East Derbyshire District Council, and Bolsover District Council.
A second option could see the formation of a separate southern unitary council with Derby City Council, South Derbyshire District Council, and Erewash Borough Council with Amber Valley Borough Council moving from the northern unitary council to join the southern unitary council.
Cllr Gilby argued the options maintain the historic areas of Derbyshire and provide an opportunity to work in partnership with others with the right size and allow for continued engagement with the newly-formed East Midlands Combined County Authority.
She added that Derbyshire County Council’s proposal for a single unitary council under LGR excluding Derby City Council is not the right approach because of its scale with a population of over 800,000 people and size of the county.
The eight Derbyshire district and borough councils have also argued the county council’s plans would create a ‘doughnut effect’ around Derby city leading to inefficient delivery of services, stifling economic and housing growth and creating a significant disparity between Derbyshire and Derby in terms of population and taxbase.
Cllr Gilby, who pointed out the plans are only ‘initial proposals’ at this stage, said: “As I have already said there is nothing binding in Chesterfield Borough Council to continue to follow this path. I however, believe it is critically important that Chesterfield Borough Council has the ability to influence the future of Local Government in Derbyshire and Derby.
“I consider the interim proposal to be the best option for LGR in Derbyshire and Derby.”
However, opposition Liberal Democrat Chesterfield Borough Cllr Paul Holmes opposed the whole concept of imposing Unitary authorities which he dubbed as ‘Hobson’s Choice’ with no democratic mandate with the ‘obliteration’ of up to 200 councils while saying it does not represent the best interests of Chesterfield residents.
He told the meeting: “This proposal to create a huge North Derbyshire Unitary Council is what used to be called a Hobson’s Choice. You can choose this bad option or that bad option, take it or leave it. These days it’s better described as a Donald Trump Choice as he is demanding of Ukraine.
“When Boris Johnson wanted to abolish districts and boroughs five years ago none of you thought it was a good idea. But now you are keeping your lips zipped shut because of top-down Labour Party dictat.
“At some point you have to stand up for your principles – otherwise you personally are tonight going to vote to scrap Chesterfield’s council and subject Chesterfield residents to a huge remote body that will simply administer Government policies. This proposal takes the ‘Local’ out of Government.
“Your only defence of what you are doing is the Donald Trump style choice of saying support this very bad option or the Labour Government will go for the even worse option being proposed by the Conservatives at Derbyshire County Council.”
He also questioned whether a new unitary authority will bring savings after he cited a recent House of Commons Library Research paper which he says could find no such convincing evidence of savings and he added that a 2015 Cardiff University Business School research paper could also find no such evidence.
Cllr Holmes is also concerned that the first few years of any LGR could cost as much as £25m to £40m which is expected to be paid for by cash-strapped councils with no Government support.
He also suggested that if the Government really wants unitary authorities they should be smaller or see the county split into three areas because larger-sized councils such as Birmingham City, Nottingham City and Bradford City have faced financial crises.
Chesterfield Borough Council Leader, Cllr Gilby, said the districts and boroughs have considered many different possible models and feel their initial proposal provides the best option for Derbyshire and Derby, and that Chesterfield will be represented the same way as any other area.
Cllr Gilby argued devolution can be a good thing highlighting how the new East Midlands Combined County Authority has already seen millions of pounds earmarked for regeneration and economic growth.
And Cllr Gavin Baldauf-Good said putting a new unitary authority in place where Chesterfield is ‘absolutely at the heart’ is the only way to resolve the problem of under-funded local authorities.
Chesterfield Borough Council Deputy Leader Amanda Serjeant said: “We are working together across party and across Derbyshire to come up with a solution that will continue to deliver good services to the people of Chesterfield and Derbyshire.”
She added that cross-party work is what people of Chesterfield and Derbyshire want from their politicians and LGR will mean the moving of power from Parliament and Whitehall to places like Chesterfield.
Cllr Serjeant said: “We need to take the opportunity to be involved. It is only right. It is only good leadership to shape that and get the very best for the people of Chesterfield.”
Conservative-controlled Derbyshire County Council previously approved its LGR report plan for its initial proposals at a council meeting on February 12 for the county council to adopt a proactive approach while working with other councils to approve a single unitary council as its preferred option.
County Council Leader, Cllr Barry Lewis, has stated that he hopes LGR will bring value for money, better use of resources, and social service delivery that is efficient, safe and responsible and he says he is determined to protect Derbyshire’s boundaries.
Derbyshire’s county council, Derby City Council, and the eight district and borough councils along with councils across England were given a March 21 deadline to submit their interim LGR proposals to the Labour Government before all the councils have to submit full and final proposals by November 28.
Derby City Council, which had indicated support for the district and boroughs’ proposals for a two-layer unitary authority, is expected to delay its decision on its initial proposals after a lengthy debate at a recent meeting proved inconclusive.
A consultation process is due during spring or summer to seek the views of residents, businesses, community representations and public sector partners particularly those in Amber Valley which may be placed in either the proposed northern or southern unitary council.
Government LGR plans also include hopes for new mayoral elections to be in place as soon as 2026 and the first newly-changed councils could be running by 2028.
The Government has argued that LGR plans will include elected mayors with more powers on planning and transport, and that the changes will create savings, create greater efficiency, improve public services, and support economic growth.
But critics are concerned about the loss of district and borough councils, a risk of greater Government control, the removal of local decision-making, tax increases, powers being taken away from communities and some also doubt the plans will create savings.
Derbyshire’s eight district and borough councils include Amber Valley Borough Council, Bolsover District Council, Chesterfield Borough Council, Derbyshire Dales District Council. Erewash Borough Council, High Peak Borough Council, North East Derbyshire District Council, and South Derbyshire District Council, as well as Derby City Council.
The county council has stated that parish and town councils are not affected by the Government’s plans.
High Peak Borough Council’s Leader has told how the council has backed plans for a new potential two-layer unitary authority with a north and south split across the county to ensure it continues to have a say on the Government’s proposed reorganisation of Local Government.
The council agreed unanimously at a meeting on March 19 at The Pavilion Gardens, in Buxton, in favour and, so far, reportedly in agreement with the county’s seven other district and borough councils’ joint initial proposals to be submitted to Government by a March 21 deadline despite Derbyshire County Council’s desire for a single super-council unitary authority.
Local authorities in two-tier areas like Derbyshire that operate county, and then district and borough councils face an uncertain future after the Labour Government’s Local Government Reorganisation White Paper proposals include potentially setting up single, unitary authorities across England with an elected mayor in counties by merging or scrapping councils in two-tier authority areas.
High Peak Borough Council Leader, Cllr Anthony McKeown, said: “We weren’t expecting to have to reorganise ourselves before the White Paper landed, but that is what the Government wants, and so we have a duty to engage with the process and help shape what comes next – or risk having reorganisation imposed on us to the potential detriment of our residents.
“Disappointingly and without any consultation with the other Derbyshire councils, Derbyshire County Council sought to delay its elections and went public with a plan for a Derbyshire-wide unitary that would absorb all the districts and boroughs and leave Derby on its current boundary and wholly surrounded, missing some of the requirements of any future proposals.
“We decided to take the time to explore a range of possible options with our neighbours, considering 15 options before reaching the two recommended in the interim plan.
“We don’t believe Derbyshire County Council’s plans for a single unitary council covering the whole of Derbyshire, excluding Derby, and serving a population of over 800,000 residents is the right approach. The organisation would be too large and too far removed from the diverse communities that we serve.
