Every council in Lancashire set to be scrapped under government plans - just not yet

The long-awaited devolution white paper suggests ministers will be “brave enough” to deliver the kind of reforms previous governments have shied away from. It sets in train a move towards creating a handful of new councils in places like Lancashire to replace the plethora that currently exist.

However, the document is devoid of any specifics about which parts of the county might merge in order to yield the simplified set-up that ministers are seeking. That is in spite of a flurry of proposals from councillors and MPs in recent weeks which have suggested ways in which the county’s council map could be redrawn.

Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner also appeared to all-but-rule out the cancellation of local elections next year ahead of any wholesale local government reorganisation – unless proposals for change were at such an advanced stage that local areas suggested it themselves.

The white paper points towards a much slower revolution than that sought by 10 of Lancashire’s 12 Labour MPs who last month wrote to the government to suggest ministers might want to “impose” changes on Lancashire given its well documented inability to agree on thorny issues like devolution and previously suggested council restructures.

The parliamentarians wanted an answer by the end of year to their proposals for all of Lancashire’s local councils to be swept away and replaced with just three or four new ones covering wider areas – with the county council also being set for the chop.

It was part of a broader push for a rapid deepening of the county’s devolution deal and the introduction of an Andy Burnham-style elected mayor within three years. The politicians suggested new standalone – or ‘unitary’ – councils could be established in as little as 18 months’ time, hence their associated call for next year’s county council elections to be abandoned.

The white paper, published on Monday afternoon, suggests that the MPs’ have been granted their desired destination – but that the journey will take longer than they had hoped. The Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) understands that the county council’s planning for local elections next May is ongoing and has been unaltered by the backdrop against which it has been set.

Nevertheless, the direction of travel is towards the abolition of all Lancashire’s councils in their current form – bringing to an end the two-tier split of responsibilities between the district and county authorities which is in place across much of the patch. Under that system, the smaller borough and city councils look after the likes of planning applications, parks and waste collection, while County Hall takes charge of big-ticket services like social care, education and the roads across most of Lancashire.

Under the government’s plans, the 135-year-old Lancashire County Council will eventually disappear, together with the dozen districts – Burnley, Chorley, Fylde, Hyndburn, Lancaster, Pendle, Preston, Ribble Valley, Rossendale, South Ribble, West Lancashire and Wyre – all of which marked their 50th anniversaries this year. The already standalone authorities in Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwen will also bite the dust – with their style of unitary operation then being rolled out across the county, but over much broader areas.

However, the exact geography of what will come in their place is less clear. While local government minister Jim McMahon has been the recipient of many a suggestion in recent weeks – from both council leaders and MPs – it does not appear that he and his ministerial colleagues have been sufficiently impressed to pursue any of them immediately.

The reason may be subtly revealed deep in the white paper itself, which refers to an expectation for “all councils in an area to work together to develop unitary proposals that are in the best interests of the whole area, rather than developing competing proposals”.

Lancashire’s horse has somewhat bolted on that front, with neighbouring parts of Central Lancashire having submitted different visions for the future in the wake of the MPs’ intervention – while several councils have opposed any change whatsoever.

As the LDRS revealed at the time, Chorley and South Ribble’s leaders have called for a tie-up with West Lancashire, while the leader of Preston City Council – responding to his authority’s exclusion from that arrangement – proposed a ‘Greater Preston’ which = would take in parts of surrounding South Ribble, Wyre and Ribble Valley.

Those two Labour-led proposals – which included suggestions about how the rest of Lancashire might be shaped to accommodate them – may just be the only ones to have emerged publicly.

Meanwhile, Lancashire’s non-Labour-run districts – Fylde, Wyre, Ribble Valley, Lancaster, Burnley and Pendle – last week told the government that now was not “the correct time” to rip up the council map. The Tory-controlled county council has also been vocal in calling on the government to stick to its timetable of next autumn for considering any “governance” changes associated with strengthening the devolution agreement.

Lancashire is objectively still far from speaking with the unified voice the government now appears to expect in relation to the next steps towards a town and county hall overhaul.

Meanwhile one of the few specifics about council reorganisation which was contained in the white paper – the size of any new councils to be formed – could complicate matters yet further for Lancashire.

The government has indicated minimum populations of 500,000 in each of the newly-merged areas. The proposals that have so far been made by council leaders are far short of that, with Greater Preston coming in at just 250,000 and a combined Chorley, South Ribble and West Lancashire totalling 353,000.

With a total population of 1.57m, Lancashire would be able to accommodate just three new local authorities under the arrangements put forward by the government. That would necessarily mean combining more areas, which would likely prove even more controversial and make the already remote prospect of consensus less likely.

However, the white paper does state that “exceptions” may be made “to ensure new structures make sense for an area, including for devolution [purposes]” – suggesting a four-way split in Lancashire might be tolerated by ministers.

So while it now seems certain that big changes are coming to Lancashire’s local authority landscape, the final picture might take a while to emerge – and the process of painting it could yet be messy.

WHAT THE GOVERNMENT SAYS ABOUT…

…scrapping two-tier councils like those in Lancashire

“Strong councils are the building blocks for effective Combined Authorities and Combined County Authorities [the separate organisations that oversee devolved powers in areas with devolution deals].

“Fewer politicians, with the right powers, will streamline local government to focus on delivering for residents. We will deliver this process as quickly as possible, including through legislation where it becomes necessary to ensure progress. Clear leadership locally will be met with an active partner nationally.

“We will expect all two tier areas and smaller or failing unitaries to develop proposals for reorganisation. We will take a phased approach to delivery, taking into account where reorganisation can unlock devolution, where areas are keen to proceed at pace or where it can help address wider failings. However, we are clear that reorganisation should not delay devolution and plans for both should be complementary.” English Devolution White Paper

…the size of any new councils

“New unitary councils must be the right size to achieve efficiencies, improve capacity and withstand financial shocks. For most areas this will mean creating councils with a population of 500,000 or more, but there may be exceptions to ensure new structures make sense for an area, including for devolution, and decisions will be on a case-by-case basis.” English Devolution White Paper

…cancelling local elections in 2025

“We’re not looking at delaying local elections, we’re not [saying] that that would be the agenda. What we want to see is collaboration and local government reform. If that means that… further down, as we get to that decision quickly, because [some areas] are halfway down that local government reform, then that would be something that would come from the bottom up, but that’s not something that we’re planning on doing from central government.” Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, during questions at an event in Leeds to launch the white paper