Local government reorganisation may not sound like the most exciting topic. But this matters. The outcome will affect many things from how much council tax you pay to who collects your bins.
At its core, local government reorganisation is about changing how public services are delivered locally. Hampshire currently has a two-tier system, with some services provided by the county council and others by district or borough councils such as East Hampshire District Council.
Under the government’s plans, in future there would be just one tier – ‘unitary councils’ – at a geographical level larger than the current districts and boroughs but smaller than the county.
At the end of process, there would not be an East Hampshire District Council and a Hampshire County Council. Town and parish councils would remain. The government also talks about new ‘Neighbourhood Area Committees’.
All this is different from – but obviously is related to – the creation of a mayor for Hampshire and the Solent.
When the last government proposed local government reform, it was voluntary and relied on councils putting forward proposals themselves.
But the new government has made reorganisation compulsory. Hampshire has no choice but to comply.
I am deeply concerned about the upheaval involved and the significant costs. In a recent Westminster Hall debate, I highlighted just how expensive this process is likely to be.
Yes, there may be some economies of scale, for example, by merging bin collections. But there will also be diseconomies.
Major services currently provided at county level, such as adult social care and high-needs provision for children, would presumably have to be re-established across multiple new unitary authorities.
The composition of each unitary authority really matters – and local council leaders at EHDC and HCC have put a lot of thought into that.
For financial security, you need substantial business rates income, and therefore significant industry within the authority area. You also need a good age-balance of the resident population, given the significance of social care costs.
I have heard claims that local government reorganisation could somehow solve East Hampshire’s major housing pressure problem, as the area would be part of a bigger geography. I fear the opposite could even be true. Planning decisions will be taken further away from the communities affected.
Whatever the outcome, the implications will be large and long-lasting. It needs to be approached it with caution.
