Main Takeaways:
- Green Party’s Lack of Preparation: Stroud District Council is perceived among parish councillors as having done the least preparation and engagement on local government reorganisation among the seven, that’s not on the officers but a sign of weak political leadership.
- Support for a Mega Unitary Authority: The ruling Greens, backed by the Tories and Lib Dems, voted for an old Tory proposal to create a single, county-wide “mega” unitary authority (which could reach 700,000 population in the next ten years), which Labour argued is too large and remote.
- Concerns Over Scale and Local Impact: Labour councillors warned the large county model would lead to higher council tax, loss of local character and accountability, and could undermine the shared ambition of joining the West of England Combined Authority (WECA).
Report:
So finally, Stroud District Council got around to having a vote on local government reorganisation. The report put before the council last night pretty much reflected that which was commissioned by the previous Conservative administration at Shire Hall by accountants PwC and contributions from Green councillors leaned heavily on it.
Labour Group leader Cllr Katy Hofmann [Rodborough] pointed out that Gloucestershire is one of the few counties in England which is not governed by unitary councils, so we should be able to benefit from planned devolution where joined-up infrastructure will mean that getting a local plan approved will be much quicker and more cheaply.
She also warned that in pushing the large-scale county model the Greens would undermine their own ambition of joining the West of England Combined Authority (WECA) who will not swallow such a county-sized whale.
Cllr Maggie Dutton [Nailsworth] noted that these changes shouldn’t surprise anyone since the devolution package was in last year’s manifesto: “Yes, it comes with a cost, but only so that councils are in a position to have the resources to deliver better services to local people.”
Cllr Bob Hughes [Dursley] remarked of the PWC report it was written by accountants masquerading as consultants whose underlying assumption was that bigger is always better. Yet, on average, larger councils also have larger council tax by up to £350 pa.
With little reference to the mountains of preparatory work done by other District councils, the Greens, Tories and Lib Dems all voted for the county-backed proposal largely on the business model laid out for the previous Tory administration, which included the argument of ‘rich east and poor west’ authorities.
However, Cllr Terry Cook (Dursley) used the Gloucester City paper and other research to show how targeted funding for tackling deprivation would lift a western council to a net positive value of £85m over ten years compared with a net negative of £35m.
Still the ruling Greens favoured turning the current County Council into a single mega unitary authority, making it one of the largest in the country. Not a single Green supported Labour’s option to retain power closer with a new East and West Gloucestershire model, opting instead to balloon the size of the current district from a 121,000 population to a massive 645,000, with little regard to Stroud’s local character.
That’s more than five times the size!
Over the next ten years this county megalith is expected to grow to more than 700,000 people, making it one of the largest and most unmanageable unitary authorities in the country. In ten years we may need to repeat the exercise.
Instead of delivering local awareness and accountability the Green’s mega council, stretching from the Wye Valley to Warwickshire and down to Stroud, would render councillors remote from local interests and the needs of Stroud, Gloucester and the Forest of Dean.
As Cllr Dutton warned, the reality is that whilst Stroud looks to South Gloucestershire and Bristol, a single county-wide authority would be dragged away towards Herefordshire and Worcestershire who have little in common with Stroud.
On the legacy proposal (‘the bigger, the better’) of the former Tory administration, Green after Green dismissed Cllr Helen Caton Hughes’ [Dursley] observation that the smaller model would be “close enough to care, and big enough to deliver”.
Cllr Ian Hamilton [Cam East] made an impassioned plea to colleagues across the chamber to recognise the completely different natures of the two sides of Gloucestershire and that the west has both greater need and potential for growth.
Cllr Milly Hill [Cam East] dismissed claims that separating east and west would create problems for key services such as health, noting that Stroud representatives already sit on health board that integrate services across boundaries and that this process will accelerate, if we can get into WECA.
Having not intended to speak Cllr Cath Moore [Stroud Uplands] rose to debunk the idea propounded by several councillors that education is working well under county rule. Noting “there are hundreds of children who do not have a place in education”.
Cllr Elizabeth Stanley [Cainscross] warned that a single county wide model would lead to loses of vital expertise and institutional memory: opening us to a Musk style Doge approach to council reform, putting arbitrary job cuts ahead of value for money.
Cllr Dave Mathews [Cainscross] was genuinely dismayed at the lack of local leadership from the Greens, who pointed out that in any future Western unitary their party had a real opportunity to provide progressive leadership.
Labour’s proposal was denied by a highly determined and well-organised bloc of Green, Tory and Lib-Dem councillors. But the two-council east/west proposal will still go forward through Cheltenham Borough, and possibly Cotswold District (their cabinet decision is on 26 November) councils. We still have a lot of work to do to bring local power back home.