Title

NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE

Let's think carefully about the best scale for delivering public services

We have seen a lack of sophisticated thinking by Government about the level at which COVID-19 initiatives were delivered, says Abdool Kara - and it looks like this may be a key theme in the NAO's ongoing coronavirus-related work programme.

I expect that readers of The MJ live in some sort of home. That home is likely to be on a street, maybe as part of a block or an estate. It will be in a neighbourhood or perhaps a village or parish. It might be part of a borough or town or city, or maybe a rural county.

Why does this matter? Well, for two main reasons: firstly, nations have to determine the appropriate geographic level for the administration of public services. Sometimes these will be at the individual or household or property level; at other times on a much larger footprint. Much thought has gone into this over the years. We can see clear thinking in some case, such as allotment provision at parish level, while transport is planned at county level or larger. Sometimes there is less obvious logic – why, for example, in two-tier areas are leisure facilities provided by districts but libraries by counties?

In my recent evidence to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government Select Committee hearing on devolution, I suggested that from the National Audit Office (NAO) perspective, we had seen a lack of sophisticated thinking by Government about the level at which individual COVID-19 initiatives were best delivered – whether from the centre as a default assumption, or from other levels of governance and accountability closer to the public. It looks like this may be a significant theme in our ongoing COVID-19-related work programme.

The second reason is its relationship to the ongoing debates about local government reorganisation and the most appropriate scale for the delivery of different services.

As administrative bureaucracies cannot exist at every layer possible, whatever size local authorities are will inevitably be a compromise between various economies and diseconomies of scale.

Mapping English local authority numbers over time shows a decrease from 1,245 authorities prior to the 1974 reorganisation down to 339 today, with further decreases to come from planned, though delayed, reorganisations in Northamptonshire and Buckinghamshire, not to mention the ongoing discussions around further devolution deals and the unitarisation that may accompany them. This is a curve heading in only one direction.

Abdool Kara is executive leader for local services at the NAO

NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE

Councils must be empowered to set all fees and charges

By Ian Miller | 02 April 2026

Ian Miller says it’s time to end the centralism where fees and charges 'are set by Whitehall, don’t take account of councils’ costs and are infrequently upda...

NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE

Toil, then trouble on LGR

By Martin Ford | 02 April 2026

The Government has announced its decisions on new unitaries in four of the Devolution Priority Programme areas. But Essex CC is threatening legal action, cou...

NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE

LGR and the ominous signs for cross-council working

By Paul Marinko | 02 April 2026

Whether or not counties decide to legally challenge proposals, they are likely now to engage less with the process, writes Paul Marinko.

NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE

Legal threat looms as counties oppose Whitehall LGR ruling

By Paul Marinko | 02 April 2026

Disgruntled county councils could slow down local government reorganisation with legal challenges to Whitehall’s verdict.

Abdool Kara

Popular articles by Abdool Kara