Title

For anyone who thought the latest change of Prime Minister may slow the Government's race to reorganise two-tier council areas they were much mistaken.Before he was replaced this week as housing and local government secretary by Angela Rayner, Steve Reed stepped up to the dispatch box last Thursday to comprehensively rewrite England's local government map.Despite rumours that several decisions would be deferred only two areas – Cambridgeshire & Peterborough and West Sussex – were left on ice.And ministers have stuck to the plan that first emerged with decisions for Devolution Priority Programme (DPP) areas, plumping for enlarged unitaries to cover cities, in the hope of them driving growth and prosperity.This was the outcome for the likes of Oxford, Brighton, Plymouth, Exeter, Torbay, Nottingham and Leicester. Most of these cities cheered the news, although Torbay slammed the plans to expand its boundaries to include parts of Teignbridge and South Hams.More widely across the sector, the Government's decisions inevitably ignited responses that spanned from delight to fury and everything in between.Cllr Richard Wright, chair of the Local Councils Network (LCN), said: ‘In many cases, the new councils announced today represent a fair compromise between simplifying the local government landscape and ensuring that local government stays genuinely local.‘However, the decisions will not be universally welcomed everywhere and some strong cases for the creation of locally based new councils have been disregarded.'But, with only one single county unitary getting the green light – namely Gloucestershire – the County Councils Network's (CCN) response was less moderate.Cllr Sean Matthews, the network's chair-elect, said: ‘While larger unitary councils will be created in some areas, most will see city and urban areas carved out and the creation of multiple smaller authorities in others.‘With unprecedented levels of splitting services and boundary change, this approach will inevitably end up costing local taxpayers more while causing greater fragmentation and upheaval to services for the most vulnerable – with new rural councils potentially most exposed to significant additional costs and service risks.'If there was a sense that the Government's decision was more focused on the benefits to be felt by cities, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) did little to dispel this sense with its announcement.The department's website pronounced: ‘Local government reorganisation [LGR] will unlock growth across different cities, from Preston to Leicester, giving local leaders the tools they need to tackle housing pressures, attract investment and build a better future for local people.'Indeed, the Labour Government seemed to have managed to unite other parties from across the political spectrum in opposition to the plans.The Lib Dem leader of Devon CC Julian Brazil said the decision to split the county into four new unities had ‘shafted' Devon's majority rural community and is a ‘deceitful betrayal' of local people.He branded it ‘Labour-led gerrymandering' which would lead to a 10%-plus rise in council tax, adding around £250 to annual bills and cuts to services.This reference to redrawing electoral boundaries for party political advantage, named after 19th century Massachusetts governor Elbridge Gerry, was also deployed by shadow communities secretary Sir James Cleverly.He claimed Reed had announced a ‘gerrymandered set of boundaries' and told the Commons: ‘This is blatant. These changes – like so many of his decisions – have been driven by party politics.'Several councils are already threatening to follow the lead of DPP authorities to challenge the decisions in the courts. These include Devon, Torbay and Hertfordshire as well as Reform-led Leicestershire.Reform's head of local government delivery Ben Bradley told The MJ its leaders in affected councils were ‘universally grumpy' about the Government's plans.‘They [the Government] set a load of criteria in the first place that they clearly haven't followed. Fundamentally, the drafts and the submissions that would have been put forward if those criteria were different, or weren't there, would have been totally different.'‘So, areas have been prevented from putting forward what they actually want by a set of criteria that ultimately has been totally ignored anyway, and that's the great frustration.'For the two areas left in limbo there was similar frustration and, potentially worryingly for the new Burnham Government, from unions as well as councils.Unison's South East regional secretary Jo Galloway said: ‘Today's announcement gives some councils a clearer picture of the future but West Sussex has been left waiting in limbo…again. If ministers need more time because of the serious financial risks, they cannot simply expect council staff to deliver to the same timetable as everyone else.'And, beyond the politics, the issue of staffing and jobs is quickly becoming as urgent a concern as ensuring new authorities are fit and raring to go on vesting day.Reed played to the supposed public mood when he claimed this round of LGR would slash senior posts by 250 and bring ‘significant salary savings'.But, while there will inevitably be fewer council chief executives in the new structure, the tsunami of change will mean all need to be appointed at the same time.‘If my maths is right, and we are going to create around 60 new councils, we will be appointing 60 chief executives between May 2027 and autumn 2027,' Martin Tucker, managing director of recruiters Faerfield, told The MJ.‘That poses a number of questions about process and about capacity.'‘At the moment we're thinking about how you might create a process where it is as easy as possible for individuals to apply for these jobs, but possibly apply for not just one but more than one. Fully appreciating, of course, that you have to be absolutely respectful of the role of elected members who will want to get the best person they possibly can for their new council.'But Julie Towers, director at Penna – another leading sector recruiter – warned about the limited experience of many existing chiefs.‘We've got, in chief exec world, candidates with the least experience because of the high level of appointments in 2020,' she said.‘If they've not done enough time, they shouldn't really be looking at a new job if they haven't done a full cycle.'With the scramble to appoint a swathe of chiefs to new unitaries she added: ‘I don't think the talent pipeline is deep enough and broad enough in some places.'The availability of suitable candidates is also set to be an issue for new unitaries seeking to fill critical roles in the next tier down, as disaggregation swells the sector with new senior roles.Towers added: ‘We felt that going into LGR there would probably be more jobs than there are people.'She argued that LGR was coming on top of there already being ‘difficult to recruit areas' such as finance, legal and human resources, as well as increasing demand for roles in new combined authorities and elsewhere in the public sector.‘My understanding is the statutory guidance that is being given now is much more for ringfencing and protecting jobs within the whole system,' Towers explained.‘Last time, the top three tiers went out to competition, whereas this time I understand the only insistence is that the chief execs are competitive.‘With chief executives there is going to be open competition, so they will flood the market. I think with the executive directors and the tier down it will depend how much internal appointing is done.'But both recruiters remained positive for the future.‘I would absolutely say this is not a time to panic at all,' said Tucker. ‘I do think this is a time of opportunity in public service.‘My advice would be for people to hold their nerve, don't panic, keep talking to each other and keep alert for possibilities.'Towers added: ‘I think we've got to be more open-minded and look at transferable skills and leadership, not just where somebody's done their leadership.‘People are going to have to be creative. I'm hoping there might even be some sharing [of roles across new unitaries] going on.'

Title

REORGANISATION

Reorganisation repercussions

By Paul Marinko | 23 July 2026

Popular articles by Paul Marinko

SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING

Popular articles by Paul Marinko