Posted by 
Appeals for consensus, accusations of double standards and calls to preserve unique heritage are just some of the reactions from Preston and the surrounding areas politicians to the government’s proposals for how the city and Lancashire may be run in future.
The government’s plans for a major shake-up of councils in Lancashire have received a mixed reception from local authority leaders across the county.
The long-awaited devolution white paper, published on Monday, heralded the end of so-called ‘two-tier’ areas where responsibility for different services is split between a county council and smaller district authorities.
Read more: The end for Preston City Council and Lancashire County Council
Under the replacement system, Lancashire is in line for three – or, at the most, four – new councils to replace the 15 that currently exist.
While ministers have said they expect all authorities in areas set to be restructured to work together to come up with new arrangements that are “in the best interests” of the whole patch, ingrained divisions over the issue have immediately surfaced in Lancashire.
Leaders of two of the district authorities that have already put forward their own – albeit competing – proposals for the future shape of local government in Lancashire welcomed the fact that a revamp is definitely on the cards for the county.
Chorley’s Labour council leader Alistair Bradley last month called for a new ‘unitary’ authority to be formed by joining up with neighbouring South Ribble and West Lancashire councils.
He described the white paper as “an exciting opportunity” and a chance to get “the right outcome” for both the borough and Lancashire as a whole.
“[It] allows us to look at moving away from the complex structure of tiered levels of authorities [and] supports a model we initially proposed in 2020. We remain committed to working with colleagues across the county to examine all options for the future of local government working.
“Chorley and South Ribble councils already have a shared service model, employing a senior management team that works across both [authorities] and sharing over half our services. [The government’s] proposals would allow this approach to be expanded.
“Creating a unitary council will allow us to transform the way services are managed, whilst retaining a population size that allows us to keep a strong local voice and work closely with our communities to deliver the very best for our residents,” Cllr Bradley said.
Preston leader Matthew Brown – who earlier this month made a pitch to government for a new ‘Greater Preston’ council area, incorporating some surrounding towns that currently lie in other districts – said it “makes sense” to shift to a single tier of local government.
However, he repeated previous calls for the 15 Lancashire leaders to reach “consensus” over the issue – a sentiment echoed by the government in the white paper.
“I’m very keen to have a conversation with all council leaders – we just need to get our heads together and decide what’s going to work best,” the Labour politician said.
Read more: Opinion: All Preston aren’t we? City’s boundary lines in sharp focus
Jacky Alty, the Labour leader of South Ribble Borough Council, said her authority’s focus was on ensuring “the unique identity and heritage of South Ribble is recognised, valued and promoted as we move forward”.
“Now that we have the white paper, we will work through the details carefully to understand the implications and consider our next steps. Our priority is to achieve the best outcome from the available options, and we remain hopeful that local government reorganisation will bring positive opportunities for our residents,” Cllr Alty added.
Wyre Council’s Conservative leader Michael Vincent told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) that the super-sized standalone authorities that are set to replace the likes of his – and which will serve populations of around half a million residents – are “not local government”.
“It’s called the devolution bill, but it’s not devolving power to traditional councils – it is taking power away from [them],” Cllr Vincent said.
Just down the coast – and within hours of the white paper being published – Tory-led Fylde Council passed a pre-planned motion opposing its own abolition, which it was claimed would “jeopardise the democratic accountability, service quality, and community focus” that authority offers.
That was according to council leader Karen Buckley, who added: “Instead of dismantling a system that works effectively at a local level, efforts should be directed toward improving collaboration between different tiers of government while preserving the vital role of district councils.
“Local government should remain local—close to the people it serves and reflective of their unique needs and priorities.”
Her Conservative counterpart leading Ribble Valley Borough Council, Stephen Atkinson, said that the coming changes created a double standard which would disadvantage Lancashire.
“If the minimum size is 500,000 people, that means Lancashire gets half of the representation that many Labour councils in Manchester get. Rochdale and Oldham are about 250,000 people each – why do they get more democracy than Lancashire?
“If Lancashire gets three [new] councils, each one will be the same geographical size as [Greater] Manchester, which comprises 10 councils.
“This is why we have a two-tier system – to bring local [services] to a large rural area. When this is gone, residents will be so far away from democracy,” Cllr Atkinson warned.
‘Not for Ministers to say’
Comments made by local government minister Jim McMahon in the Commons on Monday suggest that a call last month by the majority of Labour MPs in the county for the government to “impose” a restructure on Lancashire may have been premature.
Answering a question about reorganisation elsewhere, he stressed that the government’s role is to “invite and to receive” proposals – “not to draw the maps, which is for local authorities to do”.
“As my role is quasi-judicial and I will need to take a view on potentially competing proposals. I cannot comment on what individual counties may or may not look like,” Mr. McMahon explained.
His attention turned specifically to Lancashire when responding to comments welcoming the white paper from both the Burnley MP, Oliver Ryan, and Rossendale and Darwen’s Andy MacNae, who described two-tier local government as “dysfunctional”.
The minister noted it would be to “put it mildly” to say that there were “local tensions” in Lancashire over devolution and reorganisation , but went on to praise the “positive” experience he had enjoyed when dealing with leaders across the county, whatever their political persuasion.
On the subject of creating single-tier authorities, he added: “I think most people in Lancashire accept that, after 20 years or more of talking about it, the time [has] probably come.
“But it is for local areas to come together and have a plan that is right for their place, and to make a submission to the government. It is not for the government to redraw the map of England and impose it on every community.”
Subscribe: Keep in touch directly with the latest headlines from Blog Preston, join our WhatsApp channel and subscribe for our twice-a-week email newsletter. Both free and direct to your phone and inbox.
Read more: See the latest Preston news and headlines
