Posted by 
There is less money available for local services in Lancashire because of the complex way its councils are currently structured.
That was the message from the government minister overseeing a radical revamp of local authorities across the country, which will see Lancashire’s 15 existing councils abolished and replaced with just a handful of new ones covering much larger areas.
Jim McMahon says the aim of the overhaul is to “unlock” the funding he claims is being swallowed up by the present system of having a patchwork of different authorities providing different services.
Read more: Demolition of Mount Street buildings at former St Joseph’s orphanage begins
The change would sweep away Lancashire County Council, the dozen district authorities – in Preston, South Ribble, Chorley, West Lancashire, Fylde, Wyre, Lancaster, Ribble Valley, Burnley, Hyndburn, Rossendale and Pendle – and the two small standalone councils for Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwen.
Speaking to the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) during last week’s Convention of the North, the local government minister also stressed that he was prepared to be “flexible” over exactly how many new local authorities Lancashire will get in order to ensure they remain geographically relevant to the people they serve.
His comments came just weeks before the deadline the government has set for the 21 so-called “two-tier” areas of England, like Lancashire, to submit preliminary proposals for a streamlined council set-up in their areas.
Explaining the rationale for what is likely to prove a controversial shake-up, Mr. McMahon said the current arrangements came with a costly “premium”.
“People are paying more for a two-tier system to exist at a time when…for many places, their local neighbourhood services over 14 years – and, by the way, through no fault of local government – have been eroded.
“And so the challenge comes – how do you build those local neighbourhood services that people…value [in] their area and make the quality of life difference? The way to do that is to unlock the money that’s currently held up in that two-tier system – so that we stop paying for overhead costs at the level that we are and we free that money [up at] a local level,” the minister said.
He added that ending the division of responsibilities between the county and district councils and replacing them with single authorities that deliver all services in their area – as is already the case in Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwen – would make matters simpler for locals seeking help from their elected representatives.
“If you’re a resident in Lancashire and you go to your local councillor, how often are you told, ‘Well, actually, I’m not the right councillor, because…I’m your district councillor [and] you need to go to the county’ – and vice versa” Mr. McMahon asked.
The government has said any new local authorities created as part of the reorganisation process should cover populations of at least 500,000 people. With 1.57m residents, that means Lancashire could accommodate a maximum of three councils under the revamp – but the government’s devolution white paper did say “exceptions” may be made “to ensure new structures make sense for an area”.
That was a point Jim McMahon was keen to emphasise when asked by the LDRS about the risk of bolting together parts of the county with little in common – and the potential to undermine genuinely local government as a result.
“We do recognise that Lancashire is a very diverse place…[and] we want to work in partnership with local areas,” he said.
“So we’ve set the target of 500,000, but we’ve also said if that’s going hand-in-hand with devolution – where you have strategic authority with a mayor in place – we do recognise that there might be some flexibility required, too.
“It’s a balance, in the end. Efficiencies have got to be met with a council that has a clear enough anchor that people can recognise – and there are tensions in that.
“Councils will be making those representations to us and…we want to work with [them] to hear those arguments [about] things like travel-to-work areas [and]… geography. Just how wide do you spread the net to create the population – and is that a workable geography or not?”
Analysis back in 2020 found the biggest financial savings from scrapping two-tier systems came from their replacement with a single – or ‘unitary’ – authority for the whole of a shire county area. That would mean a lone council covering sprawling Lancashire in its entirety.
According to the report, by consultants PricewaterhouseCoopers, the single county-wide council model would generate £2.94bn of savings over five years if rolled out nationwide, compared to around £1bn being saved by the creation of two new councils – and a £340m loss as a result of the establishment of three new local authorities for a county area.
Even before the government had officially called for proposals for a new council landscape, two had emerged from Lancashire late last year – with Chorley and South Ribble’s leaders calling for a tie-up with West Lancashire, while the leader of Preston City Council, responding to his authority’s exclusion from that arrangement, proposed a ‘Greater Preston’ which would take in parts of surrounding South Ribble, Wyre and Ribble Valley. Neither of those suggestions come close to the half-a-million population threshold – at 353,000 and 250,000, respectively.
In a further sign of the divisive nature of the subject, Lancashire’s non-Labour-run districts – Fylde, Wyre, Ribble Valley, Lancaster, Burnley and Pendle – told the government in December that now was not “the correct time” to rip up the council map. Ribble Valley is also currently exploring the possibility of holding a local referendum on the subject.
What happens next?
Jim McMahon said in a letter to all council leaders in affected areas just before Christmas that reorganisation would be done in two phases, with new authorities coming into force in either April 2027 or April 2028.
As Lancashire County Council did not apply to the government for permission to cancel local elections to the authority this May – thereby delaying the date of its demise – the county as a whole is now likely on course for the longer of the two timeframes for reorganisation.
Since Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner appeared to confirm at the Convention of the North that Lancashire would have an elected mayor by May 2026, that also raises the interesting prospect of there being a two-year period during which the county will have the deepest of devolution deals in place, while still operating under the two-tier council system – a scenario painted by previous governments as being so complex that it demanded reorganisation precisely so that it could be avoided.
Local areas have been asked to submit preliminary proposals for new-look local government in Lancashire by 21st March, with a final vision to be lodged by 28th November.
The government has called on councils to make “every effort to work together to develop and jointly submit one proposal” for the entire county – but recognises that such unanimity might not be possible.
The tortuous history of discussions on the topic in Lancashire suggest that multiple blueprints are likely to land on ministerial desks in Whitehall.
‘How people feel about the place they call home won’t change’
While Jim McMahon stressed he could not offer a view on the merits, or otherwise, of any theoretical proposals – because he has to “keep an open mind” ahead of making a final decision – he is confident the changes will not affect the way people feel about where they live.
“Reorganisation is not about taking away the identity of very local places, but…people’s identity is so localised, it’s not even about the existing local authorities. If you live [say] in Chorley, you’ll have a very different view about your bit of Chorley that you hold close to your heart – and it’s the same in every part of Lancashire.
“So it’s not about whether a council does or [does] not reflect your immediate local community – but it is important that every council delivers for your local community.”
As the MP for his home town of Oldham – which, prior to the last big local government revamp in 1974, was part of the Lancashire County Council area, but now lies within Greater Manchester – Jim McMahon says he understands the importance of local identity.
“The structures that we create for local government are important for delivering good services and for growing local economies – but they don’t replace how you feel. I think for us in Oldham, many of us would say we’ve got Lancashire in our heart and Greater Manchester in our head.
“How you feel in terms of belonging isn’t the same as recognising that…the best way to grow the economy [and] to create decent jobs for working class people is about that ambition and that leadership – but people still feel very proud of our history and Lancashire will be exactly the same,” Mr. McMahon predicted.
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
