The government says it chose to split Lancashire into four new council areas, because they each reflect the county’s “distinct local identities”.
That was the explanation offered by local government secretary Steve Reed as he set out the rationale for creating the quad of new authorities as part of a major shake-up that will see Lancashire’s 15 existing main councils scrapped.
Their replacements will formally come into being on 1st April, 2028 – but will exist in so-called ‘shadow’ form from May next year, when the first elections will be held for the new organisations.
Read more: Veteran Preston MP swipes at city leader for ‘fig leaf’ council deal
Mr. Reed announced his decision in the Commons on Thursday afternoon, confirming an earlier report from Blog Preston that the government had opted for the four-way split, having been presented with five options to reshape the local authority landscape in Lancashire as part of the biggest shake-up in more than 50 years.
His choice will bind together and effectively merge, for local governance purposes:
***Preston, Lancaster and Ribble Valley (373,664 residents) ;
***Chorley, South Ribble and West Lancashire (358,947 residents);
*** Blackpool, Fylde and Wyre (348,381 residents);
***Blackburn with Darwen, Burnley, Hyndburn, Rossendale and Pendle (520,563 residents).
The names of the new authorities will be proposed within the next month, but they have provisionally been called ‘North Lancashire’, ‘South Lancashire’ ‘Fylde Coast’ and ‘Pennine Lancashire, respectively.
The radical restructure – known as local government reorganisation (LGR) – will mean the end for Lancashire County Council and Blackburn with Darwen, Blackpool, Burnley, Chorley, Fylde, Hyndburn, Lancaster, Pendle, Preston, Ribble Valley, Rossendale, South Ribble, West Lancashire and Wyre councils, which will all be axed.
Those current councils had been asked to suggest the size and shape of their successors as part of a government-ordered streamlining exercise that will see the number of councillors in Lancashire slashed from almost 700 to just over 300.
The successful pitch was the one that had been backed by more existing authorities than any of the others – garnering support from Chorley, Lancaster, Preston, Ribble Valley, South Ribble and West Lancashire councils.
The rejected options were for two, three and five new authorities, along with another suggestion for a four-council set up, but along different lines to the one that was ultimately chosen.
In a letter to Lancashire leaders explaining his decision, Mr. Reed said: “My selected option creates new councils that are more clearly rooted in the distinct local identities across the area.
“I judge that the strength of this proposal lies in the fact that it provides for sensible geographies that will be more easily recognised by residents, encompassing Lancashire’s varied identities, including the post-industrial towns of ‘Pennine Lancashire’, the rural and market town areas of ‘North Lancashire’ and ‘South Lancashire’, and the coastal communities of the ‘Fylde Coast’.
“This configuration will better ensure that the different economic, social and cultural characteristics of these areas are meaningfully reflected in the priorities of these new councils.”
The Secretary of State said the split also aligned what he described as “functional economic areas” and “key transport corridors”, while maintaining cross-border “sub-regional economies” between parts of Lancashire and its neighbours in the Liverpool City Region, Greater Manchester, Cumbria and West Yorkshire.
He also concluded that the new councils were likely to lead to “an overall improvement” in the financial sustainability of local government in Lancashire compared to those they replace.
The backers of the chosen option said they expected the new set-up to achieve cumulative overall net savings of £194.9m across the four councils, with recurring annual benefits of £81.9m, compared to the current system, from 2032/33 onwards.
They also estimated that council tax rates paid by households in the existing local authority areas could shift – theoretically in either direction – under their new council by anything between one and 10.9 percent.
Meanwhile, Mr. Reed said that while all the options had suggested ways of maintaining a degree of local “community influence” across the much broader new council areas, he believed that the chosen option – which suggested the creation of 42 ‘local community hubs’ – “strik[es] a balance between maintaining a coherent, consistent approach across a large geography and enabling place-based tailoring of public services at a local level”.
The council cartographer-in-chief also concluded that while three out of the four new authorities would serve populations well below the government’s suggested 500,000 level – the exception being the eastern council – the structure would “produce a better overall outcome for local government in Lancashire”. Mr. Reed said it was also the “strongest platform” for any future deepening of Lancashire devolution.
The reorganisation rejects
While Steve Reed focused his letter to the county’s leaders on the reasons for choosing the option he did, he nevertheless offered some insight into why he had jettisoned the others. The five suggestions had been presented across more than 800 pages of documentation.
Lancashire County Council had sought to cut the county into two huge northern and southern authorities – made up of six and eight existing councils, respectively – with the River Ribble broadly acting as the dividing line between them.
The Secretary of State said that while the proposal “demonstrated potential benefits from scale, I noted concerns on the size of the proposed councils, given they would cover a large and varied footprint”. He also warned of the “demonstrably higher…deadlock risk” of a two-council set-up in the governance arrangements for devolution across Lancashire.
Blackburn with Darwen, Fylde, Hyndburn, Rossendale and Wyre councils had pushed for a three-authority option that would have bound together: Blackpool, Fylde, Lancaster and Wyre; Chorley, Preston, South Ribble and West Lancashire; and Blackburn with Darwen, Burnley, Hyndburn, Pendle, Ribble Valley and Rossendale.
Mr. Reed noted that the suggestion offered “some strengths in terms of balance between councils”, but implied it fell down over issues of local identity.
Blackpool Council had suggested an alternative four-way split to the one selected, which would have seen it merge with Preston, Fylde and a small part of western Wyre, with the other authorities made up of: Chorley, South Ribble and West Lancashire; Blackburn with Darwen, Burnley, Hyndburn, Pendle, southernmost Ribble Valley and Rossendale; and Lancaster, most of Ribble Valley [excluding Clitheroe and southernmost areas] and eastern and northern Wyre.
This was the only option that involved dismantling some existing council areas so that they would not transfer wholesale to the same new authority. The government had warned that there would need to be significant justification for it to approve such an approach.
Steve Reed suggested there were “imbalances” in this proposal and that any claimed benefits of breaking up current local authority footprints would not “outweigh the risks from the added complexity” of doing so.
Meanwhile, Burnley and Pendle councils had proposed a five-council split, with Burnley being particularly keen to avoid any tie-up with Blackburn. Their suggested authorities would have combined: Blackburn with Darwen, Hyndburn, Ribble Valley; Burnley, Rossendale and Pendle; Lancaster and Wyre; Blackpool, Fylde and Preston; and Chorley, South Ribble and West Lancashire;
The Secretary of State said little about this proposal other than he believed the suggested council areas would be “less recognised by residents”.
What happens next?
Steve Reed’s decision will now need to go through the legislative process required to bring the new councils into effect.
That Parliamentary approval – involving the creation of a ‘structural changes order’ – is expected to extend into next year.
Last month, Lancashire’s leaders agreed that a “single implementation team” should be established to oversee the delivery of local government reorganisation in Lancashire between now and April 2028. That group will be headed by Lancashire County Council chief executive Mark Wynn, with deputies from each of the new council areas.
What is changing and why?
The overhaul will end the current ’two-tier’ system that operates across most of Lancashire.
At the moment, responsibility for local services is divided between the county council and the dozen district authorities – Burnley, Chorley, Fylde, Hyndburn, Lancaster, Pendle, Preston, Ribble Valley, Rossendale, South Ribble, West Lancashire and Wyre.
County Hall looks after major services including adult and children’s social care, roads, transport and schools, while the districts take care of the likes of waste collection, housing, parks and the majority of planning applications.
The new arrangement will create a handful of standalone – or ‘unitary’ – authorities that deliver all local services in their areas, as is already the case for Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwen councils.
The current set-up has been in place in Lancashire since the last major shake-up in 1974, with the only shift since being when Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwen became unitaries in 1998.
