Council Reorganisation: Proposals ‘Will Not Make a Jot of Difference’ Says Councillor

Published on: 12 May, 2025
Updated on: 13 May, 2025

The three-unitary proposal preferred by GBC and the majority of over 3,000 residents consulted.

By Martin Giles and Chris Caulfield, local democracy reporter

Support for a three-unitary reorganisation of Surrey’s local government structure was confirmed by Guildford Borough Council’s Executive at a meeting held last week (Wednesday, May 7) while a Conservative councillor from Farnham says what anyone thinks is irrelevant as the Government will decide.

The replacement of Surrey’s existing county, district and borough councils is necessary to comply with the Labour Government’s Devolution White Paper and Surrey County Council, which is proposing a two-unitary solution, has put Surrey in the vanguard of counties to undergo change.

The GBC Executive’s decision follows strong support for the three-unitary option in a recent survey of 3,265 residents across Surrey.

The survey, organised by nine of Surrey’s district and borough councils, found that nearly two-thirds (63 per cent) support the creation of three unitary councils, compared to just 17 per cent who favoured the alternative two-unitary model backed by Surrey County Council. The remaining 20 per cent expressed no clear preference.

The two-unitary council solution proposed by SCC

Residents also gave a clear message that a local, responsive council structure is important to them. Over 60 per cent identified “understanding of local issues” and “local decision-making” as their highest priorities. “Supporting local businesses,” “easy access to councillors,” and “creating jobs and economic growth” also ranked highly.

Cllr Julia McShane

GBC leader Julia McShane said: “We believe local government should stay local. That’s not just our view – it reflects the opinions of those who gave us vital feedback in our recent survey. Residents told us they want decisions about the borough to be made by people who understand our area. Local people want councils that are truly connected to the communities they serve.”

New unitary councils will take responsibility for the services currently delivered by Surrey County Council and the 11 district and borough councils. This would be accompanied by a new county-wide strategic authority.

The proposal was discussed by all 11 district and borough councils in Surrey last week and was formally submitted to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government on Friday, May 9.

The Waverley Council view

The proposal was also debated at Waverley Borough Council. A once-in-a-generation opportunity to “do things better” and change Surrey forever has been lost, said the leader of Waverley Borough Council as local government reorganisation plans moved forward this week.

Cllr Paul Follows

WBC leader Paul Follows (Lib Dem, Godalming Central and Ockford) said the county-imposed rush has stripped “almost all of the vision” from any plans at the altar of getting things done quickly.

Surrey County Council asked for this year’s elections to be cancelled to give officers time to meet the tight deadline – and this week its councillors backed dissolving the 11 boroughs and districts, together with the county, and replace them with two mega authorities.

But Waverley, along with Guildford and the majority of the boroughs and districts, favour a shift to three councils saying this would be a better fit for Surrey, and give residents a greater sense of place and identify – as well distribute wealth and poverty more evenly.

Cllr Liz Townsend

Cllr Liz Townsend (Lib Dem, Cranleigh and Ewhurst SCC division) said the future of local government in Surrey was at a crossroads and faced a once-in-a-generation opportunity to shape how communities are governed, services delivered and residents heard.

She said: “The impacts are so fundamental that this should have gone to the ballot box on May 1.

“Right now it’s hard to point to any immediate benefits to Waverley residents.

“They will have escalating council tax bills and the potential use of the borough’s assets to cover for others’ profligacy.

“But here is the truth, we can’t stop reorganisation, we can’t delay it and it is happening and we have a responsibility to those who we represent to do the best we can on their behalf.”

The timeline, she said, was “brutal” and “rushed”.

She added: “And we know why, the driver is the eye-watering debt, including Surrey County Council’s own debt burden of around £1.9 billion.

“This is the urgency and any delay will have a real impact on services that our residents depend on adult social care and special education.”

Cllr Carole Cockburn

Cllr Carole Cockburn (Con, Farnham Bourne) said: “This is one of the most important decisions we’ve had to make but let’s be honest, we’re not making it, it doesn’t matter what we send in.

“The sad fact is, it’s not going to make a jot of difference.

“It’s not going to make any difference what I think, what you think, what any of us thinks, it’s going to go in and it’s going to be a central government decision.

“All we can do is work with whatever comes in the mix.”

For more information on Local Government Reorganisation in Surrey, visit www.surreylgrhub.org

Responses to Council Reorganisation: Proposals ‘Will Not Make a Jot of Difference’ Says Councillor

Andrew Backhurst Reply

May 12, 2025 at 9:57 pm

I am not sure if anyone else has put forward this idea but West Surrey would work so much better with the addition of the Hampshire Blackwater Valley borough of Rushmoor, and even Fleet could be added.

These towns would complement the current West Surrey as Farnham, Camberley & Frimley already have a lot in common geographically with these towns.

These Hampshire towns have very little in common with the rest of their county and will no doubt benefit from this change. I believe it would be a great platform for an elected mayor to work with.
H Trevor Jones Reply

May 13, 2025 at 10:56 am

Andrew Backhurst’s idea, to extend Surrey into economically connected nearby Hampshire sounds good. Interestingly one of the chess leagues that Guildford plays in is the “Surrey Border League” whose clubs are all within a reasonably easy evening trip for away matches, although it does extend a bit further, as far a Basingstoke and Reading.

What would people in Hants think of the idea, and if everyone does like the idea, is there any mechanism for pursuing it?
Jim Allen Reply

May 13, 2025 at 10:42 pm

Putting the finances to one side, what about the roads, the rubbish collection, social services and education?

I would say smaller government areas for refuse collection and Social Services. The best size for Education services is debatable and roads/transport needs a bigger area of responsibility to allow more strategic planning.

But nothing says to me two or three unitaries or joining with parts of Hampshire or Sussex.

Where is the perceived need for any change? The bigger the organisation the more chance of badly written contracts failing the community.

Someone said ants in a lawn waiting for the lawn to be mowed; I’d say the wise barn owls waiting for the trees in which they have nested for years to be cut down!
John Ferns Reply

May 13, 2025 at 10:47 pm

I very much support Andrew Backhurst’s suggestion to align West Surrey with neighbouring parts of Hampshire — particularly the Blackwater Valley borough of Rushmoor, and potentially Fleet. These areas not only share close geographical proximity, but also benefit from a number of existing and practical cross-boundary synergies.

In education, for example, there is already a natural pattern of pupils crossing the River Blackwater to attend Ash Manor School, just 300 metres away. In healthcare, strong integration exists through the ICB centred on Frimley Park Hospital — which is the true hospital of choice for most residents in this area. The Royal Surrey, while an excellent institution, is further afield, and its well-known parking challenges do it no favours. The bus network, by contrast, offers a direct route to Frimley Park with no changes.

Even in policing, there’s a case for change. At present, response teams are deployed from Guildford, whereas Aldershot offers a nearer and equally capable alternative.

Quite simply, here in Ash and Tongham we have far more in common with our neighbours in Hampshire than with the Guildfordonians and Horsleyites — culturally, practically, and in terms of daily life. All of this underscores the case for realignment, and it’s easy to see how an elected mayor could make effective use of such a coherent and connected area.

But I suspect it may now be too late for any of this to be seriously considered by the powers that be — whether at parish, borough, or county level.
George Potter Reply

May 14, 2025 at 5:36 pm

Putting all of the Blackwater Valley under one unitary council, or at least under one regional mayor, is exactly the sort of obvious thing you should be doing if you are choosing to reorganise local government.

Unfortunately, however, it has been mooted in reorganisation discussions but is simply not going to happen because of the way in which the Government has chosen to conduct reorganisation.

Their guidance is that they want to use existing councils as building blocks, that they don’t want regional mayors to split apart existing police areas, and that each area (at the county level) should get to decide which areas they want to be grouped with.

So because Aldershot is in Hampshire, and because Hampshire County Council wants to create a Greater Hampshire Mayoralty (including Southampton and the Isle of Wight) within its existing county boundaries, there is no opportunity for the Blackwater Valley areas to be moved either to Surrey or to Hampshire to join them up, especially since that would mean splitting up existing districts (Ash coming away from Guildford, Farnham coming away from Waverley, etc).

If the reorganisation process weren’t being rushed through at breakneck speed then there probably would be time to look at splitting off parts of existing councils and redrawing the map properly to reflect practical human geography, but because this all has to be done toute suite there just isn’t the time to do the much more careful and considered redrawing of boundaries that would actually make more practical sense in the long run.

The Blackwater Valley was left split by the 1974 reorganisation, due to that same desire to rush things through, and it looks certain to be split by the 2026 reorganisation. Maybe another 50 years from now common sense will finally prevail, though I have my doubts.

George Potter is a Lib Dem borough and county councillor.