By Chris Caulfield

local democracy reporter

Today marks the final opportunity to have your say on the future of how services are delivered ahead of major local government changes that will spell the end of Surrey and its boroughs and districts.

Last year the Government announced the potential merger of Surrey County Council and the 11 lower councils.

How it will be reshaped is still under consideration, with residents invited to have their say during a seven-week consultation due to end today.

The leading proposals would do away with the old two-tier system where the county delivers services such as education and transport and the boroughs are in charge of matters such as local planning and waste collection.

Surrey County Council has led the charge with a plan to split the region in two – with Guildford, Waverley, Surrey Heath, Runnymede, Spelthorne and Woking Borough Councils on one side, and Elmbridge, Mole Valley, Reigate and Banstead, Tandridge, and Epsom and Ewell on the other.

The two unitary council solution proposed by SCC

It argues this would be the cheapest way to bring the benefits of devolution. Opponents say it creates councils too disparate from their residents and in the case of a new West Surrey, an area born in financial distress.

Woking Borough Council is bankrupt with debts approaching £2.6billion. Spelthorne and Runnymede are also among the most heavily indebted councils in the country and both have been under close government watch over the state of their finances recently.

The other option being consulted on would create three new councils. The argument here is it brings many of the same benefits of the two-tier system but, by being smaller, retains a greater sense of place.

The proposed three unitary authorities for Surrey (image RBC)

This option delivers a strong correlation between adult social care and children’s social services budgets and key funding sources, indicating that the geography will create authorities that are the best placed to deliver high quality services to residents.

It is argued that the new councils will also experience comparable levels of population, land area, total household numbers, homelessness, house building targets, waste collection, business activity, pupil distribution, number of birth and death registrations, and total miles of public highways.

What Surrey County Council and two district and borough councils, say about splitting the region into an East West model

Surrey County Council’s leader councillor, Tim Oliver, said :”This proposal will create stronger, simpler and more sustainable councils, and will give Surrey an even brighter future.

“The evidence is clear that two unitary councils, in partnership with a new Mayor for Surrey,
would bring the most benefits.

“Two unitary councils will bring together and simplify services currently delivered by the district and borough councils.

“Combined with the current county council services, and with lower disaggregation risks, our proposal will deliver more efficient services, better partnership working, millions of pounds
in reduced costs year on year and clarity for residents when accessing services.

“Most importantly, this proposal strengthens local community engagement.

“Connections within, and between, communities must be meaningful and tailored to the towns and villages residents relate to.

“We’re proposing the creation of community level boards across Surrey to include representation from councillors, health, police, voluntary groups, town and parish councils, residents associations and other stakeholders.

“They will focus on the things that matter most and have an impact in the places they serve.”

What the other nine borough and district councils say about the three-district model

“East Surrey, West Surrey and North Surrey, are more than just lines on a map.

“They reflect the county’s real economic and human geography. They reflect the lived reality of our residents, and the practical considerations of our businesses.

“When we examined the evidence, we found that two unitary authorities would be remote from the communities they serve, disconnected from residents and partners, reactive in service delivery, and reliant on outdated means of engagement to overcome a significant democratic deficit.

“But the impact is greater than just identity.

“There is no two-unitary option for Surrey that would not divide and fragment the county’s recognised three functional economic areas, baking in strategic inconsistency and economic incoherence from the start, and so significantly hindering economic growth.

“The decision between two or three unitary authorities is more than one of administrative convenience or one driven by purely financial considerations.

“It represents a choice between a system of local government that genuinely fosters neighbourhood and community empowerment, local decision-making and strong place leadership, and one that lacks the institutional and strategic clarity necessary to drive growth and embrace truly local decision making.

“Our proposed model of three unitary authorities demonstrates our commitment to decentralising institutional power and empowering communities.

“This structure will enable the adoption and acceleration of innovative participative methods, enhancing local decision-making and community engagement at the neighbourhood level.

“Our proposal includes examples of successful initiatives already undertaken in Surrey, as well as those from other regions, which illustrate the potential for meaningful community empowerment.”

Next steps

At 5pm the consultation shuts with a final decision on how to proceed expected to be made by the end of 2025.

If the Government decides to go ahead with merging Surrey, the first thing to look out for is the passing to legislation to allow the creation of new councils.

The timetable that is expected to be followed with then hold a shadow election in 2026 that would run alongside the existing system for a year before taking over in 2027.

See report here: https://shapingsurreysfuture.commonplace.is/