- Stay Connected
Socialize
Abraham Lincoln
If given the truth, the people can be depended upon to meet any national crisis...
Guildford news...
for Guildford people, brought to you by Guildford reporters - Guildford's own news service
Letter: Residents Should Seize the Chance to Comment on Local Government Reorganisation
Published on: 30 Mar, 2025
Updated on: 30 Mar, 2025
From John Harrison
In response to: The Future of Local Government: Your Views Are Important, Residents Told
When given the opportunity to comment on proposed local government reorganisation, residents should seize it. It’s a shame to see such cynical comments from others.
The report Shaping Surrey’s Future – mentioned in The Dragon article prepared by Surrey’s local councils examines the different characteristics of the different parts of the county, connectivity between them, their dependance on London (as a market for their services and employment for instance), current cooperation, division by Surrey of services, such as children and adults care, boundaries for other public services, eg police divisions, and so on.
It concludes that the northern districts bounding London, could form one cohesive unitary authority more urbanised and suburban in character, with the rest of the county split into East and West.
The argument for three unitaries is that it reflects the different characteristics of the county. The argument for two is that it might be marginally cheaper, but the cost savings predicted of one or two per cent of the Surrey budget are within the margin of error.
Much of the saving claimed by Surrey County Council is based on the dubious assertion that two authorities would require about 550 new middle management positions and three authorities would require about 1100. However, local authorities already cooperate, and so many services could cover more than one unitary thereby reducing the need for the extra management tier.
With only limited predicted savings between the different options. The one that gives the best service to residents is the one we should go for.
And whether there are two or three new councils, it will be crucial to establish locally elected parish councils where these do not currently exist, for instance, in the residential ring around Guildford town Centre, as well as for the town itself when it would be called a town council.
These bodies can then reflect the views of residents and be consulted on local issues. Parish councils, incidentally, are nothing to do with ecclesiastical bodies, but are the lowest tier of local government, closest to the people.
So please take the trouble to examine the proposals and understand the reason for the recommendations, and then make your comments.
Share This Post
Responses to Letter: Residents Should Seize the Chance to Comment on Local Government Reorganisation
Leave a Comment Please see our comments policy. All comments are moderated and may take time to appear. Full names, or at least initial and surname, must be given.
See: Tumbling Bay Footbridge: National Trust Says It Is ‘Committed to Finding a Resolution’
Barbara Ford
March 30, 2025 at 6:11 pm
Very sensible advice (which I have taken). There is no point refusing to participate and leaving others to make the decision because you don’t like either option: just choose the lesser of the two evils.
David Roberts
March 30, 2025 at 7:56 pm
John Harrison is completely right. So too is Bernard Quoroll (“Planned Council Reorganisation Means More Nails in the Local Democracy Coffin“).
The centralisation of Surrey’s twelve county, borough and district councils into no more than two or three unitaries is the complete opposite of “devolution”. It drastically reduces democratic accountability on day-to-day matters. This cannot be rectified by a directly elected Surrey Mayor exercising one-person strategic oversight. It can only be offset by a comprehensive network or genuinely local parish/town councils with powers and resources to match.
So why do none of our politicians propose this? Even the Lib Dems and local parties are silent. It’s time to reverse the contempt in which knowledgeable and hard-working parish councils are routinely held by the bigger councils and their salaried officers. (For the latest example, look no further than the Dragon’s report, “View of Parish Council Overruled by GBC Planning Committee“.)
By scrapping May’s county elections in the teeth of general public outrage, Labour and the Conservatives have jointly cast aside the expressed will of residents. Given the wide range of possible local government structures, the reductive choice now on offer – between two or three unitaries – is a parody of consultative democracy.
It is also incompatible with Reigate & Banstead’s quite reasonable preference for forming a unitary authority with Crawley along the M23/Gatwick corridor. This drives a coach and horses through historic county divisions already negated long ago by the expansion of London.
Is there even still a thing called “Surrey” at all? If Lambeth and Kingston are out, why should Farnham, Stanwell and Oxted still be in? We need to stop tinkering and get back to the drawing board, offering residents a range of modern, rational, radical boundary alternatives to choose from.
John Cooke
April 1, 2025 at 5:48 pm
Great points and very well made.
George Potter
April 2, 2025 at 8:34 pm
Mr Roberts says: “So why do none of our politicians propose this? Even the Lib Dems and local parties are silent. It’s time to reverse the contempt in which knowledgeable and hard-working parish councils are routinely held by the bigger councils and their salaried officers. (For the latest example, look no further than The Dragon’s report, “View of Parish Council Overruled by GBC Planning Committee“.)”
This is where Mr Roberts would be wrong. There was considerable opposition from Lib Dems to the cancellation of elections and the rush into reorganisation without consultation, including public letters signed by every Lib Dem council leader and every Lib Dem MP in Surrey. Unfortunately you may not be aware of these because our local media failed to report on them at the time, despite having been sent press releases.
However, at this point in time the government has made clear that unitarisation is now happening on their timetable, whether we like it or not, which is why our focus now has to be on getting the best possible outcome under the circumstances.
But, yet again, a press release issued not two weeks ago by the local Lib Dem council group on this very topic was conspicuous by its absence in our local press, including The Dragon. Unfortunately, despite this being one of the most momentous issues in local politics for decades, our local media has shown through its coverage that it is not up to the challenge.
I’d also note that the most recent GBC council meeting on this topic saw a public question from a member of the public (and former council leader) on the town council topic, which received an answer that this option was being ‘actively investigated’ and yet this has also not been reported on in the local media. Why local journalism is asleep at the wheel at this most critical juncture I do not know.
George Potter is the Lib Dem borough Councillor for Burpham
Editor’s response: A statement from the Lib Dem Borough Council was included in the article The Future of Local Government: Your Views Are Important, Residents Told published on March 27. A search on “devolution” (see here) shows we have published 25 articles on the subject including a 30-minute interview with a county councillor setting out the choices and situation, at that time, in detail. We agree this is an important story and our coverage is far more than we have given to any other topic.
David Roberts
April 4, 2025 at 6:01 pm
I don’t think the press is to blame. I was specifically asking why no politician of any party was championing the idea of a newly empowered layer of parish/town councils to compensate for the drastic centralisation of power into two or three unitary councils.
When Cllr Potter last replied to this question on Nextdoor, he suggested that parish councils in Guildford borough lacked the appetite for this, even compared with Waverley where he said they run one or two services like leisure centres.
I would modestly point out that, without complete geographical coverage (including Guildford town) and appropriate resourcing, volunteer parish councillors will always be treated as irrelevant by senior councils and will find it hard to take on more responsibility. And, while GBC dithers over the limited issue of a Guildford town council, the government is charging ahead with a massive centralisation of Surrey’s government, leaving democracy at a parish level generally in such a dire state that elections are rare and councillor positions often cannot be filled.
If the Lib Dems want better publicity, I suggest they stop “actively investigating” these issues and start proposing some actual policies.