Opinion: What’s in a Name?

Published on: 19 Sep, 2026
Updated on: 19 Sep, 2026

By Cllr Jane Austin

Conservative opposition leader, West Surrey Shadow Authority

There is a proposed new name for our new unitary authority – but no-one has even checked this is what our residents want.

In late July, West Surrey councillors debated a motion brought forward by the Liberal Democrat administration proposing that the new authority should change its name from West Surrey Council to “West Surrey and South Middlesex Council”.

The new name would be a major change for our new council, yet it was proposed without any public consultation or attempt to establish whether residents actually want it.

Conservative and Independent councillors therefore proposed referring the matter for public consultation before any decision was made. The Liberal Democrat administration voted that down, choosing instead to press ahead without first seeking the views of the nearly 700,000 residents who will be served by the new authority.

Cllr Austin speaking at a West Surrey Shadow Authority meeting.

Earlier this year Parliament established the new authorities as East Surrey Council and West Surrey Council. They may not be inspiring names, but they are clear, simple and tell residents exactly what they are.

West Surrey Council will serve around 685,000 residents across six, very different, boroughs: Guildford, Waverley, Woking, Surrey Heath, Runnymede and Spelthorne – a diverse authority with many proud local identities.

…it was proposed without any public consultation or attempt to establish whether residents actually want it”

Only one of those six boroughs has historic links to the southern part of Middlesex, a county abolished in 1965. Many residents will struggle to understand why one area’s former county should appear in the name of a council representing the whole of West Surrey.

In my own conversations and correspondence received from residents across Guildford and Waverley, the vast majority have little idea what Middlesex even refers to, still less any wish to see it appear in the name of their new council. That is not a criticism of Spelthorne’s connection to its own history – but it does illustrate how far this decision was from reflecting a genuinely West Surrey-wide view.

Parts of Spelthorne Borough (shown in red) were once in Middlesex. Wikipedia

Quite apart from being rather a mouthful, changing the Council’s name without consulting residents is a worrying sign of the Liberal Democrats’ priorities. We were promised open and accountable local government, yet this major change is being pursued without evidence of West Surrey-wide public support – and instead suggests political posturing is being prioritised.

I have enormous respect for those who have campaigned to preserve the historic identity of Middlesex, and I understand why some residents in Spelthorne may feel a connection to it. That heritage deserves to be celebrated through civic events, local history, museums and community organisations – not, in my view, by renaming our new Council.

My understanding is that this has been brought forward by the Lib Dems following political agreements reached during the Liberal Democrat leadership contest, with changing the council’s name forming part of the deal to secure the support of some Spelthorne councillors in the council’s leadership election.

The timing is also telling. Once West Surrey Council is fully vested, changing its name would require public consultation and a two-thirds majority of the council. Bringing the proposal forward now avoids that process, allowing the Shadow Authority instead to ask the Government to change the name before Vesting Day.

Above all, it must tackle around £4.5 billion of inherited debt…”

Following the vote, the Liberal Democrat administration wrote to the Government requesting the change and, at the time of writing, no response has been received. I question whether those pushing for the name change are confident the consultative democratic process would deliver their desired outcome.

But where does this end? If we recognise one area’s history in the council’s title, should Guildford, Waverley or Woking also be included? What about the Surrey Hills, the Wey Valley or any number of other historic or geographical identities? A council’s name should unite the authority, not risk elevating one community’s heritage above another’s.

My further concern is that pressing ahead without consulting residents exposes the council to unnecessary cost, confusion and ridicule. For me – pushing to change the council name is window dressing.

Residents want to know how services will be protected, how council tax will be spent, how the inherited debt will be managed and whether the new authority will deliver better outcomes than the councils it replaces.”

The Shadow Authority has just over six months until Vesting Day to bring together thousands of staff, over 500 services lines, millions of pounds of assets into a single council. Yet West Surrey has still to appoint its permanent senior leadership, agree governance arrangements or develop a long-term financial strategy – and is already months behind counterpart East Surrey.

Above all, it must tackle around £4.5 billion of inherited debt, yet we have still heard concerningly little from the Liberal Democrats about how they intend to address it.

I have yet to meet a resident who tells me that the biggest issue facing West Surrey is the wording on the council’s headed paper. Residents want to know how services will be protected, how council tax will be spent, how the inherited debt will be managed and whether the new authority will deliver better outcomes than the councils it replaces. Those are the questions that deserve our attention.