local democracy reporter
The leader of Surrey County Council is set to write to the Government calling for the 2025 elections to be postponed in order to allow authorities to focus on merging under devolution plans.
In December the Government announced its vision to merge councils in Surrey and get rid of its 11 boroughs and districts.
There would also be a directly elected mayor.
Leader of Surrey County Council Tim Oliver (Con, Weybridge) plans to formally ask the government to postpone county elections until May 2026 to give the councils time to “put together proposals for local government reform necessary to unlock further devolution for Surrey”.
Not everyone has welcomed the delay, with Surrey Heath Borough Council set to discuss a motion rejecting the county council leader’s proposals and allow the May 2025 poll to go ahead “in the interest of democracy and hearing the residents’ voice”.
Devolution plans are part of sweeping changes to how services are run as Downing Street looks to reshape local government.
See also: Insights – The Band on the Titanic Strikes Up ‘Devolution!’ – Part 1
Surrey currently operates under a two-tier system with the county council overseeing things such as education, transport and fire with the boroughs and districts focused local planning matters, refuse collection and housing.
Devolution would do away with this system and instead create single unitary authorities, arguing it is more cost-effective.
In a draft letter set to be approved at an extraordinary meeting next week, Cllr Oliver writes that he shares the ambitions for boosting the country’s economic prospects and reforms to strengthen the efficiency and effectiveness of public services.
He said it was clear that reforming local government would unlock the full benefits of further devolution for the county.
The letter reads: “The current two-tier structure of local government in Surrey, comprising 12 sovereign local authorities, is fragmented and in a number of areas inefficient which inevitably diverts resources away from delivering the services that residents rightly expect.
“I believe reorganisation would provide more streamlined and cost-effective services for Surrey, enabling us to achieve further efficiencies and deliver better outcomes for our residents and communities.
“Local government reorganisation is a crucial stepping stone to further devolution for Surrey, to enable our communities to take more control of their own destinies.”
Cllr Oliver said the county already delivered more than £50 billion in gross value added every year, but further and deeper devolution could lead to even better returns.
The letter adds: “I am therefore writing to ask you to exercise your ministerial powers to lay the necessary legislation to postpone the county council elections in Surrey, which are due to take place in May 2025.
“This will give us the time to work with the leaders of Surrey’s district and borough councils to put together proposals for local government reform that are necessary to unlock further devolution for Surrey.”
New unitary elections could then take place in 2026, and a mayoral election in 2027.
Cllr Oliver argues that the delay would also allow time to determine how to deal with the “significant financial risk of the level of debt currently held across the Surrey local government footprint.”
Woking Borough Council is currently bankrupt with deficit of more than £1 billion and debts of about £2billion, while Surrey County Council and Spelthorne Borough Council both have debts of more than £1billion. How the debt would be passed on to new unitary authorities has yet to be decided.
Any proposals, Cllr Oliver adds, will need to adequately consider how to ensure the sustainable operation of any authority in the absence of exceptional financial support from the Government or a level of write-off.
There is no expectation that the electorate will be consulted on the new arrangements.
Proposed Timetable for Devolution
10 January 2025 | Letter submitted to Minister of State requesting election postponement |
Before March 2025 | Minister’s response to letter received |
March 2025 | Interim Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) proposal submitted to government |
May 2025 | Full LGR proposal submitted to government |
May – June 2025 | Government evaluates proposal(s) received for LGR and makes a decision on whether to proceed on single proposal, or to consult further on one or more proposals |
July 2025 | Government consultation with affected bodies on LGR proposal(s) |
Autumn 2025 | Government decision on LGR anticipated, which begins statutory process to establish new council(s) |
January 2026 | Parliamentary process begins to lay Statutory Instruments |
May 2026 | Elections to shadow unitary authority/ies |
Spring 2027 | New unitary/ies ‘go live’ |
Spring 2027 or 2028 | Mayoral elections and mayoral strategic authority ‘go live’, with the preparations for the establishment of the Mayoral Strategic Authority (MSA) taking place throughout 2026/27, or Surrey joins MSA with neighbours |
This website is published by The Guildford Dragon NEWS
Contact: Martin Giles mgilesdragon@gmail.com
Log in- Posts - Add New - Powered by WordPress - Designed by Gabfire Themes
Mike Smith
January 3, 2025 at 2:18 pm
So the UK government’s “English Devolution White Paper” doesn’t actually mention devolution for England? How odd.
David Roberts
January 3, 2025 at 5:49 pm
A laughable ploy by a discredited incumbent party to prolong its time in office. The government should reject Cllr Oliver’s proposal and let us chuck the Tories out of Surrey County Council in May as predicted.
Graham Wright
January 4, 2025 at 9:50 am
Is this Tory councillors desperately trying to hold on to their jobs?
Jim Allen
January 4, 2025 at 11:03 am
We need a Surrey referendum to decide if we want psudo devolution in the first place. That’s how democracy works doesn’t it?
Councillors are legally elected for four years. I don’t think they have a mandate for five.
I suggest as an interim measure all councillors in Surrey who disagree with the basic principle proposed resign on block, both borough and county and force by-elections.
But are they principled enough?