Reader TTS

Feedback from the Government on proposals to merge Warwickshire's six largest councils is expected to be delayed by a month due to the county's alphabetical position. This

information came to light during this week's update by Stratford-on-Avon District Council chief executive David Buckland to councillors responsible for monitoring progress. Mr Buckland

expressed frustration and occasional sarcasm towards elected officials on the district's overview and scrutiny panel about the lack of feedback from the Ministry of Housing, Communities

and Local Government (MHCLG). READ MORE: POPULAR PUB CLOSES WITH EMOTIONAL MESSAGE It was this department that initiated local government reform in December 2024, instructing areas with

council services divided over two tiers – county councils with districts and boroughs underneath – to develop plans for unitary authorities to handle everything. If implemented, it will

result in the dissolution of Warwickshire's six existing councils. After much back-and-forth, Warwickshire's initial proposal saw Warwickshire County Council advocate for a single

new authority to cover the current county area, while the five districts and boroughs – North Warwickshire, Nuneaton & Bedworth, Rugby, Warwick and Stratford-on-Avon – argued for two

unitaries, north and south, to be considered as well. The interim proposals were submitted as a complete package by the March 21 deadline, with feedback expected to reach all six councils

around the crossover of April and May. However, Mr Buckland informed councillors: "The latest on that is a message I received yesterday (Tuesday, May 27) to say we wouldn't get our

feedback until June 3, but we are promised it on that date. "I am an accountant so I have worked out that they have had our homework for 74 days now. They only gave us 44 days to do it

in the first place. "I have written to the director general who has responsibility for this (MHCLG civil servant Will Garton) to express my disappointment that it has taken so long to

get feedback on such an important issue." When asked if Warwickshire's feedback was the only one delayed, Mr Buckland responded: "We are not alone. Please don't have a go

at me but they are doing it in alphabetical order." This method means Derbyshire has already received its feedback, with Councillor Stuart Keighley (Lib Dem, Long Marston) keen to

discern any insights. A key point of interest is the government's preference for new councils to cater to populations exceeding 500,000, which seems to nudge Warwickshire towards a

single unitary authority. "Derbyshire's submission talks about options below 500,000," Mr Buckland noted. He highlighted that there are six criteria to be met, one being

cost-related, and stated: "There are six criteria we need to respond to, one of those is around costs and a single unitary in Warwickshire will be more cost effective than two

unitaries. "We were never going to get a no at this point, it is only feedback so they are not discounting any of the solutions. "We do know from the Surrey feedback that there

wasn't a proposal for a single (council) but they were asked to (include) that by the government as part of the process so it does look like bigger is considered to be better.

"That is of course only one of the six criteria. They are not ruling them out but there hasn't been a massive softening on this issue of 500,000." Funding information remains

forthcoming.... Details are yet to be received regarding the extent of financial support councils will receive to facilitate a transition set to conclude by 2028. Late March saw the

government pledge £7.6 million to aid the 21 council areas impacted. "They still haven't told us how much of that money will be given to each local authority to help with the

preparation of formal submissions," Mr Buckland commented. An even split would amount to about £380,000 for each county area - "As I mentioned last time, divided equally that would

be around £380,000 for each of the (county) areas – a bit galling for Surrey who have already had to submit their final plan without any backing." he observed. Mr Buckland also

confirmed the planned unveiling of the funding strategy for June 3 and questioned: "I don't understand why £7.6 million divided by 21 is taking so long." What's next? The

Stratford district's working group is geared up to assemble on June 4 to mull over crucial details, provided that planned timescales are honoured, with a subsequent gathering slated

for a week later. This occasion will be marked by the arrival of a pivotal report from Deloitte, commissioned collectively by Warwickshire's five districts and boroughs to evaluate the

merits of moving towards one or two unitary authorities. In this strategic planning, the cabinet—a Liberal Democrat cohort with stewardship over Stratford district's significant service

sectors—is set to plump for its preferred option on July 7, to be followed by an all-encompassing council discussion and resolution on July 14. Though the district's Lib Dems appear to

lean towards advocating a division along north-south lines, the final decision will not remain insulated within party precincts—it will instead be subjected to a county-wide public inquiry,

confirmed Mr Buckland to begin "over the summer for at least eight weeks". Post-consultation, the overview and scrutiny committee will deliberate on the views collected on

November 5, laying the groundwork for the submission's conclusive endorsement by both cabinet and full council on November 17, which will then be presented to the government, the

determining arbitrator in the process. Regarding potential delays arising from setbacks, Mr Buckland has sought guidance from MHCLG on whether submission dates might extend, reporting back,

"I have asked MHCLG whether there is going to be a delay to the submission dates because there has been a month of delay to our feedback, the only response I have had is that they are

thinking about it." Regardless, preparations proceed under the assumption that submissions are due on: "We are still working on the basis that the submission date will be November

28." Devolution and health body reforms are also on the agenda. The debate over Warwickshire's future in terms of strategic authority – the government's chosen method for

granting more local powers and funding – is heating up. Mr Buckland laid out the three potential paths for Warwickshire: aligning with the West Midlands Combined Authority, establishing its

own Cumbria-style strategic authority, or dividing north and south to join forces with Staffordshire and Leicestershire or Worcestershire and Gloucestershire, respectively. A letter has been

penned to query West Midlands mayor Richard Parker (Lab) on his stance regarding Warwickshire's potential inclusion in the existing combined authority. "Very shortly after the

publication of the white paper, the mayor is reported to have said he did not see Warwickshire within the authority. We just need to flush that out for sure," Mr Buckland remarked.

Additionally, there was talk of an upcoming review of integrated care boards (ICBs), which are tasked with organising and financing NHS services in their regions. Currently, the Coventry

& Warwickshire ICB serves the county, but Mr Buckland foresees possible consolidations as the government seeks to slash costs by "50 per cent". "The goalposts are moving

whilst we are playing the game," he commented.