Business leaders have called on councils in Staffordshire to “reach a swift consensus” on local government reorganisation, warning that uncertainty risks holding the county back.
Staffordshire County Council has revealed new proposals to divide the county into two new unitary councils – one covering the west, the other the east – which would replace the existing two-tier system.
Under the plan, an East Staffordshire authority would deliver services for 689,784 people in Staffordshire Moorlands, East Staffordshire, Lichfield, Tamworth and Stoke-on-Trent, while a West Staffordshire council would cover 487,794 residents in Newcastle-under-Lyme, Stafford, Cannock Chase and South Staffordshire.
Staffordshire Chambers of Commerce has urged decision-makers to embed business perspectives in whatever model is chosen.
Interim deputy CEO Tom Nadin said: “Local government reorganisation presents both significant challenges and valuable opportunities for our region.
“It is therefore essential that local authorities reach a swift consensus on the way forward, ensuring that Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire are not left behind from the benefits this process could unlock.
“Embedding business perspectives within any new governance structures will be critical to attracting investment, addressing inequalities in public funding, and creating a stable, business-friendly environment that underpins sustainable economic growth, and the Chamber stands ready to support, once consensus is reached.”
The county council’s cabinet will consider the East-West option on Wednesday, 17 September, ahead of submitting a full business case to Government in November.
County council leader Ian Cooper said: “Local Government Reorganisation could help to streamline and simplify council services, making council taxpayers’ money work harder. Unrealistic timescales and Government guidelines risk undermining this but we will put forward the strongest possible business case in November to try to make the best of this situation for Staffordshire’s residents and businesses.”
Deputy leader Martin Murray, pictured above, the cabinet’s lead on reorganisation, added: “In an ideal world, we would avoid the burden of Stoke-on-Trent City Council’s financial distress on people across the wider county, but the Government are likely to dismiss any option that does not help to solve these long running financial problems or meet their wider criteria for change.
“We want the best for our residents and businesses – this isn’t about politics, it’s about giving Staffordshire the best chance of success in the circumstances. Of the options that meet the Government’s criteria, analysis is showing that an East-West option gives the best chance of success for both new councils.”
But the move has been criticised by Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council leader Simon Tagg, who said the case for breaking up the existing two-tier system had not been made.
He said: “Councils in Staffordshire are already working well together for their communities under the current system – and we have just learned that the Government hasn’t properly worked out the real costs of this forced reorganisation.
“I still see no convincing argument that this change would mean cheaper, better services for residents, or provide more accountability for taxpayers. With Angela Rayner’s resignation and the sacking of the Local Government ministerial team the architects of this plan are gone, the Government is in turmoil and it’s time for it to think again about forced reorganisation.”
Newcastle has put forward its own options should change be imposed, including remaining standalone, merging with Staffordshire Moorlands or forming a West Staffordshire authority along the M6 corridor. The borough is ‘firmly opposed’ to the creation of a North Staffordshire Authority, which would see Newcastle-under-Lyme joined with Stoke-on-Trent and the Staffordshire Moorlands
While opposing forced change, the borough council supports creating a countywide Strategic Authority to oversee transport, investment and infrastructure.
Cllr Tagg added: “There are two separate issues here. We think the creation of a Strategic Authority looking at transport, investment and infrastructure for the whole region has merit, because it has potential to bring powers and funding from London.
“Clearly the case for the Strategic Authority to have an Elected Mayor has not been made, and given experiences of elected mayors locally, would not be seen as a necessary or positive step. However, Strategic Authorities will not be responsible for delivering day-to-day services such as collecting the bins and at a local level there is no demand – and no convincing argument – to rip up the existing system of local government in favour of giving residents something less than they already have.”
Consultation on the proposals is continuing.
