local government shake up

1966_and_all_that

Well-known member
On the basis of the flimsy information you've made available ( not a criticism of you), it looks like a recipe for political mayhem. I think the Tory called it right (I never thought I'd write that!), there would be massive infighting. In the Fylde & Lancaster area, would Blackpool and Lancaster dominate? Would rural areas lose out? There are bound to be job losses. What guarantees underpin the Central Govt. funding settlements? Would it be the current funding for Lancs, Blackburn & Blackpool redrawn and if so, on what basis?
Now is not the time anyway. The UK economy is going into a Covid recession and the last thing we need is a political and structural reorganisation during it.
 

RUSTY_2_STANDS

Well-known member
Presumably doesn't effect Blackpool.
It'll affect both Lancashire Unitary authorities, Blackpool and Blackburn. All councils dissolved, including the county council, and three 'super' authorities formed. Blackpool merged with Wyre, Fylde, Lancaster and Ribble Valley. Another authority in East Lancs and one taking in Preston and the south. So one tier of local government for Lancashire replaces the current two tier system.
 

Plumbs

Well-known member
If it improves accountability then go for it.
I have no great love of local council politics
I'd be looking at gaining city status for Blackpool because I think its a genuine aim. That would bring great prestige to the town and help drag it up to former glories.
 

bfcpete

Well-known member
One thing to consider is that the big cities (and city regions) have been favoured by successive governments in terms of resources and jobs with towns and rural areas left behind in comparison. If you are going to compete for the resources, investment and jobs then you need a bigger, strategic councils to counter the cities.
It also means you could make some efficiencies, by reducing duplication in terms of numbers of councillors, CXs etc and have a more standardised refuse collection that used a standsrd size collection vehicle and routes that make more sense across existing boundaries. And you could have some better local engagement by having some budgets delegated lto local priorities via to citizen engagement panels.
 

Mexboroseasider

Well-known member
I can’t really see the case for it to be honest. Seems a bit like moving pieces around a board for the sake of it.

And what have Blackpool and Lancaster got in common to be lumped together?
 

basilrobbie

Well-known member
I am a fan of unitary Government, the fact that we don't have it throughout the country is a quirk of history, more than anything else.

This proposal seems to me to be a messy hybrid that would have only a marginal benefit in terms of efficiency whilst doing almost nothing to improve accountability. And it will create structures that local people struggle to identify with.
 

bfcpete

Well-known member
I am a fan of unitary Government, the fact that we don't have it throughout the country is a quirk of history, more than anything else.

This proposal seems to me to be a messy hybrid that would have only a marginal benefit in terms of efficiency whilst doing almost nothing to improve accountability. And it will create structures that local people struggle to identify with.
Most people could identify with 'Lancashire'. Needs to be big enough enough to have strateegic clout. In your London, whilst you have unitary London Boroughs, many are too small
 
Top