Agenda item

Report No: COU/SE/17/009

Council considered Report No: COU/SE/17/009, which sought approval for a draft business case for establishing a new single district-level council for west Suffolk.

On 30 May 2017, both St Edmundsbury Borough Council’s (SEBC) and Forest Heath District Council’s (FHDC) Cabinets commissioned officers to test the option of a single council for west Suffolk against potential alternatives. The report provided that analysis including a draft business case proposed by the Leaders of FHDC and SEBC for creating a new, single district-level council for west Suffolk, as shown in Appendix A.

Subject to approval at this and FHDC’s respective Council meeting on 14 June 2017, a public and stakeholder engagement exercise would be undertaken on the option for a single district-level council over summer 2017 to ascertain whether support was shown from communities, businesses and partner organisations in west Suffolk for the proposals, before presenting a final business case to both FHDC and SEBC’s Councils in September 2017.

Members also noted that FHDC and SEBC’s Cabinets had previously approved the establishment of an informal ‘Future Governance Steering Group’, which would comprise FHDC and SEBC Members that would report to both authorities’ Leaders.  The Group would engage with both Councils’ minority Group Leaders and Overview and Scrutiny Committee Chairmen to help inform debate on the technical issues required in order that proposals could be presented to both Councils in autumn 2017 should the final business case be approved.

Councillor John Griffiths, Leader of the Council, drew relevant issues to the attention of Council, including the significant financial savings already made through sharing services; the principal reasons for and benefits of becoming a single council; and whilst the issues of council size and future council tax charging were important matters, this and other such level of detail would be considered later should a final business case be brought forward in September 2017.

A detailed discussion was held and whilst the majority of Members supported the proposals in principle, a number of issues were raised, including:

(a)     the practicalities of the proposed harmonisation process of council tax between FHDC and SEBC;

(b)     the potential impact on democratic representation should the number of Ward Members be reduced by a significant extent;

(c)     whether the status quo should be maintained as the Councils were already making significant financial savings through sharing services;

(d)     that the new district/borough would potentially be too large to maintain a handle on local issues;

(e)     whether more consideration should be given to a different model, such as creating a unitary authority that would take on additional responsibilities  and enable more services to be delivered by the same council; and

(f)      the proposed engagement process and whether this should have been undertaken prior to reaching this point and whether a referendum on the proposals should be held.

The consensus fully supported the proposals and acknowledged the challenges facing local government and the public sector and therefore, FHDC and SEBC needed to be proactive and find ways of ensuring they remained financially secure in times of reduced national funding.  A single council would therefore help future proof and secure sustainable financial security for the next decade and beyond.

It was noted that the creation of a single district-level council was a separate issue from wider local government reorganisation, such as seeking unitary status, and as such, would continue to work across tiers of local government and the wider public sector without the need for structural change.  However, a single district-level council would enable it to be large enough for its voice to be heard when lobbying Government  (and others) and would attract new business to the area.  In addition, a single council would strengthen the continuation of making major investment in growth for bringing new homes and jobs and provide more resilient support to residents, partners and existing businesses.

The majority of Members considered there was no threat to democracy and that residents would be sufficiently and efficiently represented throughout west Suffolk whilst retaining its own local distinctiveness.  It was also recognised that the harmonisation of council tax was achievable with good proposed transitional arrangements in place, and that holding a referendum would not be in line with Government advice.

Members finally acknowledged that much further detail would emerge following the engagement exercise and preparation of the final business case, which would then provide the opportunity for extensive discussion and debate at the appropriate time.

On the motion of Councillor John Griffiths, seconded by Councillor Patrick Chung, and duly carried it was

RESOLVED:

That:

(1)     it be agreed in principle, that the draft business case attached at Appendix A to Report No: COU/SE/17/009 demonstrates that a single district-level council for west Suffolk represents the most effective governance arrangements moving forwards;

(2)     the draft business case be tested through an engagement exercise with the public and other key stakeholders in accordance with the approach set out in paragraph 1.2 of Report No: COU/SE/17/009;

(3)     the detailed considerations required in forming a single council will continue to be assessed by the Future Governance Member Steering Group set up for this purpose, be noted; and

(4)     a further report be brought to both Councils in September 2017, containing the final business case and incorporating the outcomes of the engagement exercise.

(Councillor Andrew Speed joined the meeting during the consideration of this item.)