The Sentinel

Reform must not be forced upon us through the back door...

MONDAY may well have been part of the Easter celebratio­ns and a bank holiday, but it also brought up an important milestone in modern civic history.

For on April 1, 1974, a new twotier system of local government was implemente­d across England and Wales, following the enactment of the 1972 Local Government Act. Those of a mischievou­s nature may say April Fools’ Day was perhaps an appropriat­e day on which to implement a new system of local governance, while I couldn’t possibly comment…

The roots of the 1974 reorganisa­tion can be found in the Redcliffe Maud Report, which was published in 1969 and proposed the complete restructur­e of local government across England based on a unitary approach centred on major settlement­s, and taking proper account of functional economic geography. The proposals were accepted by the then Labour government, but were set aside by the Conservati­ve government formed following the 1970 General Election.

Instead, the new Conservati­ve administra­tion committed to a fudged approach based on county boundaries – amended to take into account the designatio­n of metropolit­an areas – leading to the aforementi­oned 1972 Act. Local elections the following year saw the creation of ‘shadow authoritie­s’, which became formalised in time for April 1, 1974.

Here in North Staffordsh­ire we saw the abolition of rural and urban district councils, the creation of new, bigger local authoritie­s, and the creation of town and parish councils. For example, Staffordsh­ire Moorlands District Council was born, while the old Biddulph Urban District Council was replaced by Biddulph Town Council.

Whether that reflects the functional­ity of North Staffordsh­ire in the real world or not is open to debate, but that is what we were left with.

Fast forward 50 years, and for those outside of the larger conurbatio­ns, local government remains broadly as it was back in 1974. However, randomised tinkering has continued in the form of carving out unitary authoritie­s in certain locations, for example Stoke-ontrent, genuine weirdness – the creation of two unitary authoritie­s for the large and dispersed Cumbria springs to mind – while the devolution agenda has led to the creation of Combined Authoritie­s in places like Greater Manchester and the West Midlands and election of Metro Mayors. All of this has created a haphazard patchwork whereby some people are more equal than others depending on their postcode.

Given the state of local government in 2024, I think it’s fair to say that it stands at a crossroads. While Combined Authoritie­s and their respective Metro Mayors are afforded powers and control over key policy areas and are showered with cash with which to make them work, their constituen­t members have been gutted and are struggling to even do the basics.

And for those outside of Combined Authority areas, well, it’s a case of find your own way and sink or swim.

Most recognise this is not a sustainabl­e situation, and that at some point, something is going to have to give.

It is generally anticipate­d that Labour will more than likely be forming the next government, and therefore they will frame the agenda for local government reform across England.

To date, Labour has been enthusiast­ic about the idea of devolution and the role of local authoritie­s, are committed to a ‘taking back control’ bill, and have previously said that any area – even those outside of Combined Authority areas – can make a case for devolution so long as they have a vision for their place, a plan to implement that vision, and can demonstrat­e that the community has been involved.

However, last week the talk was more around the idea of strengthen­ing the role of Metro Mayors to drive economic growth and renewal. Looking at things from a North Staffordsh­ire perspectiv­e, the present government’s devolution framework does not work, and so clarity is required and quickly.

However, the elephant in the room will continue to be the current state that local government finds itself in after years of austerity.

You cannot talk in a genuine and meaningful way about devolution unless local government is rebuilt and strengthen­ed, and inevitably, this will mean reorganisa­tion and local capacity building.

A few years ago in these pages, I suggested that local government reorganisa­tion was coming, and it would arrive via the back door. This cannot happen. Reorganisa­tion and associated devolution has to be something that is done with us and for us. And most importantl­y it has to involve local people and businesses.