Despite the current changes at the top, the Government's latest position on local government reorganisation sets out the continuing reshaping of local governance in England. The Government has backed expanded city authorities across a number of parts of the country as part of its announcement on reorganisation for the remaining two-tier areas.
The cities identified as set to expand with unification are Plymouth, Oxford, Lincoln, Nottingham, Leicester, Exeter, Torbay and Brighton. That list matters because it suggests that, within this phase of reform, city-led geography has emerged as a compelling model for future unitary arrangements. Key to note though, is that decisions are deferred for West Sussex, Cambridge and Peterborough.
For councils, public sector partners and organisations operating across those geographies, the announcement is more than a structural development. It is a signal about how the Government may view the relationship (particularly in the light of devolution) between governance, place and economic identity: larger authorities, with the potential to simplify decision-making and strengthen strategic coordination.
Why expanded cities may be attractive
The attraction of expanded city authorities might seem obvious. Cities often provide the economic, transport, cultural and employment centre of a wider area. Aligning governance boundaries more closely with that functional footprint can be a route to clearer accountability, a stronger place narrative and more coherent long-term planning, again possibly aligned to Andy Burnham’s clear desire for devolution.
However, local government reorganisation is rarely just a question of standard administrative efficiency. It goes to the heart of how communities understand their identity, where actual voters believe power sits and whether they feel properly represented within the new structures being created. That is why the politics of place will be central to how these proposals are received.
Governance, identity and democratic legitimacy
The success of any new unitary structure will depend not only on whether it satisfies the technical requirements of reorganisation, but on whether voters, businesses and partner organisations recognise it as a credible expression of actual practical influence and local decision making with accountability. Expanded city authorities may offer scale and strategic capacity, but they can also raise understandable questions for surrounding towns, villages and rural communities about voice, visibility and influence.
Where communities are being brought within a larger city-led authority, the legal and governance work will need to be matched by careful engagement. It will be important to explain why the geography has been selected, how representation will operate and how the new authority will ensure that non-city communities are not perceived as peripheral to future decision-making.
Could reorganisation reopen gerrymandering concerns?
The focus on city-expansion proposals is likely to prompt questions from some stakeholders about the balance of representation within future authorities and indeed has raised concerns from opposition around gerrymandering.
Historically, major changes to local government geography can attract these accusations, fairly or unfairly, where boundaries are perceived to alter political advantage or weaken the influence of particular communities. Communities may well need to be convinced that the new boundaries do actually reflect their identity or dilute their democratic influence.
What this means for councils and partners
For local authorities, the announcement underlines the importance of developing reorganisation proposals that are capable of withstanding scrutiny on both governance and political grounds. The debate will not be limited to efficiency, cost or service integration. It will also focus on whether the proposed geography feels fair, whether accountability is clear and whether the design of the new authority commands confidence across the whole area.
The Weightmans view
Local government reorganisation has never really been just about moving lines around on a map. At its heart, it's about where power sits, who makes decisions, and whether local people feel those decisions are being made in the right place and by the right people.
The Government's backing for expanded city authorities is an interesting signal. It suggests that city-led models are likely to play a big part in the next phase of reform (including possible devolution), albeit some areas still await further announcements. There is also the shadow of potential legal challenges to many of the proposals and, if they transpire, the impact those would have.
As councils move from developing proposals to actually delivering them, the challenge will be convincing people that these new geographies make sense. It's not enough to demonstrate efficiencies or potential savings. Authorities will need to tell a compelling story about why the new arrangements will improve services, support growth and create stronger places, while also reassuring communities that their local identity and voice won't get lost along the way. The timescales to deliver change are challenging.
Ultimately, the councils that navigate this process most successfully are likely to be those that recognise that reorganisation is as much about people and place as it is about governance structures. Getting the technical model right matters, but ideally this will also be about bringing the local community with you.
For support on any aspects of the announced local government reorganisation, please contact our local government solicitors.
