Local Government Reorganisation

Debate between Baroness Taylor of Stevenage and Lord Grocott

Tuesday 21st July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Grocott (Lab)]

Can my noble friend provide some details and facts? She may not be able to answer now, but I would like her to do so in writing. The Statement claims that there will be very substantial savings from this operation—savings of £1 billion are mentioned at one point—but it is much more opaque on the costs of the reorganisation. Many of us with experience of these things know well enough that this can be a very expensive business. Can my noble friend therefore provide clarity on two specific questions? First, how much has it cost so far? We all know that local authorities almost come to a standstill when they are contemplating their abolition, and that central government has also been spending a lot of money. Secondly, from the various references in the Statement, which I have tried to make sense of—£1 million for new unitary authorities, capacity building funds, et cetera —can my noble friend tell us the sum total of expenditure that the Government and local authorities are expected to spend to achieve this reorganisation?

[Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)]

The estimate of the savings came from the work that the local authorities did themselves. I accept that there will be a great deal of work to be done through the process as we transition to these unitary authorities. But, quite frankly, I have worked in a two-tier authority in all my time in local government, and I think that the effort of going through the transition phase is well worth the endgame here: making sure that we have a system of unitary authorities right across the country; I know that the noble Baroness, Lady Scott, has done this exercise herself in her own council. They will be the building blocks for the devolution programme, as we continue to roll out devolution across the country.

The figures being provided for support for this process are: £1 million in funding for every new unitary council, £900,000 in capacity funding, and up to £150,000 of additional funding to support children’s services, adult social care and public health leadership. This is an investment to make sure that we have a consistent system of local government across the country and that those savings that councils have told us they can generate will occur.

Local Elections

Debate between Baroness Taylor of Stevenage and Lord Grocott

Monday 8th December 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)]

My Lords, the programme of local government reorganisation outside of the priority programme is proceeding at pace. We have received proposals from all the areas that were invited to put in their proposals by 28 November. We are now out for consultation, which has already started, and we will make announcements on that by March next year. The timetable for that further devolution and local government reorganisation will be announced, and the timetables will come forward then. I pay tribute to all my former colleagues in local government, who have worked together in a fantastic way to pull together these proposals. Some of them have told me that it has been a positive experience, which is good to hear. It is good to see them working together in such a collaborative way.

[Lord Grocott (Lab)]

Does my noble friend, with her long and distinguished experience of local government leadership, agree that, all too often, major local government reorganisations take longer than anticipated, cost more than anticipated and deliver fewer savings than anticipated? With that knowledge, which I am sure she is aware of in approaching her current duties, will she at least undertake to keep the House informed of any cost implications in extending the period of office of existing local authorities and any other associated costs?

[Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend for his question. I am always willing to come before the House and explain the impact of our programmes on local government. We remain committed to extending devolution to all corners of England. Under the last Government, we had a patchy and inconsistent approach, which meant that some areas were moving forward quickly on this and others had not even started the journey. Our commitment is to extend that devolution to all corners of England. We confirmed on 4 December the long-term funding offer for the six areas on the devolution priority programme, and we have committed close to £200 million collectively per year for 30 years to those new mayoral strategic authorities—some of that funding will be released earlier. This is really important. In my long experience in local government, we have put off these decisions around local government for far too long, and we have ended up with local government that is not sustainable for the long term. It is time to change that now, and I am committed to doing that. I am happy to report back to the House on how that is going.

Council Tax

Debate between Baroness Taylor of Stevenage and Lord Grocott

Monday 3rd February 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)]

Absolutely not. The range of legislation we have brought forward has shown just how progressive this Government are being in both fiscal and social policy.

[Lord Grocott (Lab)]

My noble friend, with her long experience in local government, knows well enough that, when there are major reorganisations in local government, you can be absolutely certain they will cost a lot of money, whatever the savings in the long term may be. Can she assure us that in the plans being considered, which are already costing local authorities preparation money to defend themselves or to decide which groups to join, the cost of this will not fall on the council tax payer?

[Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)]

My noble friend makes a very important point about the cost of devolution. We want to see all of England accessing that devolved power, and efficiencies will be generated in the long term. My honourable friend the Minister will be setting out the local government finance settlement later today, and I am sure he will include the details then.

Local Government Reorganisation

Debate between Baroness Taylor of Stevenage and Lord Grocott

Thursday 16th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)]

I disagree with the noble Lord. I believe that creating councils that can deliver good public services at local level is vital. We have seen from the areas that already have mayors that they have been able to take a strategic approach to delivering vital strategic assets that drive the local economy in their area, which will improve the lives of their residents. On the question he raised about funding, PricewaterhouseCoopers estimated that there would be a one-off reorganisation cost of around £400 million, but that there would be billions of pounds-worth of savings to the public purse over subsequent years, which could be reinvested in delivering the services that people are looking for.

[Lord Grocott (Lab)]

As my noble friend knows, the White Paper suggests that the optimum size for a unitary authority is a population of about 500,000. Can I get her assurance that those unitary authorities that are working effectively and efficiently, and providing good local services, and which may be short of 500,000 in their population, will not be unnecessarily disrupted? Furthermore, over the years I have seen so many different optimum sizes being recommended for the provision of local government services. Will she place in the Library the basis of the calculation that the Government have made that leads them to the conclusion that 500,000 is the right figure?

[Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend for his important question. It gives me an opportunity to clarify some of the misunderstanding around the number that has been given. It was in our manifesto that we would pursue a devolution agenda, and for many months after the Government were elected we were pushed to give an optimum number for the size of a council. Of course, when we did so, everyone said, “Not that number; that’s not the right number.” There is some flexibility around it. The important thing in the whole of this process is that the size, geography and demography of the units created make sense for people. We can be flexible around the numbers, but the number of 500,000 was intended to set out what we feel would be around the right size for the economies of scale and to deliver effective services at local level in a way that gives value for money.