Advice on structural reviews in Devon, Norfolk and Suffolk
1 Introduction
1.1 On 6 February 2008 the Secretary of State requested the Boundary Committee for England to advise her on the unitary proposals made by Exeter City Council, Ipswich Borough Council and Norwich City Council. The Secretary of State has requested this advice by 31 December 2008. This advice note, published by the Boundary Committee for England, sets out how the Committee intends providing advice to the Secretary of State and making any alternative proposal to her.
2 Who is the Boundary Committee for England?
2.1 The Boundary Committee for England is a statutory committee of the Electoral Commission and is responsible for conducting structural, boundary and electoral reviews of English local authorities. In relation to electoral reviews it makes its recommendations to the Electoral Commission who is responsible for implementing the proposals. In relation to local government structure and administrative boundaries, it reports to the Secretary of State. There is no Electoral Commission involvement in these structural reviews.
2.2 In 2003/4 the Boundary Committee undertook structural reviews in the North East, North West and Yorkshire & the Humber regions of England. In those areas the Government directed the Committee to make recommendations for structural change in six two-tier counties in the regions in advance of referenda on directly elected regional assemblies.
3 Background
3.1 The legal provisions for this structural review are contained primarily within sections 4 and 5 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007.
3.2 In October 2006 the Secretary of State invited principal councils in England to make proposals for unitary local government structures in their area. 26 bids were submitted, including proposals from Exeter City Council, Ipswich Borough Council and Norwich City Council to become unitary authorities on their existing boundaries. On 25 July 2007 the Minister for Local Government announced the Secretary of State’s intention to refer the Norwich City bid for unitary status to the Committee, with a view to it considering whether there might be unitary solutions for Norfolk as a whole, possibly involving boundary changes.
3.3 On 5 December 2007 the Minister announced the Secretary of State’s intention to request the advice of the Boundary Committee in relation to the Exeter City Council and Ipswich Borough Council bids.
The Committee will now undertake a review of Norfolk, Suffolk and Devon and will use the same five criteria that the Secretary of State used to assess the 26 unitary bids that she received. These are:
4. Responding to the request for advice
4.1 The legislation, the request from the Secretary of State and the accompanying guidance make clear that the Committee is under a duty to identify potential unitary solutions for each county area under review.We recognise the importance of this task to local interests and intend to work with local government and other stakeholders in identifying and assessing what alternative proposal should be made to the Secretary of State for each county area.
4.2 Our intention is to work co-operatively and openly with local authorities, and have a dialogue with them and other stakeholders. Such an approach is essential if we are to gather enough information to reach a decision on whether a particular pattern of unitary local government within a county area should be the basis of draft proposals which will be subject to public consultation.
4.3 We will need detailed financial information from all local authorities in relation to any draft proposals that we publish. This is to ensure there is evidence to demonstrate that any new unitary authorities identified will, in the Committee’s judgement, be likely to have the capacity to meet the five criteria.
5 The Review Process
Stage One:
5.1 The Committee intends to work with local authorities in identifying potential concepts for unitary options. It is also open to other stakeholders to put forward concepts to us. We are using the term ‘concept’ to describe these options, by which we mean outline geographic units (not needing precise boundaries at this stage). Such concepts should have a reasonable likelihood of meeting all of the five criteria and also work within the context of an overall unitary pattern for the county area under review.
5.2 We have produced broad areas in relation to four of the criterion that we would like the promoters of any concepts to address. This will allow local authorities to understand what issues the Boundary Committee will be addressing when identifying draft proposals. The ‘affordability’ criterion has not been included.
5.3 Section 151 officers from all local authorities will be briefed during Stage One on the information that the Committee will require in relation to the affordability criterion. This information will not be required until the draft proposals have been published. However, a briefing at this stage is intended to provide authorities with advance warning of the type of information that will be required.
5.4Our approach is intended to minimise the resources expended by local authorities throughout the review process. We do not see that the identification of unitary concepts should be a resource-intensive task in terms of expenditure for local authorities or other interested parties. For example, promoters of a particular unitary authority or pattern of unitary authorities are not expected to engage the use of consultants when considering the affordability criterion.
5.5 Unlike the unitary bids submitted to the Secretary of State after the publication of the 2007 Local Government White Paper, we will not be seeking business cases in support of unitary concepts. Rather, we are seeking a broad overview of how any new unitary pattern of local government would work.
5.6 Those submitting concepts should demonstrate they have considered whether:
Specific evidence on whether a particular concept meets the affordability criterion will be sought during Stage Three of the process.
5.7 Joint working between all the local authorities in a county area is encouraged. This will make the task of providing for the Committee’s background information needs a far simpler and more cost-effective task ensuring that there are no gaps. Similarly, joint working in the development of concepts will ensure that they “link up” for the area under review, as a whole. This is important as the Committee will only make an alternative proposal for the whole of the area under review and cannot consider any area in isolation.
Stage Two:
5.8 We will review the concepts and information it receives during Stage One. We may request further information from any authority or other stakeholder in support of a particular concept, in order to make a decision on draft proposals.
5.9 It is also open to us to seek information from any authority or other stakeholder in relation to a potential unitary authority that has not been identified locally during Stage One.
5.10 We intend consulting on one or more draft proposals for each area under review and indicate our preferred option. The draft proposals published at the beginning of Stage Three will be identified on the basis that, subject to their assessment against the affordability criterion and the outcome of public consultation, in the Committee’s judgement they will best have the capacity to meet the Secretary of State’s criteria.
Stage Three:
5.11 During Stage Three we will collect and analyse financial information from all local authorities in support of the draft proposals identified. Support will be given to local authorities in providing this information.
Stage Four:
5.12 We will consider the response to public consultation, together with all the information we have collected. We will then formulate our advice. This may include an alternative proposal for the area, which we consider, has the capacity to meet the five criteria. We will only make one alternative proposal to the Secretary of State for the county under review. This alternative proposal may comprise of one or more unitary authorities.
The indicative stages of the review are as follows:
| Stage One 3 March – 11 April 2008 |
6 weeks | Relevant background information on each county area provided by local authorities. Concepts for new unitary authorities relating broadly to the criteria submitted to the Boundary Committee |
| Stage Two 14 April – 4 July |
12 weeks | The Boundary Committee will consider the concepts and seek information as necessary from local authorities and other stakeholders. It will consider this information and make a decision on what to publish in draft proposals |
Draft proposals published
| Stage Three 7 July – 26 Sep 2008 |
12 weeks | Public consultation on draft proposals, including on the specific boundaries of any new unitary authorities. Financial information will be collected to assess the affordability of the draft proposals. |
| Stage Four 29 Sep- 19 Dec 2008 |
12 weeks | Consultation responses and financial information considered. Final decision by Committee on what to advice to provide to the Secretary of State |
Advice and alternative proposals (if any) made to the Secretary of State – by 31 December 2008
5.13 Once we have provided advice and made any alternative proposal to the Secretary of State there will be a further period for representations to be made. These representations should be made directly to the Secretary of State and within four weeks of the Boundary Committee making any alternative proposal.
6 Further Information
6.1 A link to this advice note as well as copies of additional posters and leaflets to publicise the review, can be found on our website.
6.2 The Secretary of State’s request for advice is on the Department for Communities and Local Government website:
For more information, please contact the structural review team, specifying the county concerned:
The Boundary Committee for England
Structural Review Team (Norfolk / Suffolk / Devon)
Trevelyan House
Great Peter Street
London
SW1P 2HW
Tel: 0207 271 0512
Fax: 0207 271 0505
Textphone: 18001 020 7271 0512
Back to top