Devolution and LGR FAQs: MHCLG

A: The Government has announced £63 million will be made available to support transition across the 21 reorganisation areas, with each new unitary authority receiving at least £900,000. The Local Government Association and other sector bodies are also providing wider support. The Government's three Sector Advisors are also available to assist councils and will work closely with the LGA to coordinate support. We are currently developing the support offer for future years. The department has recently issued guidance on implementation bodies and predecessor councils that is intended to provide clarity on expectations and governance structures during the transition period.

A: Each new unitary will receive a £900,000 grant. Payments will be made once we have decisions on the relevant Structural Changes Orders. We will work with the representative deputy areas to arrange the grant payment. We expect the first round of payments to be made by the end of June 2026; the second round of payments by September 2026; and payments of any potential reserve funding by December 2026 at the latest.

Funding will be allocated to Deputy Senior Responsible Officers for each of the new unitary councils. This will be paid direct to the council in which the deputy SRO leading on the establishment of the relevant unitary sits, unless you inform us that you have agreed locally it should be paid to a different council.

PSED and EPPS assessments will be carried out when deciding any additional amounts payable, if applicable, in addition to the £900k grant.

A: Yes. The flat allocation will generate a reserve fund, the size of which will be determined by the decisions from across the range of proposals creating 43-65 new unitaries.

If a lower number of new unitaries within the range are established, then the reserve funding available will increase.

Decisions on how central reserve funding will be directed have not yet been taken and can only be determined once all approvals are finalised.

PSED and EPPS assessments will be carried out when deciding any additional amounts payable, if applicable, in addition to the £900,000 grant.

A: Local authorities are well-placed to understand the particular needs of their area and will therefore be able to develop effective engagement and locality working structures that respond to these needs. 

The English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill will establish a new requirement for all local authorities to make appropriate arrangements for effective governance of any neighbourhood area. 

What constitutes appropriate arrangements will be set out in regulations, which will include details including the timeframe within which local authorities are required to implement these arrangements.  

A: We have not asked for names of new unitary authorities in proposals. However, if it is helpful, councils are welcome to include names for new authorities within their proposals.

The Structural Change Order – the secondary legislation that implements a decision to reorganise councils – will specify the names of new unitary councils. It is expected that representations will be sought from councils on the names of new unitary councils before the secondary legislation is agreed by the Minister and laid in Parliament. 

A: There is no power for the Minister to prepare their own proposal.

The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 provides that the Minister can either implement a proposal, not implement a proposal, seek advice from the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, or modify a proposal.

The Act includes a number of routes for delivering boundary change and structural change together. 

The invitations issued on 5 February 2025 provide that councils are able to submit proposals that include boundary change, and more information has been provided on what councils should include in their proposals if they would like to pursue this.

A: Local authorities undergoing reorganisation should develop structures that ensure all communities can have a greater say in the services that matter most to them.

In councils undergoing reorganisation, we expect new neighbourhood structures to drive forward improvements in local areas and to allow local people to influence the decisions that matter most to them with their local authorities.  Local authorities will be well-placed to understand the needs of their areas, and to develop these structures.

A: All proposals received will be considered by the Minister.

A: Decisions on the most appropriate option for each area will be judgements in the round, having regard to the guidance and the available evidence. The criteria are not weighted. The guidance covers issues such as size, sensible geographies, efficiencies, financial sustainability, public service delivery, community engagement, and devolution. 

A: HM Treasury and other government departments will be part of the review process for final proposals and have also contributed to the feedback on interim plans. The Secretary of State makes the formal decision whether or not to implement a proposal, according to Part 1 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007. This decision is subject to collective agreement. 

A: For those areas where Commissioners have been appointed by the Secretary of State as part of the Best Value Intervention, their input will be important in the development of robust unitary proposals.

The Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution has asked those Commissioners to engage in the development of proposals and provide their input, in their role supporting councils to deliver their duty of best value. Their expert views as Commissioners will be essential to ensure that the proposals that are developed are robust. 

A: All proposals were considered carefully, on a case-by-case basis, against the criteria, alongside the responses to the consultation, representations made and all other relevant information.

A: No. Decisions were taken individually, based on the merits of each proposal received and the local context. Each area is different and will be judged on its own circumstances.

A: Structural Changes Order to implement unitary local government in the area will be brought to Parliament later in the year. Subject to parliamentary approval, we expect new unitary councils to take on full council roles from 1 April 2028, with elections to new shadow councils in May 2027.

A: Existing councils remain responsible for delivering their services until they are formally abolished in 2028. The transitional arrangements requiring (among other things) the formation of joint committees representing all relevant council will be in place as soon as secondary legislation comes into force to support a smooth implementation. We would expect new unitary councils to take on full council roles from April 2028, with the transitional arrangements in place as soon as the secondary legislation. In the transitional year the existing councils in will continue to deliver local services to residents.

A: Scheduled elections for existing local councils in May 2026 are going ahead. We will, subject to Parliament, provide for elections to the new councils in May 2027 ready for a ‘go live’ date of April 2028. Existing councillors who were due to stand for election in May 2027 will have their term extended by 11 months. This is the approach during reorganisation, including for Surrey where elections will be held to the new West Surrey and East Surrey councils in May 2026.

A: The government has committed to unprecedented debt repayment support for Woking and Thurrock councils, given significant and exceptional unsupported debt in these councils linked to historic capital practices, and the value for money case for acting to protect local and national taxpayers. Both councils have been in Best Value Intervention for several years and have been in receipt of Exceptional Financial Support for successive years. Work and engagement on these issues preceded discussions on reorganisation and was considered as part of the Spending Review. Any support for these councils is subject to principles around assurance of the councils’ financial positions, their commitment to reduce debt locally as far as possible within their local capacity, and Value for Money for the local and national taxpayer. These commitments followed significant and detailed work in both councils, following the consequences of their severe financial failure given historic capital practices. In general, there is no proposal for council debt to be addressed centrally, including as part of local government reorganisation. Councils are responsible for their own financial management, and this includes ensuring that borrowing is affordable and managed sensibly.

A: As set out in the invitation letter, as with previous restructures, there is in general no proposal for council debt to be addressed centrally or written off as part of reorganisation.

A: The governance arrangements for transition to new councils will be included in the Structural Changes Order. As such, the final decisions will be for Ministers.

Following the process from previous reorganisations, the Department will work with councils during the preparation of this secondary legislation. As such, we expect to seek representations on matters relevant to the transition and implementation.

We have been asked whether new councils will be continuing authorities (a preparing council). Our starting position is that a continuing authority would only be considered when the geographical footprint of the successor council is the same as that of a predecessor council. This is an issue that we would consider after a decision has been taken on which proposal to implement. The Department has published an explanatory note setting out the different governance arrangements that may be agreed for an area when a proposal is implemented, and the role of predecessor councils and implementation bodies during the transition period.

A: For all areas going through Local Government Reorganisation MHCLG will seek representations on such matters, which are not covered in proposals, to inform decisions on the transitional approach that might be appropriate for each area.

The Department has published an explanatory note setting out the different governance arrangements that may be agreed for an area when a proposal is implemented, and the role of predecessor councils and implementation bodies during the transition period.

A: A Structural Changes Order (SCO) is the legislation that provides for the creation of a single tier of local government in an area, on a defined date. It establishes the new unitary councils with appropriate electoral arrangements, dissolves the existing councils, and sets out the detailed duties, governance and implementation arrangements required during the transition period. An SCO must be approved by Parliament. Examples of SCOs can be found on legislation.gov.uk.

The Department has published guidance explaining the arrangements the SCO will put in place for an area during the transition to new unitary councils: Local government reorganisation: Implementation guidance - GOV.UK. Further resources from the sector about governance issues and SCOs can be found under ‘Governance’ in the LGR toolkit.

A: An implementation body is required by a Structural Changes Order (SCO) to prepare for the transfer to new unitary councils. Implementation bodies, such as Joint Committees and Shadow Councils, have specific duties and operate for a defined period, set out in the individual SCO for an area. 

The Department has published guidance that explains the different types of implementation bodies and their functions: Local government reorganisation: Implementation guidance - GOV.UK.

A: A Joint Committee is required by a Structural Changes Order (SCO) to prepare the ground for matters that need to be in place on day one of the Shadow Councils. It is a committee of the elected members from each of the existing councils in the area of the new unitary council. The Joint Committee operates for a defined period, during the first transition period from when the SCO comes into force up to the inaugural elections to the new council.

The relevant SCO for an individual area will set out the exact functions of a Joint Committee, however they are expected to formulate proposals for a code of conduct for the new unitary council, create a team of officers (the “Implementation Team”) and prepare an implementation plan to be taken forward by the Shadow Council. The Department has published guidance that explains the membership, functions and operating period for a Joint Committee: Local government reorganisation: Implementation guidance - GOV.UK.

A: A Shadow Council is made up of members elected in the inaugural elections to the new unitary council and is responsible for preparing for the functions, property, rights and liabilities to the new unitary council, working with the predecessor councils to do so. The Shadow Council replaces the Joint Committee, in the second transition period which runs from a defined date following the inaugural elections up to vesting day. On vesting day the Shadow Council becomes the new unitary council. The relevant Structural Changes Order (SCO) for an individual area will set out the exact functions of a Shadow Council.

The Department has published guidance that explains the role of the Joint Committee with precedes a Shadow Council, and we will provide further guidance in due course on Shadow Councils. Local government reorganisation: Implementation guidance - GOV.UK.

A: A preparing council is another type of transitional governance arrangement that may be put in place, instead of a Shadow Council. It can be used (but is not required) where an existing council (county or district) already operates on the same geography as the future unitary council. That council is designated as a preparing council, which will become the new council on the reorganisation date.

The Department has published guidance that sets out the role of an Implementation Executive which precedes a preparing council (in place of a Joint Committee), and we will provide further guidance in due course on Shadow Councils and preparing councils. Local government reorganisation: Implementation guidance - GOV.UK.

A: Implementation Executive is used instead of a Joint Committee during the first transition period, if a preparing council model is put in place for an area during the transition period. As with Joint Committees, specific arrangements for the Implementation Executive are set out in the Structural Changes Order (SCO).

The Department has published guidance that explains the membership, functions and operating period for an Implementation Executive: Local government reorganisation: Implementation guidance - GOV.UK.

A: An Implementation Team is a team of officers from the predecessor councils required by the Structural Changes Order (SCO). The SCO may specify membership and key roles. The team is broadly responsible for supporting the Joint Committees and the shadow authorities fulfil their obligations and prepare for the transfer of functions as set out in the SCO. Predecessor councils must cooperate and release council officers from normal duties as reasonably required.

The Department has published guidance that explains in more detail the role, functions and membership of the Implementation Team. Local government reorganisation: Implementation guidance - GOV.UK.

A: Section 24 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 allows the Secretary of State to issue a direction after a Structural Changes Order has been made for an area. The purpose of a direction is to protect the financial and contractual position of successor authorities during transition by requiring predecessor councils to obtain consent before entering into certain contracts, disposing of land, or committing reserves above specified thresholds. We expect that Section 24 Directions will be issued for each area and we will engage with councils on the content.

A: Councils must comply with the publicity code and the heightened sensitivity in the pre-election period that starts from the date that a council publishes a notice of election. This includes making or commenting on announcements on Local Government Reorganisation or the Devolution Priority Programme.

LGA guidance can be found here.

A: The Government believes the historic identity, rights and privileges of cities and counties in England are important and should be safeguarded and celebrated.   

Most ceremonial matters can be preserved via the existing suite of general regulations which make arrangements for transfer of functions, responsibilities, assets, liabilities and rights and privileges from predecessor to successor councils. This can include town and parish councils for ceremonial matters such as city status or the holding of ceremonial plate.   

In order to preserve historic identity right or privileges such as city status or others, the decision to undertake a Community Governance Review (the mechanism for establishing new parish councils) is currently a local one, that can be undertaken by councils ahead of LGR or after, either on their own volition or in response to a petition.  

Where there are no obvious bodies on the right geography to take on ceremonial matters such as city status following the restructuring of local government then the mechanism of Charter Trustees has previously been used.   

Charter Trustees are established in secondary legislation in unparished areas, often via the Structural Changes Order or the supplementary consequential order that is made shortly before new unitary councils go live.   

Charter trustees hold historic rights and privileges such as city status safely and, while intended as a temporary solution until a town or parish council is created, can continue for as long as areas wish.  

Where local government re-organisation might affect ceremonial rights and privileges, we will work with councils throughout the LGR process to find the right solution and ensure that these are protected and retained.

A: No. The Government is committed to working with local leaders to maintain Lord Lieutenancies and wider ceremonial arrangements throughout local government reorganisation. Should any future changes affect an area’s Lord Lieutenancy or High Sheriff, we will work with local leaders to ensure these are maintained. This is likely to involve the Secretary of State using existing powers under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 to ensure continuity of ceremonial status. These provisions have previously been used successfully - for example, in the Cumbria (Structural Changes) Order 2023 - to define the areas covered by a Lord Lieutenancy.

A: City status is granted by the Monarch and applies to a defined area. The Government has committed to working with local leaders to ensure that city status and civic traditions are preserved through reorganisation. In many cases, this can be achieved through mechanisms such as charter trustees, which maintain historic rights and ceremonial functions where council structures change. This approach has been used successfully in previous reorganisations.

A: The Government has committed to working with local leaders to ensure that ceremonial functions and civic traditions continue smoothly throughout local government reorganisation.

Many ceremonial matters can be preserved via the existing suite of general regulations which make arrangements for transfer of functions, responsibilities, assets, liabilities and rights and privileges from predecessor to successor councils. This can include, for example, honorary titles and market rights moving to either the new unitary council or parish/town councils for the relevant historic area where these already exist. Councils affected by a reorganisation may also make their own agreements about how certain assets should be handled.

Where there are no obvious bodies on the right geography to take on ceremonial matters following the restructuring of local government then the mechanism of Charter Trustees has previously been used. Charter Trustees are established in secondary legislation in unparished areas, often via the supplementary consequential order that is made shortly before new unitary councils go live.

For Lord Lieutenants and High Sheriffs then specific provision may be made to amend the relevant legislation to redefine the area and add the names of the new councils. This can be done using consequential powers under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 in the supplementary consequential order.

A: In our feedback to areas on their interim Local Government Reorganisation plans (available here) we asked areas to consider options for partnership working across the new geographic boundaries, especially where proposals suggest disaggregating services. 

Local Government has a strong track record of collaborative and partnership-based working across local geographies to commission and deliver a wide range of services. There are numerous examples of where this has improved service delivery, driven better outcomes, and delivered greater value for money. 

We envisage that a similar approach to partnership working could support authorities in managing the continuity of adult social care and children’s social care. In addition, this approach would help to maximise opportunities for future collaboration by new authorities at the strategic level, such as on health and care integration and with other public services.

We are interested in the range of approaches by which new unitary authorities may choose to work across boundaries on adult social care and children’s social care. 

We are not suggesting a ‘one size fits all’ approach. It will be for local areas to identify where partnership working may be helpful, and the most workable and useful approaches, in the context of their specific local circumstances. We are keen to assist places to develop this thinking, and to work with areas to implement best practice. 

A: We are not imposing any new structures on local authorities. We are asking areas who are proposing disaggregation of services in their final proposals for Local Government Reorganisation to consider potential partnership approaches for joint working across the new unitary authorities for the delivery of social care. 

Whilst it will be for areas to develop proposals, the Government considers that an independent trust model for partnership working is not appropriate in this context for delivering high-quality outcomes. 

Local Government Reorganisation is primarily to drive more accountable and sustainable authorities, and new unitary authorities must remain responsible for delivering high quality social care services. 

We do not want to prescribe specific types or formats of partnerships on areas and recognise that this may feel and look different in different places, depending on the local need or existing partnerships areas.

Government will be seeking assurance during the Local Government Reorganisation process that authorities have considered the potential risks of disaggregation to social care services.

A: Statutory responsibilities for children’s social care legally remain with the local authority, so accountability of these services must remain a priority.   

In the context of Local Authorities that have been judged to be systemically or persistently inadequate, Children’s Trusts have had positive impacts on service delivery; they can be an effective model for delivering improvements in services where there are ingrained failures of service delivery so this remains a potential form of intervention by the Department for Education.  

Implementing a Trust is a complex process, requiring substantial funding, time and leadership expertise to be a success. They have not been tested as an approach to mitigate potential risks around boundary changes in otherwise well performing areas. 

Trusts can also introduce complex accountability arrangements, which may be challenging to navigate alongside new unitary authorities being established underneath the Trust. Typically, after significant improvements have been realised, CSC services are returned to the LA, suggesting services are easier to manage outside of a Trust.  

A: MHCLG is currently working with sector representatives, the Department for Education and the Department for Health and Social Care to clarify the principles for partnership working and will share advice shortly, in time to support areas developing their final proposals.

A: In our feedback to areas on their interim Local Government Reorganisation plans, we have asked areas to consider options for partnership-based working across the new geographic boundaries where the proposed establishment of new unitary authorities will lead to the disaggregation of services. 

We have made no assumptions about service disaggregation, and it is for areas to determine as part of their final proposals. 

A: Adult social care and children's social care are key critical services in upper tier authorities, and therefore likely to be disaggregated where there are two or more unitary councils under consideration. There is an opportunity to improve social care outcomes for local residents through closer alignment with health services, whether through partnership arrangements, shared services or hubs of specialist expertise. 

In our feedback to areas on their interim Local Government Reorganisation proposals, we advised that further consideration should be given to the impacts for crucial services such as social care, children’s services, Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND), homelessness, and for wider public services including for public safety. 

We recognise that Local Government Reorganisation is happening at the same time as we have announced other public service reforms and that we need to support Local Government deliver these simultaneous changes. 

As expressed in our feedback to areas on their interim plans, where disaggregation of social care services is being proposed, we have asked areas to think about options for partnership working for the delivery of these services. This work is about supporting areas to develop more robust final proposals. 

We understand that this work will not stop once final proposals are submitted, and we will continue to provide support to areas considering partnership approaches throughout the Local Government Reorganisation local process.

A: The Local Government (Structural and Boundary Changes) (Staffing) Regulations 2008 ("the Staffing Regulations") make provisions of general application in relation to the transfer of staff and other staffing matters when functions are transferred from a predecessor council to a new single tier council for an area i.e. when a local government structural change or boundary change is made under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007. Broadly, the effect of the Staffing Regulations is that employees of predecessor councils will enjoy the protection afforded by TUPE, though is also subject to provisions specific requirement to the appointment to the post of head of paid service (chief executive) in the new single tier council.

The department is unable to provide you with any advice, legal or otherwise, as to the application of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 in your council's particular circumstances. These are matters on which all concerned need to take their own full legal advice both in terms of the interpretation of the legislation and how it applies in specific situations.  Your attention is drawn to the provisions of Regulations 3 and 4 of the Staffing Regulations and we would recommend that you seek independent legal advice on their application, both to the transfer of local authority employees, and in respect of the special provisions in connection with the recruitment, appointment and dismissal of heads of paid service and other chief officers.

Matters are further explained in the Explanatory Memorandum  accompanying the Staffing Regulations when it was before Parliament. You may also refer to the Department’s Local Government Restructuring Guidance on Staffing issues from June 2008, which we intend to reissue in due course for this current process of local government reorganisation.

A: As set out in the White Paper, we recognise that reorganisation will create upfront costs and additional pressures for councils alongside their crucial responsibilities to communities, including caring for some of the most vulnerable in society. It is vital that new unitary councils get off to a good start, so we will work closely with local leaders to explore what support they might need to implement new structures. Considering the efficiencies that are possible through reorganisation, we expect that areas will be able to meet transition costs over time from existing budgets, including from the flexible use of capital receipts that can support authorities in taking forward transformation and invest-to-save projects. We will learn from the experience and successes of others who have been through the process.

A: As set out in the White Paper, it is for councils to develop proposals for new unitary councils which are the right size to achieve efficiencies, improve capacity and withstand financial shocks.

A: The Ministry for Communities, Housing and Local Government has already set out a process for supporting councils in receipt of Exceptional Financial Support for next financial year, and the Department will need to consider how any support processes will operate for future years. Any council that has concerns about its ability to set or maintain a balanced budget should approach the Department in the first instance where we will treat all discussions in confidence.

A: The LGBCE has a rolling and flexible work programme and is aware that there may be implications for its planned programme of work flowing from the White Paper.

The LGBCE can carry out reviews of local authorities once they have been established in law. The review process that the LGBCE follows starts with determining the number of councillors the local authority requires, before moving on to look at the number, name and boundaries of wards. Further information and guidance on the LGBCE’s review process can be found on their website.

A: The structural changes order will include electoral arrangements for the new councils, including warding arrangements. These can be based on existing wards, divisions and parish boundaries. The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (the Commission) guidance, as set out on their website and in our joint webinars last year is a good place to start, while recognising that the usual criteria are unlikely to be met in the same way as a full review. The Commission are able to offer advice and guidance as councils draw up these boundaries. The Commission intend to undertake a full electoral review of all new councils after their first election and before their second.

A: We intend to ask councils to provide us with their suggested interim warding arrangements for inclusion in the structural changes order, once a decision has been reached on which proposal, if any, is to be implemented.

A: No. On June 3 2025, Jim McMahon MP OBE, Minister of State for Local Government and Devolution, suggested that these could be useful tools to aid information and data sharing across an area, as expected in the statutory criteria. 

A: The White Paper clearly states that the Government will facilitate reorganisation for unitary councils where there is evidence of failure or where their size or boundaries impact their responsibilities. While some of these councils are included in the invitations for reorganisation in two-tier areas, there is a different legal process for mergers of unitaries. The Government is open to discussions with all areas where structural change will help them achieve a more sustainable footing.

We wrote to council leaders on 25 July 2025 providing a summary of the local government reorganisation process  and an indicative timeline for the areas which have been invited to submit a proposal. This is subject to a number of external factors.

For Surrey, we anticipate that a decision on which proposal to implement could be announced after the House returns from the Conference Recess in October. This would allow the necessary secondary legislation to be finalised in the autumn, so as to be laid in the House in the New Year, and then made in March, subject to Parliamentary approval. This would allow for elections to the new unitary authorities on 7 May 2026, and for those elections to be the only elections in Surrey. The new authorities would then go live on 1 April 2027.

For the six areas in the Devolution Priority Programme, we anticipate that following final proposals being submitted at the end of September, a consultation could be launched in November, to close in the New Year. Following this, decisions on which proposal to implement could be announced by March, before the period of sensitivity for the May local elections. Secondary legislation would then be prepared, to be laid in the House, ideally before the summer recess. The legislation could then be made in the autumn, subject to Parliamentary approval. This would allow for elections to the new unitary authorities on 6 May 2027. The new authorities would then go live on 1 April 2028.

For the remaining 14 areas, we anticipate that following final proposals being submitted at the end of November, a consultation could be launched in the New Year, and it would likely close after the local elections in May. Following this, decisions on which proposal to implement could be announced before the summer recess. Secondary legislation would then be prepared, to be laid in the House after the summer recess. The legislation could then be made, subject to Parliamentary approval. This would allow for elections to the new unitary authorities on 6 May 2027. The new authorities would then go live on 1 April 2028.

A: For areas covering councils that are in Best Value intervention and/or in receipt of Exceptional Financial Support, proposals must additionally demonstrate how reorganisation may contribute to putting local government in the area as a whole on a firmer footing and what area-specific arrangements may be necessary to make new structures viable.

In general, as with previous restructures, there is no proposal for council debt to
be addressed centrally or written off as part of reorganisation. For areas where
there are exceptional circumstances where there has been failure linked to capital practices, proposals should reflect the extent to which the implications of this can be managed locally, including as part of efficiencies possible through reorganisation.

A: The invitation letter on 5 February 2025 explained that it is essential that councils continue to deliver their business-as-usual services and duties, which remain unchanged until reorganisation is complete. The 2024 Guidance on Best Value Standards and Intervention describes the characteristics of a well-functioning authority, and in relation to handling assets the sections on governance, use of resources, service delivery and partnerships and community engagement are particularly relevant.  

A: There are no immediate plans to issue specific guidance on merging HRAs. For any other queries related to HRAs, please write to [email protected].

A: The proposals set out in the Fair Funding Review will ensure local government funding delivers the best value for money for taxpayers. These reforms will mean the vast majority of councils with social care responsibilities will see their Core Spending Power increase in real terms to 2028-29, and cash increases for most councils.

The government recognises that that councils will need to develop reorganisation proposals alongside the Fair Funding Review 2.0 consultation, which closes on 15 August. As part of this consultation, the government is seeking views on the proposed approach to agreeing allocations for new unitary authorities after reorganisation and has committed to provide additional guidance to places bringing forward plans.

To support councils’ transition to their new allocations in a sustainable way, these reforms will be delivered alongside a package of transitional arrangements. As a result, the vast majority of councils with social care responsibilities will see their Core Spending Power increase in real terms to 2028-29, and cash increases for most councils.

The government is engaging the small number of councils whose proposed new share of funding is furthest from their current share of funding about how we can support them to manage larger losses. The government intends to ensure all councils see some form of income protection over the multi-year settlement, so they can plan for their new funding allocations in a sustainable way.

A: No. Councils must continue to deliver essential services including making progress with local plans and delivering the homes we need. The Government is committed to delivering 1.5 million homes over this parliament, and wants to support councils to play their part in delivering a generational increase in social and affordable housing. Councils should continue to drive forward work that supports this ambition. 

Statutory duties relating to setting a balanced budget and the Best Value duty remain unchanged. In the invite, the Government asked councils to keep each other involved in discussions and balance the key decisions needed now to maintain service delivery and ensure value for money, with those decisions that will affect the future success of new councils. In previous reorganisations we have seen a risk of spending on projects ahead of reorganisation which we do not believe represented value for money for local taxpayers. Communication between councils is key to ensure financial decisions do not compromise the future sustainability of new councils.
 
We have written to councils providing an explanatory note on financial decisions before LGR,  which sets out the government’s expectations that all involved are cognisant that decisions taken now by councils could fetter the future decisions of new councils, and act accordingly. The note provides examples of the sort of financial decisions we would expect councils to communicate with each other on, if they are likely to affect the transition to new authorities.

We have since received queries from councils about the examples provided in this note and whether this means they should not take these decisions, such as making appointments to senior leadership team roles,  key HR decisions required to ensure councils are compliant with their employment and equality law duties, and the sale or purchase of assets that are central to housing targets or care services. This is important work that should continue to be delivered. The purpose of providing examples of decisions in this note is not to halt or slow these types of decisions from being taken in the lead up to LGR, but to ensure councils are actively considering when local communication on financial decisions is necessary ahead of LGR and to put in place voluntary arrangements to support decision making across the area.

Under the Local Government (Structural Changes) (Finance) Regulations 2008 (as amended) new unitary authorities must at the latest set a single uniform level of Band D council tax across their entire area no later than the start of year 8 of reorganisation. Prior to this point different council tax levels can be set in the predecessor areas of a new unitary authority to gradually narrow the gap between council tax levels. In recent years, reorganising councils have generally achieved harmonisation within 1 to 5 years.

A: We recognise the value that town and parish councils offer to their local communities, but they are independent institutions and are not a substitute for meaningful community engagement and neighbourhood working by a local authority. The decision to set up Town and parish councils is a local one. Areas considering new town or parish councils should think carefully about how they might be funded, to avoid putting further pressure on local authority finances and/or new burdens on the taxpayer.   

A: We will not be introducing any changes to the role of Town and Parish councils as part of local government reorganisation. New unitary structures should enable stronger community engagement and provide genuine opportunities for neighbourhood empowerment, as explained in the criteria. Proposals should demonstrate how councils in the area have collaborated to meet local needs and incorporate local views. It is up to councils to decide how best to engage locally in a meaningful and constructive way. We have advised in a previous MHCLG webinar that the views of other public sector providers, including Town and Parish councils and voluntary and community sector organisations, will be crucial.

A: Local authorities may wish to collaborate with town and parish councils to determine how they can most effectively contribute to service delivery under future arrangements. In doing so, they should consider the financial and administrative support required by town and parish councils and should seek to minimise the potential impact of new responsibilities on local taxpayers through increases to parish precepts. 

A: The ability to establish new parish, town and community councils is devolved to principal local authorities through the community governance review process. This remains the case. However, town and parish councils are no substitute for the effective neighbourhood governance arrangements which the government expects local authorities to implement. These should enable local people to take issues or concerns to their local ward councillors, who will have a clear and accountable route to act on them. 

A: Local authorities may wish to collaborate with town and parish councils to determine how they can most effectively manage local assets in future arrangements. 

A: There is no provision in legislation for a public petition to trigger a referendum on LGR. The provision for a petition to trigger a referendum on a council’s governance arrangements is limited to whether a council’s decision-making operates as a leader and cabinet, a mayor and cabinet, or the committee system.

A: As set out in the guidance which accompanied the statutory criteria, MHCLG expects there to be wide engagement with local partners and stakeholders including Members of Parliament, residents, workforce and their representatives, and businesses on a proposal before it is submitted.

It is for councils to decide how best to engage locally in a meaningful and constructive way, and this engagement activity should be evidenced in proposals, as well as an explanation of the views that have been put forward and how concerns will be addressed.

Engagement should both inform the development of robust proposals and build a shared understanding of the improvements they expect to deliver through reorganisation.

There are no plans to require local referendums on proposed local government reorganisations. 

Once a proposal has been submitted it will be for the Government to decide on taking a proposal forward and to consult as required by statute.

A: We remain committed to ensuring universal coverage of up-to-date local plans as quickly as possible. Strategic planning reform proposals should not be used as a reason to delay the preparation of local plans. The legal status of local plans is not impacted by local government reorganisation. Where reorganisation occurs, new unitary authorities are expected to promptly prepare a local plan covering their entire area. Until a new local plan is adopted, existing constituent local plans remain in force as part of the development plan for their area. New unitary authorities have the discretion to progress any emerging constituent local plans. We are aware that areas undergoing local government reorganisation and devolution will experience a transition period where responsibility for spatial development strategy might transfer between authorities. We are seeking powers in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill to complement existing powers to make regulations for transitional arrangements in such scenarios.

A: We are taking lessons learned from previous reorganisations such as those in Cumbria and Northamptonshire and are sharing these with councils through the LGR Toolkit we have developed with the LGA.

Government is not proposing a one-size-fits-all approach and it is for local areas to determine how their services are disaggregated.

For example, councils who have reorganised in the past have effectively used short-term partnership models and shared service models to maintain service continuity. It is for local areas to determine whether such models would be a suitable approach for their area.

The Department will be putting robust safeguards in place to ensure that any risks to services are identified early on and escalated quickly. Additionally, Government has committed an additional £63 million of funding to support councils to best deliver reorganisation in their areas.