Question
It is right that all options proposed by Nottinghamshire authorities be looked at fairly and properly, so I welcome the Minister’s confirmation, but today’s update makes it clear that LGR is extremely complicated, should never have been a term-one priority, and has destabilised the very organisations on which we rely to deliver so many services. Having led a local authority, I cannot emphasise enough how big an impact this is having on our councillors and council officers, so I hope the Minister can clarify the situation. Are there scenarios in which “minded to” may mean that LGR does not go ahead? Are councils able to make representations to that effect, and who is being held accountable for the announcements on 16 July, which should never have happened?
Answer
To be clear, the invitation for areas to make submissions to the LGR process was entirely voluntary; there was no mandation. When councils submit a proposal, that initiates LGR. This is a Government-wide programme, but it is taking place because we have received proposals from local councils that we are now required to review. However, I take on board my hon. Friend’s point about being mindful of the impact of the process on council officials and councillors.
Verdict: RED (22/100)
The reply only partly answers the question. It explains that the invitation to submit proposals was voluntary and that councils start the process by submitting one, but it does not say whether the minded-to decision for Nottinghamshire could fail to proceed, and it does not say whether councils can formally oppose reorganisation going ahead. The point about who is accountable for the 16 July announcements is not addressed at all, as the reply describes the programme only in general terms. The person who asked would likely need to submit a follow-up for specific answers.
How we got there
| Question item | Coverage | Specificity | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there are scenarios in which the 'minded to' decision on local government reorganisation (LGR) in Nottinghamshire may not result in LGR going ahead. | Partially Addressed | Hedged | The reply says the invitation to submit proposals was voluntary and that the process is driven by council proposals, which bears on the process but never names any scenario in which the minded-to decision for Nottinghamshire would fail to proceed. |
| Whether councils are able to make representations to the Government arguing that LGR should not go ahead. | Partially Addressed | Hedged | The statement that submitting a proposal initiates LGR describes how councils enter the process, but it does not say whether councils can make representations opposing LGR going ahead. |
| Who is being held accountable for the announcements made on 16 July regarding local government reorganisation. | Not Addressed | Generic | Describing the programme as Government-wide and acknowledging a point about the impact on officials and councillors does not identify who is accountable for the 16 July announcements. |