Question
May I warmly welcome the Minister’s statement and his announcement that Gloucestershire will be one unitary authority? That will produce better administration and better value for money. However, will he explain to my constituents why we are having an election next May on the existing councils, which will gradually lose power as we move toward the following election the next year? Why can we not simply have an election next May on the shadow unitary authority?
Answer
It is important that we have a programme that is consistent across the country. We cannot say, “Well, because there seems to be a bit more local consensus in one place than another, and maybe the legal risk is a bit less, we can suddenly kind of shortcut the process.” That means that Gloucestershire, like everywhere else, will go through the “minded to” process. The letters going to councils today will give interested parties around three weeks to make representations. We then need to consider our response and do any more development coming from that. That will mean that the 2027 election for the shadow unitary just will not be possible. Another thing to have in mind is that, even though we are doing our best to tie this work down and make it robust, any decision of Government can be challenged in court, including the one in Gloucestershire. The worst outcome is that we pretend that May ’27 is an option. We are going to get to the end of the “minded to” decision in January, and it will take a couple of months to look at it; there will be no time at all for returning officers and political parties to find candidates for the new shadow unitary. There is a chance that a decision could be judicially reviewed in that process, and that would probably be the worst outcome. It is a fact that this work will take a bit longer, but that gives more certainty to councils so that they can prepare.
Verdict: AMBER (68/100)
The reply gives a clear, direct answer on whether a May 2027 election for the proposed shadow unitary authority is possible. It says no, and gives specific reasons: the mandatory 'minded to' process and its timetable, insufficient time for returning officers and parties to find candidates, and the risk of judicial review. On the first question, the reply gives a rationale of consistency across the country and says the process cannot be shortcut, but it does not explain why elections should go ahead on councils that will be abolished before their next term. A member of the public would have firm information on the timing question but might need to ask again about the reasoning behind the election schedule.
How we got there
| Question item | Coverage | Specificity | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| What is the Government's rationale for holding an election next May on the existing Gloucestershire councils, which will lose power before the following year's election. | Partially Addressed | Direct | The reply gives a concrete rationale, consistency of the programme across the country, and says the process cannot be shortcut, but it never explicitly explains why elections go ahead on the existing councils that will be abolished before their next term. |
| Whether an election could instead be held next May on the shadow unitary authority for Gloucestershire, and if not, why not. | Addressed | Direct | The reply directly says a May 2027 election on the shadow unitary is not possible and gives reasons: the mandatory 'minded to' process and its timetable, no time for returning officers and parties to find candidates, and the risk of judicial review. |