Buckinghamshire’s districts have not ruled out launching a legal challenge against Government plans for a single unitary council, The MJ understands.
As a Government consultation on ‘minded to’ proposals to abolish the two-tier system in Buckinghamshire closed last week, the districts continued to argue in favour of their preferred two-unitary solution.
Council officials were this week reluctant to talk publicly about the possibility of taking legal action.
But asked about the possibility, Aylesbury Vale DC leader, Cllr Neil Blake, told The MJ: 'It's a bit too soon to make a comment on that. Nothing should be discounted. We just haven't seen the evidence to show that one [unitary] is the answer.'
A meeting of Chiltern DC last month agreed to put aside up to £40,000 to 'take such action as deemed necessary to protect the best interests of Chiltern and South Bucks residents and communities, including but not limited to, seeking expert legal advice and lodging of legal challenges'.
Elsewhere, Christchurch BC, has issued proceedings in the High Court for a judicial review of ministers’ decision to push ahead with local government reorganisation in Dorset, where the existing nine councils will be replaced by two unitaries.
Christchurch is continuing its legal battle against the move despite legislation last week being passed in both Houses of Parliament that means Dorset residents can expect to be served by two new unitary councils from April.
In a joint statement, the leaders of the eight councils that supported the move said: ‘This is an historic day for local government in our county and we are exceptionally proud to have reached this significant milestone.’
However, Christchurch leader, Cllr David Flagg, maintained that the council ‘has an arguable case’.
He added: ‘Christchurch BC and the majority of our residents remain opposed to local government reorganisation in Dorset.’
In Somerset, West Somerset DC and Taunton Deane BC will be replaced by a single super-district from April after receiving official approval from local government secretary James Brokenshire.
In a joint statement, the leaders of the existing councils, said: ‘This has been a long – and not always easy process.
‘It means that our team of officers will, in future, be serving a single council and that will deliver significant financial and efficiency benefits as staff will no longer have to divide their time between two separate councils.
‘This is about creating a new council that puts local people first and is fit for the 21st century. It won’t be a bolt-together or merger of the old.’
However, Somerset CC leader, Cllr David Fothergill, is also looking to replace the county’s councils with one or more single-tier unitary authorities.
Bridgwater and West Somerset MP, Ian Liddell-Grainger, last week described the plans as ‘desperate, dangerous, unwarranted and unnecessary’.
In Derbyshire, county council leader Barry Lewis has spoken about his desire for local government reorganisation, later leading to an East Midlands combined authority covering his area, Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Derby, Nottingham and Leicester.
Derbyshire Dales DC leader, Cllr Lewis Rose, said any proposed reorganisation for a county as large as Derbyshire ‘must be strongly resisted’.
Cllr Rose told councillors last week: ‘You can be assured that I have not taken this lying down and have made it clear to those who ought to know better that this is a very unhelpful and counter-productive way to proceed.
'The thought that we could end up with a unitary county is ridiculous but one we have to take seriously.’
Less controversially, a new West Suffolk Council will replace Forest Heath DC and St Edmundsbury BC from April after being given the official go-ahead by Parliament.
In a joint statement, the leaders said: ‘The case for the new council was compelling and backed locally and now by Government.’
Local government minister Rishi Sunak has said that ‘locally-led’ reorganisation would be supported byWhitehall in areas with at least 300,000 people, where there is ‘evidence of a good deal of local support’ and where it would improve service delivery, value for money and local leadership.