The announcement of a White Paper on local government reform will excite lots of people in the sector, and a few thousand in each county, but few beyond. Sir John Banham, running one of England's re-organisations back in the 1990s, noted that a fully unitary solution for much of the country would get all-party support in Parliament, but cause ‘mayhem' when implemented. 

Maybe he was wrong. Successive governments have tended to unitaries, topped out with elected mayors, and so far mayhem has yet to arrive.

While devolution in principle is popular, whenever the English are offered a local authority with devolved tax-raising powers they reject it

My advice – despite being normally very keen on surveys, public consultation and empowerment – is to consult the sector and then decide, and not to have a long drawn out process.

When I was first working in the sector I would have of course demanded extensive independent polling, but more recently I am always amazed how relatively few people really care. The public worry about key local services, but not so much about local government's structure.

Local government remains more trusted than central government, but efficiency and keeping council tax bills down will trump the number of councillors. The public consistently support more local decision-making, but this has not led to a majority voting in local elections, or protesting at decades-long centralisation of control.

While devolution in principle is popular, whenever the English are offered a local authority with devolved tax-raising powers they reject it.

So getting on with it, providing clarity and promised multi-year funding deals, are probably positive. But looking at history, a few things stand out. The savings will probably be less than hoped for, and the costs of reorganisation greater than planned. The chances of greater public involvement with fewer bigger councils, is slight. And finally, decent funding matters more than structure.

You're welcome.

Ben Page is global chief executive of Ipsos