Policy paper

Local government reorganisation: summary of feedback on interim plans

Published 3 June 2025

Applies to England

On 5 February 2025 Jim McMahon OBE MP, Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution, wrote to council leaders across 21 two-tier areas to formally invite them to work with other council leaders in their area to develop a proposal for Local Government Reorganisation. We asked for interim plans to be submitted by councils on or before 21 March 2025. We received responses to this ask from all 21 areas, and we are grateful to councils for coming together to submit interim plans within this ambitious timeframe. Many areas have published their plans, and the Local Government Association (LGA) have collated them on their Local Government Reorganisation Hub.

It is clear from the plans submitted that each area is at different stages in developing their proposals, in part recognising the different timelines that areas are working towards for implementation. All councils have now been provided with written feedback to their interim plans, and will be  invited  to meet officials to discuss further. This feedback did not seek to approve or discount any option or plan, but was designed to assist in the development of final proposals.

The priority for the next phase is supporting areas to build a shared evidence base that will underpin the development of final proposals, and to co-produce solutions to challenges identified by areas in this first phase – whether it’s improved service delivery, funding reform, maintaining a strong community voice, or preparing for devolution in tandem. We want Local Government Reorganisation to be a catalyst for local public service reform, supporting our mission to create sustainable public services by empowering local leaders who know their communities best and simplifying fragmented funding to reduce unsustainable demand pressures. Together with the LGA, we have established a sector support group that will coordinate activity to ensure councils have the information, tools and expertise to develop the solutions that are right for their area. This will include support to develop a robust evidence base for their final proposals, so that new authorities are set up for success. These sector bodies are holding events and workshops on key themes to stimulate new thinking and share approaches. We are also providing areas with financial contributions towards proposal development and providing a named official within the Department to ensure timely responses to further questions they may have on the process.

Summary of feedback

Our central message to councils through our feedback was to encourage them to build on their initial work with support from government to ensure that their final proposals fully address the assessment criteria and are supported by data and evidence.

Points of clarification

We were asked how government will assess final proposals, particularly if there is more than one potential option which meets the criteria for Local Government Reorganisation within an area. The criteria are not weighted. Decisions on the most appropriate option for each area will be judgements in the round, having regard to the guidance and the available evidence.

A number of plans sought further clarity on the criteria in the invitation letter, were unclear on the criteria in the invitation letter, and the information that should be shared in final proposals to support an assessment of their merits. For ease, we have summarised the key points below:

Criterion 1: A proposal should seek to achieve for the whole of the area concerned the establishment of a single tier of local government

• Numerous councils submitted interim plans that only included options covering part of an area that was invited to submit proposals for Local Government Reorganisation. We have emphasised to areas that whilst each council is able to submit a proposal, any proposal should include a clear single option and geography for the area as a whole; that is, the whole of the area to which the 5 February invitation was issued, not partial coverage.
• We have suggested that areas may wish to consider an options appraisal against the criteria set out in the invitation to provide a rationale for the preferred model against alternatives, and that in final proposals it would be helpful to include a high-level financial assessment which covers transition costs and overall forecast operating costs of the new unitary councils.

Criterion 2: Unitary local government must be the right size to achieve efficiencies, improve capacity and withstand financial shocks

• We have made clear to councils that the population size of 500,000 or more – as set out in the invitation and in the English Devolution White Paper – is a guiding principle, not a target. We have noted that we understand that there should be flexibility, especially given our ambition to build out devolution and take account of housing growth, alongside Local Government Reorganisation, and have asked that all proposals, whether they are at the guided level, above it, or below it, should set out the rationale for the proposed approach clearly.
• Some councils have submitted proposals that would necessitate changes to existing council boundaries. Where this is the case, we have highlighted, as the invitation sets out, that “existing district areas should be considered the building blocks for proposals, but where there is a strong justification more complex boundary changes will be considered”. We have clarified that if a decision is taken to implement a proposal, boundary changes can be achieved alongside structural change. Alternatively, areas could make a proposal for unitary local government using existing district building blocks and consider requesting a Principal Area Boundary Review (PABR) later. Such reviews have been used for minor amendments to a boundary where both councils have requested a review – such as the recent Sheffield/Barnsley boundary adjustment for a new housing estate. PABRs are the responsibility of the Local Government Boundary Commission for England who will consider such requests case-by-case. We have asked for final proposals that include a boundary change to include a clear rationale for this and to specify the area for any new unitary council(s). This could be identified by a parish or ward boundary, or if creating new boundaries, by attaching a map to final proposals.
• We confirmed to areas that the Government will preserve the important historic counties in their current ceremonial roles and will ensure that the ceremonial rights and privileges of an area will be maintained after any reorganisation of local government.
• We noted we would welcome further costed detail on expected transition costs, as well as to provide further detail to evidence potential efficiency savings from proposals. In particular, we noted it would be helpful to understand how efficiency savings have been considered alongside a sense of place and local identity.

Criterion 3: Unitary structures must prioritise the delivery of high quality and sustainable public services to citizens

• We advised areas 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. In particular, for options where there is disaggregation, such as any two or more unitary council model under consideration, we have asked for further detail on how the different options might impact on these services and how risks can be mitigated. For example, we have asked areas to consider joint working across new unitary councils through social care partnerships.

Criterion 4: Proposals should show how councils in the area have sought to work together in coming to a view that meets local needs and is informed by local views

• We have stressed to councils the importance of working together within an area and encouraged them to continue to build strong relationships and agree ways of working, including around effective data sharing to support the development of a robust evidence base. We have recommended that all final proposals within an area should use the same assumptions and data sets or be clear where and why there is a difference.
• We recognise that due to the timescale provided to develop interim plans that it may not have been practical for areas to conduct substantive engagement with residents, businesses and organisations in their area, and we welcomed the commitments made by areas to conduct engagement in advance of submitting final proposals. We advised areas that they may wish to engage in particular with those who may be affected by disaggregation of services and advised that it would be helpful to see detail that demonstrates how local ideas and views have been incorporated into final proposals.

Criterion 5: New unitary structures must support devolution arrangements

• We have encouraged councils to think further about how Local Government Reorganisation proposals will facilitate devolution in their areas.
• We have noted  that it would be helpful for areas to outline how each option would interact with a Strategic Authority and best benefit the local community, including meeting the criteria for sensible geography in the English Devolution White Paper and devolution statutory tests.

Criterion 6: New unitary structures should enable stronger community engagement and deliver genuine opportunity for neighbourhood empowerment

• We have noted that it would be helpful for areas to provide additional detail on their plans for neighbourhood-based governance and outline their thoughts about formal neighbourhood partnerships and area committees.

We were also asked about elections. The government will work with areas to hold elections for new unitary councils as soon as possible, as is the usual arrangement in the process of Local Government Reorganisation. The exact timings and detail will depend on the proposals received and the decision taken on which proposal, if any, to implement. We have no plans to postpone any elections which councils are scheduled to hold. The government’s starting point is for all elections to go ahead unless there is strong justification.

Challenges and opportunities

Through the interim plan process, we identified a number of common challenges in developing final proposals for reorganisation that will deliver better outcomes for local residents: 

• Funding reform: Areas have expressed concern about the funding available to implement reorganisation and the implications of forthcoming reforms to local government finance and the NHS for the financial sustainability of new unitaries. Our expectation is that the costs of reorganisation in an area are met by councils within that area, but we want areas to bring forward ambitious proposals that will make our councils of the future more efficient, effective and financially sustainable. We recognise this will require upfront investment to modernise back-office functions and, through usual processes, we are open to discussions about the flexible use of capital receipts and borrowing to support the transition. Further details on reform of local government finance and transition measures will be consulted on after the Spending Review in June, when we will also have more clarity on NHS funding.
• Local public service reform: Areas are considering how to maintain vital local services while also considering the opportunities presented by Local Government Reorganisation – and wider reform of the NHS, social care, SEND and homelessness – to join-up and transform the delivery of local public services and achieve better outcomes for local residents. Through the reorganisation process, we are expecting areas to work with local public service providers to manage the risks of disruption and think creatively about how they can design new ways of working to achieve better outcomes by focusing on what local people need – whether through partnership arrangements, shared services or hubs of specialist expertise. Reform will require a whole-government effort and we will work closely with areas and across Government to develop joint strategies to tackle these shared challenges.
• Strong community voice: We welcome the steps areas are taking to consider how to maintain strong community voice. Local Government Reorganisation should facilitate better and sustained community engagement and needs a clear and accountable system of local area-working and governance. Neighbourhood Area Committees, led by frontline ward councillors, offer a model of place-based engagement and leadership which maximises the structural efficiencies brought about by Local Government Reorganisation and strengthens localism and community participation across all areas. Neighbourhood Area Committees help councils fulfil their commitments to working in partnership with communities at the neighbourhood level. They can also include other service providers, such as town or parish councillors, when applicable, along with co-opted members from local community organisations. 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. 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. We want to see every local authority hardwiring local community engagement into their own structures, preferably through neighbourhood Area Committees.
• Pathway to devolution: We welcome the consideration areas have given to how new local government structures could support devolution ambitions, and we recognise that pursuing Local Government Reorganisation alongside our ambition to see universal coverage of Strategic Authorities in England presents both challenges and opportunities. We are clear that reorganisation should not delay devolution and plans for both should be complementary. We are open to thinking practically about how to limit scenarios in which we are disaggregating services like police and fire to support Local Government Reorganisation only to reaggregate them at the point that a strategic authority is established.

We recognise these challenges go to the heart of our reforms to shift power out of Whitehall, and that government will need to support areas to overcome them so they can deliver strong and sustainable unitary councils, capable of leading their communities, shaping neighbourhoods and convening local public service providers to improve outcomes for local residents.

We are committed to working with colleagues across government, and with the LGA and its sector support group to ensure councils have the information, tools and expertise to develop the solutions that are right for their area, so new authorities are set up for success. No proposal will be perfect but nor should we let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Local government has proven its adaptability and resilience – our job is to support the sector to establish new authorities that can continue to evolve and develop with their communities.