MP calls on Government to establish three unitaries in Lancashire

A Lancashire MP has criticised the current devolution deal for Lancashire and argued that the Government must step in and take a "top-down" approach to local government reorganisation in the county.

The Government announced in September that it had struck a deal to establish a combined authority in Lancashire, which would involve Lancashire County Council, Blackburn with Darwen Council and Blackpool Council.

At the time, the Government said the deal would see a non-mayoral combined county authority established in Lancashire next year.

However, the Labour MP for Burnley, Padiham & Brierfield, Oliver Ryan, has said the deal "is not ambitious enough" and that Lancashire needs a mayor, more public accountability, and a rationalisation of its local authorities from 15 councils down to 3.

Writing in a report that proposed three potential devolution models, Ryan said the county needed more powers and resources to tackle the "great issues of our time which can only be addressed by strategic cooperation within and on behalf of Lancashire: our health and social care services, local and regional transport, town and city regeneration, planning, and crucially growth".

According to Ryan, the two tier system of local Government in Lancashire does not work for its residents.

He said: "Imported from the 1970s, in 2024 the county council in particular far too often represents an anachronistic, inefficient, opaque and distant governance system, with no clear democratic sight lines."

He warned that the current system has created councils that are ill-equipped, under-powered, under-sized and under-resourced "to address the strategic issues the county faces, or in some cases ensure their own long-term financial survival".

Ryan said historic attempts at devolution in the county have failed due to "the parochial nature of the vested political interests in some areas, and the financial unsustainability of other areas".

As a result, he argued that the Government must step in and take a "top-down approach" as it "cannot rely on all Lancashire districts to naturally coalesce around a proposal".

He set out two different proposals for a devolution deal involving a mayor.

His preferred option involves the creation of three unitary councils, each covering areas with a population of around 500,000 people.

The second option involved creating four unitary councils, each with a population of around 400,000 people.

Ryan said: "Doing nothing is not an option. The time is now for Lancashire devolution, we simply cannot miss this opportunity, to reshape our powers, our politics and our county.

"This is a short document, which sets out what could be, and I have no doubt others will have their own preferred options, particularly for local government reorganisation.

"What this document does not do is set out the innumerable benefits of the mayoral model, which have been subject to much debate over the last decade.

"But whether its a bigger seat at the table of government, an increased ability to attract foreign investment, a more accountable democratic structure for local services, or a stronger voice for our county when securing local investment - the case for a mayoralty has been made, in word and in deed by our neighbours in Yorkshire, Liverpool, Greater Manchester and further afield."

Responding to Ryan's report, Cllr Stephen Atkinson, Ribble Valley Council's Conservative Leader, said the proposals would amount to "civic vandalism, creating ever more remote decision making".

Cllr Atkinson has launched a petition seeking to ensure that any changes in the structure and organisation of local government in Lancashire are put to the public via referendum.

Cllr Atkinson said the changes would create disruption, less responsive and remote services and "millions wasted on reorganisation, while we are not concentrating on delivery".

He also hit out against Ryan's call for the Government to step in.

He said: "Forced reorganisation means that some districts will lose out at the expense of others within the new frameworks.

"Will more deprived areas lose out to more high growth and prosperous areas? Or will the less well performing areas hold back the high growth areas using them as 'cash cows' to resolve their problems of social deprivation including burgeoning social care budgets?

"The problem with top-down reorganisation including forced reorganisation of district councils is that someone gets excluded paradoxically by being included in a community they don't want to be part of."

Commenting on reorganisation, Cllr Ged Mirfin, a Conservative member of Lancashire County Council for the Ribble Valley North East, said: "Let's be brutally honest if you were to organise a structure of local government you wouldn't do it on the basis that it was done 50 years ago – an agglomeration of much smaller authorities anchored geographically to the larger towns."

He argued that the "central problem is the political inertia that has paralysed" Lancashire for long periods, causing what is perceived to be a lack of socio-economic progress.

"The County – Unitary Level Devolution Deal to establish a combined authority was probably the only way to break the impasse."

He later said: "A county-wide unitary which makes a nod to local town halls as hub locations is perhaps the only way of squaring the circle and does not necessarily involve prohibitive large scale redundancies and job losses. Watch this space."

Adam Carey