Waverley fears it will be among the boroughs earmarked to share Woking’s debts during local government reorganisation.
Woking issued a section 114 in June 2023, and commissioners were appointed in December. The district has over £2bn in debt, and the council says it cannot repay it from its resources.
Surrey County Council, which is moving forward with its plans to become a Unitarity Authority, has admitted to having over £1 billion in debt, but many believe it is considerably more.
In addition to these two authorities, debt is rising in Runnymead and Spelthorne borough councils, and Guildford doesn’t look too good either. In October 2023, Waverley’s collaboration partner considered issuing a 114 notice of imminent bankruptcy and imposed controls to manage its £300m debt. Subsequently, it invoked a transformation plan, which included sharing a CEO with Waverley, resulting in £603,000 of partnership savings.
However, Guildford and other councils face tough decisions after receiving a “very difficult financial settlement from the government”. It has no extra funding to meet inflation and demand pressures, meaning it will have to cut costs further and increase income to make ends meet. Cost pressures looming over the council stand at over £3 million, with National Insurance rises and developments causing the most strain.
Surrey’s application to join the Devolution Priority programme included a statement from its leader, Tim Oliver, that “the significant financial risk of the level of debt needs to be addressed before devolution and reorganisation takes place.” Oliver wants the government to write off the debt!
SCC wants the May council elections to be called off.
Alfold Tory Cllr Kevin Deanus was among those who supported the postponement.
One of the most significant Posts we have ever written
Is Surrey County Council acting in haste?
A SOLACE report, a consultancy partly owned by the Local Government Association (LGA) and HM Treasury, was commissioned to provide an independent assessment of the benefits of the Guildford/Waverley collaboration to date and the nature and potential value of further collaborative opportunities between the two councils.
The analysis concluded that the collaboration has had a net benefit, which will grow as benefits are ongoing, but costs are one-off. The councils’ overall cost base is lower than it would have been without the collaboration, and there has been no evident deterioration in performance. The report also concluded that other collaborations elsewhere have achieved much bigger benefits, and there should be much more to be had from Guildford and Waverley working together and integrating more closely.
Waverley’s leader, Cllr Paul Follows, has warned there will be no unitary combination physically possible in Surrey that doesn’t include Guildford and Waverley being together. His preferred option is a South West Surrey unitary, with one other partner at most.
He said:
Waverley is not really a place because there is considerable overlap between the neighbouring districts and warned against politicians who further undermine the trust of our democratic institutions and politicians by scaremongering,”
With a population of 1.1m, Surrey is 400,000 short of the default assumption of the proposed size of a strategic authority, which is what SCC’s leader, Oliver, desires. This is according to the government’s devolution white paper.
The Government has many reasons (some of them good) for forging ahead with re-organisation of 2-tier Councils. it would seem dealing with Council debt is one of them. They don’t seem averse to the idea that prudent Councils should be made to shoulder the debt of the more profligate ones, once they are merged into Unitaries. This may also lead to a sale of the family silver to balance the books.
Forcing prudent Councils down this route, with the possibility of community assets being sold off, is a disgrace.
We should also not forget there are around 60 existing Unitaries across England, most of which are so small, they are unsustainable.
So will the Government choose the debt-ridden Councils to be included in their priority programme, or will they bottle it? We should know quite soon.
I suggest Follows looks at the Greater Manchester model, which is why extremely unpopular with the towns that were dragged into it. Ask any Boltonian what they think. Stand well back.
I do not believe Auntie Angie will allow a Tory anywhere near control of a County or Unitary Authority. Thus the election will not be delayed. Oust them now rather than later.
Crucially one needs to build in the Councillors Wednesday statement which is anticipated to be bugger nature and build buil build.
Meaning Liberal and Conservatives will be on the same side against such thus negating votes allowing Labour gains. Plus it really doesn’t matter as all opposition will be swept aside by Govt Planners. It’s a case of now. Rather than later. It’s going to happen.
Plus people getting a house roll vote for who gave them the chance.
Thus Surrey can be viewed less a collection of boroughs merging and more five boroughs becoming part of London with the border being the Reading to Gatwick railway line. Putting Guildford on the border and Woking firmly in London.
London can soak up the Wee oking mess whereas the remains of the County is impoverished and marginal until the mega housing development begins and thus generates tax income.
It’s not Guildford and Waverley it’s everything South of the railway. It just about gives enough population to survive until the houses are built. It’s messy it’s crude it’s the most likely answer.
Farnham.
Ash Guildford Dorking Reigate
Redhill.
The Downs Border
Hayling Chichester Brighton
Everyone needs to consider a change in scale. Small is out. Any talk of local decision making is a bad joke.
MeaninglessMud