Local Government Reorginisation in Surrey is becoming as clear as mud.

Each day that goes by, the Waverley Spiders become more discombobulated by the changes to be inflicted on us. One of our arachnids fell off its web and died! It was all too much for it when it heard that Surrey could link with parts of West Sussex, so Cranleigh and Alfold could soon become part of Horsham. Has someone gone quietly mad?!

This week, there was an interesting development in local government reorganisation, as the government launched a consultation on plans for reform in Surrey, the first area to undergo this round of Local Government Reorganisation (LGR).

 

 Recently, Mr McMahon, the head honcho responsible for LGR, rejected a bid for a unitary authority that spanned county boundaries. 

A few days ago, the government rejected the proposal for a new cross-border unitary centre around Gatwick Airport.

A bid by Reigate & Banstead (Surrey) and Crawley BC (West Sussex) sought Government support for a unitary authority that would cover the geographical area of Gatwick Airport in West Sussex. This cunning plan was thrown out!   Then comes this.

Now the very same Labour Minister raises the prospect of a strategic authority straddling Surrey and West Sussex.

So, the future for Surrey remains as clear as mud, then?

Could a Judicial Review be lodged by Surrey councils following LGR decision?

The answer is YES

Judicial reviews of local government reorganisation (LGR) have occurred elsewhere for various reasons.

In Cumbria, a judicial review was pursued against the decision to replace the two-tier system with two unitary councils.

The leader of Cumbria County Council claimed that the government’s reorganisation decision was politically motivated and lacked sufficient public consultation.

Many Surrey residents claim that consultation across the county has been derisory. Many claim SCC’s race to be the first has been conducted in indecent haste, and its residents may be left to repent at leisure.

Concerns have also been raised regarding government policy on the minimum size of a unitary authority, specifically the guideline of 300,000 to 600,000 population. A guideline that has now been revised, although confusion persists.

Some suspected that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) was being cautious in its feedback letters to avoid providing grounds for future judicial reviews.

Furthermore, a judicial review was launched over the Levelling Up Fund due to concerns about how funding was being distributed.

Could rocking up for Waverley meetings become optional?

Last year, councillors at ‘Your Waverley’ responded to a Government consultation.

Not everyone among its 50-councillor contingent endorsed the idea of participating in meetings remotely. Some long-serving councillors believed it would be a retrograde step. 

Waverley. However, some newer and younger Waverley councillors welcomed the move to make their councillor duties easier to manage alongside their work and family commitments.

With LGR – Local Government Reorganisation – happening soon, virtual attendance may become more popular due to the distances councillors may be forced to travel to unitary authorities across Surrey.

COVID prompted a move towards “virtual attendance”

The government has committed to legislating for remote attendance at council meetings when “time allows” and announced that it will also require upper-tier councils to have proxy voting schemes for full council meetings.

The Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government has published its response to a consultation it carried out last year on remote meetings and proxy voting for councils.

There was overwhelming support.

This confirmed that ministers could proceed with necessary changes to allow remote attendance at meetings, something many in the sector have campaigned for.

The consultation received 5,844 responses, and 86% were in favour of remote attendance for council meetings.

Over half (56%) said there should be “no limitations” on remote attendance. In comparison, a third suggested limits so that two-thirds of attendees should be in-person and a further 33% said remote attendance should be reserved for “exceptional circumstances.

In its conclusion, the government said:

“On remote attendance, we plan to permit local authorities to develop their own locally appropriate policies, if they decide to hold remote meetings.”

Local Government Association chair Louise Gittins (Lab) said this was a “positive step”.

“We’re pleased that the government recognises that councils should be trusted to set out the arrangements and decide for themselves how best to use this flexibility.”

Proxy voting

Separately, the consultation also sought views on proxy voting in cases where a member is unable to attend a full council meeting. This attracted less support from respondents.

Some 47% said that proxy voting would not be helpful or would be a disadvantage, and 36% said it would be beneficial. 17% said it would be neither useful nor a disadvantage.

In its consultation response, the LGA raised concerns about proxy voting, particularly as ungrouped independent members are unable to use it, which may be perceived as creating an unfair advantage for larger political parties.

However, the government said it intends to “require principal (unitary, upper and second-tier) councils to implement proxy voting schemes, to provide consistency for members who are absent when they become a new parent, or for serious or long-term illness”.

The government added that the requirement was intended for full council meetings and that for other meetings, councils could choose to use proxy voting schemes or substitute/pairing schemes.

In its submission to the consultation, the LGA said that traditional proxy voting, where someone gives their instruction about how to vote to another before the meeting, is “not compatible” with the requirement for councillors to “hear all the evidence” before reaching their decision.

The LGA added that if the proxy instead delegates their voting power to another member, it would be “more compatible”, but questioned if this would actually “have the intended impact of allowing the principal member to exercise their democratic duty indirectly”.

 Cllr Gittins said the LGA would review the proposals and “work with government to clarify any outstanding questions on how this will be practically implemented.”

Guildord & Waverley getting closer every day.

The Legal functions of both councils will merge following a major decision by ‘Your Waverley’s  Extraordinary Council Meeting. 

However, a handful of Tories, led by their group leader, Cllr  Jane Austin, typically opposed the plan.

The Tories have been opposed to any collaboration between authorities from the outset. But favour Surrey being split into two or a single Unitary authority. A move which residents’ surveys have opposed

Cllr Austin claimed a predicted 4% annual savings for both authorities was too small, the risks were high, the cost of transferring staff was too high, and the change was rushed for authorities on the cusp of local government reorganisation. She wanted any decision deferred until the Autumn, during which time the future of local authorities would be more certain. “Then we can make a more informed decision.”

Echoing her words, Cllr Michael Goodridge argued that the”rushed timeframe of July 1 – just ten days away – for implementation.  Talks with the unions and staff would be rushed.  Claiming:

“Will it be a rushed consultation or  a whitewash?”

However, their concerns were dismissed by others, saying the move was not just about monetary savings.  It would put both authorities, and in particular their staff, in a much better position in the future with LGR. The new team would be the only authority combining legal and information services for two local authorities.

 The G & W Legal and Information Team would be resilient enough to handle the huge workload before LGR due to a flood of land and asset transfers required by the parish and town councils in both Waverley & Guildford.

Leader Paul Follows said the savings would not be restricted to just 4% going forward; it could be considerably more. It was also likely that Waverley & Guildford would still be going for another two years.

Cllr Victoria Keihl said, “Just this week, on one transaction alone, the authorities had saved £5,000.

She stressed the consultation with staff and unions was already well progressed.

Cash-strapped councils needed every penny they could muster.

Legal Services and Information Governance are both back-office functions that provide essential support to enable the exercise of functions and delivery of services across the authorities.

The Legal Services and Information Governance teams of both authorities are key services that support the delivery of all the authorities’ objectives, ensuring they meet all statutory and legal requirements.

Both authorities currently operate in-house services which report to the Assistant Director for Legal Services and Information Governance.

External legal support is obtained when it is identified as necessary, either due to complexity or capacity constraints. The budget for the internal staff costs, with oncosts, is £1,050,669 at Waverley Borough Council and £1,319,620 at Guildford Borough Council. External spend on legal services for the financial year 24/25 at Waverley Borough Council is £618,872, and at Guildford Borough Council is £579,026.

Both authorities currently have contracts in place for case management systems and online resources. Having a single contract in place rather than two contracts will enable the authorities to attract better rates, creating savings.

  Guildford’s Legal Services and Information Governance team has a total of 22 FTE. (Full-time equivalents.)

The motion to join forces was approved by a vote of 25 to 7, with one abstention. The transfer takes place on 1 July 2025.

G & W have been sharing legal expertise for some considerable time.

 The total cost, excluding on-costs, is £1,009,739, with an additional £135,893 in funding from the Housing Revenue Account for services provided beyond business as usual.

The Waverley Legal Services and Information Governance team has already been increased over the financial year 24/25 following a restructuring.

The team provides advice and support, and also deals with contract disputes.  The property team advises on all matters relating to land assets, including conveyancing, leases, easements, licences, and rights to buy. They also advise on issues about land ownership by local authorities, such as appropriation and consents, and resolve disputes.

Litigation and licensing – prosecutions relating to non-compliance for planning and regulatory services, and dealing with challenges to the authorities’ decision-making.

They provide advice and guidance throughout the investigative process. Advising members on licensing matters and attending hearings. 

Planning – provide advice to officers and the committee. Negotiate and draft S106 agreements and unilateral undertakings. They deal with planning appeals and also review applications. 

 

Waverley weather warning – It’s time to check on your neighbours.

A yellow heat warning is now in effect across Surrey from now until Saturday, June 21.

WW on holiday
The Waverley Web is off to the beach.

The Alzheimer’s Society is urging residents to check in on friends, neighbours, and relatives living with dementia.  However, all older people are affected when the thermometer rises.


A yellow heat-health warning is in effect across Surrey from now until Saturday (June 21). The Alzheimer’s Society is urging residents to check in on friends, neighbours, and relatives living with dementia.

With over 18,900 people in Surrey affected by the condition, the charity warns that hot weather poses serious risks, especially dehydration, a common and dangerous issue for those with memory problems.

“People should enjoy the nice weather,” said Marion Child, Head of Local Services for Alzheimer’s Society in Surrey. “But it’s important to note that high temperatures can lead to severe health problems for people with dementia unless they take special precautions to keep cool and well-hydrated.”

Increased Risk

People with dementia may forget to drink fluids or wear appropriate clothing, and may not recognise when they are too hot or unwell. The charity says families, friends and carers can help by:

● Leaving water within easy reach and offering drinks regularly
● Providing hydrating foods like ice lollies, yoghurt and jelly
● Ensuring people wear light, breathable clothing and a sunhat outdoors
● Keeping homes cool by closing curtains and opening windows in the evening
● Avoiding going out between 11 am and 3 pm when the sun is strongest
● Using simple cooling methods like fans and iced cloths

Marion Child added: “Popping round to check on a neighbour, friend or family member with dementia can help keep them safe during the hot weather.”

A Bigger Picture

There are around a million people in the UK living with dementia — but more than a third do not have a diagnosis. Alzheimer’s Society says that means thousands of people are going without the vital care and support a diagnosis can bring.

If you’re concerned about someone, the Alzheimer’s Society offers advice and support through its Dementia Support Line (0333 150 3456) and website: alzheimers.org.uk.

As the heatwave continues, the charity is reminding people across Surrey to look out for the most vulnerable in their communities.