Council restructure plans whittled down to two options for Peterborough

They were presented with a report containing a comprehensive overview of five main options for LGR in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, which will shape how the region’s councils look going forward.

After two hours of questions and debate, members whittled it down to two preferred options (Option A and Option D) which will now be discussed by full council and subsequently cabinet before a final submission is made to government on November 28.

LGR means that from April 2028 the current seven councils in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, including Peterborough City Council, will no longer exist and be replaced by larger unitary councils.

It is part of the government’s plans to transfer more powers and funding from national to local government and move away from the current two-tier system of district and county councils in England.

All seven councils will submit their preferred options for LGR, but it is ultimately the government that will decide which one to take forward.

What are the two LGR options councillors must choose from?

Option A (North and South) – Unitary 1 (Peterborough, Fenland, Huntingdonshire), Unitary 2 (East Cambs, South Cambs, Cambridge City)

Option D (Greater Peterborough) – Unitary 1 (Peterborough, West Hunts), Unitary 2 (Fenland, East Hunts, East Cambs), Unitary 3 (South Cambs, Cambridge City)

At the joint meeting of the scrutiny committees on October 28, members decided that Option A and Option D were the best ones to take forward for further debate.

It was heard that Option A, which would include two unitary authorities, would provide greater financial benefits with a shorter payback time while Option D, which would include three unitary authorities, would offer better local responsiveness and sense of identity.

Notably, Peterborough City Council officers informed councillors that Option A would be the “most balanced and sustainable option” for the region, provided local identity and engagement were actively protected.

Financial data collated by finance officers and external advisors revealed that a two unitary model would generate annual savings of £12.1 million with a payback period of six years. It would come with one-off implementation costs of £34 million and one-off transformation costs of between £11 million and £16 million.

Meanwhile, a three unitary model would generate annual savings of £1.4 million with a payback period of 50 plus years. It would come with one-off implementation costs of £41 million and one-off transformation costs of between £7 million and £12 million.

MORE: Peterborough council tax could increase by more than £200 under Local Government Reorganisation plans

Labour and Liberal Democrat members at the meeting spoke in favour of Option D, an option put forward by the two local Labour MPs, while Conservative and some independent members seemed to favour Option A, which was recently chosen as a preferred option by Cambridgeshire County Council.

Conservative member Cllr Steve Allen claimed the worries about losing Peterborough’s identity were “over egged”.

Cllr Allen said: “This train is coming down the line and there’s a lot of things that the train is bringing with it that we won’t like.”

He added: “Initial advice from the government was to keep existing county boundaries and to have two three-authority unitaries. I think that advice was fair and reasonable and we shouldn’t ignore it.”

His party colleague Cllr Lynne Ayres added: “I am very much in favour of either Option A or Option B.

“The fact is that that will get a better financial result for Peterborough and the whole of our local authority. In my mind, that is the most important thing at the moment and will continue to be so until we get out of all our troubles.”

Labour’s Cllr Asim Mahmood said: “I truly feel that we need to have a local responsiveness to the option and for me I think Option D gives that stronger alignment and local identity.

“With the right mitigations in place I think we can overcome the financial risks that are being highlighted.”

Liberal Democrat group leader Cllr Christian Hogg claimed Option A would result in a “lack of local control” due to the size of the proposed authority.

“For me, the importance is that people on the street want to know their councillors,” he said.

“They want to know that they’re there for that time when they need them the most and I do not want to walk away from my residents.”

Green Party councillor Nicola Day raised concerns about Peterborough, which is the most relatively deprived area in the region, being paired with another deprived area as part of Option A.

Adrian Chapman, executive director of place and economy said officers’ concerns resonated with Cllr Day’s concerns.

He said: “We know the disproportionate amount of demand we have for statutory services in the north compared to other areas where affluence and prosperity is more present.

“There are other changes happening around local government reform that seek to level up the landscape.”

Chief finance officer Christine Marshall noted that the government was looking to introduce a Fairer Funding model which would see Peterborough getting additional funding in the coming years.

However, she admitted that they would not find out any further details about this until after the LGR submission had gone in.