Gedling Borough Council could be abolished if plans to create a ‘super council’ move forward.
The leader of Nottinghamshire County Council, Cllr Kay Cutts, has said she is eager to get on with plans to abolish district and borough councils and increase co-operation between East Midlands councils.
Cllr Cutts is working on two projects: to create a unitary authority in Nottinghamshire by abolishing district and borough councils; and creating a ‘super council’ with four counties and three cities in the East Midlands.
Speaking about the new unitary authority, she said the funding situation was now so serious that there were now three options: cut services, raise council tax or pool resources.
The Conservative councillor, who represents the Radcliffe on Trent ward, said: “This council needs to save £54 million out of our revenue, and if we’re going to do that, we have to close down services and for me that’s not acceptable.
“The other alternative we have is to put council tax up by something like five percent per annum for a decade.
“In Nottinghamshire, we’re going to pool our resources. In my view that’s the most sensible thing to do. We will probably double the number of councillors so everyone can have their say, and try to do what we’re elected to do which is try to provide members of the public with services.
Councillor Cutts was speaking ahead of a meeting which has been requested with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, James Brokenshire to discuss the possibility of a ‘super council’.
She added: “The local issue for Nottinghamshire is we are going to look for re-organisation, and if I have an opportunity at this meeting I will raise it, but the meeting is not about that.”
However the abolishing of councils is likely to be controversial with the councils which would be absorbed, many of which have already come out against the plan.
Nottingham City Council leader Jon Collins favours a scheme which would see an expansion of Nottingham’s borders, known as the Metro Strategy.
John Clarke, the leader of Gedling Borough Council, also favours this approach.
Other council leaders, including the boss of Ashfield District Council Jason Zadrozny, have previously said they are opposed entirely to the abolition of district and borough councils.
Speaking after a meeting of the Policy Committee today, Councillor Cutts went on to discuss the plan for a ‘strategic alliance’ which has also been dubbed a ‘super council’.
This would involve four counties and three cities – Nottinghamshire, Nottingham, Derbyshire, Derby, Leicestershire, Leicester and Lincolnshire.
It is hoped this would rival the combined authority in the West Midlands.
She said: “I have been talking to my colleagues across the East Midlands and we’re very much involved in the Midlands Engine. We need to pull our weight more with the Midlands Engine.
“The West Midlands is already very well organised. We aren’t so well organised.
“We’re going to see James Brokenshire in order to see if we can come to an agreement about a strategic authority without a mayor, that’s going to draw down funding from Government and allow us to behave like responsible councillors that we are.”
When asked about a timeframe for when the changes in Nottinghamshire could come into effect, Councillor Cutts replied: “I want to get on with it.”
Cutts by name, cuts by nature.
I wonder which party benefits from this attempt to gerrymander the electorate…?
Much better plan than anything Labour could conjur up, Mathew. We’d just get taxed. We dont need borough and district councils anymore its old fashioned. A bygon age. Cut costs save services and go with the ‘super council’ plan.
Yet another step on the road to eradicating the public sector. Rather than talk about cutting costs, how about we hold the government to account for not adequately funding public services to the brink of extinction. Hospitals, Schools, police, councils, child welfare, etc, etc etc will all end in private hands and run solely for profit if we let this government in for another term.
Tax is not a bad thing if it is distributed fairly among the rich, poor, individuals, and corporations. If everyone pays their way fairly, society as a whole benefits. The difference between paying tax to fund public services, or fees to pay for private, is that with one the money goes back in to the pot to improve things for everyone, and the other goes into the pot of a few already wealthy shareholders.
Yet another step on the road to eradicating the public sector. Rather than talk about cutting costs, how about we hold the government to account for not adequately funding public services to the brink of extinction. Hospitals, Schools, police, councils, child welfare, etc, etc etc will all end in private hands and run solely for profit if we let this government in for another term.
Tax is not a bad thing if it is distributed fairly among the rich, poor, individuals, and corporations. If everyone pays their way fairly, society as a whole benefits. The difference between paying tax to fund public services or fees to pay for private is that with one the money goes back in to the pot to improve things for everyone, and the other goes into the pot of a few already wealthy shareholders.
Cutts by name….I like it. The very same who PROMISED to remove the Burton Rd bus plug if the conservatives became the ruling party. Perhaps a name change to Billy Liar may be more appropriate.
This is a blatant power grab by Kay Cutts and her Cohorts. Unitary authorities take away local representatiin, local control and are not guaranteed to save anything. I’m fact it would cost to set up. So, Is Cutts, where would the set-up money come from? Which but if the budget would you oirate? Hopefully not the same place you got the Pothole Fund from.
Don’t forget, Is Cutts started cutting before the word Austerity came out of the dictionary.