Issue - meetings

The recommendation from the Cabinet meeting to be held on 19^th March 2025 at 10.00am will follow.

A copy of the Cabinet Report is attached.

Click here to view the recording of this item on YouTube

Councillor Beales sought Council’s permission to speak for more than the 5 minutes permitted. Council agreed to the request. 

Councillor Beales gave an update on the process undertaken since the English Devolution White paper was published on the 16 December 2024.   Norfolk and Suffolk were accepted onto the Devolution Priority Programme with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) writing to all Norfolk Leaders on 5 February 2025, inviting them to develop proposal for LGR in Norfolk. The letter set out the criteria and what was expected to be included in the Interim Plan for LGR in their area with the interim plan needing to be submitted by 21 March 2025. External consultants Deloitte were appointed to work alongside the officer working group and conduct a high-level options appraisal for LGR in Norfolk against the criteria set by the Government and to use the data collected to evaluate unitary options, whilst also considering the unique identity of Norfolk

As a result of this work an Interim Plan for Local Government Reorganisation in Norfolk had been developed.

Councillor Beales further explained the work, negotiations and discussion which had taken place between the authorities to reach the point where the proposal could come forward for debate and decision by this council.  To date 6 out of the 8 Norfolk Leaders were supporting the proposal set out in the paper in order to present a strong and unified message to MHCLG on the wishes for the future of local government in Norfolk.

He further drew attention to the fact that he had tried to ensure that all Councillors in the authority were given the chance to hear the proposals and comment on them before coming to the full Council meeting to make a decision on the preferred way forward.  He commended the work of all the Council Leaders and Officers involved in the process which was limited to such a short time scale.

Councillor Ring seconded the proposal and reserved the right to speak.

Councillor Long spoke on the proposal lamenting the loss of a 2 tier system and expressing disappointment that all district leaders weren’t in agreement.  He drew attention to the financial position put forward by the County Council, drew attention to high costs of services such as child social services which he felt there needed to be suitable resources available to fund.  He informed Council that the Conservative Group would have a free vote on the matter.

Councillor Bone spoke in support of the proposal in the report for a three council option and drew attention to the fact devolution was in the Labour manifesto.  He thanked the Leader and officers for the work put into the report to date.

Councillor Kemp spoke against local government review in Norfolk generally, but disagreeing with a 1 unitary as too big, and 3 Councils being the preferred of the options available.

Councillor Dark spoke in favour of a single  ...  view the full minutes text for item 104

As this decision was deemed urgent and could not be deferred, under standing order 12.15, Councillor Long, the Chair of the Corporate Performance Panel had agreed that this decision could not be called in.

RECOMMENDED:  1)       That the content of the Interim Plan for Local Government Re-organisation in Norfolk report (Appendix B to the report) be noted, alongside the report’s conclusion that the three unitary model option scored best overall against the government criteria and is therefore the preferred option for Norfolk.

2)             That the three unitary model for LGR be endorsed as this Council’s preferred option for submission to MHCLG.

3)             That delegated authority be granted to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader to finalise and submit the Interim Plan to MHCLG on 21^st March 2025 based on the endorsement of recommendation 2 above.

4)             That following the submission of the Interim Plan and subject to the feedback received from MHCLG, the council, continue to work with the Norfolk Districts to conduct resident and stakeholder engagement on the LGR proposals for Norfolk to inform the full business case.

5)             To delegate authority to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader, for the development of the full business case for LGR in Norfolk to be returned to full Council for approval prior to submission.

Reason for Decision

To respond to the Governments request that the council work with other local authorities in Norfolk to submit proposals for Local Government Reform in Norfolk by 21 March 2025.

Click here to view the recording of this item on YouTube

The Interim Assistant Director, Transformation and Change presented the report as included in the Agenda and provided background on the Priority Programme, processes carried out to date and timelines for Devolution and Local Government Reorganisation. 

The Interim Assistant Director referred Members to the recommendations as set out within the report which were that the Council’s preferred option was the three Unitary model and provided background on the alternative options which had also been considered.

The Interim Assistant Director highlighted the high level appraisal of the options, the criteria from Government and the scoring system used.  It was noted that this was a high level appraisal due to the short timescales involved.

Attention was drawn to the positive and useful meeting of the Joint Panels which had been held the previous evening.  They made numerous points, and supported the recommendations.

The Chair thanked the Interim Assistant Director for the report and invited questions and comments from Cabinet Members.  The following points were raised:

·         A well run authority was best value for the tax payer and in a strong financial position.

·         The savings of a larger authority were not necessarily as high as shown.

·         There was high level joint working already taking place between the district councils.

·         Differences in savings put forward by the County Council and Deloitte.

·         It was down to the quality of the Management of the organisation.

·         The issue of the Mayoral Authority was a discussion to be had at a later date.

·         Current county councillors did not feel able to have influence in a large authority.  Concern their decision was taken by the County Council Cabinet.

·         The fact that savings were proposed by the County Council by not having county elections, but they were now only put off by one year.

·         Arguments in favour of reasonable sized unitaries was persuasive.

·         Savings proposed were only 1 of 6 criteria, and the weightings were unknown.

·         The proposals should be about the place and the community and local engagement.

·         The county council’s interest payments were harmonised through the council tax and were not new debt.

·         Large parts of west Norfolk were a very large distance from Norwich.

·         The overall local focus on County services could improve.

·         It was useful to have an Independent view going into the discussions without being tied to party persuasions.  The Leader had full input to the discussions and attempted to bridge divides between differing views.

·         The arguments for the recommendations were driven by the data.

·         The proposal was supported by 6 of the 8 Leaders in the County.

Thanks were given to the Leader and the Officers involved in the process for coming to a conclusion whilst working closely with other authorities.

Under standing order 34 Councillor Ware confirmed that following the explanations and briefings given, she supported the recommendations.

As this decision was deemed urgent and could not be deferred, under standing order 12.15, Councillor Long, the Chair of the Corporate Performance Panel had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 150