"Thoroughly broken" system needs reform says Southend City Council leader
There are different proposals for unitary authorities in the county
The leader of Southend City Council, Daniel Cowan, says that their proposal for five unitary authorities in the county is "the best option."
He says that the current system is "fundamentally and thoroughly broken" and that the "system does need to be reformed."
In interview with Greatest Hits Radio Essex News, he said that:
"I think the five unitary authority business case, that I've been really proud to lead on, is the best for Essex because it creates the most number of local authorities, ensuring that local government remains local whilst also meeting all those tests that government have laid out in front of us.
"It creates stable councils which are rooted in communities based around the five major urban conurbations of Essex: Southend, Basildon, Harlow, Chelmsford and Colchester, and ensures that you retain that sense of place. That sense of identity that we all have.
"To have that pride in our place that would get lost in larger councils, but you also need to have the ability to benefit from economies of scale. And I think that what we have done is we presented an option to government that says we're big enough to stand on our own two feet.
"We're big enough to save the government money, to save the taxpayer money, most importantly, but also to ensure that services are not remote from local people, that when somebody calls their local council about an issue in their street, or in their neighbourhood, that that council isn't based miles away."
There are other proposals that have been put forward by other authorities, including plans for three or four larger Essex councils.
Daniel says that these plans "lack credibility."
"Our business case has been built from the ground up, based on real data, and the real life finances of each of the individual councils.
"We have built an accurate picture of what it costs to run services in Essex, how much income is generated and then how that could be divided into five new councils to create stable local authorities.
"Although it is my job to fight for what's best for Southend, and I believe I have fought for what's best for Southend, the question we're being asked is a bigger area, what is best for Greater Essex? And we need to remember that the people we represent don't live their lives with neat little political lines drawn on maps.
"They might live in Southend, but they might work in Rochford ,or in Basildon, or in Chelmsford.
"Or, they might live in Rayleigh, but their kids will go to school in Southend. So we need to think about how do we create local authorities that meet the broader tests of how people live their lives, where they go to work, where their kids go to school.
"I don't believe the four unitary authority business cases have done that adequately and with the three unitary authority business case, it is making the age-old argument that bigger is best.
"That having these three large mega councils, which would overnight become three of the four biggest councils in the country, I think it's incredibly dangerous because if one of those councils starts to struggle, a Council of that size, it will naturally have an effect on its neighbours.
"I think it really removes services from people, so the South Essex business case for the unitary authority for South Essex under the County council's model would see a council that runs from Grays to Great Wakering and everywhere in between,
"Trying to deliver something like social care across an area that vast would be expensive, that is already proven by the County Council model. If bigger was better, they would already be cheaper than Southend.
"In Southend we're really proud with our recent Ofsted rating and our CQC rating demonstrating that that despite being approximately 1/8 of the size of the county in terms of population and less than 1/12 in terms of geographical area, we are matching them in terms of outcomes.
"But not only are we matching them in outcomes, we're doing so at a better value for the taxpayer. So our unit costs are significantly cheaper.
"So I think that where they fall down is that it is that old argument of thinking that bigger is better when the evidence clearly doesn't demonstrate that the evidence demonstrates that the five unitary authority business case, that our model, will save more money for the taxpayer.
"You'll save £105 million a year across the whole of Essex, which means more money going back into local services. It roots councils within sensible geographies based on active travel maps.
"Of the 15 councils across Essex, ten of them are behind the five unitary authority business case. And I think that says quite a lot. The fact that the majority of Essex is supporting the five unitary authority model."
Daniel also noted that "for a lot of people, they would rather things just stay as they are."
"We absolutely hear that message. But, we also understand that the local government finance system has been broken for over 15 years."
He claimed that over this time his local authority lost over "half a billion", and said that:
"If I had half a billion pounds to spend, Southend wouldn't have any problems.
"I think that really demonstrates how fundamentally and thoroughly broken the system is.
"The system does need to be reformed, re-organised and improved.
"Whilst this isn't necessarily what people want to see happen, we are being told it is necessary, so as your elected leaders, it is our job to ensure that we deliver what is best."