Fenland set to send strong message to Government on reform

An extraordinary meeting of the full council has been called for Friday (7), when members are set to discuss local government reorganisation and what Fenland's response to the various options should be.

However, while a report to the meeting explains that Fenland would support Option D - of the five possible proposals - the council is set to discuss sending a letter from leader Cllr Chris Boden stating the current reorganisation process is "fundamentally flawed".

The letter also tells central government: "There is no good option on the table for the residents of Fenland. All options will be worse than current arrangements."

He says the Government has warned councils they need to come up with a preferred scheme if they are to have any voice in the proposed reform.

RECOMMENDED READING: Train driver who diverted horror train to Huntingdon is Iraq War veteran

"Having full regard to the Government's flawed criteria, Fenland District Council supports Option D as the least bad option."

Councillors are being asked to consider sending Cllr Boden's letter, which admits that reform is needed, but goes on to state that: "The reorganisation process initiated by Government in December 2024 is fundamentally flawed."

Cllr Boden claims that the current process does not go far enough in the type of reform needed, but at the same time is "both prohibitively expensive and, in many respects, counterproductive".

The letter tells the Government that it has failed to understand that many local services need to be provided by authorities that serve populations much less than the 500,000 lower limit prescribed, or even 300,000 in 'exceptional circumstances'.

RECOMMENDED READING: Opposition to Option A reorganisation in Huntingdonshire

He said that this is especially true in more rural areas.

Cllr Boden also believes some strategic services, including those provided by central government, 'could and should' be provided by any new authorities formed.

"The Government's current reorganisation process would leave local government in England in the perverse position that urban, relatively compact, councils in London and the ex-metropolitan county areas would on average serve significantly smaller populations than in more rural, non-metropolitan areas, where the problems of rurality would be exacerbated by having to serve much larger populations than most of the metropolitan councils," he claims.

Cllr Boden said that local government reorganisation is an expensive process and therefore, to make it justifiable to taxpayers, it needs to be carried out 'competently'.

The letter goes on: "The approach of the Government incurs all of the costs of reform but with far too few of the potential benefits.

"If the current local government reform process is allowed to proceed, the whole system will rapidly fail and will need to be reformed again, incurring substantial, otherwise unnecessary additional expense.

"Fenland District Council therefore calls on the Government to halt the current, fundamentally flawed, local government reorganisation process and to establish a Royal Commission (as has preceded previous, more rational, local government reform exercises) to consider all possible reforms, without the artificial constraints imposed by the Government in the current process."

Option D, which is also the preferred option of Peterborough City Council, comprises three Unitary Authorities in the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Area: Greater Peterborough Unitary Authority, comprising Peterborough City Council and Northern Huntingdonshire District Council; Cambridgeshire Fens Unitary Authority, comprising Fenland, East Cambridgeshire and Eastern and Southern Huntingdonshire District Councils, and Greater Cambridge Unitary Authority, comprising South Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridge City Council.

The decision of the full council will go to a cabinet meeting being held straight after from 4pm on Friday.

Cambridgeshire County Council, at its meeting on October 21, agreed to support and submit to government Option A - which would see two unitary authorities created with a north/south divide of the county. It would see Fenland, Peterborough, and Huntingdonshire make up one new authority, with East Cambs, South Cambs, and Cambridge City making up the other.

East Cambridgeshire District Council is pushing for Option B after councillors agreed to support the option at a full council meeting in September. This option also has a north/south divide. However, East Cambs would join Fenland, Peterborough, and Huntingdonshire, leaving South Cambs and Cambridge City to make up the second authority.

Peterborough City Council led the development of Option D, which would see it join with the northern Huntingdonshire District Wards to form one authority. Fenland, Huntingdonshire District southern wards, and East Cambs make up the second; South Cambs and Cambridge City make up the third.

Huntingdonshire District Council has led in the development of Option E, which would see Peterborough urban areas join with Fenland and East Cambs, while Huntingdonshire would join with Peterborough City, and South Cambridgeshire and Cambridge City would again be joined.