Principle 6 – Delivers high-quality, innovative and sustainable public services that are responsive to local need and enable wider public sector reform

Our research and evidence demonstrate that high-quality and sustainable public services can only be achieved if Principles 1 to 5 are also fulfilled. This means ensuring that the new local authority boundaries are aligned to Surrey’s district economies geographies to maximise economic growth, housing development and devolution (principles 1 and 3). These objectives are central to government’s ambition for devolution, enabling strong local leadership that brings together a Mayor of Surrey with council leaders as part of the Surrey Strategic Authority (principle 2). Reorganisation is, of course, underpinned by strong financial governance and resilience, realised through efficiencies and reduced duplication that unitarisation can deliver (principle 5). By maintaining strong local connections and accountability, where meaningful resident engagement and empowerment is central to decision making (principles 3 and 4), we can ensure that place-based local services are provided that are responsive to local needs and locally tailored.

Effective service-delivery requires a deep understanding of the unique needs and challenges within local areas. There are numerous examples that demonstrate high-quality and transformative public services are best delivered in a responsive and sustainable way when local boundaries align with the functional geography grounded in recognised local identities and democratic accountability, delivering positive outcomes for residents and supporting government’s ambitions for devolution and growth.

This is a view supported by recent resident engagement about local government reorganisation, where almost two-thirds (63%) of respondents backed our proposal to divide Surrey into three unitary authorities. When asked about what their priorities for local government were, the top concerns were overwhelmingly local - over 60% cited ‘Understanding of local issues’ and ‘Local decision-making’ as their two highest priorities.

Our proposal for three unitary authorities for Surrey best realises this, by aligning the new local government boundaries for the area around the county’s recognised functional geographies and economic areas. As set out in Principle 3 above, Surrey has three distinct places, each with their own unique functional geographies and economic areas. These are not arbitrary lines. They are functional economic areas, underpinned by real people, commuting patterns, infrastructure links, housing market assessments, and business ecosystems. These geographies are long established and have been recognised by districts and the county council over many years.[1]

Taking an approach that enables the new unitaries to plan across functional economic areas will enable us to fully realise the growth potential of these distinct places and to make maximum use of limited resources. Local authority boundaries that reflect functional economic areas are better equipped to create and enact policy that meets the needs of specific areas and enhance our potential for partnership working, to better enhance strategic decision making in the economic development of Surrey and the wider south east. Coalescing around workable geographies that represent recognisable functional areas, the new three authorities strike the right balance being able to offer services at scale and will support innovation and efficiency without divorcing decisions from the communities being served.

A two-unitary configuration of local government in Surrey would slice through these recognised and cohesive geographies. Though there is a possibility of marginal economies of scale and financial savings, such a configuration would force communities, businesses and councils into arrangements that lack strategic logic or community legitimacy. Recent experiences from local government reorganisation elsewhere in England shows that when local authority boundaries divide functional economic geography, service delivery and economic growth are negatively impacted.

In Dorset, which underwent reorganisation in 2019, the separation of interdependent and cohesive economic areas led to a diluting of local leadership, the fragmentation of economic strategy as well as a broader strategic divergence across the new administrative boundaries.

In contrast to this, when the unitary Buckinghamshire Council was vested in 2020, the alignment of the functional economic area with the new administrative boundaries ensured economic and strategic coherence that supported strategic investment into the region to deliver local economic growth and housing delivery.

What we establish for Surrey in the coming months and years must be able to provide high-quality and responsive services, not only on day one, but also in the decades ahead. This can be best achieved by creating three authorities that are accessible to residents, reflecting their locally identified needs.

[1] ‘Interim Local Strategic Statement for Surrey 2016-2031 and ‘Surrey 2050 Place Ambition version 2 – 2023’, both jointly produced by Surrey County Council and Surrey’s eleven districts and borough councils.