The Labour government’s so-called ‘devolution revolution’ could signal the end of England’s district councils, with plans to consolidate local government into larger, unitary authorities. Announced in a white paper published on Monday, this move aims to streamline governance, cut costs, and empower regions with stronger leadership structures.
What’s the Big Idea?
Labour’s plans propose replacing the current two-tier system of district and county councils with single, unitary authorities. These councils would oversee everything from transport and housing to social care, planning, and even fire and police services. Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner outlined the vision, emphasising the need for change:
“Micromanaging from the centre combined with short-term, sticking-plaster politics has left England’s regions in a doom loop, unable to achieve their potential.” – Deputy Prime Minister, Angela Rayner.
The announcement follows other recent initiatives, such as national housing targets of 370,000 homes per year and designating onshore wind as a key national infrastructure project.
While the government has yet to publish detailed plans, the overhaul will require collaboration with local leaders to deliver outcomes.
The Case for Reform
Labour aims to put regions at the heart of its economic growth strategy, delivering on promises to build 1.5 million homes and boost local economies. Central to this vision is reducing inefficiencies. The proposed elimination of 164 district councils could save up to £2 billion and pave the way for more regional mayors.
But is bigger necessarily better? Critics argue that larger councils could become disconnected from the very communities they aim to serve.
What Would Change? Merging Responsibilities
Currently, district councils manage day-to-day local services like waste collection, parks, and local planning, while county councils oversee broader services like education, roads, and social care. Under Labour’s vision, all these responsibilities would merge into a single authority.
For some areas, this wouldn’t be a drastic change – Cornwall, for example, already operates under one council. However, the creation of such ‘mega-councils‘ has sparked fears of centralisation.
Hannah Dalton, vice-chair of the District Councils’ Network, voiced these concerns: “We’re concerned that any creation of mega-councils will prove the opposite of devolution, taking powers away from local communities, depriving tens of millions of people of genuinely localised decision-making and representation.”
What Are Local Leaders Saying? A Mixed Reaction
Local councillors are divided on the proposals. For some, the plans threaten to squeeze out essential community services.
Tim Adams, Liberal Democrat leader of North Norfolk District Council, warned: “I think the risk is that if the big services, like social care, children’s services and housing are all under one umbrella, something gets squeezed out.” Adams also criticised the white paper for being “pretty incoherent”, highlighting the lack of focus on tourism and coastal defences – key concerns for his region.
By contrast, Norfolk County Council’s Conservative leader Kay Mason Billig welcomed dialogue, she stated “Let’s put the people before politics and attempt to design something that is the right shape and size to deliver efficient, accountable services.”
Labour leaders appear more optimistic. Steve Morphew, leader of Labour at Norfolk County Council, described the plans as “a very exciting prospect” and “long-overdue opportunity” to modernise local governance.
Cllr Louise Gittins, Chair of the Local Government Association, however, urged caution. She emphasised the need for sustainable funding: “Devolution is not an end in itself and cannot distract from the severe funding pressures that are pushing local services to the brink.”
Will It Work? Lessons From the Past
Labour’s proposal faces hurdles, particularly given past failed attempts at devolution. In 2016, Conservative plans to introduce a mayor for Norfolk and Suffolk were scrapped. More recently, attempts to devolve power to these counties fell through, deemed too unambitious for lacking a directly elected mayor.
For this proposal to succeed, some argue it must deliver on two key fronts: genuine decision-making powers and long-term funding. Without both, larger councils risk becoming bureaucratic behemoths that fail to deliver the local, responsive services communities need.
The Big Question: Bigger Councils, Better Services?
The success of Labour’s devolution plans hinges on whether bigger councils can remain agile, accountable, and connected to local residents. While proponents argue the move will cut costs and streamline governance, sceptics fear that merging services could weaken local decision-making.
Richard Henry, Labour leader of Stevenage Borough Council, summed up the balancing act: “When there are challenges in our community through the cost-of-living crisis, it is vital we do not lose focus and continue to improve our town and achieve our ambitions.”
Final Thought
Labour’s ‘devolution revolution’ is bold, but the devil will be in the detail. While streamlining local governance has clear financial and strategic appeal, it risks alienating communities if local voices are lost in the process. Real success will require adequate funding, genuine empowerment of local leaders, and a commitment to keeping services responsive and accessible.
The question remains as to whether bigger councils deliver better outcomes, or whether they will dilute local democracy.
Chamber UK connects the councils to the commons, for more of Chamber UK’s analysis on local government, please click here.