Appeal made to ‘abolish’ borough council in shake-up
AWEST Lancashire councillor who supports the latest Greater Lancashire devolution plans has suggested that abolishing or reforming the borough of West Lancashire, and allowing some communities to join with neighbouring areas of Liverpool, Southport or Lancashire would be a good move too.
The Advertiser asked West Lancashire councillors for their thoughts on the ‘Greater Lancashire’ county deal, which has recently been agreed by 15 Lancashire council leaders across the whole county.
The agreement sets-out arrangements and priorities for council leaders as they continue working towards negotiating a joint Lancashire devolution deal with the government. The aims are to get more decisions taken locally, rather than in London, and also to get more funding into Lancashire.
Lancashire council leaders have raised fears that the county overall is falling behind neighbouring areas with devolution deals, such as the Liverpool City Region and Greater Manchester. They believe more collaborative working is needed between councils.
But there are no plans to change existing borough and county boundaries, many of which were created in the early 1970s from former rural and urban district councils.
There will be no new elected mayor, unlike Steve Rotheram in the Liverpool City Region, Andy Burnham in Greater Manchester, or Ben Houchen in the Tees Valley area around Middlesbrough.
There will be no public referendum or poll on the Lancashire devolution plans. However, elected councillors have held special votes and debates to show their approval or opposition in the last two weeks.
West Lancashire Conservative Coun David Whittington, who represents Parbold, said he supports the Greater Lancashire plan. But, in an ideal world, he would advocate much bigger changes.
He said the best scenario would be to create new arrangements based on modern requirements and identities. Alternatives, in theory, could be that towns such as Skelmersdale and Ormskirk be allowed to join the Liverpool City Region, if residents chose.
Alternatively, West Lancashire towns could join with Southport, which could leave Merseyside to move into Lancashire? Other areas in West Lancashire may want to link with Chorley, Wigan or Preston?
But boundaries are not on the devolution agenda.
Coun Whittington was unable to attend the recent full council vote on devolution at West Lancashire,
But he said he would have voted in favour.
However, he also holds moreradical opinions on council boundaries and reforms. He emphasised that these ideas do not represent the collective view of the Conservative group at West Lancashire and he was speaking in a personal capacity.
Asked about West Lancashire’s relationship to the Liverpool region, he said: “Not all of West Lancashire has such links. Whilst I have not conducted a survey of residents in Parbold ward, you will appreciate that our travel links are via the Southport and Manchester rail line and we are very close to junction 27 on the M6. This gives us easy access north to Preston, south to Wigan and, via the M62, to Manchester.
“Parts of Wrightington are within half a mile of Junction 27 of the M6 and the unofficial access at Charnock Richard service station. The area where I live has a postal address of either Mawdesley or Heskin, both of which are in the Chorley borough. Going back some years, Parbold was part of the Chorley parliamentary constituency.
“Having said that, there is no question that there are links to the Liverpool region for large parts of West Lancashire.
“My own view is, therefore, that West Lancashire should be abolished and its constituent parts should be redistributed as each area decides. This applies outside West Lancashire as well. Southport may wish to move out of Merseyside into Lancashire and merge with the parts of West Lancashire with which it has a strong connection?”
He added: “Ultimately, local government boundaries should be drawn so that the policies of a council should be beneficial for all residents. This is impossible in practice, but should be an aim.
“The focus of West Lancashire Borough Council on its links with Liverpool and Merseyside means that this policy is irrelevant to a section of the borough and detrimental, in that resources are being directed away from such areas.
“I think my point is best illustrated by looking at the now-abandoned proposals to reorganise local government in Lancashire into a small number of unitary councils.
“Probably West Lancashire would have merged with Chorley, South Ribble and Preston. That council would not have seen its primary links with Liverpool, to the detriment of those parts of West Lancashire which do.
He added: “I do not know the best structure for local government in Lancashire. What I think I do know is that abolishing West Lancashire Borough Council would improve the existing and any alternative structure.”
Meanwhile, Ormskirk Labour Coun Gareth Dowling, a representative for the Knowsley ward, said government funding for councils rather than council boundaries was the decisive factor for community needs. Nonetheless, he was generally supportive of the new Greater Lancashire county deal ideas.
He said: “No alteration to local government organisation or structure across Lancashire or West Lancashire is going to be the silver bullet to solve the many problems we face, or suddenly deliver the investment and infrastructure we need here.
“But if this Conservative government continues to hold us to ransom and starve us of additional funding for whatever it might be, adult education and skills, transport, health and social care, etc then we have no choice locally but to back some sort of devolution proposal.
“This has been talked about for the eight years when I have been a councillor. Lancashire leaders have never been able to progress unanimously and, so, no progress has been made at all.
“Before [former Lancashire County Council leader] Geoff Driver’s retirement, he sent a proposal to the government’s secretary of state to carve the county up into three unitary authorities.
“Whatever your view is on that proposal it is interesting that the minister stated on public record that they never even had it!
“Now, my main hope is that something progresses on this topic and we can secure additional funding from central government, given the enormous cuts in local authority funding we have faced in West Lancashire.
“It remains to be seen whether the secretary of state will seriously consider a devolution deal without a directly-elected mayor for Lancashire, which is something many people are against.”