Local politics will undergo some truly significant changes in the next few years, so whatever you think about politicians, I hope you’ll understand why we are talking about it so much right now.
Last week, Suffolk County Council published its One Suffolk business case – a clear plan to set up a single unitary council for Suffolk which will bring real benefits to residents.
Within hours, district and borough council leaders dismissed it as a ‘fairy tale’ - a phrase they have borrowed from us, by the way.
And on Monday, when the districts and boroughs published their business case calling for three unitary councils, I have to admit I was fairly quick out of the blocks with my own less-than-enthusiastic assessment.
It’s probably true to say that public arguments are a bit off-putting for many people. But I won’t apologise for the passion we all bring to shaping Suffolk’s future. It’s too important to shy away from the debate.
Something that shone out from our residents’ survey – completed by over 8,100 people – is the strength of people’s identification to Suffolk.
Whether you live on the coast or in a town or the countryside, there's a shared pride in our great county.
I feel that pride too. It’s why I’m so determined to see One Suffolk succeed.
Why? Because it works.
Having now seen the alternative, One Suffolk genuinely is the only proposal that makes sense – saving Suffolk £78.2 million after the first five years, giving us the capacity to create real improvements to council services which would benefit everyone, and building a strong, flourishing, and resilient local economy that serves all residents, businesses, and communities.
The plan for three unitaries has done the opposite of what was intended – it has made me more convinced than ever that One Suffolk is the smartest, simplest and best plan for the future of Suffolk.
Splitting Suffolk into three councils would be financially disastrous and pose a real risk.
The set-up costs alone, which includes the splitting of county services, will run to tens of millions – and while the districts and borough are promising to break even in around year five – our own evidence suggests this would never happen.
The figures just don’t stack up. Their financial analysis is based on over-promised savings forecasts in reorganisation business cases from elsewhere in the country.
The fact that these plans subsequently proved to be undeliverable should be a red flag to everyone who lives and works in this county.
Why didn’t the district and borough councils do a proper evidence-based analysis of what has been delivered elsewhere?
Probably because they didn’t like the answer that it gave about three small unitary councils.
In comparison, we have made sure to take a conservative approach in our own analysis – learning lessons from the councils who have undergone reorganisation before us, in order to give a realistic assessment of what One Suffolk could deliver.
And even then, we would save Suffolk £39.4 million each year. Figures aside, there is another area of their business case which would give me sleepless nights, should their plan be implemented.
Bafflingly, the three councils’ business case looks at six different models of delivering social care. The conclusion is for a single service provider in each authority with a number of functions delivered through a partnership approach.
So why go to the risk of splitting Suffolk up into three in the first place, potentially causing serious harm to the vulnerable people who rely on our services?
Reading the proposals from the districts and borough, it is difficult to understand what their proposals for social care would actually deliver.
Disaggregation of an already strong adult social care system, to be replaced with an expensive duplication of senior management, the cobbling together of some kind of countywide trust – all to try and maintain the economies of scale necessary to ensure people continue to get good quality care.
The alternative proposal seems to fundamentally misunderstand how adult social care is delivered.
Simply saying you can save £45m by using ‘local provider options’ – whilst slashing the budget, ignoring things like fair cost of care calculations and committing to pay only the bare minimum to providers, and foregoing commitments around living wage and carer welfare.
That’s not reform. That’s chaos.
So while I’d urge you to read both plans with clear eyes – I cannot commit to staying quiet about something that is so fundamentally flawed.
As cabinet member for local government reform, I have a responsibility to champion the best future for Suffolk. One Suffolk isn’t just the simplest and most cost-effective option – it’s the right one.
This column was written by Richard Rout, cabinet member for local government reform
