Medway Conservatives have submitted a formal response as part of the local government reorganisation consultation process. The consultation sets out a series of structural options representing the most significant proposed changes to local government within the region in a generation.
The Kent councils have put forward five different options for Kent and Medway: Option 1A, Option 3A, Option 4B, Option 4D and Option 5A. The response acknowledges that the transition unlocks an opportunity to improve governance and modernise service delivery; highlights the long-established performance of Medway as an existing unitary authority and promotes Option 3A as the only option able to support a strong and thriving Kent.
The response sets out detailed analysis of each of the five options, summarised below:
Option 1A:
The response raised concerns about the scale and geographic scope of a single unitary council for the whole of the County. A unitary authority responsible for around 2m residents is an incredibly risky choice. Risks around quality service delivery, proper representation, financial resilience, and the complexity of governance are noted.
Option 4B:
The response raised concerns about population imbalances, the projected costs and long payback periods for the taxpayer. It raises issues around the separation of districts that would service their communities better together and the misalignment of strategic footprints for services such as policing and health. This option will complicate the delivery of services that you, the taxpayer, deserves to see.
Option 4D:
The response highlights the concerning proposed boundary changes that divide existing communities. Communities such as Medway are set to lose 2% of their community to another authority; Maidstone is also set to lose 2% of their community and Dartford are set to lose 22% of their community to another authority. A change at this level is not only far more expensive for the taxpayer but runs the risk of fragmenting services and prolonging the transition period. This option does not align with existing identities and will negatively impact community engagement and accountability.
Option 5A:
The response outlines the concern that the proposed boundary changes will create several inadequately sized authorities, below the government threshold for population sizes and therefore incapable of being financially resilient. Much like option 4D, this proposal splits communities, including Medway and risks inhibiting growth by separating districts that would work well together. It raises the issue of delayed and poor service delivery and the level of restructuring required for the transition, a cost the taxpayer will have to bear.
Option 3A:
This option is viewed as the best for Kent by the Medway conservatives. It is the only proposal that meets government criteria for size. It respects existing boundaries in Kent, respects existing service delivery footprints and is supported by the Kent Police and Crime Commissioner. The response notes its positive financial projections, with the greatest savings potential and lowest initial implementation cost. This option provides Kent with balanced populations, appropriately sized councils, and a strong foundation for a thriving Kent.
ENDS
