The leader of Surrey County Council, Cllr Tim Oliver has claimed the two unitary council option, heavily promoted by himself and the Conservatives, would create more savings than the three unitary option (that is supported by nine of the 11 districts and boroughs).

The document Surrey has published includes unsubstantiated and unsupported claims about savings. There is, however, evidence that two massive unitary councils would require significant internal subdivision, particularly in the proposed western unitary council which would stretch from Haslemere in the southwest to Staines/Stanwell adjacent to Heathrow Airport.

Children’s services are currently split into quadrants, the western unitary proposed by the Surrey Conservative administration includes the two western quadrants plus Spelthorne. Spelthorne is the district and borough with the highest demand for children’s services.

The potential for this massive western unitary to be adequately managed as a single entity for children’s services, or any other service is zero. So, additional layers of management will be required, more than eroding any savings associated with one fewer senior leadership team achieved by a reduction from three to two unitary councils.

However, the three unitary council option creates manageable areas without subdivision, avoiding additional layers of management, more complex administration, and associated costs. In addition, the current Surrey Police subdivision fully aligns with the three unitary council option.

Furthermore, the three unitary councils model also matches the natural economic and work travel areas, that is why the SCC transport planning areas match the three unitary split (with sub areas).

The current Labour Government’s review of funding for local government is going to see the councils in Surrey receiving less government funding and increase the reliance on council tax. It is therefore imprudent that the two unitary authority promotion excludes information on the council tax base.

The two unitary council option also includes the three councils with the highest levels of debt together, in the west, whereas the three unitary option distributes them more evenly between two unitary councils. Unsurprisingly, Elmbridge and Mole Valley (both in East) are supporting the two unitary council option.

The two unitary option is also significantly imbalanced in terms of need for services and the current council tax raised.

With ever increasing demand for high-cost council services - like adult’s and children’s social care services, SEND provision and home-to-school transport combined with increasing reliance on council tax to pay for it - the new unitary councils must drive savings and become more efficient.

Three unitary authorities is the best option for this; internal subdivision will be minimised, and service efficiency will thus be improved. Three unitary councils will better support existing natural economic areas, travel to work, socialisation and education, all contributing better to economic growth, whilst enhancing protection of the environment and green corridors.

Please considering supporting the three unitary option in response to the Government consultation and include responses to the two unitary option to explain the imbalances and deficiencies.

Cllr Catherine Powell, Surrey County Councillor (Farnham North); Leader of the Residents Associations and Independent Group; Member of the Farnham Residents Group.