High Peak is better off in a North Derbyshire unitary council

DERBYSHIRE OR GREATER MANCHESTER

My view is – and always has been – clear: I believe High Peak is better off in Derbyshire.

The Conservatives are trying to win votes off the back of the MP’s “no-brainer” comment, but in reality the government set out from the start that new councils should not cross county boundaries. So a Greater Manchester merger was never achievable.

All the borough and district councils in Derbyshire and Derby City council have now proposed a north and south Derbyshire option, as I suggested several weeks ago.

Most politicians made their proposals based on what they think will help their own political party. I tried to assess the pros and cons for High Peak residents in the reasoning I posted:

1. Unitary Councils are generally more efficient and effective than separate county and borough councils – they need fewer highly paid officers and can run services more efficiently.
2. The government has suggested that unitary councils of around 500,000 people deliver the best balance of efficiency and localism. I agree.
3. High Peak is on the edge of 4 regions. We are always going to be remote from the centre of a unitary council. We need the model that will deliver the best services locally in each area of High Peak.
4. Towns and rural areas tend to lose out when they are run from urban areas. Services are much cheaper to run from a ‘hub’. Urban councils locate their hubs in the city and expect all residents to travel to them (see Tameside’s closure of Shire Hill Hospital in Glossop as an example).
5. Councils which cover a wide rural area have to locate their hubs in towns across the council area and this model would be most likely to deliver more local services for High Peak residents.
6. There may be some reasons for Glossopdale merging with Tameside as there are good transport connections, but this doesn’t apply to the rest of High Peak which would be left out on a limb.
7. Stockport Council is another option, but is very focussed on regeneration of Stockport Town Centre and improving transport into Manchester. It is unlikely to prioritise the needs of High Peak. Stockport’s council tax is around £300 a year higher than High Peak’s for each band. High Peak residents won’t want to pay a lot more, to see their council tax put into Stockport’s regeneration.
8. I believe that staying within Derbyshire offers High Peak the best chance of good local services and is less disruptive. However the current county council is too remote from High Peak and doesn’t consider our needs enough.
9. Two unitary councils covering Derbyshire and the City of Derby would give populations of around 500,000 each – the number proposed by government to ensure efficient but localised services.
10. Enlarging Derby City Council area to include the areas which most relate to Derby would leave a north Derbyshire area including High Peak, Chesterfield, Bolsover, North East Derbyshire, and probably part of Derbyshire Dales.

Conclusion: A unitary council such as North Derbyshire would enable more local knowledge of each area. Most acute healthcare would be delivered outside of the council area – in Manchester or Sheffield – so the council would be used to working with that model. With around 20% of the councillors in such a North Derbyshire council coming from High Peak, the council would have to give sufficient focus to High Peak’s needs.

I hope this is helpful, but it’s only an initial view and I welcome other opinions.

I hope there will be plenty of opportunity for discussions and more information on the different options available before a final decision is made later this year.