Local Partnerships report now largely irrelevant following
Government’s decision to pursue unitary structure across
Surrey
Reports follows massive structural upheaval of two Councils
ongoing since 2022.
Waverley Conservatives agree with the Local Partnerships report’s
statement:
“Ultimately, it is impossible to state with certainty that the overall
position of GBC and WBC is better or worse as a result of the
collaboration.”
The report raises more concerns about the collaboration than it settles. It
asserts a headline saving of £600,000 for the 2 councils. But spread over the
last 3 years investigated in the report, this amounts to about £100,000 per
year for each council. That equates to less than 1% of Council tax. Compare
this with the commercial sector which would target between 10%-30%
reduction of operational costs and 20-40% improvement in operational
efficiency.
The report fails to address the big question of whether one Council benefits
more than the other from the collaboration. It barely references allocation
of Officer’s time, or the costs WBC are bearing of the alleged fraud at
Guildford – both are not quantified.
The data is broad brush and uses high level comparables to justify specific
cost concerns. No cashflows or detailed assumptions used in arriving at the
numbers have been provided which is not satisfactory.The report, due in August 2024, was presented to Officers on 21st November
2024. The report finally appeared on the website of a different Council on
17th Jan 2025, 5 months later than anticipated.
Despite receiving assurances Councillors would be dealt with fairly,
Opposition Councillors were not provided with the report prior to
WBC/GBC’s self-congratulatory press release which was issued without
notice. Opposition Councillors have had no opportunity to scrutinise the
detail or question on behalf of residents.
Cllr Jane Austin, Leader of the Opposition at Waverley reacted:
“A much-hyped report but providing incredibly disappointing financials –
only £100k per year saving over the last 3 years for Waverley is very poor.
Surely these cost savings could have been sourced in-house at WBC without
this hugely disruptive restructuring.”
“This report is now largely irrelevant given the recent announcement by the
Government that the unitary authority structure is to be implemented
across Surrey. For our Councils to continue debating further collaboration
would be both a waste of time and resources, given that they won’t exist in
the near future.”
“This ‘collaboration’ was always a political exercise by the Lib Dem
leadership. Things have moved on - time now to focus on real efficiencies
which will come from unitary restructuring for our residents please.”
Deputy Leader Carole Cockburn stated:
“This report does not address the practical issues stemming from the
collaboration. As Councillors we now spend our days tinkering with the
constitution and dealing with consequences of ‘aligning governance’.”
“How can we be sure staff are evenly dedicating time to each Council?
There is simply no way of measuring.”
“Our experience is that Guildford’s financial and governance issues have
been a serious distraction for Officers. We also see evidence of certain joint
roles being too big for one person – also not addressed in this report.”
Councillor Peter Martin - Waverley Borough Councillor for Godalming Holloway - said:
“This collaboration has created huge disruption for only marginal financial
savings to the taxpayer which equates to less than 1% of Council tax for
each Council. To see such a marginal gain is simply not worth all the effort
and will be wiped out shortly by National Insurance increases.”
“The report does not split out savings for each Council – if they were I
believe we might see that WBC is the poor sister in this deal.”
“We have been provided with only high level cashflows so we can’t assess
whether the inputs are appropriate. The KPI data is self-referential as it
only runs from 21/22 onwards. The comparative data assessed against other
councils is again high level and of limited relevance – the list goes on….”
“Overall, this report does not provide any evidence to change our view that
the collaboration is simply not worth it.”
