Demands grow for East Lancs to be paid back for reform pause

The Government announced in September that it was pausing the reforms following a legal challenge. The plans would have seen Blackburn with Darwen, Rossendale, Pendle, Hyndburn and Burnley councils replaced by a single ‘Pennine Lancashire’ authority.

The decision came after around 18 months of work by councils across Lancashire to draw up proposals and prepare for existing authorities to be abolished and their services transferred to successor councils.

Councils had already committed millions of pounds towards the process, including Blackburn with Darwen Council's £3.3m contribution to Lancashire's wider £30m implementation reserve. Burnley Council contributed £458,202 and Hyndburn Council £421,305.

(Image: Lancashire LGR)

Although the Pennine Lancashire proposal divided politicians in Burnley and Blackburn, there is one issue on which both sides now agree: local taxpayers should not be left “footing the bill” for the work already carried out.

Motions calling on central government to cover the costs incurred by councils have won cross-party support in recent weeks.

At Burnley Council, this saw the passing of a Conservative motion by the independent group-controlled authority, which described LGR as an attempt at “gerrymandering” and called for a refund on the “significant amounts of money and officer time” spent on the process.

Burnley Conservative Group Leader Councillor Lee Ashworth said: “At a time when councils are under financial pressure and families are watching every penny. Burnley Conservatives are clear that local taxpayers should not have to pay for a costly overhaul of local government on top of the taxes they already contribute.

“If the Government wants reorganisation, then they alone must pay for it.”

Burnley preferred the five-council model, that would have seen it combined with Pendle and Rossendale (Image: NQ)

The motion also directed Burnley’s chief executive to calculate the full cost to taxpayers of the now-paused LGR.

Cllr Ashworth continued: “Let me be very transparent on this. It’s about putting our Burnley residents first. Every pound spent on restructuring is money that could otherwise help maintain public spaces, support vulnerable people and protect services that make a real difference to everyday life.

“This raises an important question on accountability and this is why I want to see every penny spent so far on changing council structures is rightfully returned to this council and spent on our residents.”

The motion was passed just days before a similar move at Blackburn with Darwen Council, which had been on the opposite side of the debate over the proposed Pennine Lancashire authority.

Cllr Ashworth's motion was passed by Burnley Council (Image: Lee Ashworth)

Moved by Reform UK group leader Cllr Daniel Matchett, the motion lays out the money already set aside for the Lancashire transition’s £30m implementation reserve, which Blackburn has contributed £3.3m to.

Councillors argued that while government funding had been made available towards the reorganisation process, the true cost of consultation, planning, officer time and preparatory work has yet to be fully calculated.

The motion, passed by the Labour and independent-dominated council, called for this cost to be calculated and repaid, stating: “It is central Government, not the Borough's council tax payers, who should bear the cost of preparation already incurred and of unwinding it.”

At the October 1 Council Forum in Blackburn where the motion was discussed, leader of the authority Cllr Phil Riley said his party had “no argument” with Reform over whether the Government should be the ones to foot the bill for LGR.

Cllr Riley pointed out that the £3.3m placed into the LGR implementation reserve has not been lost.

“Just to be clear about that, we simply put that into reserves. It is here. It is a reserve, we can have it back, it’s ours. Nothing has been done with it at all”, he said.

The Blackburn with Darwen Council leader, however, did amend the motion to remove a call for a public referendum on whatever model Westminster decides for East Lancashire.

Supporting the amendment, Cllr Matchett said: “In the interests of getting anything done in this council cross-party.. we will work with opposition parties to try and get things done that are positive and working out the cost of LGR is important.”

The motion was carried unanimously by the whole council.

Similar concerns have also been raised at Lancashire County Council, where leader Stephen Atkinson has argued that local taxpayers should not be left “footing the bill” for work undertaken as part of the reorganisation process before ministers ordered the pause.

But the question of who will ultimately pay for the LGR process remains unanswered.

Following the announcement of the pause on September 7, a government spokesperson said: “We recognise and appreciate the significant work that councils and partners have undertaken to date.

“As part of the pause, Government will consider council costs and how to support areas through the next stage of the process."

However, ministers have so far stopped short of committing to reimburse councils for any costs incurred during the reorganisation programme, leaving authorities across East Lancashire waiting to learn whether taxpayers or Westminster will ultimately bear the cost of the work already carried out.