Beyond Safe and Legal: Rethinking Local Government Reorganisation
- truthaboutlocalgov
- Jul 22, 2025
- 10 min read
Updated: Jul 23, 2025
Local government in the UK stands at a critical juncture. With reorganisation efforts gaining momentum across the country, the sector faces a rare and powerful opportunity not merely to redraw administrative boundaries or consolidate services, but to fundamentally reimagine its purpose, structure, and relationship with the communities it serves. This is not just a bureaucratic exercise; it is a moment to ask deeper questions about the role of local government in the 21st century. As Jonathan Carr-West, Chief Executive of the Local Government Information Unit (LGIU), succinctly puts it:
“Don’t let the process be the enemy of the outcome.”
This blog explores why local government must move beyond the narrow confines of being “safe and legal” and instead embrace a bold, transformative vision one that prioritises democratic renewal, public service reform, and long-term resilience.
The Current Narrative: Size Over Substance
At present, the dominant discourse surrounding local government reorganisation is heavily focused on geography and scale. Councils are under pressure to submit business cases to central government, often within tight deadlines, and the debate has largely centred on how many unitary authorities should replace existing county and district structures. Should a county be split into two, three, or even more units? What configuration offers the most viable tax base or the most efficient service delivery?
While these are important considerations, they risk becoming distractions from the more fundamental question:
“What does good look like?”
Jonathan Carr-West warns that this preoccupation with structural design can lead to missed opportunities:
“While we’re all busy talking about size and geography, we’re not talking about what these councils are and how they operate. We’re missing the opportunity to redesign local government.”
This is a crucial point. If reorganisation is treated merely as a technical exercise in redrawing maps, it risks replicating the very challenges it seeks to solve. Without a clear and compelling vision for transformation, we risk creating new structures that inherit the same inefficiencies, financial pressures, and democratic deficits as their predecessors.
In other words, reorganisation must be more than a reshuffle it must be a reset.
Safe and Legal: Necessary but Not Sufficient
The phrase “safe and legal” has become a mantra in local government circles. It refers to the essential requirement that, on vesting day the day a new authority officially comes into being everything must function smoothly. Staff must be paid, contracts must be honoured, and vulnerable residents must continue to receive care and support without interruption.
This is, of course, non-negotiable. As Carr-West acknowledges:
“Safe and legal is vital, but it’s a necessary rather than sufficient condition.”
However, the danger lies in allowing this baseline requirement to become the ceiling of ambition. Ensuring continuity of service is the bare minimum. It does not address the deeper structural and financial challenges that have plagued local government for years.
Consider the financial context: LGIU’s annual survey reveals that nearly a third of councils believe they are on a trajectory toward issuing a Section 114 notice a formal declaration of insolvency. This is not a theoretical risk; it is a lived reality for many authorities already grappling with unsustainable budgets.
The pressures are most acute in statutory services such as adult social care and children’s services, where demand continues to rise year on year. These services are not only expensive but also complex, often requiring coordination across multiple agencies and sectors. Without reform, they will continue to consume an ever-larger share of council budgets, leaving little room for investment in universal services like libraries, parks, and community development. Reorganisation, if done in isolation, will not solve these problems. Changing the shape of local government without changing its operating model is like rearranging the furniture in a house with a crumbling foundation. What is needed is a shift towards preventative, integrated, and community-centred public services a model that tackles problems at their root rather than responding to crises after they occur.
Avoiding the Copy-Paste Trap
One of the most significant risks in any local government reorganisation is the temptation to simply replicate existing models within new structures. This “copy and paste” approach may feel safe and familiar, but it fundamentally undermines the opportunity for meaningful change. Without a deliberate effort to rethink how councils operate, we risk embedding outdated practices into newly formed authorities effectively carrying forward the same challenges under a different name. Jonathan Carr-West advocates for a dual-track approach to avoid this pitfall. He explains:
“You need a completely different set of people thinking about day two, month two, year two. It’s almost impossible to be in a headspace where you’re sorting out safe and legal and also thinking about transformation.”
This insight is crucial. The teams responsible for ensuring operational continuity on vesting day are often overwhelmed by the sheer complexity of legal, financial, and HR tasks. Expecting them to simultaneously lead innovation and long-term strategy is unrealistic.
Instead, councils must intentionally carve out dedicated transformation teams. These groups should be tasked with exploring new models of service delivery, engaging with communities, and learning from both domestic and international best practice. They should be empowered to think beyond compliance and ask bold questions: What if we redesigned services from the ground up? What if we co-produced solutions with residents? What if we reimagined the role of the council entirely?
This also means engaging with national initiatives such as “test and learn” pilots, which offer a structured way to experiment with new approaches. Councils should not be afraid to try, fail, and iterate provided they are learning and adapting along the way. A key challenge here is overcoming what Carr-West calls “pilot purgatory” a state where innovative projects are endlessly trialled but never scaled. Too often, promising pilots remain isolated from mainstream operations, either due to risk aversion, lack of funding, or institutional inertia. To break this cycle, councils must commit to systemic change, embedding successful innovations into core business processes and performance frameworks.
What Good Looks Like: A Vision for Transformation
So, what does successful transformation actually look like in a newly reorganised council? It’s not just about efficiency or cost savings it’s about creating a system that is more responsive, resilient, and rooted in the needs of local people. Carr-West outlines several key pillars of this vision:
1. Integrated Services
At the heart of transformation is the need for joined-up working across sectors. Health, education, employment, housing, and social care must no longer operate in silos. Instead, they should collaborate to address the root causes of disadvantage and improve outcomes for residents.
“We need to get money to move across the system differently,” says Carr-West.
This means pooling budgets, sharing data, and aligning priorities across agencies. It also means designing services around people’s lives, not organisational boundaries.
2. Digital Innovation
Technology has the potential to revolutionise local government but only if it is used strategically. From predictive analytics to assistive technologies, digital tools can help councils deliver smarter, more personalised services. Carr-West offers a compelling example: “Smart toilet sensors can detect dehydration risks in elderly residents, preventing falls and hospitalisations.” This may sound futuristic, but it’s already being trialled in parts of the UK. The challenge is not the technology itself, but the capacity to adopt and scale it. Councils must invest in digital infrastructure, skills, and culture to unlock these benefits.
3. Design Thinking
Transformation also requires a shift in mindset from reactive service delivery to proactive problem-solving. This is where design thinking comes in: a human-centred approach that starts with understanding people’s needs and works backwards to create solutions.
Rather than asking “How do we deliver this service more efficiently?”, councils should ask “How might we prevent the need for this service in the first place?” This involves reimagining processes, engaging users in co-design, and testing new ideas in real-world settings.
4. Community Engagement
Finally, councils must move from being top-down bureaucracies to bottom-up catalysts. This means recognising the strengths, assets, and energy that already exist within communities and working in partnership to harness them.
“The Council doesn’t have to do everything it’s about making things happen,” Carr-West explains.
This includes supporting informal care networks, empowering local volunteers, and embedding councillors as connectors and advocates within their wards. It also means creating spaces for genuine dialogue and shared decision-making.
Democracy at Risk or Ready for Renewal?
One of the most contentious aspects of reorganisation is its impact on local democracy. With fewer councillors representing larger populations, there is a real risk of democratic dilution. Residents may feel more distant from decision-makers, and local voices may be lost in the noise of larger bureaucracies. Yet, as Carr-West argues, this challenge can also be an opportunity:
“We need a narrative that says this is about giving you more say.”
Polling by LGIU reveals a complex picture. While many people are supportive of directly elected mayors seeing them as strong advocates for their regions there is also deep attachment to the traditional county and district model. People worry that reorganisation will lead to centralisation, standardisation, and a loss of local identity.
To address these concerns, councils must design in democratic engagement from the outset. This means creating structures and processes that bring decision-making closer to communities, such as:
Neighbourhood committees that give residents a voice in local priorities
Participatory budgeting that allows communities to allocate funding
Citizens’ assemblies that deliberate on complex issues
Community pots of funding that councillors can use to support grassroots initiatives
These mechanisms are not just democratic niceties they are essential tools for building trust, legitimacy, and accountability in the new system. They ensure that even large unitary authorities remain responsive to local needs and reflective of local aspirations.
Outcomes That Matter: What Communities Should Expect
Ultimately, local government reorganisation must deliver real, tangible benefits for the people it affects. It is not enough to restructure for the sake of administrative tidiness, theoretical efficiency, or compliance with central government directives. The true measure of success lies in whether residents experience improvements in their everyday lives whether services become more accessible, more responsive, and more attuned to local needs. At a minimum, communities should expect:
Better public services that are joined-up, accessible, and responsive. This means services that work together rather than in isolation where housing, health, education, and social care are coordinated to support individuals holistically. Residents should no longer be passed from one department to another, repeating their stories and navigating complex bureaucracies. Instead, they should encounter a seamless experience that puts their needs first.
Improved value for money, with resources used more effectively and transparently. In a time of fiscal constraint, councils must demonstrate that every pound spent delivers maximum impact. This includes reducing duplication, streamlining processes, and investing in preventative measures that reduce long-term costs. Residents should feel confident that their council tax is funding services that matter and that those services are delivered efficiently and equitably.
Relief from pressure on statutory services through prevention and early intervention. Adult social care and children’s services are under immense strain, often consuming the lion’s share of council budgets. By investing in upstream solutions such as community health programmes, family support initiatives, and digital monitoring tools councils can reduce demand and improve outcomes. This frees up resources for other vital services and helps build a more sustainable system.
More investment in universal services like parks, libraries, youth provision, and cultural activities. These services are often the first to be cut during financial crises, yet they play a crucial role in community wellbeing, social cohesion, and civic pride. Reorganisation should create the fiscal headroom to reinvest in these spaces, making them more inclusive, accessible, and vibrant.
Enhanced democratic engagement, with more opportunities for residents to shape decisions. Whether through participatory budgeting, citizens’ assemblies, or neighbourhood forums, councils must create meaningful channels for public input. People should not only be consulted they should be empowered. A restructured council must be more than a service provider; it must be a platform for civic participation and local leadership.
Jonathan Carr-West is unequivocal in his assessment:
“If it doesn’t deliver more effective public services, what is the point?”
This is a powerful reminder that transformation must be intentional. It cannot be left to chance or assumed to follow automatically from structural change. It must be guided by a clear vision, supported by strong leadership, and driven by the lived experiences and aspirations of local people. Without this focus, reorganisation risks becoming a hollow exercise rearranging deck chairs on a sinking ship, as Carr-West aptly puts it. The stakes are too high for superficial reform. What’s needed is a bold, systemic shift that redefines the role of local government in modern Britain.
A Sector-Wide Responsibility
The scale of change currently underway in local government is unprecedented. Reorganisation is happening alongside a raft of other reforms, including devolution deals, funding formula revisions, multi-year financial settlements, and the long-awaited review of adult social care. Each of these initiatives carries its own complexities, timelines, and political sensitivities. Jonathan Carr-West cautions:
“The risk is that those things don’t cohere.”
Indeed, the danger is that these reforms proceed in parallel but fail to align creating confusion, duplication, and missed opportunities. For example, a newly reorganised council may find itself negotiating a devolution deal while simultaneously adapting to a new funding formula and preparing for changes in social care legislation. Without strategic coordination, the result could be fragmentation rather than integration.
While central government has a critical role to play in setting the framework and ensuring coherence, Carr-West emphasises that the responsibility does not lie with Whitehall alone:
“We have to help bring all of this together. It’s all of our responsibility to make it work.”
This is where organisations like the Local Government Information Unit (LGIU) come in. LGIU is actively supporting the sector through a range of initiatives designed to foster collaboration, share knowledge, and promote innovation. Their work includes:
Data analysis of reorganisation proposals, helping councils understand the landscape, compare models, and identify trends. This evidence base is essential for informed decision-making and strategic planning.
Facilitation of political and community engagement, supporting councils in navigating the complex dynamics of local leadership, stakeholder consultation, and public communication. LGIU helps councils build consensus, manage conflict, and articulate a compelling vision for change.
Thought leadership drawing on international best practice, offering insights from other countries and sectors that have undergone similar reforms. This global perspective helps councils avoid common pitfalls and adopt proven strategies.
By fostering a culture of shared learning and mutual support, LGIU helps councils avoid siloed thinking and build a shared vision for the future one that is ambitious, inclusive, and grounded in the realities of local governance.
Final Message: Focus on the Outcome
As councils navigate the complexities of reorganisation, it is easy to become consumed by process. The deadlines, the paperwork, the legal requirements all demand attention and resources. But amidst this operational whirlwind, it is vital to keep sight of the bigger picture. Jonathan Carr-West offers a powerful closing message:
“Keep a laser focus on what good looks like. Otherwise, it’s just a pointless process that we all gave two years of our life to for no end.”
This is a call to leadership. Transformation is not easy it requires courage, clarity, and collaboration. It demands that councils challenge assumptions, take risks, and engage deeply with their communities. But it also offers a rare opportunity: a chance to build a local government that is resilient, responsive, and rooted in the people it serves.
Reorganisation should not be seen as an endpoint, but as a beginning. It is the foundation upon which a new model of local governance can be built one that is fit for the future, driven by values, and capable of delivering real change.
Join the Conversation
If you're involved in local government reorganisation or simply passionate about the future of public services now is the time to engage. Connect with the Local Government Information Unit, explore their resources, and join a growing network of professionals committed to making transformation meaningful. Their insights, data, and facilitation support can help councils move beyond “safe and legal” and towards a future that truly works for everyone.
