CONSERVATIVE county councillors have failed in a bid to ensure the option of a single unitary authority for Hertfordshire would be back on the table reports the Local Democracy Reporter.

Hertfordshire currently operates on a ‘two-tier’ system of local government – with 10 district and borough councils and one unitary.

But by November, council leaders will have to submit proposals to the Government that would replace those councils with a unitary council structure.

Earlier this year, an interim submission to the Government by Hertfordshire’s 11 council leaders identified five possible options – including one, two, three or four unitary authorities.

But following the change of administration of the county council, in May, it was decided that no further work would be undertaken to develop the proposal for a single unitary.

At a meeting of the county council on Monday (July 21), leader of the Conservative Opposition – and former leader of the county council – Cllr Richard Roberts proposed that consideration should again be given to the option of a single unitary authority.

He proposed a motion – ultimately voted down by the council – that suggested a single authority would serve the best interests of residents and businesses.

And he called for a continuation of planning for “a range of new council unitaries, including a single authority”.

The motion suggested that splitting “high performing” services into two, three or four different services would “create havoc, be incredibly costly and could cause catastrophic failure of vital service delivery”.

It pointed to estimates that suggest that over a five-year period, a single unitary authority would save more than £100m – whereas a structure with four unitaries would cost an additional £1.5bn.

It suggested that smaller unitaries may compete for resources – and that, it suggests, could lead to unfair and unequal outcomes across Hertfordshire.

Cllr Roberts urged councillors: “Let’s model the cost profile of a single council for Hertfordshire – just so that we know what we are really getting into.

“Hertfordshire is nationally significant. These are strategic decisions. Let’s think strategically to deliver a Hertfordshire for the future that is in the best interest of residents and businesses.”

Liberal Democrat leader of the county council, Cllr Steve Jarvis, who stressed work on local government reform should not divert them from the council’s service delivery, was among the majority of councillors who opposed the move.

“It is clear that a single unitary does not have the support of people in Hertfordshire,” he said.

“It doesn’t have the support of the district and boroughs. And the evidence shows it doesn’t have the support of the population.

“So I think that inevitably local government is a trade off between the two parts – it is a trade off between ‘local’ and ‘government’.

“It would no doubt be more effective to deliver some of these services on an even greater scale. But that’s not what we should do.

“My judgement is that the best compromise – between delivering services that are close to people and delivering services that are effective – is probably that there should be two unitary councils in Hertfordshire.

“There are others who are arguing that there might be more. I personally am not convinced.

“That is where I think we should be. I don’t think we should reinstate a single unitary option.”

Leader of the Green group, Cllr Kirsty Taylor-Moran, also spoke against the motion, suggesting a single unitary authority would not be democratic.

She told councillors: “This is a really exciting opportunity to make things better for people and we shouldn’t waste it.”

Labour’s Cllr Ian Albert suggested there was a “clear desire” amongst residents to simplify local government in Hertfordshire.

But signalling that the Labour group would vote against the motion, he said that a single authority doing all the work of the districts and county councils for 1.3 million people would be “too big, too remote an authority”.

Meanwhile, Reform UK Cllr Matthew Hurst – who signalled his group would be supporting the motion – suggested that from a purely financial position, local government reorganisation made sense.

And backing the principle of a single authority, he said: “At Reform we believe and respect in the historic county borders and not carving these up into meaningless units.

“We are on the side of the patriotic majority who have the warmth and affection to their county identity.

“And carving these up into meaningless units for the sake of reorganisation is not only being rushed, but is exceedingly ill-thought-out.

“We appreciate the principle of electoral reform, but using botched-up devolution to justify it is the wrong approach.”

The majority of councillors (42) voted against the motion, with 27 voting for and two abstentions.