ADVICE from senior government officials on the strongest financial option for new unitary councils in Essex was rejected by the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, it has been revealed.

In a pre-action letter of response from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to a proposed judicial review by Essex County Council of the decision on re-organising Essex’s councils, it has emerged that advice from senior officials on the relative financial robustness of four competing proposals was disregarded by the Secretary of State.

Instead, the Government favoured the option to create the largest number of new authorities, five new councils.

Officials recommended the implementation of the ‘three unitary proposal’, led by Essex County Council, remarking:

“…We recommend the three unitary proposal as it meets all the criteria and does so more strongly than the other three proposals. It is the only proposal we assess to be financially viable within five years, which is particularly pertinent given unsupported debt in Thurrock. …”

The advice also noted that the Government’s preferred five-council option (5UA) “…risked creating councils that are at significant disadvantage (tax base, service demand and ability to deliver services) …”

The MHCLG pre-action response letter also stated that “…in respect to the first part of officials’ assessment of financial efficiency [effectively analysing the costs and savings presented within the proposals], the three unitary presented the strongest case based on the data submitted.”

It noted that confidence was low in the figures presented by the successful bid, stating: “The payback period for the 5UA proposal was unclear, with figures disputed locally and officials were not able to verify the position. It was noted that there were ambitious savings in the 5UA proposal although officials had low confidence in the estimates.”

On another key criteria, the delivery of high quality and sustainable public services, the three unitary proposal was also judged to be the strongest, and was supported by officials from the Department for Education. Alongside officials from the Department of Health, both ministries raised concerns about the five unitary authority proposal.

Councillor Peter Harris, Leader of Essex County Council, described the revelations from the letter as a major embarrassment for the Government and questioned whether the ongoing process of reorganisation should continue.

He said: “The fact that a Secretary of State was prepared to ignore the advice of highly paid, experienced officials not just from his own department but across Whitehall on a decision affecting 1.7 million Essex residents is beyond staggering and a major embarrassment.

“It is as clear as day that Ministers chose to ignore their officials in pursuit of what were clearly political goals, heaping millions of pounds in costs on to taxpayers in the process.

“He clearly made his mind up that regardless of the advice and regardless of the published criteria, small councils were to be the favoured option – even if financially unviable, because he chose that option not only in Essex but in Norfolk, Suffolk and Hampshire.

“To choose the worst financial option meant effectively jeopardising the future of services to our most vulnerable adults and children.

“The credibility of this whole process is in tatters. I have already written to the Government asking them to withdraw their proposals. Unless they do, we will have no choice but the launch a judicial review of their decision in the coming days.”

There are other flaws in the decision which will form part of the county council’s grounds for legal challenge.