Epping Forest: Local Government Reform and Devolution for Essex
News / Sat 11th Jan 2025 at 11:22am
COUNCIL Leader, Councillor Chris Whitbread has written to fellow councillors and employees of Epping Forest District Council following the decision of Essex County Council earlier today to apply to the government’s priority devolution and local government reorganisation programme.

“Epping Forest District Council is expected to become part of the Devolution and Local Government Reorganisation process outlined in the recent government white paper, following endorsement of the proposals by Essex County Council on Friday (10 January). The County Council decision echoes similar endorsements by Thurrock and Southend-on-Sea Unitary Councils earlier in the week.
Essex, Southend and Thurrock will now write formally to the government requesting inclusion in the government’s priority programme.
The decision commits Essex to:
The councils will now wait to hear from the government on whether Essex has been accepted as part of the priority programme.
In fact, Devolution and Local Government Reorganisation has already taken place across many parts of the UK. The government made clear in its white paper that it expects remaining areas to be reorganised before the end of this Parliament. Inclusion in the priority programme includes an incentive for local areas to lead the reorganisation process, while the government may impose its own proposals in those areas that do not take the initiative.
Should the government accept the inclusion of Essex in its priority programme, the current two-tier arrangement of district and county council in Epping Forest will be replaced by a new unitary authority. The new unitary will assume all the roles currently carried out separately by the District and County.
The government white paper suggests that new unitary councils will be larger than the districts they replace.
At the core of these changes must be the interests of our residents. We know how confusing the two-tier system can be for our residents, let alone for officers and councillors at times. We also know the potential benefits of economies of scale. But we also know the importance of local accountability, transparency and democracy.
The government says it expects new unitary councils to have a population size of 500,000 people or more. The population of Essex is approximately 2 million. That suggests fewer new unitary councils will be much larger than the tier-two district, borough and city councils they replace.
We would be replaced by a new unitary council made up of us and several of our neighbours. It’s too early to say exactly what the new local government map of Essex will look like, but we would obviously look to our closest neighbours as our most likely partners.
The other key component of the proposals is a combined authority governed by an elected mayor for the whole of Essex, responsible for the strategic coordination of the new unitary councils and new powers devolved from central government. The mayor would also take on the police and fire service responsibilities currently held by the Police and Fire Crime Commissioner.”
Hmmm no elections why should we pay taxes then
Just the boys club deciding how to spend even more of our taxes with very little democratic input
Plan is to scrap DCs and CCs in favour unitaries of 500k population. However proposal seems to keep new unitaries within historic county biundaries. Say Harlow merges with Uttlesford and Epping to get to 300k then what? Brentwood? A bit of Chelmsford? What will unite us? What's our idenity? What platform does the new mayor stand on? Irony is one of the few things that unite these towns/areas is opposition to ill considered sprawling development, which is exactly what this new system is supposed to excelerate.
Larger unitary authorities will make for significant savings and efficiencies and potentially lower taxes. For example, the 14 Essex Councils have 14 CEOs, 14 Finance Directors, 14 Council offices; by rationalising the structure to say 4 unitary authorities with populations of around 500,000 the savings potential is huge. It would also mean that residents will eliminate the constant confusion between which authority is responsible for which service: district or county. Procurement will be more efficient and cost effective. Harlow suffers from high population density and very limited land for new housing and businesses. Becoming part of a geographically much larger authority could greatly help. Parochial issues such as who will get the council tax for developments such as Latton Priory become redundant as it will be a single authority. A West Essex unitary authority comprising, for example: Harlow, Epping Forest, Uttlesford and Brentwood would be strategically positioned on the Cambridge-London corridor with the M11, M25 and Stansted Airport within its district and Harlow at the centre would be perfectly placed to attract investment and new businesses under a single strategy instead of competing with each other. Buckinghamshire and Dorset operate as single unitary authorities with no Districts and seem ok. The current two tier system is archaic and redundant. This change is going to happen. Let's embrace the opportunity.
Hi Surinder would it not make more sense to do away with historic (archaic?) county boarders, remove brentwood in favour of East Herts. News yesterday of planning permission granted to Gilsten development feelsrather precient. Being one unitary authority to include East Herts would overcome residents fears of this development being in a different Council.
Surinder, on the other hand, whilst there is only one Social Care and Education Departments in Essex, there will need to be three, none of the computer systsems will be the same so will need to be changed at a huge cost, staff will be travelling for miles to get issues they need to deal with, there is already a county wide procurement system in place for the 13 councils. There would need to be more councils linked to get to a population of 500,00, where would it be centred, well ironically Chelmsford could be the contender.
Surinder when have you ever known taxes to reduce significantly what will happen is taxes will rise for some reason.
As I mentioned, Dorset (population 381,000 and 82 councillors) and Buckinghamshire (population 534,000 and 147 councillors) operate perfectly well as single countywide authorities. Essex has a population of around 1,920,000 with 75 county councillors and 616 District Councillors! It is absurd and wasteful, not mention 14 District CEOs plus County. How anyone can justify this cumbersome structure and burden on taxpayers beggars belief. We need to modernise and rationalise. This will happen so it is best that Harlow is in the driving seat.
Nick Taylor bemoans the prospects for 'independent/residents parties' yet Harlow is the only council in Essex that is bipolar- Con/Lab. Every other Council has Independents, Resident Association or other parties: Lib Dem's, Reform UK or Greens. He should welcome the proposed reforms. Our neighbours in Epping Forest DC and Uttelsford have 38 independent councillors!
Surinder, your examples prove the point I have made about representation by councillors. At the moment HDC and EFDC have a combined population of 230,000 and a total of 87 councillors. If the proposals go ahaead, Harlow will have far fewer councilors and will be a small cog in a big wheel, with councillors living dozens of miles away from Harlow making decisions about towns future. It is certainly not wasteful having many local councillors, afterall they are supposed to represent the electors in their ward. Whilst for instance there are many Loughton Resident Association councillors at EFDC, time and time again they are out voted on issues which affect Loughton. The same will happen here in Harlow with these changes. As I said earlier, it is a fallacy that these changes will save money and I do wonder what the residents in Dorset feel about the changes made there. I suspect you have never worked in local government and don't understand the issues involved, which is really about giving more power to fewer people.
10 Comments for Epping Forest: Local Government Reform and Devolution for Essex: