Bulwell councillor lambasts councils shake-up 'myths' as legal review branded waste of money
A Bulwell councillor has blasted what he has described as ‘myths’ concerning the city ahead of the biggest local government shake-up in 50 years.
Coun Ethan Radford (Lab) was reacting to comments that have been made about Nottingham City Council in the wake of the Government's decision to favour the city council-backed option Bii in the Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) announcements last week.
Coun Radford said: “To anyone putting these myths about, do not for a minute think the council is going to allow our city to be used as a political football – they will be robustly and firmly challenged.”
Under LGR, by 2028, Gedling, Broxtowe and Rushcliffe boroughs will be carved up, and border towns such as Arnold, Beeston and West Bridgford will join a new Nottingham city single-tier unitary authority.
These plans were approved under the Labour Government’s LGR programme, which aims to simplify structures and save money by abolishing smaller councils.
Nottingham and Nottinghamshire’s nine existing councils will be abolished in favour of two new single-tier unitary councils.
However, the journey to the decision has been far from smooth sailing.
Coun Radford says while it is important the pros and cons of the merger are debated, discussions must be ‘based in fact, not myth’.
One of the most frequently cited ‘myths’, he says, is that the council is in great amounts of debt and bankrupt.
While the authority did declare what was effectively bankruptcy in 2023, the council is now reporting a £20m underspend, is reinvesting in services, and has reduced debt from £827m in 2020 down to £292m.
And after publishing a joint statement with finance director, Stuart Fair, to address what they consider factual inaccuracies, Coun Radford told the Local Democracy Reporting Service ((LDRS): “Any suggestion we are bankrupt is just categorically not true.
“Don’t just take our word for it, look at the facts.
"If we were bankrupt we wouldn’t have set the lowest council tax in 18 years, we wouldn’t be investing £45m in frontline services, we wouldn’t have cut our debt by over a half in the last six years – it is a complete fallacy.”
He said the boroughs and districts do not have debt because they do not run costly services such as adults and children’s social care and highways maintenance.
These are all covered by Nottinghamshire County Council under the current two-tier structure that operates in the county.
Coun Radford added: “Rushcliffe as a borough doesn’t need debt, it has the county council to do all that for them, it is totally artificial.
“If LGR for Nottingham city was about a cash grab, a land grab, and an asset strip, we wouldn’t have put in for the option we asked for.
"The option we got wasn’t the most financially beneficial to the council, it was the best option for the region.”
His comments come following statements made by senior politicians, including Sir James Cleverly (Con), the shadow secretary of state for housing, communities and local government.
On July 16, he told the Commons: “Take Nottinghamshire, Rushcliffe council, a Conservative-run council, well-run, financially secure, yet under the plans it will be carved up, with most of its assets to a debt-ridden Labour Nottingham City Council.
“How on earth can weakening well managed councils to prop up bankrupt ones create a stronger foundation for local government?”
Coun Neil Clarke (Con), Rushcliffe Council leader, has said he is considering taking a judicial review forward but as a council any review has not yet proceeded.
Judicial reviews involve a judge reviewing the lawfulness of a decision or action made by a public body, but they can only be launched to challenge the way in which a decision was made, rather than the rights and wrongs of that decision.
Coun Clarke has argued the Government has gone against its own criteria, which originally included existing districts and boroughs not being split up and new councils having a minimum population of 500,000.
Coun Radford added: “It’s a question for the Government.
"As far as I’m concerned it is a political stunt.
"If they want to waste taxpayers’ money going down a rabbit hole they can crack on.
“The taxpayer will have to fund it.
"You must reach your own conclusions as to whether you think the Government has followed the processes it needs to follow.
“And they have been very clear throughout this that they anticipate authorities to put in judicial reviews and have been following the process rigorously.”