Hucknall avoids city move as Government approves expanded city Local Government Reorganisation plan

The Labour Government has backed option Bii from the LGR consultation – which was put forward by the Labour-led city council – to create two single-tier unitary councils.

Nottingham city and parts of Rushcliffe, Gedling and Broxtowe now become part of a new unitary city council

The rest of the county, including Hucknall, will now become part of the new unitary county council.

However, in the short term, there will be no change to existing services and all services currently delivered by the nine affected councils will continue as normal.

Three LGR options for Nottinghamshire were put forward for the Government consultation and decision.

Option 1b was for Broxtowe, Gedling, and Nottingham City councils to form a new unitary city council, while Nottinghamshire, Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Mansfield, Newark & Sherwood, and Rushcliffe councils formed a new unitary county council.

Option 1e was a north-south split proposal with Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Gedling, Mansfield, and Newark & Sherwood in one new unitary council and Broxtowe, Nottingham City, and Rushcliffe in the other.

Option Bii – the city council’s option – proposed a city boundary review with one new unitary council comprised of Nottingham City and parts of Broxtowe, Gedling and Rushcliffe, while the other new unitary council would see the remaining parts of Broxtowe, Gedling and Rushcliffe combined with Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Mansfield, and Newark & Sherwood and it is this option the Government has backed.

Coun Lee Waters (Ash Ind), who represents Hucknall Central on Ashfield Council, said he was glad Hucknall had avoided becoming part of the city.

But he was still criticial of the Government’s decision.

He said: “This decision looks like blatant Labour gerrymandering, designed around rescuing Nottingham City Council rather than serving the communities of Nottinghamshire.

“Option 1Bii carves up established council areas, ignores local identity and creates a sprawling, incoherent authority across the north and east of the county.

"It does not pass the common-sense test and appears to contradict the Government’s own requirements for sensible geography, local support and deliverability.

“I am relieved Hucknall has escaped being swallowed up by Nottingham City, something local residents never asked for.

"But that does not make 1Bii a good deal.”

A spokesperson for all nine councils, including Ashfield, said: "The Government has announced its preferred option for LGR.

“All nine councils have worked hard to meet the deadlines set by central Government and to provide submissions that we believe are best for the residents we serve.

“We will continue to work together to ensure services continue and that residents and businesses remain our priority.

“We want to reassure everyone that this will not affect the day-to-day running of your local council, our services will continue and we are working closely with the thousands of staff who are coming on this LGR journey with us.

"The work has only just begun, and we can now start the work of transitioning to be ready by April 2028."

Coun Richard Darrington (Ref), who represents Hucknall South on the county council, said: “I called this five months ago after we’d had the vote at a full council meeting – we voted for option 1b and I knew it wouldn’t happen.

"I find it amusing that the Government can give a set of directions, criteria and an approach and then accept something which is totally in contradiction of the guidance and rules.

"All that hard work and they put their own option forward anyway.

"At least Hucknall stayed out of the city, we definitely wanted that.”

Meanwhile, Coun Sam Smith (Con), opposition leader at Nottinghamshire Council, called the decision a ‘Labour stitch-up’ – and blamed the Reform for letting it happen.

He said: “Reform have sold Nottinghamshire residents down the river.

"Despite our repeated warnings, they ploughed ahead with a proposal that has enabled this Labour stitch-up.

“Large parts of our county are being carved off and absorbed into a city council that has faced serious financial difficulties in the past.

"Residents in Broxtowe, Rushcliffe and Gedling, who Reform promised to protect, are now facing higher council tax and worse services as a direct result.

“This Labour Government has gone against its own criteria, wasting millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money on consultations and plans for a process that was clearly predetermined.

"The district boundary threshold was ditched without a second thought.

"The disaggregation of services alone will cost a fortune that should have been spent on frontline care, not bureaucracy.

"We are now calling for a full judicial review and I will be writing to the Coun Mick Barton (Ref), the council leader, demanding support for that review.”

Coun Mick Barton, county council leader, said: “To say I am bitterly disappointed, is an understatement.

"The Conservatives came up with the concept of the LGR and the Labour Government carried the legislation on.

"The local Conservative group and the Conservative party had 10 years to deal with LGR and did absolutely nothing except kick it into the long grass.

"A further example of the Conservative inability to make hard decisions, they are to blame for the mess we find ourselves in now.

"They are killing our communities with this legislation.

"If Reform were in Government, we would not continue with LGR.

"When choosing an option, the county council did our due diligence and sought the services of a professional company to help us do so.

"The option we chose endorsed all the governments criteria and guidelines.

"Our option of 1B would have made the county council and city council sustainable and its services deliverable for decades to come.

"The Government’s decision has gone against its own criteria and guidelines.

"The city council was virtually bankrupt six years ago and has been in financial measures until very recently.

"This is Labour looking after Labour, trying to save their own regions, politically.

"This decision has not been made for the benefit of the residents. It has been made to benefit the Labour councillors and the Labour Government.

"I shall be reviewing all the options in the next few days, once I receive the full details.

"But like I have said for months, I will do what is best for the residents.

"If it means going for a judicial review option, that is what I will do.

"We have spent five months working on an option that was evidence led and that fitted all the Governments criteria.

"This has been overturned to fit a rushed Labour model, land and asset grabbing, with a squiggly line.

"This leaves the rest of the county vulnerable.

"The labour Government and labour group members will end up regretting this in next year’s elections in May.”