The reorganisation of Worcestershire Councils will be the largest local government reshuffle in over 50 years.
It represents a defining moment for our county, one that offers either the opportunity to deliver better value for money to residents or, conversely, the risk of seeing parts of the county pushed involuntarily into becoming an extension of Birmingham. The stakes could not be higher.
The required aims of the new council organisation are clear: financial sustainability, good value for money, high‑quality services, and an ambition of continued improvement.
These are not abstract aspirations; they are the practical foundations required to protect our communities, and safeguard essential services.
Looking at the two options ahead of us, there is only one that will achieve these wants and needs of the local community.
That is one unitary authority that keeps Worcestershire together. A single, united structure that provides the clarity, efficiency, and the strategic strength necessary to meet the challenges that lie ahead.
The harmony between rural tranquillity and accessible urban life is part of what makes Worcestershire a fantastic place to live.
It is also a balancing act that would be toppled by the forced use of a city‑template. A model designed for incomparable metropolitan areas cannot be imposed onto a county defined by its large rural character without causing catastrophic disruption. Any local reorganisation that happens in Worcestershire must be in recognition of, and respectful of, our distinct needs.
The creation of two unitary councils would do the opposite. It would see North Worcestershire become, by default, an extension of Birmingham and would shift our identity fundamentally.
North Worcestershire is a neighbour of Birmingham but is proud to be part of the adjacent countryside that so many Birmingham residents enjoy, and conversely, North Worcestershire enjoys a proximity to Birmingham whilst maintaining its unique rural character and slower pace of life.
A divided structure would only weaken our voice, dilute our identity, and place our future in the hands of those who do not understand us.
One unitary authority is the only option that protects Worcestershire’s integrity, strengthens its governance, and secures its long‑term ambition for prosperity.
Our valued identity must be protected from being merged into an urban extension or even treated as a subset of an identity that has existed for generations.
We’re already at risk of urbanisation from, and our local democracy is already being eroded by the unprecedented housing targets being forced upon us despite the consistent local objection.
As a 79% rural consistency composed of 89% greenbelt land and approximately 8% brownfield land, our housing targets have increased by 85%.
Meanwhile Birmingham, our neighbouring city with at least 140 hectares of brownfield land and extensively established infrastructure, has seen their targets cut by over 30%.
If we were to involuntarily risk becoming an extension of Birmingham, it is highly likely that our precious greenbelt would be sacrificed even further. The character of our county; its landscape, identity, and rural heritage, would be placed at real risk.
When providing a common-sense counter to central government decisions such as unreasonable housing targets, one unified voice is essential. A single, coherent authority can speak for the whole county, representing all our views and standing the strongest chance of securing greater funding for transport, housing, and economic development. Multiple voices drown each other out; a united voice is often harder to ignore.
Alongside ensuring that decision‑making is kept local to Worcestershire, and that my constituents are not stripped of their voice – an action that would run counter to the very principle of devolution – a one unitary council is also the most sensible financial decision.
Financial sustainability is vital for any council. Across the country, we have seen many councils beginning to struggle with rising costs; costs that inevitably become the burden of the British taxpayer.
Without a sustainable model, residents pay the price through higher taxes, reduced services, or both.
A single, financially resilient authority is the most responsible way to safeguard public money and ensure that essential services remain secure for the long term.
Reorganising local government alone will not resolve all the financial challenges facing our communities. Even with structural change, there will continue to be rising demand on Adult Social Care, persistent pressures in homelessness and temporary accommodation, a growing resource need for schools, and increasing demand for children’s services.
That is why financial sustainability must be by design not chance. Anything less will fail to meet the increasing needs of local communities and will ultimately result in deficits that must be paid for by hard‑working residents. Financial sustainability cannot be an afterthought; it must be the foundation.
That’s why I strongly support the creation of one unitary council that will streamline services, improve value for money for residents and work towards a strong future for Worcestershire.
This is an opportunity to shape an efficient and community‑centred system for our local government.
One that respects our current identity whilst preparing us for the challenges and opportunities ahead.
A single unitary council is not merely an administrative preference; it is a strategic choice for a more secure, more coherent and more prosperous Worcestershire.
We need a single coherent authority that will champion the whole of Worcestershire
