Summary of the Secretary of State’s feedback on interim LGR proposals

The Secretary of State has provided individual feedback to the 21 local authorities that submitted interim proposals for local government reorganisation in their areas (LGR). Meetings are now being arranged for local authorities to meet with their designated Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) ‘point person’ to discuss the feedback.

On 3 June 2025, the Secretary of State published a summary of the feedback provided and announced the allocation of a development contribution to each area, based on a flat rate of £135,000 plus an additional 20p per person in the area based on the Office for National Statistics’ population estimates.

The feedback confirms that the criteria for unitary local government against which LGR proposals are assessed is not weighted, and decisions on the most appropriate LGR option for each area will be “judgements in the round having regard to the guidance and available evidence”. The key points of the feedback summary for local authorities to consider in the preparation of their final proposals are outlined below.

Criterion one: A proposal should seek to achieve, for the whole of the area concerned, the establishment of a single-tier of local government

• Numerous interim proposals included options covering part of an area which was invited to submit an LGR proposal.
• Whilst each council in an area can submit a proposal, any final proposal should include a single option and geography for the area as a whole.
• Areas may wish to consider an options appraisal against the criteria to provide a rationale for the preferred final proposal, comparing it to any alternatives. This includes a high-level financial assessment of transition costs and forecast operating expenses for the new unitary council(s).

Criterion two: A unitary local government must be the right size to achieve efficiencies, improve capacity and withstand financial shocks

• The population size of 500,000 or more is a guiding principle, not a target.
• The government recognises the need for flexibility, given the need to take into account housing growth alongside LGR.
• Final proposals should set out the rationale for their approach to the size of an area, whether it is at, above or below 500,000.
• Existing district areas should be considered the building blocks for final proposals; however, more complex boundary changes will be considered where there is a strong justification for them.
• Final proposals, which include a proposed boundary change, should include a clear rationale for it and specify the area of any new unitary council(s).
• Boundary changes can be achieved alongside LGR structural changes or subsequently by way of a principal area boundary review undertaken by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England.
• Important historic counties and their ceremonial roles, rights and privileges will be maintained.
• Expected transition costs and evidence of potential efficiency savings in consideration of a sense of place and local identity should be included in final proposals.

Criterion three: Unitary services must prioritise the delivery of high-quality and sustainable public services to citizens

• The final proposal should include further consideration of the impact of LGR on crucial services such as social care, children’s services, SEND, homelessness and wider public services such as public safety.
• Where there are options for disaggregation, further detail on how different options might impact upon such services and risk mitigation should be included, for example, through social care partnerships. 

Criterion four: Proposals should show how councils in the area have sought to work together in coming to a view that meets local needs and is informed by local views

• Councils within an area should work together to agree ways of working, including around effective data sharing, to develop a robust evidence base for proposals.
• All final proposals for an area should use the same assumptions and data sets, and be clear on where and why there is any difference.
• The government recognises that due to the short timescale for the development of interim plans, local authorities’ substantive engagement with residents, businesses and organisations may not have been practical. Local authorities’ commitment to engage them before submitting final proposals is welcome.
• Local authorities may wish to engage, particularly with those who may be affected by service disaggregation and demonstrate how final proposals have incorporated local ideas and views.

Criterion five: New unitary structures must support devolution arrangements

• Local authorities should give further thought to how their final LGR proposals will facilitate devolution in their areas.
• The final proposal should outline how they will interact with a strategic authority, benefit the local community and meet statutory tests for devolution set out in the English Devolution White Paper.

Criterion six: New unitary structures should enable stronger community engagement and deliver genuine opportunities for neighbourhood empowerment

Final proposals should include further detail on plans for neighbourhood-based governance, and outline thoughts about formal neighbourhood partnerships and area committees.

Local elections

• The government will work with areas to hold elections for new unitary authorities as soon as possible.
• Exact timings and details will depend on the proposals received and those which will be implemented, if any.
• The government has no plans to postpone any elections that councils are due to hold.

Challenges and opportunities

From the interim proposals, the government has identified the following common challenges for the development of final proposals:

Funding reform

• The government expects LGR costs to be met by the councils within the area concerned, but recognises that upfront investment will be required to modernise back-office functions and is open to discussions about the flexible use of capital receipts and borrowing to support transition.
• Further details on the reform of local government finance and transition measures will be subject to consultation following the recent spending review.

Local public service reform

• The government expects local authorities to work with local public service providers in their areas to manage disruption risks during LGR, and design new ways of working, such as partnerships, shared services and specialist hubs, to achieve better outcomes based on local need.
• MHCLG will work across central government departments to develop joint strategies to tackle shared challenges. 

Strong community voice

• LGR should facilitate improved and sustained community engagement through a clear and accountable system of local area working and governance.
• Neighbourhood area committees (NACs) led by frontline ward councillors offer a model of place-based engagement and leadership which maximises LGR structural efficiencies and strengthens localism and community participation.
• NACs may include other service providers such as town or parish councillors, along with co-opted members from local community organisations.
• Areas considering new town/parish councils must consider how they will be funded so as to avoid further pressure on local authority finances and/or new burdens on local taxpayers.
• Areas must keep in mind that town/parish councils are independent bodies and are not a substitute for meaningful local government, community engagement and neighbourhood working.

Pathway to devolution

• The government recognises that pursuing LGR alongside devolution presents challenges and opportunities, but LGR should not delay devolution and plans for both should be complementary.
• The government is open to thinking practically about how to limit scenarios in which services such as the police and fire authorities are being disaggregated in support of LGR, only to be segregated upon the establishment of a strategic authority.

The full summary of the Secretary of State’s feedback is available here.

For more information

For more information, contact Claire Ward.