Agenda item

David Whittle (Director of Strategy, Policy, Relationships and Corporate Assurance) and Jenny Dixon-Sherreard (Strategy Manager, Strategy, Policy, Relationships & Corporate Assurance) were in attendance for this item

1. The Leader introduced the item, presenting the final version of Kent County Council’s Strategic Business Case for Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) in Kent and Medway for Cabinet approval, prior to submission to Government by the 28 November deadline.

2. The Leader reiterated that KCC had not sought LGR but, as Government was progressing with the process, the Council had a responsibility to ensure any reorganisation delivered maximum benefit for Kent residents and minimised risk.

3. The Strategic Business Case proposed a single Kent and Medway Council with devolved area assemblies as the most viable option. This model was identified as the lowest cost to implement, the fastest to achieve payback, the highest net saver, and the fairest to communities. The proposal maintained Kent’s integrity as a single county, avoided risks associated with fragmenting critical services such as social care, and preserved the scale needed to manage pressures linked to Kent’s border location.

4. It balanced strategic capacity with local responsiveness and offered a modern approach to meaningful engagement and representation. The Leader acknowledged that the LGR process was not perfect and would require compromises but confirmed that, based on evidence from internal work and joint discussions with Kent council leaders, the single unitary model set out in the Strategic Business Case remained the most viable option for Kent and Medway.

5. Mr Whittle recorded his thanks to Mrs Dixon-Sherreard, the Policy and Strategy team, Kent Analytics, Financial Strategy, MRX, and other teams for their work in developing KCC’s Strategic Business Case for Local Government Reorganisation (LGR). He noted that the process, which began last December, had been complex and significant, given its long-term impact on services and residents.

6. He highlighted that KCC had met all Government expectations, working jointly with Kent council leaders and facilitating the LGR workstream. The Strategic Business Case was transparently cross-comparable with other options and based on a shared evidence base, including financial assessments. Members had been fully briefed throughout, with updates to the Cabinet Committee, party groups, and County Council.

7. Mr Whittle confirmed that Option 1A remained the most viable proposal, offering the lowest implementation cost, fastest payback (3.3 years), and highest cumulative savings (£457m over 10 years). He contrasted this with other options, which had significantly higher costs and longer payback periods. He stressed that the financial case was particularly strong given current pressures and that the chosen option would affect the sector’s long-term sustainability.

8. If approved, the business case would be submitted to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), after which the process would be led by Government through consultation, decision-making, and legislation. Mr Whittle suggested Cabinet consider sharing the business case with other departments, such as the Department for Education, Department for Transport, and the Home Office, due to potential wider impacts.

9. Mrs Dixon-Sherreard reported that the business case had been finalised for Cabinet approval following completion of resident and stakeholder engagement reports. She confirmed that headline findings remained consistent with interim results previously presented to the Cabinet Committee and County Council.

10. She explained that a late agreement among Kent and Medway councils on the data sets for population and electorate figures required recalculation of councillor numbers to ensure comparability across all proposals. This adjustment increased the number of councillors from 118 to 122 and resulted in a slight rise in predicted member allowance costs, which was reflected in the business case.

11. Sections identified as unclear during feedback had been clarified, and appendices collated to provide full transparency. These included the options appraisals, engagement reports, KPMG’s financial assessment, and the proposed community engagement toolkit. Mrs Dixon-Sherreard noted that the designed version of the business case, published as a supplementary paper, was identical in content to the original version aside from formatting improvements.

12. Mrs Dixon-Sherreard expressed thanks to colleagues across multiple teams, including Policy and Strategy, Finance, MRX, Growth and Communities, Democratic Services, and Directorate Management Teams, for their contributions. It was noted that the development of the business case demonstrated KCC’s capacity and capability to work collaboratively and respond effectively to complex challenges within tight timescales.

13. Further to questions and comments from Members the discussion included the following:

(a)  Thanks were expressed to the Leader and officers for the extensive work undertaken on the Strategic Business Case for Local Government Reorganisation (LGR). He noted that the report was comprehensive and acknowledged that most Members had not sought LGR. Concerns however were raised that many members of the public were unaware of the process and its potential financial impact through council tax.

(b)  There was a risk to critical services such as foster care and fire and rescue, as dividing these into multiple unitaries would dilute service quality and increase costs due to loss of economies of scale.

(c)  Support for Option 1A was reiterated as the least financially risky and most workable solution for Kent taxpayers, despite the view that LGR was unnecessary.

(d)  Option 1A reflected Kent’s unique geography and social diversity, balanced strategic capability with local accountability, avoided disaggregation risks for services such as SEND and Adult Social Care, and maintained economies of scale. It was the least disruptive option and the most economically viable, with the lowest transition costs and fastest payback period.

(e)  With regard to addressing concerns about local democracy, it was explained that the proposal included strong community engagement processes and dedicated staff within each assembly area.  Kent remained positive about future devolution, though no timetable had been provided by Government. The business case was bold, compelling, and focused on securing best value for Kent residents.

(f)   Mr Watts noted that Members, in considering the decision before them, had been given full opportunity to review and debate the proposals through Cabinet Committee discussions and County Council. He confirmed that concerns raised during the process were clearly set out in the proposed Record of Decision and had been considered by Members. Mr Watts placed on record that the decision had been made with due regard to those concerns, ensuring transparency for any future review of how the decision was reached.

14. RESOLVED that Cabinet agree to:

(a)  APPROVE the KCC Strategic Business Case for Local Government Reorganisation in Kent and Medway;

(b)  DELEGATE authority to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, to take the required actions to submit the finalised Strategic Business Case submission to Government by the 28 November deadline.

(c)  DELEGATE authority to the Chief Executive to take other necessary actions, including but not limited to negotiating and entering into contracts or other legal agreements, as required to implement the decision