Embedded Files
Extract from submission made by the administration at Surrey County Council, opposed by Opposition Group showing why the option promoted by them and accepted by the Government was the worst possible option for the residents of West Surrey which includes Farnham.
Timeline for Local Government Reorganisation
1st April 2027
New West Surrey Unitary Authority due to take over responsibility for all services and statutory duties currently provided by Surrey County Council and the six existing Districts and Boroughs in west Surrey
21st of May 2026 - 31st of March 2027
West Surrey Shadow Unitary Authority and the newly elected Unitary Councillors (2 for North Farnham) undertakes work to ensure that West Surrey Unitary Authority can operate all services and statutory duties from the 1st of April. Splitting Surrey County Council services into two and pulling together the services currently provided by the existing Districts and Boroughs, including Waverley Borough Council (where Farnham is). Also responsible for negotiating with East Surrey Shadown Unitary Authority and the Government on resolving the massive debts being inherited by West Surrey, particularly from Woking and Spelthorne which are both currently being run by Government Commissioners who are trying to resolve the debt situation.
Surrey County Council and the existing Surrey County Councillor - Catherine Powell continue but are also responsible for supporting preparations for splitting Surrey County Council Services.
Waverley Borough Council and the existing Waverley Borough Councillors - see your Councillors Page continue but are also responsible for supporting preparations for merging district and borough services.
Farnham Town Council is not impacted by Local Government Reorganisations but is going to take on the maintenance and management of key assets in Farnham from Waverley Borough Council including the following sites in North Farnham:
Badshot Lea Recreation Ground
Oast House Recreation Ground
Weybourne Road Allotments
Six Bells Allotments (Hale Road)
21st of May 2026
West Surrey Shadow Unitary Authority Annual General Meeting
8th of May 2026
Results of Unitary elections announced
7th of May 2026
Unitary elections for shadow year and then a 4 year term starting on the 1st of April 2027
What has happened so far in Local Government Reorganisation in Surrey
16th of December 2024 - JIM MCMAHON OBE MP - Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution publishes the English Devolution White Paper and announces
"Local government reorganisation
My intention is to formally invite unitary proposals in January 2025 from all councils in two-tier areas, and small neighbouring unitary councils. In this invitation, I will set out further detail on the criteria I will consider when taking decisions on the proposals that are submitted to Government. I intend to ask for interim plans by March 2025.
As set out in the White Paper, new unitary councils must be the right size to achieve efficiencies, improve capacity and withstand financial shocks. For most areas, this will mean creating councils with a population of 500,000 or more. However, there may be exceptions to ensure new structures make sense for an area, including on devolution. Final decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis. We will ask you to work with other councils in your area to develop unitary proposals that are in the best interests of the whole area, rather than developing competing proposals."
20th of December 2024 - Surrey County Council announces an Extraordinary Council meeting on the 8th of January 2025 to discuss submission to Government for the formation of Unitary Councils in Surrey
31st of December 2024
Publication of the papers for the Extraordinary Council (Agenda for Council on Wednesday, 8 January 2025, 10.00 am - Surrey County Council) and Extraordinary Cabinet (Agenda for Cabinet on Wednesday, 8 January 2025, 2.30 pm - Surrey County Council)
1st of January 2025 - Catherine Powell shares her analysis of the appropriate geographic areas for Local Government Reorganisation with Surrey MPs, Councillors and on North Farnham Voice Facebook Page .
Between the 16th and the 31st of December Catherine Powell founder of North Farnham Voice did lots of reading and analysis of what was being proposed (see maps below), her conclusions
Is change needed? Yes
Does the change also need to address the long term funding issues and enormous debts of Councils like Woking (around £2billion)? Yes
Does the White Paper set out to resolve these issues? Only in part, there are big fundamental gaps. For example, the Government seems to be saying that all of the residents of Surrey are going to have to take on the debts run up by previous administrations at Woking, Spelthorne and Runnymede to name a few. Guildford also has serious issues. There is a risk that this leads to selling of much needed Council assets in one part of Surrey to pay for debts in another, inevitably increasing longer term costs as assets will need to be rented from others rather than already being owned.
Do the White Paper timescales and "ground rules"set Councils on a path to create a sustainable long-term basis for Local Government for the residents and businesses of Farnham, Waverley, Surrey and England, sadly I have concluded no.
3rd of January 2025
Catherine Powell raises a request for a Government Petition to form a Blackwater Valley Unitary Authority
8th of January 2025 - Extraordinary SCC Council Meeting at 10am - Devolution, Local Government Reorganisation and Surrey
Catherine Powell wrote to the Leader of Surrey County Council asking that they go back to the Government stating that the English Devolution White Paper sets out an impossible timescale that hasn't been achieved by any successful Unitary Authority. Asking that another year be given to all Councils to develop proposals, which would also support the elections going ahead in May and allow more time for very necessary discussions and negotiations within Surrey and cross county border discussions, whilst still supporting major structural reform in this parliament alongside funding reform.
Catherine Powell's 3 minute statement can be watched on the webcast, accessible via this link - https://mycouncil.surreycc.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx...
Councillors we able to vote on the following recommendations
The Council is asked to:
a) Note that the Leader will respond to the government expressing this council’s interest in pursuing a joint programme of devolution and local government reorganisation (as set out in the draft letter in Annex 2), noting that acceptance onto this programme may lead to the postponement of the 2025 county elections.
b) Note that the decision to respond to the letter from the Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution, dated the 16 December 2024, is an Executive function.
One of the most important decisions Surrey County Council will ever make and it was a VOTE to NOTE!
5th of February 2025 - Letter issued by Leader of Surrey County Council
Dear Members,
As you know, last month I wrote to the government to outline the county’s ambition to fully engage with the recent White Paper on Devolution, requesting that Surrey be part of the 'first wave' of the accelerated programme for reform, which aims to simplify and streamline local government. Today, we have received confirmation that Surrey will be part of the first wave.
This is good news. I have always been an advocate of further devolution from Westminster and Whitehall to local regions and communities, and Local Government Reorganisation will mean we can deliver a simpler, more efficient, and effective local government system. We owe it to Surrey’s residents to reorganise and get the best devolution deal possible for our county.
The Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution has also confirmed that the government has decided to postpone Surrey’s local elections in May until 2026, which will enable the detailed work for reorganisation and devolution to take place. The resource and time that would have been spent on elections for a soon-to-be-abolished council can now be directed to working on the best possible outcome for Surrey's reorganisation.
The next steps are to develop a business case for reorganisation and submit a draft to government in March. Of course, any proposal will need to be worked up in collaboration with local government and other partners across the county, so that together we can really grasp this opportunity to deliver something meaningful for the future of Surrey.
Collectively, we must be absolutely clear to residents that, throughout this process, our vital work supporting them will continue - services will be delivered and we will still be here for those who need us most - until whatever new council is fully established to take on that delivery.
This is an important step towards a better future for Surrey residents and should fully embrace the opportunities it presents.
I will write to you again in due course with more detail.
Kind regards
Tim Oliver OBE
Leader of Surrey County Council
This means that there will be no County elections in May 2025 and there will be elections in May 2026 for the new Unitary Councils
Interim plans on how to carve up Surrey and which District and Borough Councils will be in which new Unitary are due by the end of March with final plans by the end of May
7th of February 2025 - Timescale for Local Government Reorganisations
The letter issued by Jim McMahon OBE MP, Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution, invites the development of proposals for Surrey local government reorganisation and includes an even more accelerated programme.
Interim plans by the 21st of March 2025 rather than the end of March 2025
Final plans by the 9th of May rather than the end of May 2025
The County Council Elections due on the 1st of May 2025 have been postponed to May 2026
This change is being rushed through with no funding from Government. It is distracting from the day-to-day delivery of services at a time when all councils are struggling with increased demand for statutory services.
24th of February 2025 - The Government has rejected the Blackwater Valley Unitary Petition raised on the 3rd of January with a 21 day response time.
The Government has set the rules for Local Government Reorganisation but their reason for rejecting the petition is :
"Sorry, we can’t accept your petition – “Create Blackwater Valley Authority - 310,000 people in 80 square miles”.
It requests action at a local level.
We can’t accept petitions that request action at a local level. You could ask your MP to take action on your concerns about this issue, including by asking them to present a public (paper) petition about this."
Net result Local Government Reorganisation proposals will leave the Blackwater Valley split across 3 of the new unitary authorities that will be formed from the existing Councils. This will remain the largest conurbation in England split in this way with more than 310,000 people in less that 80 square miles.
18th March 2025 - Surrey County Council meeting - VOTE to NOTE Cabinet's decision to submit interim proposals for two unitary options with one three unitary option included.
https://mycouncil.surreycc.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx...
The Council meeting was immediately followed by a Cabinet Meeting that agreed to submit to Government by the 21st of March
Part A which has been agreed by the Surrey Cabinet and the Leaders of all 11 the Districts and Boroughs (Ds and Bs) - which is essentially background information about Surrey
SCC authored Part B which says that the only answer is to split Surrey into two unitary authorities and
Ds and Bs authored Part B which says two or three unitaries could be sustainable but they believe 3 is the right answer.
Concerns
Debt - Woking has unserviceable debt, it was announced on yesterday that the inspectors have been called into Spelthorne, and although not in the same position, Runnymede also has very high debt levels - at this point there is nothing from the Government about how this is going to be handled, any Council that gets Woking or Spelthorne will be unsustainable from day 1
Balancing Council Tax in with Council Tax out - Where SCC Council tax is raised? Which District and Borough areas see more Surrey County Council - Council Tax spent that raised? If an imbalance between the two or three unitary authorities is created then one or more will be unsustainable from day 1. Concerns that based on the data that is available all of the two unitary options see the Unitary that Farnham ends up in as the one that will be unsustainable.
How we continue to engage with residents - Motion on this and another on Community Asset Transfer (taken council assets current used for community use and transferring them to voluntary use), both were carried unanimously and the SCC part B papers were modified during this afternoon's Cabinet meeting to reflect the motion raised by Catherine Powell - despite the leader saying during the meeting it already did, he agreed after the meeting had finished that it didn't.
Fundamentally the decision is going to be made by the Minister - BUT how can he make any decision on how to split Surrey until a clear strategy exists for dealing with debt and have the information on Council tax raising and spending is available
6th of May 2025 - Why the two unitary authority option proposed by the Surrey County Council Administration is flawed?
The Administration at Surrey County Council is not just promoting a two unitary authority option they are presenting a two unitary authority option that massively disadvantages West Surrey. Below are some reasons why.
Surrey County Council’s Final LGR Plan is:
7th May 2025 - Another Vote to Note
Surrey County Council Meeting with another Vote to Note the Cabinet's intention to submit their preferred two unitary option which further disadvantages West Surrey.
Again please made to get the debt issue resolved before any decision is made and for transparency on the debt issues with residents.
https://mycouncil.surreycc.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx...
Surrey County Council Cabinet resolves to submit their preferred two unitary option along with Elmbridge Borough Council and Mole Valley District Council - both of which are in the East and therefore have a vested interest in the option that is the best for East Surrey.
12th May 2025 - Catherine Powell launches Debt petition
Woking Borough Council has run up over £2 billion in debt starting in 2004. The cost of servicing that debt is now £171million a year versus an annual budget for services of £23million. Putting up Council Tax in Woking or even across the whole of Surrey to cover this is immoral and simply wrong, penalising those already struggling with the cost-of-living crisis. Whilst there are wealthy parts of Surrey there are also pockets of real deprivation that continue to be hit hardest by this unfair tax along with many hard working families on limited budgets already struggling to make ends meet. .
There are also other Councils in Surrey, and nationally, that have run up huge debts, including Spelthorne, Thurrock and Warrington, all of whom have had Government Inspectors imposed for 5 years. After 18 months Government Inspectors still have no solution for Woking other than writing off the debt – so why not just do it?
Please sign this petition to get the Government to commit to writing off all the unserviceable PWLB debt accrued by councils and fully fund the costs of enforced Local Government Reorganisation to avoid massive rises in unfair Council Tax, that hits the least well off hardest to cover the costs.
17th of June 2025 - Government - Surrey Local Government Reorganisations Consultation goes live
Closing on the 5th of August 2025
The Government has today launched it's consultation on two options to reorganise Surrey, getting rid of Surrey County Council and all 11 Districts and Boroughs and replacing them with 2 or 3 unitary authorities that will be responsible for all of the services currently split between Surrey and the Districts and Boroughs.
The Administration at Surrey County Council supports a two unitary solution, not the two unitary solution that I believe is supported by their own analysis but one that massively disadvantages West Surrey.
The two unitary solution that puts the three districts and boroughs with the highest levels of debt and the highest levels of needs for Council Services but the lowest levels of Council tax raised per person all together in the West with Farnham. It also means that Haslemere will be in the same mega Council as Staines near Heathrow Airport.
The remaining 9 Districts and Boroughs support a 3 unitary option
3 unitary authorities represent the 3 economic areas that are based around Heathrow Airport, Gatwick Airport and the Blackwater Valley. These are the areas that are most likely to be able to support economic development and are small enough to be run effectively. 3 will have 3 leadership teams rather than 2 so on paper has a higher cost, but and to me it is a big but, big is not always better - there are lots of inefficiencies in Surrey today because of it's scale and many of the services are already provided in 1/3s or 1/4s of Surrey - Manageable geographies within which people live and work will be easier to run.
Consultation Questions
1. Does the proposal suggest sensible economic areas and geographies which will achieve a single tier of local government for the whole of Surrey?
Please explain your answer, including any comments on whether this proposal suggests sensible economic areas (for example reflect economic geography/travel to work areas/functioning economies) for councils with an appropriate tax base that does not create an undue advantage or disadvantage for one part of the area, and a sensible geography that will help to increase housing supply and meet local needs?
2. Will the local government structures being put forward, if implemented, achieve the outcomes described?
Please explain your answer, including any specific comments on the evidence and analysis to support the proposals.
3. Is the councils’ proposal for unitary local government of the right size to achieve efficiencies, improve capacity and withstand financial shocks and is this supported by a rationale for the population size proposed?
Please explain your answer, including any specific comments on the efficiencies identified to help improve the councils’ finances, how it will manage transition costs and any future service transformation opportunities identified.
4. As an area covering councils in Best Value intervention and in receipt of Exceptional Financial Support, do you agree the proposal will put local government in the area as a whole on a firmer footing?
As of 17 June 2025, councils in Surrey in Best Value intervention are Spelthorne Borough Council and Woking Borough Council.
As of 17 June 2025, the council in Surrey in receipt of Exceptional Financial Support in 2025/26 is Woking Borough Council.
Please explain your answer, including any specific comments on the area specific arrangements necessary to make new structures viable.
5. Will the proposal prioritise the delivery of high quality and sustainable public services to citizens, improve local government and service delivery, avoid unnecessary fragmentation of services and lead to better value for money in the delivery of these services?
Please explain your answer, including any comments on the public service reform opportunities within the proposal, including social care, children’s services, SEND and homelessness, and wider public services, including public safety.
6. Has the proposal been informed by local views, and does it consider issues of local identity and cultural and historic importance?
Please explain your answer, including any comments on the local engagement activity undertaken on the proposal and how it is proposed that any local concerns will be addressed.
7. Does the councils’ proposal support devolution arrangements?
Do you have any comments on the proposed devolution arrangements?
8. Will the councils’ proposal enable stronger community engagement and deliver genuine opportunity for neighbourhood empowerment?
Do you have any comments on the proposed approach to community engagement?
9. Do you have any other comments with regards to the proposed local government reorganisation in Surrey?
Surrey County Council are providing an online session on the 7th of July to promote their two unitary option, I would like to offer an opportunity for residents for Farnham to hear about the three unitary option.
One question everyone should be asking is what is happening about Woking's £2billion of debt and £171 million annual debt servicing costs. The answer is that the government recognises the position isn't sustainable but doesn't yet have a confirmed path forward. We need that as for either option, Farnham is with Woking
https://consult.communities.gov.uk/local.../surrey/
Catherine Powell's response to the Consultation
SCC Residents Association and Independent Group response to Surrey LGR Consultation.pdf19th of July 2025 - Why three is the magic number
8th of October 2025 - Government advised final decision on Surrey Local Government reorganisations due on the 15th of October has been delayed
28th of October 2025 - Government Selects Two Unitary Authorities for Surrey
Two unitary option that sets the new West Surrey Unitary up to fail with all the debt and high needs, leaving the East debt free, high council tax base and lower need selected by Government
No one has had a vote on this, not even your local Councillors had a meaningful vote
9th of December 2025 - Debt Motion passed by Surrey County Council
Surrey County Councillor for Farnham North got cross party support for her motion to call on the Leader of Surrey County Council to write to and work with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government to seek agreement to ensure:
That the debts held by both Woking Borough Council and Spelthorne Borough Council will be ring-fenced and addressed by further debt support.
That the to be formed West Surrey Unitary Council will not be expected to commit to reducing the debt by selling off predecessor council assets currently held by district and borough councils in the West Surrey area or by Surrey County Council, due to the relatively high levels of debt held by some of those districts and boroughs in the West Surrey area.
That Government will commit to resolving the debt situations in Woking Borough Council and Spelthorne Borough Council before the summer recess in 2026. This will allow the West Surrey Unitary Authority to have sufficient time to seek to develop a balanced budget for its first year (2027/2028) given the other financial challenges associated with on-going budget pressures, particularly in Adult Social Care, Children’s Social Care, SEND, aging highway infrastructure, housing and temporary accommodation and changes to local government funding.
Also agreed the Surrey County Council Members of the West Surrey Joint Committee that will start meeting on a voluntary basis in January, then meet formally once the Government have passed legislation to confirm their decision to proceed with the two unitary option for Surrey proposed by the administration. Surrey County Councillor for Farnham North will be one of the six Surrey County Council Committee Members
Browse meetings - West Surrey Joint Committee - Surrey County Council
16th of January 2026 - First West Surrey Voluntary Joint Committee Meeting
The Government determined that there needed to be one representative of each of the Districts and Boroughs in each of the to be formed unitary authorities and an equal number of Surrey County Councillors and those would be appointed based on political proportionality. The Surrey County Councillor for Farnham North is the Independent SCC Councillor on the West Surrey Unitary.
The papers for the meeting can be accessed via the link below.
https://mycouncil.surreycc.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx...
For this first meeting the decisions on how it would be run where made by officers and they determined that this would be a public meeting but it would not be webcast and not recording of the meeting would be linked to the papers. Committee members strong objected to this and eventually it was agreed that Woking Borough Council who were hosting the first meeting would record the meeting.
A link to this recording has now been shared and the democratic services officer has advised that this can be shared. Please note that a password is needed to access the recording this is also provided below.
https://woking.public-i.tv/.../webcast_interactive/1057444
Password: aFS5WgD8
The role of the Joint Committees specified by Government on papers is fairly limited -see Terms of Reference
18th of February 2026 - Second West Surrey Voluntary Joint Committee Meeting
The Committee called for a financial baseline to be generated once all of the constituent authorities has set their budgets for 2026/27 - this was eventually agreed by Officers.
Reviewed implementation plan for setting up the new unitary authorities, concerns raised about debt and lack of engagement with Councillors, residents and other stakeholders.
Papers via this link - Agenda for West Surrey Voluntary Joint Committee on Wednesday, 18 February 2026, 1.00 pm - Surrey County Council
The meeting was also webcast and you can view the meeting should you wish to do so via this link - West Surrey Joint Committee - 18 February 2026
13th of March 2026 - First West Surrey Joint Committee Meeting
This committee has no real power, it is responsible for making sure that at the AGM for the West Surrey Shadow unitary on the 21st of May at 2pm the Councillors elected on the 7th May have the key procedural documents that they can adopt to operate and that there are interim Officers appointed into the three key roles to support initial operation of the Shadow Authority.
However the committee as well as doing that has sought to ensure that there is transparency about the very real challenges facing West Surrey due to the debts held by some of the constituent Councils.
The papers make the stark realities of the situation very clear - you can read them via this link
https://mycouncil.surreycc.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx...
Screenshots of key section below
There was a good discussion around the financial issues with critical issues raised by a committee members, the meeting can be watched via this link
https://elmbridge.public-i.tv/.../webcast.../1064908
MHCLG (Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government) attended the meeting and for the first time (this is the first formal meeting) were active participants and did answer questions. One key message was that they accepted that there were exceptional circumstances in West Surrey and that support would be required from Government to support setting a balanced budget for 2027/28.
Page updated
Report abuse