Data fails to show link between size of council and its performance: District Councils Network
The District Councils Network (DCN) has published data which it claims reveals the lack of any link between councils’ size and performance, “undermining the Government’s case to impose mega councils across England”.
The data was collated by Uttlesford District Council for the DCN. Councils were divided into four quartiles based on their population size and their performance was compared using publicly available data including Ofsted and Care Quality Commission (CQC) ratings.
The report claimed that on children’s services, almost twice as many councils with the smallest populations obtained the CQC’s highest ‘outstanding’ rating than councils with the largest populations.
In relation to adult social care, although more councils with the largest populations were deemed to be ‘outstanding’ than those with smaller populations, the larger councils also “appeared to be prone to experiencing major problems”, the DCN claimed.
All six of the unitary councils nationwide that got the lowest ‘requires improvement’ rating had higher than average populations, it said.
The data also suggested that councils with below-average populations were more likely to get the highest ratings when it came to tenant satisfaction ratings for their area.
The DCN meanwhile said there was also no indication that smaller councils were more prone to severe financial problems, with slightly fewer of them issuing a Section 114 notice or capitalisation directions over the past three years than was the case with their bigger counterparts.
Cllr Sam Chapman-Allen, Chair of the District Councils’ Network, said: “When there’s no relationship between the size of unitary councils and their performance, it’s baffling that the Government continues to pursue mega councils each covering half a million people or more.
“Mega councils are by their very definition further from their communities – the danger is that they’re remote organisations that are unresponsive to the very localised needs of our communities.
“The Government is currently rushing through local government reorganisation without pausing to consider whether mega councils really will benefit local people. We know mega councils don’t necessarily offer better services or are more financially sustainable than the rest of local government, so why force them upon our areas?”
Cllr Chapman-Allen added: “Reorganisation requires painstaking organisational upheaval which will inevitably occupy local leaders who would far rather prioritise the more important business of delivering for our communities – building homes, creating jobs and supporting vulnerable people.
“I fully support any reorganisation that keeps the ‘local’ in local government, is bottom-up, integrally involves our communities in the design of new councils and builds services around the needs of the everyone in our community. The danger is that by rushing ahead to impose mega councils with no evidence that they work our communities will endure all the pain of upheaval without any gain.”
On Friday the County Councils Network claimed that establishing unitary councils covering 500,000 or more people is "absolutely essential" and could save almost £2bn over five years.
The CCN also advised against creating smaller councils, arguing such a move could cost taxpayers "hundreds of millions".
