THE battle for supremacy burst into the public arena this week with East Hampshire District Council leader Ferris Cowper slating his county counterpart Roy Perry’s vision for local government in Hampshire as “a hammer blow to local democracy”.

So incensed is Mr Cowper over Mr Perry’s latest thoughts on future change to local government structure, he is urging “all councils and concerned communities to take up this opportunity to fight for localism and fight for your local council”.

The row has erupted over pressure from central government which could potentially result in the break up of Hampshire County Council as the districts wrestle with the concept of two combined authorities covering Solent City in the south and the Heart of Hampshire, giving more devolved power to the districts.

East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) is supporting the ‘Solent’ bid.

Mr Perry is arguing instead for the creation of a new unitary Hampshire Council which would replace both the county council and Hampshire’s 11 district councils, making the latter redundant.

The response follows an address by Mr Perry to the county council’s annual meeting last Friday urging a “full and genuine public consultation” over any future changes, be it for combined authorities, an elected mayor, or a unitary council.

Pointing out that he had met very few people who wanted a ‘Solent City’ established and still fewer who wanted a ‘metro mayor’, Mr Perry went on to explain that while the county council had been encouraged to support the creation of one or other of the proposed combined authorities, both would be based on an elected mayor and a new layer of administration, setting a path toward the creation of separate unitary councils, but paying little regard to current economic, NHS or emergency service boundaries.

In the face of these moves to split Hampshire, the county council has recently commissioned an independent study by Deloitte to provide an initial analysis of how services could be better provided across the whole county, at lower cost.

According to Mr Perry, this report, which explores a number of options, has indicated the creation of a new unitary structure for local government in Hampshire that would cut council tax for the majority of Hampshire households (for around 90 per cent), streamline services, and deliver tens of millions of pounds of savings each year.

“Their estimates suggest this would be at least a third more (more than £40m) than the £30m apparently offered by the Government to a Solent combined authority,” reported Mr Perry.

One of the options under consideration is the creation of a new unitary Hampshire Council which, according to the study, would “deliver lower council tax, more efficient services and clearer democratic accountability to Hampshire residents”.

As a single local authority, Hampshire Council would be expected to carry out the full range of local government services for its area, encompassing all the duties and functions that are carried out in ‘two-tier’ areas by both district and county councils like Hampshire.

Mr Perry said: “I have worked hard to make the two-tier structure work but the districts and cities have now come up with their separate proposals that will begin to divide the county immediately. We are convinced that this would lead ultimately to unitary councils based on a perverse geography which will do little to enhance the economy of the area.

“Interestingly, the independent analysis shows that two such unitaries based on the Solent and Heart of Hampshire proposals would be the most disruptive and least efficient model out of all of the options open to Hampshire.

“Unfortunately, these proposals devolve very few powers down from central government but would transfer, and therefore split, some of the county’s key services such as highways and transport. They don’t bring greater clarity or efficiencies. They add a new layer of local government and additional costs and will inevitably disrupt high-quality countywide services.

“The county council has painstakingly built over many years a range of services, especially in the protection of vulnerable adults and children, that are the envy of the country. I cannot accept that these should be broken up in this way. I would far rather lose the county council as we know it and establish a new Hampshire Council than threaten those services.

“As such, we reluctantly concluded that Hampshire County Council had been left with no choice but to explore other options for the future of local government in Hampshire, including reorganisation.

“We would very much like to study other examples of unitary councils. This option would also give much more influence and power to local town and parish councils, thereby strengthening local democracy. This proposal is not about protecting historical arrangements, or matters of individual sovereignty, but about securing a sustainable future for Hampshire residents with high quality and efficient services and a buoyant economy.

“However, such a fundamental decision about the future of Hampshire can only happen if residents want it and are given a proper opportunity to voice their views. This is why the county council will shortly be going out to a full public consultation on this issue.”