Council chiefs agree on new super council name

District and county chiefs have agreed to name the new unitary authority The Buckinghamshire Council following numerous debates.
District and county chiefs have agreed to name the new unitary authority The Buckinghamshire Council following numerous debates.

District and county chiefs have agreed to name the new unitary authority The Buckinghamshire Council following numerous debates.

During an interview yesterday (December 19) leader of Bucks County Council (BCC) Martin Tett said he recently met with district leaders and the secretary of state, James Brokenshire, to discuss unitary plans.
While the councillors still have “nuanced differences” in some areas about how the new council should be run, they did agree on the name.
Last month district councils met to discuss the next steps towards creating a super council in Bucks, including the name, with Council McCouncilface among the less serious suggestions.
Cllr Tett said: “We had a meeting with the minister of communities, housing and local government on Friday and we went through the areas of agreement and where we still have some nuanced differences.
“For example, I am very pleased to see my colleagues in the districts have accepted the name of the council will be Buckinghamshire Council, as opposed to Council McCouncilface.
“The name that was in the business case was The Buckinghamshire Council, and lo and behold it’s now been agreed.”
The government’s approval of a super council in the county came as a blow to district leaders – who have long-campaigned for two unitary authorities, one for the north and one for the south.
Cllr Tett says there are still disagreements over the number of councillors the new council should have, after Mr Brokenshire suggested it should be made up of 147, rather than the 98 politicians originally proposed.
The leader argues the extra councillors are not necessary as some work and services will be taken on by town and parish councils once the new authority is in place.
However leader of Chiltern District Council, Isobel Darby, has previously argued the additional councillors are a “small price to pay for democracy”.
Cllr Tett added: “The business case talks about massive devolution down to town and parish councils and the democracy is down at town and parish council level.
“You don’t need another layer in between, almost like a district layer put back in, of 147 members.
“I regard it a little like Brexit, as it there’s a decision and we still need to implement it.
“We have made lots of commitments over the last two and half years in terms of what will be involved in the government’s acceptance of our business case, and if we don’t deliver that I worry there is going to be a concern that what people believe they supported doesn’t get delivered.”