Benefits for residents and businesses
Reducing 10 councils in Derby and Derbyshire into a single unitary council covering the whole area is in the best interests of all residents and businesses in Derby and Derbyshire.
It would help us to ensure:
- everyone in Derbyshire can live healthy, safe, independent lives with fair access to support and opportunities
- Derbyshire will be a great place to live, work, visit, and invest - with strong infrastructure, good homes, and a vibrant economy rooted in natural beauty and heritage
- a simpler, stronger, more efficient council that puts residents first, delivers better value, and is ambitious for the future
Benefits for residents
Here are some of the benefits for residents:
- substantially larger savings than the council's options for a 2-council system – estimated savings of at least an extra £100 million over the first 6 years and £45.1 million annually thereafter. Compared to the current local government system in Derby and Derbyshire, that's a saving of at least £144 million after 6 years and £45.1 million per year from year 6 onwards
- savings would support long-term running of essential services able to meet future demands
- simpler, fairer, and more responsive services across the city and county with clearer accountability
- local teams based in towns and neighbourhoods to ensure services remain visible and accessible
- focus on what matters most: better roads, safer streets, affordable homes, and support for families and older people
- continuation of major essential services without the challenge, cost and risk of splitting them in in 2 – particularly those with high demand and costs such as adult social care, children's social care, highways and transport, public health, and waste disposal
- our commitment to listening to communities and protecting local identity during local government reorganisation
- reflects that residents generally did not favour a north/south 2 council split
- protecting the historic county boundary and local identity
- speaking with one voice for the county, providing a stronger voice regionally and nationally – including within the East Midlands Combined County Authority
Benefits for businesses
Here are some of the benefits for businesses:
- substantially larger savings than the council's options for creating 2 new unitary councils – estimated savings of at least an extra £100 million over the first 6 years and £45.1 million annually thereafter. Compared to the current local government system in Derby and Derbyshire, that's a saving of at least £144 million after 6 years and £45.1m per year from year 6 onwards
- savings would support long-term running of essential services able to meet future demands
- simpler, fairer, and more responsive services across the city and county with clearer accountability
- supports economic growth by linking housing, transport, skills, and business needs
- greater ability to attract investment, jobs, and regeneration across all areas
- builds on Derbyshire's strengths in innovation, engineering, and advanced manufacturing
- stronger regional and national voice, including within the East Midlands Combined County Authority
- continuation of major essential services without the challenge, cost and risk of splitting them in 2 – particularly those with high demand and costs such as adult social care, children's social care, highways and transport, public health, and waste disposal
Other benefits
Other benefits include:
- lower upfront costs to set up
- provides a good mix of urban and rural areas which helps make services more reliable and better able to cope with challenges
- fits with operating areas for all public sector key partners including the NHS, police and East Midlands Combined County Authority, which makes it easier to work with them
- greater efficiency, strengthening partnerships with health, the regional mayor, police, and voluntary organisations
Disadvantages
Disadvantages of moving to a 2-council option for Derby and Derbyshire include:
- introducing a new geographical split that lacks public support or recognition
- would be complex to set up and cause disruption for residents with major essential services needing to be split in 2 – particularly those with high demand and costs such as adult social care, children's social care, highways and transport, public health, and waste disposal
- does not meet the government's criteria for minimum population size in most scenarios
- savings are minimal and the financial benefits are limited compared to the cost of putting it in place
- creates difficult boundaries for Derbyshire Dales and Amber Valley, which do not divide cleanly north-south
- risks diluting Derby City Council's identity and undermining its delivery expertise
- smaller areas of local government have less flexibility to meet housing demands than larger ones