What will local elections mean in Lancashire?
What is changing?
The forthcoming changes will see the county's 15 local authorities scrapped and replaced with a handful of new ones.The ruling Conservative group at County Hall were given the chance to postpone the upcoming election to allow the changes to take place.However, they chose to go ahead, even though it is likely that elected councillors will not serve a full term.That means the outcome of the 1 May elections will determine the make-up of Lancashire County Council, but that will be completely separate from the plans for reorganisation.Under the current "two-tier" system, Lancashire County Council looks after issues like social care, schools and highways across the vast majority of the county, while the 12 district authorities – Preston, South Ribble, Chorley, West Lancashire, Fylde, Wyre, Lancaster, Ribble Valley, Burnley, Hyndburn, Rossendale and Pendle – take care of the likes of planning applications, parks and waste collection in their own patches.Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwen councils are already unitaries and so provide the full range of local services in those areas.a March deadline to come up with a plan as to how they will merge with each other and several proposals have been discussed.The idea is to create single unitary authorities to provide all the services in their area under an elected mayor.Once these are created, there will be no need for Lancashire County Council.A Combined County Authority, including Lancashire County Council, Blackburn with Darwen Council and Blackpool Council, has been formed and held its first meeting on 11 March.This has some devolved powers and funding, but less than would be the case under the preferred mayoral model.Some district councils have also expressed their concerns because they do not have a vote on the larger authority.Analysis has also revealed that the new system could end up costing £11m more to run than the one it replaces.
What happens next?
The government asked Lancashire's councils to submit their initial proposals by 21 March and all 15 council leaders put their names to a letter setting out their thoughts.Crucially though, the letter did not have details about any merger plans and also noted that no proposal had majority support.It added that some places wanted no changes at all.The next deadline is in November when final proposals have to be submitted.Ministers will then decide how to proceed.All of which means those elected on 1 May still have no confirmation of how much of their usual four-year term they will serve.
POSTCODE LOOKUP: Check if there is an election in your areaSIMPLE GUIDE: Everything you need to know about the local electionsGET IN TOUCH: Tell us the election issues that matter to youFULL COVERAGE: Catch up on all our election stories
Listen to the best of BBC Radio Lancashire on Sounds and follow BBC Lancashire on Facebook, X and Instagram. You can also send story ideas via Whatsapp to 0808 100 2230.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
38 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Keir Starmer should have followed SNP lead and asked higher earners to pay more tax
Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... When Keir Starmer stood up shortly after taking office and told us things were going to get worse, even he could not have envisaged the extent to which broken promises, infighting, bad decisions and shambolic U-turns would define his first 12 months as Prime Minister. Barely a household in the country has not been left disappointed or downright angry by the actions of a Labour government, which – time and time again – has found itself on the wrong side of the argument, defending the frankly indefensible. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I am well aware, from the office I hold, that governments must be driven by consistent values and clear direction – both of which appear to be completely lacking at Westminster. First Minister John Swinney during a visit to Springburn Academy in Glasgow. Picture: Jane Barlow/PA Wire When I became First Minister, I set clear missions around eradicating child poverty, growing the economy, improving public services and tackling the climate emergency. SNP-run Scotland is the only part of the UK where child poverty is expected to fall, and soon we will take another step forward by abolishing Labour's two-child cap. We are introducing more measures to help with the cost of living, such as scrapping peak rail fares permanently. And when it comes to the NHS, I am putting in place lasting solutions around the country, which will deliver sustained long-term improvements. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Incidentally, I have managed to do all this – and much more besides – without the enormous parliamentary majority that Keir Starmer enjoys. I intend to build on this progress over the next year and, as we approach the 2026 election, the SNP will set out ambitious plans to move Scotland into the next decade. The dividing lines for that election are already becoming clear. People wanting to know what a Labour government would be like in Scotland need look no further than the shambles of the last 12 months at Westminster. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Anas Sarwar has defended Keir Starmer every mis-step of the way, and there is little doubt that a Scottish Labour government would be equally determined to balance the books on the backs of the poor, the disabled and older people. Labour could have avoided the fiscal nightmare currently tearing them apart if Keir Starmer had the courage to do what the SNP have done, and ask higher earners to pay more tax. This is therefore a strange moment for Mr Sarwar to begin arguing for precisely the opposite – but that is what he has begun doing. Much like every Conservative leader who makes similar demands, Mr Sarwar will have to explain what he would cut in Scotland to pay for his tax cuts for the rich. NHS funding? Free university tuition? The Scottish Child Payment? The Prime Minister's many mistakes in his first 12 months add up to a much bigger problem – he has taken the hope people felt last year and has extinguished it. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Hope must be the defining feature of next year's election, and hope is what I intend that the SNP offer – a vision of an independent Scotland free from Westminster chaos.
Telegraph
40 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Starmer: I'm a hard bastard
Sir Keir Starmer has claimed he is a 'hard bastard' as marked the first anniversary of his time in Downing Street. The Prime Minister made the quip in an interview with Nick Robinson on BBC Radio 4's Political Thinking podcast one year on from the general election. Mr Robinson said he had been told by one of Sir Keir's five-a-side football teammates that he was a 'hard bastard'. The presenter asked: 'Are you a hard enough bastard to look in the mirror to say I've got to change, the party's got to change, something serious has to change in year two for Keir Starmer?' Sir Keir responded: 'We need to reflect on where things haven't gone according to plan [...] but we also need to emphasise the very many good things we have done.' Adding that he was 'really proud' of his record in office, he said: 'I'm a hard enough bastard to find out who it was who said that, so that I can have a discussion with him.' The first year of Sir Keir's premiership has seen Labour tank in the polls, two ministers quit his front bench and a number of about-turns on major policies. He was forced to tear up large parts of his flagship welfare Bill to starve off a Labour revolt. Asked if was a football manager who had 'lost the dressing room' after 49 MPs voted against his reforms, Sir Keir said: 'Absolutely not, Nick. As soon as we go through the long list of things that we've achieved this year, the Labour dressing room – the PLP [Parliamentary Labour Party] – is proud as hell of what we've done. 'And their frustration, my frustration, is that sometimes the other stuff, welfare would be an example, can obscure us being able to get that out. But you'll be hearing a lot from me about that.' Sir Keir also expanded on the bond he has struck up with Donald Trump since the US president returned to the White House in January, despite a sharp contrast in their policies and leadership styles. The Prime Minister admitted last week that a focus on international affairs had distracted him from the recent rebellion over welfare reforms. Asked if he was spending 'too much time' with the likes of Mr Trump instead of his own MPs, he replied: 'It is important to have a good relationship with President Trump – it is in the national interest. 'But it also helped us when we were negotiating a trade deal.' When it was pointed out that he and Mr Trump were very different, Sir Keir said: 'We are different people and we've got different political backgrounds and leanings, but we do have a good relationship and that comes from a number of places. 'I think I do understand what anchors the president – what he really cares about – but also we have a good personal relationship. 'The first time I ever spoke to him was when I picked up the phone to him after he had been shot when he was at a rally before he became president. 'And that was a phone call really to ask him how it was and in particular I wanted to know how it had impacted on his family. So that was the beginning of his relationship.' Discussing the relationship they have beyond 'important matters of state', he added: 'I think for both of us we really care about family and there's a point of connection there in terms of how we care about our families. 'In having a good relationship with President Trump we were able to do a trade deal.' The UK-US trade deal came into force on Monday after being signed in June and has reduced tariffs for the British automotive and aerospace sectors. Sir Keir recalled receiving a call from Mr Trump a few days after Nick Starmer, his younger brother, died on Boxing Day after fighting cancer. Reflecting on the loss of his brother, Sir Keir said he had been a 'very vulnerable man' and that he would not have wanted his stage-four diagnosis to come under the spotlight. 'I made it my business to be there in the hospital when he was told so that I could begin to help to look after him,' he added. 'I don't think he would have wanted or withstood any public knowledge of where he was at. And I wanted fiercely to protect him and that's why both before and after the election I went secretly to see him at home, secretly to see him in hospital, he was in intensive care for a long time.' Sir Keir continued: 'It was important for me to do that to support him and very important for me not to share that with the world because this was my brother – I deeply cared about him and I wanted to and would always have protected him and his privacy.'
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
BBC admits it is still letting biological men use women's lavatories
The BBC has admitted it is still letting biological men use women's lavatories. In response to a Freedom of Information (FoI) request, the corporation said it would only change its policies once guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is approved by the Government. In the meantime, the BBC said that 'sanitary facilities vary' across its estate, which includes studios and offices across the country. Signs will not be changed until the guidance is approved this autumn. The Supreme Court ruled in April that the word 'sex' in the Equality Act refers to biological sex and not to a person's gender identity. It means that facilities such as lavatories, changing rooms and showers should be segregated by sex and gender. The EHRC followed this up with interim guidance which confirmed that transwomen – biological males – should not be allowed in such women's spaces. And last month, Sir Keir Starmer said public bodies must implement the ruling 'as soon as possible'. However, the BBC said it would wait until the final guidance is published and signed off by the Government before taking any action. Catherine Leng, advocacy lead at the gender-critical group Seen in Journalism, said: 'We know that before the ruling, the BBC did not signpost facilities for women only by biological sex – in fact, it refused requests to do so – and they've done nothing since the Supreme Court judgment to change that. 'The BBC itself said the judgment gives clarity, so why is it dragging its feet on single-sex spaces? 'How can female journalists and other staff feel confident their employer will support them in being impartial when it won't respect the law itself? The law is the law now, it doesn't depend on EHRC guidance and the EHRC chair has made that clear. 'It needs to stop asking its diversity teams what to do and start asking lawyers.' 'Deeply shocking' In its FoI request, Seen in Journalism asked: 'Do all or any BBC buildings and workplaces in the UK have single-sex toilets, changing rooms and/or showers which are accessible only to members of one sex and not to trans-identified members of the opposite sex?' The response was: 'Sanitary facilities vary across the BBC property estate. We fully intend to comply with any new guidance once approved, while ensuring that we provide facilities that respect the needs and rights of all staff and visitors to our buildings.' A BBC spokesman said: 'We want to ensure dignity and respect for all colleagues. We currently have self-contained facilities and/or mixed-sex toilets everyone can use at most of our sites. 'We are now working through what steps we might need to take, noting the EHRC's interim update, to ensure we have sufficient provision of facilities everyone can use across all BBC sites. No signage has been changed at this time. 'An EHRC consultation on its Code of Practice for services, public functions and associations following the Supreme Court Ruling closed on 30 June. After this, a new Code of Practice will be sent for ministerial approval. 'Following this we will be reviewing our policies and practices to consider if they need to be updated, to meet any legal obligations across any applicable legislation.' Fiona McAnena, the director of campaigns at women's rights charity Sex Matters, said: 'It is deeply shocking that the UK's flagship broadcaster, which covered the Supreme Court judgment extensively, cannot give a straight answer to a very clear question on whether it provides single-sex facilities for its employees. 'In fact, the BBC's response suggests that the organisation could currently be operating outside the law, and gives the impression it is in no hurry to ensure it complies with the law. 'The ruling laid out clearly how the Equality Act should be interpreted, with single-sex toilets and changing rooms operating on the basis of biological sex. 'The Prime Minister himself has said that public bodies refusing to implement the Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman must do it 'as soon as possible'. The BBC surely has the legal resources to interpret and implement a clear judgment. It is only putting itself at increased risk of legal action with each day it delays.'
