City expansion confirmed - but councils remain divided

For years, councillors in Nottingham have argued that the city needs to expand.

This week, they finally got their wish.

As part of a huge shake-up to local government, the city is set to merge with parts of Broxtowe, Gedling, and Rushcliffe.

Leader of the Labour-run city council, Neghat Khan, was clearly happy with the outcome, but insisted it has "never been about grabbing money or land."

"If it was all about a power grab, I'll tell you straight - we would have gone for 1E," she said.

"1E" refers to one of the other options put forward last year, which has now been rejected by government.

It would have involved the entirety of Nottingham city, Broxtowe and Rushcliffe merging along their current boundaries.

"If you want the money, Rushcliffe is where with council tax you benefit the most," she said.

"This has never for me been about grabbing money or land, this is about doing the right thing."

It is important to note that while the plan can fairly be described as an expansion to Nottingham city, it is not an expansion of Nottingham City Council.

Instead, all the existing councils will be scrapped with entirely new authorities replacing them.

But is it the right thing, as Khan suggests?

The argument goes that the current system, with boundaries set decades ago, is hugely unfair for those who live in the city at present.

The tight nature of the city boundary means you probably never notice when you cross over from the city proper into one of the surrounding boroughs.

It has meant a long-running headache for the Labour stronghold when it comes to raising enough money to fund services, and the party has argued it was a contributing factor to it effectively declaring bankruptcy in 2023.

The current city council mostly covers low-income areas, with 80% of properties in council tax bands A or B.

Meanwhile, much of the more affluent suburbs aren't actually in the city's administrative area.

People living in those suburbs might go into the city and use city services, but they don't contribute to the city pot through council tax.

Nonetheless, the city's well-documented financial problems have led to concerns being raised by some people living in those areas, which are now set to merge with it.

And last week some county councillors staged a last-ditch attempt for the reorganisation to be halted, calling the proposals "ill-thought-out" and "rushed".

Indeed, a series of votes held last year was instructive of the mood among many politicians in the wider county, with no other authority in Nottinghamshire backing boundary changes.

Khan, however, insists the city council has turned its finances around, and points towards the £20m underspend it recently announced.

But given how much of the debate so far has centred around arguments against joining the city, I asked if there is a positive case to be made for it.

She said: "Seventy per cent of the people that work in the city don't live in the city."

Khan highlighted bus services, shops, and hospitals that all fall within the current boundary.

"The city that you use, you'll have a say in who runs the city going forward," she said.

Khan added reducing duplication would save money that could be spent on services instead.

"You've [currently] got nine local authorities, nine chief execs, nine section 151 officers, monitoring officers, corporate directors. You've got so many, they will suddenly become two," she said.

The idea of it being a better financial model will no doubt be a contested claim.

Both Reform UK and the Conservatives have hinted at pursuing a judicial review, which would see a senior judge check if the government has acted within the law and followed proper procedures.

Conservative leader of Rushcliffe Borough Council, Neil Clarke, confirmed after the announcement that he would "seek King's counsel advice with a view to launching a judicial review on this process".

"I will be writing to the other councils to ask if they will join and support this judicial review because I believe the Labour government have really gerrymandered this," he added.

The Reform UK leader of Nottinghamshire County Council, Mick Barton, called the government's decision "Labour looking after Labour", and accused the city of "asset stripping".

He said: "It's an awful decision and they've made it political.

"We'll look at it legally and see what we can do in that way, but I don't want to say too much until we get all the detail and see what it looks like."

So what now?

Any final decision will need approval from Parliament before it can be implemented.

The Labour MPs for Broxtowe, Gedling, and Rushcliffe have all expressed their disappointment at the chosen option, with Gedling's Michael Payne going so far as to say it is a decision he "cannot and will not support".

In response, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government Steve Reed MP said the option "offers the strongest economic geography" and "will benefit everyone living in Nottinghamshire".

If the plans are approved though, the newly created councils are not set to be formally established until 2028, at which point all nine of the area's existing local authorities will be abolished.

Before then, however, the replacements will be set up as "shadow authorities" in order to prepare for the transition.

That means "shadow elections" taking place as early as next May.

As divisive as this topic has already been in Nottinghamshire, you can expect plenty more argument still to come.

Listen to BBC Radio Nottingham on Sounds and follow BBC Nottingham on Facebook, on X, or on Instagram. Send your story ideas to eastmidsnews@bbc.co.uk or via WhatsApp on 0808 100 2210.