The public is invited to share their views on proposed local government reforms in Gloucestershire, with the Government currently consulting on three main options.
The first proposal suggests creating a single unitary council that would provide all services currently managed by Gloucestershire County Council and its six district authorities.
The second option proposes an east-west division, forming two unitary councils: one comprising Gloucester city along with Stroud and the Forest of Dean districts, and the other including Cheltenham, Tewkesbury boroughs, and the Cotswolds district.
READ MORE: Prolific Shoplifter Kayleigh McConnon Jailed After Tesco and Superdry Thefts
READ MORE: First Aircraft Confirmed for Royal International Air Tattoo 2026
The third possibility involves expanding Gloucester City Council to cover an enlarged area, with a separate authority managing the remainder of the county.
Martin Horwood, a former MP for Cheltenham and local councillor, supports the east-west split as the most effective solution.
“Ministers indicate the need to merge all seven Gloucestershire councils into either one or two unitary councils handling comprehensive services—from parks and planning permissions to libraries and adult social care,” Horwood explained.
“There is concern that Cheltenham Borough Council, after 150 years, would be dissolved along with other districts. What will happen to localized decision-making, like planning permissions close to Cheltenham’s Regency centre or Tewkesbury’s medieval heart? Furthermore, what becomes of Cheltenham’s support for its cultural landmarks such as Cheltenham Festivals, the Everyman Theatre, and the Pump Room once absorbed into a larger council?”
Horwood argues that smaller councils foster greater accountability, responsiveness, and efficiency. “In smaller authorities, any community naturally has a louder voice,” he said. “Two unitary councils would be more agile and less bureaucratic.”
He compares this to business, where smaller companies tend to be more innovative and adaptable, whereas larger organizations tend to lose that edge.
Horwood is firmly against the “Gloucester and doughnut” model and prefers the straightforward east-west split. Addressing concerns about dividing Gloucestershire, he notes that similar arrangements exist elsewhere, allowing communities to retain their identities within larger counties—for example, Bath remains part of Somerset and Swindon is in Wiltshire.
He highlights that many areas have already adopted multi-unitary structures successfully, including Berkshire, Shropshire, Cheshire, Bedfordshire, Wiltshire, Dorset, Buckinghamshire, Cumbria, North Yorkshire, and more recently Somerset.
Horwood points out that ratings from Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission show that excellence in children’s and adult social services can be achieved regardless of council size, citing outstanding examples in York, North Yorkshire, Milton Keynes, Telford, and Wiltshire (excluding Swindon).
Financially, the east-west split would be balanced, with only a small 2% variation—£20 million—on combined budgets totaling £850 million. Furthermore, government funding formulas favor less affluent councils, which would mitigate any disparities.
Quoting EF Schumacher from 1974, Horwood reminds us that despite the belief in the necessity of large organizations, people desire the convenience, humanity, and manageability that come with smaller structures.
“I urge everyone to support two smaller councils rather than one enormous super-council,” he concluded.
The consultation on local government reorganisation is open until March 26, inviting residents to review the proposals and share their opinions on the official consultation website.