‘Greater Gloucester’ Council Bid Driven by Leader’s Decades-Long Ambition Amid Council Abolition Threat

The proposal to establish a “Greater Gloucester” authority is seen by some opposition councillors as driven by one politician’s longtime desire to lead the city — even as the current Gloucester City Council faces possible abolition.

Jeremy Hilton, a Liberal Democrat and councillor for Kingsholm and Wotton, became leader of Gloucester City Council last year, 42 years after first being elected. Since then, he has championed the creation of a Greater Gloucester unitary authority as part of the wider local government reorganisation outlined in the English Devolution white paper published last December. The paper advocates merging district and county authorities into new unitary councils.

Gloucestershire currently operates a two-tier system, with responsibilities split between Gloucestershire County Council at Shire Hall and six district councils. Three restructuring options are being considered:

A single unitary authority covering the entire county with a population of around 650,000, preferred by Gloucestershire County Council and Tewkesbury Borough Council.
Two unitary councils divided roughly east and west, supported by the councils of Cheltenham and the Cotswolds and five of the county’s seven MPs.
A unitary authority centred on Gloucester, proposed by Cllr Hilton, which would include surrounding parishes such as Brockworth, Churchdown, Hardwicke, Highnam, Longford, and Upton St Leonards.

The City Council recently created a £35,000-a-year communications post to promote the Greater Gloucester proposal, a move that has sparked controversy. Conservative Councillor Sajid Patel questioned the timing and motivation at a recent cabinet meeting, suggesting Cllr Hilton’s push for this option stems from a personal effort to preserve his leadership role, which may vanish if the council is abolished.

“Why is the leader still backing this ‘doughnut’ option that other councils and the county have rejected? You want to spend taxpayers' money to sell your vision because you fear losing your position as leader,” Cllr Patel stated. “You waited 30 years for this role, and now the rug is being pulled out from under you. Yet you’ve not secured unanimous council support for this plan.”

Cllr Hilton defended the council’s approach, noting that the previous Conservative-led County Council had invested around £600,000 in local government reorganisation efforts, while Gloucester City Council itself has not yet contributed financially. He justified the new communications position as necessary to fairly present the strengths and weaknesses of each option.

“We need to ensure all options are openly debated so residents understand the implications,” Hilton said. “The prior administration championed a single unitary for the county and lost the election badly because of it. The ‘Greater Gloucester’ plan, often mischaracterised as a ‘doughnut’, is better described as a horseshoe, with Gloucester at its centre surrounded by closely linked parishes.”

He added that before the 1974 county reorganisation, Gloucester operated as a county borough, and the new proposal would restore a similar governance structure — one focused on the city and its immediate neighbours rather than being shaped by interests from the county’s outskirts.

To date, Gloucester City Council has spent about £8,000 on consultants regarding the local government reorganisation. While seven local authorities jointly bid for £3.6 million in government funding, only £266,000 was awarded. The City Council is reportedly seeking some of these funds to support its Greater Gloucester bid.