Hampshire likely to be in ‘vanguard’ of counties to go unitary, mayoral elections could take place in 2026

Hampshire is likely to be in the “vanguard” of areas affected by the Government’s local council reorganisation plans, with mayoral elections expected to take place as early as 2026.

Hampshire County Council leader Nick Adams-King stated that the Government was “very keen” for Hampshire to be in the first wave of two-tier counties that re-organised into a single, unitary authority.

This would mean that borough councils such as Basingstoke and Deane would be dissolved and absorbed into a single, larger council that could cover the entirety of Hampshire, the Solent and the Isle of Wight.

It would dictate all local government functions in the county and be led by an elected mayor who would have greater devolved powers and funding flexibility within the area.

Mr Adams-King was speaking to North Hampshire residents at a meeting in Woolton Hill Church Hall on the evening of Tuesday, December 17.

He said: “The bottom line for me is that the idea of devolution, and the idea of us beginning to do things at a wider scale across the entire, in terms of Hampshire and the Solent, is a good thing.”

He was keen for the process to begin sooner rather than later, as he believed the sooner Hampshire was able to adapt to the Government’s new way of thinking, the quicker the county would be able to have more control over its finances.

The Conservative councillor still had his concerns though.

He said: “The bit that worries me is the local government re-organisation.

“If you’re going to start going through that process of putting councils together, drawing new lines on maps, creating new councils, taking away the districts and boroughs; yes there is some saving there, but that saving could be very quickly eaten up by the uncertainty and the cost of reorganisation.”

He also wasn’t too keen on the idea of an elected mayor leading the new council and stated: “I don’t like the idea of a mayor. We don’t really need one.

“We can probably do that together if we work together as councils, but that’s what they want to do. They [the Government] want one person with whom to speak.

“If it brings benefit to you and me as residents of Hampshire, then I am happy that we do have one.”

Mr Adams-King answered the concerns of residents who wondered why they would have to join a council that serves them as well as cities as far away as Southampton and Portsmouth, and also the fear that their council tax would be funnelled into those urban areas rather than their rural ones.

He said: “We have to draw a line somewhere.

“There are established relationships in this area, between all the different councils, and most importantly the Government says that you can’t leave areas of the country out.

“I think your fear of money being sucked south is unfounded. Your fear should be, does money get sucked into social care?”

He did understand that the idea of one large unitary covering all of Hampshire could make rural residents feel particularly disenfranchised and disconnected from their local government, and he did believe that the scale of these new unitary councils needs to be smaller.

He suggested that Hampshire be split into three unitaries to achieve this.

A council covering the greater Portsmouth area, a council covering the greater Southampton area and a council covering Mid and North Hampshire.

However, it is still not known how the county will be divided, if at all, when the unitarisation takes place, and Mr Adams-King did acknowledge that this re-organisation of Hampshire’s 11 district councils and two unitaries would probably cost “a lot of money”.

Mr Adams-King said: “If the combined authority and the mayor bring additional funding and additional powers, great.

“If we’ve got to re-organise local government then we’ve got to be really careful about how we do it, and we’ve got to make sure that it doesn’t cost us much more money and the good stuff that happens in the district is not lost as a consequence of the pressures on social care and so on.

“If whatever we do improves the lives of you all, I’m up for it.

“If whatever we do costs you all money and stops the good stuff happening, I don’t see the point in doing it.”