Kent's Councils: 5 Options

A total of five different options have now been put forward for council areas in Kent once the current two-tier system is abolished.

Under central government plans, all 14 exiting Kent councils will be abolished and replaced with a smaller number of much larger unitary bodies.

It's the biggest shake up for 50 years.

Five draft business cases have been published and each local authority will decide which of the options it prefers ahead of a deadline of November 28th.

The government will have the final say - after public consultation with Kent residents.

Kent County Council (KCC) currently provides major services such as adult social care, highways and schools while the smaller councils deliver housing and bin collection.

Medway Council, which is already a unitary, operates all of these but it, too, will be abolished.

In future, the unitary model will provide all services.

Two options were agreed in September using a pot of money provided by the government, although three more locally financed versions have also been submitted as part of the Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) process launched less than a year ago.

Option one: Known as 3a, this would consist of three unitaries councils consisting of Dartford, Gravesham, Medway and Swale in the north; Sevenoaks, Tonbridge and Malling, Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells in the west and Ashford, Canterbury, Thanet, Dover and Folkestone and Hythe in the east.

Option two: Referred to as 4b, four unitary councils consisting of Dartford, Gravesham and Medway in the north; Sevenoaks, Tonbridge and Malling, Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells in the west; Swale, Ashford and Folkestone and Hythe in the middle of Kent and Canterbury, Thanet and Dover in the east.

Option three: KCC announced its intention to explore the case for a single unitary council, known as 1a, covering Kent and Medway supplemented with three area assemblies of Dartford, Gravesham, Medway and Swale in the north; Sevenoaks, Tonbridge and Malling, Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells in the west and Ashford, Canterbury, Thanet, Dover and Folkestone and Hythe in the east.

Option four: Called 4d, Medway Council is proposing a four-unitary model with changes to existing council boundaries, consisting of parts of Dartford, Gravesham, Medway and Swale in the north; the remaining part of Dartford, Gravesham, Medway, with Sevenoaks, Tunbridge Wells, and parts of Tonbridge and Malling in the west; Maidstone, Ashford with the remaining parts of Tonbridge and Malling, Swale, and part of Folkestone and Hythe; and Canterbury, Thanet, Dover and with the remaining parts Swale of Folkestone and Hythe in the east.

Option five: Known as 5a, Gravesham Borough Council and Dartford Borough Council have developed a proposal for a five-unitary model with boundary changes, consisting of Dartford, Gravesham, parts of Medway west of the River Medway, and Swanley in the north; Sevenoaks, Tonbridge & Malling, Tunbridge Wells, and Maidstone (excluding Swanley) in the west; the remainder of Medway with the western part of Swale (Sittingbourne area) in the middle; the rest of Swale (Faversham area) combined with Canterbury and Thanet; and finally, Ashford, Folkestone & Hythe, and Dover in the east.

It is unclear at this stage which of these options is likely to be picked, although the influential County Councils’ Network (CCN) has warned in recent months that multi-unitary models are unlikely to deliver the savings the government has hoped for.

This partly because ministers and Whitehall officials had used 2020 data provided by the CCN which has since been amended.

Even so, options one and two seem the more likely to be passed as they could fit the criteria suggested by the government.

Although few Kent council leaders have given any credence to the KCC proposal, it is the one which aligns most neatly with the projections currently provided by the CCN.

All options will have to satisfy Kent’s growing population, the integration of vital services, such as social care, and achieve financial sustainability.

The government hopes to be able to streamline the way services are provided and be more efficient. It is unclear whether the preferred model will accommodate the government’s ambition for a mayoralty, which is seen as a way of giving “two tier” counties, like Kent, greater financial autonomy.

KCC leader Linden Kemkaran said: “KCC has put together its own business case and it shows the vast, projected cost of LGR, something that has not been made available to us from Central Government. The business case also shows that option 1a is the least likely to involve a hike in council tax across the county to pay the cost of the disaggregation of core services.

“The lack of time and the lack of proper public engagement is nothing short of scandalous and for that, the Government is squarely to blame. But, despite all the hurdles, we have come up with a plan that is the most sensible of the lot and I hope to win majority support for it going forward.”

Cllr Noel Ovenden, Leader of Ashford Borough Council, said: “As we publish these draft business cases for the future of local government in Kent and Medway, our focus remains firmly on delivering high-quality, efficient services that truly meet the needs of our residents.

“This is the most significant change to local councils in half a century, and while the exact shape of the new unitary councils is still to be determined, we are committed to working collaboratively with our partners and the community to ensure the best possible outcomes for Ashford and the wider region.

“We know from recent engagement that people want clarity, value for money, and services that solve problems quickly. That’s why, as we move through this process, we will continue to listen, to inform, and to put residents at the heart of every decision. There is much work ahead, but I am confident that, together, we can shape a future local government that is responsive, resilient, and ready to meet the challenges and opportunities ahead.”