Ten years after breaking away from Leicestershire to become an all-purpose unitary council, England's smallest county - population 38,500 - celebrated "independence day" last weekend with morris dancing, carnivals, concerts and fireworks.
Rutland, on the southern fringes of the East Midlands, within commuting distance of London, might stretch a mere 18 miles from north to south and 17 east to west at the widest point, but it still occupies a land area bigger than many cities. And its status is attracting renewed interest, with unitary local government back on the agenda as ministers prepare final guidance to create, potentially, 16 new unitary authorities, from Exeter to Northumberland. Local government minister John Healey insists that the new authorities will deliver more "effective, responsive and efficient services", and will save around £150m annually, which can be used to cut council tax bills.
Significant deficits
The message from Rutland, based on the last review of local government in the mid-1990s, which created a raft of new unitary councils, is that the opposite can be the case, with many new councils inheriting significant deficits. The dilemma is how to match efficiency and economies of scale with the need to create units of local governance that accommodate historical boundaries and interests. In other words, balancing size with local identity.
By any measure, the residents of Rutland - motto: Much in Little - are proud to identify with a county first recognised as a shire in the 12th century. With 51 parishes, two towns - Oakham and Uppingham - and 26 county councillors, it certainly passes the democratic test. "We are lean and mean," enthuses chief executive Helen Briggs, who lives in Oakham. "When I go shopping, people stop me in the street and question me about local services, like the swimming pool [which has just had a £500,000 revamp]. At parish council meetings, it's not unusual for me to attend along with other officials."
But does an authority with only 350 staff - a further 378 are tied to education, serving 17 primary and three secondary schools - and a net budget of £27m pass the value-for-money test. Council leader Roger Begy, a Conservative who is proud to lead what he calls a "non-political council" based on consensus - there is no party whip, although most members are Tories - is still rattled by the bill Leicestershire left his infant council to pick up 10 years ago. "The rationale is that the budget should have followed services, but we were left with a £3m shortfall," he says. "That has always put pressure on the community in terms of council tax and a dedicated staff to deliver services as cost effectively as possible."
The upshot, he concedes, is that while a majority of Rutlanders are pleased with the performance of the county council, a "significant minority" remain concerned about the cost of independence. Jim Harrison, mayor of Oakham, the largest town, is among them. "I was always against the idea from the outset," he says. "I said it would cost us more money - and so it has. Nothing good has come of it."
For Harrison, it boils down to the council tax: £1,200 annually, he says, for a three-bedroom house in Rutland and only £800 for a similar property in Leicestershire "three miles away". Since his outburst in the Rutland Times last week, he insists he has received considerable support. "A lot of people have stopped me and said: 'Thank God we have a mayor who's saying what we're thinking.' They remember the first thing the [new] council did: spend £1m to extend its head office."
Begy will have none of it. "[Harrison] has taken a hell of a lot of stick from local people who feel he has no open mind on this issue," he responds. But Begy accepts that running Rutland requires some imaginative thinking - namely, sharing services with neighbouring authorities, including Leicestershire and Lincolnshire county councils. Aside from police and fire, still run by Leicestershire, internal audit and economic development are shared; shortly, revenue and benefits, legal services and building control will follow suit.
While acknowledging that sharing services is essential to the survival of Rutland, Briggs insists that collaboration on this scale means the council can customise delivery to suit local circumstances. At present, for instance, a mobile library service is shared with Leicestershire, although they are now considering how to modify this to provide a wider mobile access point for council services.
Briggs, a former corporate director with Doncaster council in South Yorkshire, which serves a population of 287,000, is clearly enthused about Rutland's close identity with the community. She recalls, for instance, the council's former lead member, who knew the names, and the circumstances, of all the children in the care of the local council.
Passionate about issues
And party politics? While 19 of the 26 councillors are Conservatives, Briggs finds it hard to detect party allegiances. She says: "I would describe them as members who are passionate about issues, and not political in a party political sense - passionate about doing the right thing for Rutland."
As to the future, Begy thinks unitary, or all-purpose local government, may be the way forward for other councils - provided the financial base is secure. He says: "Ten years ago, we were told that the creation of new unitaries would be cost-neutral and the funding would follow the services, yet we inherited a deficit that has taken 10 years to write off."
Not surprisingly, his advice to aspiring all-purpose councils is to "spend a lot of time and effort on calculating and negotiating the way service delivery costs are split up". But he knows that tiny Rutland still has its detractors. Too small to be efficient? "Absolute rubbish," he responds "We've done a hell of a lot in 10 years, connecting with the public in a way that larger councils cannot. Surely that is what local democracy is about?"
· Email your comments to
society@guardian.co.uk. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication"
