Together with our public sector clients, we are exploring the implications of local government reorganisation (LGR) for leisure and active wellbeing services.

Dom Hudson and SLC colleagues have been examining the potential threats, hurdles and opportunities that may lie ahead through our work with local authorities and wider system partners.

Through an optimistic lens, LGR presents a unique, once in a generation opportunity to make the case for and secure a clear purpose for active wellbeing. Its vital role in supporting the health and social care system provides a more compelling argument for single-tier authorities.

But how will the new shadow unitary authorities prioritise active wellbeing within their organisations – or will it get lost in the convergence of legacy local authorities?

Will there simply not be enough funding to realise ambitions? If so, what can an active wellbeing service do to provide a sustainable platform that could create the conditions of becoming self-funding in the medium term?

In this article, the first within a series, we’ll introduce the key strategic considerations for active wellbeing services as they navigate this evolving landscape. This serves as a foundation for several more in-depth articles we will publish this year.

We will scrutinise and explore the challenges and opportunities presented for existing local authorities as they transition into shadow unitary authorities. We will focus on how active wellbeing can help tackle multi-faceted problems, delivering positive outcomes for community health and wellbeing, economic development and placemaking.

From our learning so far, we are seeing our clients considering one of three positions;

  • Use it or lose it
  • Oven ready; and
  • Wait and see

‘Use it or lose it’

Some local authorities are feeling a sense of urgency to invest existing reserves into leisure and active wellbeing facilities (either on new ones or maintenance/upgrades of existing ones). They feel that these commitments will need to be secured before the restructuring happens and / or restrictions on expenditure are imposed. After the reorganisation it may be harder for localities to secure as much funding for specific projects amongst a wider set of competing priorities.

In essence, some local authorities are considering a ‘use it or lose it’ approach regarding the finances they currently have and control, before it is divided up or absorbed into a larger unitary authority.

There is also a perceived risk that with the restructuring, some localities may inherit a significant amount of debt from their neighbours due to merging with other local authorities with a more challenging financial position.

‘Oven ready’

Another approach that we are seeing some local authorities adopt is pushing ahead with developing plans for projects or masterplans that have a local mandate and political support, even if they can’t be delivered pre-LGR.

We are seeing the development of ‘oven ready’ projects and masterplans for the new authority’s consideration. This has the advantage of ensuring the business case is already well evidenced and robust. It potentially offers a new authority and administration an ‘early win’, acknowledging that it cannot be delivered within the existing authority’s term.

‘Wait and see’

Some local authorities are taking a ‘wait and see’ stance, particularly those who have been under significant financial pressure or are still forming their new potential cluster within a new unitary area.

This may be in case of future uncertainties around the transition. It may be because they want to ensure that any new facilities and services are aligned with the new strategic goals of the reorganised unitary authority.

If the new unitary authorities have a different focus or vision for leisure or active wellbeing facilities and services, there could be a delay in delivering new projects. This is until those broader plans are clearer, and affordability has been assessed.

This would also need to be linked to the new unitary’s medium term financial plan and capital programme. There will be a great deal of competing priorities over a larger geographic area.

So how will decisions be made?

The decision that each local authority makes leading up to LGR phase 1 or 2 will essentially come down to local dynamics. Some may indeed push to invest now or prepare the ground for future investment, while others might adopt a ‘wait and see’ strategy.

One thing is for certain – nobody wants to take an approach of ‘fudging it’. We will explore future service delivery models, and phased transformation plans further in subsequent articles.

What are SLC doing to support the journey ahead?

With so much uncertainty within a backdrop of brutal financial settlements and waves of budget cuts and service reductions, we’ll be proactively supporting our clients and the wider sector in tackling the challenges that lie ahead.

We’ll be exploring what local authorities can do now to manage the ambiguity they face. We’ll consider how they can ensure their highly valued local sport, leisure and active wellbeing services are not marginalised or left behind post LGR.

We will:

  • Develop a series of articles over the next 6 months, that offer guidance, support and opportunity for exploration for individual local authority’s or clusters of authorities seeking to form a new unitary.
  • Continue to host our popular Think Tank seminars for service leads and portfolio holders. We’ll hear from those who have experience of forming a new unitary, to share insights and explore differing approaches to positioning active wellbeing.
  • Be open to exploring how we might facilitate an online community of practice. One which creates a safe, confidential space for service and transformation leads and portfolio holders to come together and work through the challenges and opportunities that LGR presents.

Championing positive change

SLC is no stranger to supporting transformational change. We hosted 12 think tank seminars for over 150 local authorities over the course of the COVID pandemic to support the sector and share learning between peers. We directly supported 23 local authorities (including three core cities) in managing the impact of the crisis with their leisure operating partners.

We’re actively supporting service level redesign in major unitary authorities and developing partnering and procurement solutions that are fully aligned to active wellbeing.

We are the first B CorpTM certified organisation in our sector, showing our commitment to people, planet and purpose.

We’ve authored national guidance on strategic planning and service delivery for local authority public leisure services. We’ve been a leading advocate for the pivot of public leisure services to active wellbeing.

On our journey over the last 16 years, we have supported securing £712m of investment into sustainable facility provision. The last 24 procurements that we’ve supported have delivered a total of £20.16m in annual cashable savings. This is an average of £840k per authority per annum.

Future articles will explore:

  • Strategic decisions facing new organisations, such as whether to commission new facilities or extend existing contracts prior to reorganisation.
  • Challenges and opportunities for newly formed unitary authorities in embedding active wellbeing to optimise the benefits.
  • Lessons learned from recent new unitary local authorities in bringing legacy arrangements together into a single service model.
  • Challenges and opportunities associated with embedding prevention and proportionate universalism into a new active wellbeing service.
  • What legacy local authorities and shadow authorities can start doing now to ensure active wellbeing services are positioned at the heart of the new organisation and deliver early visible impacts for communities.

We’re very keen to hear from local authorities about some of the challenges and opportunities that LGR presents for their leisure and active wellbeing services. Feel free to contact us for an informal chat at info@slc.uk.com  or call 01444 459927.