Commentary | LGR: Practical Engagement that Builds Confidence

Successful reorganisation begins with clarity about the statutory process. Outlining the consultation, approvals, and order-making stages in a public roadmap, with named owners and dates, helps partners and residents understand what happens at each step. Providing early visibility reduces uncertainty and keeps the process on track.

On democratic method, consultation is the better tool than a referendum for complex, interdependent changes. Structural reform involves choices across governance, finance, and service design that benefit from detailed evidence rather than a binary vote. Explaining this plainly and showing how evidence shapes decisions strengthens legitimacy.

Since calls for a referendum are probable, it is wise to address them from the start. Clearly defining how consultation results will impact options and the final proposal shows that participation is valued. When people can see how their input influences outcomes, trust increases.

Breaking the conversation into themes makes engagement more manageable and informative. Asking for views separately on governance, finance, services, and place-based impacts encourages more focused contributions and prevents an all-or-nothing approach. The result is feedback that is easier to analyse and act upon.

Expected and welcomed increased scrutiny. Publishing the evidence base, the options considered, and the criteria for selecting a preferred model demonstrates that choices are rational and proportionate. Transparency at this stage minimises challenges later and facilitates a smoother statutory process.

Analysing responses by locality and protected characteristics adds depth. Different areas and groups may experience change in various ways, so highlighting these patterns and explaining how proposals will adapt enhances both the fairness and credibility of the plan.

Every consultation addresses topics that tend to attract disproportionate attention. A balanced approach allows space for those issues while ensuring the broader programme is not neglected. Using multiple channels and revisiting the full range of themes helps to maintain perspective.

Accessible materials are the best remedy for low engagement. Short explainers, clear diagrams, and local examples help residents grasp what changes in their area. When people see practical effects on services and places they know, participation increases and feedback improves.

Coordination with partners is vital when multiple councils or agencies are involved. Shared FAQs, aligned messages, and consistent lines to take minimise confusion and present a unified, coherent explanation of what is proposed and why. This consistency fosters trust.

Being open about trade-offs is part of treating residents as partners. When powers, funding, or structures change, explaining what improves, what stays the same, and what mitigations are planned helps people assess the proposal fairly. Clear presentation of advantages and disadvantages encourages constructive dialogue.

A visible approach, you said, is that we do route closes the feedback loop. Documenting how consultation shaped revisions and how those changes carry through to the statutory instrument stage demonstrates that engagement is significant. This practice of explanation reinforces accountability.

Finally, timing is important. With national policy indicating widespread availability of deals by 2030, aligning local schedules with that timeline helps maximise opportunities and prevents unnecessary friction. Positioning LGR within the broader reform context ensures the work is paced and ordered to succeed.Download our checklist to support the development of your proposals.