Lancashire County Council is to be abolished on 1st April 2028. Many will say “Good Riddance!“, since few of the 1974 local government “counties” has made quite such an outrageously inappropriate use of a real county name than has this local authority. But what will replace it? And will that replacement repeat the mistakes of 1974?
For 52 years Lancashire County Council has shamelessly masqueraded as something it is not. Created in 1974, its area comprised only the northern two-thirds of the main body of the real county of Lancashire, excluding altogether the southern third of the county, where the majority of its people live. It also excluded the Cartmel and Furness peninsulas (Lancashire North of the Sands). The council area also included the Forest of Bowland and West Craven areas of Yorkshire – a continuing source of anger and frustration to Yorkshire folk. Though Blackburn with Darwen Council and Blackpool Council became unitary authorities in 1998, they remained part of the lieutenancy area of “Lancashire“.
On 1st April 2028, Lancashire County Council will be wound up – along with all the district councils, Blackburn with Darwen Council and Blackpool Council. A new local government set-up based on unitary councils will take their place. The Government has launched a consultation on Proposals for local government reorganisation in Lancashire, Blackburn with Darwen and Blackpool.
This process has two huge pluses for the Association of British Counties (ABC):
- The new unitary authorities will be called just “council” and not “county council”.
- None of the new councils will literally make claim to be Lancashire itself.
Whilst ABC has no views about the structure or areas of local government, we consider it vital that the new councils do not repeat the mistake of making inappropriate use of a historic county name. If the name “Lancashire” is to be used by a council then it must be with appropriate qualification, so that it properly reflects where the council area lies within the real county. The outrage of having parts of Yorkshire labelled as “Lancashire” has to stop.
The Government is apparently still fraught with indecision about the future council set-up. The consultation presents five possible scenarios for the new local councils! Here we look at each of these scenarios, discuss the appropriateness of the proposed council names and suggest some better alternatives.
Option 1 is a two council set-up. Both proposed council names are woefully inappropriate.
- About 25% of the “North Lancashire Council” area actually comprises the Forest of Bowland area of Yorkshire. “North Lancashire and Bowland Council” would be more appropriate.
- The “South Lancashire Council” area lies across the centre of Lancashire, not the south. It also includes the West Craven area of Yorkshire. “Central Lancashire and West Craven Council” would be more appropriate.
Option 2 presents a three council set-up.
- A real positive is that “Central Lancashire Council” properly reflects the position of this council area within the real county. Sadly, this approach is not followed in Options 3-5.
- “Coastal Lancashire Council” is fine, though it covers only half the Lancashire coast along with a large inland area. “North Lancashire Council” would be an alternative.
- “Pennine Lancashire Council“ is not a credible name since around 35% of the council area lies in Yorkshire, including both the Forest of Bowland and West Craven areas. At the very least the council name must reflect the fact that a large part of the area is not in Lancashire. One possible name is “East Lancashire and Ribble Valley Council“. The River Ribble flows between the Bowland and West Craven areas of Yorkshire and across the whole of the proposed council area. A perhaps more offbeat suggestion is “East Lancashire and Western Craven Council“. Historically, Craven was considered to cover a large area in the west of the West Riding, including Bowland.
Option 3 presents a four council set-up.
- ABC has no issue with the name “Fylde Coast Council“.
- “South Lancashire Council” should be “Central Lancashire Council” (as in Option 2).
- Around 30% of the “North Lancashire Council” area comprises the Forest of Bowland area of Yorkshire. It would be better named “North Lancashire and Bowland Council“.
- The “Pennine Lancashire Council” area includes the West Craven area of Yorkshire. A better name would be “Pennine Lancashire and West Craven Council” or “East Lancashire and West Craven Council“.
Option 4 presents an alternative four council set-up.
- ABC has no issue with the name “Western Lancashire Council”.
- “Southern Lancashire Council” should be “Central Lancashire Council” (as in Option 2).
- Around 35% of the “Northern Lancashire Council” area comprises the Forest of Bowland area of Yorkshire. It should be named “North Lancashire and Bowland Council“.
- The “Eastern Lancashire Council” area includes the West Craven area of Yorkshire. A better name would be “East Lancashire and West Craven Council”.
Option 5 presents a five-council set-up.
- ABC has no issue with the names “North Lancashire Council” and “West Lancashire Council”.
- “South Lancashire Council” should be “Central Lancashire Council“ (as in Option 2).
- Nearly half of the “Middle Lancashire Council” area comprises the Forest of Bowland area of Yorkshire. It would be far better named “Mid Lancashire and Bowland Council“.
- The “East Lancashire Council” area includes the West Craven area of Yorkshire. A better name would be “East Lancashire and West Craven Council”.
The consultation concludes on 26th March 2026. make sure you have your say.
Once the Government has finally managed to decide on the pattern of unitary local government, it will implement this through a Statutory Instrument which will name each new council. Shadow authorities will be elected in May 2027. Ultimately each new council will be able to amend its name from that given in the original Statutory Instrument.
The consultation makes no mention at all of what, if any, effect the local government changes will have on the “Lancashire” lieutenancy. To leave the lieutenancy based on the former Lancashire County Council area would be anachronistic and absurd. ABC has proposed that the lieutenancies throughout the UK be re-appointed to the historic counties.
The so-called Lancashire County Combined Authority will continue after the local government changes, still covering an area which isn’t anything like Lancashire. The only positive is that at least the word “County” will disappear and it will be called the Lancashire Combined Authority. This combined authority needs to choose a more sensible name.
Administrative entities will always come and go. Combined authorities in particular seem to be very fluid, often merging to form larger authorities not long after being created. The massive North East Combined Authority may point the way to where things are tending. It is entirely possible that the Lancashire Combined Authority and the soon-to-be Cumbria Combined Authority become merged into something larger – and hopefully less tiresomely named – before too long.
