At a meeting last week, West Surrey councillors debated a motion brought forward by the Liberal Democrat administration proposing that the new authority's name should include South Middlesex.

My understanding is that this proposal stems from political agreements reached during the Liberal Democrat leadership contest, with changing the council's name forming part of the deal to secure the support of some Spelthorne councillors.

The proposed name – West Surrey and South Middlesex Council – is a significant symbolic change, yet it was put forward without any attempt to establish whether residents actually want it. Conservative and Independent councillors therefore called for a public consultation before any decision was made.

The Liberal Democrat administration voted that down, choosing instead to press ahead without first seeking the views of the nearly 700,000 residents who will be served by the new authority.

Earlier this year, Parliament established the new authorities as East Surrey Council and West Surrey Council. They may not be inspiring names, but they are clear, simple and tell residents exactly what they are.

West Surrey Council will serve residents across six very different boroughs: Guildford, Waverley, Woking, Surrey Heath, Runnymede and Spelthorne – a diverse authority with many proud local identities.

Only one of the six boroughs has historic links to Middlesex, a county abolished in 1965. Many residents will struggle to understand why one area's former county should appear in the name of a council representing the whole of West Surrey.

Quite apart from being rather a mouthful, changing the council's name without consulting residents is a worrying sign of the Liberal Democrats' priorities. We were promised open and accountable local government, yet this major change is being pursued without evidence of West Surrey-wide public support, suggesting political priorities are taking precedence.

I understand why some residents in Spelthorne feel a strong connection to the historic identity of Middlesex. That heritage deserves to be celebrated through civic events, local history, museums and community organisations – not, in my view, by renaming our new council.

If we recognise one area's history in the council's title, should Guildford, Waverley or Woking also be included? What about the Surrey Hills, the Wey Valley or any number of other historic or geographical identities? A council's name should unite the authority, not elevate one community's heritage above another's.

My further concern is that pressing ahead without consulting residents exposes the council to unnecessary cost, confusion and ridicule.

The Shadow Authority has less than nine months until Vesting Day to bring together thousands of staff, more than 500 service lines, and millions of pounds of assets into a single council. Yet West Surrey has still to appoint its permanent senior leadership, agree governance arrangements or develop a long-term financial strategy.

Above all, it must tackle around £4.5 billion of inherited debt, yet we have heard concerningly little from the Liberal Democrats about how they intend to address it.

I have yet to meet a resident who tells me that the biggest issue facing West Surrey is the wording on the council's headed paper.

Residents want to know how services will be protected, how council tax will be spent, how the inherited debt will be managed and whether the new authority will deliver better outcomes than the councils it replaces. Those are the questions that deserve our attention.