Last week, after months of waiting - and a fair bit of guessing - I joined colleagues from across Surrey to hear the Government’s verdict on the future of local government in our county.

For months we’d been told this was our opportunity to fix a system creaking at the seams: a chance to make local government more accountable, efficient and genuinely local. The promise was change for the better. The reality? Not so much.

Across Surrey’s 12 boroughs and districts, residents were asked what they thought. More than half - 51 per cent - agreed that three smaller, more local councils would serve people best. Most council leaders backed that model too.

Smaller councils, closer to the communities they represent, just make sense. For transparency, it’s worth noting that only 5,617 people responded to the Government’s consultation - out of a population of around 1.2 million.

Some have used that small sample size to question the findings. Even so, the majority of respondents, and most local leaders, backed the same view: smaller, more local government works better.

The financial case reinforces that argument. Woking alone is carrying a staggering £2.1 billion of debt - roughly 100 times its annual budget. Spelthorne owes £1 billion, Runnymede £600 million, and here in Surrey Heath we’re sitting on £175 million. Add in the £1.5 billion already on Surrey County Council’s books and you start to see the scale of the problem.

Dividing Surrey into three smaller authorities would have spread that burden more evenly and allowed for tighter, more responsible financial management. Instead, Ministers chose to ignore both the data and the clear views of residents.

Against local wishes, the Government sided with the Conservative-run county council and opted for two huge “mega-councils” instead.

That decision comes despite growing concern about the county council’s own financial record. BBC analysis this year revealed Surrey County Council increased its borrowing by nearly 50 per cent in a single year - from £726.9million in 2023-24 to more than £1billion in 2024-25 - the biggest rise of any council in the country. It’s hardly a model of caution.

Under the new plan, all 12 existing councils will be abolished. In their place will come two new authorities: East Surrey, covering Elmbridge, Epsom & Ewell, Mole Valley, Reigate & Banstead and Tandridge; and West Surrey, covering Surrey Heath, Guildford, Woking, Waverley, Spelthorne and Runnymede.

Elections for the new councils are expected in May 2026, giving residents at least one chance to have their say. But there’s a sting in the tail: West Surrey will begin life saddled with an estimated £2 billion of bad debt - around £3,300 for every resident in our part of the county - and that figure could rise as more financial details emerge.

In practical terms, that means Surrey Heath residents will be paying for debts we didn’t create, while the Government’s much-publicised £500million “support” package for Woking barely scratches the surface. So yes - I’m frustrated.

Frustrated that Conservative leaders at County Hall have pushed this through without proper checks or transparency, and disappointed that the Labour Government simply nodded it through rather than listening to local voices.

This decision is short-sighted, expensive and risky. It leaves the new West Surrey council struggling from day one. Surrey residents deserve better - local government that’s transparent, financially sound and rooted in genuine community accountability.

Because this isn’t about political point-scoring. It’s about fairness. It’s about making sure the people of Surrey Heath aren’t left footing the bill for mistakes made miles away and years ago - and ensuring we can access the services we want, need and expect in the future.

As these changes take shape, I’ll keep standing up for our community, challenging bad decisions and making sure Surrey Heath’s voice is heard loud and clear.