The County Council of Gloucestershire met on Wednesday 12 November 2025, with a significant portion of the meeting dedicated to discussing the future structure of local government in the county. Councillors voted to express a preference for a single unitary authority for the whole of Gloucestershire. The council also debated and passed motions concerning the improvement of highways services, the incorporation of young people's views into decision-making, and the impact of proposed inheritance tax changes on the farming community.

Local Government Reorganisation

A major focus of the meeting was the consideration of two proposals for the reorganisation of local government in Gloucestershire: the creation of a single unitary authority for the entire county, or the establishment of two unitary authorities based on an East/West division of existing districts. After extensive debate, the Council voted to express a preference for the creation of a single countywide unitary authority. This decision was supported by 38 votes, with 4 votes in favour of two unitary authorities, and 10 abstentions.

During the discussion, many members spoke in favour of the single unitary authority, arguing it would provide a simpler, more accountable system for residents, deliver better value for money, and ensure consistent service delivery across major directorates such as Adult Services, Children's Services, Public Health, and Highways. Concerns were raised about the potential for a two-unitary authority model to create financial deficits and inequalities in service access.

Conversely, proponents of the two-unitary authority model argued it would offer stronger local connections, greater responsiveness, and more efficient service delivery. Some members also expressed a preference for retaining the current two-tier system, but acknowledged this was not an option presented by the government. A third option, the Greater Gloucester proposal, was also discussed, but was not put to a vote due to concerns about its viability and lack of detailed information. The final decision on local government reorganisation rests with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government.

Improving Highways Services

A motion was proposed by Councillor Michael Rees and seconded by Councillor Mark Howard, calling for greater transparency and accountability in the Highways Department. The motion highlighted concerns about the condition of local roads, the timeliness of repairs, and communication from the department. It proposed the publication of quarterly Highways Performance Reports, a breakdown of staffing and resourcing, and the establishment of a cross-party working group to review working practices.

An amendment, proposed by Councillor Joe Harris and seconded by Councillor Roger Whyborn, was accepted as friendly and became the substantive motion. This amendment acknowledged the ongoing concerns and noted that many of the themes were already being addressed through the Council's Corporate Plan priorities for Highways, including fixing roads, improving communications, tidier streets, and quality of work. The resolved action was to refer the issues raised in the motion to Cabinet for consideration as part of the delivery of the Corporate Plan and the ongoing Highways Improvement Programme. The motion was carried with 47 votes in favour, 0 against, and 1 abstention.

Incorporating Young People's Views in Decision-Making

Councillor Craig Horrocks proposed, and Councillor Dr. Natalie Rothwell-Warn seconded, a motion aimed at developing a framework to better incorporate the views and needs of young people in the Council's decision-making processes. The motion highlighted that young people are uniquely impacted by policy decisions and that their voices often remain underrepresented.

The Council committed to collaborating with officers, young people, and youth workers on a consultation to identify young people's specific needs and how policymaking can better incorporate their views. The Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Committee (CFOSC) will lead on designing and undertaking the consultation, and using the results to develop a template for policy and resource allocation decisions. The motion also called for consideration of any resources needed to facilitate this process, with actions to be completed by May 2026. The motion was unanimously passed.

Supporting Gloucestershire's Farmers and Opposing the Family Farm Tax

A motion proposed by Councillor Dom Morris and seconded by Councillor Daryl Corps expressed strong opposition to proposed reforms to Inheritance Tax (IHT) that would introduce a 20% tax on agricultural assets valued over £1 million. The motion argued that these changes would amount to a Family Farm Tax, making it significantly harder for Gloucestershire farmers to pass on their businesses to the next generation and potentially leading to land being diverted from food production.

An amendment proposed by Councillor Stuart Graham and seconded by Councillor Chris Mayo was accepted, which also called for recognition of the growing mental health challenges faced by farmers and a commitment to supporting their wellbeing through collaboration with local NHS services and farming charities.

However, a further proposal by Councillor Colin Hay, seconded by Councillor Lisa Spivey, moved to refer the subject of the debate to the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee (COSC) to establish a working group to report back to the Council in March. This procedural motion was carried with 27 votes in favour, 15 against, and 2 abstentions, meaning the original motion and its amendments were not voted upon directly at this meeting.

Other Matters

The Council also approved and adopted amended Terms of Reference for the Health and Wellbeing Board and adopted electronic voting. The new Council Strategy 2025-2029, titled A Stronger Future Built Together, was also adopted. Members also asked various questions regarding council services, including highways maintenance, the M5 Junction 10 scheme, and the operation of Household Recycling Centres. The Audit and Governance Committee Chair's Annual Report was presented, noting the maintenance of an adequate internal control framework.