Letter: Benefits of single-tier local authorities
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Sir Peter Newsam appears to be trying to alarm us into keeping unnecessarily large and unwieldy local education authorities (Letters, 26 April). There is nothing inherently more efficient about larger authorities. Indeed, experience shows that the larger the organisation the more scope there is for inefficiency.
Research in Hampshire shows that unitary authorities would be at least as efficient as the county council, more responsive, and more accountable. Sir Peter also suggests that county education authorities have a better chance of survival but schools are more likely to opt out of larger authorities than smaller ones.
Most local education authorities serve populations below 300,000. Is Sir Peter saying that they are all inefficient or are in imminent danger of central government takeover?
Yours faithfully,
PETER RODGERS
Leader, East Hampshire
District Council
Petersfield, Hampshire
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments