Mythbusting

Your biggest questions, our answers.

Yes they are. 3Councils will create three councils closer to their communities. Detailed financial analysis undertaken by independent experts shows that these will be efficient and able to withstand financial shocks, while also able to tailor services to meet the needs of local residents and businesses.

Each of our three proposed councils meet the Government’s requirements for scale, resilience, and long-term sustainability. Our proposal would achieve £49m in total per annum savings after five years in total, as well as stronger growth in business rates and council tax receipts than the other proposals.

3Councils would deliver effective and efficient services, ensure the ability to manage future demand pressures, and invest in transformation. By designing local authorities around coherent and distinct economic and demographic areas, the model supports strong, stable financial foundations over the long term.

Pixel Financial, experts in local government finance and funding, has carried out financial modelling and assessments, with further support from consultants at LGFin and Inner Circle Consulting.

Their analysis shows that the 3Councils proposal fully meets Government criteria on financial sustainability by having:

Early in the LGR process, there was a loose goal mentioned of around 500,000 population. However, things quickly development and the government confirmed that, first and foremost, councils should be designed around what works best for the local area. A population of 500,000 or more is simply a guiding principle, not a hard target. Their starting point is to support and empower local leaders and to respect their knowledge, expertise and insight. This approach was confirmed again in May 2025.

With a current population of 240k, Greater Oxford is the smallest. However, put in context with existing unitary councils, this is in fact median-sized, and by 2040, with a population of 345k, it will be among the top third largest unitary authorities. Northern Oxfordshire is the next smallest at 265k, growing to a population of 370k by 2040. The biggest council of the three, Ridgeway, already has a population of 430k (545k by 2040).

We believe that the population size of each Council under the 3Councils approach are equally viable and sustainable and take into account the local needs for each area.

In contrast, the One Unitary proposal would see the creation of a mega-council that tries to look after one million people by 2040, second only to Birmingham in size.

For us, it’s not about size of services, but about the impact. We believe that smaller, local councils are best placed to deliver the services that supports their communities, and are able to use their local knowledge and understanding to deliver truly local services.

3Councils would build high-density housing close to the city and/or transport infrastructure, to help reduce congestion from commuting. Independent experts estimate this would use just 2.6% of green belt land. This approach will also protect existing villages from overdevelopment.

The rules on allowing development on Green Belt will still apply with the 3 Councils proposal, and we will be actively protecting the Green Belt overall as an environmental benefit for everyone.

We know that the Green Belt is important, and we would want to grow in a strategic way, balancing density and green space by ensuring development is in the best locations, supported by infrastructure.

This would mean that any release of the Green Belt would be in close proximity to Oxford and in locations that are close to existing or new infrastructure (such as transport links to the city).

This would be achieved by using 2.6% of Oxford’s 35,000-hectare Green Belt.

Concentrating new housing at high density close to Oxford would help protect many villages from existing incremental development. It would also see a lower overall level of greenfield land across Oxfordshire used for development when compared to either the One or Two Unitary proposals.

New developments are also expected to provide on-site green spaces, as well as contributing to expanding and maintaining public areas, and protecting and enhancing other areas for biodiversity net gain and nature recovery.

For example, this could support the potential expansion of Shotover Country Park, or Berks Bucks & Oxon Wildlife Trust’s (BBOWT’s) ambition of linking Otmoor and Bernwood.

This will be supported by ensuring appropriate developer contributions and land value capture from the release of Green Belt land.

It will also be possible to deliver appropriate levels of community infrastructure, working with the local communities to ensure their voice guides its design and delivery.

A strategic plan would allow us to ensure sufficient housing for those in need, and allow selective development that balances sustainable and public transport, preserving character and appearance of the area, applying biodiversity net gain, and the need to build genuinely affordable homes.

Ultimately, this approach will protect more of the green belt and prevent a sprawl of small and isolated developments across the wider green belt.

Based on population, Oxfordshire County Council spends about £357m of its £1.6 billion budget on Oxford every year, which includes services like social care, pothole repairs, education, fire and rescue, and libraries – which is around 44% of services by expenditure in Oxford.

Oxford City Council looks after the remaining (56%) services, spending around £454m in Oxford every year on other services like community centres, leisure centres, parks, bin collections and street cleaning. 

For us, it’s not about size of services, but about the impact.

We believe that smaller, local councils are best placed to deliver the services that supports their communities, and are able to use their local knowledge and understanding to deliver truly local services.