Rationale for scoring: 2 unitary authorities

• 1 unitary authority: strongly disagree
• 2 unitary authorities: strongly disagree
• 3 unitary authorities: strongly agree

Still too large and remote from communities

Each proposed council covers vast areas (up to 1,430 square miles) and populations of 400k-530k. This scale risks creating authorities that feel distant from residents, weakening local accountability and responsiveness.

Fails to deliver truly local decision-making

While smaller than a single unitary, these councils still centralise power far from rural and coastal communities. Residents in rural communities will have limited influence compared to urban hubs like Norwich.

Norwich is fundamentally different from the rest of its proposed council

Norwich is a dense urban centre with unique economic drivers including finance, tech, higher education while the surrounding proposed East Norfolk area is dominated by rural and coastal communities with very different priorities. Grouping these together risks diluting focus and creating conflicting agendas.

Geography remains artificial in places

The proposal admits that North Norfolk boundaries may need future refinement. This signals that the model does not fully reflect natural economic or community patterns from the outset.

Economic diversity undermines focus

Each unitary combines very different economies for example Norwich's technology and finance cluster with Great Yarmouth's energy coast which would make it hard to set coherent priorities and deliver tailored growth strategies.

Public engagement priorities not fully met

Residents said they want stronger local identity and decision-making. Two large councils still dilute local voices and risk creating governance that feels remote and bureaucratic