Biddulph Town Council voted to "resist all and every attempt to incorporate Biddulph into Stoke-on-Trent, either at local government or parliamentary level" at its latest meeting.

A meeting of the town council was held on Zoom last night (Tuesday), with the motion providing a source of robust debate on Government's plans for the reform of local authorities.

Those in favour of the motion - most of the council's Independent members - argued that merging Biddulph with Stoke-on-Trent would take decision-making away from local people, with council tax being used to prop up the city's own authority.

However, those who criticised the motion - the council's Labour members - raised concerns that no white paper on these reforms had yet been published by Government, and felt that they were being asked to vote on reforms that did not yet exist.

Biddulph Nub News reported in September how a report by the Centre for Cities think tank proposed merging the Moorlands with Stoke-on-Trent and Newcastle-under-Lyme to become one new unitary council, named 'Greater Stoke'.

Following this, a Government white paper on 'devolution and local recovery' was expected earlier this year, but it has been shelved for now as the battle against Covid-19 took priority.

Beginning the debate, Labour's Cllr Kevin Jackson asked why the motion was being discussed, saying the white paper may not be published for another year or two.

Independent Cllr and Biddulph's mayor John Jones replied that it was perfectly reasonable to discuss the motion now.

Cllr Jackson then asked how councillors could vote on a white paper that doesn't exist, to which Cllr Jones argued that the motion was not asking councillors to vote on the white paper specifically.

Independent Cllr David Hawley argued that local Government reform was "taking decision making away from the people", saying: "The Government is currently banding around white papers looking at saving money on local Government. We have already put forward comments expressing disapproval of the proposed planning changes.

"Now they also have the idea of reducing the number of local authorities. When will Government realise that democracy comes at a price? This is taking decision making away from the people.

"Merging with Stoke-on-Trent is the last thing the majority of people in Biddulph want. Our council tax would be used to prop up a failing authority."

But Labour Cllr Jill Salt reiterated that no white paper had yet been published, saying: "The white paper hasn't even been published. Two councillors have mentioned it, but how can we profess to know what's going on when it doesn't exist?

"You are advocating going against Conservative policy. If so, wouldn't lobbying the local Conservative MPs be a more sensible option - especially given the Independents' close association with Karen Bradley? Cllr Andrew Hart had a sign saying 'Vote Karen Bradley' on his land, and Cllr Tony Hall sits in on her surgeries."

Cllr Jones responded: "I have no close association with Karen Bradley, and that's only two councillors out of all the Independents."

While Independent Cllr Wayne Rogers added: "I take offence to that. I follow whoever the MP is, whatever party they're from. Regarding the motion, it's a bit vague but I would vote not to go into Stoke-on-Trent and remain in the Moorlands."

Returning to the motion, Labour Cllr Nigel Yates asked if the motion would be upheld in perpetuity if it was passed, or if it would be subject to change following local elections.

Cllr Jones replied that things could always change, and pointed out the United States' relationship with the Paris climate agreement as an example of this.

Cllr Yates then asked if the use of the word "resist" in the motion advocated for breaking the law, to which Cllr Jones replied that it did not.

Cllr Yates then asked if he could make another point of clarification, but Cllr Jones said he could not.

Rounding off the discussion, Cllr Jackson called the motion as silly as banning unicorn hunting on Biddulph Moor.

He said: "This motion has been worded sloppily. It tries to combine two items. It has mentioned Parliament, but there is nothing on this at parliamentary level.

"This is as silly as if I put forward a motion to ban unicorn hunting on Biddulph moor. We're going to vote on something that doesn't exist, it's a complete and utter waste of time."

Councillors took a named vote on the proposal, with 12 voting in favour, two voting against, and six abstaining. The motion was therefore passed.

If you would like to watch the meeting in full, visit the council's Facebook page here.