Ben Obese-Jecty, the Conservative member of Parliament for Huntingdon, told the Westminster Hall debate of 1 September that ministers had settled on "option D", splitting Huntingdonshire between a Mid Cambridgeshire unitary and a Greater Peterborough one 1. That is his account, not a Government announcement. The minister did not confirm the option, and no Structural Changes Order, the statutory instrument that legally creates a new council, was laid during the window 2.
Obese-Jecty quoted the option's own business case against it. Peterborough City Council carries debt worth 91% of its assets, measured against a national gearing benchmark of 50%, and holds a high-risk resilience rating from the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy 3.
A new unitary inherits every predecessor's borrowing and every predecessor's assets, and the ratio between the two governs what it can borrow next. Attach a district to a council already geared against 91% of what it owns, and the successor authority opens with almost no headroom. Borrowing headroom is what pays for school places, road repairs and housing, so the constraint reaches residents through services rather than through the council tax bill, which is where they would look for it.
The department withheld a decision on the county in July, because the 500,000-population threshold was hardest to defend there , and every option drawn up since has involved dividing something that currently sits together. Huntingdonshire's own politics have not waited: the Liberal Democrats took St Neots Eynesbury from Reform UK in the district in August .
