Our communities face unrelenting challenges – stagnant growth, fiscal restraint, rising inequality, intergenerational poverty, and a catastrophic loss of trust in institutions.

Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) offers a vital opportunity to address these issues, yet some see it as a short term cost-saving exercise through the creation of a small number of large councils. It’s an approach that relies on basic number crunching, zooming out on maps and adopting outdated models of local government service delivery. At best this approach is insucient. At worst it will be a hugely costly and disruptive process that will simply create larger versions of semi-functional or dysfunctional arrangements that aren’t delivering for those that need it the most or for the nation as a whole.

The Government's programme of devolution is a long-awaited opportunity for local government transformation. But, if we only focus on how councils operate, we may still fail to improve outcomes for communities and places. The question of where central government fits into this dynamic – what kind of Whitehall works – must be answered.

The reverberations from December's English Devolution White Paper were felt in areas with single tier and two-tier structures, within the Devolution Priority Programme and outside it. Many areas across England have called for more opportunities to take the initiative for their people and places. But they have also highlighted the need for central government to get out of the way, citing among other things, mandated central government policies that are insensitive to local contexts and a tendency for Whitehall to engage directly with communities without talking to local leaders or truly understanding the spirit of devolution.

The Government’s devolution aims have been summed up so far in headlines focusing on mayoral powers and the consolidation of councils. But this week’s white paper in fact reveals an urgent demand for reform and renewal.

Specifically, it demands reform to deliver growth and housing, reform to focus on prevention and reform to restore trust in politics and institutions. Those demands insist we move beyond the narrow ambition – a focus on ‘safe and legal’ and an over-reliance on off-the-shelf business cases - of previous re-organisations. For this moment to yield a smaller number of organisations working as before would be a dismal failure for all involved.