West Lancashire deserves a future built around the communities it actually belongs to — not an artificial administrative arrangement created simply because it fits within an existing county boundary.

We are calling on West Lancashire Borough Council and the Government to stop and reconsider the proposed South Lancashire unitary authority with Chorley and South Ribble, and allow West Lancashire to properly explore joining with Sefton and the wider Liverpool City Region.

This is about much more than council boundaries.

It is about where West Lancashire's communities look, where our residents travel, where our services are connected, and where the greatest opportunities for our future lie.

Look at the map
For communities in West Lancashire, our closest neighbours are Southport, Formby and Maghull.

Ormskirk is only a few miles from Southport and Maghull. Burscough is closely connected to Southport. Aughton and Halsall physically meet Sefton communities.

Our railway already connects Ormskirk and the surrounding communities directly with Liverpool.

Our residents work across the boundary.

We shop across the boundary.

We use services across the boundary.

Our families and communities cross the boundary.

Our hospital services cross the boundary.

The boundary exists on a map. Our communities don't live their lives according to it.

West Lancashire's own Local Plan has previously recognised that the borough sits within the Liverpool City Region because of its strong economic, social, cultural and transport links, particularly with Southport and Liverpool.

That is not a new political argument. It is something West Lancashire's own planning evidence has acknowledged for years.

The evidence points towards Sefton
The 2021 Census recorded thousands of people travelling between West Lancashire and Sefton for work.

The two-way commuting relationship with Sefton is substantially greater than the relationship between West Lancashire and Chorley.

Lancashire's own evidence has recognised the strength of West Lancashire's links with Merseyside.

So we have to ask:

Why is West Lancashire being placed in a South Lancashire authority with Chorley and South Ribble when so much of our existing economic and community geography points in the opposite direction?

Southport and Ormskirk are already connected
The relationship between Southport and Ormskirk isn't something that needs to be invented.

It already exists.

The two towns share transport links, employment connections, shopping and leisure patterns and, critically, a long-established healthcare relationship.

The Southport–Ormskirk hospital issue has shown just how artificial the existing administrative boundaries can be.

West Lancashire residents rely on services on both sides of the boundary, yet different NHS and local-government structures can leave communities caught between systems.

The question should therefore be:

Should our future local government arrangements work with these existing relationships, rather than continually trying to make our communities fit an administrative boundary?

What about Skelmersdale?
Skelmersdale deserves better.

For decades, improved rail connectivity has been discussed as a vital part of Skelmersdale's regeneration.

The town sits extraordinarily close to the Liverpool City Region, yet its rail connection remains unfinished.

There has been progress towards developing the Skelmersdale rail project, but residents have waited for generations for a proper rail connection.

We should be asking whether West Lancashire's current political and economic geography is giving Skelmersdale the best possible opportunity to secure the transformational investment it needs.

Liverpool City Region has already developed significant devolved powers and investment programmes covering transport, economic development, skills, housing and regeneration.

West Lancashire already has strong economic and transport links with that region.

Why shouldn't West Lancashire be able to fully participate in those opportunities?

We want West Lancashire to thrive
This petition isn't about being against Chorley or South Ribble.

It is about wanting more for West Lancashire.

We want Ormskirk to thrive.

We want Skelmersdale to thrive.

We want Burscough and our villages to thrive.

We want better transport.

We want investment.

We want better employment opportunities.

We want thriving town centres.

We want our young people to have reasons to stay.

We want the Liverpool City Region's growth and investment to be an opportunity for West Lancashire rather than something happening just across the boundary.

We do not want to simply create another council, change who collects our council tax and then discover that the fundamental challenges facing our communities remain exactly the same.

Changing the structure of local government is not enough. We need to change the opportunities available to our communities.

Even West Lancashire's own Leader has questioned the boundaries
This is particularly important.

West Lancashire's Leader, Councillor David Whittington, has publicly acknowledged that he has long believed West Lancashire's boundaries are not in the right format.

He has identified the different relationships between parts of West Lancashire and neighbouring areas, including links between communities such as Halsall and Aughton and Merseyside, and has described the failure to undertake a comprehensive boundary review as a mistake.

At the same time, he has supported the proposed Chorley–South Ribble–West Lancashire arrangement because, among the Lancashire options actually put forward, he considered it the best available option.

But those two positions are not necessarily incompatible.

If the Leader believes the existing boundaries are imperfect, and if West Lancashire was previously unable to properly explore a cross-boundary option with Sefton because of the Government's restrictions, then the Government's current review provides an opportunity to finally examine the alternatives properly.

The question should no longer be:

“Which Lancashire-only option do we prefer?”

It should be:

“What boundary actually makes the most sense for the people of West Lancashire?”

This idea has history
This is not a new or radical idea.

More than twenty years ago, the Boundary Committee formally examined proposals involving the expansion of Sefton into parts of West Lancashire.

The 2003 review included proposals to transfer a number of West Lancashire wards into a new Sefton and West Lancashire authority.

The fact that this was formally considered demonstrates something important:

The idea of aligning West Lancashire communities with Sefton is not new.

The question has been considered before. The relationships between the communities have existed for decades.

Yet West Lancashire has never been given the opportunity to properly explore the question in the context of today's economy, transport network, housing market and Liverpool City Region.

Now is the time to reconsider
During the previous Local Government Reorganisation process, West Lancashire Council stated that it was unable to explore opportunities for reorganisation with neighbouring authorities in the Liverpool City Region because of the Government's approach to crossing the existing Lancashire boundary.

The Government has now paused and is reviewing the Lancashire LGR decisions.

That changes the circumstances.

We believe West Lancashire should use this opportunity to say:

Let's look again.

Let's look at the commuting figures.

Let's look at transport.

Let's look at healthcare.

Let's look at housing.

Let's look at employment.

Let's look at community identity.

Let's look at investment.

Let's look at the opportunities available through the Liverpool City Region.

And let's compare that evidence honestly with the proposed South Lancashire model.

We are asking for a choice
We are not asking the Government to impose an answer without evidence.

We are asking for the opportunity to properly investigate the alternative.

We call on West Lancashire Borough Council and the Government to:

Pause the proposed South Lancashire unitary authority involving West Lancashire, Chorley and South Ribble.
Allow West Lancashire and Sefton to formally explore a joint unitary arrangement.
Assess the West Lancashire–Sefton option against the South Lancashire proposal using objective evidence.
Consider West Lancashire's existing and future relationship with the Liverpool City Region.
Examine the potential benefits for transport, regeneration, jobs, housing, skills and investment.
Give residents of West Lancashire a meaningful opportunity to have their say before any final decision is made.
West Lancashire is not simply a piece of Lancashire that needs to be attached to another district.

It is a collection of communities with their own identity, history and relationships.

Our future should be determined by where our communities actually connect — not simply by where an administrative boundary happens to run.

We believe West Lancashire has an opportunity to become part of a wider economic region with the ambition, investment and devolved powers to help our communities thrive.

We want West Lancashire to look forward, not simply be reorganised.

We want investment, opportunity and growth.

We want our future to be built around Southport, Formby, Maghull, Liverpool and the communities of West Lancashire that are already connected to them.

Give West Lancashire the choice.

Give West Lancashire the opportunity to explore a future with Sefton and the Liverpool City Region.