It’s a town with a strong identity and no desire for change, but a major decision could soon shake up the status quo.

The Derbyshire town of Chapel-en-le-Frith is just a nine mile drive from the nearest Greater Manchester village, High Lane. However, locals have little interest in becoming part of the city-region.

In fact, opinion is so strong that a Facebook page has even been set up for locals to voice their opposition.

Chapelites, as they’re known, live in a region known as High Peak in Derbyshire, which is set to see significant change in a major restructure of the council. What exactly will happen is still up in the air.

The local authority shake-up would see smaller councils within large counties, such as Lancashire, be merged as the two-tier system of local government is scrapped.

It could mean areas like High Peak join Greater Manchester.

The High Peak MP, Jon Pearce, said it’s a ‘no-brainer’ for his constituency to join the Greater Manchester. But people in Chapel-en-le-Frith think the idea is ‘brainless’.

Crunching through the snow in the main stretch of the town, the only thing colder than the freezing temperatures was local opinion towards joining the city-region. No one who spoke wanted to have Greater Manchester written on the bottom of their home address.

Alan Waterhouse is Derbyshire born and bred. The 56-year-old thinks the idea would see the area become even more crowded than it already is.

“Lots of people commute from here to the Manchester area, they don’t contribute to the community. If we join with GM that could get worse.

“Years ago Chapel was a farming community, but it isn’t like that anymore. People come away to live here from the city for a more peaceful life.

“The amount of people who talk with a Manchester accent at my son’s school is crazy.

“A few years back our postcode changed from SK17 to SK23. It means we’re out of the Buxton post code area now.”

His friend, walking past, chipped in saying “the MP said it’s a ‘no brainer’, but I say it’s brainless.”

Walking up Market Street towards the Kings Arms, Dawn Goodwin steps out of the dog groomers with her Cockerpoo Izzy. Her main concern about High Peak moving to a different local authority is how it will impact finances.  

“I’d want to stay as we are. I think it’d be more expensive to join Greater Manchester as they’re having to cover more areas. We already have to pay quite a lot. 

“It was shocking to see when that idea was brought up by the MP. From what I know, no one is keen.”

Just across the street, Arthur Carrington is waiting for a bus to Buxton, but he has enough time to discuss the topic he described as being ‘the talk of the town’. 

The Chinley-born 78-year-old said: “I think most people around here don’t go to Manchester anyway. That’s a big city and we’re country folk. 

“I can see the Glossop connection but not here. I think it would look wrong. This is country, (Manchester’s) a city.

“It’s not so much the name being on the address that’s the issue, there is just no affiliation.

“I think Andy Burnham is a good mayor. But people around here think they’d just get the little bits and everything would go to the city. 

“I don’t think Manchester would be interested in picking up Chapel anyway. Lots of people have a worry about admin costs if things are run from Manchester.”

Turning the corner of the high street onto Market Place, Chris Sizeland is about to grab himself a coffee to stave off the wintery cold. He said that such a monumental change in local government isn’t necessary.

Chris suggested that the authorities near areas like Chapel and Glossop, which run close to a number of county borders, should simply work together better. 

The 67-year-old believes Greater Manchester, East Cheshire, and Derbyshire councils should try to make things like bus travel, healthcare and education more streamlined.

He wants less complications for locals who have to go to hospitals in Greater Manchester, attend schools in East Cheshire, and live in Derbyshire. 

Given you can drive through the three counties in a matter of minutes, the faff of dealing with different local authorities which have different cost structures for things like public transport, and different political identities, is a very real problem for people in the area.

Chris said: “The problem is we have a unique identity here and the political composition is very different to Greater Manchester, as it’s very Labour there. This area tends to lean towards conservatives and Greater Manchester is controlled largely by Labour councils.

“A lot of the benefits suggested can easily be done without the change of area. From here you go through East Cheshire to get to Manchester. 

“I don’t want to be bounced into anything, it seems like a political stunt to control more areas.

“They could set up a joint task force between Greater Manchester, Derbyshire and Cheshire to help each other out in crossover areas. 

“So if you get a bus, from here to Manchester for example, you’re not at different rates and prices in different areas.

“We don’t need this big change, we just need more joined-up thinking.”

What happens next for the council shake-up

Chapel-en-le-Frith is among the towns that form High Peak Borough Council, which is currently part of Derbyshire County Council. As the county council prepares to submit their merger proposals, one option High Peak could look at is joining with Tameside or Stockport councils in Greater Manchester.

The area’s MP, Jon Pearce, expressed his desire for the area to join Greater Manchester at the end of 2024 – sparking a fierce debate locally.  The Labour MP said he would not like to see High Peak Borough Council split up and would prefer for the whole borough to merge with Tameside council. 

However, Mr Pearce said he is ‘entirely open minded’ if there is a ‘better idea’, such as part of High Peak joining Stockport.

It all comes off the back of the government unveiling its English Devolution White Paper. The document, published on December 16, said that all two tier areas and smaller or failing unitary authorities will be expected to develop reorganisation plans.

For most areas, this will mean creating new unitary councils with a population of 500,000 or more, according to the White Paper – although decisions will be made on a ‘case-by-case basis’. The government says that closing and merging councils could save £2bn.

The first new unitary, or single-tier authorities, are set to be created by April 2027.

Despite differing opinions over the idea of High Peak joining with Greater Manchester, there are many hurdles that would need to be overcome to get there. It would need sign off from multiple councils, government agreement, and it would also need to make sense in terms of population sizes.

What High Peak Council says

Leader of High Peak Borough Council, Councillor Anthony McKeown said: “Whilst we knew the White Paper was coming we didn’t have any detailed idea of its contents around local government reorganisation.

“We therefore need time to study the proposals and consider what is best for the residents and businesses in High Peak before making any further comment.

“As a council we have fully engaged with devolution so far and we are still in the early days of working with, and being represented on, the East Midlands County Combined Authority. We also have our successful strategic alliance with our neighbours at Staffordshire Moorlands District Council already delivering efficiently and effectively for our respective areas.”

What Derbyshire County Council says

Coun Barry Lewis, Leader of Derbyshire County Council said: “We welcome reform of local government where it could deliver real savings, enhance local democracy, and simplify access to council services.

“It’s early days, there are still some conversations to be had within the council, and we need to look at the details of the government’s proposals. But if the principle of combining tiers of councils with a minimum half-million population is upheld and the approach is sensible then merging two-tier authorities like ours into a single county unitary council could potentially provide wider benefits for our local communities.

“We’re ready to work with Derby City Council and district and borough colleagues to shape the proposals if the government’s plans are sufficiently directive and they align with what is best for Derbyshire.

“As part of any sensible, coherent and credible arrangements it makes sense that those proposals should at least work within the current boundaries defined by the Mayoral Combined County Authority to reflect where skills and transport investment will be delivered.

“Acting outside sensible well-established municipal geographies will inevitably compromise service delivery and potentially escalate costs.”

“As a county council within a Mayoral Combined County Authority, we’ve already successfully pursued and embraced reform and have the vision and drive to deliver meaningful change for our residents.”