IN two years' time, a radical shake-up of local government could see the whole of Wiltshire served by just one local authority.

The county council and all four existing district councils, including Salisbury and Kennet, would be abolished and replaced by a unitary authority.

The new super council idea has the backing of Wiltshire County Council and North Wiltshire District Council, which claim it will save money and reduce duplication.

But it is fiercely opposed by Salisbury, Kennet and West Wiltshire District Councils, which say the business case for the super authority is fundamentally flawed, and that it would increase council tax. The Government has approved the first phase of the unitary council bid, and there is now to be 12 weeks of consultation before Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Ruth Kelly, announces a final decision on the issue in July.

What do you think? Would a single council for the whole of Wiltshire be a good, value for money way of delivering local services, or would it be a bad thing for local taxpayers?

Over the next two weeks, the Journal will be conducting a telephone poll on the issue.

You have your first chance to vote yes or no today, and we will be running the poll again in next week's paper.

The poll will close on Monday, April 16 and we will announce the result in the Journal of Thursday, April 19.

To vote in favour of the unitary council proposal call 09012210206. To vote against it, call 09012210207.

Alternatively, simply send a text starting with "savote," followed by "yes" or "no" to 88010.

Calls cost 25p (some networks may charge more) and texts cost 25p plus your normal network charges. Lines open today and close on April 16.

And to help readers make up their minds, we are printing statements by chief executive of Wiltshire County Council, Keith Robinson, stating the unitary case and Salisbury District Council leader, Richard Britton, opposing the plan.

For

By Chief executive of Wiltshire County Council, Keith Robinson.

ONE telephone number to call; one website where you can do everything from renewing your library book to booking a squash court and paying your council tax; one service centre in your town where you can talk to the person you need - doesn't this make sense?

One Council in Wiltshire could achieve just that.

One Council would be cheaper to run than the current five councils, saving money on everything from senior managers to IT systems.

And One Council could join up services which are currently provided by two separate councils - e.g. collecting the rubbish (district council) and getting rid of it (county council).

One Council would mean one councillor for your area.

We estimate approximately 100 councillors could run the council in place of the present 250 district and county councillors.

If they were paid the same as current county councillors, that would save £225,000 per annum.

But would it still be local government? The establishment of area boards in Wiltshire towns would enable councillors to take local decisions and shape local services to suit their communities. Savings of £15 million per year can be made without centralising any services.

(And these calculations are being checked by the Audit Commission, the Government's independent watchdog.) We know the One Council bid does have its opponents but we really believe the bid is the best for Wiltshire.

Take a look at the website www.onecouncilforwiltshire.co.uk to see our common sense answers to critics, or email us with our queries.

Against

By Leader of Salisbury District Council, Richard Britton.

WILTSHIRE County Council's bid to turn itself into a unitary council is financially flawed and there are many reasons why it would not best serve the people of South Wiltshire.

Firstly, service reductions. County says its mega-council could achieve a £14.7m saving by slashing staff numbers by centralising all services at Trowbridge. It claims this would not affect services to residents.

Does that sound right to you?

It admits the figure is only a rough estimate and professional commentators say it is grossly overstated.

Anyway, the amount is only 2.7 per cent of the combined district/county spend, and district councils already have joint plans to achieve similar cost reductions - without the risk and disruption of sweeping reorganisation.

Unitary arrangements elsewhere show they end up costing residents more to run, not less.

Secondly, geography. Trowbridge is remote from us and there is an obvious north-south divide.

How could services based at Trowbridge serve us in the South equally to those in the north?

Thirdly, the loss of local democratic representation. County would save money by reducing the number of councillors serving Wiltshire from the present 230 to 98 - and later to only 60 or 70. How could 60 councillors have the same detailed knowledge of, links with and commitment to, their "patch'"as current district councillors?

A unitary authority would be remote, bureaucratic, hugely inefficient and undemocratic. All local focus would be lost.

Closer collaborative working between districts will provide the economies government seeks but retain the local orientation our people expect.