The Government has sent a very clear message about the likelihood of new unitary authorities being created in England over the coming years. The tightness of the timetable and the strict criteria mean that few, if any authorities, are likely to further their ambitions in this respect.

Oxford City Council continues to maintain its ambition to go for a unitary authority based on the city. It has, however, lost its only ally in the combined weight of the Vale of White Horse and South Oxfordshire district councils. The leaders of both of those councils have effectively ruled out their plans to go for a unitary in the south in the wake of publication of the White Paper.

So, could Oxford conceivably go it alone? We think not. It has little hope of meeting the criteria laid down by ministers.

To begin with, it would have to demonstrate that the change to a unitary Oxford would pay for itself and that it would offer value for money to the taxpayer.

In the words of the District Auditor, the city council already provides poor value for money. It is in no position to deliver value for money out of what would be an expensive reorganisation and a new authority that would inevitably duplicate management structures in education and social services that are already in place at county level. There would be no economies of scale delivered by turning one small authority into a unitary. Common sense says the reverse would be the case.

Any case brought by the city council would have to have broad support across the community. Anyone who remembers the divisive arguments of the early nineties will know that there is no consensus in Oxford or Oxfordshire about unitary councils.

It has taken a long time for councils in Oxfordshire to put behind them the bitterness caused by that debate.

Only now are we seeing greater co-operation between the districts and the county council over things like waste management.

The two-tier system of district and county local government is not perfect. It can confuse the public and cause some friction over the provision of services.

Our council leaders, however, have a duty to make those services as effective and seamless as possible. Political empire-building has to take second place.

Interestingly, the White Paper offers a second way forward - the Pathfinder initiative.

Counties and all their constituent districts are being invited to put forward proposals for closer working.

These include what is called "unified service delivery", where the service user would have no need to understand which authority is providing the service, and shared office functions. The proposals would also have to demonstrate a high level of accountability so that voters knew who was responsible for what decisions.

It seems tailor made for Oxfordshire but has met with a lukewarm response from local politicians. City council leader John Goddard said he did not want to see any more "county dominance", while county council leader Keith Mitchell said they would struggle to meet the deadline for the Pathfinder initiative.

It is easy to see why the Pathfinder route is difficult politically for our authorities. It does, however, represent a sensible way forward for Oxfordshire if, as expected, there are no changes to the structure of local government in the county.

Whether Oxfordshire signs up to Pathfinder or not, closer working between authorities, including one-stop shops where the user can access a service whoever provides it, offers the best way forward.

It is already happening in Oxfordshire. The politicians may not like it, but the benefits for all of us are clear.