Cllr Paul Follows, leader of Waverley Borough Council, has admitted that his comments about “skewing” a report on Surrey’s local government restructuring (LGR) were “ill-chosen”.

His remarks sparked controversy, with Conservative opposition members calling for his resignation after he was overheard suggesting that devolution reports should be adjusted to “actively promote” splitting Surrey into three, rather than two, new unitary authorities.

Surrey is currently composed of a county council and 11 boroughs and districts. The Government wants to reorganise this and create a single elected mayor with either two, or three unitary authorities in their responsibility.

The county and boroughs are divided on the issue, with the county council in favour of two authorities and the majority of the boroughs in favour of three.

This division was at the heart of calls for Cllr Paul Follows to step down after he was recorded last week saying reports published last week should have their “tone slightly” changed “to be a bit more skewed to actively promoting three”.

At an extraordinary meeting of Waverley Borough Council on Tuesday (March 18) evening to discuss the issue, Cllr Follows acknowledged controversy surrounding his comments on LGR and issued an apology for any confusion.

“I did that very silly thing that politicians do at all levels on some occasions, they ended up becoming the story,” he told the meeting.

Cllr Paul Follows stated he had never hidden his stance of in favour of three authorities, as he believed having more “local, local authorities” would better serve residents.

“I believe I’m a pretty straight-shooter when it comes to my views on things, especially on important things like this, and I completely concede that my choice of words when talking to my chief executive at the Waverley executive last week in regards to LGR were clearly ill-chosen,” he said.

Cllr Paul Follows stated that the majority of district and borough leaders had provided clear direction in support of three unitary authorities. He explained that the wording of the proposals needed to explicitly reflect this when presented to the Government.

“I’ve opened myself up to all the flak and silliness that comes from that, that’s on me,” he said. “But I do want to apologise to any residents or members for any confusion that has arisen from this.”

During the extraordinary meeting, some councillors argued LGR was a chance to improve governance, while others expressed concern about the feasibility of such large administrative changes in such a short timescale.

Another key issue raised during the meeting was the unresolved financial burden on Surrey’s district and borough councils, particularly the significant debts of Woking and Spelthorne councils.

“None of these unitaries can be incorporated on day one, at present, without a plan to resolve the debt issues of Woking, Spelthorne and others,” warned Cllr Follows.

“In practice, everything we say here about these bids and specific proposals in the future presumes those elements are sorted out first.

“Because no triple, double or single unitary can absorb any or part of the portion of the debt without it being unviable at the point of incorporation.”

The councillors voted in favour of supporting the three-unitary model by 33 votes to eight, with four abstentions.