One of the first things you learn as a district councillor is that much of your time is looking at the impact on your own area of decisions made in another place.

I represent one of the most deprived wards in the country. Much of my time is spent dealing with issues from a shortage of housing, problems accessing health services or the impact of crime and anti-social behaviour.

As a district councillor, it can sometimes feel like you are powerless.

Many of these issues lie out of the direct control of Cherwell as an authority, so any influence you can have is as a community advocate rather than a decision-maker.

Even on things like roads, schools, roads, social care, libraries, children’s centres, buses, youth centres; these areas technically lie within the power and responsibility of the county council rather than the authority on which I serve.

But residents, rightly, do not care much about the division of responsibility. As a councillor, your job is to fix things, not find excuses.

It is why I think the debate about devolution in Oxfordshire, while fascinating for politicos like me, has barely registered with most residents who above all else care about local services, economy and infrastructure.

The debate, however, is an important one. It goes right to the heart of who makes decisions and why are they making them.

The county council and districts in the south of the county have declared in favour of a unitary for Oxfordshire. This would mean doing away with Cherwell and the district councils. Barry Wood, the leader of Cherwell has – perhaps unsurprisingly – spoken against this.

Other proposals are for a merging of the districts in West Oxfordshire and Cherwell to make a northern unitary authority, similar arrangements between South and Vale and a solitary unitary for Oxford city.

These ideas all have their advantages and drawbacks. Yet for me, there is a key issue which is being ignored, which is this: the driver for devolution is saving money rather than improving things for residents. We only have to look over the border in Northamptonshire to see this where similar discussions have gained immediate urgency as a result of the county council going bust. Oxfordshire is not bust, but it is primarily interested in reform of local government as a consequence of government cuts.

This is not the right approach. Any devolution or re-organisation of local government should come about first and foremost to improve democratic accountability and improve services. Saving money should be a secondary driver.

Cherwell has done relatively well out of ‘austerity’ because it is an area that has seen a lot of housebuilding and so the government has given the council a lot of money in the form of the New Homes Bonus.

So, before deciding on the shape of local government in Oxfordshire, let’s have a rethink of the role, funding and priorities for local government first.