The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness (Alison McGovern)
As I said to the House yesterday, we need to set local authorities on a plan for financial sustainability, after 14 years during which the Tories decimated local government, and local government reorganisation is a part of that journey.
Having layers of councils is both inefficient and ineffective. With one council in charge in each area, we will see quicker decisions to grow our towns and cities and to connect people to opportunity. Residents will see more preventive care; a family needing special educational needs support and help with housing, for instance, will need to contact only one council, rather than being passed between two. Residents will also benefit from more financially stable councils, with combined services delivering for a larger population, providing for efficiencies and better value. That is why reorganisation is a vital part of our change: stronger local councils equipped to generate economic growth will improve local public services and empower their communities. As we break for Christmas, I would like to thank colleagues in this place and councils across the country for working with the Government to deliver this process.
We want to make these changes in this Parliament. We have already reached a number of key milestones, including the Secretary of State’s decision to implement two new unitary councils in Surrey. We have now received proposals from all 20 remaining invitation areas and a consultation is open on 17 of those proposals from six invitation areas. I expect to launch a consultation in early February on proposals for the remaining 14 areas that seek to meet the terms of the statutory invitation; that consultation would be for seven weeks. I remain committed to the indicative timetable that was published in July, which will see elections to new councils in May 2027 and those new councils going live in April 2028, subject to Parliament.
Local government reorganisation is a complex process involving the rewiring of local services to bring housing, planning, public health and social care all under one roof. When councils have told us about the limits they are working within and the capacity required for reorganisation, my ministerial colleagues and I have heard them. In recent weeks, as final proposals have been submitted, the number of councils voicing such concerns have grown.
Many councils across the country—and of all stripes—have expressed anxiety about their capacity to deliver a smooth and safe transition to new councils, alongside running resource-intensive elections to councils proposed to be abolished shortly. They have expressed concerns about the time and energy spent managing elections to bodies that will shortly not exist, only to run an election a year later. We have also heard from councils querying the value for taxpayers of spending tens of millions of pounds running elections to bodies that will not exist for much longer. Councils are telling us that where capacity is a problem, postponement would free up resources to be concentrated on local government reorganisation and the delivery of good services.
This Government believe in devolution and local leadership. We do not wish to dictate local decisions from Whitehall without consultation; instead, we will listen to local leaders. It is right that the Secretary of State considers the concerns that have been raised with specific relevance to the areas they have come from. Capacity will vary between councils, and that is why the Secretary of State wants to hear from local leaders who know their areas best and understand their own local capacity. He is therefore today seeking the views of council leaders regarding their local capacity to deliver local government reorganisation alongside elections.
To be clear, should a council say that it has no reason to delay its elections, there will be no delay. If a council voices genuine concerns, we will take these issues seriously, and would be minded to grant a delay in those areas. To that end, the Secretary of State is minded to make an order to postpone elections for one year only to the councils that raise capacity concerns. We have asked for representations from councils by no later than midnight on 15 January, and will then be in a position to make an informed decision.
I will continue to update the House on this and other important milestones for reorganisation as we deliver on this vital agenda. I commend this statement to the House.
Paul Holmes (Hamble Valley) (Con)
I thank the Minister for advance sight of her statement. The question many will be asking out there today is: what does this Labour Government have against democracy? Only two days ago, when asked, the Secretary of State said that all local elections were going ahead. He either hid his decision until today or has changed his mind in the past 48 hours. Which was it?
Voters will now potentially be denied the right to elect their own representatives, and not for the first time under this Labour Government. This is the second year in a row that Ministers have scrambled to postpone elections. Now, while many people gather around their screens to watch movies like “How the Grinch Stole Christmas”, we are sitting here discussing how Labour is trying to steal the elections.
There is no mandate for the Government’s botched reorganisation plan, and they have behaved as the sole actor, forcing local council leaders to reorganise, with little regard for local people and their democratic rights. Has the Electoral Commission been consulted on these latest changes, or has it been ignored once again? Just as the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission noted when mayoral elections were previously cancelled, the commission exists to protect the integrity of our electoral system, but time and again the Government seem content to brush aside its advice when it becomes inconvenient.
Do the Government still believe in the Gould principle—the long-standing agreement that election rules and practices should not be changed within the six-month period of a scheduled election—or is that expendable whenever Labour finds itself politically vulnerable? The Opposition accept that there is a precedent for a single-year delay, but that is not what we face. Do the Government accept the clear advice of the Electoral Commission that further delays are unacceptable? It said that scheduled polls should be postponed only in exceptional circumstances —what are the exceptional circumstances in this case? We know the answer: Labour’s rushed, chaotic and flawed local government reorganisation plan. It is the Government’s fault, not local leaders’ fault.
Have the Government undertaken or commissioned any up-to-date research into the costs of restructuring? Again, we know the answer, and it is a resounding no. What assessment has been made of the paralysis that the restructuring risks causing in local plan preparations? At a time when the Government claim they want to speed up planning, how does freezing governance structures help? Will this disruption not make the Government’s beleaguered 1.5 million homes target even harder to achieve? What about social care? What assessment has been made of the impacts of breaking up counties on adult and children’s social care provision? The broader narrative is clear. Yes, some councils have expressed an interest in restructuring, but Labour’s process has been rushed and deeply flawed, local residents have not been properly consulted and this Labour Government have put a gun to the heads of local council leaders.
The Opposition support council leaders who have engaged with the process, such as Kevin Bentley, the leader of Essex county council, who has stated clearly in the public domain that he will not ask for elections to be delayed in Greater Essex. I am pleased to say that my authority, Hampshire county council, does not support the move, either.
In December 2024, the Conservatives set out several clear tests; Labour has failed every single one of them. Is this a genuine choice for councils and communities, or are councils being compelled and punished if they do not comply? Will they be more accountable as a result? Will this reorganisation keep council tax down and improve services or simply add new layers of cost? Will it avoid disruption to social care at a time of immense strain? On all counts, the answer is no.
Earlier this month, Labour cancelled mayoral elections because it was worried it would not win them. Now it is doing the same with local elections, pausing the democratic process to serve its own political interests, creating for itself a true nightmare before Christmas. The process has been a mess from start to finish. It is not wanted, not in Labour’s manifesto and centrally dictated. It should be scrapped today.
Alison McGovern
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his response. I will do my best to respond to a couple of his substantive points. He said that the Opposition are supporting local leaders who are engaging in the process in good faith, and I thank him for that, despite his other comments where he indicated that perhaps his party is not supporting the move to towards unitary councils, which we know are more efficient and effective, as I said.
On the hon. Gentleman’s important point about the Electoral Commission, the Secretary of State will take that under advisement, and will take any issues raised seriously. As I mentioned, we want to take an approach that puts local insights first. He mentioned councils that do not support a delay. As I said, that is fine; there is no problem with that at all. We want to support local leaders through what we are doing.
The hon. Gentleman mentioned planning, which is extremely important, given the desperate need to build more homes; in fact, part of the motivation for moving to unitary authorities is to get that work done effectively and efficiently. He also asked about social care, which is an extremely important area. A lot of change is going on in social care, not least through the work in the Department for Health and Social Care on changing how NHS England works. I am working closely with colleagues in that Department on that, and I am happy to engage further with him on it.
The position on elections is as it has always been. The starting point remains that elections go ahead unless there is a strong justification for them not going ahead. Today, we are writing to local leaders who have raised concerns and made justifications to us, to ask them to set those out, so that an informed decision can be taken.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call the Chair of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee.
Florence Eshalomi (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Minister for her statement. I appreciate that she outlined that she has listened to valid concerns from councils about reorganisation. I have raised with Ministers the uncertainty that councils will face in transitioning into new councils, and in running vital day-to-day services.
I am a bit disappointed in the Minister, in that this announcement has come so late in the day. This is an issue of grave importance to so many hon. Members right across the Chamber, but many of them will not be here today to raise their concerns with her. In addition to the Secretary of State’s comments two days ago, he said this when he appeared before the Select Committee on 11 November:
“Where the elections are intended to go ahead, they will go ahead.”
What has changed since then?
The deadline is in a few weeks—the Minister asked that representations be made no later than 15 January—which leaves councils little time to prepare, if we are to make sure that we inform the Electoral Commission as well. What advice would she give to election officers who are planning elections, which takes time and costs money? Should they go ahead or should that work be paused? After that date, when will the final decision be made? Can Members have sight of that date?
We appreciate that local government reorganisation is complex, but we cannot have a situation in which the Government keep postponing elections. Local elections are vital and a sign of a healthy democracy.
Alison McGovern
I thank the Chair of the Select Committee for raising those points. First, I take seriously her point about the timings. She will understand that it has been a particularly busy time, given all that is happening in the Department, but I absolutely accept her point. I have been in touch with many Members of the House on reorganisation, funding and other matters, and I anticipate that I will also be in touch with Members over the rest of the year, and very much in the new year as well.
My hon. Friend asked, “Why now?” We have had representations from a number of councils undergoing reorganisation—albeit by no means the majority, as most councils that are reorganising are not due to have elections in any case—and we think it is important that we take stock of their views on capacity constraints. My hon. Friend also asked about timings; we have asked the councils to come back to us quickly, and we will take decisions swiftly.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)
I thank the Minister for advance sight of her statement. Just over two weeks ago, we were in this Chamber for a statement cancelling the mayoral elections in six areas. At the time, the Government assured us that they intended to go ahead with May 2026 elections, so it is deeply disappointing to be here again discussing cancellations and the prospect of people being denied their vote and their voice. I do wonder how voters and Members of this House can trust the Government on the topic of elections, given that they have gone back on their repeated assurances that elections would go ahead.
In her statement, the Minister indicated that concerns had been raised about lack of capacity. With the Government’s timetable for reorganisation having been clearly set out in July, it seems strange that capacity issues are only just being highlighted. Will she clarify to the House the type of capacity issues that are being highlighted? Will she also say which tier of council will be the primary decision maker on whether an area has capacity issues? What will happen if district and county councils have differing views?
Finally, the Minister will be aware that councils have already committed significant financial resources, not to mention staff hours, to planning for the May 2026 elections. Will she commit today to fully reimbursing councils for costs incurred in planning for 2026, if they end up having their elections cancelled?
Alison McGovern
I thank the hon. Lady for her questions. I will not respond again to those to which I have already responded. As I mentioned, the majority of the English electorate will get to vote in the elections in 2026 that are not affected by reorganisation. There are other elections going on and, as I said, this does not apply to the majority of councils undergoing reorganisation, either.
A number of councils have raised capacity issues, demand on limited resources and the challenge of getting the transition process right. They have shared details with us, which is why we are writing to them to ask their view formally. We will get on with this process as quickly as we can.
Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)
I thank the Minister not just for her statement, but for moving at pace with the local government reorganisation programme. Contrary to what we heard from the shadow Minister, for whom I have great respect, we want local government reorganisation in Exeter and across Devon. I have lost count over the past 18 months of the list of places and topics for which two-tier government is simply not working for a diverse and dynamic city such as Exeter. I will not list them today, Madam Deputy Speaker, but does the Minister agree that streamlining councils and allowing cities such as Exeter to take control of their own economy, destiny and services will deliver real benefits—not just for the economy and for services, but for local people?
Alison McGovern
I understand that today we may hear more from those with concerns about reorganisation, but the case that my hon. Friend makes is the right one. Everywhere in this country deserves the possibility of economic and social growth.
Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)
Today, Gosport borough council has been given the lowest possible rating by a Government regulator for the management of its social housing. The Minister will understand that this is a deeply worrying time for the 3,000 Gosport tenants and for local council tax payers. What is not helping is the constant ambiguity, uncertainty and speculation from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government about the borough’s future, compounding the chaos and confusion from the council’s already quite hapless leadership. The Minister has already heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes) that Hampshire county council does not favour a delay, but does she agree that today’s announcement just adds to the uncertainty that thousands of residents face across Hampshire?
Alison McGovern
I thank the hon. Lady for raising this issue in the House; it sounds really serious. I will look at what has happened in Gosport. We endeavour to take decisions quickly and have clarity, but I will have a look at the issue that she raises, because it sounds important to her constituents.
Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her statement. Outside the political bubble, many people—particularly those who have struggled over the past few years to get the local services that they need on their doorstep—will welcome the idea of a modernised local government system, but this is also about funding. Luton North deserves more than just the bare essentials. That is why I welcome the 63% increase in multi-year funding, compared with the previous Government’s cuts of over £116 million to our town. Does the Minister agree that areas like my town of Luton not only deserve every single penny, so that we can bring back our play parks, our high streets and our local assets, but deserve the mechanisms to deliver for people?
Alison McGovern
I agree: Luton deserves far better, and it is about time that people in Luton had their fair share.
Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)
Can the Minister confirm that elections in Surrey will go ahead in May 2026?
Jon Trickett (Normanton and Hemsworth) (Lab)
The fact of the matter is that Britain has one of the most centralised political structures anywhere in the world. If we are to renew our democracy and rebuild confidence in the people, we need well-led, financially secure authorities that can speak powerfully to central Government, so I advise the Minister to proceed quickly and carefully with the reorganisation. [Interruption.] I do not want to listen to advice from Opposition Members. They launched a tsunami of financial attacks on local government that left councils strapped for resources.
One final point: there are 10,000 parish and town councils, including quite a number in my constituency. Will the Minister look at how we can use them to help to renew our democracy?
Alison McGovern
I do not want to try your patience, Madam Deputy Speaker. There is much I could say in response to my hon. Friend, who makes some excellent points, but I will just say that I have heard what he says, and I will do my best.
Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)
Labour’s process of local government reorganisation is descending into farce. Two days ago, the Secretary of State assured the House that next May’s elections were going ahead. Now, the day we rise for Christmas, the Minister comes here and says, “Well, they might not.” I back to the hilt the Conservative leader of Essex county council, Kevin Bentley, when he says that they must go ahead. He is right, but what about the lower tier? What about Labour-led Basildon, Labour-led Thurrock and Labour-led Southend? Are they allowed to run away and hide, just because Labour is tanking in the polls?
Alison McGovern
I am pleased to hear that the right hon. Gentleman has been in touch with local authority leaders. They will have heard what he has said, and I am sure that they can take his views into consideration when they respond to our letter.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
In Newcastle-under-Lyme and in Staffordshire, there is real discussion about what the future may look like. It is clear that some things have to change, because councils are not operating as effectively as they might. That said, can the Minister assure me that the views of local people, and the history, traditions and identity of communities, will be the driving force behind any discussion about what the future may look like?
Alison McGovern
Of course those things are taken into consideration. We have set out some criteria by which the decisions on reorganisation are taken, and I refer my hon. Friend to those, but effective local government is built out of a strong sense of community. I am sure that will be reflected in his constituency, as elsewhere.
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
I draw the attention of the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, as a serving county councillor. Why has the Minister given Norfolk Conservatives a route to chicken out of their impending electoral doom? Will she tell me why the Government did not support my amendment to the English Devolution and Empowerment Bill, which would require her to win a vote in this place in order to stop elections? Does she not believe that elected Members here have a right to stand up for their constituents?
Alison McGovern
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. We are following the precedent for dealing with situations like this. This happened under the previous Government, too, and we support that process. Council leaders will have heard what he said. I am not sure what the politics are of the situation that he alluded to. None the less, local leaders will have heard what he said, and I am sure that they will consider that when they take their decision.
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
This is another U-turn from the Government. Two days ago, the Secretary of State said that the votes were going ahead. Now we are told, in a statement slipped out just before we rise for Christmas, that they are not going ahead. The Minister uses as her excuse representations that she tells us she has received from councils. Will she take this opportunity to confirm that the Conservative leader of Norfolk county council has not made representations to her, and reaffirm her public position that she will not ask for a delay in elections in Norfolk?
Alison McGovern
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. I will write to him to confirm the response to it. Primarily, that is one for Norfolk. I am sure it may say things publicly, but I would be very happy to discuss with him the circumstances in his constituency, if he would like that.
Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)
The Minister is doing a noble job of defending the absolutely indefensible cancellation of further elections, but where is the Secretary of State who just two days ago told this House, I am sure in good faith, that the elections would go ahead? The Minister needs to explain what has changed in the last 48 hours; otherwise, MPs are left with the regrettable conclusion that the Secretary of State inadvertently misled the House.
Alison McGovern
I am awfully sorry that I am not the person that the hon. Member wanted to see at the Dispatch Box today.
Alison McGovern
A merry Christmas to him, too! I feel disappointed that he is disappointed to see me here. In any case, as I have said to other Members, what has happened is that local councils have raised concerns with us, and we are attempting to get in touch with them—the letter is going to them today—so that they can say what the circumstances are in their boroughs. As we have discussed, if they wish for elections to go ahead, that is fine.
Alison Griffiths (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con)
This is a disgraceful decision that damages our democracy and sets a dangerous precedent. To borrow a phrase, is the Minister afraid? Frightened? Frit? What does she say to my constituents whose fundamental right to have their say at the ballot box is now being taken away?
Alison McGovern
I am sure that the hon. Lady’s council will have heard what she has said and understood her views—and it is right that it has. Having stood in one local council election and five general elections, I am not afraid of democracy.
John Milne (Horsham) (LD)
This feels like some kind of unholy Labour-Conservative alliance to avoid electoral humiliation. At West Sussex county council, the dysfunctional Conservative administration will surely grab the chance to cling on to power for yet another year past its sell-by date. To make sure that any decision to delay is taken for the right reasons, will the Minister agree to require that any council seeking to cancel elections will also be required to see out the rest of its term under a cross-party rainbow coalition comprised of existing councillors?
Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)
I invite the Minister to be open and candid with the House. Could she tell us what discussions there have been and what views, opinions, advice or instructions have been issued to her, her fellow Ministers or special advisers by the political advisers in No. 10?
Alison McGovern
As I have mentioned a few times, we have had representations from councils about their capacity. Of course we discuss these issues as Ministers and as part of the Government, and those discussions happen in the usual way, as the hon. Member would expect.
Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)
After Reform-led Staffordshire county council, Conservative-run East Sussex county council paid out the highest amount in compensation relating to potholes between 2022 and 2024. People in Eastbourne want to have their say. Can the Minister confirm whether the leader of East Sussex county council has already made representations to her about the cancellation of elections next year? Will she confirm whether she expects the people of East Sussex to have a say at the ballot box in 2026?
Alison McGovern
I am sure that East Sussex county council has heard what the hon. Member has said. It may discuss that with him directly, as I will happily do if he would like.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
Can I explain to the Minister why this U-turn is worrying? She said that there would have to be strong reasons for elections to be cancelled, and then cancelled them on the basis of not very strong reasons. Her predecessor said that there would have to be very strong reasons why boundary changes might happen during local government reorganisation. We are extremely concerned that Southampton city council wants to split off the sensitive waterside that looks towards the rural New Forest and amalgamate that under its power structure in the future. Can we now be confident that those very strong reasons that would have to be adduced for any boundary changes really amount to any sort of guardianship of the situation at all?
Alison McGovern
The right hon. Gentleman makes an important point. I have heard it and take it away as part of our consideration of the issues around reorganisation. We published the criteria that we will use to take decisions with regards to reorganisation, and we need to stick to those criteria, but I take seriously the point that he raises.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for her update. Having gone through a local government restructure in Northern Ireland some years ago, I can say that the shifts are dynamic and that it can be very difficult to reconcile the new ways. What information will be available for the general public to ensure that the transition is understood and that people are not alienated from their local representation?
Alison McGovern
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his commitment to taking part in these discussions and for the insights he brings from Northern Ireland. I will alert colleagues in local government to those and let them know that there is experience they could learn from.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
The hon. Gentleman will know that that is not a matter for the Chair. I am reluctant to allow continuation of debate via the mechanism of points of order, unless the Minister wishes to respond.