Local Elections Postponed – Maybe
PAUL MCLAUGHLIN
The Government has sparked anger in Westminster by officially postponing this year’s council elections across Hastings and East Sussex. The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Steve Reed, made the announcement in a House of Commons Statement last Thursday (22 January) in which he told MPs that the elections, which were due to be held on 7 May, will now be held in 2027 instead.
The decision drew criticism from all the opposition parties in Parliament. Reform UK, which is leading in national opinion polls and would be expected to make significant gains in the elections, attacked the plans as “harmful to democratic principles” and they are seeking to overturn the decision in the law courts.
The case will be heard by a High Court judge at a two-day hearing scheduled for 19-20 February. Whilst the Government is confident the legal challenge will be defeated, Mr Reed said it would “not be appropriate” for him to comment on the proceedings.
He explained the election delay was a direct result of what he called “the most ambitious reorganisation of council structures in a generation.” To “accelerate preparations for this essential overhaul,” he confirmed the postponement of elections in Sussex and 25 other council areas across England, most of them Labour-controlled.
Under the local government reform (LGR) plans, all existing councils in Sussex will be abolished and replaced with up to five new unitary authorities. For Hastings, two options are proposed: One East Sussex, a single council for the entire county, or a Coastal Unitary Authority combining Hastings, Eastbourne, and Bexhill.
CLAIMED BENEFITS
Mr. Reed said: “It is very important that LGR be delivered with as much speed as we can muster because of the benefits to local residents, who will see more money available to spend on things like fixing potholes and caring for older people – rather than paying for two sets of councillors, two sets of chief execs and two sets of finance directors. That is wasting tens of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money.”
Whilst opposition parties in Parliament strongly attacked the plans, the position locally is somewhat different. In a joint statement issued before Christmas, the Greens, Labour, Conservatives and Hastings Independents agreed that holding elections “would likely divert attention from critical reorganisation work…Political leaders needed to be fully focused on getting the best deal for Hastings out of the reorganisation process.”
They also raised concerns about the financial cost of an election when council budgets are already tight.
UNCERTAINTY
But Reform UK’s legal challenge has created uncertainty within local politics. Councillors who were due to stand down now find themselves serving an indefinite extension of their mandates, regardless of public or personal preference. Prospective candidates and local parties have been left in a state of campaign limbo, unable to plan or mobilise their teams of local canvassers, while not knowing if the elections will go ahead.
Meanwhile, council officers, charged with facilitating a smooth transition to the new unitary authority, whatever option the Government eventually chooses, must still allocate resources to election preparations in case the legal challenge is successful. This divided focus makes it less likely that Hastings BC or East Sussex CC will realise any cost savings for local taxpayers that the election postponement was intended to achieve.
It is ordinary voters, however, who will feel the impact of the local election shenanigans most acutely. The postponement arguably strips communities of tangible choices on crucial local issues – be it potholes, bus fares or housing insecurities. It also reinforces a deepening sense that voting really doesn’t matter, further entrenching the very apathy and disconnection that LGR ostensibly seeks to address.
The inaugural Sussex Mayoral vote is already delayed by two years, and fundamental details of the new unitary authority are yet to be announced. Yet ministers insist the new council will be operational for the 2027 local elections. Given its track record so far, voters may well see this as an aspiration rather than a firm policy commitment.
We hope you have enjoyed reading this article. The future of our volunteer led, non-profit publication would be far more secure with the aid of a small donation. You can also support local journalism by becoming a friend of HIP. It only takes a minute and we would be very grateful.
Leave a Reply