Legal advice ahead of court hearing sees Government ditch plans to postpone local elections

The Government in December last year proposed delaying elections for 63 areas in order to allow them to focus resources on replacing their two-tier local authorities with unitary councils.

Reform UK subsequently launched a legal challenge to the decision, and on 20 January Mr Justice Chamberlain ordered that this claim be heard by a Divisional Court on 19 February.

On 22 January, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government confirmed plans to postpone elections in 29 areas. This was subsequently increased to 30 following a last-minute representation from Pendle Borough Council.

However, in a letter sent today to council leaders where proposals have been submitted for reorganisation, the Secretary of State said the Government had written to the High Court to say:

The Secretary of State has decided to withdraw his decision to postpone the council elections of 30 local councils due to take place in May 2026 in the light of recent legal advice (for the avoidance of doubt no privilege is waived).

The Secretary State invited the housing minister, who was not involved in the initial decision-making, to reconsider the position afresh on a very urgent basis recognising the pressing timescales involved. The housing minister has decided that the elections should proceed in May 2026.

The Secretary of State will seek to agree an order with the Claimant in the light of this announcement disposing of the claim and will agree to pay the Claimant’s costs of these proceedings.

​Reed also wrote: “I recognise that many of the local councils undergoing reorganisation voiced genuine concerns about the pressure they are under as we seek to deliver the most ambitious reforms of local government in a generation.

“I am therefore announcing today that we will provide up to £63m in additional capacity funding to the 21 local areas undergoing reorganisation across the whole programme, building on the £7.6m provided for developing proposals last year. I will shortly set out further detail about how that funding will be allocated.”

The ​Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) meanwhile said it would take the necessary steps to revoke the secondary legislation in Parliament to ensure that all local elections will now go ahead in May.

Writing on X, Reform UK's leader Nigel Farage said: "We took this Labour government to court and won. In collusion with the Tories, Keir Starmer tried to stop 4.6 million people voting on May 7th. Only Reform UK fights for democracy."

Responding to the announcement, Cllr Richard Wright, Chair of the District Councils’ Network, said: “Council officers, councillors and local electorates will be bewildered by the unrelenting changes to the electoral timetable.

“Councils were assured by the Government that elections could be legally cancelled but now it seems ministers have come to the opposite conclusion. It’s the Government, not councils that have acted in good faith, which should bear responsibility for this mess which impacts on people’s faith in our cherished local democracy.

“The councils affected face an unnecessary race against time to ensure elections proceed smoothly and fairly, with polling stations booked and electoral staff available.”

He added: “If election cancellations were deemed necessary to free up capacity for local government reorganisation to succeed, councils will now be asking where this leaves the reorganisation timetable.

“We need to have faith in the Government’s decision-making as we work on the biggest shake-up of councils in 50 years – but the Government is doing little assure us that it has a strong grasp of the huge legal complexity involved.”

In a statement the Association of Electoral Administrators (AEA) said: "We are extremely disappointed Returning Officers, Electoral Registration Officers and electoral administration teams have lost months of essential planning time for reinstated 7 May elections.

"Local elections are highly complex, far more so than a general election for instance. These teams now face an uphill struggle to catch up to where they should be. They have paused planning to avoid unnecessary cost, but this means they are now playing catch up.

"It’s also important to stress this decision affects far more councils than the 30 holding elections. County councils do not run elections themselves; they rely on district councils to deliver them. It’s actually 47 teams who now have to rapidly mobilise after previously being told to stand down, with some due to run elections for both their district and county at the same time."

The AEA also called for additional funding to be made available to cover any increased costs for these polls. "Alternative polling station and count venues may be needed, and extra spending should not have to be borne by local government when it is incurred due to a central government row back."

Laura Hughes, Partner and Head of Public Law at law firm Browne Jacobson, said: “This shift in position has significant ramifications for direction of travel and timetabling for the local government reorganisation programme (LGR).

“It is possible to establish new unitary authorities without a year-long shadow period and this approach has been used before, particularly where the ‘continuing council’ model is adopted, though this could also be used where councils will not continue on the same geographies.

“However, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government was widely expected to use orders based very closely on previous approaches to LGR to minimise drafting time and complexity."

Hughes added: “This change will undoubtedly slow things down as alternative approaches are explored. Equally, any transition period without elected members in place on new boundaries will potentially lead to slower progress with members possibly not as invested in a smooth transition if they are likely to lose their seats on election. We await with interest the government’s next move.”