-
Question
Why was the decision to reinstate local elections delegated from the Secretary of State to a junior minister? Is there any correspondence that should be disclosed in the House of Commons Library?
Minister reply
The delegation of responsibility followed legal advice and internal departmental processes. All relevant communications will be reviewed for transparency.
-
Question
Was there undue pressure on councils to conform to the Secretary of State’s decision? Will he place all correspondence between his Department and local authorities in the public domain?
Minister reply
The Government is committed to transparency. We are reviewing all communications for disclosure as appropriate.
-
Question
What are the costs associated with this decision and what is the status of election pilots proposed by the Government?
Minister reply
The exact costs will be reviewed. The Government remains committed to reorganisation processes, including election pilots, which will proceed as planned.
-
Question
The MP criticises the Secretary of State's decision to cancel and then reinstate local elections, questioning motives, legal advice adherence, and costs. He also asks about election pilots' status and amendments tabled in the other place.
Minister reply
Steve Reed acknowledges receiving a letter from the shadow Secretary of State and explains that decisions were revised based on legal advice. The decision to delegate was standard practice when revisiting ministerial decisions following such advice.
-
Question
Perkins asks about the implications for Derbyshire's planned reorganisation in 2027, questioning whether it is logical not to hold elections for soon-to-be non-existent authorities.
Minister reply
Steve Reed agrees on the importance of reorganisation and respecting legal advice but confirms that election delays are rare and only happen under specific circumstances.
-
Question
Amos questions whether public opinion will influence Government decisions on top-down reorganisation and inquires about the rationale behind the postponement of elections in 2025 compared to 2026.
Minister reply
Steve Reed emphasises that local government reorganisation aims to eliminate confusion, duplication, and waste, thus benefiting frontline services. He avoids discussing detailed legal advice but confirms its influence on decision-making.
-
Question
Race inquires about the benefits of Exeter's local government reorganisation for economic development, housing, and strategic planning.
Minister reply
Steve Reed agrees that local government reorganisation is crucial for boosting local economies by generating savings to be invested back into communities.
-
Question
Cocking congratulates Broxbourne council on its stance against election delays and asks the Secretary of State not to use similar tactics to delay general elections.
Minister reply
Steve Reed expresses agreement with congratulating Broxbourne but does not address delaying future general elections.
-
Question
Davies seeks assurances for Amber Valley borough council's situation during local government reorganisation, stressing the need for a 100-year outcome based on practicality and service access.
Minister reply
Steve Reed confirms special interest in Amber Valley and acknowledges additional capacity funding to assist councils with challenges related to reorganisation.
-
Question
The right hon. Gentleman seeks assurances regarding the impartiality of government handling local government reform and expresses concerns about Southampton city council's proposed boundary changes in New Forest East, asking for assurance that political affiliations will not influence decisions.
Minister reply
I reassure the right hon. Gentleman on his point. I also reassure him that concerns have been raised across the political spectrum about the capacity to complete local government reorganisation. Additional capacity funding has been announced to support councils in completing this reform.
-
Question
The hon. Member expresses sympathy for the Secretary of State and criticism of the lack of figures indicating savings from local government reorganisation, stating that there are no savings projected, only significant financial costs to local authorities.
Minister reply
I thank my hon. Friend for his question and state that there will be savings from local government reorganisation which will make the system simpler for local people to understand.
-
Question
The hon. Member questions whether £63 million of new capacity funding is sufficient compared with the real cost of local government reorganisation, citing lack of proper funding for merging workforces and contracts.
Minister reply
I have announced additional funding. It goes a long way towards supporting councils that need to go through local government reorganisation, which aims at removing anomalies in services provided by different councils.
-
Question
The hon. Member asks the Secretary of State to consider calling the proposed unitary authority 'West Surrey and South Middlesex' to take account of historical ties to Middlesex.
Minister reply
I am always happy to consider proposals made by the hon. Gentleman and will ensure that he gets an appropriate meeting on his constituents’ behalf.
-
Question
The hon. Member welcomes the news of local government reorganisation in East Sussex, but seeks a pledge from the Secretary of State to not disrespect the right to democracy when voting for unitary councillors.
Minister reply
I am happy to give the hon. Gentleman the reassurance that he seeks regarding the election process.
-
Question
The hon. Member requests an apology from the Secretary of State for confusion and chaos caused by cancelling elections, suggesting resignation.
Minister reply
I will not make any apologies for listening to local leaders or respecting legal advice.
-
Question
The hon. Member questions whether the same arguments that apply to restoring cancelled elections also apply to mayoral elections in Sussex and Hampshire.
Minister reply
That decision was taken under different legislation and circumstances, important for local government reorganisation to be completed before going ahead with the mayoral elections.
-
Question
The hon. Member asks about the original timescale for creation of unitary authorities and combined authority in West Sussex, and seeks additional support provided to council staff.
Minister reply
We are proceeding on the agreed timetable with no changes envisaged, and we have made additional funding available to support capacity needs.
-
Question
The hon. Member inquires about taxpayers' money given to claimants due to the legal action that forced restoration of cancelled elections.
Minister reply
That is not an unusual circumstance, and costs are still being assessed; I am unable to give the exact amount at this moment.
-
Question
The hon. Member questions whether the Secretary of State ignored Attorney General’s legal advice or if incorrect legal advice was provided.
Minister reply
I am unable to discuss details of legal advice, but there is nothing unusual about giving fresh ministerial consideration when decisions are revisited after receiving new legal advice.
-
Question
Given that the Government have now reversed their decision to postpone the 2026 local elections following legal advice, can the Secretary of State confirm whether the same legal considerations also applied to the elections to Surrey county council—which covers my constituency—that were postponed last year? If he states that the Government do not comment on legal advice, do you not agree, Madam Deputy Speaker, that my Woking constituents have been unlawfully robbed of voting out an incompetent Surrey county council last year?
Minister reply
As I said in my statement, the unitary council elections will be going ahead in Surrey this year.
-
Question
I thank the Secretary of State for his endeavours. I note that this reorganisation is set to streamline services and save an estimated £2.9 billion over five years. However, from my experience—I am not better than anybody else, but I always try to be helpful—I issue a note of caution. With Northern Ireland 10 years on from our reform of councils, a 2024 Department for Communities report concluded that it is too early to determine whether those reforms have been cost-effective, with the new, larger councils actually spending more than their 26 predecessors. Has the Secretary of State taken into account that report and that uncertainty, and has he ensured that the Government are not promising billions of pounds in savings while actually taking more from taxpayers and ratepayers?
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question and his observations, but I remain confident that eliminating duplication where residents are paying for two sets of councillors, two sets of chief executives and two sets of finance directors will save residents money, which can then be invested in the frontline services that matter most to people; for example, it can be used to fix the potholes that we heard about earlier.