Secretary of State makes final decisions on local government reorganisation in four areas

The decisions, which are subject to parliamentary approval, are:

Essex, Southend-on-Sea and Thurrock

A five-unitary proposal, creating the councils referred to in the proposals as:

• West Essex Council (current local government areas of Epping Forest, Harlow and Uttlesford)
• North East Essex Council (current local government areas of Braintree, Colchester and Tendring)
• Mid Essex Council (current local government areas of Brentwood, Chelmsford and Maldon)
• South West Essex Council (current local government areas of Basildon and Thurrock)
• South East Essex Council (current local government areas of Castle Point, Rochford and Southend-on-Sea).

Hampshire, Isle of Wight, Portsmouth and Southampton

A five-unitary proposal (option 1A) submitted by Eastleigh, Fareham, Hart, Havant, Portsmouth, Rushmoor and Southampton councils, creating the councils referred to in the proposals as:

• North Hampshire Council (current local government areas of Basingstoke and Deane, Hart and Rushmoor)
• Mid Hampshire Council (current local government areas of East Hampshire, New Forest, Test Valley and Winchester, less 11 parishes from all 4 areas)
• South East Hampshire Council (current local government areas from East Hampshire, Fareham, Gosport, Havant, Portsmouth, 3 parishes from East Hampshire and 1 parish from Winchester)
• South West Hampshire Council (current local government areas of Eastleigh, 4 parishes from New Forest, Southampton and 3 parishes from Test Valley)
• Isle of Wight Council will remain as a separate unitary authority.

Norfolk

A three-unitary proposal, creating the councils referred to in the proposals as:

• West Norfolk Council (current local government areas of Breckland, King’s Lynn and West Norfolk, and 9 parishes from South Norfolk).
• Greater Norwich Council (current local government areas of Norwich, 19 parishes from Broadland, and 16 parishes from South Norfolk).
• East Norfolk Council (current local government areas of Broadland (less 19 parishes), Great Yarmouth, North Norfolk, and South Norfolk (less 25 parishes)).

Suffolk

A three-unitary proposal, creating the councils referred to in the proposals as:

• Central and Eastern Suffolk Council (current local government areas of West Suffolk, 21 parishes from Mid Suffolk, and Babergh (less 31 parishes)).
• Western Suffolk Council (current local government areas of Mid Suffolk (less 29 parishes), and East Suffolk (less 25 parishes).
• Ipswich and South Suffolk Council (current local government areas of Ipswich, 31 parishes from Babergh, 8 parishes from Mid Suffolk, and 25 parishes from East Suffolk).

However, in a written ministerial statement, Steve Reed also revealed that in relation to East Sussex and Brighton and Hove and West Sussex, where councils had also been asked to submit proposals, he is yet to make a decision. This was “due to concerns regarding all four of the proposals I received”.

Reed added that he was still “fully committed” to delivering reorganisation in these areas with elections in May 2027 and changes coming into effect from April 2028. A decision on modified proposals will be made “as soon as practicable”.

The Secretary of State meanwhile confirmed the Government’s “significant and unprecedented” commitment to repay in-principle £200m of Thurrock Council’s debt in 2026-27.

This “reflects an assessment of value for money for national and local taxpayers, given the significant unsupported debt at the council linked to historic capital practices”.

Reed added that to prevent failures like those seen in Thurrock and Woking from happening again, the Government would now bring into operation the statutory powers enacted in 2023 - but never used by the previous government - which allow direct intervention where authorities take excessive risks in their borrowing and investment practices.

“These powers will ensure that essential capital investment in services, housing and growth can continue, but within a much stronger framework of safeguards to protect taxpayers from costly and avoidable failure,” he said, adding that the Government would soon launch a consultation to engage with the sector and stakeholders in developing and implementing these powers.

On the next steps in local government reorganisation, the Secretary of State said: “Delivering reorganisation for the benefit of all residents is a shared endeavour, and ongoing collaboration will be vital to ensure that these reforms are implemented with the interests of residents at their heart.

“We remain committed to the timetable we have set out previously, with elections to the new unitary councils taking place in May 2027, ahead of them going live and delivering services in April 2028.

“For the other 14 areas going through local government reorganisation, I would like to emphasise that the decisions taken here, and previously in Surrey, do not set any precedent. Decisions will be taken individually, based on the published criteria....., the merits of each proposal we receive, and the local context.”

Responding to the announcement, Simon Edwards, Chief Executive of the County Councils Network, accused the Government of choosing to implement proposals that are “clearly odds with their own criteria”.

He said: “Some 12 of the 15 proposed unitary authorities are substantially below the 500,000-population threshold, while we now face the prospect of widespread disaggregation of care services and unprecedented levels of complex boundary changes to create small, under-bounded city based unitary councils.”

He warned that “the evidence clearly shows that these ministerial decisions will inevitably end up costing local taxpayers more while causing greater upheaval to services for the most vulnerable”.

The Secretary of State’s decisions have been welcomed by the Local Councils Network (formerly the District Councils’ Network), however.

The group’s Chair, Cllr Richard Wright, said: “The Government has listened to local people’s views and retained the ‘local’ in local government….

“In just about every consultation that’s ever taken place on local government reorganisation, local people have backed councils that remain close to communities.”

He added: “The evidence shows that smaller unitary councils are just as likely to perform well and to be financially sustainable as larger ones. The best way to ensure a strong focus on local growth and prevention – which will bring enduring economic and health benefits – is to have councils that are genuinely local.”

Amardeep Gill, partner at law firm Trowers & Hamlins, said the latest local government reorganisation decisions "signal a clear shift towards smaller, more localised unitary authorities, with government backing business cases that appear to prioritise place-based delivery over scale. We shall wait to see if this plays out amongst the areas where decisions are still outstanding.

"What’s particularly striking is the willingness to move below the previously indicated 500,000 population threshold, reflecting a more pragmatic, case-by-case approach."

He added: "At the same time, unresolved areas like Sussex highlight that structural reform remains as much about local confidence and viability as it is about central policy direction.

"For local government leaders, the message is clear: strong, evidence-led proposals with a compelling local narrative will shape the next phase of local government reorganisation.”

See also: Local Government Reorganisation 2026: Read Local Government Lawyer’s exclusive guide providing insight into the challenges that senior legal professionals are facing, alongside analysis of the work needed to ensure a smooth transition.