County councils urge PM to reveal rationale for reorganisation decisions

The letter, facilitated by the County Councils Network (CCN), also expresses concern about the recent decisions on council reorganisation, claiming they do not align with the original criteria.

It said that county councils engaged in the process in “good faith" and developed proposals in line with the Government's criteria, which were "rooted in scale, sustainability and service resilience, while avoiding unnecessary fragmentation and complex boundary changes".

It added: "We did so on the understanding that evidence would be robustly and consistently assessed against the Government’s own criteria.

"Instead, the decisions on March 25th 2026 to create 15 new unitary councils across four areas have set in train an experimental approach to reorganisation that bears all the hallmarks of a set of short-term political choices, not a coherent or consistent application of the government’s own framework."

The letter claimed that the Government departed from its statutory criteria without “clear, transparent reasoning", adding that the published supporting evidence was "deeply troubling and raises serious doubts over the robustness of the decisions taken".

"Credibility and trust in the process is further eroded by the imposition of a top-down proposal in Sussex, previously rejected by local authorities," it added.

According to the letter, the Government has refused to disclose the departmental analysis that would justify how ministers could be satisfied that the proposals can be delivered on a sustainable financial basis.

It also "strongly" questioned whether ministers had fully and sufficiently evaluated proposals against the public service criterion.

Elsewhere, the letter highlighted concerns among senior council staff regarding capacity of the system to deliver "safe and legal services" to the timetable proposed.

It called on the Government to immediately disclose the evidence and departmental analysis relating to reorganisation decision that have already been taken, stating that it is "unreasonable" to ask administrations to respond to the decisions without having sight of the analysis behind the selection.

The letter continued: "For the remaining areas awaiting decisions, if this pattern of large-scale fragmentation and complex boundary change, at odds with the government criteria, is repeated, this will create a pattern of reform that is more costly, less stable and less effective than the current two-tier system."

The councils argue that the creation of smaller, fragmented unitary authorities will increase severe financial pressures, jeopardise the delivery of essential adult and children’s services and require ‘hundreds of millions of central government funding to support transition’. As a result, they warn that some services may not be functioning on day one of these new councils coming into inception in April 2028:

The letter was endorsed by cross-party members of CCN’s management committee. All county councils and the CCN unitary member, North Lincolnshire, impacted by the March decisions and those due be decided on in July, were invited to sign the letter based on their local circumstances. In total, 16 out of those councils signed the letter.

An MHCLG spokesperson said: “We don’t recognise these figures. In fact, local government reorganisation will save taxpayers’ money by streamlining services and boosting regional growth so we can put more cash in peoples’ pockets.

“Our plans will make public services like social care work better for local people, alongside speeding up the construction of vital new homes and infrastructure.”

The correspondence comes as the Government is facing at least four potential judicial review challenges over reorganisation.

Essex County Council, Hampshire County Council, Suffolk County Council and Norfolk County Council have each sent pre-action protocol letters to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government about the plans in their areas.

It is understood that Essex and Suffolk’s pre-action letters contained arguments that the Government departed from its own criteria when making its decisions. The grounds threatened by Hampshire and Norfolk are not currently known.

New Forest District Council this week decided against pursuing a judicial review challenge, after receiving advice that it would fail.

Adam Carey