The following Answer to an Urgent Question was given in the House of Commons on Monday 19 January.

“We are undertaking a once-in-a-generation reorganisation of local government. We have now received proposals from all areas, and from councils across the political spectrum. For decades, the two-tier council system, where it still exists, has made local government more complicated and more bureaucratic than it needs to be. This Government are bold enough to change that.

We will put in place single-tier councils everywhere by the end of this Parliament. That will mean faster local decisions to build homes and grow our towns and cities. It will bring services such as housing and social care under one roof, making them more effective and responsive to what communities need, and it will end the duplication that sees two sets of chief executives and two sets of councillors, which creates confusion and waste for local taxpayers. This is a proven model, and when we change to unitaries, we never hear calls for a return to two-tier local government.

On 18 December I updated the House on our plans to seek councils’ views on their elections in May. There is clear precedent for postponing elections due to local government reorganisation—the previous Government postponed many elections between 2019 and 2022 in order to smooth the transition to new councils. I therefore wrote to 63 councils undergoing reorganisations with elections in May to ask them if postponing their elections could release essential capacity to deliver reorganisation and to allow it to progress effectively. It is only right that we listen to councils when they express concerns about their capacity. Local leaders know their areas best and are best placed to judge their own capacity. As we have said, should a council say that it has no reason to delay, we will listen; if a council voices genuine concerns, we will take those seriously.

We are running a legally robust and fair process, and all representations are now being considered before decisions are made. The Secretary of State has written to four councils to ask for more clarity on their position by 10 am tomorrow. These councils are Essex county council, Norfolk county council, Oxford city council and Southampton city council. As I have said, no decisions have been made, but we want to make them as quickly as possible in order to give councils certainty, and we will update Parliament on those decisions in the usual way”.

My Lords, we have consistently asked the Government to share a definitive timescale for local government reorganisation and the establishment of new strategic mayoral authorities. Given that the imminence of this restructure is the sole reason that the Government have given for yet another delay in local elections, will they please, for the sake of local councils and their residents, share their timetable once and for all? If not, why not? Does it exist? How can they even begin to justify the cancellation of elections if it does not exist?

We are undertaking a once-in-a-generation reorganisation of local government. We have now received proposals on this issue from all areas and from councils across the political spectrum. It is only right that we listen to councils when they express concerns about their capacity. Local leaders know their areas best and are best placed to judge their own capacity.

On the noble Baroness’s question about the timescale, if she is referring to the timescale for the reorganisation, we have been very clear with local authorities about when we wanted their proposals in. The priority areas are moving ahead at pace now, and we are going out to consultation on the other areas in February. We will be come back to them before the Summer Recess to let them know of the Secretary of State’s decisions.

My Lords, it is disappointing that the Government appear set on disregarding the Electoral Commission’s views, which were that

“we do not think that capacity constraints are a legitimate reason for delaying long planned elections”.

However, as that seems to be the course that we are set on, can the Minister confirm that county councillors in places such as Sussex will have their term of office extended only by one year, and that the Government will not end up extending their term of office by two years until the new councils are due to come in? An extension of two years would mean that councillors elected for four years would end up serving a term of seven years. Can the Minister unequivocally rule out any possibility that councillors will end up serving seven-year terms?

On the noble Lord’s point about the Electoral Commission, we wrote to the Electoral Commission to notify it, and last week I met the commission to discuss the matter. On elections to county councils, our intention is to hold elections for the Shadow authorities in 2027.

My Lords, my question is asked in the light of the result of today’s Horsley By-election for Derbyshire County Council, in which the Green Party took the seat from Reform with 43% of the vote. Reform had 35% of the vote, the Conservatives 14% and Labour 4%. Given that the political landscape is clearly changing, and people’s political views are changing very fast, is it not right that every community in the land should have representatives who reflect their current political views?

If those elections are agreed for cancellation, the councillors who would have been due for election will already have an electoral mandate. The councils have decided whether they wish to go ahead with the elections. This is about the capacity of the councils; it is not a political issue.

My Lords, this Government have, rightly, condemned some of the ethical standards of the previous Government. They have prided themselves on setting up an Ethics and Integrity Commission, whose work includes, inter alia, ministerial standards, the Electoral Commission, and, above all, the Nolan principles, one of which is accountability. Which of these codes, commissioners for standards and so on has the ability and the right to enforce the Nolan principle of accountability and ensure that elections take place?

I agree with the noble Baroness about accountability and the Nolan principles. It is also the duty of councillors to make sure that they can provide the quality of public services that we expect of our councils. If they are struggling with capacity, it is for them to come forward as part of this process and let us know that that is the case.

My Lords, the Minister will perhaps recall 1968 and the GLC coming into consideration. To the best of my knowledge and memory, those procedures were terminated temporarily, and then local elections went ahead. The key point is accountability of those who have been carrying out services for the public over the last couple of years or whatever it is. There should be a judgment on that, which is what these elections are all about.

As I said, it was up to councils to determine how they responded. The vast Majority of places that were due to have elections will have them. Where councils have responded that they feel that it will cause them some difficulty as part of the reorganisation process, the Secretary of State will give due consideration to that.

My Lords, there has been all-party consensus on the postponement of elections in the past—for example, in World War II, for foot and mouth disease, and for Covid—but there was no such all-party agreement in this case, and no such extenuating circumstances can be justified. But, if there were, would it not be right for Parliament to have a say on whether elections can be postponed?

There is clear precedent for postponing local elections where local government reorganisations are in progress. It can prevent costly and distracting elections for short-term posts that may soon be abolished. For example, between 2019 and 2022, the previous Government postponed elections in Buckinghamshire, Cumbria, North Yorkshire, Northamptonshire, Somerset, and Weymouth and Portland. This responsibility has been delegated by Parliament to the Secretary of State.

My Lords, on Monday at 5.38 pm, the Minister gave details of letters that had been sent to four councils—Norfolk, Essex, Southampton and Oxford—and said that they were expected to reply by 10 am the next day, indicating their views. The Minister was asked just now about the timetable that is being followed. Given that we are now well beyond the limited timetable that was given to those four councils, why is it not possible for the Government to give a timetable on which they will take a decision for those who are entitled to a vote on 7 May?

The Secretary of State wrote to four councils following the responses that came in on 15 January because it was not clear from their responses whether they were requesting a postponement. That is why there was a short-term deadline for them to reply on that specific issue. The Secretary of State is now considering all the views provided before he makes the final decision, and he will make that decision as quickly as possible. He is very aware of the timetable needed for elections.

Does the Minister agree that there seems to be some form of collective amnesia on the Benches opposite? I well recall, as an employee of the Greater London Council, that the 1985 local elections in Greater London, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Merseyside, the West Midlands, et cetera were all cancelled for the political convenience of the Government at the time, without particular reference to democracy. They just believed that they were in the right in getting rid of those councils, and that was simply it.

My noble friend is quite right to say that there is a precedent for cancelling elections. I have been involved with local government for a very long time. At many times in the past, there has been tinkering at the edges of reorganising local government. If we do not reorganise local government, it will not be sustainable for the future. This is the biggest reorganisation of local government for over 50 years. We have asked the councils, if they wish to postpone their elections, to let us know about that. We are now considering their responses.

My Lords, later today, the House will debate the children Bill, which proposes an enormous increase in the duties and responsibilities of local authorities. How will postponement of elections help the preparation for those changes, given that they will be working while hoping, but not knowing, that the structures necessary for them to be implemented will exist?

As the process of reorganisation and devolution has gone forward, a key aspect that the department has focused on with our colleagues in local government has been a smooth transition of key public services such as children’s services. We are reassuring ourselves as we go through that process that all the areas where reorganisation is taking place have a clear plan for the transition of their service from one organisational structure to another.