Title

Sussex leaders are to demand ministers fully explain why they have delayed a final reorganisation decision, or they will consider launching a judicial review.Local government secretary Steve Reed said last month he had not reached a decision ‘due to concerns regarding all four of the proposals I received' and was ‘considering modifications' [see map] that could require further consultation.Local government secretary Steve Reed's reorganisation proposalsReed has suggested four unitary councils for Sussex, including modifying the West Sussex proposal to include Chichester DC with the proposed inland unitary and changing both the East Sussex and Brighton and Hove proposals.He said there would be a ‘further technical consultation', but views will only be invited from councils and public sector partners instead of residents.The Government is expected to decide in the summer, with Reed remaining committed to unitaries going live in April 2028.West Sussex CC leader Paul Marshall told The MJ: ‘We spent nine months doing a business case. Being quite blunt, I think there was a last-minute discussion with some of the Labour MPs on the coast. I'm not against unitaries, but we've done all this work and it just stinks of geopolitical alignment and is not based on the devolution White Paper.‘We just can't understand what their rationale is. The first thing we're going to do is tackle their data and conclusions. Leaders will challenge the Government on the rationale and ask why it has ignored evidence – and, if it doesn't substantiate, we will consider a judicial review.'Lewes DC leader Zoe Nicholson said the Government's intervention was ‘boggling' and ‘clearly gerrymandering'.She added: ‘People are absolutely furious and we've come out fighting. We're not taking it lying down. We are looking at all legal ways at our disposal.'Another Sussex source said: ‘All that wasted time and resource just to come up with their own options to benefit themselves. It's a massive political game and it stinks.'Writing for the LGiU think-tank, Laura Hughes, an experienced public sector lawyer at Browne Jacobson, said: ‘The bar for a case to be arguable is relatively low, and, in circumstances where there is a high profile and high levels of political involvement, the court often does give permission. If a case proceeds to a full hearing, it inevitably takes time to be heard in court, even if it is expedited. The effect of a judicial review, if it is successful, is so significant (undoing the decisions which have been taken) that people do not want to take action to implement the decision under challenge while a claim is in process.‘When applied to a timetable that is already very tight, any freezing impact while a claim is in train would seriously threaten delivery on the same timescales.'The frustrated deputy leader of Hastings BC, Julia Hilton, said she had been left in ‘disbelief' by the ministerial delay.However, she said she thought that – in light of a judicial review of reorganisation plans in Dorset being refused by the High Court in 2018 – that legal proceedings would be a ‘waste of time and money'.The developments in Sussex have come as more than 9,000 people have signed a petition against the Government's plans to break up New Forest DC as part of Hampshire's reorganisation.Those behind the petition have called on New Forest DC and Test Valley BC to collaborate and seek legal advice on a possible judicial review.

Title

POLICY AND POLITICS

EXCLUSIVE: Ministers face legal threat as furious Sussex leaders demand answers on reorganisation delay

By Dan Peters | 09 April 2026

Popular articles by Dan Peters

SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING

Popular articles by Dan Peters