Nearly ten million voters in England could see their right to participate in local democracy put on hold next year, as the government considers delaying elections in dozens of councils undergoing a sweeping reorganisation. The move has sparked outrage from opposition parties, electoral watchdogs, and civil rights campaigners, all warning that postponements risk undermining public trust and democratic principles at a pivotal political moment.
The controversy erupted after Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey wrote to the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) on December 22, 2025, urging an urgent investigation into the government’s approach. In his letter, Sir Ed didn’t mince words: “Nearly ten million people could see their democratic rights ripped away,” he wrote, calling the government’s actions “cavalier” and suggesting they were in clear breach of Article 3 of the first protocol of the Human Rights Act, which guarantees the right to free elections. He pressed the EHRC to “confirm your plans to investigate the government’s cavalier approach to our elections,” as reported by Sky News and the BBC.
The government’s plan stems from an ambitious overhaul of England’s local government structure, the largest in half a century. The shake-up would eliminate the traditional two-tier system of district and county councils, replacing them with new unitary authorities by 2028. Many of these new bodies would be led by directly elected mayors, a move ministers say will widen devolution and give local leaders more control over their communities. But as part of this transition, ministers have proposed postponing local elections in councils affected by the reforms—if those councils request it—raising alarms about the impact on democratic accountability.
Local Government Minister Alison McGovern announced that all 63 councils affected by the reorganisation and scheduled to hold elections in May 2026 had been asked to indicate by January 15 whether they required a delay. “Should a council say they have no reason for postponement, then we will listen to them,” McGovern wrote in a ministerial statement. “But if a council voices genuine concerns about its capacity, then we will take these concerns seriously. To that end, the secretary of state is only minded to make an order to postpone elections for one year for those councils that raise capacity concerns.”
So far, at least five councils—including Blackburn with Darwen (Labour), Chorley (Labour), East Sussex (Conservative minority), Hastings (Green minority), and West Sussex (Conservative)—have confirmed they will request postponements, according to Sky News. Other councils are expected to make decisions in the new year, ahead of the government’s deadline. The government has stressed that any delay would be “temporary, lawful and subject to clear statutory safeguards,” insisting that councils must “demonstrate exceptional reasons and ministers will scrutinise every case carefully,” as Downing Street told the BBC.
But the backlash has been swift and fierce. The Electoral Commission, the independent body overseeing UK elections, has warned that “capacity constraints aren’t a legitimate reason for delaying long planned elections,” and that such moves risk “damaging public confidence.” The watchdog’s chief executive, Vijay Rangarajan, went further, telling the BBC there was “a clear conflict of interest in asking existing councils to decide how long it will be before they are answerable to voters.”
Opposition parties have echoed these concerns. Reform UK’s head of policy, Zia Yusuf, called the proposed delays “extremely dangerous” and announced plans to try to force a parliamentary vote on the issue. The party is preparing to table a Private Members’ Bill to ensure the elections go ahead in May 2026, although it is considered unlikely to pass. Yusuf argued, “There are going to be thousands of Tory councillors who, as far as we’re concerned, are illegitimately squatting in their posts—not giving voters the right to vote them out.” He also accused Labour and the Conservatives of colluding to “rob millions of people in this country of their vote for the second year running.”
Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson Lisa Smart suggested the delays could be a political stitch-up, saying on BBC Radio Four’s Today programme, “It’s hard to see how this is as anything other than an attempt to stitch things up by people who don’t think they’re going to do a lot of winning in May.” She pointed out that the postponements could result in some councillors serving for as long as seven years without facing voters. “People should have a say on who elects them—it can’t possibly be right that councillors are elected—in some cases—for what’s looking like a seven-year term.”
The political stakes are high. The May 2026 elections are expected to be a crucial test for both Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, with the results potentially influencing leadership challenges within their parties. Of the 63 councils asked about delays, Labour holds a majority in 18, the Conservatives in nine, and the Liberal Democrats in seven. The Conservatives are defending the largest number of seats—610, more than a quarter of those up for re-election. As BBC analysis notes, the outcome could shift the balance of power across England’s local government landscape.
Some councils, for their part, have expressed genuine concerns about the logistics and costs of holding elections for positions that may soon be abolished. The Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government argued that “these are exceptional circumstances where councils have told us they’re struggling to prepare for resource-intensive elections to councils that will shortly be abolished, while also reorganising into more efficient authorities that can better serve local residents.” The ministry also pointed to precedent, saying similar postponements occurred during reorganisations in 2019 and 2022.
Still, critics aren’t convinced. Green Party peer Baroness Jenny Jones claimed the decision offered “Labour-run councils an opportunity to avoid meltdown at the polls” and would “prop up tired and stale Conservative administrations.” Even within the Conservative Party, there’s division: some Tories have accused the government of being “scared of the voters,” while leader Kemi Badenoch said, “We need to listen to what they are saying, but in my view we should just have all these elections and be done with it.”
For now, the fate of millions of voters hangs in the balance as the government awaits responses from the affected councils. With the January 15 deadline fast approaching and political tensions running high, the coming weeks will be decisive for the future of local democracy in England. Whether the EHRC launches a formal investigation, and whether ministers heed the warnings from watchdogs and opposition parties, could shape not just the next election, but the very fabric of English local governance for years to come.
