Essex, a county with a rich history and a patchwork of local councils, is on the brink of the most dramatic overhaul of its local government in decades. On September 14, 2025, proposals were published that would abolish all fifteen of its existing councils—currently a blend of county, district, and unitary authorities—and replace them with a handful of powerful new bodies called unitary authorities. These new authorities would be responsible for providing every local service, from bin collection and house building to social care and infrastructure. The aim? To streamline governance, cut costs, and, perhaps most contentiously, redraw the political map of Essex.
This week, councillors across Essex are set to debate the plans before formal business cases are submitted to the government later in the month. The conversations are expected to be lively, reflecting the high stakes and deep divisions over the future of local democracy in the county.
At the heart of the debate are several competing visions for how Essex should be governed. According to reporting by BBC, the plan with the broadest support comes from Southend-on-Sea City Council, which proposes replacing the current fifteen councils with five all-purpose unitary authorities. This proposal is backed by most Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs, ten council leaders (including independents), and even the Conservative leader of Harlow Council—a rare moment of cross-party consensus in local politics.
The five proposed authorities would be grouped as follows: South West (Basildon, Thurrock), South East (Southend, Rochford, Castle Point), West (Harlow, Epping Forest, Uttlesford), Mid (Chelmsford, Brentwood, Maldon), and North East (Colchester, Braintree, Tendring). Each would serve between 326,000 and 510,000 residents, a size the plan’s authors say "reflects real communities" and "travel-to-work patterns." They argue that five super councils would achieve "economies of scale while maintaining strong local representation," and that trimming fifteen councils down to five would be a smoother and cheaper transition than, say, reducing to three.
The financial case is compelling. Analysis by the accountancy firm Grant Thornton projects that the five-unitary model would bring a net benefit of £35 million by 2032-33. The report goes further, stating that "earlier intervention, prevention and pooled commissioning under a five-authority system could eliminate current deficits and achieve substantial annual saving" in adult social care. There’s also a social argument: the authors claim that if there were fewer than five councils, deprived communities like Jaywick and Clacton's Pier Ward "will struggle for representation over too wide a region."
But not everyone is convinced. Essex County Council, controlled by the Conservatives, has put forward a rival plan for just three unitary authorities: North (Colchester, Tendring, Braintree, Uttlesford), Mid (Chelmsford, Harlow, Epping Forest, Brentwood, Maldon), and South (Southend, Basildon, Thurrock, Castle Point, Rochford). The council’s report is blunt, stating that "bureaucracy, duplication and inefficiencies built into the two-tier system of [local] government are holding us back." They believe that delivering "housing, economic growth and infrastructure is likely to be successful across all three unitary areas."
The three-council model would reduce the number of councillors from 700 to 284 and, according to Essex County Council, could achieve more than £380 million in savings by 2040. Consultancy firm PwC’s modeling supports this, suggesting a net benefit of £86 million. The report also claims that the number of social care departments would not increase and that transition costs would be lower with fewer authorities.
Meanwhile, both Thurrock and Rochford Councils have floated alternative plans for four-unitary models, though neither has gained much traction elsewhere. Thurrock’s version, for example, is designed to better reflect transport and economic connections, while Rochford’s offers a different division of the county. PwC’s analysis suggests that either four-unitary model could yield a net financial benefit of £15.6 million after seven years—a more modest return than the three- or five-council options.
Some options, however, are firmly off the table. There are no serious proposals for a single Essex council, which would serve a staggering 1.9 million people—three times the size of England’s largest non-metropolitan council. Nor is a two-council model being considered; Essex County Council argues that such a move "would weaken accountability and local identity" and would simply be "too large."
Of course, politics is never far from the surface. As BBC analysis notes, Essex has long been a Conservative stronghold, with the Tories dominating both the county council and Essex-wide elections for police, fire, and crime commissioner for more than two decades. The prevailing theory is that the fewer and larger the new unitary authorities, the more likely the Conservatives are to retain control. Conversely, a greater number of smaller councils would favor Labour, the Liberal Democrats, and independent-led coalitions. This political calculus helps explain why Conservatives generally support the three-council model, while their opponents favor five.
But the political winds in Essex are shifting. Recent opinion polls and local election results show a surge in support for Reform UK, led by Clacton MP Nigel Farage. This unpredictability means that, regardless of how the county is carved up, the outcome of future elections is far from certain. As the BBC puts it, "predicting the outcome of future elections is arguably a folly."
One particularly thorny issue is Thurrock’s debt, which is expected to rise above £1 billion in 2026. Unlike other Essex councils, whose debts are backed by assets, Thurrock’s financial woes stem from failed investments. It’s widely acknowledged by Essex councils and the government that this debt can’t be managed locally. Essex County Council’s proposal notes, "We are seeking early confirmation of the continuing support the government will provide and welcome ongoing discussions about how the residual debt may be supported." Local councillors say they do not expect any new authority that includes Thurrock to be burdened by the existing debt, but the government has yet to make a formal announcement.
In the coming weeks, as these proposals are debated and refined, the people of Essex will be watching closely. The decisions made now will shape not just the delivery of vital local services, but the very fabric of local democracy for years to come. Whether Essex ends up with three, four, or five super councils—or something else entirely—one thing is clear: the county’s political landscape is about to change in ways that will be felt for generations.
