Councillors who asked to cancel elections now forced to face electorate

A government u-turn leaves local authorities scrabbling to be ready for elections on 7 May

Hello and welcome to The Lancashire Lead.

Lancashire’s Labour leaders must be scratching their heads wondering how they’ve ended up fighting an election from the weakest possible position after the government announced all councils will contest elections in 2026.

It’s hard to imagine how this could’ve been traversed more catastrophically. The government asked councils if they wanted to cancel elections - leaving those leaders to take responsibility for that decision. Then, when their feelings are public, the rug is pulled and the door is open for those leaders to be declared anti-democracy.

There’s more nuance to the entire farce than that. Many cited the pressures of local government reorganisation, the fact that it will likely mean elections will take place in both 2026 and 2027 when turnout is already low for local elections and the precedent set by thoroughly uncontroversial cancellations elsewhere in the UK when reorganisation is taking place.

But politics is different today and voices that were once fringe are now mainstream. One only needs to look at the Gorton and Denton by-election odds to see that’s the case.

Nationally, Nigel Farage is taking the credit for the decision after his High Court legal challenge appeared to be factor that forced the government u-turn. But locally, campaigners like Reform UK’s Jemma Rushe, who organised a protest against the cancellation in Preston, can feel pleased with the stance they took.

Labour was already entering these local elections on the back foot. National politics often rules these elections more than what any party is doing locally. Even those leaders and members who think they are doing a good job - many will be, others less so - will feel they’re about to be punished due to the perception of Keir Starmer’s record in government.

But election time is good for The Lancashire Lead - it’s why we’re here. And there are seven boroughs for us to get stuck into between now and May.

Lancashire briefing

🏗️ New plans for the Eden Project Morecambe with two main shell-shaped domes, themed gardens, sea walls and a causeway entrance have been approved by Lancaster City Council. Eden Project Morecambe Ltd’s updated plan reflects two years of discussions and changing factors in the £100million scheme, including a backdrop of rising costs and feedback from residents and councillors. Permission was first given in 2022 for a four-dome design but Eden recently wanted permission to vary some aspects. The latest plan was backed by city councillors on the planning committee in Morecambe this week. Speaking there, Conservative Cllr Keith Budden said: “I was chairman of the planning committee years ago when the original Eden Project plan came through. There was a feeling of euphoria. And back then, we thought we might actually be sitting in the Eden Project now, that it would be open. “But it is making progress and I think the will is there. Councillors are talking-up the Eden Project and there are Eden representatives here at the meeting today, which is good. So it’s not a case of ‘if’. This will happen.”

💉 Parents across Lancashire are being reminded to ensure that their children’s measles vaccinations are up-to-date after an outbreak of the potentially fatal disease in London. Sixty children have been infected and 15 of them hospitalised in the borough of Enfield in the capital. While Lancashire has a higher take-up rate of the two-dose measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) jab than the England average – and far higher than in Enfield – it remains below the 95 percent coverage level recommended by the World Health Organisation. According to the latest data from the UK Health Security Agency, 88.6 percent of five-year-olds in the Lancashire County Council area had had both doses during 2024-2025, compared to 83.7 percent across England. The figures for the Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwen areas were 87.4 percent and 83.7 percent, respectively.

🏠 Controversial plans for 200 homes on greenfield land on the edge of a Lancaster village have been refused. Councillors on Lancaster City Council’s planning committee have rejected an application from Wrenman Strategic Land Ltd, which wanted outline permission for up to 200 homes on land west of Slyne Road at Bolton Le Sands. The application had prompted more than 600 objections to Lancaster City Council and dozens of objectors attended Monday’s planning committee meeting in Morecambe (February 16). Councillors said the plan threatened urban sprawl in the green belt and some were unhappy with the land being viewed as ‘grey belt’, a newer planning term for land deemed less important for farming, environmental or landscape reasons, and potentially suited for new development. They insisted it was good quality farmland and vital ‘green lung’ for the area. More on this and similar developments in a future edition of The Lancashire Lead.

---

Councillors who asked to cancel elections now forced to face electorate

Elections count in 2019

By Luke Beardsworth and Paul Faulkner

Political leaders across Lancashire are readying their troops to fight local elections that it appeared were never going to happen.

It comes after the government staged a dramatic U-turn over a previous decision to scrap electoral contests that were due to take place in seven districts – Blackburn with Darwen, Burnley, Chorley, Hyndburn, Pendle, Preston and West Lancashire – on 7 May.

Having resolved last month that voting would not proceed as planned – amid claims that councils would struggle both to stage elections and prepare for a shake-up that will see all 15 main authorities in Lancashire abolished and replaced in 2028 – local government secretary Steve Reed backtracked on Monday and reinstated the polls.

The move followed a legal challenge from Reform UK which was due to be heard at the High Court later this week, as the party attempted to overturn the decision taken to axe elections in 30 council areas across England because ‘local government reorganisation’ (LGR) was taking place in each of them.

Reed said the change of mind followed “recent legal advice”.

Speaking on behalf of Reform across Lancashire, Stephen Atkinson – the party’s leader on Lancashire County Council, which is not due to hold elections this year – branded the original cancellation plan “a disgrace”.

He said: “There should be no taxation without representation. Steve Reed should explain why he allowed this to happen – he should publish the legal advice in full and if his actions [were] unlawful, he should consider his position.

“This is a complete victory for Reform – Reform guaranteed democracy.

“Councillors who voted to stop democracy will now have to face the electorate,“ said County Cllr Atkinson, who had previously written to the Secretary of State urging him not to interfere in the election schedule.

Late last year, the government gave any council with an election scheduled for this May – and whose days were numbered because of the forthcoming LGR changes – the chance to request that their polls were “postponed”, pending elections to so-called’ shadow’ versions of the replacement councils, due to be held in May 2027. They invited the authorities to outline any concerns they had about their capacity to hold elections this year and carry out the work needed for LGR.

Requests were submitted – and ultimately accepted by the government – in relation to all seven Lancashire councils with elections scheduled for May 2026, against the backdrop of varying degrees of local political controversy.

In the cases of Blackburn with Darwen, Burnley, Chorley, Hyndburn, Pendle and Preston, submissions were made on behalf of the authorities themselves after majority or unanimous votes of their full councils or cabinets. However, in West Lancashire, the call came from the ruling Labour group alone, as no council or cabinet vote was held.

Reed said last month that he had made his decision after “a comprehensive consideration of all the evidence available to me”.

He added: “By delaying these elections, I am confident that we will be releasing essential capacity within councils to allow [councils] teams to focus their full energy on the complex reorganisation process, while also addressing concerns regarding the cost of holding elections for bodies that will soon cease to exist.”

However, those elections will now go ahead in Lancashire as they were previously intended, with one in three seats on each of the local authorities – usually one in each ward – being contested.

No elections were due to take place this year in the Blackpool, Fylde, Lancaster, Ribble Valley, Rossendale, South Ribble and Wyre council areas.

The ruling Labour group’s cabinet at Preston City Council had requested a change to the election timetable ahead of LGR, which council leader Matthew Brown said was “proportionate” to ensure the necessary focus on the complexity of the shake-up process.

Responding to the government’s reversal, he told The Lancashire Lead: “From a Preston Labour perspective, we are pleased this will at least bring speculation to an end.

“We have been looking to the future, as next May we will have new unitary authorities with budgets exceeding £500m – and a whole host of powers not available to district authorities. I hope opposition parties will outline a vision of the future in their manifestos.

“We are looking forward to putting our case to the people of Preston [regarding] that future vision. We are up for the fight and looking forward to challenging the populist right politics of Reform UK, especially, who are seeking to divide our communities here in Preston.”

That was a rosier picture than his deputy leader Cllr Martyn Rawlinson, who fumed online: “I did say I wasn’t bothered whether elections went ahead or not, but this is just treating councillors with contempt yet again.”