People are being asked to share their views on how councils should be reorganised across Sussex.
The government wants every part of the country to be served by unitary councils which will mean abolishing district councils in places such as East and West Sussex.
Currently, Brighton and Hove City Council is the only unitary council in Sussex.
The wider area has two county councils as part of a two-tier system, with 12 districts although some of the district councils are known as boroughs, such as Worthing Borough Council.
The government is expected to decide the outcome of the shake up next year, with elections to the new unitary councils due to take place in May 2027.
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government outlined four options – based on proposals submitted by councils in Sussex including Brighton and Hove City Council. The consultation ends on Sunday 11 January.
The consultation includes 52 questions overall, with each proposal containing a link to the relevant business case that was sent to the government.
East Sussex County Council submitted a proposal jointly with Lewes District Council, Eastbourne Borough Council, Hastings Borough Council and Rother District Council for two unitary councils.
One would serve the existing East Sussex County Council area and Brighton and Hove City Council would serve an unchanged area.
The other local authority in East Sussex, Wealden District Council, did not submit a proposal.
Brighton and Hove City Council proposed the creation of five unitary councils across the whole of Sussex, with some of the existing districts having to be split
- Brighton and Hove plus four wards and one parish from Lewes (East Saltdean, Telscombe Cliffs, Peacehaven and Falmer)
- Eastbourne, Hastings, Rother plus five wards from Lewes and nine wards from Wealden
- Mid Sussex plus 34 wards from Wealden and 10 wards from Lewes
- Chichester, Crawley and Horsham
- Adur, Arun and Worthing
West Sussex County Council proposed one unitary council to serve its existing area while the seven district councils in West Sussex proposed two unitary councils.
The West Sussex districts proposed
- Adur, Arun, Chichester and Worthing
- Crawley, Horsham, and Mid Sussex
Each question in the consultation has a drop-down menu offering responders answers ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree as well as don’t know.
There are also free text boxes to allow people to give reasons for their answers.
To see the consultation or to take part, click here.
The Ministerial statement https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-11-19/debates/25111932000018/LocalGovernmentUnitaryCouncils
Has this in it
“Some proposals were accompanied by requests for boundary change, whereby existing districts would be split; these will require careful consideration.”
Since some of the proposals (and especially the B&H ones) divide some councils up I’ll stick my necout and say that those proposals won’t happen as it complicates the move to the new structures (as well as costing time and money to sort out)
[as an aside the only difference between a borough and a district council is that a Borough has a civic Mayor whereas a district council has a Chair. The councils have the same functions]
The present system works very well with moving to so called unitary councils would be expensive to implement and would be more beneficial for the government /Labour party in future elections than it’s residents, in the long run it would cost those living in these areas higher council tax to pay into councils with spending going into the red.
Personally I appose this proposal.
Just to add one quick clarification, Bill. Brighton & Hove is actually already a unitary council and has been since 1997. So nothing in the proposals would change the basic structure here. Historically, we’ve not seen political swings in other area once they’ve transitioned either.
I think it is worth pointing out that NAO reviews of other areas that have transitions all show broadly the same pattern. Higher one-off transition costs (which government is supplying funding for), but lower running costs afterwards because you cut duplication in management, commissioning, legal, HR, IT and procurement.
It’s a very real concern for a lot of people though, and the information is not easily accessible. For me, the evidence base points to a bold, but positive outcome, so I’m for it, personally.