URL: https://rother.moderngov.co.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=1869

Decision Maker: Cabinet

Outcome: Recommendations Approved

Is Key Decision?: Yes

Is Callable In?: No

Purpose: To approve the Local Government Reorganisation Plan for East Sussex

Content: Consideration was given to the report of the Chief Executive on the Business Case for Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) in East Sussex.  The Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee had met on 22 September 2025, and full Council had met prior to this meeting and the views expressed at both meetings were taken into account by Cabinet when considering the recommendations before it.   The report, accompanying appendices and annexes detailed the background and collaborative work undertaken across the East Sussex Councils to create the Business Case that set out a strong and well-evidenced rationale for creating a single unitary authority across East Sussex.  It followed a comprehensive appraisal of three options, each assessed against the Government's criteria for local government reform. The options considered were:   ·         Option 1: One East Sussex – A single unitary authority covering the current East Sussex boundaries. ·         Option 2: Two Unitary Authorities – Dividing East Sussex into two new councils (geography undefined). ·         Option 3: Brighton & Hove Expansion – Brighton & Hove City Council (BHCC) expands into parts of Lewes District (with four proposed variants), while the remainder of East Sussex forms a separate unitary authority.   The options appraisal clearly demonstrated that the 'One East Sussex' model best aligned with the Government's criteria for local government reform.  It also reflected existing service delivery footprints, ensured minimal disruption to statutory services and established partnerships. Furthermore, it built on the strong foundation of collaboration already in place across the six councils, enabling a smoother transition and greater continuity in service provision.  The 'One East Sussex' proposal delivered operational efficiencies by consolidating services under a single authority, while also avoiding the significant costs and complexities associated with disaggregating County Council functions.   The extensive resident and stakeholder engagement showed a preference for a single unitary authority on the existing East Sussex footprint over all other proposals, although there were a significant number of views preferring no change to current arrangements together with concerns over potential loss of local representation.   Subject to the agreement of each council, the identical Business Case would be submitted to central Government by all East Sussex authorities.  It was noted that Wealden District Council had issued a press release on 12 September 2025 indicating that they had “paused their commitment” to the ‘One East Sussex’ model on financial grounds, and they had met earlier in the day and had resolved not to support it.    Cabinet considered the recommendations before it and the following points were made:   ·         Congratulations and thanks were extended to all the Leaders and officers across the six East Sussex Councils who had been involved in / collaborated on the LGR process and for developing a robust Business Case which was a good reflection of the views of residents across the county. ·         Several concerns were raised namely, the size of the ‘One East Sussex’ model (too large); transformation of services and potential service deterioration; casework increase for elected Members (double areas of responsibility); only one proposal was being submitted – residents deserved a choice; financial and remoteness risks; and loss of continuity, local representation, identity and area knowledge. ·         It was suggested that some statutory / primary services could be commissioned to other unitary authorities or devolved to the Mayoral authority. ·         At present, under East Sussex County Council, many statutory / primary services were being delivered successfully, and relevant cross-county partnerships were already in place to support these services. ·         It was recommended and agreed that the Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution should be made aware of the following issues regarding the district, namely, protection of the High Weald National Landscape; Sites of Special Scientific Interest; natural landscapes; and addressing deprivation. ·         Important that the local voice was heard – parish and town councils, local community and voluntary groups must be included within the set-up of the new Unitary Authority i.e. Neighbourhood Area Committees etc. ·         Some support was expressed for two smaller unitary authorities. ·         Some preference was also expressed for BHCC’s proposal which had been submitted only last week.  The Chief Executive advised that BHCC had not consulted any of the other East Sussex Councils regarding this proposal, despite numerous requests for them to participate in all discussions.  This proposal would subdivide Lewes District Council (break current boundaries).  Concern was expressed regarding its late submission.  The East Sussex Councils had not had time to consider this proposal / limited information was available.  It was understood that BHCC’s proposal would be submitted to the Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution, but it was unknown at this stage whether it would meet the Government’s stringent LGR criteria.   Councillor Bayliss moved and this was seconded by Councillor McCourt that the original recommendation, as detailed within the report, be amended as follows:   1)    both the Business Case for Local Government Reorganisation in East Sussex (attached) and the Brighton and Hove proposal be approved for submission to the Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution; 2)    the findings of the resident and stakeholder engagement which has informed the production of both reports be noted; and 3)    the Chief Executive be granted delegated authority, in consultation with the Leader and Deputy Leaders, to make any final amendments to the submissions and provide any additional correspondence with the submission.   The Motion being put forward was declared LOST (3 for / 6 against / 1 abstention).   It was noted that, following submission, the Government would undertake its own statutory consultation process, which was expected to run from November 2025 to January 2026.  The Government would then decide whether to implement the proposal, either in its original form or with modifications, or decide not to proceed with any proposal for the area.  Subject to approval, secondary legislation would enable the establishment of a Shadow Authority by May 2027 to oversee the transitional arrangements, and the new Unitary Council would then assume full responsibilities from April 2028.   Not all Cabinet Members were supportive of the ‘One East Sussex’ model and could not support the current proposal.  However, it was requested and agreed that the Chief Executive be granted delegated authority, in consultation with the Leader, to make any final amendments to the submission and provide additional comments and concerns raised by all Members in the preceding meetings by way of a side letter to accompany the submission.  It was agreed that the Deputy Leaders should also be consulted.  Despite the concerns, some of which were shared by all, the Leader was keen to support and approve the Business Case for LGR in East Sussex to ensure that Rother District Council had the opportunity to influence in a positive way, rather than have change implemented with little or no influence.   Councillor Oliver moved and this was seconded by Councillor Prochak that the original recommendation, as detailed within the report, with the inclusion of “and Deputy Leaders” in recommendation 3).   The Motion being put forward was declared CARRIED (7 for / 3 against).   RESOLVED: That:   1)    the Business Case for Local Government Reorganisation in East Sussex (attached) be approved for submission to the Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution;   2)    the findings of the resident and stakeholder engagement which has informed the production of the report be noted; and   3)    delegated authority be granted to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader and Deputy Leaders, to make any final amendments to the submission and provide any additional correspondence with the submission.   (Councillor Bayliss wished it to be formally recorded that she had voted against the resolution).

Date of Decision: September 24, 2025