East Surrey Council Leaders Also Want to Stay ‘On Track’ With Reorganisation Programme

Published on: 9 Sep, 2026
Updated on: 9 Sep, 2026

Cllr Steve Wotton East Surrey Shadow Authority

By James Moules

local democracy reporter

East Surrey’s shadow council leader has insisted that the county’s council restructure remains “on track” after the government hit pause on planned reforms following new legal advice.

His view is similar to that of his party colleague Cllr Paul Follows, leader of the Shadow West Surrey Council.

The government announced yesterday a halt in the reorganisation of two-tier councils across England, which would have seen scores of county and district councils abolished in favour of larger unitary authorities.

Housing Secretary Angela Rayner told MPs: “In light of legal advice, I want to satisfy myself firstly that the right process is in place, that it is robust, and of course complies with the law.”

However, Surrey’s move towards two new unitary councils in East and West Surrey is still set to go ahead.

Local Goverment Reorgansation Timeline. Source – Local Government Information Unit

As the first in a tranche of local authorities to undergo restructuring, Surrey already elected its two shadow authorities earlier this year – meaning the changes will still go ahead.

East Surrey council leader Cllr Steve Wotton (Lib Dem, Horley West , Salfords & Sidlow) said: “Government has been clear that Surrey’s local government reorganisation programme remains on track.

“Councils across Surrey have worked at pace to develop robust proposals that will deliver long-term benefits for residents, businesses and communities.

“We remain confident that reorganisation will create stronger, more sustainable local government and help us deliver better outcomes for local people.”

The move away from two-tier councils, which have separate county and district councils responsible for different services, has been a key reform pushed for by the Labour government.

Advocates believe that scrapping the different tiers of council will improve efficiency and eliminate duplication, although critics worry that the loss of smaller district councils will give remote communities less of a voice.

East Surrey opposition leader Cllr David Lewis (Con, Cobham & Oxshott South) told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS): “The local government reorganisation process in Surrey is now well advanced.

“Surrey residents have already had their say, electing representatives to the new East and West Surrey shadow authorities in May, and significant work is underway to ensure both authorities are fully prepared to serve residents from day one in April next year.”

He added: “Having committed to reorganisation, it is vital that the Government honours its promise on devolution. The creation of a Foundation Strategic Authority next April should pave the way for a directly elected Surrey Mayor in 2028, bringing greater powers, investment and local accountability to Surrey.”

Zöe Franklin MP

Guildford MP Zöe Franklin, who is also the Liberal Democrats’ local government spokesperson, challenged Angela Rayner to publish the legal advice that had led to the pause.

She told the House of Commons yesterday: “In my own area of Surrey, councils were forced down a reorganisation route that now appears to be effectively abandoned by the government and questionable on a legal basis.”

Ms Rayner responded: “It is a long-standing principle that the Government does not publish or comment on legal advice.”

Elections to Surrey’s two shadow authorities took place in May – which are now tasked with setting up the new councils in time for next April, when they fully assume responsibility for local government in the area.

A Reform UK Surrey spokesperson told the LDRS: “The government’s decision to halt and review local government reorganisation across significant parts of England raises serious questions about why Surrey residents are being denied the same level of scrutiny.”

They added: “Surrey residents deserve to know that this once-in-a-generation change is being undertaken for their benefit, rather than simply because the process has progressed too far for government to reconsider it.”