MP accused the government of acting like “dictators” by postponing local elections in Southern England, denying 5.5 million voters the chance to have their say. The debate centered on the government’s decision to cancel upcoming council elections, with critics warning of a “serious risk” to democracy.
“Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker,” the MP began. “Dictators cancel elections—not democracies. Yet here we are, with 5.5 million voters in Southern England being denied the right to pass judgment on the performance of their councillors over the last four years.”
The MP pointed out that the decision to cancel the elections could have political motivations, particularly in areas where Reform UK is expected to perform well. “Interestingly, these cancellations are happening in areas where Reform UK is predicted to do rather well. Coincidence? I think not.”
The MP also criticized the Secretary of State for Local Government, highlighting the lack of clarity about what will replace the cancelled elections. “The Secretary of State has admitted she doesn’t even know what will replace these elections. This raises a serious risk that things won’t be ready in 12 months’ time. So, can the Secretary of State be crystal clear: will these elections be delayed another year, or will they go ahead in May 2026?”
The Secretary of State responded by defending the government’s decision, insisting it was not about cancelling democracy but about reorganizing local government structures. “Madame Deputy Speaker, when the member talks about dictators, let’s not forget that the leader of Reform UK hasn’t faced an election to secure his leadership position,” she said, firing back at the MP.
She went on to explain the rationale behind the decision. “We’re not cancelling elections. This is about reorganization and further devolution. People in these local areas will get more powers, which is exactly what we promised in our manifesto. This government is delivering on its promises.”
The Secretary of State also emphasized that this kind of reorganization is not unprecedented. “This isn’t something new or unique. It’s been done before, and it’s about making sure local governments are better equipped to serve their communities.”
However, the MP remained unconvinced, arguing that the postponement undermines trust in the democratic process. “People deserve the right to vote, to hold their representatives accountable. Delaying these elections without a clear plan is not just unfair—it’s undemocratic.”
The exchange highlighted growing tensions over the government’s approach to local democracy, with critics accusing it of sidelining voters while supporters argue the changes will lead to stronger, more empowered local governments. As the debate continues, one thing is clear: the question of who gets to have a say—and when—is far from settled.
