Local Government Reorganisation decision for Kent to have four unitary authorities

By Local Democracy Reporter Simon Finlay

Thanet’s preferred option for Local Government Reorganisation has been chosen by government, it has been revealed today (July 16).

Kent will be carved up into four new unitary authorities once the 14 existing councils abolish themselves in the coming months.

The Local Democracy Reporting Service understands Housing, Communities and Local Government Secretary Steve Reed has chosen an option, known as 4b, which comprises new authorities in the north, west, mid/south Kent and east.

Fourteen leaders put forward five options for the government to choose from, based on geography and population size and growth.

Option 4b would be made up of: Dartford, Gravesham and Medway in the north; Sevenoaks, Tonbridge and Malling, Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells in the west; Swale, Ashford and Folkestone and Hythe in the middle of Kent and Canterbury, Thanet and Dover in the east.

New system

In the short-term, key services such as bin collections, tips, libraries, Highways and social care, will stay the same for residents but work will now start on finding the most effective way to run them under the new system.

The announcement ends months of speculation and allows senior council officers and political leaders to manage the transfer into the geographical configurations.

It amounts to the biggest change in local government in Kent for more than half a century, erasing the two-tier system.

For decades, borough and district councils provided some services, such as bin-collecting, and the larger Kent County Council (KCC) handled bigger ones such as roads, education and social care.

But observers noted that the system often caused disconnection and division as different tiers favoured their own agendas.

Medway Council was felt to be too small a unitary council to survive on its own.

Cllr Rick Everitt, Leader of Thanet District Council, said: “Thanet councillors have overwhelmingly supported plans for local government reorganisation and devolution in Kent, so I am pleased that a decision has been made and that we can now move forward.

“This four unitary model for the county was always our preferred option and I am pleased that government has listened and agreed that it is the best option. It is the right compromise between economic viability and local identity.

“We already work closely with Canterbury City Council and Dover District Council, and we will now work hard with our neighbours and with Kent County Council to give the new authority a successful start and a firm foundation to look after key services for residents in our unique towns and villages for decades to come.”

Leader of Kent County Council (KCC), Linden Kemkaran told today’s full council: “The government has made its decision and we will take time to understand exactly what it means for Kent including how the new arrangements will be implemented and the timescale involved.

“In the meantime our focus remains the same, delivering services for residents, supporting our workforce through the changes ahead and ensuring people continue to receive the support they rely on us every single day.”

In a joint statement, Kent and Medway’s council leaders said: “We want to reassure our residents that not one of our services will change overnight – you will still be dealing with the same council staff tomorrow and the day after that.

“The new councils will not come into being until 1 April 2028.

“All of the councils in Kent and Medway have a long history of working closely together to do the very best for the people we serve and that will not change one bit.

“This is the start of the process of bringing our different teams together with the aim of designing then delivering the best possible services for the people we serve.

“Of course, this change affects the thousands of council staff across the county who work incredibly hard day in and day out. Our focus will be supporting them through this change while helping them to carry on delivering our business-as-usual services seamlessly.

“There is a lot of work to do but we will make sure we take every opportunity to make our services the very best they can be.”

Cliftonville division councillor Rob Yates said: “Now that we know the shape of the east Kent authority, it will be very important for the council to have a poverty strategy and strategies for jobs and young people.”

Reorganisation

Local government reorganisation (LGR), which was launched by the then Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner in December 2024, aimed at streamlining the councils to just a handful in Kent.

It is hoped these will be cheaper, more efficient and hand more power to the communities being served.

Political parties will now have to work out which of the new bodies they have the best chance of winning seats on if elections to the new transitional “shadow” authorities are held next year.

Reform UK, which scooped 57 of the 81 seats at KCC in May 2025 all over the county, will be keen to impose the same dominance.

But the party has been luckless in Kent by-elections since, even unexpectedly losing a seat to the Greens in April in the Cliftonville division.

Critics say that the new system will create greater distance between residents and elected representatives.

The new system will require fewer staff across the board – particularly in the top officer salary bands – with AI eventually being employed to reduce bureaucracy further.

Secretary of State Steve Reed said that all but KCC’s one unitary proposal satisfied the criteria set for the new devolved arrangements.

In a letter to council leaders obtained by the Local Democracy Reporting Service he expressed “significant concerns” about the size of one council because with a population of 1.9m, it far exceeded the 500,000 set out in his “guiding principles”.

He wrote: “I am also concerned about how services would be delivered over this footprint, and how the untested federated model would work.

“In addition, the option would also pose significant challenges for accessing the deepest levels of devolution for the area. Therefore, in my view, this proposal did not meet the criteria.”