The Government has abandoned plans to postpone elections across 30 councils this May after receiving advice from lawyers following a legal challenge from Reform UK.
Local Government Secretary Steve Reed had approved proposals to delay the polls to help deliver a major reorganisation of local authorities.
But in a letter to council leaders on Monday, the Cabinet minister said the Government had written to the High Court confirming he was withdrawing the decision “in light of recent legal advice”.
Some £63 million will be made available to local authorities undergoing structural changes, he said.
“I recognise that many of the local councils undergoing reorganisation voiced genuine concerns about the pressure they are under as we seek to deliver the most ambitious reforms of local government in a generation,” Mr Reed said.
“My officials will be in touch with those affected councils to understand if any further practical support will be required.”
The Government has agreed to pay Reform UK’s legal costs after the party challenged the initial decision to postpone the votes.
Following the U-turn, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) said that “providing certainty to councils about their local elections is now the most crucial thing”.
City councils in Lincoln, Exeter, Norwich, Peterborough and Preston had been among those where ballots were not to take place on May 7, alongside several districts such as Cannock Chase, Harlow, Welwyn Hatfield and West Lancashire.
Polling day had also been postponed for county council voters in East Sussex, West Sussex, Norfolk and Suffolk.
We took this Labour government to court and won.
— Nigel Farage MP (@Nigel_Farage) February 16, 2026
In collusion with the Tories, Keir Starmer tried to stop 4.6 million people voting on May 7th.
Only Reform UK fights for democracy. pic.twitter.com/TUS6YGT2Vp
Nigel Farage said the Government’s decision on Monday was a victory for Reform UK, saying in a post on X: “We took this Labour government to court and won.”
Reform UK had asked the court to determine the full claim before the end of March, when notices of election are published.
Another hearing had been set for Thursday.
Steve Reed now has very serious questions to answer on whether political considerations were behind his decision. He must come clean or we will use every means at our disposal to get to the truth.
— Kemi Badenoch (@KemiBadenoch) February 16, 2026
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch described the reversal as “predictable chaos from a useless Government that cannot make basic decisions”.
“Even the simple stuff that should be business as usual gets messed up,” she said.
Shadow local government secretary Sir James Cleverly dismissed Labour as a “joke” and said Mr Reed’s credibility was “now completely gone”.
Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said the Government had been “forced into a humiliating U-turn” and should be stripped of its power to “cancel elections on a whim”.
“That is why the Liberal Democrats have brought forward an amendment to change the law, stripping the Government of this power and ensuring that the public’s voice is protected by statute, not left to the whims of ministers,” he said.
Green Party leader Zack Polanski said he was “pleased the Government had done another U-turn”, describing the delay elections in May as part of “a disturbing authoritarian trend from this caretaker Prime Minister.”
An MHCLG spokesperson said: “Following legal advice, the Government has withdrawn its original decision to postpone 30 local elections in May.
“Providing certainty to councils about their local elections is now the most crucial thing and all local elections will now go ahead in May 2026.”
Read MoreStarmer pledges to act in ‘months not years’ to protect children on social media
How could a UK social media ban for under-16s work?
Britain strengthens ties with California as new energy and climate agreement signed
Budget-style online safety debates could help law ‘keep pace’ with tech changes
Peggie appeal unaffected by trans medic departure, legal team says
First Minister questioned over engagement with China, but not US president