Lib Dems urge human rights watchdog to examine potential election delays

Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey has warned that almost 10 million people could be denied their democratic right to vote if proposed delays to some local elections in England are approved.

Sir Ed has written to the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, asking it to investigate what he described as the government’s “cavalier approach to our elections”.

Concerns have also been raised by Reform UK. The party’s head of policy, Zia Yusuf, told the BBC that Reform would attempt to force a parliamentary vote in protest at what he called “extremely dangerous” delays.

The row follows signals from the government last week that it would permit councils to postpone elections if they argue they lack the capacity to run them while implementing sweeping local government reforms. Some councils have also questioned the value of spending public money on elections for positions that could soon be abolished.

Lib Dems urge human rights

Downing Street said any delay would be temporary, lawful and subject to clear statutory safeguards. It added that councils would need to demonstrate exceptional reasons and that ministers would scrutinise every request carefully.

The controversy comes after the government outlined plans for the largest reorganisation of local government in England for 50 years. Proposals include introducing a mayor for every region and merging areas that currently operate under two tier authority systems by 2028.

In February, ministers said nine areas could delay their 2025 local elections until 2026 to allow time to prepare for restructuring. More recently, all 63 councils affected by the overhaul were asked whether they needed to postpone elections scheduled for May 2026.

In a statement issued on Thursday, the final day before the parliamentary Christmas recess, Local Government Minister Alison McGovern said that “multiple councils” had requested a postponement. So far, Hastings and East and West Sussex councils have confirmed they have sought a delay. Others have told the BBC they will consider the issue in the new year, ahead of a government deadline of 15 January.

In his letter to the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, Sir Ed cited Article 3 of the first protocol of the Human Rights Act, which guarantees the right to free elections. He wrote that removing elections altogether, without clear necessity, would be a breach of that principle and asked the watchdog to confirm whether it would investigate.

The Liberal Democrats’ home affairs spokesperson Lisa Smart told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that it was hard to see the move as anything other than an attempt to manipulate the system by parties expecting poor results in May. She argued that delays could leave some councillors in office for unusually long terms, in some cases stretching to seven years, without renewed public consent.

Read More: Prince Andrew and Epstein: The Scandal That Refuses to Fade

She added that she had not spoken directly to Liberal Democrat leaders in the affected councils and was not aware of any who had called for a delay.

The elections that do go ahead in May are seen as a crucial moment in the political calendar, with the results expected to influence whether Prime Minister Keir Starmer or Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch face leadership challenges.

Reform UK has said it will introduce a Private Members’ Bill to compel the government to hold the elections in May, although such a bill is unlikely to become law. Yusuf said the aim was to push MPs to publicly oppose what he described as Labour and Conservative collusion to deny millions of voters their say for a second year running.

Labour currently controls 18 of the 63 councils asked about potential delays, with the Conservatives holding nine and the Liberal Democrats seven. However, the Conservatives are defending the largest number of seats, 610 in total, which is more than a quarter of those due for re election in May.

Conservatives have accused the government of being afraid of voters, although Badenoch indicated she would not prevent Tory led councils from requesting a postponement. She told the BBC that while councils’ concerns should be heard, her view was that elections should simply go ahead as planned.

Green Party peer Jenny Jones said the decision offered Labour run councils a chance to avoid electoral backlash and would also prop up what she described as tired Conservative administrations.

The Electoral Commission has also voiced concern. Its chief executive Vijay Rangarajan said there was a clear conflict of interest in asking councils to decide how long it should be before they are accountable to voters.

Responding to the criticism, the government said it was taking a locally led approach and argued that councils were best placed to judge the impact of any postponement on their area. A spokesperson said the circumstances were exceptional, with councils struggling to prepare for resource intensive elections while simultaneously reorganising into new authorities intended to better serve residents.