Draft Sussex and Brighton Combined County Authority Regulations 2026
(1 day, 6 hours ago)
General CommitteesRead Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Miatta Fahnbulleh)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Sussex and Brighton Combined County Authority Regulations 2026.
The draft regulations were laid before the House on 11 February 2026. Before I proceed, I draw the Committee’s attention to the correction slip, which corrects the name of the appropriate administering authority for pension purposes from East Sussex to West Sussex. This change was requested by and agreed with the constituent councils. From here on in, when referring to Sussex and Brighton combined county authority, I will use the term “strategic authority”.
Let me state very clearly that we believe that devolution is a critical lever for delivering growth and prosperity, with mayors and local leaders being best placed to take the decisions that benefit local communities. The Government were elected on a manifesto commitment to widen and deepen devolution across England, and the English devolution White Paper sets out our plans to achieve that. Much of that White Paper is now being taken through Parliament via the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill. The White Paper also launched the devolution priority programme, to provide a fast track to establish a new wave of mayoral strategic authorities, including Sussex and Brighton. This statutory instrument, which will establish their strategic authority and provide for the mayoral elections, represents substantial progress towards fulfilling our commitment to move power out of Whitehall and back to those who know their patch best.
The Government have worked closely on the draft regulations with the constituent councils in Sussex and Brighton: West Sussex county council, East Sussex county council, and Brighton and Hove city council. All the constituent councils have consented to the making of the regulations, and I thank personally the local leaders and their councils for their support in getting us to this point. The regulations will be made, if Parliament approves them, under the enabling provision in the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023. The strategic authority will be established on the day after the regulations are made. The inaugural mayoral election is due to take place on 4 May 2028, and the elected mayor will take office on 8 May 2028, with a four-year term.
The draft regulations make provision for the governance arrangements for the strategic authority. Each constituent council will appoint two of its elected members to be members of the strategic authority, with the mayor also a member once in office. The strategic authority can also appoint non-constituent and associate members to support its work. Each voting member is to have one vote, and the vast majority of decisions are to be determined by a simple majority of the members presenting and voting. Once the mayor takes office, that majority must include the mayor, or the deputy mayor acting on the mayor’s behalf.
The regulations provide some functions in relation to transport and economic development, but there is a strong link to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill. Subject to Royal Assent, which I hope we will get, the Sussex and Brighton strategic authority will be classed as a mayoral strategic authority, and the functions reserved for that tier will automatically be conferred. Even before the mayor is in office, the strategic authority will be able to exercise mayoral strategic authority functions, with the exception of those specifically reserved for the mayor.
As this is an important change to the governance landscape of the area, we ensured that there was robust and effective consultation with stakeholders across the area. The consultation was promoted using social media, a communications campaign, a dedicated website, online and in-person events, and the distribution of the consultation material. Responses could be made online, by email and by post. We received a wide range of responses from key stakeholders: the public, businesses, councils, universities, and third sector and other bodies. A summary of the responses has been published on the gov.uk website. We are clear and confident that the statutory tests to establish the strategic authority have all been met.
Subject to the regulations being made, the strategic authority will receive devolved funding, including funding for transport and adult skills, capacity funding, and a 30-year mayoral investment fund to support key local priorities.
The draft regulations represent clear progress on our mission to widen and deepen devolution in England and will make that a reality in Sussex and Brighton. They will empower local leaders to deliver for their communities, improving residents’ lives and opportunities. I look forward to answering any questions that Members may have, and I hope that the Committee will join me in supporting these critical regulations.
David Simmonds (Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. Let me say at the outset that the Opposition do not propose to divide the Committee on the regulations, because they achieve an ambition that we support. Indeed, Katy Bourne was selected some time ago as the Conservative candidate for the new mayoral role and has been campaigning for a good deal of time, in the expectation that the election would take place in May 2026, as per the original timetable.
The fact that we are here considering this instrument, which will be made under Conservative legislation—the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023—is an indication of how far behind the Government are on achieving their ambitions for devolution in England. We find ourselves in the position that elections will go ahead in May for councils that the Government are set to abolish, but not for the new mayor, who, it is envisaged, will take over some of their responsibilities. I intend to press the Minister a little on those issues.
The first thing that it will be helpful to understand is the likely cost of the delay. As we know from feedback from local authority leaders around the country, the delays that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has introduced consistently to this process have meant that things like the renewal of contracts to provide children’s social care, adult social care, highways and pothole maintenance—all kinds of different local authority services—have been put in question, because the new authorities do not know when they will come into those responsibilities, and the authorities that currently hold them do not know when they will be abolished. That imposes a cost on taxpayers, causes a degree of uncertainty and bears down on the service quality that can be leveraged through that process.
It will also be helpful if the Minister can set out what interdependencies there are between the draft regulations and the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, which is yet to make its way through the parliamentary process. There is no carry-over provision for the Bill, so, with Prorogation imminent, the Government will have to undertake significant consideration of what parts of it will make it through, if any at all. Having spent many painful days on the Bill Committee, I am sure that the Minister is no more enthusiastic than the Opposition about the prospect of having to relitigate all the points on the Bill. However, the Bill is designed to create the underpinnings of the role that this mayor will occupy. Clearly, there is significant doubt about the ability to implement those policies, if the necessary legislation has yet to make it through Parliament.
Finally, is the Minister able to say anything about the interaction between these regulations and the Home Office proposal to abolish the role of police and crime commissioner? The Government set out very clearly in the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill the expectation that these new mayoral authorities would take on some of the responsibilities of PCCs, but the elections of the new mayors have been significantly delayed, so there will be a gap between the end of the current PCCs’ terms in office and the election of the new mayors, of whom I think this the first to have delegated legislation underpinning their role.
Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. Before I begin, I refer the Committee to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.
The Liberal Democrats want to see devolution to local people, and we believe that every area in England should be able to secure a devolution deal that works for it, for its local economy and for its residents. We believe that local government reorganisation should be a matter for councils and local people to decide.
However, I am mindful that the regulations are being debated before the Government’s decision on the new unitary authorities that will replace the three councils—Brighton and Hove city council, West Sussex county council and East Sussex county council— so is the Minister able to tell the Committee when the announcement will be made on those new unitary structures? Folk in Sussex were working on the understanding that it would be made in March, so, given that the House will rise for the Easter recess on Thursday, can she give any clarity on when that decision will be announced?
Let me also make some points about fair representation. There is concern from the county areas that Brighton and Hove may be over-represented and West Sussex and East Sussex under-represented. If that is not to be the case, how will it be safeguarded against? In addition, in the interim, transitional period before the new unitary councils come into place, what will be the roles of the district and borough councils in the combined authority? How will their voices be heard? They are the most local level of government, and they understand the community they are so closely attached to. Finally, how will fair representation be ensured when authorities are in a state of no overall control?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I thank Members for the cross-party support for both devolution and the regulations. This is an important step forward for the area, and I am glad it is being done with our collective support.
Let me pick up the specific questions that were asked. When we informed both the areas concerned and the House that we would be postponing the elections until 2028, I said the rationale was that, in our judgment and from the experience of devolution in lots of different areas, the strength of the partnership is critical. In the context of local government reorganisation and creating strategic authorities—the footprint upon which we put a mayor—our view was that we needed to create the time to allow those institutions to bed in. We have been working very closely with the constituent authorities to ensure that there is an effective partnership, which will create the foundations upon which we can have mayoral elections. I think that is the right way to go. In the end, what we all care about is that at the other side of the process we have effective institutions that can deliver for local people. We think that by taking this slower, more considered journey towards it, we will deliver better outcomes for everyone.
On the costs specifically of mayoral elections—rather than those associated with local government reorganisation—we do not think that costs will be incurred by the constituent strategic authorities. We have committed to capacity funding from this year so that the institution can build its capacity and resources to work collectively. We are also clear that in advance of having the mayor, the strategic authority will operate as a mayoral strategic authority with powers over transport and skills, for example, so that it can crack on with the job that it needs to do. We will work on a case-by-case basis where there are pressures in the system. That support has been welcomed by the constituent authorities, and we are clear that we will do this in partnership.
On the interdependencies with the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, we are optimistic and confident that we will get the Bill through in this Session, and it is key to this change; part of the reason that this statutory instrument is much slimmer than ones approved previously is that a lot of this is built into the Bill. We are working relentlessly with our colleagues in the House of Lords to make sure that we can get the Bill through. I think there is cross-party support for the idea that this is a critical step in terms of governance and pushing power out, and I hope we will have cross-party support to get the Bill through in this Session.
An important question was asked about the abolition of police and crime commissioners. We are working very closely with the Home Office to make sure that we get that transition right.
As Members will know, we are in the process of rolling out strategic authorities across the country, because we want to make sure that devolution is spread across every part of the country. Those strategic authorities, whether they have mayors or not, potentially have an important role to play in the transition of both police and fire services. We are working with constituent, combined and strategic authorities to think about how we transition the functions that currently sit with PCCs or with fire authorities into those authorities.
On the point about devolution being required in all areas, I completely agree with the hon. Member for Mid Sussex. That is why we are rolling out devolution through strategic authorities. We have just closed expressions of interest for all areas to come forward and set out the partnerships that they want to build, and we will be taking that forward. We will move at the pace that places want to move, because we are very clear that we will not impose devolution geographies on places, but we are working actively with all areas. My hope is that in a year—possibly a year and a half—the entire country will be filled with the strategic authority footprints that will allow us to push powers down to those different areas.
On the hon. Member’s point about Brighton and Hove being over-represented, that is not my understanding. I have spent a lot of time engaging with the constituent authorities, and that issue has never been raised. What I would say—and this is right—is that we have left the particular set-up of the committee and governance structure to local partners. It is not for the Government to dictate to them how they should govern themselves; that is based on what the constituent authorities think is right and on local consent. I hope everyone would agree that that is the right approach.
We are therefore leaving it to our partners in local government to decide the right balance, particularly in the transitions where we have district councils in place that may not be in place in 2028. Different areas will approach it differently, and that is what we are seeing here. Ultimately, as I said when we were taking the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill through the House, it is in the interests of constituent authorities to make sure that they are engaging their communities, and all constituent authorities, because, ultimately, partnerships are based on consent. That is what we are seeing in practice, and that is what I believe that this particular strategic authority will continue to take forward.
In conclusion, we have worked incredibly closely with the constituent authorities. I am confident that they will make this work and that, even though the mayoral elections will be in 2028, we will create a strong partnership that will allow them to crack on with the important job of building an economic strategy for their area and delivering for their area, with the investment to do that. I thank hon. Members from across the House for supporting the regulations, and I hope that we can take them forward in order to deliver the benefits of devolution.
Question put and agreed to.