Authority would include Eastleigh and Southampton

By Caroline Griffith 

Lymington Times – 23 May 2025

Splitting the Waterside from the New Forest to form an authority with Southampton and Eastleigh councils must be prevented and the area's "unique identity" protected, an MP has urged. Sir Julian Lewis, the member for New Forest East, has written to the Minister for Local Government and English Devolution, Jim McMahon, in the wake of what he says are proposals by both councils to merge with [some of] the New Forest area as part of local government reorganisation.

As reported in the A&T, the current mix of two-tier systems – county and district/borough councils – will be replaced by larger unitary authorities with populations of around 500,000. This has come amid the government's devolution plans which will see power transferred from central government to local areas through larger strategic authorities headed by an elected mayor.

In the letter, Sir Julian claims Southampton and Eastleigh councils are proposing the creation of a unitary authority that would detach all wards along the coastal edge of the Forest – which he says would be "anathema" to those who live there. He wrote:

"Not only is there historical, cultural and community identity as part of the historic Forest – with traditional Commoning rights reaching to the water – the Waterside is also seen as the economic heart of the Forest with employment, skills and housing intertwined. These Waterside communities are intimately linked with the open Forest, with the national park area dipping in and out of the historic civil parishes which are threatened with being annexed from the wider Forest and dominated by urban areas to which they have never been oriented."

He added:

"Nor can I believe that an urban unitary council, no doubt based in Southampton, would find it effective or value for money to provide services down a strip of land 12.5 miles long and fewer than three miles wide. Neighbouring councils state the rationale is that these wards are required so they can be financially sustainable and support the growth agenda. If this were the case, then they would support an option including the whole New Forest. The New Forest area has over half a century played a part delivering economic prosperity and growth centred around the Fawley oil refinery and Marchwood port. With devolution bringing in a mayoral authority, any case that economic areas cannot span new unitary council boundaries is clearly spurious."

A New Forest District Council spokesperson confirmed that, as part of the process of working collectively with other councils to develop a proposal for the future of local government in Hampshire and the Solent, it has been "made clear" that the preference of Southampton and Eastleigh councils is a new council area based around the city that would include parts of the New Forest. Sir Julian added:

"This is not moving a parish or two. On an initial assessment, it would involve 37% of properties, 32% of council tax revenue, 54% of business rates and 40% of the NFDC's housing stock. Splitting a district like NFDC would mean that, on top of the immense known logistical challenge of creating new new councils, it would also involve dividing revenues and benefits systems, waste collection depots and operational staff, and housing and homelessness services including the housing stock.

"Logistically, services would need to be provided down the Waterside by one council, leaving another council to deliver across the rump of the Forest area. This is a whole new layer of complexity and risk to the intended process of creating functional unitary councils that I do not believe was originally intended or indeed is justified. What we are facing is precisely the sort of scenario which you and the Secretary of State anticipated some acquisitive local authorities might be tempted to propose. We in the Forest and on the Waterside have tried to respond positively and in faith to what the UK government is trying to do. In return, we look to you to protect this area, its culture, traditions and local economy, from being carved up and taken over by large urban areas in the neighbourhood."

New Forest District Council says Sir Julian's letter

"echoes the council's consistent position that any changes to local government structures must respect the historic, cultural and community integrity of the New Forest and be shaped with local people, not imposed upon them".

It has been endorsed by all four [Conservative, Liberal Democrat, Green and Independent] group leaders at NFDC.

Leader Cllr Jill Cleary said:

"We are proud to have a cross-party consensus on this important issue, and we thank Sir Julian for his strong advocacy on behalf of our communities. The New Forest is a unique and cohesive area, environmentally, culturally, and economically. Any attempt to divide it would not only undermine service delivery and local identity but also add unnecessary complexity, cost and risk to the reorganisation process. Our position remains clear – we are working as asked by government to reform local councils, but we believe the New Forest should remain whole and be treated as a building block in any future arrangements. We urge the government to support a process that strengthens, rather than fragments, local identity, service efficiency and accountability."

On the prospect of splitting districts to form new authorities, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has said existing district areas

"should be considered the building blocks for proposals",

but added:

"Where there is a strong justification, more complex boundary changes will be considered. There will need to be a strong public services and financial sustainability-related justification for any proposals that involve boundary changes, or that affect wider public services, such as fire and rescue authorities, due to the likely additional costs and complexities of implementation."

The A&T has contacted Southampton and Eastleigh councils for comment.