Reclaiming our counties: the end of “county councils”

On 16th July 2026, the Rt Hon Steve Reed (Secretary of State of Housing, Communities and Local Government) confirmed that all the remaining 1974 local government “counties” in England will be abolished on 1st April 2028. This final end of the 1974 fake “counties” will be a major boost to the work of the Association of British Counties (ABC). Henceforth, we can promote the real counties as the important geographical and cultural entities that they are, unencumbered by the widespread confusion caused by having local authorities masquerading as “counties“.

We will wish a not-so-fond farewell to Cambridgeshire County Council, Essex County Council, Kent County Council, Lancashire County Council, Lincolnshire County Council, Oxfordshire County Council, Staffordshire County Council, Surrey County Council, Warwickshire County Council and Worcestershire County Council – local authorities which for half a century have shamelessly portrayed themselves as some kind of institutional embodiment of the real counties whose names they so absurdly borrowed.

Each will be abolished, along with the district councils in its area, and replaced by two or more new unitary councils. The new unitary councils will be known just as “councils” and not as “county councils“.

These local government changes form part of the Government’s longer term plan for devolved government in England. The Government started a process in 2025 to see all of the remaining two-tier areas of local government (county council and district councils) replaced by unitary councils. The announcement of 16th July was that of the final batch of areas to be considered (although decisions were deferred in two areas).

The table below shows the outcome of the process for all two-tier areas in England. In most areas, shadow authorities will be elected in May 2027, fully taking office on 1st April 2028.

Naming the new unitary councils

ABC’s concern now is to ensure that none of the new unitary councils repeats the mistake of 1974 and chooses a name which makes inappropriate use of a historic county name.

To be clear, ABC is not opposed to historic county names being used within a council’s name, but only if this makes sense geographically. For some of the new councils the use of a historic county name with appropriate qualification would provide the best description of the location and area of that council, e.g. North Staffordshire Council, East Kent Council, Northern Oxfordshire Council etc.  

Other councils do not have areas which are sensibly described by reference to a single historic county. In such cases using a historic county name at all can be a contrivance best avoided. For example, ABC has no objection to the proposed name of the new Ridgeway Council which will cover parts of both Berkshire and Oxfordshire.

The process by which the new council names will be determined is potentially quite lengthy. In the 16th July announcements, the Government was not prescriptive about what the new councils would be named. The names in the table above are those put forward in the initial consultations from earlier in the year. They are being quoted by the Government, but being described as “provisional” names at present. The Government needs to decide on a name for each new council to put into the Statutory Instrument which will create the new council. At present it is not clear when and how it is going to decide on those names. In any case, once elected each new shadow authority will be able to change its name from that in the Statutory Instrument.

Nonetheless, given the number and size of the new unitary councils, there is actually little scope for the new councils to make inappropriate use of a historic county name. We can be fairly confident that any doing so will be an exception rather than, as in 1974, the rule.

However, there are some problem areas we need to aware of:

• Our friends in Middlesex Heritage are fighting an ongoing battle to see the current shadow West Surrey Council rename itself to West Surrey and South Middlesex Council. This shadow authority was elected in May 2026 and will take office in April 2027. There is huge support in the Spelthorne area to see ‘Middlesex’ as part of the council name.

• The biggest source of controversy is likely to be around the names of the unitary councils replacing Lancashire County Council, primarily because two major areas of Yorkshire (Bowland and West Craven) have been in the Lancashire County Council area since 1974. It would be unconscionable for the names of the new councils to continue to portray these areas as being in Lancashire.

• The Government has actually yet to make a decision about the future form of local government in the current Cambridgeshire County Council area. This could yet produce proposals that apply the name Cambridgeshire to Huntingdonshire and the Soke of Peterborough area of Northamptonshire.

Below we take a more detailed look at the effect of the local government changes announced on 16th July in those parts of England which have suffered the most from “county confusion“ since 1974. In each case we compare the new councils to the historic counties to provide a sanity check on the new council names.

Lancashire County Council / Blackburn with Darwen Council / Blackpool Council

These councils are to be abolished and replaced with four new unitary councils. These are shown below, along with their provisional names, compared to the historic counties.

Lancashire County Council was one of the worst named of all of the 1974 local authorities. Despite its name, it excludes the whole urban south of Lancashire where most of the county’s people live. It also excludes the Furness and Cartmel peninsulas. It infamously includes the Forest of Bowland and West Craven areas of Yorkshire.

The names of each new unitary council must be chosen so as to properly reflect the location of the new council within Lancashire itself and, where relevant, to give proper respect to the Bowland and West Craven areas of Yorkshire. ABC has major objections to three of the provisional names:

• South Lancashire Council does not lie in the south of Lancashire and would be better named Central Lancashire Council;

• Around 30% of the North Lancashire Council area comprises the Forest of Bowland area of Yorkshire. It would be better named North Lancashire and Bowland Council;

• The Pennine Lancashire Council area includes the West Craven area of Yorkshire. A better name would be East Lancashire and West Craven Council.

Local pressure needs to be brought to bear in these areas to ensure that sensible council names are adopted.

Leicestershire County Council / Leicester City Council / Rutland Council

These councils will be replaced by two new unitary councils. These are shown below, along with their provisional names, compared to the historic counties.

As set up in 1974, Leicestershire County Council was infamous in that its area also included Rutland. Rutland Council became a unitary council in 1997.

The current local government reorganisation sees an expanded unitary Leicester City Council with the rest of the Leicestershire County Council and Rutland Council areas becoming the basis for a new unitary council. ABC considers it essential that this later authority has ‘and Rutland‘ within its name. This does seem to be the intention.

Oxfordshire County Council / West Berkshire Council

These councils will be replaced by three new unitary councils. These are shown below, along with their provisional names, compared to the historic counties.

The current Oxfordshire County Council is infamous for having a wildly inappropriate name, its area including a huge area in the north-west of Berkshire. The new unitary set-up will bring this ridiculous situation to an end after 54 years.

Whilst two of the successor unitary councils do cover parts of both counties, the provisional names (Greater Oxford Council and Ridgeway Council) are sensibly neutral as far as the counties are concerned. The name Northern Oxfordshire Council is entirely reasonable for the third council.

Lincolnshire County Council / North Lincolnshire Council / North East Lincolnshire Council

Lincolnshire County Council and the district councils in its area will be replaced by two new unitary councils. These are shown below, along with their provisional names, compared to the historic counties. North Lincolnshire Council and North East Lincolnshire Council will continue.

The current Lincolnshire County Council, as set up in 1974, has always excluded the northern part of the county. From 1974-1996 this area was under Humberside County Council and has since been under the two unitary councils North Lincolnshire Council and North East Lincolnshire Council.

The replacement of Lincolnshire County Council with two unitary councils presents an opportunity to find a less bizarre set of council names in this area. Unfortunately it is hard to see a council choosing to call itself Rural Lincolnshire Council, the provisional name. A better name than this needs to be found. Naming it just Lincolnshire Council should not be an option.

Warwickshire County Council

Warwickshire County Council and the districts councils in its area will be replaced by two new unitary councils. These are shown below, along with their provisional names, compared to the historic counties.

The current Warwickshire County Council, set up in 1974, has one of the most outrageous of all local government names. Its area excludes the entire populous north-west of the county, including Birmingham, Coventry, Solihull and Sutton Coldfield.

The splitting of this council area into two unitary councils and the overwhelming likelihood that these will be called North Warwickshire Council and South Warwickshire Council will finally resolve this issue. When viewed in relation to their place in the historic county as a whole, these names are reasonable.

Worcestershire County Council

Worcestershire County Council and the districts councils in its area will be replaced by two new unitary councils. These are shown below, along with their provisional names, compared to the historic counties.

The current Worcestershire County Council was set up in 1998 after the abolition of Hereford and Worcester County Council, itself a creation of 1974. The council’s name is not ideal since its area excludes the populous north-east of the county.

The provisional unitary council names North Worcestershire Council and South Worcestershire Council are fairly reasonable for the areas they cover. Whilst North Worcestershire Council still doesn’t cover the populous north-east of the county, at least these council names are not literally claiming to cover / be the whole county.

Staffordshire County Council / Stoke-on-Trent City Council

These councils will be replaced by two new unitary councils. These are shown below, along with their provisional names, compared to the historic counties.

The name of Staffordshire County Council has, since 1974, been wholly inappropriate since this council area excludes the populous south-east of Staffordshire, including Wolverhampton, Walsall and West Bromwich.

The provisional new council names North Staffordshire Council and Southern and Mid Staffordshire Council are reasonable for the areas they cover, though the latter council would arguably be better called Mid Staffordshire Council.

Gloucestershire County Council

Gloucestershire County Council and the districts councils in its area will be replaced by a single new unitary council covering the same area as the current county council. This is shown below compared to the historic counties. South Gloucestershire Council will continue.

The current Gloucestershire County Council, as set up in 1974, has always excluded the southern part of the county. From 1974-1996 this area was under Avon County Council and has since been under the two unitary councils: South Gloucestershire Council and Bristol City Council.

This is the only instance in the ongoing reorganisation that a current county council area is being made the basis of a new unitary council. It seem highly likely that the new unitary council will end up being called Gloucestershire Council. The bizarre set-up of having a Gloucestershire Council and an adjacent South Gloucestershire Council could be avoided by calling the new council North and West Gloucestershire Council.

Hertfordshire County Council

Hertfordshire County Council and the district councils in its area will be replaced by four new unitary councils. These are shown below, along with their provisional names, compared to the historic counties.

The current Hertfordshire County Council, as set up in 1974, has always excluded the High Barnet part of county. It also includes the town of Potters Bar in Middlesex.

Some thought should be given to whether a better name than South West Hertfordshire Council could be found for the new unitary council that includes Potters Bar. Possibilities include Watford and Borehamwood Council or Colne Valley Council.

Kent County Council / Medway Council

These councils will be replaced by four unitary councils. These are shown below, along with their provisional names, compared to the historic counties.

The main problem with the name of the 1974 Kent County Council has always been that its area excludes the highly populous part of the county in Greater London, including Bromley, Greenwich and Bexleyheath.

The creation of four unitary councils with compass-point names actually rather lessens the impression that the metropolitan part of Kent is not part of the historic county. Indeed, if one thinks of that area as Metropolitan Kent then it sits alongside the other council areas with no confusion at all.

Lieutenancy Areas

There is still the problem of the so-called “ceremonial counties”, that is the counties for the purposes of the Lieutenancies Act 1997. These were based on the newly created local government “counties” in 1974 and have remained largely based on them ever since – even as areas have been removed from county council control and made the basis of unitary councils. But the on-going large-scale local government reorganisation presents the Government with problems in relation to the lieutenancies.

Campaigners in Rutland believe that the Government has already promised to maintain Rutland’s “ceremonial status” once it has become part of a larger Leicestershire and Rutland Council. This suggests that the Government is going to create separate Leicestershire and Rutland lieutenancy areas within the Lieutenancies Act 1997. This would be a major change to the current approach of basing lieutenancies in England on current local government areas. At present, Stockton on Tees is the only council area to be split (along the River Tees) for lieutenancy purposes.

The abolition of local government Oxfordshire and the creation of Ridgeway Council and Greater Oxford Council also presents a problem to the Government. The current Oxfordshire and Berkshire lieutenancy areas reflect the 1974 local government areas of these names. The new unitary councils cut across the current local government boundaries. There has been no indication from Government as to how it plans to deal with this. Splitting these councils along the course of the Thames (cf. the Stockton-on-Tees approach) could be on the cards.

To ABC there is an obvious problem. Why should Rutland have its own lord-lieutenant but not Middlesex? Why not Huntingdonshire? Why not Glamorgan? Why not every historic county in Great Britain?

Continuing to base the lieutenancies on what will soon be former local government areas would be anachronistic and absurd. It is long since time that the lieutenancies throughout Great Britain were re-appointed to the historic counties. This move would fully end the last vestiges of “county confusion“. We will be repeating our call on the Government to undertake this simple and common-sense measure.

Concluding Remarks – Reclaiming the Counties

The end of the 1974 local government geography is a necessary condition for the real counties to resume their role as the standard geographical and cultural divisions of England. But it is not sufficient in and of itself. The Association of British Counties, the Historic Counties Trust and many other national and local organisations have much more work to do in promoting the existence and importance of the real counties. But the main obstacle to public and media understanding of our message is being removed and we can pursue our aims with renewed vigour and confidence.

The counties need to be on road-signs, on maps, in postal addresses, in geographical databases and major reference sources. Their histories and importance needs to be taught in schools. It is also time for the heritage sector (British Museum, National Trust, English Heritage, Historic England et al.) to acknowledge and promote this important part of our living heritage.

Note that whilst this article is primarily concerned with the situation with regard to the historic counties in England, there are, of course, still issues with the confusion of local government and the historic counties in Scotland and Wales.

The banner photo of a “Welcome to Lancashire” sign as one leaves Blackpool is courtesy of Google Maps.