Why it matters: The formal complaint to the minister for local government alleges the county council's campaign contains "incorrect statements and unfounded promises" and is "neither honest nor truthful", potentially undermining the integrity of the local government reorganisation process in Suffolk.
The big picture: The escalating dispute centres on Suffolk County Council's campaign for a single unitary authority, which the district and borough councils claim violates the Local Government Code of Publicity and the Advertising Standards Authority's Code of Advertising Practice.
The details: In their letter to Alison McGovern, minister of state for local government and homelessness, dated 11 November 2025, the leaders of West Suffolk, East Suffolk, Ipswich Borough, Babergh District and Mid Suffolk District councils outlined three main concerns:
The campaign's content is not honest and truthful
It is not objective and even-handed
It uses public funds to pay for lobbyists and lobbying activity
The councils say the One Suffolk proposal promises to cut council tax and invest £40 million in market towns, commitments they claim amount to £72 million of unfunded cost. They argue the £32 million lost revenue through cutting council tax is a recurring annual cost which "could only realistically be funded by cuts to public services", but this is not made clear in the campaign materials.
What they're saying: The district and borough councils state in their letter: "The One Suffolk Campaign fails to meet the Local Government Code of Publicity and the Advertising Standards Authority's Code of Advertising Practice in that its content is not honest and truthful; it is not objective and even-handed; and it uses public funds to pay for lobbyists and lobbying activity."
They contrasted their approach with the county council's, saying: "The Three Councils approach is about information sharing and we are ensuring that it complies with the Local Government Code of Publicity. It is cost effective, objective and even-handed."
The lobbying allegations: Freedom of information requests disclosed that Suffolk County Council conducted a procurement exercise to commission services for a public and stakeholder communications campaign with a budget of up to £50,000.
Documentation shows an "invitation to quote" email from the county council's communications and public affairs manager to potential bidders stated the campaign should "develop and deliver a campaign that raises awareness of our proposals, builds public and stakeholder support for our approach, exposes weaknesses of alternative proposals and influences the Government's decision making when it comes to making a decision on which proposal to consult on publicly".
The district and borough councils highlight that Westco's draft public affairs and stakeholder engagement plan included targeting the secretary of state and senior civil servants, with a cost proposal including three days for "specialist outreach to key contacts in Whitehall".
Part of the One Suffolk campaign invited newsletter recipients to send a proforma letter to their MP in support of One Suffolk, which the district and borough councils describe as "a clear case of public funds being used to create a lobbying campaign designed to influence MPs".
The other side: Councillor Richard Rout, Suffolk County Council's cabinet member for devolution, local government reform and NSIPs, said: "The Local Government Code of Publicity was fully taken into consideration throughout the planning and delivery of work, as is our requirement. The outcome of local government reorganisation will have a lasting impact on Suffolk and its residents, and we have a duty to raise awareness of the impact of these changes.
"Looking at this objectively, to suggest our business case is dishonest is both ironic and hypocritical. Three councils will cost more than one, so there will be less money for public services. In fact it will cost more than the current two-tier system. That is a fact."
He added: "We've been very clear throughout on the enormous benefits of having one council - and our analysis of the proposal for three has exposed clear weaknesses. People should know about these major flaws that are being hidden from sight."
Suffolk County Council said the costs for the local government reorganisation work are being covered by an underspend in 2024/25 and capacity funding received from the Government. The council stated the campaign spending "is just a small percentage of the money that will be saved through One Suffolk - £78.2 million saved over the first five years and £39.4 million saved each year thereafter".
The council said its proposal to harmonise council tax to the lowest level across Suffolk is based on analysis conducted in partnership with global advisory firm Grant Thornton, and is "neither misleading nor false advertising".
What's next: The district and borough councils are asking the Government to ensure Suffolk County Council ceases activity that breaches the codes and to factor the impact of lobbying techniques into the analysis of consultation results.
They state: "We seek assurance that consideration of the impact of the use of lobbying will be factored into the analysis of consultation results, and that bias caused by such techniques will not impact on the decision made about the future of local government in Suffolk."
For context: The Government plans to abolish Suffolk's two-tier system of local councils and replace the six current authorities with either one, two or three unitary councils. Suffolk County Council favours a single council for the whole of Suffolk, while the district and borough councils prefer three new unitary councils with a fallback position of two.
The bottom line: The formal complaint raises serious questions about the use of public funds during the local government reorganisation process, with the district and borough councils arguing that Suffolk County Council's approach "risks bringing the validity of the local government reorganisation process into question within Suffolk".
