Can the New Forest actually stop being split in two? What the law says…
A week after protests outside New Forest District Council offices and their unanimous vote to gain legal counsel on the government’s decision to split the New Forest in two - what does this actually mean, and can it change anything?
As part of a local government reorganisation (LGR) within Hampshire, it’s been confirmed the New Forest district will be separated in two with the Waterside area merging with Southampton, Eastleigh and part of Test Valley. The rest of the New Forest will receive services from a ‘mid-Hampshire’ council covering East Hampshire and Winchester.
The government’s decision goes against the New Forest District Council’s (NFDC) proposal submitted in January to keep the district together and combine with Test Valley, Winchester and East Hampshire.
In this proposal, NFDC stated that keeping the New Forest together would deliver long-term savings estimating £63.9m with costs recovered within three years.
According to the council’s figures, 3,141 people responded to the consultation, making it the authority’s “highest survey participation”. 70% of all respondents supported the council’s final preferred option, as did 98% of New Forest businesses.
Southampton City Council had originally backed the option ultimately selected by government, merging the east of the New Forest, the Waterside, with Southampton and Eastleigh.
Council backs legal advice after heated meeting
At a meeting on April 13, New Forest District Council considered its response to the government’s reorganisation plans, following a petition from newly formed campaign group New Forest Together.
The petition, presented to councillors at the meeting, called on the council to pursue a judicial review if legal advice confirms there are grounds to challenge the decision.
Councillors agreed to extend the meeting’s debate from 15 to 30 minutes, as more than 200 people gathered outside the council offices in support of the campaign.
Cheers and shouts from protesters could be heard inside the chamber as the discussion unfolded.
The motion, backed unanimously by councillors, means the council will now obtain specialist legal advice on whether a challenge is possible.
Speaking at the meeting, Councillor Peter Armstrong said, “What is being done to the Waterside and Totton has not been done for us - it is being done to us.
“However slim the chance of overturning the government’s decision, we have a duty to stand up for our residents.”
Councillor Janet Richards added, “We need to wait for legal advice on whether there are grounds for a judicial review, but we also need to be aware of the risks.
“Even if a legal challenge is successful, the new decision may not be the one we want.”
The legal process
In practice, this means NFDC will seek advice from specialist public law barristers, often a King’s Counsel (KC), on whether there are legal grounds to challenge the government’s decision.
Only if those grounds exist would a judicial review then be considered.
Any such legal challenge would only focus on the way the decision was made, rather than whether the decision itself was right or wrong.
This means, even if the government were requested to go through the decision process again, they could come to the same outcome.
So, even a successful legal challenge may not stop the New Forest being split.
The New Forest is not alone as other authorities across England are also understood to be exploring legal options in response to reorganisation proposals.
“The future of the New Forest is at stake”
We spoke with James Hartley-Binns, Campaign Coordinator of New Forest Together, who confirmed the next step depends heavily on the outcome of the council’s legal advice, which is expected within a relatively short timeframe.
He said if the legal advice identifies grounds for a legal challenge, the council will need to act quickly - with any judicial review required to be logged with the High Court within three months of the original decision.
“Even if we’re not successful in the High Court, I’m feeling more confident that we could frustrate the process enough… and actually this does get scrapped.”
Alongside this, he said the campaign is continuing to build momentum through their petition, currently at almost 19,000 signatures, with hopes of reaching 25,000 to strengthen their case politically as well as legally.
He suggested the issue goes beyond administrative boundaries, pointing to concerns about long-term development, local identity and how decisions are made about the area.
“I think that the future of the New Forest is at stake,” James shared, warning that changes to governance could have lasting impacts over the coming decades.
While a legal challenge is one possible route, campaigners acknowledge it is not guaranteed to overturn the decision.
Instead, they say success could come through a combination of legal pressure, political momentum and sustained public opposition.
“There’s every chance that we could frustrate the process enough,” James added, suggesting delays alone could have an impact on the outcome.
Councillor Malcolm Wade told New Forest Dispatch, “I support the view of the residents, that of keeping the forest together, therefore any legal action New Forest District Council can take to achieve the wishes of local people has my support.”
Whether a legal challenge proceeds, and if it could alter the decision to break apart the New Forest, now depends on advice expected in the coming weeks.
New Forest Dispatch will continue to follow this story.
