If East Sussex had gone to the polls in May 2025, the political map of the county would likely look very different today. Polling forecasts, voting history and real world by-election results suggest that Reform UK was on course for a breakthrough that would have reshaped county government. It would have changed the balance of power for years.
Reform UK advisors completed independent modelling using historic performance by division and national poll tracking from Politico. The analysis suggested that Reform was positioned to win seven out of nine divisions across the Bexhill and Battle constituency alone. Support has continued to grow since then, with local by-election results, including Catsfield and Crowhurst, showing a surge in Reform votes and defection from previously dominant parties.
In Pevensey and Stone Cross, Tom Liddiard was expected to fall to Reform, potentially dropping to third place. In Bexhill East, Independent Charles Clark, one of the councillors who voted to delay the election, would likely have lost to former Conservative Martin Kenward, now a member of Reform. In Bexhill West, Nuala Geary’s Conservative support was forecast to drop by nearly half. Analysts believe Reform would have secured a clear majority in the division.
The pattern repeats across the county. In Rother North West, Eleanor Kirby-Green would likely have slipped behind both the Greens and Reform. In Bexhill North, former Conservative Abul Azad, now Independent and another key vote for delaying democracy, may have finished fourth. In Brede Valley and Marsham, Reform was predicted to replace Conservative councillor Carl Maynard.
The remaining divisions were expected to tighten dramatically. Northern Rother was forecast as a marginal between Reform and the Liberal Democrats. Battle and Crowhurst could have shifted away from a previously dominant Lib Dem majority following heavy Liberal Democrat losses in the Catsfield and Crowhurst by-election.
Residents were set to have a clear choice about the direction of local services including roads, education, social care and infrastructure investment. Instead, local government remains paralysed by uncertainty. Costs associated with reorganisation now appear to be rising rapidly rather than delivering savings. Promised reductions in bureaucracy have been replaced by suggestions that a Mayor of Sussex will be introduced while county reorganisation is postponed, meaning some residents fear four tiers of government instead of two.
Many believe that had democracy not been suspended, East Sussex would now have a Reform UK controlled council using business expertise to restore financial responsibility and public trust. Instead, the county faces two more years of leadership that has already overseen declining local services, increasing debt and mounting public frustration.
Whether by design or accident, the delay benefited political parties facing punishment at the ballot box. What could have been the beginning of actual reform may now be two years of drift, rising costs and further damage to confidence in local democracy.
The only certainty is that the electorate will not forget what was taken from them. When they finally have their say, the result may be more emphatic than anything seen before. Those who denied democracy will be held accountable – as they should be.
