The North East is entering a period of political upheaval unlike anything seen in recent memory. With all-out local elections scheduled for May 2026 – following boundary changes in Newcastle, Sunderland, Gateshead, and South Tyneside – the stakes could hardly be higher. Control of councils, the North East Combined Authority, and regional policy direction are all on the line.

Yet, a worrying pattern is emerging: some elected representatives appear determined to cling to office at almost any cost, prioritising career survival over the communities that elected them.

In political circles, this is called the “chicken run” – when councillors or MPs seek election in another ward or constituency because their current seat is marginal or uncertain. The ethical, democratic, and representational consequences are increasingly visible in Newcastle and across the region.

A city and region in flux

Across the North East, the political landscape has shifted dramatically in recent years:

• County Durham elected a Reform UK administration last year, showing voters are open to alternatives.
• North Tyneside returned a Labour mayor, but with a reduced majority of 12,000 votes.
• Newcastle and South Tyneside councils operate under no overall control.
• The Green Party is steadily gaining traction, reflecting voter appetite for change.

Even within Newcastle, current council activity illustrates the unusual nature of these times:

• In South Jesmond, a traditionally confident Labour ward, Labour came third.
• The Liberal Democrats, led by a figure known for his ambition to lead the council, came second, yet abstained on a vote of no confidence against Labour.
• Meanwhile, the Green Party secured a win, highlighting a shift in voter priorities.

At the same time, multiple seat selections are underway, and Labour is struggling to field candidates in some wards – a stark reminder that even dominant parties are vulnerable.

“Residents are seeing change at every turn – the rules have shifted, and the traditional certainties of local politics are no longer guaranteed.”

Ambition versus accountability

At the heart of the chicken run lies a simple question: when an elected representative seeks selection elsewhere while still holding office, whose interests are they serving?

For residents, the consequences are tangible: councillors negotiating for another seat cannot devote their full attention to current constituents. Meetings, casework, and local advocacy inevitably take a back seat.

“Is this the type of character you want representing your community?”

Ethically, this raises concerns about the nature of public service. Can residents have confidence in representatives who spend years expressing pride in an area, only to manoeuvre behind the scenes for a “safer” seat elsewhere?

The optics are damaging

Even when lawful, the optics are stark. Social media posts, rumours, and ward-switching feed a perception of opportunism.

In Newcastle, two notices of no confidence have been tabled against Labour. Despite repeated claims from opposition parties that they seek change, both the Green Party and Liberal Democrats abstained – even on votes framed as a matter of principle. How a party can abstain on a confidence vote raises serious questions about motivation, integrity, and commitment.

Across the region, similar patterns are evident. Councillors pursuing the chicken run illustrate the tension between personal ambition and public service, leaving voters questioning: whose priorities matter most?

Party over community

The chicken run highlights an uncomfortable truth: party survival and career security often come before community service.

Labour’s messaging in Newcastle has been striking. Over the past year, the party has shifted from developing a distinct city identity to mirroring the national party, currently one of the least popular governments in modern history. Combined with internal manoeuvres and councillor movements, this underscores the disconnection between political leadership and the communities they serve.

“Residents are left wondering: is the councillor working for us, or for the party machine?”

Implications for the Combined Authority

The governance of the North East Combined Authority (NECA) is deliberately different from other regions. The interim cabinet designed the authority so that decision-making rests with the cabinet, not the elected mayor, giving constituent councils significant influence over regional strategy. This structure was intended to balance power and ensure collaborative oversight – a rare feature among devolved authorities in England.

As a result, the outcome of local elections in Newcastle, Gateshead, Sunderland, and South Tyneside could dramatically reshape the cabinet, altering the authority’s decision-making and the trajectory of its programme. If a Labour mayor, such as Mayor McGuinness, is left with only one or a few Labour cabinet colleagues, the ability to advance Labour priorities could be severely constrained. Conversely, a cabinet with a different political composition could shift priorities entirely, focusing on agendas that may not align with previous Labour ambitions for the region.

This highlights a critical point: the political choices of councillors in the constituent authorities are not just local matters. Decisions driven by ambition, party manoeuvring, or self-preservation – such as the chicken run – have real consequences for regional governance, investment, and the strategic direction of the North East. Councillors prioritising personal survival over community representation risk not only undermining local trust but also affecting the region’s capacity to deliver on its devolution deal and broader ambitions.

A moment of truth

The May 2026 elections are more than routine contests. They are a referendum on integrity, accountability, and the moral compass of those claiming to serve the region.

Residents will judge not only parties but individuals: how they acted, where their priorities lay, and whether they can be trusted to represent a ward fully and fairly.

In this context, the chicken run is a symbol of a wider cultural shift: the professionalisation of local politics and the willingness of some politicians to place ambition above community.

For councillors, the next six months are pivotal. Their decisions – whether to remain committed to current constituents or manoeuvre for safer political ground – will define reputations and shape voter trust. For residents, it is a moment to reflect on what they value in representation: principle, loyalty, and service, or ambition and careerism.

“In an era of unprecedented political change, the answer will shape the North East for years to come.”