Two English local authorities remain without a functioning administration or controlling political group two months after May’s local ballot, highlighting the increasingly fractured nature of British electoral politics.

The May 7 polls resulted in 64 councils – close to half of those holding elections – where no single party secured an overall majority, placing them in what officials term no overall control.

Negotiations between local political groups have enabled most of these authorities to establish working arrangements, with many operating under minority administrations.

However, in Oldham within Greater Manchester and Kirklees in West Yorkshire, multiple rounds of voting have failed to produce a new leader.

Labour had governed Oldham since 2011, but the May elections left them as the dominant force on the council with 18 representatives, considerably short of the 31 required for a working majority.

Reform UK performed strongly, finishing second with 16 seats, while various Independent candidates collectively secured another 16 seats. The Liberal Democrats took six positions and the Conservatives secured four.

So far, the rival factions have been unable to propose a contender capable of securing the 31 votes necessary for leadership.

Ballots to elect a leader faltered on May 20, June 15 and most recently on July 1.

At Kirklees, the electoral outcome placed Reform in the top position with 29 seats, followed by Independents with 14, the Green Party with 12, the Conservatives with nine and the Liberal Democrats with five.

No party commands the 35 seats required for an overall majority, and leadership votes came to nothing on May 20 and May 28.

Both Oldham and Kirklees are scheduled to reconvene on July 15 for another attempt at election.

While local circumstances – characterised by some as toxic and divisive – have contributed to Oldham’s deadlock, the borough’s Liberal Democrat group leader Sam Al-Hamdani contends that animosity originating from national politics also plays a role.

He told the Press Association that politics has deteriorated into a yah-boo culture where disagreement leads to vilification, making it extremely challenging to have reasonable discussions and resolve matters like leadership disputes.

Although council officials can handle routine operations in Oldham and Kirklees, the failure to elect a leader raises concerns about whether these authorities will be capable of passing budgets for the coming year or developing long-term strategies for their boroughs.

There also exists the possibility of central government intervention should the absence of leadership prevent councils from making critical decisions.

A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesperson said councils are responsible for electing their leaders, and they are legally obligated to ensure decision-making proceeds effectively even during leadership gaps, adding that the department will step in when required to guarantee compliance with legal requirements.

While Oldham and Kirklees represent unusual cases of having no leadership, the fragmentation of British politics and the growth of Reform alongside the Green Party has prompted some analysts to suggest that no overall control could become the norm for British governance.

Jonathan Carr-West, representing the Local Government Information Unit, told PA that no overall control was already widespread in England, with seats distributed more evenly across a greater number of parties.

He pointed to Birmingham as an indication of future trends.

Having previously been under Labour control, the May elections elevated Reform to the leading position with 23 seats, ahead of the Greens on 19, Labour on 17, the Conservatives on 16 and the Liberal Democrats on 12, with 14 Independents also represented.

The outcome has produced a Liberal Democrat-Green-Independent coalition operating a minority administration, with no party willing to collaborate with Reform.

He observed that his concern centres on what might occur at the next general election and whether the nation should anticipate scenarios similar to Birmingham and prepare accordingly.

May’s elections left 64 councils operating without overall control, 30 of which had previously been governed by majority administrations.

Fifteen councils have seen formal coalition agreements emerge, though the majority of the 64 authorities now function under minority arrangements, typically anchored by the largest party.

In certain areas, parties have united specifically to prevent the leading group from taking office.

At Redditch in Worcestershire, Labour finished first with 13 seats, yet the council is now overseen by a Conservative-Independent coalition supported by Reform representatives.

In Southwark, part of London, Labour secured 29 seats compared to the Greens’ 22 and the Liberal Democrats’ 12, but the latter two parties joined forces to exclude the previous administration from power.

Elsewhere, it has been Reform excluded from office, such as in Havant, Hampshire, where Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens have maintained their pre-election partnership despite Reform emerging as the largest group after May.

Mr Carr-West noted that the ascent of Reform and the Greens creates additional complications for councils operating under no overall control, given their different operational approaches compared to established parties.

He explained that the Greens, for instance, do not enforce party discipline, nor do they adhere to a single unified manifesto, meaning the capacity of group leaders to direct their members is considerably weaker than in traditional parties, making coordination significantly more difficult.

Mr Carr-West further noted that the substantial influx of new councillors meant many lacked shared history or in some cases barely knew one another.

While he emphasised this was not inherently problematic, he suggested it meant that many of the methods officials previously relied upon to navigate situations of no overall control – established relationships, prior engagement, familiarity with manifestos and working through group leaders – are all diminished in their effectiveness.