logo
Even though they have control of 10 councils, Reform may find that running them as they want is a lot harder than they think

Even though they have control of 10 councils, Reform may find that running them as they want is a lot harder than they think

Independent04-05-2025
In 11 years as a member of the European parliament and 10 months as an MP, Nigel Farage has tasted power as a one-man band leader of Ukip, the Brexit Party and now Reform UK without having any responsibility. That has changed after Reform's spectacular advance in last Thursday's local elections in England: Mr Farage's party now has 677 councillors and runs 10 authorities.
Their actions in office will provide a huge test for Reform as it tries to show it is a credible party for power nationally. It has built a grassroots organisation and 'professionalised' the party in a way Mr Farage's previous vehicles failed to do. His council candidates were carefully vetted (unlike his standard-bearers at last year's general election), though it is likely that some with controversial views slipped through the net and may soon command unwanted headlines. The signs are that Reform HQ will try to keep a tight rein on its new representatives, but experience suggests that will be harder than it sounds.
While many people turned to Reform last Thursday because they are disenchanted with both Labour and the Conservatives, some will have voted on local issues and would have been attracted by Mr Farage's pledges to root out waste to keep down council tax bills.
The Independent believes Reform will struggle to turn the simplistic slogans of an election campaign into hard policy. Mr Farage wants a 'Doge' in every council – a reference to the Department of Government Efficiency set up by Elon Musk for Donald Trump.
Of course, ensuring value for money is vital at a time when the UK's public finances are under intense pressure. But the idea that a hidden treasure trove is waiting to be discovered in town halls is fanciful: local authorities have borne the brunt of the austerity measures imposed by central government and been hollowed out. Their reserve kitties have largely been spent; several councils, including Tory-run ones, are in the red and others, like Birmingham and Nottingham city councils, have effectively declared themselves bankrupt. Many authorities can now provide little more than their statutory responsibilities, such as adult and children's social care and special educational needs. Even after the Starmer government put in extra money, council funding per resident is still 19 per cent lower than in 2020, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies.
Reform admits its approach will be based on ideology as well as saving money. It promises to end 'woke nonsense' in town halls. Mr Farage has advised council officials working on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and net zero to look for 'alternative careers'. Yet, as our political editor revealed, the extent of such appointments has been exaggerated.
Most of the authorities Reform won were previously under the control of the Tories, who are not known for their adherence to the DEI cause. Savings from ending such practices may prove paltry.
Zia Yusuf, Reform's energetic chair, wants to ' remoralise ' young people by bringing in a 'patriotic curriculum' in schools so pupils are no longer taught to 'hate their country'. A better approach would be an honest and balanced appraisal of the history of the British empire – including episodes such as the slave trade.
The party's new local champions, including Dame Andrea Jenkyns, the mayor of Greater Lincolnshire, have vowed to oppose housing asylum seekers in their areas who crossed the Channel in small boats. This will probably require legal action, since contracts signed by the Home Office are in place until 2029.
Mr Farage's councillors may also resort to legal challenges to stop the building of wind and solar farms, which would be regrettable. It would be no surprise if the courts ruled that asylum and energy policy are matters for the national government. Reform, which also intends to bring in outside auditors to review council contracts with private companies, could end up spending millions of pounds of local taxpayers' money on fruitless challenges – money that councils plainly do not have. The irony is that such actions would be an example of the very waste the party has vowed to wipe out, with little purpose other than to make Reform politicians feel good about themselves.
The likely trouble ahead for Reform councillors should give both Labour and the Tories pause for thought. If they are panicked into aping Reform, as some in both parties want to see, many voters will surely opt for the real thing. Far better to take on Mr Farage, expose the contradictions in his thin policy offer and deploy the ammunition provided by the long overdue scrutiny his party will receive now it has responsibility as well as power.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Lords reform task force proposed amid moves to oust hereditary peers
Lords reform task force proposed amid moves to oust hereditary peers

The Independent

time28 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Lords reform task force proposed amid moves to oust hereditary peers

A dedicated task force has been proposed by the leader of the House of Lords to consider the next stages of reforming the upper chamber. The select committee would specifically consider the introduction of a participation requirement and a retirement age, said Baroness Smith of Basildon as these issues had been raised consistently by peers and had been in Labour's election manifesto. The Cabinet minister made the suggestion as she sought to reassure peers that promised future Lords reform 'will not flounder', after the planned removal of hereditary peers. Responding, to concerns it would be 'a very good and highly-qualified talking shop', Lady Smith stressed it was important for the House to take a view and so press ahead with changes on its own or be used to pave the way for legislation if required. Although subject to discussion, Lady Smith hoped the committee could be set up within three months of the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill being passed and its findings be considered within a year. The Lords leader outlined the proposal as peers prepared to vote on plans to oust bloodline members, which has faced heavy Tory criticism. The House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill, which has already been through the Commons, will abolish the 92 seats reserved for members of the upper chamber who are there by right of birth. The Bill delivers on a promise in Labour's election manifesto and was promoted as the first step in a process of reform. Having held extensive meetings with peers, Lady Smith said: 'I think the House is seeking reassurance that the plans for the next stage of reforms will not flounder, and the Government is serious about its intention for further reforms. 'Can I say I've been greatly encouraged by support for two specific issues have been mentioned so many times … and that is on retirement and participation.' She added: 'We all value the role of this House as being self-governing, and I am keen that as a House, we take some ownership in moving forward on other issues. 'But reflecting on discussions and advice, I feel we need a formal and recognised process that is supported by the House. 'I've considered the mechanisms we could use, and I've concluded the best way forward would be to establish a dedicated select committee to look at the specific matters that members have indicated they're keen to make progress on. 'I am open to discussing other mechanisms, but that's the way forward I think may work the best. 'Obviously, I will discuss further with usual channels (party whips) before putting any such proposal to the house, but I would hope the House could probably set up such a committee within three months of the Bill gaining royal assent, and by this time next year, the House be able to consider the committee's findings.' Tory former Lords leader Lord Strathclyde said: 'What authority will this committee have? Would it be regarded by the Government as having authority? 'In other words, would its conclusions, or if it is passed by the House, would it be carried on by the Government, or would it be what I rather suspect, it will be a very good and highly-qualified talking shop, but it won't in the end, lead to anything because the Government will very easily be able to ignore it completely?' Responding, Lady Smith said: 'Well, I really hope that wouldn't be the case. 'There some things that may be able to be done by the House itself, but if the House comes to a conclusion on matters that need legislation, then I think there's an easier way to put through legislation if the House has taken a view. 'So, I'm very keen to have the House express a view.' 'But there may well be things that we can do without legislation. If that's the case, we can proceed. 'Where legislation is required … we have a manifesto commitment for legislation, and we determined to press ahead to these two issues.' Lady Smith acknowledged the manifesto proposal for members to retire at the end of the Parliament after they reached the age of 80 could create problems because it created a cliff-edge and see an exodus of peers. She said: 'If there are better suggestions, I would be happy to consider those.' She told peers: 'It would be purely on the issues of participation and retirement age. 'I'm quite keen to make progress on these issues, and I think by having what I call bite-sized chunks, I've always referred to these two issues as being stage two (of reform). 'There seems to be a consensus around the house that those are two issues the House wants to deal with, and that's why I've chosen those two specific issues because they were mentioned so often by members.'

MPs back foreign investors owning minority stakes in UK newspapers
MPs back foreign investors owning minority stakes in UK newspapers

Leader Live

time30 minutes ago

  • Leader Live

MPs back foreign investors owning minority stakes in UK newspapers

The Commons voted overwhelmingly in favour of a change to the law by Labour which would allow foreign firms to buy minority stakes. It is the latest turn in a tumultuous two-year takeover process for the 170-year-old newspaper business. It comes after the previous Conservative government put a block in place amid fears the Telegraph could be bought by a majority-owned UAE company, RedBird IMI. The investment vehicle is a joint venture with US financiers. The regulation was approved by 338 votes to 79, majority 259. Labour was boosted in the voting lobbies by four Reform UK MPs, including its leader Nigel Farage (Clacton), and seven Independent MPs. Meanwhile former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, a vocal critic of China, was among those to vote against it. The Liberal Democrats, who forced the vote over fears foreign ownership would compromise editorial independence, also opposed it. The result will give the green light to RedBird IMI, with the cap in place now being supported by MPs. RedBird Capital, the US junior partner in RedBird IMI, agreed a deal in May to buy a majority stake in the newspaper for £500 million. Abu-Dhabi's IMI will look to buy a minority stake as part of the consortium. RedBird has investments in AC Milan, film production giant Skydance and Liverpool FC owner Fenway Sports Group. It is also understood that the Daily Mail and General Trust (DMGT) – which owns the Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday, the i, and the Metro – is also looking to buy a stake. This is in addition to Sir Len Blavatnik, who owns the Theatre Royal Haymarket in the West End, who is considering a minority stake, according to Sky News reports. The rules were introduced after RedBird IMI looked to buy the Telegraph Media Group (TMG) from the Barclay Brothers. Then-Conservative culture secretary Lucy Frazer told a Society of Editors Conference in April 2024: 'I had concerns about the potential impacts of this deal on free expression and accurate presentation of news and that's why I issued a public interest intervention.' Culture minister Stephanie Peacock told MPs last month that appropriate safeguards had been introduced. She said: 'Government need to balance the importance of creating certainty and sustainability for our newspaper industry with the need to protect against the risk of foreign state influence by setting a clear threshold for exceptions within the regime at 15%. We believe that we have done that effectively.' Speaking after the vote, the Liberal Democrats' spokesman on media Max Wilkinson said: 'Freedom of the press is an historic and inviolable cornerstone of our democracy. That the Government is pushing to sell off stakes in our British papers to foreign governments is astonishing. 'It's outrageous that Labour and the Conservative MPs failed to stand up, do their patriotic duty and block this legislation. The leader of the opposition sponsored the Bill that restricted foreign states owning British newspapers last year – yet even she failed to vote against the measure. 'Liberal Democrats have already successfully forced the Government to backtrack on their senseless plan to let multiple states club together to buy whatever sized stake in a British outlet they fancied. Now my colleagues in the Lords and I will deliver a showdown to overturn this Bill entirely – rallying Conservative and crossbench peers to defeat the Government on this misguided policy.' The Department for Culture, Media and Sport has been approached for comment.

Lords reform task force proposed amid moves to oust hereditary peers
Lords reform task force proposed amid moves to oust hereditary peers

Glasgow Times

time36 minutes ago

  • Glasgow Times

Lords reform task force proposed amid moves to oust hereditary peers

The select committee would specifically consider the introduction of a participation requirement and a retirement age, said Baroness Smith of Basildon as these issues had been raised consistently by peers and had been in Labour's election manifesto. The Cabinet minister made the suggestion as she sought to reassure peers that promised future Lords reform 'will not flounder', after the planned removal of hereditary peers. Responding, to concerns it would be 'a very good and highly-qualified talking shop', Lady Smith stressed it was important for the House to take a view and so press ahead with changes on its own or be used to pave the way for legislation if required. Although subject to discussion, Lady Smith hoped the committee could be set up within three months of the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill being passed and its findings be considered within a year. The Lords leader outlined the proposal as peers prepared to vote on plans to oust bloodline members, which has faced heavy Tory criticism. The House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill, which has already been through the Commons, will abolish the 92 seats reserved for members of the upper chamber who are there by right of birth. The Bill delivers on a promise in Labour's election manifesto and was promoted as the first step in a process of reform. Having held extensive meetings with peers, Lady Smith said: 'I think the House is seeking reassurance that the plans for the next stage of reforms will not flounder, and the Government is serious about its intention for further reforms. 'Can I say I've been greatly encouraged by support for two specific issues have been mentioned so many times … and that is on retirement and participation.' She added: 'We all value the role of this House as being self-governing, and I am keen that as a House, we take some ownership in moving forward on other issues. 'But reflecting on discussions and advice, I feel we need a formal and recognised process that is supported by the House. 'I've considered the mechanisms we could use, and I've concluded the best way forward would be to establish a dedicated select committee to look at the specific matters that members have indicated they're keen to make progress on. 'I am open to discussing other mechanisms, but that's the way forward I think may work the best. 'Obviously, I will discuss further with usual channels (party whips) before putting any such proposal to the house, but I would hope the House could probably set up such a committee within three months of the Bill gaining royal assent, and by this time next year, the House be able to consider the committee's findings.' Tory former Lords leader Lord Strathclyde said: 'What authority will this committee have? Would it be regarded by the Government as having authority? 'In other words, would its conclusions, or if it is passed by the House, would it be carried on by the Government, or would it be what I rather suspect, it will be a very good and highly-qualified talking shop, but it won't in the end, lead to anything because the Government will very easily be able to ignore it completely?' Responding, Lady Smith said: 'Well, I really hope that wouldn't be the case. 'There some things that may be able to be done by the House itself, but if the House comes to a conclusion on matters that need legislation, then I think there's an easier way to put through legislation if the House has taken a view. 'So, I'm very keen to have the House express a view.' 'But there may well be things that we can do without legislation. If that's the case, we can proceed. 'Where legislation is required … we have a manifesto commitment for legislation, and we determined to press ahead to these two issues.' Lady Smith acknowledged the manifesto proposal for members to retire at the end of the Parliament after they reached the age of 80 could create problems because it created a cliff-edge and see an exodus of peers. She said: 'If there are better suggestions, I would be happy to consider those.' She told peers: 'It would be purely on the issues of participation and retirement age. 'I'm quite keen to make progress on these issues, and I think by having what I call bite-sized chunks, I've always referred to these two issues as being stage two (of reform). 'There seems to be a consensus around the house that those are two issues the House wants to deal with, and that's why I've chosen those two specific issues because they were mentioned so often by members.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store