Councils now run by Reform - end of the beginning or beginning of the end?

[boys3]

So after 1st May Local Elections Reform have outright control of ten top tier Councils, and are the largest, or close to the largest party, in a number of others.

How will they get on do we think? Suddenly having responsibility and accountability for real stuff.

Just for a bit of context the recent National Audit Office report on Local Government in England.
https://www.nao.org.uk/reports/local-government-financial-sustainability-2025/?nab=2

These are the Councils they won outright. Number of seats they won and total seats on each Council, plus a link to the more detailed results. Some of the Councils have really good info sets with clear summaries and maps showing who won where. Others are a bit more basic. These councils deliver services for some 8 million people

Derbyshire
42/64 Derbyshire Results

Doncaster

37/55 Doncaster Results

County Durham
65/98 Durham Results

Kent

57/81 Kent Results

Lancashire
53/84 Lancashire Resuts

Lincolnshire

44/70 Lincolnshire Results

North Northants
39/68 North Northants Results

2 seats pending as ward election postponed due to death of a candidate

Nottinghamshire
40/66 Nottinghamshire Results
2 seats pending as ward election postponed due to death of a candidate

Staffordshire
49/62 Staffordshire Results

West Northants
42/76 West Northants Results

There are then 4 Councils where they are the largest party but short of a majority. Will Cons, or others, support them in any of these to give control? Or will others, incl Cons, coalesce to prevent that? We'll soon find out. If anyone knows already post away!

Cornwall 28/87. Cons have 7 seats so even combined well short of a majority. Lib Dems won 26 seats. I think more likely that Lib Dems will get support from sufficient Independents (19), Green (3) and Lab (4) to form an adminstration.
Cornwall Results

Leicestershire 25/55, so 3 short. Cons have 15 seats. So could easily support a Reform led adminstration. Or would they join with Lib Dems (11), Lab (2), Green (1) and Indie (1) to create a coalition administration that keeps Reform out?
Leicestershire Results

Warwickshire 23/57 so 5 short, Cons then have 9 seats, so could support to provide a majority. Lib Dems 14, Greens 7, Lab 3, Indie 1 - combined 25 so again short of a majority, Which way will Cons go?
Warwickshire Results

Worcestershire 27/57 so 2 short. Cons then have 12 seats, so could support to provide a majority. Or could join with the Greens (8), Lib Dems (6), Lab (2) and Indie (2) to thwart a Reform led Council. Equally only needs 2 of the 12 Cons to side with Reform to give them a majority and control though
Worcestshire Results

Of the remaining hung councils:

Northumberland Cons won 26/69, then Reform with 23, So the two combined have a comfortable majority, Or would the Cons look for support from 9 from Lab (8) Indie (7) Lib Dem (3) and Green (2) and avoid Reform. Northumberland Results

Buckinghamshire. Cons have 48/97 so 1 short of a majority. Reform only have 3 seats, but Cons only need support of 1. Equaly 1 of the 13 independents may provide that support. Buckinghamshire Results

In the others Devon, Gloucestershire and Hertfordshire support from Lab and Greens would give the Lib Dems control in each.
Hertfordshire Results
Gloucestshire Results
Devon Results

Lastly Wiltshire all down it seems to the Indies (7). Lib Dems have 43/98. Cons have 37 seats and Reform 10. Wiltshire Results

The final 3 Councils contested last Thursday all delivered Lib Dem majorities - Cambridgeshire, Oxfordshire and Shropshire

Reform are busy doing the pick me dance in Northumberland

Reform demand 'extremely high price' for coalition agreement in Northumberland

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/reform-demand-extremely-high-price-31601050#ICID=Android_ChronicleNewsApp_AppShare

Residing in a council now controlled by reform, it’s worrying how little experience any of them actually have. Where we are there is a current very real issue with a new build development which the local , very experienced councillor was giving a lot of support to resolving and ensuring positive outcomes, he’s now gone, the case officer responsible for the development has basically said she had no idea what will now happen a it’s already clear the reform councillor doesn’t know what to do

Shame he can’t be given the bill for the cost of the by election.

Looking at the Reform seats in Bucks, 2 are representing new estates. I was surprised at this. They are absolutely not left behind old industrial areas. Far from it. There’s a surprising number of independents and I would think one or more of these could work with the Cons. Although a couple represent pretty Con areas so the independents could be protest votes. Four independents represent very very expensive areas! So we shall see.

I dont think the Cons have messed up here. They don’t have the money they would like and obviously services are not what they would like them to be. A big issue for nearly every council and Reform won’t find savings. The Cons have definitely made them here.

And each time we have a by-election, it causes a frustrating cancellation of all sorts of things already in progress. So lots of hidden costs to the council and to other organisations who also can’t get on with things, because of the period of purdah.

There’s no purdah for by elections.

Are you sure about that @BIossomtoes ? A quick look at my local council’s website suggests it would apply locally - though of course business as usual continues. Granted that is just one council website, but hopefully they are correct in what they are saying.

but from what I have read Purdah is based on convention rather than being set out in law.

at a local council level is it more a period of heightened sensitivity if it’s a by-election.

Happy to be corrected.

Cons are only one short in Bucks aren’t they? @TizerorFizz will be interesting if they formally accept Reform support, or instead look to a couple of the 13 independents.

I'll preface this post by saying that I cannot stand Reform.

I'm worried that this is a missed opportunity. They won't really be able to change anything meaningful (to them), thanks to councils already being cut beyond the bone, with only obligatory services left running and our employment / equality laws putting the brakes on. It will be Reform-Lite Therefore, the electorate won't get the opportunity see and feel the true effects of their policy. This 'give them an inch' could end up backfiring and being a "give us a better chance to show us what we can do when we're not being strangled by the Elites! Let us flex our muscles in Westminster" scenario.

Obviously that the utter incompetence and inexperience of the new incumbents is likely to cause issues, even if they make no changes and just attempt to keep the ship afloat. This would be true of any party, or any organisation.

It seems unbelievable that they could fail at a local level (or actively wreck things) but It's very likely that people will give them the benefit of the doubt and find excuses to give them a second chance.

I do not want 'Reform-heavy' but it might be what is required to show some of the more moderate R voters what the policies look like in real terms. Some will be fine with it, of course.

@boys3 Yes. 1 short. Although the Cons not having control was unthinkable until recently.

I think brokering a coalition or confidence and supply deal depends how Independents have positioned themselves. Anti Con or just mavericks! I don’t have any near me so I’m just not sure.

Also, all the Reform wards have 2 or 3 councillors. Two share with 2 Cons and the other with a Lib Dem! That ward is nearly all new developments! Split opinions there.

It will be interesting to see what trading goes on but Bucks doesn’t have any fat to trim! Lots of the Reform nonsense didn’t hit home here and they really won’t find money in imaginary “DEI services” to divert to potholes!

Purdah might be more limited in area or topics but it’s certainly applied in by elections IME and as advised by democratic services @BIossomtoes@boys3- and there is suggestion in our are that there may be more complaints if councils aren’t careful.

Purdah applies for local elections like those held last week and for general elections, it doesn’t apply to by elections. As someone whose job required close observation of purdah, I know this.

This is the LGA guidance @blossomtoes- https://www.local.gov.uk/our-support/communications-and-community-engagement/pre-election-period/frequently-asked-questions - scroll down to the bottom picture, I tried to take a photo of it but for some reason Mumsnet decided it was sensitive 😂.

Although in theory it only applies to the particular ward, my experience working in a local authority is that it actually affects things more widely than that, especially when it’s a town (or city) with multiple wards where you can’t separate out issues easily.

It says,

The whole council must take care that its actions and communications in relation to those wards comply with the pre-election period restrictions. This means that the council should not make statements about candidates in those wards or make statements on controversial issues that are identified with the views of individual candidates or parties in those wards, or which may influence the voters in those wards. Council publications about other wards where there is no election will not be affected unless they bear directly on political issues in those wards where there is an election.

I know. There’s no reference to by elections because it doesn’t apply.

@BIossomtoesa by-election is an election in one ward, this is the question “What happens when there are by-elections in individual wards. Is the whole council bound by the pre-election period restrictions?”

I don’t know if we’re talking at cross purposes or if I’m misinterpreting what you’re saying. But when there is an election in one ward, it does affect council business.

Purdah or not every council by-election one costs time and money.

687 Reform councillors elected last week

57 had previously stood as Conservatives

55 had previously stood for Reform but not for the Cons

51 had stood as Independents or for another party

524 are new councillors

I can see a significant attrition rate coming

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/may/10/reform-uk-councillors-face-allegations-sharing-far-right-islamophobic-content

Up to 12 newly elected Reform UK councillors are facing allegations of sharing social media content ranging from support for the far right to explicitly Islamophobic comments.

They include councillors at three different county councils who have shared social media content from Britain First, a far-right party known for staging provocative marches and stunts.

Thanks to @InterP for this link (hope you don’t mind me reposting it on this thread as well)

https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/25152599.council-responds-claims-durham-reform-councillors-already-quit/

Reform councillors as seen through the eyes and experience of an existing councillor. S/s 4 is particularly shocking.

https://bsky.app/profile/lunabelle.bsky.social/post/3lotuxfbcok2w

He was busing raking in all that money! (£12m , last I read).

This bodes well

The BBC can reveal that a newly-elected Leicestershire county councillor was sacked from the police last year.

Andrew Hamilton-Gray won a seat in Loughborough for Reform, with almost 40% of the vote.

It has now emerged that a police misconduct hearing in January 2024 found he had called in sick, to travel to Spain, when he should have been working as a PC.

The misconduct hearing found that was one of two occasions when he reported sick to pursue his outside business interests.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cre9z20x0r3o

Good luck

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/local-news/who-charge-what-reform-uk-10184980

How are they racist?

19 and in charge of children’s services? What could possibly go wrong?