Owl has been receiving reports from East Devon NHS patients with hearing loss that they were told the Social Enterprise, Chime, would cease providing their audiology services from the beginning of April.

Information on how these services would be replaced has been patchy and mislesading.

Owl has discovered that the private Midlands based firm Scrivens, founded in 1938, is the replacement provider. 

Scrivens web site indicates that similar services eg repairs and replacement batteries will be provided at local East Devon health hubs as they were with Chime.

However, this appears to be misleading.

Richard Foord, who has obviously been getting similar reports from patients as Owl, has asked Secretary of State Streeting for these local services to be restored. Meanwhile it will have to be “on the bus”.

Topical Questions Health and Social Care – in the House of Commons on 17 June 2025.

Link to Hansard

Richard Foord Liberal Democrat, Honiton and Sidmouth

People in East Devon have been told that they must now travel to Exeter for audiology services that they previously received at their local community hospital. What steps are the Government taking to encourage new providers to restore accessible audiology services?

Wes Streeting Secretary of State for Health and Social Care

That has been a running theme this morning, which will not be lost on Ministers. We will ensure, as we deliver neighbourhood health services, that people can receive care closer to home, wherever they live. We have heard that message loud and clear today, and I think the hon. Member will see that priority reflected in our 10-year plan for health.

Government has a huge local government reform agenda, including finance and local audit systems, key social care services and an extensive reorganisation of local government structures; all happening at once. It is not clear whether local authorities will have the capacity to cope.

18 June 2025 sources: Committee of Public Accounts Local Government Financial Sustainability Thirty-First Report of Session 2024–25 and comments from the Chailr.

Local government finance is in a perilous state. Despite a real terms funding increase in central government grants, council tax and locally retained business rates of 4%, over the period 2015–16 to 2023–24, the amount per person fell over the same period. Funding has not kept pace with population growth, demand for services, complexity of need, or the rising costs of delivering services. As demand for targeted services such as social care, special educational needs, and temporary accommodation has grown, there has been a significant reduction in spending on commonly used discretionary services, such as street cleaning and lighting, parks and gardens, and leisure services. With exponential increases in demand for services they must provide, local authorities have less money for early intervention or preventative services, which can help reduce demand and deliver better outcomes for people. Yet government does not know if funding to local authorities is spent well, and there are signs that service quality is declining. At the same time local authorities’ ability to improve outcomes for people is made harder by having to navigate an overly complex funding system.

Local authorities fund their services from multiple sources including central government grants, council tax, locally retained business rates, commercial activities, sales fees and charges and their reserves. They spent over £72.8 billion in 2023–24, of which 58% went on adult and children’s social care. Some local authorities are spending as much as 80% of their budget on these services. Increases in national insurance contributions may have a significant impact on local service providers, particularly smaller charities. Yet neither the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) nor HM Treasury has assessed the impact.

With promised funding reforms delayed alongside rising demand, funding has not matched need nor local circumstances. Instead, MHCLG has implemented short-term and unsustainable approaches to keep local government afloat. Since 2020–21, 42 local authorities have received exceptional financial support from government to help manage financial pressures. Spending on special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) has outstripped the money available from the Department for Education (DfE) to pay for it. Local authority deficits from these overspends are expected to be between £2.9 billion and £3.9 billion a year by the end of 2027–28. The mechanism which allows local authorities to keep these deficits off their books is due to run out in March 2026 and without it, many local authorities are at risk of effectively going bankrupt.

Government has a huge local government reform agenda, including reforms to the finance and local audit systems, and key services such as adult and children’s social care, SEND and homelessness. This is in addition to extensive reorganisation of local government structures. With reforms all happening at once, it is not clear what transitional arrangements will be and whether local authorities will have the capacity to cope.

• Read the report
• Read the report (PDF)
• Read all publications related to this inquiry
• Public Accounts Committee  

Chair comment 

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Chair of the Committee, said:  

“Our inquiry heard that the government is concerned about local authority finances. But the lack of urgent action to come forward with a plan to address the fast-approaching cliff edge for under-pressure authorities would seem to suggest it is comfortable with the current state of affairs as normalised background noise. Alarmingly, scrutiny of council finances can now provoke a sense of déjà vu, with the same unfixed issues seen over and over. We would urge the government to use the funding announced in this spending review as a starting point for the paradigm shift required. 

“However, even with concrete measures to put councils back on a proper long-term sustainable footing, once again the government seems not to have taken a holistic view of the butterfly effect of its other policies. To introduce major changes to national insurance without taking into account the likely effect on an already tottering local government sector is a major misstep. Similarly, aspirations for wide-ranging reforms seem to be unengaged with a reality in which local authorities do not have good and strong capacity to fundamentally change the way they work.  

“Our report gives a wide overview of the various and severe challenges that local government face – for the sake of everyone who relies on local authorities’ services, we hope decision-makers begin to take a similar overview in how policy is delivered.” 

Almost £2m given to candidates in the 2024 general election has “essentially disappeared” from the public’s view of British political campaign finance, a report claims.

Henry Dyer www.theguardian.com 

It notes that 170 candidates received in total almost £2m more than they were legally allowed to spend locally during the election, raising questions about where the surplus funds went after the campaign. The donors who funded them are also tricky to identify, especially if the candidate was unsuccessful.

The effect is a lack of transparency around who is funding constituency campaigns and what subsequently happens to excess funds.

If a candidate received more money than they could spend, they might transfer the surplus to the central party. As a result, parties could use candidates as a “back door” for money from donors hoping to remain anonymous, the report says.

The report’s authors, an academic at the University of Antwerp and a Liberal Democrat peer, have recommended three solutions to make it easier for the public to see who is funding candidates.

“There is a lot of money flowing to candidates that essentially disappears from the readily accessible public record,” Mark Pack, the president of the Lib Dems and a peer, told the Guardian.

Details of donations to central parties and local associations are routinely reported by the Electoral Commission, with extra disclosures made during elections. But contributions given to candidates, and how much they spent, are not available for public inspection from council returning officers until more than a month after polling day.

The Electoral Commission publishes headline figures per candidate on donations and expenditure, without the details of who funded their campaigns, months after the election.

The report’s authors, Chris Butler and Pack, sought a sample of the spending returns submitted by the candidates from the Electoral Commission. The watchdog provided them, but removed the identity of the donors.

This results in an “illogical” situation in which donors who give directly to a party, subject to a minimum reporting threshold, appear in the Electoral Commission’s database, while donors to individual candidates are obscured.

Pack said he thought this was “hard to justify” on the watchdog’s cited grounds of data protection. “The point of there being a place to say who your donors are in the form is so that people can look it up and check,” he said.

Pack believes there are reasonable grounds for the Electoral Commission to revise its position. The government is expected to bring a new elections bill, which could be an opportunity to change the complicated rules on political financing.

As for the almost £2m surplus funds from the last election, “we don’t know what is happening to that money”, Pack said. He suggested that some may have been given to the central parties, which could use it against their national spending limit while benefiting the candidate’s local efforts, such as with target letters to voters in that constituency.

“There is not a clear ‘what did you do with your surplus’ box on the expense forms,” he said.

Butler and Pack also propose the Electoral Commission publish the details of the direct donations as part of its political finance database, and proactively share their data with the House of Commons authorities to ensure candidates who become MPs are properly registering donations.

A spokesperson for the Electoral Commission said: “While the Electoral Commission publishes information on candidate spending to aid transparency, we do not have the legal authority to publish donors’ personal data from candidate returns.

“We recognise that the current political finance framework could be strengthened further, and have recommended that our remit be extended to include candidates, which would simplify the regulatory process for candidates and improve transparency for voters.”

Environmental campaigners who took Shropshire Council to the High Court over the massive expansion of a chicken farm have managed to get planning permission overturned.

www.shropshirestar.com

River Action UK managed to get the approval of a 200,000-bird intensive poultry unit at Felton Butler, near Shrewsbury, in the River Severn catchment overturned after a two-day hearing at the High Court in Cardiff. 

It comes after activists dressed up in chicken costumes outside the court, holding placards with slogans including “kindly cluck off”, with bird excrement streaming into the river one of the big concerns.

Campaigners say the judgment marks a pivotal moment in the movement against factory farming in the UK and that planning authorities must assess the cumulative impacts of having multiple intensive agricultural developments in one river catchment before granting permission for another. 

They say councils must also consider how livestock production units dispose of the waste from treatment facilities downstream, including from anaerobic digestion plants.

“This ruling is a wake-up call,” said Emma Dearnaley, River Action’s head of legal. “For too long, councils like Shropshire have been rubber-stamping intensive livestock farms without fully considering the damage they do to the surrounding environment. There are already far too many chickens in areas like the Severn and our rivers are choking on chicken muck. Today, the court drew a line: no more megafarms without looking at the bigger picture.

“This landmark judgment means councils across the country must take the health of the wider area into account and look at the wider consequences when it comes to agricultural waste. It’s a big win for our rivers. The reckless spread of intensive agriculture must end now.”

The judicial review focused on Shropshire Council’s failure to lawfully assess the environmental impact of the development, including the widespread and damaging practice of spreading poultry manure or digestate on surrounding land.

Key issues upheld by the court included:

* Failure to assess cumulative impact: The council did not properly assess the reality of having multiple polluting poultry units in one area, especially in light of the high density of existing units in the Severn river catchment.

* Failure to assess the indirect environmental impacts of the development. The council failed to lawfully assess the impacts of spreading manure or digestate, as indirect effects of the development.

Dr Alison Caffyn, a campaigner from River Action UK, said: “There are nearly 65 chickens for every person in Shropshire and yet the council still thought we needed more. This ruling proves what we’ve said all along: the planning system has been putting our rivers at risk. This case is a win for communities across the UK who are standing up to the environmental degradation caused by industrial factory farming.”

 Ricardo Gama, solicitor at Leigh Day, the firm representing Dr Caffyn, said: “River Action and our client are obviously delighted about this result. 

“They and others have done a huge amount of painstaking work reviewing technical documents to bring to light the flaws in this planning application. 

“Dr Caffyn and River Action say that industrial agriculture has flown under the radar for too long, and it’s only through the tireless work of them and others that people are waking up to its massive environmental impacts. 

“A High Court judge has found that Shropshire Council failed to properly assess those impacts, particularly given their legal obligation to look at the impacts in the round alongside the huge number of other intensive poultry units in the Severn catchment. River Action hopes that this will serve as an example for other councils looking at similar applications.”

This judgment follows several recent challenges against industrial agriculture. In March, the High Court ruled in The National Farmers’ Union v Herefordshire Council that farming manure constitutes industrial waste in law, with significant implications for the sustainable management of manure-as-waste across the UK.

Earlier this year, a proposed megafarm in Methwold, Norfolk was rejected over environmental concerns including the need to take full climate impacts into account when deciding whether to grant permission and the need to properly manage waste to prevent air and water pollution.

Campaigners hope that today’s victory will be a turning point in agricultural planning and policy, putting environmental health at the heart of decisions, stopping the spread of unsustainable megafarms and delivering proper protection for rivers.

Work on a massive housing scheme on the outskirts of Newton Abbot has stopped following a major public protest and an urgent intervention from Teignbridge Council.

Protesters at Wolborough (image courtesy: Newton Says No)

Guy Henderson, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk

Developer Vistry Homes has downed tools on the ‘NA3’ site at Wolborough, where permission has been given for 1,200 new homes.

At the end of April officers from Teignbridge Council stepped in to halt the work amid claims that Vistry had gone beyond the limits of the permission granted.

Work had got under way on a large drainage pond, and campaigners said they feared the works would cause irreparable damage to nearby Wolborough Fen, an official Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).

A national newspaper recently named the fen as one its 10 ‘jewels’ of English nature at risk from development. Protesters walked onto the site with placards to see the pond for themselves.

Teignbridge Council said work to create the drainage pond fell outside the approved areas and issued a temporary stop notice, which is due to expire next week.

Vistry said at the time that it would continue to work with the council to resolve any concerns and ensure that recommended planning procedures were followed.

However, ward councillors have today received an email from council officers telling them that Vistry has confirmed in writing that it will stop work on the whole site, apart from ‘mitigation’ work to reduce soil erosion and make sure silt does not end up in the fen during storms.

Talks are understood to be in progress between the council and the developers.

The email goes on: “It has been made clear to the developer that regular monitoring of the situation will be undertaken, and it has been stressed to the developer that any continuation of works on the site itself  – other than agreed interim mitigation/remediation works – would likely necessitate the council having to formally serve a stop notice and enforcement notice.”

The news was announced on social media by the Newton Says No group which has campaigned against the NA3 housing project in its current form.

One group member posted: “Well done everyone, it just shows what we can achieve if we stick together and stay strong.”

Cllr Richard Daws (Ind, Ambrook) said: “This reinforces what we have been saying the whole time, which is please be sure that if you do anything, it is not to the detriment of the SSSI.

“And without doubt the residents putting forward such a strong and cohesive case made it difficult for the developers and the council to ignore.”

Vistry Homes has been invited to comment on the latest development.

Plans for a battery storage facility in East Devon have been unanimously rejected because of concerns about pollution.

Bradley Gerrard, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk 

The proposal for a battery energy storage system (BESS) at Blackpool Corner, Axminster had been submitted by Root Power, which hoped it would be able to store enough energy to power 100,000 homes for two hours.

Such sites are becoming more prevalent because they can store energy from renewable sources, such as wind or solar, and then feed it into the grid at times of high demand when there is little to no wind or sunshine to generate electricity.

However, members of East Devon District Council’s planning committee raised fears that a vital aquifer that provides water to local residents could be polluted in the event of a fire.

The applicant had proposed underground storage for run-off water that would be used to cool equipment if a blaze broke out. The storage is aimed at preventing the water entering watercourses, but planners weren’t satisfied with the details.

“The detail is just not in this one,” said Cllr Mike Howe (Independent, Clyst Valley).

“We have problems with not having the correct details, and problems with the possible damage to the aquifer.

“Also, they have put water storage in, but they don’t have enough storage to collect what would be needed to fight a fire.”

The report for councillors said the scheme proposed 500,000 litres of water storage to capture run-off from any firefighting, but that around five million litres was needed to deal with such an incident.

“My main concern is the aquifer, which has not been addressed properly by the applicant,” Cllr Brian Bailey (Conservative, Exmouth Littleham).

The Environment Agency said while it didn’t have an objection to the scheme, there was “no specific assessment on risks to groundwater”, and recommended the council “seeks more information in relation to the protection of groundwater”.

Committee chair Cllr Olly Davey (Green Party, Exmouth Town) noted that the applicant had “not sent a representative along to plead their case”.

Residents attended the meeting to speak out against the application, which had also been recommended for refusal by officers based on its “significant adverse landscape impact”.

Objector Elliot Jones, a member of the Hawkchurch Action  Group, said this was “the wrong location for this form of development”, noting an application on this site had previously been refused.

Dr Karen Goaman called the approach to water storage “disingenuous” and “inadequate”.

She referenced how the Planning Inspectorate had refused an appeal for a BESS at nearby Pound Road partly because of the size of water storage on site, which was believed to be insufficient.

The two objectors were among those who had just weeks earlier successfully lobbied for a similar scheme in a nearby location to be refused.

That scheme, submitted by Clearstone Energy for land near Hazelhurst Raymonds Hill, Axminster, was thrown out after a three-and-a-half hour debate.

Darwin Escapes, the operator of nearby Hawkchurch Resort and Spa, reiterated its objection to the latest development, emphasising the “tranquil” landscape would be disrupted.

It said its guests would be able to see the four-metre-high security lighting columns that had been proposed around it would ruin the area’s dark night skies, and a four-metre tall fence would also negatively impact the area’s natural beauty.

The committee voted unanimously to refuse the scheme.
 

A Devon farmer and county councillor has criticised the government’s latest Spending Review, warning that it offers “nothing for rural areas and no rural strategy.”

Ella Sampson www.themoorlander.co.uk 

Councillor Cheryl Cottle-Hunkin, Devon County Council’s Cabinet Member for Rural Affairs and Broadband and a fifth-generation farmer in North Devon, said she was “really disappointed” by the Chancellor’s announcements during the review, which she felt focused heavily on urban areas in the North and Midlands.

“There’s nothing for rural areas and no rural strategy,” she said. 

“The loss of the £10 million Rural Services Delivery Grant at short notice was a terrific blow to the county, and although the government has committed to an average of £2.7 billion per year from 2026 to 2029 for sustainable farming and nature recovery, this represents a real-term cut of 2.3 per cent, and within this the NFU has identified a £100 million reduction in farming and countryside programmes including the Environmental schemes.”

Cllr Cottle-Hunkin expressed concern over the future of the Environmental Land Management schemes, which many farmers rely on. 

“It appears likely that the Environmental Land Management schemes will be reduced, especially considering that the current SFI applications (which were reopened following the NFU’s legal challenge over the abrupt closure of SFI applications) were capped at £9,300 per year per farm business.”

She warned the government does not seem to understand the importance of rural communities. 

“The Government does not appear to recognise the vital role our farming and rural communities play in caring for and improving the environment, and supporting jobs and the economy in rurally isolated places, and this concerns me greatly.”

However, she did welcome one U-turn, following pressure from local government. 

“I am pleased that the Government has listened to campaigners including Devon councillors in relation to the winter fuel U-turn after a motion by my fellow Liberal Democrat councillor Alan Connett in September condemned this proposal.”

She said this shows ministers can be swayed: “This suggests that they will listen and are prepared to change when they make unpopular and ill-judged decisions, so we can only hope they do the same and see sense on the farm inheritance tax issue.”

Cllr Cottle-Hunkin described the inheritance tax proposals as “devastating” for farming families, saying: “From the very outset this has caused overwhelming stress and worry within the farming sector with no time to plan for many. Farming is not a job but a way of life, and many farms have been farmed and passed down, along with their inherent knowledge of the land and associated farming practices, through many generations – myself included as a fifth-generation Devon farmer.”

She backed the EFRA Select Committee’s recent call to pause and rework the policy and praised the NFU’s alternative proposal: “The NFU has put forward an alternative ‘clawback’ mechanism which is used in other European countries and would allow working farms to continue as they are, but close loopholes on those purchasing farms simply for inheritance tax reasons.”

“Central Government needs to sit up and listen and understand the disaster they are creating both in terms of food security and the wider impact on our rural areas across the UK if they continue with this devastating policy. We are not backing down on this one – the farming community is united and we won’t give up.”

Cllr Cottle-Hunkin added that ministers should spend more time in Devon to better understand rural issues.

“Perhaps if they spent more time in our beautiful part of the world and had a better understanding of rural areas and food production, they would know that it is our resilient farming communities who have many of the solutions to problems such as Britain’s food security, sustainability and environmental improvements.

“Devon has huge potential and could do so much more with a modest amount of support in the right places, but we are being desperately misunderstood by those making the big decisions in Westminster.”

Earlier this week, Conservative MP for Central Devon and Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride echoed these concerns, saying that the Chancellor “has barely mentioned farming”.

“It’s not enough to hit farmers with the family farm tax,” Mr Stride said during the Spending Review debate on Wednesday, 11 June. 

“Today the choice is to make further cuts to vital grants on which many farmers rely.

“It is a huge betrayal of the farming communities, and some of the government’s MPs in rural constituencies will have to explain this [to voters].”

Labour, however, defended its record, claiming the funding package demonstrates its “steadfast commitment to farming, food security, and nature’s recovery.”

Spending Review documents stated: “The government will invest more than £2.7 billion per year in sustainable farming and nature recovery from 2026–27 until 2028–29. Farmers will benefit from an average of £2.3 billion through the Farming and Countryside Programme and up to £400 million from additional nature schemes.”

Parliament committee slams water company culture and urges tougher action.

Committees – UK Parliament

A failing water sector in which “water companies increasingly look like financial institutions rather than businesses servicing monopolised critical infrastructure” is in need of “root and branch reform”, according to a new report by Parliament’s Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee.

• Read the report [HTML]
• Read the report [PDF]
• Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee

MPs say there is a cultural problem in the sector and call for “a major refresh of the incentives and drivers” and “much more regulated management of financial incentives for senior executives”.  

The report follows the Committee’s evidence sessions with the leadership of ten of England and Wales’ major water and sewerage companies in 2025.  

The MPs’ ‘Priorities for water sector reform’ report makes recommendations to the Independent Water Commission, ahead of its Chair, Sir Jon Cunliffe, publishing his final report next month. The Committee will put their findings to Sir Jon in an evidence session tomorrow (Tuesday 17 June). 

Culture, ownership, leadership and bonuses  

The report urges the Water Commission to consider a variety of models of corporate ownership, which they say “could offer a better culture of responsible leadership.” 

MPs want the Commission to “determine how regulators can better vet or veto potential owners of water companies to prevent bad actors from running critical national infrastructure”.  

The report notes that bonuses totalling millions of pounds have been repeatedly paid to senior executives over many years, despite poor performance, which they say “seriously diminish trust” and may fail to incentivise improvement. 

MPs want the Commission to consider reforms to “ensure that the right people are put into senior positions” as they call for greater oversight from Ofwat before appointments are made and bonuses are paid, as well as “clearer statutory expectations on the criteria for bonuses”.  

The report states that “privatisation has almost certainly weakened the accountability of the water industry to the public”, noting that water data is often not public in practice. MPs want water companies to be legally obliged to publish performance, environmental and financial data on a regular basis. 

Financial management and structures  

The report today says there has been “serious economic mismanagement of companies” and calls for greater regulation of debt accumulation and debt management, saying that “a culture of relying on debt must never be allowed to arise again”.    

On the issue of dividends, MPs call for safeguards “to prevent egregious dividend payments” and say that examples of excessive dividends contrasted with poor performance, are “symptomatic of a culture of profiteering over duties to regulators and customers”. 

Stating that “investors need to see stable but modest long-term returns”, the report stresses that the regulatory system should “ensure that services for customers and the environment take priority”. MPs say that dividends should correlate to a company’s performance. 

On the question of special administration, MPs believe it should be a last resort given the high initial cost to government but say “it is unclear whether allowing a failing company to struggle on and accumulate progressively more debt is a better outcome than assuming temporary national control more quickly, with the associated costs that it could incur”. 

The Price Review Process and the regulatory environment  

The Committee supports the Water Commission’s focus on creating a better regulatory framework, but says “a good framework is nothing without well-equipped regulators to act against bad actors and poor behaviours”.   

MPs want the Commission to ensure that data on water is as open as possible and believe that regulators should gain automatic access to water companies’ data relevant to their regulatory functions. 

They say that the current regulatory system, which has not incentivised enough investment in water infrastructure, impacts both short-term resilience against asset failures and long-term water security. The report cites that, despite well-known population and climate pressures, such as drought in the South and South East, efforts to ensure future water supplies are regarded by some stakeholders as insufficient.   

MPs say that if the price review process is to be retained, it needs to be reformed. They want the Commission’s proposals to result in a price review process and regulatory system that encourages better resilience, to protect customers from short term shocks and to ensure that water resources are protected in the future.   

Relationship with consumers and need for single social tariff  

During its inquiry, the Committee heard of instances of inadequate communication from some water companies during events such as water outages or raw sewage entering homes and was particularly concerned to hear of vulnerable customers not receiving the support they needed. MPs also say that “it is generally thought that levels of compensation after these events are too low and easy to avoid paying.”   

The report urges Defra and the Water Commission to address the issues of local coordination with key bodies and communication with customers, and to consider the introduction of statutory standards to “create a customer-first culture” among water companies.  

The Committee wants the Commission to make provisions to establish a single social tariff to protect low-income households and for the Commission to establish how effectively water poverty is being tackled. 

Chair comment (The Rt Hon Mr Alistair Carmichael is the Liberal Democrat MP for Orkney and Shetland)

“The water sector has a serious culture problem. Water companies are the keepers of a vital national infrastructure. They exist to provide an essential service to the public and to protect the environment. But these primary functions seem to have been forgotten. Amidst growing public outrage at the poor performance of water companies, some companies have been paying out high dividends to shareholders and excessive bonuses to their senior executives.   

 “Water companies’ complex and sometimes impenetrable financial structures, with their myriad subsidiaries, holding companies and parent organisations, seem to suggest that their purpose is less to provide a good service to their customers and more to allow them to juggle their finances and their increasingly unsustainable levels of debt.   

“Meanwhile, an ineffective regulatory system has failed to protect customers, the environment and the financial stability of the sector. It has failed to ensure that companies invest in essential infrastructure and it has not encouraged long-term thinking.  

“This has got to stop now. Trust and accountability in the water sector are very low. It is not acceptable that it has fallen to commendable citizen scientists to expose issues with local water resources. Environmental protection and the delivery of a reliable and safe water must be the first priorities of water companies and regulators. 

“We want the country’s water sector to be fit for purpose. Now and in the long-term. The Water Commission has got the opportunity to draw up the root and branch reforms necessary to ensure that the issues plaguing the sector are resolved. It must not shy away from bold proposals.”  

Richard Foord speaking at the end of one of the debates on Lib Dem ammendments but the Government bulldozed them all away.

Only one or two Tories bothered to speak.

Planning and Infrastructure Bill Tuesday 10 June 2025

…….I wish to put it on the record that Devon, which is rightly celebrated across Britain for its rugged coastline, its rolling farmland, its spectacular moorlands and its ancient woodlands, is subject to the diggers of developers who are encouraged by this Government. Although we all need houses and we all need the protection that they afford, this Bill, if enacted, will only damage nature. Nature in Devon is part of who we are and we face a nature crossroads. The Devon Local Nature Partnership tells us that the loss and decline of Devon’s wildlife has accelerated rapidly over the past 50 years. The wooded valleys of the Blackdown hills and the wildflower meadows of East Devon are priceless, but once they are gone, they cannot be brought back.

Yesterday in the Tea Room, we were talking about the darkening clouds of the international system and how this Government are having to deal with such grave matters of state. Somebody then pointed out that, never mind grappling with wars and conflict, we cannot even create a system where a £44 swift brick is put in a new house to encourage nature in our rural areas.

Healthy natural systems underpin our economy and our communities, but unless we restore nature, we will have nothing left. Building homes does not need to come at the cost of nature. We must build in the right places with nature embedded at the heart of planning.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves did not mention Send deficits in her spending review speech, but documents released later pledged clarification in the autumn.

Devon’s accumulated deficit of more than £130 million is greater than the council’s cash reserves.

Audit committee to hold an extraordinary meeting next month to discuss the issue in more detail.

Bradley Gerrard, Local Democracy Reporter www.devonlive.com

Fears have been raised about Devon County Council’s ability to start its budget-setting process amid ongoing uncertainty around its huge special needs deficit.

Many councils across the country, including Devon, were hoping for clarity from the government about what it will do about roughly £6 billion of special educational needs and disabilities (Send) deficits nationwide.‌

The previous government allowed councils to effectively ringfence these deficits out their annual accounts, but that permission – officially called the statutory override – ends next March unless it is extended or an alternative solution created.‌

What that means is a council’s Send deficit will be moved back onto its balance sheet.

In Devon’s case, at more than £130 million, it is greater than the council’s cash reserves.

Addressing the audit committee this week, the council’s finance director Angie Stewart said if no government action is taken it would put its finances at risk.

“This is not unique to Devon, but we have to deal with our own issues,” she said.

“We must be mindful of what the government is going to do with the end of the statutory override approaching.”

Chancellor Rachel Reeves did not mention Send deficits in her spending review speech, but documents released later pledged clarification in the autumn.

Donna Manson, the council’s chief executive, said the lack of any clarity is worrying.

“I have concerns about the ability of the council to set a budget for next year, as there are question marks on whether the Send deficit will be moved or not, and that has a significant impact on what we look at as an organisation,” she said.

“I consider this a matter or urgency as we did not hear what we expected to in the spending review.”

Committee’s chair Cllr Alan Connett (Liberal Democrat, Exminster & Haldon) expressed his frustration given the Send deficit “entirely wipes out our reserves”.

“It is the single-biggest risk to this council that has no mitigation as the government has done nothing to say whether the current arrangement carries on or what they expect us to do,” he said.

“The Safety Valve agreement does nothing to limit the demand that has to be met by the council.”

Devon secured £95 million from the Safety Valve rescue scheme run by the previous government, with funding paid over nine years.

But the current government halted new applications for such grants, meaning the future of existing agreements is unclear.

Cllr Connett agreed to hold an extraordinary meeting next month to discuss the issue in more detail, after worries from some councillors that it would be too long to wait until the next scheduled meeting in September.

Deputy chair Cllr Paul Hayward (Independent, Axminster) said: “I feel a little bit ill at ease given the chief executive’s point, because if the audit committee considers this in September, we will be well into budget preparations [for the 26/27 financial year], and waiting until then could cause problems.

“The item is so significant to this authority that I would be happier with an extraordinary meeting when the government provides clarity [to the council].”

A Devon cabinet member is upset at the lack of detail in the government’s spending review linked to reforms of the special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) system.

Bradley Gerrard www.midweekherald.co.uk

Cllr Denise Bickley (Liberal Democrat, Sidmouth) cabinet member for Send at Devon County Council, said “It was very sad not to hear it mentioned at all and have it bundled in with [upcoming] reviews and plans.

“I am glad it will be dealt with and hope the forthcoming white paper will provide a scheme to fix the things that are going wrong, but that isn’t helping today, which is a shame.”

The spending review provides for a £3.25 billion transformation fund to contribute towards the “reform of the Send system to improve pupil outcomes” – with £760 million between now and 2027/28.

“Details of the government’s intended approach to Send reform will be set out in a schools white paper in the autumn,” the documents said.

Devon’s Send service has built up a cumulative overspend of more than £130 million, and it has around 9,800 education, health and care plans (EHCPs),  documents that specify additional help individual pupils need in school.

These cost an average of £17,000 per plan, according to figures from the county council earlier this year.

The overspend is allowed to be kept outside the council’s main finances, but rules allowing that expire in March unless they are renewed.

At breaking point

Cllr Bickley says the system is “already at breaking point” with mainstream schools being asked to take on more responsibilities, including children with additional needs, but usually without extra financial support.

She added the funding formula also disadvantages Devon, given its rural nature meant its bill for transporting children to school is far higher than an urban council’s.

Cllr Bickley, who has only been in the cabinet post for a few weeks, said the council had, before she took on the role, sent feedback to government about what it wanted to see in the Send review.

“We want to help get what is needed and we need to work with all parts of the education system, as well as parents, to make sure the system works for children,” she added.

“Safeguarding money is important, as we cannot just write a cheque for the needs that there are, but then that means children and parents are not getting what they are entitled to, so it is a very hard balancing act.”

Last year, Devon County Council secured £95 million from the Department for Education through a Safety Valve scheme, which gave grants to councils with large Send overspends.

The money is paid over eight years, and comes with strings attached, such as a requirement for councils to contribute cash to tackling the deficit and improving the service.

Maybe – Owl

Government will fund Cullompton railway station

Two south west MPs have claimed a hard-fought victory in relation to a funding pledge for railway stations in two towns in Devon and Somerset.

Bradley Gerrard, local democracy reporterwww.radioexe.co.uk 

Richard Foord, the Liberal Democrat member for Honiton and Sidmouth, and colleague Gideon Amos, the Taunton and Wellington member, had been hoping the chancellor Rachel Reeves would mention cash for the reopening of Cullompton and Wellington railway stations in her spending review, but were disappointed by the time she left the despatch box having not mentioned the projects.

But Mr Foord has now said the Treasury has confirmed to him that funding would be allocated to the two projects.

Some other local politicians suggested more caution, though, given funding had been pledged for the project before, and then the scheme had been shelved due the change in government after the 2024 general election.

Cllr James Buczkowski, who represents Cullompton on Devon County Council and is also a Mid Devon District Council councillor, said he was “really pleased” the two MPs had continued their fight for the stations, but noted he was “cautiously optimistic”.

“It’s fantastic that we have two MPs who have tirelessly fought for these stations but it was disappointing that the government was not very explicit about the funding for the infrastructure that Cullompton needs,” he said.

“I will wait for the formal announcement from the Department for Transport to see what that entails, and until contracts are signed with them, like they have been with the Cullompton town centre relief road, I won’t get too excited.”

He added it was positive news the funding seemed to be available, but noted that it had been announced and withdrawn previously.

“Until I see wet ink on paper, I’ll hold my celebrations for now,” Cllr Buczkowski said.

Mr Foord has previously argued that the reopening of Cullompton station is vital to make the forthcoming development of around 5,000 homes at Culm Garden Village more sustainable.

“It has been a long campaign over many years, with hundreds of people determined to secure this historic outcome,” Mr Foord said in a statement after claiming to have secured confirmation of the funding from the Treasury.

“Working alongside my Liberal Democrat colleague, Gideon Amos MP, we have raised this issue at the highest levels of government, making a strong case to the chancellor, the transport secretary and the rail minister.”

Mr Foord added that Mid Devon District Council had put together an “irrefutable business case for the reopening of the station.

The MP added the new station would mean residents could “beat congestion in the town”, a reference to Cullompton’s virtually daily queues that form at the town’s junction 28 of the M5.

Rachel Gilmour says government fails the county

Since publication Richard Foord MP for Honiton has now said the Treasury has confirmed to him that funding would be allocated to the two projects.

However, some other local politicians suggested more caution, though, given funding had been pledged for the project before, and then the scheme had been shelved due the change in government after the 2024 general election. – see separate post.

Bradley Gerrard, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk 

A Devon MP has criticised the government’s spending review for giving “nothing” to Devon.

Liberal Democrat Rachel Gilmour, who represents Tiverton and Minehead, said the announcement failed to support the county or Somerset.

“Nothing for Devon, nothing for Somerset,” she said.

“The spending review feels like a missed opportunity to draw a line under years of Conservative mismanagement, which damaged our public services, left our NHS on its knees, social care and Send teetering on the edge, and school and hospital buildings crumbling – and begin to deliver the change people were promised.

“The government must understand that we can’t fix the NHS if don’t fix social care.”

Ms Gilmour said that while her party welcomed the investment of £29 billion a year into day-to-day NHS spending, she is shocked at the “deafening silence on the social care crisis in the chancellor’s speech”.

“That spoke volumes,” she said.

“NHS investment will be wasted if hospitals can’t discharge patients who don’t need to be there – and if local authorities don’t have the resources to care for people in their homes, preventing them going to hospital in the first place.

“The government must stop dragging its feet and conclude their social care review by Christmas.”

Farmers also seemed to be hit as a result of the spending review, Ms Gilmour claimed.

“Following the budget, this spending review provided the perfect opportunity to change course and back our farmers and rural communities, yet our farmers are still being left to carry the burden of budget cuts,” she said.

“This is unacceptable, and shows that the government have, once again, not considered UK food security.”

Labour claims its funding settlement shows its “steadfast commitment to farming, food security, and nature’s recovery”.

Spending review documents said: “The government will invest more than £2.7 billion per year in sustainable farming and nature recovery from 2026-27 until 2028-29.

“Farmers will benefit from an average of £2.3 billion through the Farming and Countryside Programme and up to £400 million from additional nature schemes.”

On NHS funding, the spending review stated the £29 billion additional annual cash through to 2028/29 would take spending to £226 billion by that year, equivalent to a three per cent annual boost.

“This investment will support the NHS to deliver the government’s Plan for Change commitment, meaning that by the end of the parliament, 92 per cent of patients will start consultant-led treatment for non-urgent conditions within 18 weeks of referral,” the spending review document said.

Since publication Richard Foord has now said the Treasury has confirmed to him that funding would be allocated to the two projects.

However, some other local politicians suggested more caution, though, given funding had been pledged for the project before, and then the scheme had been shelved due the change in government after the 2024 general election. – see separate post.

Bradley Gerrard www.midweekherald.co.uk 

A Devon MP has criticised the government’s spending review’s strategy which he describes as “unacceptably” failing to invest properly in the westcountry.

Richard Foord, the Liberal Democrat member for Honiton and Sidmouth, said the “vast majority” of funding is targeted at the north of England, the Midlands, and London.

Neither Devon nor the south west are mentioned in initial government documents released following the announcement on Wednesday.

“The westcountry has missed out on essential investment yet again,” Mr Foord said.

“Devon wasn’t even mentioned in the spending review, and this is particularly galling given the 15 per cent cut to the rural affairs budget that will hit farmers and nature-friendly farming schemes.

“It will have devastating implications for our environment, for food security and for our rural economy.”

Spending review papers show that the administrative budget for the Department for Food and Rural Affairs, known as Defra, will fall from just over £1 billion this financial year to £962 million by 2029/30.

The government claims its funding settlement shows its “steadfast commitment to farming, food security, and nature’s recovery”.

“The government will invest more than £2.7 billion per year in sustainable farming and nature recovery from 2026-27 until 2028-29,” the documents said.

“Farmers will benefit from an average of £2.3 billion through the Farming and Countryside Programme and up to £400 million from additional nature schemes.”

Mr Foord said he is also “disappointed that the government is doing next to nothing” to resolve the crises in special educational needs and social care.

£15bn in transport projects announced but not here.

UK’s Shared Prosperity Fund (SPF) to help boost local economies (important for Cornwall) is being replaced by a “new local growth fund”, aimed at “mayoral city regions in the North and Midlands”, as well as investing in up to “350 deprived communities across the UK” – maybe, Owl

Spending review frustrates South West transport campaigners

Some politicians, railway campaigners and residents in the South West have expressed disappointment following the Government’s spending review on Wednesday.

Cameron Weldon, Jack Silver www.bbc.co.uk 

Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced £15bn of new investment in transport projects last week, and none of the money has so far been earmarked for named projects in Devon or Cornwall.

Reeves pledged funding for affordable homes, health, defence and schools but any areas in the South West set to benefit have not been spelt out at this stage.

Some campaigners and local residents had hoped her speech would have included additional investment for the region – such as funding to bring back Cullompton’s railway station.

Mid-Devon district councillor Steve Keable said the “political reality” was that Reeves was “playing into her Labour heartland” by prioritising other parts of the country.

Keable, who represents Taw Vale for the Liberal Democrats, said he hoped to find out “over the next few days” what would happen to “the capital funding that Cullompton and Mid Devon are so looking forward to”.

He added that the Cullompton Station project, as well as a separate project to build an additional junction on the M5 south of the town, could not “progress before we get the go ahead”.

Some local residents remain supportive of the railway station project.

“I think it would boost the economy of the town,” one said, adding: “I think it needs some money to push local businesses forward.”

Another local resident said the station was “always used before” and felt “the trains would be used more” if the station was rebuilt.

One mother said it would be “fantastic” if the station came back, adding: “My children would have access to days out – it would be really wonderful for everyone.”

Cornwall Council was awarded £184m in January by the UK’s Shared Prosperity Fund (SPF) to help boost the local economy.

However, the government announced this week it would be replacing the fund, which itself was originally established to replace EU funding by the last Conservative government.

Cornwall previously received about £400m of Objective One funding from the EU as it contained some of the poorest areas in England and Wales.

The government said it planned to establish a “new local growth fund”, external aimed at “mayoral city regions in the North and Midlands”, as well as investing in up to “350 deprived communities across the UK”.

Jayne Kirkham, Labour MP for Truro and Falmouth, said she had been told the money from the fund would be distributed by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), adding: “So that will come a bit later.”

“We are hoping that is coming soon and what the SPF might be morphing into,” she said.

Andrew George, Liberal Democrats MP for St Ives, said money for Cornwall should be ring-fenced if “there [was] ring-fencing for other nations”.

George said Cornwall had “rightly” received the investment over the last 25 years.

“Now what we want to happen is to make sure Cornwall is treated as it has been over that period,” he said.

Four cliff falls at Jacob’s Ladder were reported a couple of weeks ago, now Exmouth seafront roads have been closed by “ectoplasm”.

South West Water are not thought to be involved. – Owl

Weird slime covers Devon seaside road as police say it’s like ectoplasm

Shannon Brown www.devonlive.com

A mysterious gooey substance caused a cyclist to crash and end up in hospital and closed a coastal road in Devon.

Queen’s Drive and Maer Lane in Exmouth was closed at the roundabout while clean-up crews dealt with what has been described as a “slime that bears a very strong resemblance to ectoplasm”.

Devon County Council closed the road near the RNLI lifeboat station, Exmouth Police said.

The road was reopened by around 1.30pm.

The weird substance was “super slippery and very gooey” according to Exmouth Police.

One cyclist was taken to hospital after being “taken off” by the slime.

“Devon County Council have closed the Seafront by the lifeboat station, as well as Maer Lane,” Exmouth Police said.

“The roundabout is covered in a mysterious slime that bears a very strong resemblance to ectoplasm!

“It’s super slippery and very gooey. It has already taken off one cyclist who is currently in Exmouth Hospital.

“We do not feel it causes a wider human health implication at this time.”

Exmouth Police continued: “Despite best efforts by colleagues from East Devon District Council street team and Devon County Council Highways, we are unable to either identify of remove the substance.

“It just won’t clean off and its not through lack of serious trying with industrial jet washes, road sweepers, etc (we know that Tony form Exmouth Town Council in his brand new road sweeper would have sorted it)!

“DCC’s closure is pending a specialist environmental cleaning contractor arriving which may be some hours.

“We have considered South West Water activity in the area but it appears to not be their cargo.”

Rapid spreading “Nimbus” Covid wave looks set to hit UK this summer

Scientists fear the UK will see a new Covid wave this summer as the new “Nimbus” variant spreads rapidly around the world.

Tom Bawden inews.co.uk

The NB.1.8.1 variant – which has been dubbed Nimbus – is thought to be more contagious than the other active Covid variants, although there is no evidence that the symptoms are any more severe.

At the same time, the immunity Britons have built up from jabs and previous infections has waned considerably after relatively few cases of Covid over the last six months and a prolonged period of low vaccination levels.

As such, scientists are concerned the Nimbus variant could push up cases in the UK after sending infections soaring in China, Singapore and Hong Kong.

There are already signs that the Nimbus is spreading fast in the UK after its share of new Covid infections (from all variants) jumped from 2 per cent on 28 April to 11 per cent on 12 May, the latest date for which data is available, according to the COVspectrum database.

And while new infections are still well below the peaks seen last summer and autumn, there are signs that cases are starting to pick up in the UK.

New figures from the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) today indicate that new Covid infections rose by about 7 per cent in the week to Sunday 1 June – and are around 80 per cent higher than at the start of March.

It is not clear when any new wave would occur or how big it would be, but scientists say they do expect to see a spike in infections over the next month or two.

“We are very likely to see a spike of infections over the next couple of months, possibly by later this month or in July. But it’s difficult to predict the level of this infection wave,” Professor Lawrence Young, a virologist at Warwick University, told The i Paper.

“Population immunity, either from vaccination or previous infection, is waning and, unlike other respiratory viruses such as flu, the Covid virus continues to spread in hot and humid weather.”

“The NB.1.8.1 variant has driven surges of infection in Asia over the spring and is now the dominant strain in Hong Kong and China. It is also spreading in the US and Australia,” Professor Young said.

“Preliminary evidence from lab studies suggests that NB.1.8.1 can infect cells more efficiently than previous variants and that it can partially evade the immune protection provided by antibodies from vaccinated or previously infected people”.

Professor Young urged those who are eligible to take up their booster vaccines as the World Health Organisation has said that jabs still offer good protection against severe disease from infections by the Nimbus variant.

Free vaccines are still available for people aged 75 years and older, residents in care homes for older people, and those aged six months and over with a weakened immune system until 17 June in the current spring booster campaign.

Professor Christina Pagel, a healthcare data analyst at University College London, added: “It’s quite possible we will see a large wave of infection here in two months or so once it becomes dominant.”

Professor Steve Griffin, of Leeds University, said: “The UK has been fortunate not to have a major wave of Covid infections since last autumn. But a recent surge in cases in South East Asian countries, signifies that the relatively quiet spell may be coming to an end.”

Professor Paul Hunter, of University of East Anglia, said: “I guess we will see some increase in reported infections. I doubt case numbers will be as high as this time last year though I cannot be 100 per cent certain on this. But we do need to follow its progress”.

The UKHSA said today that 5.9 per cent of those people with respiratory symptoms testing for Covid in hospitals tested positive in the week to Sunday.

That “positivity rate” compares to 16.2 per cent in last July’s peak and 2.3 per cent at the start of the year.

Positivity rates among hospital patients with symptoms are typically much higher than infection rates in the general population – figures which are not available for the UK outside of winter.

Although the figures are not available for the UK and only cover England, scientists say they give a good indication of trends and across the four nations.

Final push for new Devon railway station near M5

The fate of Cullompton railway station and its sister project in Wellington, Somerset, will be revealed at the end of the government’s spending review on June 11.

Daniel Mumby, Alex Richards www.devonlive.com 

Richard Foord MP (Honiton and Sidmouth) and Gideon Amos MP, (Taunton and Wellington) have been fervently campaigning for the two stations for months, engaging with transport ministers, participating in Westminster Hall debates and organising a parliamentary delegation in April.

Mr Amos raised the issue in the House of Commons on Wednesday (June 4), shortly after the chancellor announced over £15bn for UK-wide transport projects – an announcement which failed to provide any reassurance about the new stations.

“The chief secretary [of the Treasury] will know that the benefits of the Cullompton and Wellington stations project would bring tens of thousands of people to the city, the metro region and the Cardiff-Bristol-Exeter corridor. Thanks to a cost-benefit ratio of almost 4:1, will he acknowledge the strength of the case for that project, as set out in the letter he received from his honourable friends the members for Weston-super-Mare (Dan Aldridge), for North Somerset (Sadik Al-Hassan) and for Exeter (Steve Race) – and from me and my honourable friend Richard Foord?”.

Somerset Council has thrown its support behind the proposed new stations at Cullompton and Wellington which are anticipated to draw tens of thousands.

Planning permission was given in May 2024 by the council for a housing development on Nynehead Road, which includes provisions for station access, and detailed designs for the spine road, featuring pedestrian and cycle links, as well as plans for an inviting ‘station square’, were greenlit.

West of England Developments (Taunton) Ltd, responsible for the forthcoming homes and roads, has assured that the site earmarked for the station will remain safeguarded from any future development should officials decide against it. The government’s commitment to rail investment was reinforced with assurances from Darren Jones, Chief Secretary to the Treasury and MP for Bristol North West, who expressed gratitude to Mr Amos for his persistent advocacy on the matter.

He stated: “I thank the honourable member for his campaigning and for welcoming today’s news of historic levels of investment into the west of England for transport.

“The best use of the money is to make sure that not only do we deliver infrastructure within our combined authorities, but that opportunities are unlocked for broader spending decisions on intercity transport, heavy rail, road investments, new housebuilding and industrial policy spending.

“The review of the Green Book has been looking at this and further details will be published next week. However, I am confident that we will be able to unlock opportunities for areas outside the combined authorities, and the investment announced today makes a stronger case for doing so.”

Mr Jones added that the government would publish its “infrastructure strategy” shortly after the spending review which would lay out how the government would address supply chain issues and other problems in delivering major transport projects.

A fascinating analysis by the BBC.

[This was written late last week just as Reform Chair, Zia Yusuf, announced his exit, 48 hours later he re-entered stage right. Par for the course in the leadership turmoils of Reform. – Owl]

Joshua Nevett www.bbc.co.uk 

Reform UK’s success in the recent local elections has propelled many councillors with limited or no political experience into council chambers across England.

While Reform UK’s rise was the big story of those elections, almost half of the councils up for grabs were not won outright by any single party.

That means many of those newbie councillors are now navigating so-called hung councils, where parties with little in common often work together to get the business of local government done.

But so far, it hasn’t panned out that way for Reform UK, which isn’t involved in any formal coalitions, pacts or deals in areas where there were local elections this year.

This was despite rampant speculation about Reform-Conservative coalitions ahead of the polls, with party leaders Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage not ruling out council deals.

So, what’s going on?

In some places – Warwickshire, Worcestershire and Leicestershire – Reform UK has enough councillors to form minority administrations and is attempting to govern alone.

In other areas where coalitions were possible, Reform UK has either shunned co-operation or vice versa. Where Reform UK has explored potential partnerships locally, its policies have been viewed with suspicion by the established parties.

In Cornwall, the Liberal Democrats, Labour and the Conservatives refused to work with Reform UK, even though it was the biggest party and had won the most seats.

Instead, the Lib Dems teamed up with independent councillors to run Cornwall Council as a minority administration.

That infuriated Reform UK’s group leader in Cornwall, Rob Parsonage, who branded the coalition deal “undemocratic” and “a total stitch-up”.

Did other parties contrive to exclude Reform UK? The newly minted Lib Dem council leader, Leigh Frost, does not think so.

“The reality is our core values at heart of it just stand for two very different things and it makes working together incompatible,” Frost told the BBC.

“And then Reform was given two weeks to try to form an administration and chose not to.”

Frost said Reform UK’s Cornwall candidates mainly campaigned on immigration.

This was echoed in conversations with other local party leaders across the country.

The BBC was told Reform’s candidates had little local policy to offer and mostly focused on national issues, such as stopping small boats crossing the English Channel.

[For the record two Reform councillors, out of 28, have not yet attended any meeting in Cornwall and another three have only attended half the number they were slated to attend – Owl]

Slashing “wasteful spending” by councils, like Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) in the US, was also a common campaign theme.

In Worcestershire, where Reform won the most seats but fell short of a majority, the party’s supposed lack of local policy was a major sticking point for the Conservatives.

“They haven’t got a local prospectus and that was part of the problem,” said Adam Kent, Tory group leader on Worcestershire County Council.

“They didn’t stand on any local issues. It was on national politics. How can you go into coalition with somebody if you don’t even know what they stand for?”

Joanne Monk, the Reform UK council leader in the county, said she only had “a brief couple of chats” with other party leaders but was uncompromising on coalitions.

“I’m damned sure we’re not on the same wavelength,” she said.

She followed the lead of Farage, who ruled out formal coalitions at council level but said “in the interests of local people we’ll do deals”, in comments ahead of the local elections.

In Worcestershire, Reform UK’s minority administration may need to do deals to pass key decisions and avoid other parties banding together to veto their plans.

Recognising this, she acknowledged other parties were “going to have to work with us at some point”.

In Northumberland, the Conservatives retained their position as the largest party and gave the impression they were willing to entertain coalition talks with Reform UK, which gained 23 seats.

“I said I would work with anyone and my door is open,” said Conservative council leader Glen Sanderson.

“But Reform the next day put out a press release saying the price for working with the Conservatives would be extremely high. So on that basis, I assumed that was the door closed on me.”

No talks were held and the Conservatives formed a minority administration.

Weeks had passed after the local elections before Mark Peart was voted in as Reform UK’s local group leader in the county. As a result, he wasn’t in a position to talk to anybody.

“Everything had already been agreed,” Peart said. “It was too late.”

Reform UK sources admitted the party was caught a bit flat-footed here and elsewhere as many of its new councillors got the grips with their new jobs in the weeks following the local elections.

A support network for those councillors, in the form of training sessions and a local branch system, is being developed by the party.

But this week Zia Yusuf, one of the key architects behind that professionalisation drive and the Doge cost-cutting initiative, resigned as party chairman, leaving a gap in the party’s leadership.

Reform UK’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, said the party’s success at the local elections “was partly because of the significant efforts and improvements to the infrastructure of the party” spearheaded by Yusuf.

Though Yusuf is gone, the party has considerably strengthened its foundations at local level, after gaining 677 new councillors and two mayors.

A Reform UK source said party bosses will be keeping an eye out for stand-out councillors who could go on to become parliamentary candidates before the general election.

They said in areas where Reform UK runs councils as a minority administration, it’s going to take some compromise with other parties and independents to pass budgets and key policies.

In the messy world of town halls and council chambers, that could be a tough apprenticeship.

Political opposition has an important role to play in all levels of democratic government but it needs to be conducted seriously, in a consistent and principled way, not through broadcasting hypocritical nonsense through social media. – Owl 

From Independent Cllr. Paul Hayward’s facebook post 7 June

Having now met with most of my fellow Councillors at DCC, and most of the newly and democratically elected Reform group, I am somewhat disappointed that their supporters and campaigners in East Devon insist on claiming that the new administration at DCC (of which I am not a part I must add) has acted in an undemocratic way by not appointing any Reform Councillors to the Cabinet. The words “disgraceful” have been bandied about by social media commentators and elected cllrs alike.

I can understand why they might be disgruntled, and upset, but that is politics, but it is certainly not undemocratic. For if it were, then they would leap at the chance to also criticise Leicestershire County Council where Reform won 45% of the seats on a 32% total vote share, and have formed a minority administration themselves, with 100% of all Cabinet seats being shared amongst their group – plus the Chair and Vice Chair.

Nothing unlawful or unusual about that – to the victor, the spoils etc – but it is a little bit hypocritical to then criticise another political group at another County Council with a similar cllr demographic and then also refuse to publish a comment making that observation in the interests of transparency and veracity.

I look forward to working with all my DC Cllr colleagues in the greater interests of helping everyone in Devon, and I also wish all Cabinet members the very best as they face the unenviable task of trying to unpick the financial maelstrom that is engulfing DCC, like so many larger authorities with adult and child care responsibilities and expenditure.

I would beseech local campaign teams to get involved in helping their elected councillors do the very best in their communities rather than putting out social media commentary that glaringly overlooks what their own party is doing elsewhere in the country.

Updated 1900 to include an example from the Reform Exmouth and Exeter East face book page.

Text reads:

NO MAJORITY. NO FAIRNESS.

On May 1st, no party won a majority… but the Liberal Democrats have chosen to fill Devon’s Cabinet entirely with their own councillors, bar one seat handed to the Greens!

Reform came a strong second in seat numbers. We’ve been given ZERO Cabinet roles.

For a party that champions proportional representation, this decision says it all.

Our 18 Reform councillors will now focus on Scrutiny Committees: holding the council to account, protecting taxpayers’ money and fighting for the people who elected us.

We are here to do the job you voted us in to do!