Who are the candidates in the race to be North Tyneside mayor?
The race is on to find a new mayor for North Tyneside - a role that effectively heads North Tyneside Council although, in many other authority areas, it is ceremonial.Labour's Norma Redfearn is standing down after 12 years in the job.Seven candidates have entered the contest to take on the top political position in the borough. Whoever wins the election will become the council's main spokesperson, directing the authority and chairing cabinet meetings.
The Labour Party candidate, Karen Clark, is currently the cabinet member for public health and wellbeing for the council and a ward councillor for Longbenton and Benton.Employment and the economy are her main priorities."People having a good quality job with some money in their pocket is the number one way to lift people out of poverty."She said she would be working to support businesses and talking to the government about investment in the area.
Liam Bones is the leader of the Conservatives in North Tyneside - the largest opposition party. He is a councillor for the Preston and Preston Grange ward.He has vowed to improve road maintenance in the borough. He said there was a backlog of roads and pavements which needed to be fixed and that about £36m needed to be spent tackling the problem. He said people are seeing "damage to their cars and trip hazards in pretty much every street."
The Liberal Democrat Party has selected Dr John Appleby as their candidate.He is a senior lecturer in engineering mathematics.For Dr Appleby, the environment is a key issue."We can talk about good air quality for health and making walking safer and more pleasant."He has also vowed to look after places like Marden Quarry and the Rising Sun Country Park.
Disability rights campaigner Chloe-Louise Reilly is the Green Party candidate.She stood as the party's candidate for Tynemouth in the 2024 General Election, but lost out to Labour's Alan Campbell.The party has vowed to abolish the role of the mayor, if Ms Reilly is elected. It believes the cabinet being chosen by the mayor, rather than via an election system, is undemocratic.Young people are also a priority for her. She said she would get them involved in projects like re-purposing empty buildings and would "give them the opportunity to decide what they want in the community."
Local resident John Falkenstein has lived in the borough for most of his life and has worked as a barrister for almost 30 years. He is standing for Reform UK.If elected, his top priority would be to "balance the books."He has called for a review of spending and said "Vanity projects have to stop, finances have to be rationalised and this all has to be done publicly."
Two independent candidates have also entered the race.Cath Davis is a former Labour councillor for the Preston ward who left the party in 2023.She wants to abolish the role that she is standing for, also objecting to the cabinet being chosen by the mayor, rather than via an election system."One of the major things I want to do is scrap the system," she said. "It's undemocratic."
A second independent candidate Martin Henry Uren has also entered the race.A watersports enthusiast, his main priority is to restore Tynemouth's Lido.He wants the pool to be council-run and for any profits to be invested in the area. He said "It's such a lovely project that has been in the public eye for a few years."It's time now to just get it done."
The election is on 1 May and only residents living in the borough are eligible to vote. The role is separate from the North East Mayor, a post held by Labour's Kim McGuinness, who represents the seven local authorities in the region, including North Tyneside.
Follow BBC North East on X, Facebook, Nextdoor and Instagram.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
an hour ago
- Leader Live
Bowie challenges Tories to ‘step up' against Miliband's ‘eco-zealotry'
The Scottish Conservative MP criticised both Labour and the SNP over their opposition to new oil and gas developments in the North Sea. Accusing the UK Government of 'overseeing the wilful deindustrialisation of this nation', Mr Bowie hit out at the 'frankly dangerous eco-zealotry of Ed Miliband', the Energy Secretary. Speaking at the Scottish Conservative conference at Murrayfield in Edinburgh Mr Bowie told his party: 'We must step up. Britain needs us more than ever.' The Tory insisted: 'The future of Scotland and Britain is at stake, our country's security depends on a strong Conservative Party to stand up for what is right.' He recalled how former US president Ronald Reagan had 'once said the first duty of government is to protect' – but added that 'on every front the SNP and Labour are failing to do that'. Attacking both Labour and the SNP, Mr Bowie, who is also his party's shadow Scottish secretary, said: 'They haven't protected everyone's economic security, by raising taxes, or ripping away their winter fuel payment, even if they are now apparently going to hand it back to them. 'They haven't protected our energy security by insisting on no new oil and gas developments.' The Conservative MP continued: 'We can all see what is happening in the world, there is more risk out there, we as a country are more vulnerable. 'That is why the decisions of this Labour Government are so gravely concerning. Their economic incompetence, coupled with their frightening ineptitude when it comes to our energy security is making the United Kingdom more vulnerable.' He attacked the Labour Government over its 'madcap drive to clean power by 2030', as he said ministers were 'actively accelerating the decline of our North Sea'. This, he said, was 'forcing us to become increasingly exposed to over-reliance on imports from overseas, imports that are shipped in diesel-chugging tankers across the Atlantic from America or from Norwegian wells'. The Tory said the opposition to new oil and gas developments meant 'investment is drying up, work is being put on pause, companies are literally shutting up shop and jobs are being lost'. But he added: 'This hostility for our oil and gas workers is not simply the preserve of the zealots in the Labour Party. 'The SNP have their fingerprints all over the job losses, the well closures.' It's Scottish Conservative Conference! 🇬🇧🏴 Hello Murrayfield! @ScotTories @Conservatives — Andrew Bowie (@AndrewBowie_MP) June 13, 2025 Mr Bowie added: 'We need Conservative leadership because we know where the SNP and Labour will take us.' He also used his speech to attack the 'snake oil salesmen' in Reform UK, insisting that Nigel Farage's party do not 'care one jot for Scotland, or for our United Kingdom'. The Tory said: 'Let me be clear. Reform is quite simply not a conservative party, not a unionist party, frankly they are not a serious party.' The Scottish government energy secretary Gillian Martin said: 'The Scottish Government is clear in our support for a just transition for Scotland's valued oil and gas sector, which recognises the maturity of the North Sea basin and is in line with climate change commitments and energy security. 'We are deeply concerned at recent announcements of planned job losses in the North East and have called on the UK Government for the earliest possible end to the Energy Profits Levy (EPL) – which was supposed to be a temporary measure but was extended by the previous Conservative UK Government.'
Wales Online
an hour ago
- Wales Online
Fears new M4 service station could become 'destination in its own right'
For generations, Wales' rail network has been starved of investment. We've been left with a rail network that is outdated and not fit for the nation's needs. There is no good reason why more money should be spent per resident in England on rail infrastructure than in Wales. We have far less electrified track than England and fewer modern services. We've been campaigning since the start of the year to raise awareness of the two massive opportunities Keir Starmer's government has this year to act. We wanted to put pressure on politicians to do something about it. You can help put pressure on him to do use this historic opportunity by signing WalesOnline's petition on the UK government website calling for fair rail funding for Wales. Very simply, we want people in England and Wales to be treated the same when it comes to rail. We've now had the results of the first of those two massive opportunities. Thanks to the pressure from the Welsh Government, Welsh Labour MPs, opposition parties and ourselves, Rachel Reeves has promised Wales nearly half a billion pounds for rail. There are arguments over whether this in itself is enough, what it will be spent on and what time period it is being spent over. But it is undeniably good news that work can start on some much needed projects. These include five new train stations on the south Wales mainline. Later on in the year, Mr Starmer's government is planning a major bit of rail legislation that will be a once-in-a-generation chance to put in place a mechanism to guarantee fairness in perpetuity. Read more about this here. There are arguments about how this should be done but widespread agreement that things must change. One academic told WalesOnline the Wales always comes at the bottom of the pile and will continue to unless there is full devolution. Another told us there was no appetite in either Cardiff Bay or Westminster for devolution and this lack of ambition was repeating the biggest mistake the Welsh Government had ever made. There are fears that unless there is full devolution, Wales will suffer every time the UK government cuts spending but protects major projects in England, as is happening right now. However the Welsh Government believes fair funding can be delivered without full devolution, which is does not want. And the head of a passenger body told us he didn't care who got the money as long as they did a good job with it, adding more cash could make a huge difference.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
£43,000-a-year boarding school is forced to make 'heart-wrenching' decision to close after 125 years following Labour's tax raid on private education
A £43,000-a-year boarding school has been forced to make the 'heart-wrenching' it will close after 125 years following Labour's tax raid on private education. Labour 's decision to levy VAT on private school fees has dealt a heavy blow to the sector, which some institutions have been unable to deal with. Queen Margaret's School For Girls in York has become the latest to announce its closure saying they are 'unable to withstand mounting financial pressure' following the introduction of VAT on fees. The controversial tax, pledged in Labour's manifesto, came into force in January this year. The school also blamed 'increased national insurance and pension contributions, the removal of charitable-status business rates relief, and rising costs for the upkeep and operation of our estate'. The 114-year-old institution said that 'tireless efforts' in the past 18 months to 'respond to these challenges' included a possible merger or sale and the search for 'fresh investment'. However, the school said 'none of these routes resulted in a successful outcome' and coupled with declining entries, it has 'been left with no alternative' but to close. After 'strong student enquiry levels' in Autumn, the school said 'these declined sharply in early 2025 following the implementation of VAT' and is 'below the viable level required' to keep the school open. The school added it is 'unable to meet the costs of closure' and has therefore filed a Notice to Appoint an Administrator. The independent boarding and day school for girls aged 11 to 18 will shut for good at the end of their summer term on July 5. A statement from Queen Margaret's School said: 'This is a heart-wrenching decision that no governing body wants to take, and we fully recognise that the closure of Queen Margaret's will be deeply distressing for the whole QM community. 'Our priority is the wellbeing of our pupils, their families and all of our incredible teaching staff, and we are committed to ensuring as smooth a transition as possible for everyone. 'We will work closely with every family to achieve the best possible solution for every pupil and will provide ongoing support to all members of staff.' It comes as today private school families were dealt a devastating blow after they lost a High Court challenge to Labour's VAT on fees. The judicial review claim, heard earlier this year, aimed to have the 20 per cent tax declared 'incompatible' with human rights law. However, in a decision handed down this morning, judges rejected all claims, despite agreeing with some of the arguments. Earlier this year, Maidwell Hall In Northamptonshire revealed plans to close after it had been 'adversely affected by external factors. The 114-year-old institution said it had been operating at a loss for several years but 'received further blows last November, when the announcement of VAT on school fees and the elimination of business rates relief was confirmed in the Budget'. As well as the VAT hike, private schools in England with charitable status will also be stripped of their 80 per cent business rates relief from April. Loughborough Amherst school - which began in 1850 - is another recent victim of the economic headwinds facing the sector, alongside other institutions in Norfolk, Oxfordshire, Hertfordshire, Hampshire, Staffordshire, Leicestershire and Scotland. Three groups of families – most of whom are anonymous – joined private schools in bringing a legal challenge against the policy. Their lawyers argued the tax is a breach of children's right to an education under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The various families also said it was 'discriminatory' – either because their child has special educational needs (SEN), has a preference for a religious education, or because they need an all-girls environment. In their judgement this morning, Dame Victoria Sharp, Lord Justice Newey and Mr Justice Chamberlain agreed that the tax interfered with SEN children's human rights. However, Parliament ultimately had the right make the decision, they concluded. They said Parliament had a 'broad margin of discretion in deciding how to balance the interests of those adversely affected by the policy against the interests of others who may gain from public provision funded by the money it will raise'. They added that 'the challenged legislation falls within that broad margin'. They also pointed out, more generally, that the EHCR does not 'impose any general obligation on the state not to hinder access to private education.' At the opening of the court case in April, families of children with SEN from all over the country protested outside. They said they have been forced to choose the private sector due to the state provision for SEN being so poor – but cannot afford the extra cost of the VAT. During the case, lawyers argued that even a report by the National Audit Office (NAO) had said SEN provision in the state sector was 'not delivering for children' and 'unsustainable'. And they pointed out Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson appeared to agree, saying in October that the report highlighted a 'broken' system. Government lawyers sparked outrage by trying to claim the NAO evidence was 'inadmissible'. Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker of the House of Commons, was criticised at the time for backing the Government's position. In today's judgement, judges agreed the evidence amounted to 'proceedings in Parliament' and therefore inadmissible. However, the judges said it 'does not affect the outcome' of the case because most of the key facts in that report were now 'agreed' by both parties. During one of the hearings, it was also revealed Labour had considered making an exemption for SEN children, but then decided it would not raise enough revenue. In written submissions, Sir James Eadie KC, representing the Government, said: 'Having considered 17,502 consultation responses, the Government rejected the exemptions… because they were incompatible with the principles underpinning the policy, namely being revenue diminishing, unfair, unworkable and/or administratively onerous.' He said the 'central objectives' in implementing the tax included 'raising additional tax revenue annually by 2029-2030 to invest in public services, including the state education system, and enhancing the fairness of the tax system overall.' And he added that the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) projected the measure will yield exchequer revenue of £1.5billion in 2025/26, rising to £1.7 billion per year by 2029/30. There is already an exemption in place for SEN children who have an education, health and care plan (EHCP), which entitles them to a higher level of state-backed support. However, only a small proportion are able to get an EHCP, leaving the vast majority of SEN families having to pay the tax. In their decision today, the judges said they accepted that a 'significant number of the pupils with SEN but no EHCP who are displaced from private schools into the state sector will receive materially worse provision for their SEN than they do now.' They added: 'In some cases, that provision is likely to be inadequate, at least in the immediate future'. Among the other claimants are Jewish pupils at specialist religious private schools who fear anti-Semitic attacks if they go into the state sector. There is also a girl who had to attend a single-sex private school – the only all-girls school in her area – due to 'harassment' by boys at her co-educational state school. And there are also claimants using Christian private schools because they cannot obtain the same religious education in the state system. One is Stephen White, who has chosen not to be anonymous, and whose eldest four children are at Bradford Christian School, a private Christian school in West Yorkshire. In April, he helped stage a protest outside the High Court to mark the opening of the case, joined by dozens of other parents from around the country not involved in the case. This morning, the Christian Legal Centre, which supported his case, vowed to appeal the decision. Meanwhile, the Independent Schools Council (ISC), which represents most private schools, said it would decide whether to appeal in considering its 'next steps'. ISC chief executive Julie Robinson said: 'The ISC is carefully considering the court's judgment and next steps. Our focus remains on supporting schools, families and children. 'We will continue to work to ensure the Government is held to account over the negative impact this tax on education is having across independent and state schools.' David Walker, director, Boarding Schools' Association (BSA), said: 'There are no winners here. 'It is unlikely VAT will raise the expected funds, given the drop in pupil numbers is already far higher than predicted, with boarding schools seeing a 4 per cent drop in pupil numbers over the last year. 'This means children and communities are suffering due to disrupted education or school closures. 'It is a particularly sad day for students with needs that cannot be met in the mainstream system. 'We urge the government to stop its assault on independent education, before more children are caught in the crosshairs.' It comes after the Prime Minister was criticised yesterday for appearing to suggest the money raised from the tax would now be spent on housing, not teachers (pictured: Sir Keir Starmer's post on X) A spokesman for parent group Education Not Taxation said: 'While we are disappointed in the overall outcome of the challenge, we are grateful that the Court recognised that imposing VAT on school fees will have a disproportionately prejudicial effect on pupils with SEN but no EHCP, and therefore that the Government's measure discriminates against them. 'As the Court found, the Government's education tax violates the human rights of these vulnerable children. 'Labour have consistently demanded respect for the European Convention of Human Rights and we expect them to think hard about what these senior judges have said – does their concern for human rights not extend to these rights for children as well? 'We urge the Government to reconsider its education tax. 'We look forward to meeting with ministers soon to reiterate the harms this is causing children and families and to discuss next steps.' The Government has always maintained the tax is necessary to raise money for state schools – including providing 6,500 new teachers. However, in an X post after Wednesday's Spending Review, Sir Keir appeared to suggest housing will now be the beneficiary. He wrote: 'In the budget last year, my government made the tough but fair decision to apply VAT to private schools. 'The Tories opposed it. Reform opposed it. 'Today, because of that choice, we have announced the largest investment in affordable housing in a generation.' Replying, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said: 'You said 'every penny' would go into state schools... but now it's housing?' In October 2024, the OBR estimated the new tax would lead to 35,000 fewer pupils in private schools. A Government spokesman said: 'We welcome the court's decision, which confirms that the legislation is compatible with the Government's human rights obligations. 'Ending tax breaks for private schools will raise £1.8 billion a year, helping to support public services including the 94 per cent of pupils who attend state schools.'
