Reform-run Staffordshire council could stop solar and wind farms
Newly-elected Reform UK councillors have been celebrating after they swept to power and took control of Staffordshire County Council.Party leader Nigel Farage spoke to members at the County Showground after results came in and he listed some of the decisions they could make.He told them they could say no to a proposed wind farm for Staffordshire Moorlands and a solar farm in Cheadle - and also cut funding spent on asylum seekers."I wish you all the luck in the world," he said. "It won't be easy, it will be a learning curve, but it is an incredible opportunity."
The final tally for Staffordshire shows Reform now has 49 out of 62 seats after winning 41% of the overall vote.Going into the election, Reform had no councillors in the county and the Conservatives held 53 of the 62 seats.
Local elections 2025 in maps and chartsLive: Local elections latest from across England
Farage branded the authority under the previous Conservative administration as "very woke".He said: "Maybe a bit of a warning if you do work for Staffordshire County Council and you are involved in climate change policy, or involved with DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion), or anything like that, imay be time to go and look for a different job."He added: "Here in Staffordshire we are now in charge."County councils are there to perform basic functions for taxpayers. We want to slim down the size of local government and re-prioritise it on what its job really is."You will judge us, quite rightly, on how we do."
'Take control'
Martin Murray, Reform UK's Staffordshire county co-ordinator and new councillor for Cannock town, said the feeling was "one of excitement, exhilaration and anticipation to get started to do that work".He said: "I knew the day was coming up when we were going to take control of this council. I could feel it across the streets of the whole county."We have gone beyond expectations and we thank everybody for that vote of confidence and we will deliver back to it."
Follow BBC Stoke & Staffordshire on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
37 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Mass migration isn't Britain's lifeblood. It's an economic disaster
Within hours of stepping up as Reform chairman on Tuesday, David Bull triggered his first media controversy by remarking that 'immigration is the lifeblood of this country – it always has been'. As popular as this sentiment is with Britain's politicians, it isn't true today and it certainly wasn't in the past. From 1066 through to the end of the Second World War, the population of Britain has been marked by relative stability. As a crude illustration, as late as 1951 the total non-White population of Great Britain was estimated at about 30,000 people, or about 0.07pc of the population. Today it's roughly 20pc, and on course to pass 50pc by the end of the century. In other words, the population changes induced by migration over the past seven decades are essentially without parallel in 1,000 years of British history. Even within this modern period, however, it's not quite right to say that migration has been Britain's lifeblood. It would be more accurate to say it's been the default policy of a state that keeps repeating its mistakes. A brief summary of the last 70 years might fairly cast British migration policy as a mixture of blunders, unintended consequences, and myopic pursuit of short-term objectives, right from the arrival of the Empire Windrush in 1948. As other writers have pointed out, while the narrative promoted today is 'you called and we came', internal government communications show that efforts were made to dissuade Caribbean migration in ways that wouldn't imperil the precarious bonds with Britain's colonies. Shortly after the ship's arrival, Britain adopted a sweeping nationality act that permitted anyone with a passport issued by the British government to enter the country. This act, while 'never intended to sanction a mass migration', combined with policies aimed at attracting workers in specific fields to create a mass inflow. Now, where have we heard that before?
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
The BBC is helping Reform - and has become a danger to democracy
You might not know it - as the national broadcaster, the source of most information for most of Britain has singularly failed to report it - but the BBC has drawn up plans to win over Reform voters. It's strange how the BBC, a channel of staggering narcissism which never misses a chance to talk about itself, isn't saying much about the leaking of minutes from a meeting of its Editorial Guidelines and Standards Committee. Read more The story was broken by the Byline Times, one of Britain's 'new media' outlets that's increasingly proving to be an excellent source of investigative journalism. BBC Director-General Tim Davie and other senior figures like 'News CEO' Deborah Turness want to reshape the broadcaster to appeal to Reform voters. They believe BBC news and drama is causing 'low trust issues' among the radical right. Turness discussed altering 'story selection' and 'other types of output, such as drama' to win Reform hearts and minds The committee includes former GB News executive Robbie Gibb, appointed to the BBC board by Boris Johnson. Emily Maitlis once called him an 'active agent of the Conservative Party'. Minutes stated that bosses 'recognised the importance of local BBC teams in the plan, given their closeness to audiences'. So keep an eye on how BBC Scotland behaves from now on. Here's the bottom line: the BBC should not seek to appeal to anyone. It should report the news with complete objectivity, impartiality, and political neutrality. The words 'without fear or favour' should be tattooed on the heart of every BBC employee, especially the cosseted, overpaid establishment mandarins who run the organisation. We pay their wages. The BBC should represent Britain in its entirety, not favoured special interest groups. However, this courting of Reform proves impartiality to be a lie. It doesn't matter if Marxists or Nazis like a particular story. It's irrelevant whether coverage makes liberals happy or conservatives sad, or vice versa. No consideration should ever be paid to whether drama is perceived as progressive or reactionary. What matters is that news is reported accurately and fairly, analysis is balanced, and drama has cultural merit and entertains. By attempting to woo Reform, the BBC alienates everyone else. Worse, the BBC reinforces the grievances levelled against it. Scotland's Yes movement has accused the BBC of bias for years. Now independence supporters can continue to do so but with ammunition to back up their allegations. How can the BBC pretend to report news honestly, or reflect British politics and culture fairly, when it has been caught out cosying up to Nigel Farage? BBC Director-General Tim Davie with former Conservative PM David Cameron (Image: free) The BBC slits its own throat. And many of its enemies will gleefully watch the blood spill. Specifically, Farage. He has consistently attacked the BBC. Indeed, he uses his own platform - the disgracefully biased GB News - to do so. With delicious irony, Farage previously accused the BBC of being a 'political actor'. Well, now the broadcaster appears to be acting politically for its nemesis. Farage threatened to boycott the BBC, and claimed editors used 'story selection' to bash Reform. If Farage ever takes power he'll gut the BBC in an afternoon. In truth, the BBC deserves all it gets. It made Farage's career, endlessly platforming him, giving him far higher exposure than other comparative politicians. If you think there's any fairness to BBC coverage ask yourself how much you see the LibDems on air compared to Reform. Then look at the two parties and their parliamentary representation. Reform has five MPs, the LibDems 72. Indeed, the Greens have four. Do the Greens get four-fifths of the time devoted to Reform? Do they hell. Only last month, Davie, the director-general, was sounding off about the 'crisis of trust' in Britain. He grandly claimed the BBC would play a leading role in reversing the decline and help combat division. The BBC would create a future where 'trusted information strengthens democracy'. Davie, though, is doing everything he can to deepen division, damage democracy and foment distrust in journalism at a time when society needs good, honest reporting more than ever. When he said 'reform' was needed, it now appears Davie meant with a capital R. Currently, Reform is causing chaos in councils the party won at the English local elections. Will that be reported under the new pro-Reform BBC guidelines? I'm afraid we now need to ask ourselves whether the BBC will tip the next election for Reform. Davie should go, along with the entire BBC board. They disgrace journalism, and are not impartial or balanced. Read more The notion of politicising drama is disgusting. Artists exist to create and enrich our lives, not do the bidding of tawdry media executives in hock to the hard-right. In Britain, trust is at rock bottom. New findings released yesterday from the National Centre for Social Research found that just 19% of us believe the current system of governing Britain works. Only 12% trust governments to put country before party. As long as I've been alive, the BBC was billed as the last redoubt for fairness and balance. Over the last decade, that claim has well and truly undergone an acid bath. Now, the mask is off. The BBC has shown us what it really is, and we need to take notice. Globally, the rise of the hard-right has caused many to lose their minds - from commentators and business leaders, to political parties and academics. In Britain, the BBC hasn't just suffered a nervous breakdown, it has completely surrendered its principles of fairness. It's now more a danger to our democracy than a line of defence. Neil Mackay is the Herald's Writer-at-Large. He's a multi-award winning investigative journalist, author of both fiction and non-fiction, and a filmmaker and broadcaster. He specialises in intelligence, security, crime, social affairs, cultural commentary, and foreign and domestic politics
Scotsman
2 hours ago
- Scotsman
Acorn project funding uncertainty as 'final decision' still to be made by Chancellor Rachel Reeves
Concerns have emerged over how much funding the Chancellor will hand over for the Acorn project. Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... North Sea bosses have welcomed the UK government finally pledging to back Scotland's carbon capture project after years of delay - but concerns have been raised after it emerged a final investment decision is still to be made. Chancellor Rachel Reeves confirmed in her spending review that the Acorn carbon capture and storage project, based at St Fergus near Peterhead, will receive funding from the Treasury. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Keir Starmer's government has finally pledged funding for the Acorn project at the St Fergus gas terminal hear Peterhead (Photo by Jeff) | Getty Images But buried in the detail, the Treasury has confirmed that 'a final investment decision will be taken later this parliament, subject to project readiness and affordability'. This has led to a warning over 'investor uncertainty' if a final decision for the Acorn project is not taken 'urgently'. The Acorn project, made up of several firms including Shell, Harbour Energy and Storegga, will, in theory, take harmful carbon emissions and prevent them from being released into the atmosphere and instead buried under the seabed off the Aberdeenshire coast. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad There are also plans to repurpose an existing oil and gas pipeline to potential transport carbon from Grangemouth to the offshore storage sites. The Scottish Government has commissioned a report into whether this is possible, but has not yet published that work. The previous Conservative UK government had only granted the Acorn project 'reserved' status and favoured projects south of the Border for full early funding. But the Chancellor told the House of Commons she was announcing 'support for the Acorn project', adding that it will 'support Scotland's transition from oil and gas to low-carbon technology". Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Pressed over how much investment will be allocated by the UK government, Ms Reeves simply said that 'we are putting money into Acorn'. As well as indicating support for the Acorn project, the Chancellor also pledged to back the Viking project south of the Border. David Whitehouse, Offshore Energies UK (OEUK) CEO, said: 'The support for the next phase of carbon storage projects in Scotland and Humberside is welcome, and an important step towards final investment decisions later in this parliament. OEUK's chief executive, David Whitehouse | OEUK 'Together Viking and Acorn have the potential to unlock over £25 billion of investment by 2035, creating over 30,000 jobs at peak construction.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad He added: 'These projects will provide the pathway to support the decarbonisation of UK industries and are critical to the government's clean power objectives. We will continue to work with government to detail the long-term support required to deliver these projects and unlock the UK's wider CCS ambitions.' Trade unions have also welcomed the vow to back the Acorn project. STUC general secretary, Roz Foyer, said: 'Following years of Tory failure to invest in carbon capture and storage, this funding is welcome. STUC general secretary Roz Foyer | Andrew Milligan/PA Wire 'The UK and Scottish governments must now work with the relevant unions to ensure that the project maximises the opportunity to create and retain high quality, unionised jobs.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Sara Thiam, chief executive of development body, Prosper, said that 'advancing development' in the Acorn project was 'a welcome step', but she warned that 'final confirmation for the project is urgently required to reduce investor uncertainty'. Environmental campaigners have repeatedly raised concerns about the reliance on carbon capture to meet emissions goals, despite independent watchdogs, the Climate Change Committee, suggesting net zero targets cannot be hit without the technology. There are concerns about the reliability of carbon capture technology which is yet to be proven at commercial scale. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Friends of the Earth Scotland's climate campaigner, Alex Lee, branded the project 'a fossil fuel polluters pipe dream' that 'will never live up to the hype'. They added: 'Carbon capture has received billions in funding around the world and it has never worked properly.
