'Apocalyptic' situation for Tories
The Conservative leader of Kent County Council has described his party's situation at the local elections as "apocalyptic". Roger Gough said he was not sure he would hang on to his own seat at Sevenoaks and Darent Valley North.It comes as the results have started to be declared in Kent with Reform UK taking the first two seats from the Conservatives. All 72 electoral divisions across the county are up for election - equating to 81 councillors in total.
Gough described his party's situation as "apocalyptic" and added: "That's the only way I can describe it."The Conservatives had overall control of the authority with 56 of the 81 councillors before the vote.At 13:00 BST Reform UK had won seats at Maidstone South East and Gravesham Rural. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage told BBC Radio Kent: "It's looking a very good day for us in Kent, I'm being told it could even be a majority win for us. That will help the celebrations tonight."Counting started on Friday morning and results were expected by 19:00 BST.
Who has been in charge?Before the 2025 vote, the council was made up of 55 Conservatives, six Liberal Democrats, five Labour councillors (including Labour and Co-operative), five Green Party members, four Independent councillors, three Reform UK members, one Heritage Party councillor, one Swale Independents councillor, and there was one vacancy.Kent County Council has been Conservative-run for most of its existence.Since it was created in its current format in 1974, it has had a Conservative leader for all but four years, as between 1993 and 1997 the authority was led by joint leaders from Labour and the Liberal Democrats.In 1997, the Conservatives won their majority back, which they have held onto since, although their authority was shaken in the 2013 election when Ukip became the second largest party on the council, before losing all their seats four years later.
When will we know all the results?How the BBC is reporting local election resultsAnger and indifference collide in unpredictable local elections
What happened at the last election?In the last county council election in 2021, the Conservatives won 49% of the vote, securing 61 seats.In terms of seats won, the Lib Dems came second with six, Labour got five and the Green Party secured four.Reform UK did not win any seats.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
18 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
SNP and Reform feed off each other – but Labour is still hungry
Nats activists never tire of referring to Labour & Tories as two cheeks of the same a*** - the same charge can now be levelled at SNP and Nigel Farage's Reform CHRIS MUSSON SNP and Reform feed off each other – but Labour is still hungry SNP activists never tire of referring to Labour and the Tories as two cheeks of the same a***. Well, the same charge can now be levelled at the Nats and Nigel Farage's Reform UK. 1 Reform came a close third to the SNP and winners Labour Neither will want to hear this, but their equally destructive stances on funding Scotland's public services reveal yet another similarity between the two parties, vying for power at Holyrood next year with Labour. Both claim to be the outsiders standing up to the Westminster establishment, though for the SNP this is also not-so-subtle code for England. The stock-in-trade for both is to blame others for all ills. Both engineered referendums to leave major economic unions, and both lean heavily on populist rhetoric. And as we discovered in the run-up to last week's crunch by-election, they both want to cut Scotland's funding off at the knees. They want to do so to further their own narrow, political aims. For the SNP, that's independence. For Reform, electoral domination down south. As underlined by the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election — where Reform came a close third to the SNP and winners Labour — support for Farage is surging amid falls in backing for traditional parties. Scottish Labour have been buoyed by that Hamilton result. and remain hungry for power. But they still face a huge battle. Because the more Reform's support grows, the more likely it becomes the SNP can win the 2026 Scottish Parliament elections with a far lower vote share than they got in 2021. And the two parties don't just share ideas — they are feeding off each other. There may be a point in the coming years — with Farage in No10 and the SNP in power at Holyrood — that these competing forms of nationalism create a perfect storm. Moment John Swinney is heckled by Reform UK campaigners as FM breezes past warring activists heads of Hamilton by-election Both parties have set out how they want the Scottish Government to have more independence in terms of funding, a move that would go a long way to ending the current 'pooling and sharing' of resources which Scotland voted to keep in 2014. The common theme is the scrapping of the Barnett Formula — the funding mechanism which drives Scotland's significantly higher share of public spending than the UK average. Last year, this meant thousands of pounds per person extra to spend on Scots services like the NHS and schools. Scotland spent £22.7billion more than the £88.5bn it raised in taxes in 2023/24. Including oil revenues, we brought in just £60 per head more in tax than the UK average. But we spent £2,417 per head more. Not a bad deal, you may think — unless you look for the worst in everything, as the SNP do. But Holyrood Finance Secretary Shona Robison wants to scrap this 'Union dividend'. She has resurrected an SNP aim to ditch the pooling and sharing — which means that extra spending is covered — and turn that £22.7bn overspend into Scotland's problem. Robison says that short of independence, 'moving to full fiscal autonomy for the Scottish Government would create a fairer system that would protect public services and allow investment in our economy'. Ms Robison knows full well that the opposite is true. Full fiscal autonomy may mean keeping all taxes raised in Scotland — income tax, VAT, corporation tax, oil revenues and so on. HOLYROOD sits just three days a week, when it's not enjoying long holidays. When it does, MSPs spend an inordinate amount of time debating meaningless motions. Last week, the Scottish Government staged a debate and vote congratulating itself for making 'significant progress' towards becoming one of 'Europe's fastest-growing start-up economies'. Some brass neck, given how anti-business and anti-growth the SNP have been. And the previous week, it had emerged that because Scotland's economy has lagged behind the UK average, we are losing hundreds of millions of pounds a year in funds for public services. That's the reality. So how about knuckling down to sorting that out, rather than grandstanding about this imaginary world? But it also means we have to pay for everything. And we simply can't afford it. It means the end of the Barnett Formula, and the Scottish Government having to find ten per cent of its GDP to fill that £22.7bn gap. Borrowing at these levels, even if it were possible, would provoke a response from the markets making Liz Truss's mini-budget disaster seem small fry. If you think the NHS and schools and roads are bad now, just wait for the super-charged austerity under full fiscal autonomy. It would be economic suicide, and Robison is not thick. Which leads me to think this is a kamikaze policy. Scots public services are the target, leading to the inevitable conclusion from SNP chiefs that things are so terrible the only way out of the wreck is independence. And what about Farage? Last week this newspaper tried to get some Scots policies out of him. Reform UK are quite light on those — meaning they really haven't got any. He did confirm he no longer wanted to axe MSPs — good news for the ones who could be elected for Reform in 2026. But one thing he did speak on during his Scots trip was scrapping the Barnett Formula. In his own words, he said it 'seems to me to be somewhat out of date', adding: 'What I'd like to see is a Scottish Government that's able to raise a bit more of its own revenue, and a Scottish economy that has genuine growth.' Like the SNP's funding policy, the consequences would be the opposite of what Farage says. It would strangle spending and growth. With a reduced settlement for public services here — while people in England get the same, or closer, to the current Scots levels — it would mean savage cuts, tax rises, or both. This would also suit the SNP's independence argument. Does Farage care much about that? I'm not sure he actually does. Scotland has never been his priority. Domination in England is. There would be a bit more money for England, styled as one in the eye for 'subsidy junkie' Scots, playing well to potential Reform voters down south. At the heart of it, like the SNP's stance, it's about making Scotland poorer, not wealthier. As the SNP's Trade Union Group put it last week: 'This is code for a bonfire of public services. And the effective end to devolution.' Correct. But they may want to look in the mirror, as SNP chiefs are proposing the same.
Spectator
31 minutes ago
- Spectator
The battle of the Channel has been fought
Kemi Badenoch says the Conservative party will take a look at withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), freeing us at a leap and a bound from the tyranny of human rights lawyers. The Tory leader would give Britain the power to deter the cross-Channel influx of asylum seekers, by withdrawing protections from those arriving in Britain without papers. As there is unlikely to be a Conservative government in the foreseeable future, this announcement it's going to have no effect now, or any time soon, on the actual boats. And read the fine print: Badenoch hasn't really even made up her mind; she is going to set up a committee to look into it. In the real world, the boats aren't being stopped, the gangs aren't being smashed and the French judges and police are shrugging.
Glasgow Times
an hour ago
- Glasgow Times
North missed £140bn of transport investment over last government, research finds
Independent analysis by think tank the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) looked at Treasury figures between 2009/10 and 2022/23, during which time the Conservatives were in power. It reached the figure, which it said was enough to build seven Elizabeth Lines, by considering the amount of spending per person across the different English regions over that period. While England as a whole saw £592 spent per person each year, London received double that amount with £1,183 spent per person, the IPPR said. The entire North region saw £486 spent per person, with the North East and North West seeing £430 and £540 spent per person respectively. This amounted to £140 billion of missed investment for the North, more than the entire £83 billion estimate of capital spending on transport in the region since 1999/2000, according to the analysis. The region with the lowest amount of investment over the period was the East Midlands with just £355 spent per person. Among the most divisive transport investment projects for the previous government was the HS2 rail project, which was axed north of Birmingham in October 2023. Then-prime minister Rishi Sunak pledged to 'reinvest every single penny, £36 billion, in hundreds of new transport projects in the North and the Midlands', including improvements to road, rail and bus schemes. Earlier this week, Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced a £15.6 billion package for mayoral authorities to use on public transport projects across the North and Midlands ahead of the spending review. It is expected to include funding to extend the metros in Tyne and Wear, Greater Manchester and the West Midlands, along with a renewed tram network in South Yorkshire and a new mass transit system in West Yorkshire. Rachel Reeves has set out plans for new transport investment in the North and Midlands (Peter Byrne/PA) Marcus Johns, senior research fellow at IPPR North, said: 'Today's figures are concrete proof that promises made to the North over the last decade were hollow. It was a decade of deceit. 'We are 124 years on from the end of Queen Victoria's reign, yet the North is still running on infrastructure built during her rein – while our transport chasm widens. 'This isn't London bashing – Londoners absolutely deserve investment. But £1,182 per person for London and £486 for northerners? The numbers don't lie – this isn't right. 'This Government have begun to restore fairness with their big bet on transport cash for city leaders. 'They should continue on this journey to close this investment gap in the upcoming spending review and decades ahead.' Former Treasury minister Lord Jim O'Neill said: 'Good governance requires the guts to take a long-term approach, not just quick fixes. So the Chancellor is right in her focus on the UK's long-standing supply-side weaknesses – namely our woeful productivity and weak private and public investment. 'Backing major infrastructure is the right call, and this spending review is the right time for the Chancellor to place a big bet on northern growth and begin to close this investment chasm. 'But it's going to take more than commitments alone – she'll need to set out a transparent framework for delivery.'
