Former Newsround and Most Haunted star becomes Reform UK's new chairman
Dr David Bull takes over from Zia Yusuf, who dramatically quit as Reform UK's chairman last week, before returning to the party in a new position just two days later
A former BBC Newsround presenter has been made Reform UK's new chairman.
Dr David Bull takes over from Zia Yusuf, who dramatically quit the role last week, before returning to the party in a new position just two days later.
Nigel Farage welcomed Dr Bull, who was previously Reform's co-deputy leader, saying he would come to the role of Reform UK chairman with "terrific verve, energy, enthusiasm". Mr Farage, Reform's leader, added: "It's going to be great fun." Mr Yusuf said he is "hugely excited" that Dr Bull was taking the role.
Some viewers might recognise Dr Bull, now 56, from his former years as a TV presenter, with his credits including Newsround and paranormal series Most Haunted.
The now Talk TV presenter's broadcasting career first started in 1995, when he starred as an on-screen doctor for Sky TV giving people advice to people travelling abroad. The Reform politician then joined Newsround in the late 1990s.
It followed Dr Bull having qualified as a physician in 1993 from St Mary's Hospital Medical School in London.
He went to present other BBC kids shows, before joining BBC's Watchdog to present its Healthcheck spin-off. His presenting credits also include Most Haunted Live and Hospital Live.
After his years as a TV doctor, Dr Bull turned to politics. He was selected as Tory candidate for Brighton Pavilion but stood down in 2009 before the election to head up a Conservative policy review on sexual health with Anne Milton, the shadow health minister.
In 2019, he was elected as a Member of the European Parliament, as part of The Brexit Party, and served until the UK left the EU. He has since been Reform UK's Deputy leader and health spokesman.
Mr Yusuf resigned after criticising Reform MP Sarah Pochin for asking a "dumb" question at PMQs about a burka ban. In a parting jibe, he added: "I no longer believe working to get a Reform government elected is a good use of my time, and hereby resign the office."
But he returned to the party just days later. Mr Yusuf said he regrets his social media post about Ms Pochin. He will now lead the so-called "Doge team", which is inspired by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency in Donald Trump's administration.
Dr Bull reportedly backs "banning the burqa".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wales Online
2 hours ago
- Wales Online
Lords' objections to Data Bill over copyright threatens its existence
Lords' objections to Data Bill over copyright threatens its existence – minister Sir Chris Bryant said the continued parliamentary ping-pong, where a bill bounces back and forth between the Lords and the Commons could "imperil" the Bill Protesters in central London in May called on the Government to ditch plans to allow AI tech firms to steal their work without payment or permission (Image: PA Wire/PA Images ) The continued refusal by the House of Lords to pass the Data Bill threatens its existence altogether, a minister has said, as the Commons passed an amendment to head off a challenge from peers. Sir Chris Bryant said the continued parliamentary ping-pong, where a bill bounces back and forth between the Lords and the Commons could "imperil" the Bill. The critical stand-off arose as artists and musicians including Sir Elton John and Sir Paul McCartney, raised concerns over AI companies using copyrighted work without permission. Baroness Kidron, who directed the second Bridget Jones film, had put forward an amendment aiming to ensure copyright holders could see when their work had been used, which was overwhelmingly passed by the Lords for the second time last week. However this has not won Government backing. In a concession to win around the Lords, the Government has instead said it will give a parliamentary statement six months after the passage of the Bill, where it will update MPs and peers on an economic impact assessment, and a report on the use of copyright works in the development of AI. A parliamentary working group will also be established. Article continues below Technology minister Sir Chris said the amendments showed the Government had "unequivocally heard concerns". However Conservative chairwoman of the Culture, Media and Sport select committee Dame Caroline Dinenage said MPs had been "gaslit". MPs voted in favour of the Government's amendment, which replace the changes put forward by Lady Kidron, by 304 votes to 189, majority 115. These will now go back to the Lords for peers to approve. During the last session in the Lords, where Lady Kidron had successfully forward her amendment, she told peers it she would not hold up the Bill further if the Commons chose to disagree with it. MPs heard the Bill will help establish digital verification services, a new national underground asset register which could speed up roadworks, and allow better healthcare and policing. It would also renew UK and EU data protection laws. The current agreement with Brussels will run out in December. Speaking at the start of the Bill, Sir Chris said: "Double insistence would kill the Bill, where ever the Bill has started. I take people at their word when they say that they don't want to kill the Bill." Sir Chris added: "Its provisions have the support of all parties in both Houses. "Which is why I urge this House to accept our amendments in lieu. "And I urge their Lordships not to insist on their amendment, but to agree with us. "It is worth pointing out, that if their Lordships do persist, they are not just delaying and imperilling a Bill which all parties agree is an important and necessary piece of legislation. "They are also imperilling something else of much greater significance and importance economically; our data adequacy with the European Union." He said he was "mystified" by Liberal Democrat and Conservative opposition to the Bill. "These amendments show our commitment to ensuring considered and effective solutions as I have just outlined, and demonstrate that we have unequivocally heard concerns about timing and accountability." Conservative shadow technology minister Dr Ben Spencer said the creative industries and peers "were not buying" the Government's approach. He said: "They're not buying it because the Government has lost the confidence of their stakeholders that it will bring forward legislation to enact effective and proportionate transparency requirements for AI models in the use of their creative content." Dame Caroline said Sir Chris and the Government were not engaging with the central issue. She said: "By being cloth-eared to the legitimate concerns of the world-leading creative industries for month after month after month; they have been virtually dragged kicking and screaming to this position now, where they bring forward a couple of tiny amendments. "By gaslighting members of all parties at both ends of this building who have attempted to draw attention to this. "By somehow pitting our world-leading creative industries against AI, almost somehow presenting them as luddites, that they are somehow allergic to innovation and technology when actually these are some of the most groundbreaking and innovative sectors out there; they are using AI every single day to produce world-breaking pieces of creative content." Responding, Sir Chris said: "I would just say to her (Dame Caroline) that she clearly has forgotten that the previous government actually introduced plans which would have brought forward a text and data mining exemption for commercial exploitation of copyrighted materials without any additional protections for creative industries at all. "That seems to have slipped her mind. Article continues below "We have moved a considerable deal since this Bill started. "We have moved and we have listened to what their lordships and, more importantly, what the creative industries have to say in this."
New Statesman
3 hours ago
- New Statesman
Rachel Reeves' economic credibility is on the line
Photo byIt's Spending Review day, when Rachel Reeves gets to set departmental budgets for much of the rest of the parliament. The Chancellor's balancing act – ensuring public services have the day-to-day funds they need and are able to fulfil Labour's missions, without breaking her tax pledges or her 'ironclad' fiscal rules – is an unenviable one. George Eaton has already written this week on how Reeves intends to rebut the twin accusations that the government is embarking upon austerity 2.0 and that Labour is losing its grip on the purse strings. Today, Reeves will try to frame her stance – maintaining her fiscal rules while boosting overall spending by £300bn – around a pledge to 'invest in Britain's renewal'. 'In place of chaos, I choose stability. In place of decline, I choose investment,' she will say (with an accompanying promise of £39bn for a new Affordable Homes Programme over the next decade). It's a dangerous moment for Reeves: while the chatter about the precarity of her position at the start of the year has simmered down, there is real dismay within Labour at some of the Chancellor's choices, and her name is one of those most cited as patience begins to wear thin. We'll find out later this afternoon if Reeves can pull it off, but rather than speculating on what we might hear in a few hours' time, let's zoom out and examine the wider context. While Spending Reviews are always important, this one comes at a particularly critical time. Less than a year since winning a landslide victory, Labour's popularity has plummeted. Though the Conservatives remain in disarray, Reform has leapfrogged both mainstream parties to top the polls, with Nigel Farage presenting himself a realistic alternative prime minister. One of the key attack lines against Reform used by both Labour and the Tories has concerned economic credibility. Last month, Farage announced the outlines of Reform's economic programme, which consisted of lots of popular but expensive policies (slashing taxes while restoring the winter fuel allowance and scrapping the two-child benefit cap) with little word on how to pay for them. According to the IFS there is an estimated £80bn black hole in the plans. Cue accusations of 'fantasy economics' – or, as the Liberal Democrats pithily put it, 'Trussonomics on steroids'. The Farage-as-Truss comparison is one Keir Starmer has been hammering at PMQs. Unfortunately, the public do not seem to be buying it. New polling from More In Common ahead of the Spending Review contains much to terrify Downing Street, but most disturbing is surely the revelation that Reform and Labour are neck-and-neck on who the public trust most on the economy (on 22 per cent each) – with Starmer and Farage virtually tied in a head-to-head (51 per cent to 49 per cent, in Starmer's favour). Why isn't the Truss attack, which proved so effective at skewering the Tories (resentment over the mini-Budget still comes up on the doorstep), not working against Reform? One reason may be down to what people actually think happened back in October 2022. While there is widespread belief that 'Liz Truss crashed the economy', drill down in focus groups and you'll find people are far hazier on how exactly she managed to do so. 'They associate her with being shit but they don't know why,' as one pollster put it. And her failure is very much associated with the Tories. Farage could promise to do exactly what Truss did (his unfunded tax cuts are definitely comparable) and still skirt the toxicity associated with her. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe There are other worrying insights in the More In Common polling – for Labour, the Tories, and anyone else who values a stable a economy. While 46 per cent of people believe Reform would indeed be a risk to the economy (compared to 29 per cent who don't), almost as many (40 per cent) believe the risk is worth it as 'Reform can't be any worse than other parties when it comes to managing the economy'. This is Farage's argument any time he's called out on his party's dodgy figures (such as in Wales on Monday), pointing to the Conservatives' economic record and Labour's current struggles, with the implicit message 'how much worse could Reform be?' There is an answer to that, and it's one that gives economists nightmares. But both Labour and the Tories need to find a way to tell it compellingly if they are to win on this key battleground. Two other nuggets stand out. First, on economic credibility, the Tories are actually going backwards, with a decline in how much people trust them on a range of economic metrics since March. (Reform has increased trust on all metrics, while Labour is a mixed bag.) Most of the polling will have taken place before Mel Stride made his speech disavowing the Truss era. It's an apology which many Tories believe should have come much sooner. Second, while people want an improvement in public services, there is little appetite for tax rises. The public seem to believe the progress they want can all be funded by that elusive ambition of cutting 'waste' – almost half of Brits (44 per cent) think the government could cut one fifth of government spending without damaging the economy or reducing the quality of public services. This is essentially Reform's argument, with its Musk-inspired DOGE initiative. If it were that easy, previous governments might have tried it. All of which paints Reeves into a corner, at a time when the government's economic credibility – and its wider political reputation – is at stake. The Chancellor needs to make the case for her fiscal rules to an audience that doesn't really understand why they're necessary. That's what her lines about 'stability' over 'chaos' are all about. And she must find a way to present her prioritisation of capital spending over day-to-day budgets not as austerity, but as investing in the future. It's the kind of challenge that requires not just a rock-solid grasp of the figures but a laser-like comms operation. Good luck, Rachel Reeves. [See more: Labour is losing Wales] Related
South Wales Guardian
4 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
UK Government ‘betraying Wales' over rail funding, Plaid leader says
Rhun ap Iorwerth, leader of Plaid, criticised the UK Labour Government for reclassifying the £6.6 billion Oxford to Cambridge line to an England and Wales project. The designation means Wales will not receive the additional rail funding it would get if branded an England-only project. Mr ap Iorwerth called on Eluned Morgan, the Welsh Labour First Minister, to condemn the reclassification. Baroness Morgan agreed Wales was not getting its fair share but said she was expecting to see positive changes in the UK Government's spending review on Wednesday. Mr ap Iorwerth's comments come following reports that revealed the project had originally been listed as England-only from 2020 to 2024. The Treasury told the BBC the classification was a 'publishing error' and insisted it was always considered an England and Wales development. Speaking First Minister's Questions in the Senedd on Tuesday, Mr ap Iorwerth said: 'We were getting our share until Labour actively moved the goalposts. 'Labour went out of its way to make sure Wales wouldn't get the money when the big spending really began.' He added: 'She should be joining me in condemning the UK Labour Government for betraying Wales. Will she?' Mr ap Iorwerth argued the reclassification was a 'new HS2 scandal' – a rail project that has been controversial in Wales. Despite none of the track being laid in the country, it was also designated an England and Wales project by the last UK Conservative government. Plaid has said this designation cost Wales £3.9 billion in funding. Responding to Mr Iorwerth, Baroness Morgan said: 'I've learned to expect nothing but constant negativity from the Plaid Cymru leader. 'I've been clear and I've been consistent when it comes to rail funding that we have not been getting our fair share of funding, in a position that the Tories left us with for over a decade. 'The difference between the Tories and the UK Labour Government is that they've recognised that injustice. 'I don't know what's going to be in the spending review, but the one thing I do know is that if Labour gave Wales a total land of milk and honey, Plaid Cymru would still find fault.' Baroness Morgan added they were 'expecting something positive from the spending review', but the Welsh government would have to keep on making the case for a fair share of funding. In January, the UK government admitted Welsh railways had been underfunded, with spending at 'low levels' in recent years. However, Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander did not announce any additional funding at the time.
