Re-elected council leader motivated by devolution
A council leader who survived a narrow re-election has said he is motivated to "finish the job" he started on devolution.
Councillor Phil Jordan stays in charge of Isle of Wight Council following a tied vote on Wednesday.
Councillor Ed Blake, leader of the Conservative group of councillors, received the same amount of support but lost out on a casting vote.
East Cowes Councillor Karl Love was ousted as chair of the council after being replaced by Binstead and Fishbourne's councillor Ian Dore.
Mr Jordan, the head of County Hall's Alliance group, has been a keen supporter of devolution and local government reorganisation.
The changes will transfer powers and funding away from central government and allow decisions to be made locally.
Portsmouth and Southampton city councils, along with Hampshire County Council and the Isle of Wight, voted to accept the government's offer to create a combined mayoral authority earlier this year.
Mr Jordan said it was "vital" to maintain "consistency and continuity in our relationships and establish the best deal for our island in our negotiations with government".
He continued: "This is a pivotal moment for our Island, and we have less than a year to get the best outcomes, the best funding, the best transfer of powers and the key asks I have already made, such as oversight of the ferries and additional funding for the island in a fair funding settlement.
"It is not the moment for someone to be learning on the job or having doubts about the past two years of intense work.
"Our island comes first, before personal wishes or aspirations and I am confident, and best placed, that I can deliver the best outcome for the Isle of Wight."
You can follow BBC Hampshire & Isle of Wight on Facebook, X, or Instagram.
Differing views as devolution plans progress
Council mergers a 'threat', Portsmouth leader says
Island must retain own council, devolution plan says
Councils to submit joint mayor and devolution plan
Isle of Wight Council
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Most new homes must have solar panels and heat pumps under Government proposals
Builders will be required to fit solar panels on rooftops and install low-carbon heating for most new build homes in England under proposed changes to be published this year. The Energy Department (Desnz) said on Friday that the future homes standard (FHS), which will be published in autumn, is expected to require new residential properties to have solar panels by default. Gas boilers will also not meet the proposed standard, meaning low-carbon heating – such as heat pumps – will also likely become the new default under building regulations. With a significant amount of the UK's carbon footprint coming from gas heating of homes, the FHS will require new housing in England to produce fewer carbon emissions than those built under current regulations. The Government said the measures will also help to slash household energy bills and boost the nation's energy security. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said: 'Solar panels can save people hundreds of pounds off their energy bills, so it is just common sense for new homes to have them fitted as standard. 'So many people just don't understand why this doesn't already happen. With our plans, it will.' Desnz calculates that a typical existing UK home could save around £530 a year from installing rooftop solar based on the current energy price cap. Matthew Pennycook, housing and planning minister, said: 'The future homes standard will ensure new homes are modern and efficient with low-carbon heating, while our common-sense planning changes will now make it easier and cheaper for people to use heat pumps and switch to EVs so they can play their part in bolstering our nation's energy security.' Current building regulations do not require developers to add solar panels or heat pumps to new homes. In 2023, the previous Conservative government proposed new build homes would need solar panel coverage equivalent to 40% of the building's floor area. But this also allowed for exemptions, which would lead to no solar on many developments, the current Government says. Under the proposed changes, developers who cannot meet 40% coverage will still be required to install a reasonable amount of solar coverage – or other forms of renewable electricity generation, with rare exceptions. Ministers also say the FHS will effectively require low-carbon heating, such as domestic heat pumps installed into new builds. The previous Conservative government faced criticism for rowing back on its proposals to ban the sale of new gas boilers by 2035. While the Government is not planning to introduce such a ban, citing concerns around cost, Desnz confirmed on Friday that FHS proposals include mandating minimum criteria for energy efficiency which mean newly built homes have to install greener heating systems. Recent changes to planning rules aimed at removing barriers to heat pump installations came into force on May 29, enabling households to install a heat pump within one metre of their property's boundary without having to submit a planning application. The first quarter of 2025 saw a record number of applications to the boiler upgrade scheme, which provides households with up to £7,500 off the cost of a heat pump, seeing a 73% jump from the same quarter last year. Charles Wood, deputy director of policy (systems) at Energy UK, said: 'This change, alongside wider reforms to planning processes and network connections, will reduce bills for people in new build properties while also giving the industry confidence to invest in increased manufacturing and installer training as demand increases, creating jobs and bringing down technology costs for everyone.' The UK is legally committed to reaching its net zero target by 2050, meaning the UK must cut carbon emissions until it removes as much as it produces, in line with the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Canadians divided on whether U.S. is an 'ally' or 'enemy' country: Poll
OTTAWA — Faced with a trade war they didn't start, Canadians are divided on whether they see the United States as an "enemy" or an "ally," a new poll suggests. The Leger poll, which was conducted online and can't be assigned a margin of error, surveyed more than 1,500 people between May 30 and June 1. Almost a third of respondents said they view the U.S. as a "neutral country," while 27 per cent said they consider it an "ally" and 26 per cent see it as an "enemy country." Just over a third of men said they consider the U.S. an ally, compared with one in five women. Almost 30 per cent of women said they view the U.S. as an enemy, compared with 22 per cent of men. Older Canadians, those at least 55 years of age, were more likely to consider the U.S. an enemy than younger Canadians. Regionally Albertans were most likely to consider the U.S. an ally while Ontarians and British Columbians were most likely to see it as an enemy. The difference is starkest between political party supporters, with 44 per cent of Conservative supporters saying they view the U.S. as an ally, compared with 17 per cent of Liberal supporters and 12 per cent of NDP supporters said the same. Comparatively 16 per cent of Conservative supporters said they view the U.S. as an enemy country, while 36 per cent of Liberal supporters and 41 per cent of NDP supporters said the same. U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order Tuesday to double his levies on steel and aluminum to 50 per cent. He claimed the measure will protect the country's national security and domestic industries. Prime Minister Mark Carney has said his government will need to take "some time" to craft a response to the increased U.S. tariffs. The number of Canadians that report seeing the U.S. as an enemy country has dropped by six points since mid-March. At that time, 32 per cent of survey respondents told Leger they viewed the country as an enemy. The number of Canadians that view the U.S. as an ally also decreased by two percentage points since March, from 29 to 27 per cent, while the number that view it as a neutral country increased by six percentage points, from 24 to 30 per cent. Andrew Enns, Leger's executive vice-president for Central Canada, said that, broadly speaking, the patterns haven't changed much since the organization asked the question in February — when 27 per cent of respondents said they viewed the U.S. as an enemy and 30 per cent said they viewed it as an ally. Enns said the decline in the number of people saying the U.S. is an enemy likely reflects the overall sentiment on tariffs. "It's still obviously there and, you know, clearly now we're dealing with higher steel tariffs, but the commentary coming from the White House and the Trump administration seems to have dissipated a bit and that's probably helping just tone things down," he said. Enns said Canada also has a new prime minister with a mandate that might "take the edge off things." "I think that just keeps things more at a moderate level, and I think that reflects in people maybe feeling a little less threatened by the U.S.," Enns said. Enns said political and business leaders have also sent a consistent message that the U.S. remains an important trading partner. He said that may encourage Canadians to believe there's a way to "work things out." The polling industry's professional body, the Canadian Research Insights Council, says online surveys cannot be assigned a margin of error because they do not randomly sample the population. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 5, 2025. Catherine Morrison, The Canadian Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
CBS News
9 hours ago
- CBS News
Former San Francisco Parks Alliance CEOs, board treasurer subpoenaed after missing committee hearing
The San Francisco Government Audit and Oversight Committee subpoenaed the former CEOs and the board treasurer of the San Francisco Parks Alliance after they did not show up to the committee hearing Thursday morning. More than a dozen community members from various nonprofit organizations that relied financially on the SF Parks Alliance publicly commented on their lack of trust. "Sutro Stewards in particular had close to $200,000 in reserves that is now gone," Ildiko Polony, the executive director of Sutro Stewards, told CBS News Bay Area. The SF Parks Alliance has been fiscally sponsoring groups like Sutro Stewards for nearly two decades. The alliance helps fund communities to revitalize and maintain public parks through money raised in part by these nonprofits' fundraisers. "It's enraging, it's incredibly sad. It's scary, we were all laid off as of Monday. So, currently I'm scrambling as the executive director to find a new fiscal sponsor and I'm working for free," Polony said. A recent probe alleges that SF Parks Alliance misspent $3.8 million of donation funds. Additionally, the city is investigating allegations that the alliance failed to reimburse smaller nonprofits for their projects. "The Parks Alliance holds tens of thousands of dollars of ours, including over $10,000 in money that we've either promised to other people or that we've spent already," Matthew Blain, the chair of SF Urban Riders, told CBS News Bay Area. Blain said his community of biker volunteers works on trails and habitats throughout the city. But with everything in limbo, their operations have come to a halt. "Right now, we need a structure so that the functions the Parks Alliance provided continues, for us and other park partners and other community networks throughout the city," Blain said. "The city needs to step up because we are in a crisis that impacts every San Franciscan's quality of life," Polony added. This isn't the first red flag with the SF Parks Alliance. San Francisco District 10 Supervisor Shamann Walton said the board had approved a $3.25 million grant for the Port of San Francisco and the Parks Alliance. But he added that the port had only received $975,000 of those funds. Walton said this is about accountability. "Report to this committee, tell us where the resources are, how they were spent, who owes what, so we could get to the bottom of this," Walton told CBS News Bay Area. He has pushed for the subpoena to the former heads of the alliance and has called for them to testify. "They'll have the answer in terms of how to get resources back into the hands of these nonprofits, but most certainly, we will work together to try to come up with solutions. And we still have to know what assets the Parks Alliance has, what resources they have on hand, what they may be able to repay, what they may not be able to repay," he added. While no meeting date is set just yet, city leaders and community members hope to get more answers on where their money is and when they're getting it back. CBS News Bay Area reached out to the SF Parks Alliance for comment and has not yet heard back.
