Joanna Bishop is the Reform UK candidate for the Sutton Central ward by-election in the London Borough of Sutton. We spoke with Joanna about her decision to stand.
“I felt we had been gradually suffocated by the red tape and regulations putting a strain on businesses and making the future seem quite bleak”
Can you introduce yourself to our readers, and tell us what made you decide to run?
My name is Joanna Bishop and I am standing in the Sutton Central ward by-election for the London Borough of Sutton. I have lived in Sutton for 23 years and the wider local area for my entire life.
I decided to run as a candidate having become disillusioned with the successive governments over the past couple of decades. I have always followed politics to a degree but I never felt compelled to join a party before. I started to pay more attention during the COVID-19 pandemic, and it struck me how badly our country was being run. I felt we had been gradually suffocated by the red tape and regulations putting a strain on businesses and making the future seem quite bleak. Nigel Farage has been on my radar for some time, and I have massive respect for his bravery in standing up and challenging the establishment. I read every word of Reforms contract to the people before the July 2024 general election, and it resonated with me in such a way that I felt compelled to not only vote for Reform but to get stuck in and help.
I have a burning desire to help Reform flourish from grass roots up. I feel like local residents have become so used to inefficient and sometimes incompetent councillors that that’s what they now expect. I would love to turn that around and establish a local support network where I can meet and speak with residents on local issues.
“Sutton high street is the target of shoplifters and local residential properties and vehicles are being targeted by thieves on a regular basis”
You’re the candidate for Sutton Central. What are the main concerns in the area?
Although the violent crime rate is low in Sutton in comparison to the other London boroughs it is still prevalent, and residents would like to see more police presence on our streets. Sutton high street is the target of shoplifters and local residential properties and vehicles are being targeted by thieves on a regular basis.
Local residents have been calling out for their council representative to be accessible and for their concerns to be listened to. I pledge to be a strong voice on the council so that the resident’s voices will finally be heard.
“The council needs to spend the residents’ tax more wisely and cut waste”
What do you see as the major issues more widely in Sutton and if elected what do you hope to champion?
Overhaul Suttons infrastructure. Reduce the mass of restrictions on our roads. Reverse the ULEZ expansion. Better transport links and affordable housing. The council needs to spend the residents’ tax more wisely and cut waste.
How can people find out more or get involved in the campaign?
“local residents have become so used to inefficient and sometimes incompetent councillors that that’s what they now expect. I would love to turn that around”
Adam Williams is the SDP candidate for Totteridge and Bowerdean in May’s Buckinghamshire Council elections. We spoke with Adam about his decision to stand.
“my standing is an investment in the future of our town. I want to see it succeed for my children and their children after them”
Can you introduce yourself to our readers, and tell us what made you decide to run?
My name is Adam Williams, I’m 27 years old and originally from the West Midlands. I’ve set up shop in Buckinghamshire and I am putting down roots in Wycombe. I’ve decided to run because I believe that High Wycombe offers a lot of potential for young people and their families, and my standing is an investment in the future of our town. I want to see it succeed for my children and their children after them.
I’m standing for the Social Democratic Party as the party of the traditional left. We’re culturally conservative and left leaning on economics. We seek the common good of the British people. We believe in a social market economy, the family, the fraternity of the British nation and aim to provide a political party for those who have given up on the current batch in Parliament and are looking for a hopeful alternative.
“Windrush Drive has appalling potholes, the Red Kite council estate is in disrepair and the tenants are not looked after properly”
You’re the candidate for Totteridge and Bowerdean. What are the main concerns in the area?
Windrush Drive has appalling potholes, the Red Kite council estate is in disrepair and the tenants are not looked after properly, the London Road is used a racetrack at times, and we have major issues with speeding. We’re seeing a rise in major crime events, just the other day the train station had police surrounding it, as well as minor ones such as fly tipping, making the area feel dirty and unsafe.
“I would push for the construction of data centres in Iver and Wycombe in order to facilitate economic growth in the county”
What do you see as the major issues more widely across Buckinghamshire, and if elected, what do you hope to champion?
The major issues across Buckinghamshire and what will I champion are:
Drug Crime and associated disorder
Pressures the council budget faces from unfunded mandates
Economic growth – more jobs in the county rather than being a stop over for London commuters, in particular low and medium skill jobs.
Housing for young people
I would push for the construction of data centres in Iver and Wycombe in order to facilitate economic growth in the county, and in my ward in particular I would be focusing on anti-social behaviour, such as littering, fly tipping and speeding, pressuring the council to carry out much needed road repair and advocating for a restoration of the Red Kite council housing to properly suit the tenants needs.
“We seek the common good of the British people. We believe in a social market economy, the family, the fraternity of the British nation”
How can people find out more or get involved in the campaign?
At our My tuppenceworth evening on the 19th February Mike Swadling spoke about the Benefits Trap.
“4.2 million working age people in Great Britain are receiving health related benefits which is 10.2% of the population”
I want to talk about the benefits trap and the problem particularly with sickness benefit in this country. Now, you might know that Fraser Nelson was speaking about this on Trigonometry this week. I think it came out Sunday. You will notice the difference if you have watched that between mine and his version. His is eloquent, whereas I’m me. I did honesty write this before that came out, and frankly I just don’t have that quick of a turnaround to have written it after.
The unemployment rate in the UK is 4.4%. Currently, the employment rate for people age 16 to 64 is 74.8%, so there’s a bit of a delta there. 4.2 million working age people in Great Britain are receiving health related benefits which is 10.2% of the population.
“if families support themselves, it’s up to them what they do. But when we support them, we as taxpayers have a vested interest I think, in their choices”
There are people that are under 64 that are retired. There are people looking after children or other family members. And frankly, if families support themselves, it’s up to them what they do. But when we support them, we as taxpayers have a vested interest I think, in their choices.
As a reminder, in the last 30 years, we’ve had just three years not in budget deficit for the government. The last one of them was 24 years ago. Britain now spends more on sickness than on defence with £65 billion on health-related payments compared to just £54 billion for the military.
1.57 million unemployed people in the UK compares to 2.83 million people age 16 to 64 who are economically inactive due to long term sickness. Unemployment, thankfully, is not (yet?) necessarily the major problem. It’s sickness benefit that is the big part of our benefit system. The cost of personal independence payments, which is the main disability benefit, is predicted to rise by 60% up to £35 billion in the next four years.
They reckon getting 400,000 people back to work would save £10 billion. If the Treasury cuts spending on disability benefits and universal credit to just pre-pandemic levels, and this is not some weird utopian ideal, just cut it to where we were five years ago, it would take 3p off the basic rate of income tax, 4p off higher rate tax and scrap inheritance tax. But that’s the financial side.
I think the major problem is the moral problem. A couple of quotes for you.
Lord George Bridges the Chair of The Lords Economic Affairs Committee said the system encouraged welfare over work, calling it “financially unsustainable” and a “waste of human potential.”
Quote Tony Blair – “You’ve got to be careful of translating those [challenges] into a mental health condition and losing your own agency, in a way, to govern your own life… Life has its ups and downs, and everybody experiences those. And you’ve got to be careful of encouraging people to think they’ve got some sort of condition other than simply confronting the challenges of life. We need a proper public conversation about this because you really cannot afford to be spending the amount of money we’re spending on mental health.”
I’m sure we’ve all seen family members or friends, who lose agency and drive though periods of unemployment.
“open up offices for the people to come into two or three days a week from nine to five. No longer would you be able to stay at home seven days a week as an option and get paid”
So, what’s my idea? Why am I speaking to you? What I would like to do is make sure that no one is allowed to stay at home seven days a week on benefits. Now, let’s qualify that a bit. No one who’s retired or in regular medical care or receiving a carer’s allowance would be expected to attend.
If you’re of working age, you’re not receiving treatment or caring for someone, you will need to come into an office, the unemployment office. I would like to open up offices for the people to come into two or three days a week from nine to five. No longer would you be able to stay at home seven days a week as an option and get paid.
Why am I saying this? Frankly, you are, what you do.
Staying at home makes you stay at home.
A lack of motivation keeps you unmotivated.
A lack of mixing with people keeps you bad at mixing with people.
Being made to do something you don’t want to do makes you much more likely to do other, better things you do want to do.
Now, I want to, for a moment, park what people do whilst they’re in the unemployment office. Mainly because I don’t think that matters much. It bogs us down in the wrong discussion. For the purpose of this, let’s just assume they’re coming to watch TV.
“No longer would they be simply staying at home, staying in a routine, they’re having to do something different, and it gives them the motivation to do something better”
Why do I want to do this? Now, I suspect, and it’s only suspicion, and I admit I can’t back up these numbers, but as soon as you make people physically, regularly, and for extended periods of time turn up, you will find:
5% of the people on benefits simply don’t exist and drop off
10% have full-time jobs, so drop off
Another 10% have another means of support or choose simply no longer to collect benefits.
I would call a 25% reduction a good start. Now, even if I overestimated that by 100%, I don’t think that was wild numbers I used there, 12.5% would still be a darn good start. And then you get to the more important part, the moral part. Starting to energise those people who have been out of work for extended periods. No longer would they be simply staying at home, staying in a routine, they’re having to do something different, and it gives them the motivation to do something better.
Every government seems to rename benefits and tinker around the edges of how to implement them. Experts come and go and implement different ideas to varying success. The benefit, I think, of this plan is its simplicity. You simply have to turn up.
But who turns up? The top 10 types of health conditions for people aged 16 to 64 who are economically inactive and in long-term sickness are depression, bad nerves and anxiety, impacting 1.3 million. Problems with legs or feet and problems with back or neck, affecting a million people. Mental illness impacts 900,000. Between 600,000 and 800,000 people have problems with arms and legs, heart, blood or circulation. And then other health conditions, chest or breathing problems, digestive problems, and diabetes impact about 360,000. And of course, some people have more than one of these.
The point is, whilst those might be very serious conditions, these are not people with stage 4 cancer. They’re not undergoing major surgery. No one would expect those people to be in the office, but literally millions who are currently receiving sickness benefits could be.
Assuming you end up targeting 3 million of the 4.1 million people on health benefits, at two days a week in the office, that would be equivalent to 2,000 people needing to be housed for each of the 600 job centres in the UK. That is a lot, and I won’t pretend that’s easy.
There are many empty buildings that could easily house 1,000 people in Croydon, and across the country. Many office buildings are half empty. This is not an insurmountable challenge and could be built up to. Schools are empty a third of the year. Towns are full of empty halls, churches and many other places that could be brought into use.
What will it cost? Frankly, a fraction of the savings you would make by getting Britain back to work.
“You can give them YouTube how-to videos. You can give them distance learning courses. You can invite charities in to help people…. You could do a multitude of things, but you’ve got to get them to turn up first”
What would people do? Now, I did park that, and I parked it because I think it’s much less important than forcing the change on people. But frankly, by default, people could watch the History Channel. You could stick on the Open University. You could make books available. You can give them YouTube how-to videos. You can give them distance learning courses. You can invite charities in to help people. You can organise litter picking giving people the day off after two hours of effort, et cetera, et cetera. You could do a multitude of things, but you’ve got to get them to turn up first.
What matters is you get people out, you increase their motivation, and you increase their ability to live life once again.
At our My tuppenceworth evening on the 19th February Mike Swadling spoke about his ideas for a Croydon DOGE.
“As significant as stopping the waste in the £50 billion budget is, I suspect more savings are being made by the cultural impact that DOGE is bringing about”
I want to talk briefly about DOGE, Department of Government Efficiency. But I want to localise it a little bit and talk about a Croydon DOGE. We’ve all seen DOGE and Elon Musk’s team going to USAID and strip back huge amounts of government spending.
As significant as stopping the waste in the £50 billion budget is, I suspect more savings are being made by the cultural impact that DOGE is bringing about.
Most government workers are not on the take. They’re not politically motivated. Most middle managers with an authority to spend will simply be going about their job and responding to the incentives and cultures of the organisation they’re in. And I say this as a middle manager with an authority to spend most of my career. Overnight that culture has changed from one of ‘no one asked- questions regarding the spending’ to ‘don’t let what you signed off become the laugh line of the White House press secretary’.
I suspect that undocumented cultural change is saving many more billions of dollars than perhaps the direct work that DOGE is doing.
“Does anyone know who received £171,356.72 Borough of Culture Payments in 2024?
I can’t tell you. No one knows, because that’s the total amount of redacted payments that they’re not telling us who they gave it to”
I want to ask you a question.
Does anyone know what links, Savvy Theatre, The Enriched Kids CIC, SDNA LTD, and Fashion Meets Music Collective C.I.C.?
They all received £2,000 from Croydon Council last year as part of a Borough of Culture payment.
Another one.
Does anyone know what links, Talawa Theatre Company, THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH LIMITED T/A The Circus, Scanners Inc, and Double Take Projections LTD?
They all received payments between £40,000 and £65,000 from Croydon Council last year as part of the Borough of Culture.
Does anyone know who received £171,356.72 Borough of Culture Payments in 2024?
I can’t tell you. No one knows, because that’s the total amount of redacted payments that they’re not telling us who they gave it to.
Croydon, yes, the bankrupt borough of Croydon, was the London Borough of Culture in 2023. All of those payments came in 2024, and many of them very late on.
“Whilst the £813,000 worth of payments from the Borough of Culture that I can find, barely touch the sides of this £136 million that the council needs, it does, if you pardon the pun, set the culture of spending”
Croydon is a de facto bankrupt borough and is requesting a £136 million bailout from the government after overspending by at least £98 million this year and is predicted to overspend by £83 million next year. Whilst the £813,000 worth of payments from the Borough of Culture that I can find, barely touch the sides of this £136 million that the council needs, it does, if you pardon the pun, set the culture of spending.
One can hardly be surprised when a council officer providing actual services overspends their budget when they know the council has given £10,000 to the Brit School, or £6,000 to the Bureau Of Silly Ideas Limited, or £3,100 to The Poetry Takeaway Ltd. Often, of course, these funds are accompanied by a photo opportunity for a plethora of Croydon dignitaries. What is their incentive to reduce spending if you’re actually trying to provide a real service?
The council, of course, has been quick to try and fix its financial problems by raising funds off the backs of the people of Croydon. In 2023, Croydon’s council tax went up 15%. Despite Mayor Jason Perry promising to scrap Low Traffic Neighbourhoods or LTNs, he backtracked and is alleged to have said because “£20m of future income … would have to be replaced”. The council even floated the plan to impose a workplace parking levy on car park spaces, as if the people of Croydon needed more reasons not to return to the office or indeed invest in Croydon.
We need a cultural change in Croydon, and specifically at the borough. Not everything needs to be hiking taxes or even sweeping cuts to services. We need a cultural change at Croydon Council to have it focus on key services, on the people of Croydon, and on not wasting money.
“Is there any chance the taxpayers of Croydon can get an Independence Day from all this spending? We need a DOGE Croydon to publicly, and perhaps more importantly, within the Council, ring the alarm at this waste”
If you look at Your Croydon, the newsroom for the Executive Mayor, Jason Perry, the top story is Croydon’s proposed licensing scheme to tackle rogue landlords. A quick flick down the page then boasts about a new flagship programme to support residents to be healthier. Are these two things needed? Are they even a good idea? Does a bankrupt borough need to be spending money on things like this?
In the past year, the Civic Mayor of Croydon has raised the flag outside Croydon Town Hall for Uganda Independence Day, Nigerian Independence Day, India Independence Day, Pakistan Independence Day, all with the accompanied photo ops and no doubt receptions for local dignitaries. Is there any chance the taxpayers of Croydon can get an Independence Day from all this spending? We need a DOGE Croydon to publicly, and perhaps more importantly, within the Council, ring the alarm at this waste.
“I would question whether the £10,000 to £38,000 payments for services were really fully costed, or whether that was just a number somebody decided to charge us”
We need to set the stall out that costs are being cut and that Croydon taxpayers’ cash is not some slush fund for Council officers to dip into. The Council will say, of course, that they are cutting payments and not wasting money, but I’m sure if we had a Croydon DOGE operating, they would have questioned the £7,550 paid to Emergency Exit Arts, the £10,000 paid to Sound Diplomacy Limited, the £13,200 paid to Giant Cheese Limited, or the £38,000 paid to Croydonites Festival of New Theatre CIC. All of these were made in one payment, no doubt for a well provided service, but isn’t it interesting how suspiciously round these numbers often are.
I would question whether the £10,000 to £38,000 payments for services were really fully costed, or whether that was just a number somebody decided to charge us. These all came from the Cultural Growth Fund at Croydon Council. That’s not the London Borough of Culture Fund I mentioned a moment ago. That’s a different fund. Don’t worry, when they can no longer waste your money on being the London Borough of Culture, they can give it away in Croydon Cultural Growth.
On that note, another question for you.
Can anyone tell me what the Culture Growth Fund spent £55,625.98 on?
I’ve given you a clue already. That’s the redacted amount. I can’t tell you what they spent it on. They don’t tell us. We live in a democracy. We live in an era of freedom of information, and they don’t tell us who our money went to.
Now I should declare a slight conflict of interest here. There has been a recent story on Croydon Council spending £3,077 of taxpayers’ money on teas, biscuits, sandwiches and other refreshments in 2024. I must admit to being the recipient of these. I have volunteered some time at the Council and received free tea and coffee for this. I’ve even had some sandwiches and biscuits on an all-day training course to enable me to do such things. I don’t mind admitting that when I give up many hours of free time, frankly, I do expect a cup of tea in return.
But lastly, I will say if this cost is of concern to you, might I suggest the council simply in future hold back from funding Stuco Design Limited, Premm Design Limited, or Continental Drifts, no I’ve never heard of any of them either, all of whom received more than £3,000 from Croydon Council in 2024 for Cultural Growth.
At our My tuppenceworth evening on the 19th February Crispin Williams spoke about his ideas for a blueprint for education.
“I have never had recourse to my knowledge of the cross-section of a rift valley in Africa, or, ever since, had to dissect a fuchsia”
O, for a muse of fire that would ascend The brightest heaven of invention! A kingdom for a stage, princes to act, And monarchs to behold the swelling scene! Then should the warlike Harry, like himself, Assume the port of Mars, and at his heels, Leashed in like hounds, should famine, sword, and fire Crouch for employment.
I learnt the Prologue to Henry V by heart in my O Level year, 1968-69 and for some extraordinary reason, I can still remember it, despite not being able to remember what I had for dinner last night.
But what was the point? Apart from impressing (!) my friends, it is completely useless. As are probably 75% of the facts I supposedly learnt at school. I have never had recourse to my knowledge of the cross-section of a rift valley in Africa, or, ever since, had to dissect a fuchsia.
No, the sole reason for learning such things was to pass exams. And (the Shakespeare quote apart) I – like pretty much everyone else – forgot all this type of knowledge by the time the summer holidays started.
“Most children, of whatever ability, leave school without being taught how to boil and egg, wallpaper a wall, manage their finances, understand the small print of a loan contract or change a wheel”
I went to the best school in Croydon (when you could use the word best in a sentence about Croydon!). But even then, and ever since, I have thought our whole education system to be ridiculous.
Most children, of whatever ability, leave school without being taught how to boil and egg, wallpaper a wall, manage their finances, understand the small print of a loan contract or change a wheel. Surely, we should be teaching practical and useful everyday skills before academic niceties.
Of course there is a place for some ‘academic’ skills. Basic arithmetic is essential: it is not very convenient or seemly to open the calculator on your phone to work out Tesco’s best deal on mince. And it is hard to decide where to go on holiday if you don’t know the difference between Austria and Australia (mind you, I’m not sure they teach that anyway).
“We learn small periods in history in minute detail for exam syllabuses but, I for one, have never known the chronology of the kings and queens of this country, or the rough dates of major wars”
So, rather than focussing on very narrow aspects of individual subjects, we should first ensure that all children are taught a broad general knowledge. I will give you examples:
History: We learn small periods in history in minute detail for exam syllabuses but, I for one, have never known the chronology of the kings and queens of this country, or the rough dates of major wars and other significant events throughout the past 2,000 years.
Geography: Yes, I did learn to draw a cross-section of a rift valley in Africa (arguably that’s geology anyway). We should start by understanding the map of the world: where countries are, what their capitals are and then what they are like – hot, cold, mountainous, desert, rain forest, etc. And this, above all other subjects, lends itself to being taught visually with the use of videos.
English Literature: Instead of forensically studying a few classics, we should be taught a broad overview of classic authors’ works. Hence, although I know a lot about Henry V and A Midsummer Night’s Dream, I was given no idea what Hamlet or Macbeth are about.
And so on… The same arguments apply to biology, physics and even, to some small extent, languages.
I have omitted English language. Although language evolves over time, often through ignorance of correct grammar and spelling, in recent years it has been so bastardised by lack of knowledge of correct usage that it is often unintelligible. And this ‘evolving’ has continued at such a rapid pace that, for example, adjectives are becoming nouns (“Unlock your happy”) and adverbs are disappearing in front of our very eyes (“He did bad”).
I have also omitted mathematics, or at least arithmetic, from the list although the teaching of this could be much improved by relating it to everyday matters.
“Artistic children should be encouraged along that route and scientifically minded ones in that appropriate direction. And this may well mean transferring to specialist schools so that all schools do not try to be ‘one size fits all’”
Thus, by the age of thirteen, all children should have a broad general knowledge in every one of the traditional subjects, plus those unfashionable ones like cookery and DIY. By then, a child’s particular interests and capabilities will have started to become apparent, and their continuing education should be geared to their individual talents and preferences. Artistic children should be encouraged along that route and scientifically minded ones in that appropriate direction. And this may well mean transferring to specialist schools so that all schools do not try to be ‘one size fits all’.
Physical exercise is very underrated these days in schools; children should have plenty of opportunity to let off energy as well as keeping fit, but this again needs to be done with an individual approach. Some children, for example, love football while others are useless at it and hate it. So, they should be allowed to take their exercise doing something they do like (or, at least, not hate). Anything – hopscotch, even games of ‘It’.
The latter points of this article lead to a discussion of the structure for providing this type of broad, rounded education. And that will form another document in due course…
Maxine Fothergill is the Reform UK candidate for Sevenoaks Rural North East in May’s Kent County Council elections. We spoke with Maxine about her decision to stand.
“I have a strong track record of standing up for my community, both as a business owner for over 23 years and through my extensive experience in local government”
Can you introduce yourself to our readers, and tell us what made you decide to run?
I’m Maxine Fothergill, the Reform UK candidate for Sevenoaks Rural North East in the Kent County Council elections. I am leading the local campaign for Reform UK because I believe our area needs stronger representation, real action, and a fresh approach to tackling the issues that matter most to residents.
I have a strong track record of standing up for my community, both as a business owner for over 23 years and through my extensive experience in local government. I decided to run because I see the growing challenges in our area—from the threat to our Green Belt to the worsening state of our roads—and I want to be a strong, independent voice for local residents. Unlike the main parties, I’m not tied to Westminster politics; my priority is fighting for what truly matters to the people of Sevenoaks Rural North East.
I have a long history in local government, having lived in Bexley for 30 years and serving as a councillor in Bexley for eight years. After moving to Sevenoaks Rural North East, I became frustrated with the main political parties and their failure to put local communities first. This led me to stand as an Independent councillor, running on my own mandate—and in doing so, I made history. I successfully won a seat in Fawkham and West Kingsdown, taking it from the Conservatives for the first time ever. From 2019 to 2023, I served as Deputy Leader of the Independent Group on Sevenoaks District Council, working hard to challenge poor decision-making and push for real change. Unfortunately, I lost my seat in the last election due to a split vote, largely caused by paper candidates from the Conservatives and the Green Party.
Beyond local politics, I have long been a supporter of Nigel Farage and his efforts to challenge the establishment. I was actively involved in campaigning for the Brexit Party, particularly during the MEP elections and London Mayoral elections. I was also honoured to be selected as the Parliamentary candidate for Old Bexley and Sidcup, where, despite having just a four-week campaign, we achieved an incredible result—winning 10,384 votes and 21.8% of the vote share, significantly improving on the previous 6% result in the 2021 by-election.
My political journey has always been about putting local people first, standing up for what’s right, and ensuring that the voices of residents are not ignored. That is exactly what I will do if elected as your Kent County Councillor for Sevenoaks Rural North East, standing proudly as your Reform UK candidate.
“The condition of our roads is one of the biggest frustrations for residents. Potholes and poor maintenance are causing serious damage to vehicles, and many drivers have had to replace tyres or pay for costly repairs”
You’re the candidate for Sevenoaks Rural North East. What are the main concerns in the area?
As the Reform UK candidate for Sevenoaks Rural North East, I am campaigning on the real local issues that residents have told me matter most to them. These include:
• Protecting Our Green Belt – Our beautiful countryside is under threat from large-scale solar farm applications and inappropriate housing developments. At least five solar farms are currently proposed, which would destroy productive farmland and damage the rural character of our area. I will fight to challenge these developments and ensure local residents’ views are properly considered in planning decisions.
• Fixing Our Roads – The condition of our roads is one of the biggest frustrations for residents. Potholes and poor maintenance are causing serious damage to vehicles, and many drivers have had to replace tyres or pay for costly repairs. I will push for proper investment in long-term road maintenance rather than temporary patch-up jobs that don’t last.
• Tackling Fly-Tipping – Illegal dumping is a growing problem in our rural areas, damaging our environment and putting unfair costs on landowners and farmers who are left to clear up the mess. I will push for stronger enforcement, tougher penalties for offenders, and better waste disposal solutions to prevent fly-tipping and hold those responsible to account.
Beyond these key issues, I know that many families in our area are struggling. West Kingsdown has one of the largest food banks in the area, showing just how many people need extra support. Meanwhile, elderly residents who have lost their winter fuel allowance are finding it harder to afford heating, and many don’t have the technology or assistance to apply for financial help. I will work with local partners to secure more support for our community and ensure the most vulnerable are not left behind.
If elected, I will be a determined voice for Sevenoaks Rural North East, ensuring that local concerns are heard and acted upon.
“I won’t make promises I can’t keep, but I will work tirelessly to ensure that Sevenoaks Rural North East gets the attention and investment it deserves”
What do you see as the major issues more widely across Kent, and if elected, what do you hope to champion?
Across Kent, we are facing many of the same challenges—overdevelopment, failing infrastructure, and underfunded local services—but these issues hit Sevenoaks Rural North East particularly hard. As the Reform UK candidate, I will work to ensure our area gets the support and investment it desperately needs.
• Overdevelopment and Planning Concerns – Across Kent, overdevelopment is putting pressure on local infrastructure, roads, and services. In our area, this is particularly evident in the growing number of solar farm applications, which threaten our best agricultural land. I will fight to ensure that rural communities are protected and that sustainable planning decisions are made with residents’ concerns in mind.
• Investment in Local Infrastructure – Kent’s infrastructure is struggling to keep up with demand, and Sevenoaks Rural North East is often overlooked when funding decisions are made. I will push for better road repairs, improved transport links, and stronger investment in local services to ensure our area is not left behind.
• Better Waste and Environmental Management – Fly-tipping is a county-wide issue, but it is particularly damaging in rural areas like ours. I will push for tougher action against offenders, as well as better local waste disposal facilities so that people are less likely to resort to illegal dumping.
• Support for Vulnerable Residents – Many elderly residents and struggling families in Kent are not getting the help they need. I will work to secure more local funding for community support services, ensuring that those most in need—including those without internet access—are not left behind.
I won’t make promises I can’t keep, but I will work tirelessly to ensure that Sevenoaks Rural North East gets the attention and investment it deserves, standing proudly as your Reform UK candidate.
“I decided to run because I see the growing challenges in our area—from the threat to our Green Belt to the worsening state of our roads—and I want to be a strong, independent voice for local residents”
How can people find out more or get involved in the campaign?
I encourage everyone to follow my campaign for updates and ways to get involved:
Following threats of protest at the venue in Purley for our meeting on the 19th March, we have sadly had to cancel the event.
Local elections in London are due in May 2026. Reform UK are making inroads across the capital with some polls showing them leading in Bromley & Biggin Hill, and Croydon East constituencies, among others.
Join us on Wednesday 19th March for our drinks and conversation with Alan and Scott. We will be discussing where they are with their planning for the local elections and where Reform UK is more generally.
For drinks, a conversation and Q&A with Alan and Scott about the Reform UK local plans, come along Wednesday 19th March at 7pm
This is part of our #ThirdWednesday drinks and events, we hold these in association with Dick Delingpole’s #ThirdWednesday Libertarian drinks club, and POLITICS in PUBS a group of people from across the political spectrum who value the freedom to question and to speak openly.
Mahendra Negi is the Reform UK candidate for the Alperton ward by-election on Tuesday 18 February in the London Borough of Brent. We spoke with Mahendra about his decision to stand.
“after four decades of experience working with Banks and IT services, I took voluntary retirement in 2022. I have since devoted myself to voluntary work across the community”
Can you introduce yourself to our readers, and tell us what made you decide to run?
My name is Mahendra Negi, and I am standing in the Alperton ward by-election for the London Borough of Brent. I live in Wembley, Brent and after four decades of experience working with Banks and IT services, I took voluntary retirement in 2022. I have since devoted myself to voluntary work across the community, volunteering within education, social services and the Metropolitan Police.
I have been on two educational panels and a Governor at three schools in Brent. Recently, I have also been elected to chair a Ward Panel for the Safer Neighbourhood Teams initiative. I am part of the Brent India Association and Brent Indian Community, and an active participant in various cultural activities, through Sanatan Charities, temples and SwamiNarayan sanstha.
As a volunteer, I have also had opportunities to participate in school visits to mosques and churches. These initiatives and my participation in the Brent Multi Faith Forum, enable me to contribute towards promoting inter-faith dialogue and harmony within our various communities.
What are the main concerns in the area? “The availability of fair and affordable homes for local families in Alperton and the abysmal tenant satisfaction rates of council tenants”
You’re the candidate for Alperton. What are the main concerns in the area?
The state and safety of our streets. The availability of fair and affordable homes for local families in Alperton and the abysmal tenant satisfaction rates of council tenants. The need for infrastructure to match the community’s needs with ongoing developments.
“The cost of living being compounded by council tax increases and waste across the council”
What do you see as the major issues more widely in Brent and if elected what do you hope to champion?
The cost of living being compounded by council tax increases and waste across the council. Much needed support for small local businesses and available parking.
For those eager to help, how can they get involved in the campaign?
Jerry Wraith writes to energy supplier OVO Energy Customer Care:
Thank you for your kind response to my email concerning the tragedy that is net zero. I have responded to your comments and apologise for the delay in this reply.
I am not convinced by your arguments and suggest that you, and OVO, rethink your net zero strategy, as I believe all your arguments are totally spurious and unsupportable. However, I understand that OVO (and probably all the other energy providers) are under pressure from various UK governments to support their catastrophic net zero policy. However, if OVO made a stand against it I feel sure this would be rewarded by vastly increasing your customer base, as the public would appreciate an energy company which is on their side and trying to reduce their costs.
“Net Zero is all about reducing emissions of CO2 which is not a pollutant“
Jerry’s response:
I sent my FOI to Milliband on net zero to OVO my energy supplier. This was part of their response. My comments are in bold and italics, with grateful thanks to Roger Arthur, CEng, MIEE, MIET, for his expert contributions.
The Bigger Picture: Why the UK’s Efforts Matter
I completely understand why the UK’s CO₂ contributions might feel small compared to the global total—it’s a fair observation. However, tackling climate change is a collective effort, and every country’s actions contribute to the larger picture. By leading the way in reducing emissions, the UK is setting an example
By destroying our economy?
Net Zero is all about reducing emissions of CO2 which is not a pollutant. In fact SO2 emissions have also been reduced in the process and that has increased the intensity of electromagnetic radiation hitting the earth.
and showing that transitioning to a greener economy is not only possible but can also come with major benefits, like cleaner air,
What cleaner air? We breathe out CO2!
“Many hundreds of thousands of UK jobs are being sacrificed on the altar of net zero, as industries move abroad, where they will cause higher global CO2 emissions than before“
improved public health,
One common objection to this argument is that decarbonization has other benefits—for example, reducing local air pollution. But consider the case of China, where life expectancy allegedly increased by 10 years from 1980 to 2020, even as fossil-fuel use increased by 700 percent. (Some of that owes to the reduction in indoor pollution due to cleaner cooking fuels like LPG, a fossil fuel.) Even the dirty Chinese coal plants had great benefits, since increased energy availability was much more important to most Chinese than cleaner air.
Also, if you check how many Death Certificates cite air pollution as the cause of death, you will find only one or two, while the numbers suffering from fuel poverty increased by around 67% between 2020 and 2023, impacting most on the vulnerable. Which do you think had the greatest impact on public health?
and job creation in growing industries like renewable energy.
Many hundreds of thousands of UK jobs are being sacrificed on the altar of net zero, as industries move abroad, where they will cause higher global CO2 emissions than before. China emits more CO2 in 11 days than the UK does in a year, but we are to spend £trillions to help the Chinese take away our industries and jobs. They and other big emitters are building 100s of coal fired power stations every year and they are clearly not following our so called lead.
It’s also worth noting that the UK’s leadership inspires other countries to take action.
Prove it! How many countries followed Starmer’s boast at COP 29 that we would reduce UK CO2 emissions by 81%? NONE! The USA is likely to abolish net zero when Trump gets into the White House, thank God!
The main momentum that is building up is in reduced growth, increased poverty and excess deaths, due to deranged net zero targets. More people are dying from cold than from excess temperature.
When countries commit to ambitious targets, it builds momentum on a global scale—something that’s essential for addressing a challenge as complex as climate change.
Again, prove it? Like India, China, and the USA for example? Look at the EU? Germany and France plus other EU countries are really struggling due to totally irresponsible and unnecessary net zero aims.
Addressing Your Specific Questions
a) What benefit is there to the UK, its citizens, and taxpayers by limiting its CO₂ emissions to 0.00072 ppm/annum, when the rest of the world is producing CO₂ at vastly greater quantities?
The benefits extend beyond just the numbers. By reducing emissions, we’re investing in cleaner air, which directly improves public health and reduces healthcare costs.
How dirty is our air now and how much cleaner will it be after emissions are reduced. Also see the comment above about the Chinese experience.
How much have UK healthcare costs reduced due to reduced CO2 emissions?
How many extra deaths have occurred in the UK due to extreme cold and the incapability of energy poverty people being unable to pay for their astronomical heating costs?
How many extra businesses have closed or gone abroad in order to survive by reducing their astronomical energy costs?
As indicated above, more people are suffering from health problems and dying from the cold, than from overheating. In fact, an average increase of ½ of 1 deg C would reduce the numbers dying, due to the cold.
At the same time, we’re building a stronger, greener economy. Renewable energy is now one of the UK’s fastest-growing sectors, creating jobs and making us less reliant on imported fossil fuels, which in turn shields us from volatile energy prices.
Not true! We are building a rapidly reducing economy. Industries and jobs are being exported to China which is building more fossil fuel powered stations as rapidly as possible. We have closed all ours down under instructions from the EU, which is now building hundreds of new fossil fuelled generating stations. Our current rate of growth is about zero and will probably reduce further. We are facing massive power cuts due to our reliance on intermittent renewable energy and are having to increase our reliance on imported energy.
Also, we don NOT have to import fossil fuels. The UK taxpayers have big reserves of coal and gas under our feet and gas in the North Sea.
b) What benefit is there to the UK, its citizens, and taxpayers by reducing its emissions from 0.00072 ppm/annum to 0.000137 ppm/annum?
“Our current rate of growth is about zero and will probably reduce further. We are facing massive power cuts due to our reliance on intermittent renewable energy“
Achieving this reduction shows the world that it’s possible to make meaningful progress while maintaining a thriving economy.
Again, NOT TRUE! See note above. This reduction is any case not achievable without completely destroying the UK economy. Maybe that is what you and the politicians really, really, want?
What are your estimates of the UK’s GDP now and after the reduction proposed taking into consideration the high cost of energy, the power cuts and the cost of importing most of our goods from China and elsewhere?
With regard to the high cost of energy: That’s because these guarantees are irrespective of how competitive the prices actually are in the energy market. For example, floating offshore wind was recently awarded an eye-watering strike price of £176 per MWh, even though the wholesale price for most of 2024 averaged £78.70 per MWh. Why would these renewable energy companies look to cut costs and become more efficient if they can rely on such cushy subsidies?
It also helps us remain competitive in the global race for green technologies, which are rapidly becoming essential industries of the future.
Not true. The green technologies are mainly imported. We get our wind turbines from Denmark and our solar panels from China. Our EV’s are ruinously expensive and are ticking time bombs ready to burst into uncontrollable flames at the moment their batteries develop a fault. In addition, they are so heavy that they must be making our pot holed roads even worse. Furthermore, they are being shunned by UK motorists and rightly so due to their cost and dismal trade in value! EV’s made in China are much, much cheaper than those made in the UK and the EU!
So, how much profit has the UK made from exporting green technology in the last 15/20 or so years?
What is the TOTAL amount of money in £billions/trillions the UK taxpayers have had to pay for “green” energy in subsidies over the last 15/20 years?
“In the past 150 years the warmest period was from 1880 to 1942 with many records from these years still standing today. The last two warm periods were during Roman times and from 750 to 1200 AD“
Plus, the reductions we make now help to mitigate the long-term costs of climate change—whether that’s through extreme weather, flooding, or other impacts that we’re already starting to see.
Nonsense! There is absolutely NO evidence that increasing CO2 causes extreme weather, flooding or other impacts like hurricanes, heatwaves etc. Rather the reverse is true as records show that these events have all been reducing over time!
Also, you can’t make such judgements based on short term trends. Global temperature trends run on for thousands of years and we are nearing an interglacial peak as we continue to emerge from an Ice Age. As seen, that peak is lower than many of the previous ones, which occurred long before the Industrial Revolution and we are about to enter a cooling period. The previous peak was higher and it occurred long before the Industrial Revolution.
More recently the last notable climate change was between 1500 and 1850, but since around 1870 there been no significant change. Global warming is when average temperatures increase but currently many places have seen a temperature decrease
In the past 150 years the warmest period was from 1880 to 1942 with many records from these years still standing today. The last two warm periods were during Roman times and from 750 to 1200 AD when it was a lot warmer than today.
The worst UK drought on record was in 1540 when half a million died, when CO2 levels were much lower than now.
Since the 1920s, the number of deaths due to extreme weather events has reduced by more than 90% – in spite of a four-fold rise in population – in parallel with increasing CO2 levels.
Just check what happened when human emissions fell due to Covid and Lockdowns, then decide for yourself. Total human related emissions fell noticeably, due to Covid and Lockdown, but CO2 content continued upwards, by record amounts. So, the reduction in human emissions had no discernible impact on the upward trend in CO2
The government should check Professor William Happer’s findings – that a 50% increase in CO2 levels would cause global temperature to rise by less than 1/10th of 1 deg C – and abandon UK net zero altogether. You should be lobbying them to do just that.
I understand your concerns about the scale of the UK’s contribution, but these efforts are part of a much larger, interconnected plan. Climate change affects everyone, and by acting together, we have a much better chance of protecting the planet for future generations.
NONSENSE! As stated above a 50% increase in CO2 will increase global temperature by less than 1/10 Deg C according to Prof, Emeritus William Happer of Princeton University. The current rate of CO2 increase is 2.4 ppm/annum (see my FOI request to Ed Milliband). Hence it will take 75 years for global CO2 (i.e. natural and human) to reach that level. Kindly detail how much damage a rise of less than 1/10th of deg C (97% of which is beyond human influence) will create for the earth after 75 years!
CONCLUSION
I sent you a detailed analysis of how small and insignificant the UK’s CO2 contribution to the global CO2 total really is, with references to my sources. Your response has been totally airy fairy with unsubstantiated claims which have absolutely no proof. Hence the OVO boasts about its green energy etc is total NONSENSE and not worth the paper they are written on. I note that you have not tried to refute my figures as they are clearly irrefutable!
I appreciate that OVO is probably complying with government (Conservative and Labour) directives, but your customers are paying extortionate amounts for their energy and destroying the UK economy, (as planned by them) in the process. You and OVO are supporting and perpetuating one of the greatest scams of modern life and should be doing the exact opposite. i.e. refusing to participate in deranged government demands to install smart meters, and inefficient and expensive heat pumps etc. All these demands are obviously making your customers energy bills much larger. You could start by making your customers aware of the unfair, unreasonable and unnecessary costs involved by detailing the total proportion of your customers bills that are simply subsidies for the “green” energy we are all having to pay for and are therefore totally divorced from the actual energy supplied!
However, if you and OVO are so keen on renewable energy I challenge you all to install smart meters and limit your company and personal electricity consumption, every hour, on a daily basis, to that proportion provided by renewables. Please let me know how you all get on with that scenario!
In the words of Prof Richard Lindzen:
“The influence of mankind on climate is trivially true and numerically insignificant.”
“China emits more CO2 in 11 days than the UK does in a year“
