2026 Local Elections Thread

[Broucek]

The Greens have successfully secured the support of the type of voter who would vote for Your Party. Not to mention they are an internal car-crash of a political party.

Perhaps it's a clever wheeze to make the Greens look electable?

 

[RT4038]

People keep saying this but people never seem to explain what they mean, and where they think it applies.

Reform has two newly-minted councils in the North East. Sunderland is 95% White British and 95% UK-born. South Tyneside is 93% White British and 95% UK-born. This is largely the same as it has always been, South Tyneside having had a small but notable Yemeni population since WWI.

The same applies across the board: Reform areas are overwhelming full of people who were born in the UK and who identify as White British.

So what are these demographic changes?

Being charitable, it is a fear of the unknown. People who haven't been to London for 25 years see a Muslim mayor and believe the nonsense about "Londonistan." As a Bradfordian, I hear the same from people who've been to Bradford once, 20 years ago: oh, you never see a white face in Bradford lol. Bradford is one of the most diverse places in the country yet, even in Bradford, 65% of people there are White British.

In think you are looking at this too narrowly - Bishop Auckland man (or Sunderland or South Tyneside or various other parts of the country) is not looking at the colour or ethnic make up of his immediate surroundings. He may be socially conservative (nothing wrong in that per se) but he can put two and two together. Might not always make 4 :

1. Sees, on the news, immigrants coming into the country on boats and being accommodated in hotels and given money. £millions are quoted as having been spent on this enterprise. Many a Bishop Auckland man has probably never or rarely stayed in a hotel. He also sees news of refugee camps in Middle East and Africa and sees no such luxury there. Sees the living standards in Bishop Auckland compared with other parts of the UK and thinks this is very unfair. This money could have been spent in Bishop Auckland.
2. Sees on the news and reads about legal immigrants coming to this country and being showered with benefits and priority on housing queues and free medical (esp. if they have children and even more if they conveniently become/are a single parent). Sees the living standards in Bishop Auckland compared to other parts of the UK and thinks this is very unfair. This money could have been spent in Bishop Auckland.
3. Even Bishop Auckland probably has its share of Turkish Barbers and dodgy looking convenience stores, with young immigrant men hanging around with their flash cars and accessories. Bishop Auckland man will be thinking that these businesses are not all kosher and paying their share of taxes, quite apart from the provenance of some of the goods. The Authorities seem to do little, which Bishop Auckland man sees as unfair, because if he had one of those businesses, officials would be on his back (or alternatively they are squeezing him out of his action? !)
4. Bishop Auckland man may well have noticed that the 'professions' (Doctors, consultants, opticians, lawyers, accountants etc) and their good salaries are increasingly dominated by immigrants and the children of immigrants.
5. Being that these are well paid professions, they can afford for their children to dominate the best schools thereby perpetuating and increasing their economic dominance towards the future. Which Bishop Auckland man sees as unfair, as his children are increasingly being swamped by Special Education Needs pupils and marginalised, by a system which is not designed to get the best out of all pupils.
6. Bishop Auckland man may well look at other Cities and towns around the country (either by experiencing them or being told about them in one way or another) and is alarmed by the reducing % of White British and reckons it won't be long before they are in a minority over swathes of the country.
7. That may well bring fear that the White British will be ultimately outvoted. He sees that the political scene can easily change, and political parties of various ethnic blocks could emerge and become powerful, particularly in coalition. This may well result in further economic decline of the White British, plus (as has been seen already in a small way) bring international disputes onto UK soil.
8. Bishop Auckland man may well think that the current level of illegal migration is only the tip of the iceberg; if strong action is not taken an increasing influx of young immigrant men will depress wages for everyone and likely see increasing levels of criminality as they get more desperate for money and see the easy pickings of British culture - will he, for instance, need burglar bars on his house, like in the countries many of these people will have come from?

Maybe the progressives and left wingers are right to consider these as the fear of the ignorant, or maybe Bishop Auckland man is cannier than they think?

 

[The Ham]

Maybe the progressives and left wingers are right to consider these as the fear of the ignorant, or maybe Bishop Auckland man is cannier than they think?

The thing is, those reasons are why they would have also probably not supported schemes like sending people to Rwanda as rather than British companies (hotels) getting the money we're sending it elsewhere.

Although, in terms of not paying they're fair tax, I suspect that even the most dodgy looking shop is paying a much higher percentage than that nice (multi national) coffee shop over the street.

 

[AlterEgo]

The thing is, those reasons are why they would have also probably not supported schemes like sending people to Rwanda as rather than British companies (hotels) getting the money we're sending it elsewhere.

Although, in terms of not paying they're fair tax, I suspect that even the most dodgy looking shop is paying a much higher percentage than that nice (multi national) coffee shop over the street.

Tax is not people's objection to the proliferation of Turkish barbers etc, many of which are obviously not sustainable businesses in their own right.

There are 15 barber shops or hair salons in Bishop Auckland, which has 25,000 people.

(Btw our local Turkish barber is excellent - there is also the flip side that the Turkish barber shops are actually *very good*)

 

[The Ham]

Tax is not people's objection to the proliferation of Turkish barbers etc, many of which are obviously not sustainable businesses in their own right.

There are 15 barber shops or hair salons in Bishop Auckland, which has 25,000 people.

(Btw our local Turkish barber is excellent - there is also the flip side that the Turkish barber shops are actually *very good*)

Indeed, however, I was picking up on one of the specific points raised in the full post I was replying to (my bold):

3. Even Bishop Auckland probably has its share of Turkish Barbers and dodgy looking convenience stores, with young immigrant men hanging around with their flash cars and accessories. Bishop Auckland man will be thinking that these businesses are not all kosher and paying their share of taxes, quite apart from the provenance of some of the goods. The Authorities seem to do little, which Bishop Auckland man sees as unfair, because if he had one of those businesses, officials would be on his back (or alternatively they are squeezing him out of his action? !)

 

[Horizon22]

In think you are looking at this too narrowly - Bishop Auckland man (or Sunderland or South Tyneside or various other parts of the country) is not looking at the colour or ethnic make up of his immediate surroundings. He may be socially conservative (nothing wrong in that per se) but he can put two and two together. Might not always make 4 :

1. Sees, on the news, immigrants coming into the country on boats and being accommodated in hotels and given money. £millions are quoted as having been spent on this enterprise. Many a Bishop Auckland man has probably never or rarely stayed in a hotel. He also sees news of refugee camps in Middle East and Africa and sees no such luxury there. Sees the living standards in Bishop Auckland compared with other parts of the UK and thinks this is very unfair. This money could have been spent in Bishop Auckland.
2. Sees on the news and reads about legal immigrants coming to this country and being showered with benefits and priority on housing queues and free medical (esp. if they have children and even more if they conveniently become/are a single parent). Sees the living standards in Bishop Auckland compared to other parts of the UK and thinks this is very unfair. This money could have been spent in Bishop Auckland.
3. Even Bishop Auckland probably has its share of Turkish Barbers and dodgy looking convenience stores, with young immigrant men hanging around with their flash cars and accessories. Bishop Auckland man will be thinking that these businesses are not all kosher and paying their share of taxes, quite apart from the provenance of some of the goods. The Authorities seem to do little, which Bishop Auckland man sees as unfair, because if he had one of those businesses, officials would be on his back (or alternatively they are squeezing him out of his action? !)
4. Bishop Auckland man may well have noticed that the 'professions' (Doctors, consultants, opticians, lawyers, accountants etc) and their good salaries are increasingly dominated by immigrants and the children of immigrants.
5. Being that these are well paid professions, they can afford for their children to dominate the best schools thereby perpetuating and increasing their economic dominance towards the future. Which Bishop Auckland man sees as unfair, as his children are increasingly being swamped by Special Education Needs pupils and marginalised, by a system which is not designed to get the best out of all pupils.
6. Bishop Auckland man may well look at other Cities and towns around the country (either by experiencing them or being told about them in one way or another) and is alarmed by the reducing % of White British and reckons it won't be long before they are in a minority over swathes of the country.
7. That may well bring fear that the White British will be ultimately outvoted. He sees that the political scene can easily change, and political parties of various ethnic blocks could emerge and become powerful, particularly in coalition. This may well result in further economic decline of the White British, plus (as has been seen already in a small way) bring international disputes onto UK soil.
8. Bishop Auckland man may well think that the current level of illegal migration is only the tip of the iceberg; if strong action is not taken an increasing influx of young immigrant men will depress wages for everyone and likely see increasing levels of criminality as they get more desperate for money and see the easy pickings of British culture - will he, for instance, need burglar bars on his house, like in the countries many of these people will have come from?

Maybe the progressives and left wingers are right to consider these as the fear of the ignorant, or maybe Bishop Auckland man is cannier than they think?

A lot of that is unjustified fear which is correct. But that being said, trying to explain the reality of the situation - whilst acknowledging concerns - doesn’t seem to work too well either. Also there’s a huge amount of disinformation in what “Bishop Auckland man” has actually “seen”. Also to take this quote - and I’m not suggesting everyone is stupid but there’s some truth in it:

Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

There’s also an element of “Schrödinger’s immigrant” going on here - they are both illegal and young criminal men (points 1,8) yet also taking on professional roles important to society (point 4).

People may be rightly fed up, but often direct their anger at the wrong source. There’s definitely some elements of truth, but much of it is scapegoating with an undercurrent of xenophobia, racism and reluctance to change in some people.

There are systemic issues at play here though.

 

[RT4038]

Although, in terms of not paying they're fair tax, I suspect that even the most dodgy looking shop is paying a much higher percentage than that nice (multi national) coffee shop over the street.

Really? So what tax is 'even the most dodgy looking shop' paying that a multi national coffee shop is not? Tax on the cash sales? Tax on the goods of dubious provenance? Eyes open please.

A lot of that is unjustified fear which is correct. But that being said, trying to explain the reality of the situation - whilst acknowledging concerns - doesn’t seem to work too well either. Also there’s a huge amount of disinformation in what “Bishop Auckland man” has actually “seen”.

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Obviously 'Bishop Auckland man' is an amalgam [no offence meant to real Bishop Auckland people] and not every person will have an issue with every one of my points. Neither is that list exhaustive.

There’s also an element of “Schrödinger’s immigrant” going on here - they are both illegal and young criminal men (points 1,8) yet also taking on professional roles important to society (point 4).

Not sure what this point is, apart from trying to belittle and play down the issue. Obviously immigrants are not a homogenous group - some can be illegal and/or young criminal men, and some can be taking on an increasingly large proportion of professional roles important to society, for instance.

People may be rightly fed up, but often direct their anger at the wrong source. There’s definitely some elements of truth, but much of it is scapegoating with an undercurrent of xenophobia, racism and reluctance to change in some people.

There are systemic issues at play here though.

They may or may not be. However, it is quite possible that the progressive, the educated and the wealthy middle classes think they are currently immune to these pressures and therefore play down their significance (probably gaining from them even). They may well do well to stand back and ponder them for a while though, rather than making fun of them and dismissing them. The issues will come to them soon enough.

Might I suggest that the failure of the main political parties to address this issue (laughing at and ignoring 'Bishop Auckland man') and a number of other issues [the effect of EU membership, or the widening gap between him and the wealthy middle classes for instance] is the cause of the collapse of support for these parties. You may think 'Bishop Auckland man' is stupid, but he is probably cannier than you think.

Whether any up and coming political parties will address any of these issues is neither here nor there - the main political parties have not done so for at least the last 25 years, so might as well give them a chance.

 

[The Ham]

Really? So what tax is 'even the most dodgy looking shop' paying that a multi national coffee shop is not? Tax on the cash sales? Tax on the goods of dubious provenance? Eyes open please.

As a percentage, there's been cases of Starbucks UK paying corporation tax of 0% (or £0 makes no odds) of sales due to a paying a royalty fee to the parent company meant that Starbucks UK made a loss.

If the shop is properly dodgy (I.e. a front for money laundering) they will be claiming lots and lots in sales which don't even exist as they will want the maximum income possible from the money with a dubious source.

Whist Starbucks would be charging their customers VAT on their hot drinks, an independent coffee shop would also be doing that AND paying some business taxes.

I'm not aware of general taxes linked to sales other than VAT or for certain products (i.e. duty on alcohol or cigarettes or sugary drinks) and when that is charged is subject to government rules and so comparisons between different markets gets complex.

As to from dodgy sources, the supply of coffee has a history (including ongoing) of involving slave labour and/or other exploration of those growing the coffee.

For example, Starbucks in the USA has been alleged to have links with trafficking and "slavery-like conditions" on supplying farms with legal processing being brought as recently as 2025 (date of article 16 April 2025):

‘Morally repugnant’: Brazilian workers sue coffee supplier to Starbucks over ‘slavery-like conditions’

Brazil has been the world’s leading coffee producer due to the forced labour of enslaved Africans and Afro-Brazilians

www.theguardian.com

This week, John and seven other Brazilian workers – all identified simply as John Doe 1-8 for fear of retaliation – filed a civil lawsuit in the US against Starbucks, with the support of International Rights Advocates (IRA), seeking financial compensation for the harm they allege to have suffered.

On Thursday, the NGO Coffee Watch also filed a complaint with US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seeking to “exclude coffee and coffee products produced ‘wholly or in part’ with forced labour in Brazil” from being imported by Starbucks and other major companies such as Nestlé, Jacobs Douwe Egberts, Dunkin’, Illy and McDonald’s.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't look into those dodgy shops, as they are not good, but just because something looks professional it doesn't mean that it's paying its fair share of taxes and there's not potential for products of dubious sources.

 

[RT4038]

As a percentage, there's been cases of Starbucks UK paying corporation tax of 0% (or £0 makes no odds) of sales due to a paying a royalty fee to the parent company meant that Starbucks UK made a loss.

And how much Corporation Tax does a dodgy convenience store / vape shop / mobile phone unlocking shop pay?

I'm not saying that we shouldn't look into those dodgy shops, as they are not good, but just because something looks professional it doesn't mean that it's paying its fair share of taxes and there's not potential for products of dubious sources.

And there is the point - the Authorities are not particularly good at looking into these kind of shops [almost entirely the province of immigrants] , and ineffective laws do not help, but 'Bishop Auckland' man will see this as being unfair. If he tried these kind of stunts the Authorities would be on to him pretty sharply. The main political parties appear to be doing / have done little effective to redress this.

 

[SJL2020]

And how much Corporation Tax does a dodgy convenience store / vape shop / mobile phone unlocking shop pay?


And there is the point - the Authorities are not particularly good at looking into these kind of shops [almost entirely the province of immigrants] , and ineffective laws do not help, but 'Bishop Auckland' man will see this as being unfair. If he tried these kind of stunts the Authorities would be on to him pretty sharply. The main political parties appear to be doing / have done little effective to redress this.

Investigating these can be risky though...

'We will kill you and burn your house': Council staff under attack from High Street gangs

Dozens of Trading Standards officers describe intimidation from criminals running mini-marts and vape shops.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[simonw]

And how much Corporation Tax does a dodgy convenience store / vape shop / mobile phone unlocking shop pay?


And there is the point - the Authorities are not particularly good at looking into these kind of shops [almost entirely the province of immigrants] , and ineffective laws do not help, but 'Bishop Auckland' man will see this as being unfair. If he tried these kind of stunts the Authorities would be on to him pretty sharply. The main political parties appear to be doing / have done little effective to redress this.

If the dodgy convenience store is there for money laundering and not for retail, it will be inflating its turnover and profit in order to clean the money. It will therefore have to declare these profits in order to clean them and thus pay tax. What the scale of money laundering through such stores is I have no idea.

 

[RT4038]

If the dodgy convenience store is there for money laundering and not for retail, it will be inflating its turnover and profit in order to clean the money. It will therefore have to declare these profits in order to clean them and thus pay tax. What the scale of money laundering through such stores is I have no idea.

And if it is there to sell goods of dubious provenance for cash, it will not have to. Paying Corporation tax on laundered money doesn't make it ok in any way, or worthy of comparison to multi national businesses fully complying with the tax laws in force. If the tax laws need changing to create a fairer system, then this is up to the politicians in power to arrange.

 

[weeklycommuter]

The front page of the Express today with its screaming headline "For the good of your country go now" reads like a tantrum from a spoiled child unable to get what they want.

The reaction of the financial markets to the prospect of Sir Keir Starmer resigning as Prime Minister sends the message that the best interests of the country are in reality served by Sir Keir Starmer continuing as Prime Minister and by an end to calls for his resignation.

 

[simonw]

And if it is there to sell goods of dubious provenance for cash, it will not have to. Paying Corporation tax on laundered money doesn't make it ok in any way.

I made no comment on the ethics of the operation. It won't be selling dubious goods for cash - or not declaring them if it is there to launder money. I was merely explaining why they are likely to pay more tax than say starbucks

 

[RT4038]

I made no comment on the ethics of the operation. It won't be selling dubious goods for cash - or not declaring them if it is there to launder money. I was merely explaining why they are likely to pay more tax than say starbucks

And I am suggesting that this is somewhat unlikely. Paying Corporation tax on laundered money doesn't make it ok in any way, or worthy of comparison to multi national businesses fully complying with the tax laws in force. If the tax laws on Multi Nationals need changing to create a fairer system, then this is up to the politicians in power to arrange.

 

[Tetchytyke]

If the dodgy convenience store is there for money laundering and not for retail, it will be inflating its turnover and profit in order to clean the money. It will therefore have to declare these profits in order to clean them and thus pay tax. What the scale of money laundering through such stores is I have no idea.

The problem is that the dodgy money laundering shops don't hang around for long. They do a year, wind up the business, rinse and repeat. So no, they won't be paying any more tax than Starbucks do. They fold the business before any tax is paid. Westminster City Council are having huge issues with this.

Of course the real issue is one step further up the ladder than the dodgy money laundering shops, whether it's a dodgy vape shop or a dodgy wizard-tat shop. The people who own the buildings do very well indeed out of all of this. Maybe the focus needs to be more on them.

The other thing is that it is incredibly easy- too easy- to form a limited company, shove a load of money through it, and then do a runner. The ultimate owners of these dodgy vape shops are highly unlikely to even live in the U, making enforcement impossible. But efforts to clamp down on this, to make it harder to register limited companies, are stymied at every opportunity by those on the economic right who say it is "red tape."

Might I suggest that the failure of the main political parties to address this issue (laughing at and ignoring 'Bishop Auckland man') and a number of other issues [the effect of EU membership, or the widening gap between him and the wealthy middle classes for instance] is the cause of the collapse of support for these parties. You may think 'Bishop Auckland man' is stupid, but he is probably cannier than you think.

There is one very simple reason for the widening gap between the poor and the middle class: two income families.

I'm a University graduate working in the financial sector. My wife is a University graduate working in the health sector. We both have a decent wage, we both individually earn roughly 1.5 to 2 times the UK's national average wage.

The effect of this is that the gaps between low income work, medium income work, and high income work become more and more amplified. This feeds into everything else; houses are priced for families on two incomes.

The towns with strong Reform support are, generally, the towns whose residents have lower educational attainment. 'Stupid' is a loaded word and I don't think it's quite right- high educational attainment doesn't always make you clever and low educational attainment doesn't always make you thick.

But the effect of this is that the higher income jobs aren't in those towns- the necessary skills aren't there- and increasingly even the middle income jobs aren't there. Unless you go and learn a trade (and for all my University education, when I try to paint my house it looks like Stevie Wonder did it with a fire hose), the only jobs you'll see are packing boxes in HMP Amazon Prime out by the ring road.

What saddens me is that the destruction of the sectors which had decent paying jobs which don't require high education levels was completely unnecessary. We still need a steel industry. We still need the ability to get coal out of the ground to make that steel. But the people who caused and supported that destruction are the ones who are now wearing their turquoise rosettes and saying that it's all the fault of some brown man in a dinghy.

 

[MP33]

Having done a job related to Consumer Protection. Stories about Trading Standards officers, being threatened and assaulted. Are not new. In the past, it was the used car trade. Westminster Council, had a unique problem with illegal street trading and the traders giving a false name in Court. So they could not bring repeat offenders, to the attention of the Magistrates.

 

[The Ham]

And how much Corporation Tax does a dodgy convenience store / vape shop / mobile phone unlocking shop pay?

Given that we're talking in comparison to a company which has paid £0, even paying £100 is significantly more, that's before you consider one has a turnover of tens of millions and the other tens of thousands.

 

[Horizon22]

Not sure what this point is, apart from trying to belittle and play down the issue. Obviously immigrants are not a homogenous group - some can be illegal and/or young criminal men, and some can be taking on an increasingly large proportion of professional roles important to society, for instance.

The point is that it is cherrypicking to make immigration out to be solely negative, no matter which way it is looked at and that “all immigrants are X” whilst somehow claiming “all immigrants are Y”.

And actually many of those people in professional roles are 3rd generation by this point and are British and some just conflate immigrants with "non-white" which frankly is bordering on racist.

It is obviously more nuanced and frankly this country would be in a worse position if there hadn’t been a reasonable amount of immigration - from EU countries or otherwise - in recent years. But it hasn’t always been supported by infrastructure.

 

[317 forever]

London's council results were interesting, Havering going to Reform was a given although it does cover up a sobering reality that they've hit a hard ceiling in terms of winning over voters in the outer boroughs.

Council elections aren't an indicator of how Mayoral elections will go but if I were someone at Conservative HQ, I would be seeing a path to winning and it's not appealing to the Reform voter, it's the Lib Dem voter in South West London.

I think it is no coincidence that the London borough Reform have won is the furthest from central London.