The Overlooked Cost of Party Politics: The Marginalisation of Local Issues
Written by Georgia Scarisbrick, a Regular Contributor for Women In Whitehall.
Councillors are elected to serve their communities, not to wage party political wars. The May 2026 English local elections, however, brought national political divisions ever more prominently into council chambers, resulting in local issues being brushed aside in the pursuit of party control.
As the Greens and Reform UK gained their first 5 and 14 Councils, respectively, the governing Labour party lost over half of both its local authorities and overall Councillors. Most importantly, the number of English councils with “no overall control” (no party majority) increased from 37 to 64. This split, as will be shown, has increasingly disrupted the prioritisation of local issues as party politics, focused primarily on winning national elections, has overtaken the representation of local communities and issues in the minds of representatives.
Cross-party collaboration is, of course, not a new phenomena in British politics, especially at the local level. After all, a healthy democracy with a thriving civic culture should include a range of opinions, each with a voice in the governing process. The danger of this fragmentation is therefore not in the fundamental move away from two-party dominance, but the translation of adversarial, polarised party politics to local chambers; a simply incompatible pair.
Kirklees Council, in the borough of West Yorkshire, is a striking demonstration of this issue. Although Reform secured 29 seats, this was not an overall majority. The question of who would lead the council therefore had to be answered alongside the Greens, Independents, Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Valley Independents also elected Perhaps unsurprisingly, a decision was not reached, despite successive rounds of voting and meetings, until July – leaving an effective power vacuum and constant spiral of debate between parties for months after the initial election.
Rather than focusing on the ability and competence of potential leaders, comments and general opposition were framed in terms of party membership. For instance, Andrew Cooper (leader of the local Greens) claimed that “Reform UK have… failed to find any allies on the Council”, painting a clear image of division, based on party lines, in the chamber. He went on to argue that “their lack of experience” and “actions of neighbouring Reform led administrations” were a serious cause for concern”, further attacking the party, even beyond Kirklees. While commenting on competence and ability to govern is of course legitimate, these attacks seem less concerned about the Kirklees and its residents, and more about criticising an entire party’s approach and experience, comments more relevant for a national campaign.
This leadership disagreement had a direct impact on both residents of Kirklees and the wider West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA). Not only were at least 6 council meetings cancelled between May and July, wasting potential time for discussion of pressing local issues, but Kirklees remained unrepresented at the WYCA meeting on June 25. Even a skim of the meeting minutes show a number of important discussions, such as budget proposals and upcoming infrastructural programmes, in which the Kirklees residents were simply unrepresented. In sum, the interests of over 400,000 residents were, in several instances, not communicated as the individuals they elected focused on criticising one another in a bid to gain control of the Council.
An even more severe story of deadlock appears further East, in Oldham Council. After a “no overall control” result in May, this Council was only able to reach an agreement in September – missing any fixed, leading voice for 4 precious months. More concerningly, the eventual decision was only a temporary fix (an “interim” coalition between the 4 largest parties), meaning resources and time must again be dedicated to a leadership row in the near future.
Even this undesirable situation, however, is a relief compared to the government intervention almost deployed. As the summer reached its end in August, there was the prospect of Westminster-employed commissioners being sent to rescue Oldham; a move that could cost over £1,200 per day. While narrowly avoided, this prospect should be a lesson that the bitter divisions caused by party competition at the local level can be extremely costly in several ways: time, money, and responsiveness to the community.
The conflict itself had a particularly bitter character in Oldham. At one stage over the summer, independent Brian Hobin claimed that “it’s getting personal, it’s getting nasty and we are not getting anywhere”, tightly capturing the dynamic between councillors and clear de-prioritisation of local issues through deadlock. As in Kirklees, party-wide insults were also thrown around. Al-Hamdani, leader of the Oldham Liberal Democrats, blamed the deadlock directly on Labour and Reform, who he claimed “won’t even entertain” attempts to form an administration. The former, he says, “were only interested in themselves” . This not only highlights the prioritisation of party influence over local issues, but equally the bitter divisions across party lines within local chambers. Importantly, however, the leadership deadlock that comes with this is inevitably at the expense of the local community, who cannot be adequately represented when attention is so clearly diverted.
When put to the test at a time of intense political polarisation, the compatibility of party politics and local government clearly comes under strain. Instead of uniting to elect a worthy leadership that will focus on community needs, many English Councils fell into a spiral of division, arguments and a lack of authority. Even a temporary diversion away from local needs and functions is extremely harmful, leaving residents underrepresented and creating lasting, bitter taste in the mouths of councillors who argue based on party affiliations. While only two examples were addressed here, this narrative has played out, to varying extremes, in several local authorities since May. This illustrates the incompatibility of party and local politics, and the urgency of considering alternative models to protect local interests. Measures to strengthen cross-party cooperation; increase the number of independent councillors; or secure greater space for public participation in local government, for example, could help to ensure local issues remain a priority.
