Reform UK Accused of ‘Betraying Residents’ for Benefit of Fossil Fuel Donors as More Net Zero Targets Scrapped

Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system

Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Nigel Farage’s party has been accused of “betraying residents” in the interests of oil and gas interests after another Reform UK council ditched its 2030 Net Zero targets, pushing back the date by which the council must be carbon neutral by twenty years.

The North Northamptonshire Council executive team voted on Tuesday at the Corby Cube to delay the borough’s Net Zero target from 2030 to 2050, the latest it can happen under UK law.

It follows similar moves by Reform-controlled Durham County Council and West Northamptonshire Council. Mirroring the US Trump administration, Reform councils have also been ditching language about climate change altogether. 

Reform councillors’ decision in North Northants aligns with their party’s national stance. Leader Nigel Farage MP has promised to abolish all spending on Net Zero – which would likely include abolishing public investment in renewable energy, home insulation schemes, electric vehicle charging, programmes to reduce toxic pollution, and even walking and cycling infrastructure. 

It comes after Reform UK received millions of pounds in funding from oil and gas interests and climate change ‘sceptics’ since 2019, according to separate analysis by DeSmog and the New York Times.

Cllr Emily Fedorowycz, Green Party Leader for North Northamptonshire, described the decision to scrap net zero targets as “a betrayal of local people and a huge missed opportunity.”

She added: “This decision is not about saving money for local residents. It is about following Reform HQ. Is it a coincidence Reform have made this decision when it directly benefits their fossil fuel donors? This is about ideology, not practicality. Meanwhile it is local people who will pay the price – through higher energy bills, through missed investment, and through increased risks from floods and heatwaves.”

A report from the North Northants administration said the move was being made to “reset” the Council’s carbon neutral target, “in line with the policy position of the new administration, given the additional financial commitment required to either fully decarbonise Council operations.” 

But the council’s own climate impact assessment on the move notes: “Not having a defined delivery deadline, specifically in relation to climate change legislation as set out in the Climate Change Act 2008, may lead to fragmentation of effort, with climate actions becoming more reactive, less coordinated, and potentially deprioritised in future planning cycles.”

It added that the change “may undermine the council’s ability to meet long-term environmental and social objectives and may also affect public and stakeholder confidence in the council’s commitment to climate leadership and partner willingness to continue working with the council on climate related projects.”

Residents, business leaders and climate experts attended the executive meeting on Tuesday, with many urging the council to ‘hold its course’. However, the Reform-led executive pushed through the change.

Fedorowycz said the decision was a missed opportunity for the area.

“Two-thirds of English councils have set ambitious 2030 Net Zero targets…These councils are already reaping the benefits. Richmond recently secured £7 million to decarbonise its buildings. Durham [before Reform’s election there in May] has brought in millions through its award-winning climate programme,” she said.

“By choosing delay, North Northants will not only fall behind, but it will also actively lose out on the funding and business opportunities that ambitious councils are winning every day.”

Councils have a major role in carbon reduction through their powers and resources covering housing, transport and planning applications – such as for energy projects. 

Campaigners and residents who attended pointed to the example of Nissan’s £1 billion EV hub in Sunderland and GE’s wind turbine blade factory in Teesside as multi-million-pound investments that were secured because the regions signalled they were serious about net zero.

Sacked, Expelled, or in the Dock: All the Reform UK Councillors Nigel Farage Has Lost in Just Four Months

Party faces questions over candidate screening after string of resignations, expulsions and criminal investigations

Olly Haynes

“By walking away from our 2030 target, we are sending a message to industry that North Northamptonshire is not serious,” added Cllr Fedorowycz. “We risk lurching backwards, losing jobs, losing funding, and undermining the confidence of businesses who want to invest here.”

Fellow Green councillor Ben Jameson added: “It’s very disappointing, but not surprising from a party funded by fossil fuels. They have voted to delay climate action and we as Green councillors will continue to fight alongside our constituents for the future of our area – we can no longer rely on this council.”

The Reform administration’s report claimed the change would ensure carbon reducation was done “at a cost and a pace that is sustainable for the Council” and would “ensure that the Council is aligned with the UK target to be net zero by 2050.”

The Greens are calling on residents to continue pressing the council to reverse this decision.

It follows Reform blocking a motion last Wednesday (3rd September) calling for financial transparency on the council’s Section 106 funds – cash promised by developers for community projects and local infrastructure in return for planning permission. It was voted down by Reform, while Conservatives, Labour and the Greens were in favour. 

Green councillor Ben Williams said: “We were under the impression that DOGE [Reform HQ’s Department of Government Efficiency] was supposed to be fighting for financial transparency…It is hypocrisy at its finest.”

Fellow opposition councillor Steve Geary added: “Residents are looking for transparency. We may have substantial money doing nothing. Other local authorities share where funds are spent, residents can see where money is left. Why has NNC failed to do the same?”

Council leader Cllr Martin Griffith claimed in the debate that the tools were already there to see S106 funding. “They’re all in place. We’re starting the Planning Improvement Board yet again…If anyone has any examples of things where they don’t think S106 is being handled properly, there is the Members’ Inquiry programme, or email me and I’ll get it investigated…We will oppose parochial, party politically-motivated motions.” 

Got a story? Get in touch in confidence on josiah@bylinetimes.com 

Subscribers Get More from JOSIAH

Josiah Mortimer also writes the On the Ground column, exclusive to the print edition of Byline Times.

So for more from him…

Subscribe to Byline Times