Reform-run Kent council accused of fabricating £40m net zero savings | Reform UK

Reform UK’s flagship council has been accused of telling a “blatant lie” after its claim of nearly £40m in savings on net zero was found to be based on hypothetical projects for which there was no documentation.

Kent county council, which has a £2.5bn annual budget, is one of 10 where Nigel Farage’s party has outright control and is seen as a test case for whether the insurgent party can govern competently.

Soon after being elected, the council leader, Linden Kemkaran, promised the party’s “department of local government efficiency”, or Dolge, would bring a “laser-like focus on getting value for money”.

The council’s leadership claimed it had found £100m in savings, £39.5m of which come from what it said was two net zero-related projects: £32m by scrapping a programme to make properties more environmentally friendly, and £7.5m by not making the council’s fleet of vehicles electric by 2030.

After Kemkaran announced these at a council meeting last July, Polly Billington, a Labour MP in Kent, requested details of the apparent savings via a freedom of information request, setting off a months-long battle with the council.

The eventual answer said the two projects were documented in two lines of a “potential capital projects” section of the council’s 2025-26 budget plans, but added they had no business cases or identified funding.

Billington said the response showed Kemkaran’s claims about the savings were “a blatant lie”.

“These supposedly cancelled net zero projects never existed, and the fantastical £39.5m savings figure she is spinning is something she completely made up.

Billington accused Kemkaran, of trying to claim credit for “fantastical” savings for political reasons.

“The reality is that Reform had no plan to deliver savings at Kent county council, and now they’re lying to people rather than admitting their council is in chaos and they’re hiking council tax to cover up their mess. Linden Kemkaran needs to stop peddling these false figures and focus on delivering better services for the people of Kent.”

The council rejected this assessment, saying that while the only detail on the projects was two lines in an appendix to a budget document, and that they had not been approved or made subject to a business case, they were a “future cost?avoidance measure”, and thus legitimate to claim as a saving.

The row comes after one of the Reform councillors charged with finding major savings at the council admitted that the party had not found significant waste when it took over the local authority last year.

Paul Chamberlain, who headed Kent’s Elon Musk-style department of local government efficiency, later apologised for a “lapse of judgment” with the comments and stepped down from the role.

A Kent spokesperson said: “Kent county council categorically rejects any suggestion of impropriety, fabrication of figures or attempts to mislead. As we have already set out clearly in previous correspondence and our FoI response, the figures referenced relate to forward?looking assumptions in the published budget book, not approved or designed projects.

“The two items cited were listed in the potential capital projects section – high?level, unfunded and unapproved possibilities for which no business cases existed. Local authorities routinely include such indicative items in medium?term planning. The decision not to progress them is therefore a future cost?avoidance measure, reflecting borrowing and expenditure the council will no longer need to incur.”

The Reform leadership in Kent sent a separate statement, saying: “Only in Westminster bubble politics could stopping waste before it happens be spun as dishonesty. Reform prevented bad spending, and we make no apology for it.

“This story is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how public finances work, and a deliberate attempt to mislead readers … Polly Billington’s claim that these projects ‘never existed’ is demonstrably false.”

Late last year, Kemkaran appointed a paid political adviser, Michael Hadwen. The move was condemned by the Liberal Democrat group on the council as a waste of money. They also expressed concern at previous social media posts by Hadwen that expressed support for Enoch Powell’s ideas about immigration.