Gillian Ford Challenges Reform UK Climate Motion in Havering 2026

Key Points

• Challenge to Climate Motion: Opposition Leader Councillor Gillian Ford has formally challenged a motion put forward by Reform UK regarding Havering Council’s climate emergency strategy.
• Critique of Abandonment: Cllr Ford argued that scrapping the borough’s current climate strategy would represent a “retrograde step” for the local authority and its community.
• Emphasis on Resident Benefits: The intervention highlighted that climate mitigation measures directly support residents through lower energy bills, improved home insulation, heat refuge, EV infrastructure, and safer travel routes.
• Scrutiny of Funding: Concerns were raised over Reform UK’s broader national positioning on climate policies, citing reports regarding financial contributions from oil and gas interests.
• Call for Cross-Party Support: Cllr Ford urged councillors, specifically highlighting former Conservative members now with Reform UK and the Cabinet Member for Economic Development, to back an amendment to review and refocus the strategy rather than abandon it.

Havering (East London Times) August 19, 2026 — In a full council chamber debate, Councillor Gillian Ford, the Opposition Leader on Havering Council, challenged a Reform UK motion attempting to alter the borough’s climate emergency framework, warning that dismantling the strategy would be a retrograde step for local residents.

What prompted the debate over Havering Council’s climate strategy?

During a session of full council, councillors gathered to debate a motion submitted by Reform UK concerning the future direction of Havering Council’s approach to the climate emergency. The debate centered on whether the local authority should abandon its existing framework or retain and adapt its commitments to address environmental challenges.

Opposing the motion, Cllr Gillian Ford delivered an extensive speech urging the chamber to reject Reform UK’s proposal. As reported by local news outlets covering Havering Council’s proceedings, Cllr Ford argued that climate mitigation policies are inextricably linked to the immediate health, economic, and practical welfare of borough residents.

Why did Councillor Gillian Ford label the motion a retrograde step?

Focusing on the immediate human cost of severe weather patterns, Cllr Ford opened her address by referencing recent public health data regarding seasonal temperature extremes. Addressing the chamber directly, Cllr Ford stated:

“We will all have seen this month’s suggestion that more than 2,700 people may have died in May and June due to the exceptional heatwaves; that doesn’t include July’s statistics which would almost certainly add to the losses. The majority of us within this chamber will have the ability to find refuge from the heat, but that isn’t the case for a significant number of our residents, living in poverty and on the breadline.”

Cllr Ford maintained that abandoning the borough’s established strategy would leave vulnerable demographics unprotected against escalating environmental risks, thereby constituting a major setback for local governance.

How does Reform UK’s national platform impact local policy debates?

In her remarks, Cllr Ford drew a direct link between the local motion brought by Reform UK councillors and the wider political party’s national funding structure. According to statements recorded from the chamber floor, Cllr Ford highlighted:

“Reform UK Ltd has received £24 million from oil and gas interests, accounting for more than two thirds of its total income, it is therefore hardly surprising that Reform UK Ltd are blocking or rescinding Climate Emergency Policies across the UK.”

She argued that local motions seeking to dismantle climate emergency declarations mirror broader national party directives rather than serving the primary interests of Havering residents.

What practical community benefits do climate policies deliver?

To counter arguments that climate strategies represent unnecessary bureaucratic expenditure, Cllr Ford detailed how local environmental initiatives deliver tangible economic and social improvements. Addressing the members directly, Cllr Ford stated:

“So what is a ‘Climate Emergency declaration’, it is a generic title recognised across the globe with no costs attached. It is the delivery plan and framework where costs lie. But what are the costs? Who in this chamber would oppose the planting of more trees, the reduction in fuel poverty, cool spaces for our vulnerable residents, better insulation in council owned properties and cheaper energy bills for public buildings and for residents?”

Continuing her breakdown of infrastructure necessities, Cllr Ford addressed transport and health requirements across the borough:

“As Diesel and petrol begin to be phased out we need to adapt and deliver EV charging points, we need a public transport network that has clean energy and not the hand-me-down London buses we have had over the last few years. We need safer cycle routes as we see more children wanting to ride a bike to school.”

She noted that supporting active travel choices for younger residents extends beyond environmental targets, adding that:

“Children cycling and walking isn’t just about net zero it is about their health and wellbeing, as The Cabinet Member for Adults and Wellbeing heard for himself at the Healthy Weight Summit last week.”

How did previous statements from cabinet members factor into the debate?

In building her case for a cross-party amendment, Cllr Ford cited historical remarks made by the Cabinet Member for Economic Development regarding climate responsibilities and development standards. Reminding the chamber of the Cabinet Member’s past positions as a developer, Cllr Ford noted:

“The Cabinet Member of Economic Development has previously made it clear that actions have to be to mitigate against climate change in his other role as a developer. His proposed development on the old Ice Rink site was going to be ‘50 per cent betterment in terms of carbon’ ‘It’s not going to be an ordinary development we are looking for this to be a zero-carbon development’.”

Cllr Ford further highlighted past media interviews given by the Cabinet Member to demonstrate existing consensus on the issue:

“In an Interview on Chain Reaction on Thursday 27th May 2021 the Cabinet Member stated there were ‘Emergencies in climate change’.”

She added that on 4th August 2022, the Cabinet Member stated:

“Last month, the Met Office reported Britain’s hottest recorded temperature – a roasting 40.3°C. An extraordinary and terrifying milestone. Most climate scientists agree climate change is the reason we are seeing such brutal temperatures.”

Concluding this section of her address, Cllr Ford remarked:

“The Cabinet Member is absolutely right. These are the challenges we all face and one we have powers to address for the benefit of Havering residents and the generations to come.”

What alternative approach was proposed for Havering Council?

Rather than an outright cancellation of environmental commitments, Cllr Ford advocated for a structured review of existing plans to ensure maximum efficacy without burdening local taxpayers. Explaining the rationale for an amendment, Cllr Ford stated:

“The impact of climate change hits the most vulnerable the hardest, with the lack of funds to seek mitigation measures. To abandon the Strategy is a retrograde step. Reviewing it however, provides the opportunity to revise and redirect the focus.”

Outlining the financial and operational safeguards embedded within council governance, Cllr Ford continued:

“Let’s be honest, the Council will always consider value for money, its relationships with residents, strategic partners, businesses, and the voluntary sector. It has also been very clear not to place unnecessary costs, restrictions on residents, motorists, businesses or essential Council services. We need collective co-operation the identification of areas of risk, the pooling of budgets, the sourcing of external funding and a strong delivery framework.”

Rejecting the original motion, Cllr Ford concluded her argument by appealing directly to individual members across political divides:

“It is for these very reasons we cannot support the Reform UK motion which is merely posturing and cowering to Reform UK Ltd.’s demands. The residents of Havering deserve better and turn to us for strong leadership, and to lead by example.”

She specifically called on individual members based on past voting records:

“We recognise that the Leader of the Council abstained from the climate Emergency vote in March 2023, however two Reform UK Councillors (former Conservative Councillors) supported the motion. We therefore expect the two former Conservative Councillors and the Cabinet Member for Economic Development, who has spoken so adeptly on climate emergency, to support our amendment and invite all of you within the chamber to do the same.”

Background of Havering Council’s Climate Emergency Framework

Havering Council originally joined numerous local authorities across the United Kingdom in declaring a climate emergency in March 2023. The declaration established an overarching goal for the local authority to reduce carbon emissions, enhance sustainability, and prepare local infrastructure for extreme weather events.

Declarations of this nature act as non-binding policy frameworks designed to guide subsequent administrative decisions, planning approvals, building insulation standards, and public transport integration. In Havering, previous votes on the strategy saw varied political positions, including abstentions from leadership and support from members who subsequently moved between party groups, leading to ongoing political debates over the exact scope, cost, and implementation of council climate measures.

Impact Prediction: How this development affects Havering residents and motorists

The outcome of this council debate and the long-term status of Havering’s climate strategy carry direct implications for several groups across the borough:

• Low-Income and Vulnerable Residents: Should climate mitigation policies remain in place and undergo strategic review, vulnerable households stand to benefit from targeted energy efficiency programs, home insulation schemes, and municipal support designed to lower domestic fuel bills and provide relief during extreme heatwaves. Conversely, a total rollback could reduce targeted local funding for housing adaptations.
• Local Motorists and Commuters: The debate directly impacts the rollout speed of EV charging infrastructure across local streets. While an outright abandonment of targets might reduce immediate council spending on green transit infrastructure, maintaining or refocusing the framework ensures continued investment in EV infrastructure, cleaner bus routes, and safer cycling paths for families and school children.
• Local Taxpayers and Council Tenants: Refocusing the delivery framework ensures that energy efficiency improvements to public buildings and council-owned housing stock continue, aimed at generating long-term operational savings for municipal budgets while protecting council tenants from rising heating and energy costs.