East Ayrshire Council has taken the unusual step of ruling out any formal or informal agreements, alliances, or working partnerships with Reform UK councillors should the party win seats at next year's local elections.
The motion, brought by council's SNP Deputy Leader Councillor Jim McMahon and jointly seconded by Conservative Councillor Neil Watts and Labour group leader Councillor Barry Douglas, was approved after an extended and often impassioned debate at Thursday's full council meeting.
Motion Details and Rationale
It states that while any Reform UK councillors elected in future would hold a 'legitimate mandate' and their democratic right to represent constituents would be respected, the council would not enter into any formal or informal arrangements with them because of what it described as the party's 'extreme views and rhetoric' on issues including immigration, race, equality, climate policy, and welfare.
Introducing the motion, Councillor McMahon said it sought to balance respect for democracy with what he described as the council's responsibility to uphold values of fairness, inclusion, and equality. He said: 'This motion does not seek to remove anyone's democratic right to hold office or speak for those who elect them. It does however resolve clearly that we will not enter into any formal or informal arrangements, alliances, or working partnerships with Reform UK councillors.'
He argued that public statements made by Reform UK candidates over the past year on immigration, LGBTQ+ issues, climate policy, and the NHS demonstrated 'deep and significant differences in policies and principle' between Reform UK and the parties represented on East Ayrshire Council. He added: 'This is not about shutting down debate. It's about standing firm in the standards our communities expect and ensuring our work is always guided by fairness, inclusion, and respect for everyone.'
Cross-Party Support
Conservative Group Leader Councillor Watts said the motion 'strikes the correct and necessary balance' by recognising the democratic mandate of elected representatives while refusing to 'normalise extreme rhetoric'. Labour Group Leader Councillor Barry Douglas said there was 'more that unites us than will ever divide us' across the political spectrum but argued there should be 'no deals, no coalitions, and no formal or informal working arrangements' with Reform UK if it secured representation on the authority. He added that while councillors regularly disagreed over issues such as independence or the economy, local government was ultimately about 'bins, roads, schools, and the bread and butter that actually matters to the public here in East Ayrshire.'
Labour Councillor Jayne Sangster delivered an emotional contribution, airing her concerns about comments made by Reform politicians questioning diagnoses and support for disabled people. She said: 'Behind every diagnosis is a real person. Behind every support package is a child, a young person, or an adult trying to achieve their potential and live with dignity. These are not statistics in a balance sheet. These are people. They're human beings. They're our neighbours, our friends, our constituents, and for some of us, our own family members.'
She added that she was proud that the council had just re-elected Provost Claire Leitch to the role, saying: 'It fills me with immense pride that we have in East Ayrshire a lady Provost who is not only a woman who is unashamedly herself but someone who is a very proud member of and advocate for our neurodiverse community.'
Labour Councillor Linda Mabon said she believed the Equality Act and other legal protections should be defended and argued that cooperation with political parties 'cannot come at the expense of our principles.'
Opposing Views and Debate
While no formal amendment was lodged against the motion, several councillors questioned whether refusing to work with Reform UK was the right approach. Former SNP, now independent Councillor David Richardson said he agreed with many of the criticisms made of Reform UK but argued the party should instead be defeated 'at the ballot box'. He warned against refusing to work with any party elected by voters, saying politicians had a duty to respect the choices made by the electorate.
He alluded to the rise of Hitler when he said: 'I think we need to learn the lessons of history and we need to look back to Germany in the 1930s. Hindenburg made Hitler Chancellor in 1933. Now that didn't happen overnight. That happened after a series of elections to the Reichstag which undermined the Weimar Republic. Those elections were held because the elite … felt they could control Hitler.'
He said that the public saw an 'elite' that was trying to nullify a party they were starting to believe. 'Unfortunately, now once in power, that party wasted no time in making Germany a one-party state. And why shouldn't they? Because every other party in their mind had refused to work with them.' He connected this to the motion by adding: 'Reform must be defeated. But they must be defeated at the ballot box by every one of us. Don't say to the public, if you vote for Reform when they come into council chambers, I won't speak to them.'
Cllr McMahon described the comparison as appalling. The historical event described by Cllr Richardson has also been regularly used to warn against the 'appeasement' of the far right.
Conservative Councillor James Adams also expressed reservations, saying he feared the motion could itself create division. He told members: 'By refusing to work with other political groups, in my opinion, we're not fulfilling a role. We need to work with others and learn from others.'
Deputy Provost John McGhee questioned what practical effect the motion would have given that council elections are due in May next year and any future council would not be bound by the decision.
Council's Chief Governance Officer David Mitchell advised members that while the motion would not bind a future administration after the election, it remained a legitimate political statement setting out the current council's position. He said the debate allowed the three main political groups to 'plant a flag' and give a clear message about what they believed the council should stand for.
Summing up, Councillor McMahon said Reform UK had risen by 'exploiting people's anger and resentment' and argued that some comments attributed to Reform representatives meant he personally could not work alongside them in any formal arrangement. As no amendment was proposed, the motion was carried without a recorded vote.
