Councillors in West Northamptonshire last night slammed Reform UK’s plan to access council data as part of a drive that it claims is intended to reduce local “fraud and waste”.
In a key test of Reform’s battle to access data from councils, West Northamptonshire became the first to welcome unnamed and unpaid “experts” from the party’s ‘DOGE’ unit into the council to find ways to cut its budget.
The council says it will reserve the right to stop DOGE from accessing restricted personal information, and will vet the members of Reform’s unit to ensure they have relevant qualifications. However, opposition councillors protested against the proposal in local cabinet meeting last night.
Councillor Jonathan Harris, leader of the council’s Liberal Democrat group, cautioned the Reform members who drafted the plan, warning: “I hope you are clear collectively on the legalities around this and what it means, and what it doesn’t mean. Any opportunity to take advantage of it in an inappropriate way will be called out”.
Other councillors raised concerns over Reform’s failure to reveal the identities of its 12-member DOGE team, the protection of potentially sensitive data, and the what is the place where that DOGE’s members may expect from the council in exchange for offering their services for free.
Several councillors expressed doubt that the DOGE unit could find more to cut from a council that has already wrung £115 million from its budget in the last four years. Even the Reform-led proposal acknowledges that further cuts will be “difficult to deliver” due to “huge pressures” in the provision of social care.
“I suspect there was a view that [Reform] would be able to come in and find masses of money hidden away,” said Harris. “Well, actually, the lemon has been squeezed in West Northamptonshire. There is only so much squeezing of that lemon you can do before you have nothing.”
UNISON East Midlands regional organiser Lynsey Tod told DeSmog that the union would be “closely monitoring” DOGE’s work in West Northamptonshire.
“We’ve seen in other Reform-led councils that there’s simply nothing left to cut unless they’re prepared to slash vital frontline services. Local government staff are already stretched to breaking point, doing more with fewer resources,” Tod said.
“If hard working staff are overloaded, it will only worsen services for residents and make it even harder for councils to recruit and retain the staff they need.”
Local Lib Dem leader Harris also questioned whether the DOGE volunteers – some of whom are business leaders, according to the party – will expect something in return for offering their services for free.
“Why for free?” Harris asked. “There’s no such thing as a free lunch.”
Reform – which campaigns to stop clean energy development, ditch the UK’s climate targets, and ramp up fossil fuel production – is already putting its stamp on West Northamptonshire Council after May’s elections.
Immediately before approving the arrival of the party’s DOGE unit, the council voted to scrap its net zero emissions targets, following the lead of Durham Council, which is also controlled by Reform.
Reform’s DOGE Origins
Reform’s won control of 10 councils in May’s elections, prompting the party’s then-chairman Zia Yusuf to create a UK DOGE team of “software engineers, data analysts and forensic auditors” who would work to “identify waste and efficiencies” in local government.
Yusuf’s plan was inspired by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, established by President Donald Trump’s new administration, which has accessed vast amounts of highly sensitive personal data held by the U.S. federal government.
Trump’s DOGE has overseen extreme cuts to vital, life-saving services. A recent study by the Lancet medical journal estimates that Musk’s cuts to the U.S. aid budget – which provided HIV medication and food aid to the developing world – could lead to 14 million deaths by 2030.
Since the formation of Reform’s DOGE unit, critics have sounded the alarm that Yusuf – who now runs the team – seeks to replicate Trump’s agenda in the UK.
Former tech entrepreneur Yusuf has not been shy about his desire to be the UK’s Musk, and has suggested he wants looser personal data privacy protections in the UK. Reform has also vowed to use its newfound power to block local renewable energy projects, mirroring Trump’s anti-climate policies.
After its election victories, Reform’s DOGE team began meeting with councils to negotiate the sharing of data with the unit. Since then, battles have ensued between councils and Nigel Farage’s party over how much access its DOGE team will get to potentially sensitive personal data.
Kent County Council – the first to receive a visit from DOGE and a letter from Reform’s leadership demanding “all council-held documents, reports, and records” – has hired external lawyers to challenge Yusuf’s plan, according to the Financial Times.
Conservative Shadow Minister for Local Government Kevin Hollinrake has called the demands a “cybersecurity disaster waiting to happen”, and has requested that the UK’s information watchdog conduct an investigation into Reform’s letter.
Yusuf has also made a series of accusations on social media about local government spending in Kent, often without providing documentary evidence and frequently misinterpreting the council’s procurement decisions.
Yusuf’s Secret Accomplices
Who are the people behind Yusuf’s DOGE operation? Opposition leaders in West Northamptonshire were quick to point out that their names and backgrounds, which until now have been kept secret by the party, may remain a mystery to the public even after they start work in the council.
There is no provision in West Northamptonshire’s agreement with Reform for the public disclosure of those involved in the DOGE team. Even though the council says it will require all DOGE volunteers to undergo “due diligence” checks to the “satisfaction” of the council’s chief executive officer, there is no information on the transparency of that process.
“We’re being asked to approve sharing data with people we cannot name”, said Councillor Dan Lister, leader of the council’s Conservative group.
Harris of the Lib Dems echoed Lister’s concern: “We don’t know who those people are. So I hope that there is absolutely clear scrutiny about those individuals and the skills that they bring”.
However, the person responsible for these checks has already faced criticism for backing Yusuf’s project. Anna Earnshaw, the council’s CEO, appeared in photos with Yusuf during his visit to West Northamptonshire in June, and has expressed support for the council’s collaboration with DOGE.
“From all of our point of view there’s no better time than now to do this piece of work”, Earnshaw told the Northampton Chronicle & Echo.
Reform’s leader in West Northamptonshire Mark Arnull said: “I am confident the team will be able to support the council in identifying further efficiencies and potential future savings whilst continuing to protect and deliver services for residents across West Northamptonshire”.
DOGE Comes to West Northamptonshire
West Northamptonshire Council’s plan states that protections will be put in place to prevent the DOGE unit from accessing personal data.
The council’s report states: “It is agreed that no personal or special category data will either be requested or shared with any third party appointed”.
Concerns of future breaches remain, however, and the council’s plan includes taking out insurance to protect itself in case of “potential loss or damage”.
“Well, good luck with that”, warned Conservative Councillor Cecile Irving-Swift in Wednesday’s meeting.
Councillor Sally Keeble, leader of the Labour group, also suggested that the information requested by Reform should be “circulated to all [councillors] transparently” rather than “selectively to a few people”.
Credit: Zia Yusuf / X
Indeed, the council has been accused of violating its obligation to political neutrality by asking a political party for help in enacting spending cuts.
The information requested by Yusuf’s team includes data on asylum hotels, potholes, home to school transport, adult and children’s social care, budget models, and the council’s digital operation – requests which align closely with Reform campaigns.
“This is politically branded,” said local Tory leader Lister. “This is a council run by Reform UK with a proposal brought by Reform UK councillors, using volunteers who have offered their services to Reform UK, branded using a term adopted by Reform UK. The Local Government Act is explicit, we cannot provide assistance that could be seen as supporting a political party.”
Lister recommended a list of “safeguards” against the potential politicisation of DOGE’s work including “a cross-party group of leaders” who would “require full disclosure and approval” of every person who might access the council’s data, a “guarantee” that the findings would be “council property”, and a process for parties to scrutinise DOGE’s recommendations before the council takes any action.
Keeble further accused the council of creating a “preferential arrangement” that would provide the DOGE unit with a “competitive advantage” over other companies or bodies that may be able to help the council to find efficiencies.
She called for a formal procurement process to be established – allowing others to bid for the work in an open tender process – a call echoed by Harris, who said one was needed “in order to give every resident the best value for money”.
Reform’s DOGE team wants to eventually meet each of the 10 Reform-controlled councils it secured in May’s elections. Next up, Yusuf has announced plans to visit Staffordshire County Council, where his unit will again discuss accessing council data.
Dr Ryan Swift, a research fellow at the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) North think tank, told DeSmog that he hopes councils continue to resist Yusuf’s efforts: “Attempts by Reform to bring in its so-called DOGE unit to review sensitive internal council data are misguided. Officials are rightly pushing back against this assault on local democracy”.
This article was produced with support from the European Media and Information Fund, managed by the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation. The sole responsibility for any content supported by the European Media and Information Fund lies with the author(s) and it may not necessarily reflect the positions of the EMIF and the Fund Partners, the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation and the European University Institute.
About The Author
