Oldham still without Leader as govt steps in
Councillors were unable, for a fifth time, to appoint a Leader during Thursday’s meeting. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government has commenced an oversight process that could end with commissioners being brought in to run the politically volatile local authority.
Oldham Council has not had a Leader since May’s local elections.
National implications
MHCLG commenced talks with Oldham Council chief executive Shelley Kipling two weeks ago, notifying her that the council had been designated formally as “an authority that requires additional oversight”.
This will come in the form of a MHCLG appointed stewardship team who will meet with the local authority to provide governance support.
The stewardship team will meet with Kipling in two weeks’ time.
Kipling told members on Friday that this team was the first step in what could be a broader intervention.
Oldham Council’s monitoring officer and top legal official, Alex Bougatef, will now submit his Section 5 report to the secretary of state, which states he believes the council is now acting unlawfully.
This is because Oldham’s constitution dictates an executive leader and cabinet model, which requires a Leader to make key decisions and appoint accountable and figures, such as the lead member for children’s services.
“The appointment of a leader is not optional, it is a statutory requirement,” Bougatef told councillors.
His report states: “The monitoring officer’s conclusion is that the issue has progressed beyond ordinary political disagreement and now raises questions concerning constitutional compliance, effectiveness of governance, accountability, executive decision making and public confidence.”
Greater Manchester consequences
Without a Leader, Oldham has not had a representation within the Greater Manchester Combined Authority since the May elections.
Kipling told members that this means there has been no one to advocate and lobby for Oldham when it comes to decisions around regional transport, the distribution of resources, and other key sub-regional issues.
GMCA told Kipling that should the council be unable to appoint a Leader by September, it would look to reallocate the committee spaces currently reserved for Oldham. These could go to other local authorities, according to Kipling. She noted the GMCA had also said that these spaces may be directly allocated to Oldham councillors across party lines.
The GMCA has been approached for comment.
In the meantime…
An Oldham Council spokesperson noted that the council was continuing its work.
“Council services continue to operate as normal, and arrangements remain in place to ensure the council can fulfil its statutory responsibilities and continue delivering for residents, communities and partners across the borough,” the spokesperson said.
“We will now await further correspondence from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.”
Unwilling to compromise
Thursday’s meeting showed a council that is still as fractious and unwilling to compromise as it was in the aftermath of May’s elections.
Labour has the most councillors, with 18 members. In May, the party lost eight seats.
Reform, which picked up seven of Labour’s former seats, is the second largest party with 16 members. Of those, 13 were newly elected, which the group has argued gives it a strong mandate to govern.
Both Reform and Labour put forward motions to run minority administrations. Both failed.
Liberal Democrat Cllr Dave Murphy summed up his opposition to both, noting that he felt “like a vegetarian being forced to eat a meat dish”.
“I can’t think of a single reason to support Labour,” he said, adding that previous Labour Administrations had “run the town into the ground”.
However, while he admitted he was willing to work with Reform, he said he had seen no such inclination from that party for collaboration.
“What you want, as you sit there with the body language of a spoilt child, is you just want us to vote for you,” he said. You’ve not given us a reason.”
Reform had also put together motions to hold all-out elections in May 2027 to resolve the political impasse, and another motion to have the council join a regular all-out, four-year election cycle. These two motions also failed.
Failsworth Independent Cllr Brian Hobin put himself forward as Leader. His motion failed.
There were two compromise options put to councillors.
The first, which came from the Liberal Democrats, would see Lib Dem Cllr Diane Williamson become Leader. Williamson, who is not the leader of that party group, would then create a Leader’s advisory committee with the leader and deputy leader of each political group. This committee would be consulted on major strategic decisions.
This motion, which was supported by the Oldham Group and Conservatives, failed.
The second motion came from the Oldham Group and called for a rotation of the Leader position, with each party having a go throughout the term. This was supported by the Conservatives, Lib Dems, and Failsworth Independents. It also failed.
You can watch the more than two-hour council meeting on YouTube.
Why don’t they just say they don’t want to work with Reform?
Perhaps the real problem is that this is a council with too many skeletons in the cupboard, and a functioning uni-party arrangement suits those who would rather the cupboard doors stayed firmly shut.
Whatever people think of Reform, genuine opposition means scrutiny, awkward questions and accountability. If the established parties are determined to keep Reform at arm’s length, they should explain why — rather than hiding behind political manoeuvring.
Oldham needs transparency, not another cosy arrangement where everyone agrees not to look too closely.
By Steve5839
Of course they don’t want to work with Reform. They’ve seen what that party is doing around the country. Couldn’t run a bath, as my grandad used to say. Also, divisive horrorshows, as he didn’t use to say. The question you could be asking, but aren’t, is what concessions Reform are making such that someone might work with them. It’s unlikely to be anything at all, because they really haven’t got the hang of how local politics works once you get past Nigel’s PR campaigning.
By Unbot.
@ August 21, 2026 at 12:41 pm
By Steve5839
I think the cupboard doors will, in time, be flung open. If not straightaway in Oldham, then certainly in another northern authority.
Reform has its faults and contradicts – but it’s asking the difficult questions, which is what is needed. It’s also, so far, run a number of its councils surprisingly efficiently; in Lancashire County Council, whose area I live in, the roads have very notably improved. Road resurfacing works take place deep in the evenings or would use a flowing Stop-Go manned sign rather than traffic lights. Other issues have also been scrutinised.
Some of the youngest council leaders in the land are Reform, such as in St Helens. Pause for thought for the old parties.
By Anonymous
The Labour Party has taken Oldhamers for granted. Some parts of Oldham are so dirty and neglected, it is hard to believe that you are in Western Europe. Of course resources in towns like Oldham are limited but there is an acceptance by the leaders of that town, Oldham is a lost cause, and that they are managing the inevitable decline. The Princes Gate project was originally something for the town to be proud of, it is still a building site. The grand bank at Mumps is a building most towns would have redeveloped as it is next to the Metrolink but not Oldham, they are waiting for it to fall down.
By Elephant