Local government reorganisation is being quietly pushed by central government without the consent of the people it will affect most. That alone should give everyone pause.

There is no democratic mandate for these changes. They were not set out clearly in the government’s manifesto, nor have they been put to the electorate in any meaningful or binding way. Voters have not been asked whether they want their councils abolished, their counties broken up, or decision-making shifted further away from their communities.

That is not how democracy is supposed to work.

Reform UK is clear: any fundamental change to the structure of local government must have the explicit consent of local people. Anything else is top-down government by diktat.

Let’s Be Honest: Local Government Is Broken

It is important to be honest. Local government is a mess in many parts of the country.

Councils are too often dominated by unaccountable senior officers, insulated from voters, driving policy, procurement, and priorities with little effective scrutiny. Wasteful spending, vanity projects, bloated management structures, and poor value for money have become endemic. Many councils feel less like democratic institutions and more like closed administrative corporations.

Reform UK’s successes in the May local elections have given us a clear window into the true scale of this problem. Where Reform councillors have gained access to the books, the contracts, and the internal processes, the picture has been stark: inefficiency, waste, weak accountability, and a culture that too often treats taxpayers as an afterthought.

But recognising that local government is broken does not mean accepting that Whitehall knows best how to fix it.

Reorganisation Is Not Reform

The answer to failing local government is not to abolish councils, merge counties, or create ever larger and more remote authorities.

There is no serious evidence that breaking counties apart or scrapping district councils leads to better governance. In many cases, it simply concentrates power further away from communities and further into the hands of senior officers — the very problem people are already angry about.

Far from delivering real devolution, these plans risk doing the opposite: pushing decisions about planning, housing, local services, and community priorities upwards, away from towns, villages, and neighbourhoods.

That is not empowering local people. It is insulating decision-makers from them.

A Threat to Historic County Identities

Local government is not just about structures and balance sheets. It is also about identity, history, and belonging.

Counties such as Kent and Derbyshire have strong, deeply rooted identities that matter to the people who live there. These are not arbitrary administrative zones dreamt up in Whitehall; they are places with shared history, culture, and civic pride.

Breaking them up into artificial units risks eroding that identity permanently. Once lost, it will not be easily restored.

Real Reform Starts With Consent and Accountability

Reform UK does not oppose change. But real reform means:

• restoring democratic control over officer-led bureaucracies

• rooting out waste and poor value for money

• strengthening transparency and scrutiny

• and bringing decision-making closer to the people it affects

Crucially, it also means local consent. If communities want structural change, that case should be made openly, debated honestly, and decided through proper consultation or a clear local vote.

What we oppose is a quiet restructuring of local democracy without permission, without a mandate, and without respect for local identity or accountability.

Local government should serve local people — not officers, not Whitehall, and not abstract organisational theories. Any attempt to reform it must start with the voters, not bypass them.

Following recent local elections, Reform UK has begun implementing a programme known as DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) across the councils it now controls. The initiative is focused on reviewing local authority spending, increasing transparency, and identifying waste so that public money is directed towards services that genuinely benefit residents.

This article explains what DOGE is, how it operates, and what councils and residents can expect.

A Clear Electoral Mandate

Reform UK was elected to local government with an explicit commitment to scrutinise council finances and reduce wasteful spending. In several authorities, this mandate resulted in outright control of the council, giving Reform UK the ability to act directly on those commitments.

DOGE is the mechanism through which that pledge is being delivered. The programme is designed to complement existing council audit processes by applying specialist skills and modern analytical tools to complex spending data.

Leadership and Expertise

The DOGE programme is led by Zia Yusuf and delivered by a team of professional software engineers, data analysts, and forensic auditors.

Rather than relying solely on traditional audit methods, the team uses:

• Advanced data analysis

• Artificial intelligence tools

• Forensic accounting techniques

These approaches are intended to identify patterns of inefficiency, waste, or potential misuse of public funds that may not be immediately visible through standard financial reviews.

Initial Council Engagements

The team’s first visit was to Kent County Council, the largest local authority in the UK. This was followed by engagement with West Northamptonshire Council.

In both cases, the DOGE team met with council leadership, chief executives, and senior officers. These meetings focused on collaboration, access to data, and ensuring the work aligns fully with each council’s governance, legal responsibilities, and operational realities.

Collaborative and Pro-Bono by Design

A defining feature of DOGE is that it operates on a pro-bono basis. This means:

• There is no cost to local taxpayers

• No council budget is diverted to fund the work

• The arrangement mirrors that of an external contractor, but without fees

Many Reform-controlled councils already have internal value-for-money or efficiency programmes underway. DOGE is intended to supplement these efforts by adding specialist technical capability, not to replace existing officers or statutory audit functions.

A Deliberately Low-Profile, Professional Approach

It is also important to be clear about what DOGE is not.

This is not a publicity-led initiative, nor is it designed to produce a constant stream of announcements, headlines, or adversarial “hit jobs”. The majority of DOGE’s work will take place quietly in the background, analysing complex datasets, testing assumptions, and working constructively with council officers who are already committed to delivering value for money for the taxpayer.

Across local government, many senior officers share the same objectives as elected members: efficient services, robust governance, and public trust. DOGE is designed to support that shared goal — not to undermine it.

Where significant findings emerge, they will be reported through proper channels and considered by council administrations. However, residents should not expect a running commentary or performative press campaign. This is a serious, technical exercise focused on outcomes rather than optics.

Why DOGE Was Considered Necessary

Supporters of the programme argue that the scale of waste already identified in some councils demonstrates the need for deeper scrutiny. For example, previously disclosed figures from Kent County Council include:

• A £350 million recruitment services contract tendered over four years — equivalent to around 22% of the council’s annual payroll

• £2.8 million of confirmed fraud recorded in the most recent year

DOGE’s role is to analyse spending data in detail and produce evidence-based recommendations that elected councillors can then consider and, where appropriate, act upon.

What the DOGE Team Does

In practical terms, the DOGE programme aims to:

• Audit council spending to improve transparency

• Identify inefficient or wasteful expenditure

• Recommend lawful, practical cost-saving measures

• Help redirect resources towards frontline services

Final decisions remain with elected councillors, who are accountable to residents for determining which recommendations to implement.

Data Protection and Confidentiality

Given the sensitivity of local authority data, strict safeguards are in place:

• Each council enters into a formal Data Sharing Agreement with the DOGE team

• Data use is limited strictly to audit and analysis purposes

• Where possible, pseudonymisation is used, replacing personal identifiers with coded references

• Governance standards mirror those used when councils appoint third-party auditors or consultants

These measures are designed to ensure full compliance with data protection law and council requirements.

What Happens Next?

The DOGE team will visit and analyse every Reform UK-controlled council. The programme began with Kent and will be rolled out across all twelve authorities under Reform control in due course.

As reports are completed, findings and recommendations will be presented to council administrations, who will decide how best to act in the interests of local residents.

In Summary

DOGE represents Reform UK’s approach to delivering on its promise to cut waste and improve value for money in local government. By combining a clear electoral mandate, specialist expertise, a collaborative delivery model, and a deliberately low-profile approach, the programme aims to demonstrate how technology-led scrutiny can be applied at council level.

Its success will not be measured by headlines, but by better use of public funds, reduced waste, and more money directed to frontline services — quietly, professionally, and in the interests of residents.