Labour has taken control of East Staffordshire council in what the party has described as a “hugely significant result”.
Labour has won 21 seats. The Conservatives lost eight seats to finish with 15 councillors, with one independent. The Labour group leader on the council is Cllr Michael Fitzpatrick.
A Labour spokesperson said the result “confirms we are on course for a majority Labour government. We have been going backwards in Staffordshire in recent general elections. With this gain and our win in Stoke we are making real progress in the places we need to win the next election”.
East Staffordshire Result #LE2023:
LAB: 21 (+11)
CON: 15 (-8)
IND: 1 (-2)
LDM: 0 (-1)Labour GAIN From Conservative. pic.twitter.com/N1JGpErywU
— Election Maps UK (@ElectionMapsUK) May 5, 2023
The Conservatives had held East Staffordshire at the last set of local elections in 2019, taking 25 seats to Labour’s ten.
News of Labour’s East Staffordshire gain came after Keir Starmer was reported to have told a packed Labour HQ around midday: “Doesn’t it feel good to be back on the march?”
He added: “Let’s never mistake confidence for complacency. But we are going to bottle this feeling we have today and then we’re going to turn it into a general election win next year.”
Read more on the local elections:
- Latest updates: Labour councils won, held and lost
- Labour win overall control in key target council Stoke
- Local elections: ‘Seismic’ Labour win in bellwether Plymouth council
- Labour becomes largest party in Bolton but not in overall control
- Labour’s Chris Cooke takes Middlesbrough mayor post from independent
- Labour bruises the Tories in North West Leicestershire, Hartlepool, Tamworth
- What would good local election results look like for Labour?
More from LabourList
‘Do not fall into the speed trap – Labour must take the time to get rail nationalisation right’
Labour ‘holding up strong’ with support for Budget among voters, claim MPs after national campaign weekend
‘This US election matters more than any in 80 years – the stakes could not be higher’