He said he has been involved in politics for 15 years, “from the UKIP days all the way to Reform”

A Reform UK councillor who has become the star of a viral video has spoken about his now-infamous “UKIP” gaffe.

Peter Reeve, who won the Stanground South ward seat on May 7, has achieved notoriety after mistakenly referring to his former party, UKIP, in a television interview at Peterborough’s local election results.

Speaking to the press during the early hours of May 8, a jubilant Mr Reeve said: “Our message is: ‘UKIP’s here, working hard with local communities.”

He subsequently corrected himself, quickly clarifying that he had been involved in politics for 15 years “from the UKIP days all the way to Reform”.

The clip has since gone viral after being posted on social media. So was it a simple mis-speak or more of a Freudian slip?

“So, essentially; [it was] four o’clock in the morning, [and the] tenth interview in a row,” Cllr Reeve told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS).

“It wasn’t deliberate,” he continued, chuckling at his own faux-pas: “some people are suggesting that [as] I’ve had so much media coverage off the back of it.”

Deliberate or not, it’s fair to say that the newly installed councillor definitely has received a lot of attention as a result. “The national coverage I’ve got from that mistake is absolutely huge,” he acknowledged.

The councillor said he bears no grudge at all with the broadcaster that aired his clanger. “I don’t see a real problem with the ITV interview itself,” he said, adding “they made light of it.”

However, Cllr Reeve was keen to clarify that Reform UK “is an entirely different party with an entirely different agenda,” to UKIP.

At the same time, he was also eager to confirm “I’ve got no shame in what we did with UKIP.”

One thing that has irked Cllr Reeve is how the clip has since been manipulated by some on social media, an arena which he admits he has only modest experience dealing with.

He said: “The.. thing I’ve learned is how brutal social media is. [The] really, really nasty comments on there have made me realise just how toxic social media is.

“It’s really opened up my eyes at what some kids and the younger generation are… going through and the level of trauma it can cause.”

Though he has not enjoyed this curt introduction to the darker side of digital fame, he still believes the experience has been “really useful.”

“I’ve got a much better insight into how social media can affect people in a toxic and negative way.”

City of York Council’s executive approved plans to close the market on Tuesdays to improve access to the city centre, despite warnings it could cost between £2.6 million and £7.82 million in lost spending.

Cllr Pete Kilbane, the council’s Labour economy spokesperson, said they would not bar some from the city centre during the event but they had a difficult balance to strike.

The move follows traffic restrictions which saw vehicles including Blue Badge holders barred from driving into the city centre when last year’s market was running.

RECOMMENDED READING:

Speaking at the Executive meeting on Tuesday, May 12, Amanda Cooper of the York Disability Rights Forum said barring disabled people’s access to essential services was already causing stress for some.

Ms Cooper said: “There’s a deaf and bling person who needs to access the bank, restricting access causes them stress over their finances.

“It could also result in others going into financial difficulties or debt.”

Lee Clayton, who runs Nutty’s Emporium and has traded at the market for five years, said the closures may force him to do business elsewhere in the future.

The trader said ahead of the meeting: “A lost day’s trade, which is in effect five or six days across the whole market, is crippling for a small business like myself.

“It be a real shame as I love being part of the market for both the success it brings my business and the atmosphere it creates.”

York Christmas Market is set to close on Tuesdays this year (Image: Staff)

Disability rights activist Flick Williams said she was dismayed by what she said was the ableism from some in the business community in the run up to the decision.

The campaigner said: “Disabled people aren’t a homogenous mass with the same access needs.

“Businesses who say we just need to suck it up in response to being totally excluded for six weeks of the year might do well to examine their own access arrangements.”

Resident Gwen Swinburn said she was concerned about the financial, legal and safety risks if the council is liable for anything which happens as a result of the closures.

York Access Forum’s Diane Rowarth said running the market all week shut disabled people out of the city through no choice of their own.

Ms Rowarth said: “York city centre must be a place for all residents, disabled people have been excluded for a whole period during the Christmas Market.

“This isn’t a perfect solution, but it’s one day a week more than we have now.”

Rob Collins, owner of Parliament Street’s Days café, said his business relied on earnings during the market to tide them through January, February and March.

The café owner said: “A city centre full of empty chalets will kill it for one day a week.

“This is one of the worst times in history for the hospitality industry, we need your support not another nail in the coffin.”

Marketing profession Charlotte Bodman said she feared that getting the message out about rest days would be difficult.

She said: “Visitors who arrive on a closed Tuesday are unlikely simply to return another day, many will have planned specific travel dates, overnight stays or day trips around their visit.

“Reducing trading days sets a precedent that may prove difficult to reverse.”

Concerns over the effects of the closures were also raised by York’s Business Improvement District (BID), High Street Forum, Made in Yorkshire and the Grand Yorkshire steam train tours company.

North Yorkshire Police requested an Anti-Terror Traffic Regulation Order (ATTRO) to deter terror attacks and the restrictions are now available for use all year round on a case-by-case basis.

Police and counter-terror advice ahead of Tuesday was that keeping the market open all week offered the most security but said the decision rested with the council.

Measures approved for this year would see Blue Badge holders allowed onto the ‘Goodramgate loop’ on Tuesdays between Deansgate, King’s Square and Colliergate but Church Street would be closed.

Rest days will be trialled this year, with a return to a seven-day-a-week market not ruled out as council officials work on long-term solutions to access issues.

Water bills are rising, public anger over sewage pollution has not abated, and the government has now set out a major overhaul of water regulation in the king’s speech.

The proposed water reform bill signals a shift in emphasis. Rather than focusing solely on water companies, the legislation aims to address pollution more broadly, including contributions from agriculture and industry. This wider lens has long been missing from water policy and is, in principle, a welcome change.

The bill also promises a more unified regulatory system. The financial regulator Ofwat, the Drinking Water Inspectorate and the water-related arms of the Environment Agency and Natural England would be brought together under a single regulatory umbrella. The intention is to end the fragmented oversight that has characterised the sector for decades.

These proposals follow the recommendations of the Independent Water Commission, as outlined in the 2025 Cunliffe review which critiqued England’s privatised water industry, and Labour’s white paper. Yet despite the language of reform, the vision looks less like a radical reset and more like a reboot of privatisation.

The Clean Water Now coalition – a group of over 40 environmental groups – has put forward proposals that include three main asks: to fix the system, stop the polluters and restore nature.

Public opinion polling consistently shows strong support for bringing water back into public ownership. Labour’s white paper, however, places clear emphasis on “making water a more attractive and reliable sector for investors seeking stable and fair returns”. It is this focus that will worry campaigners, as it suggests continuity with an economic model widely blamed for underinvestment, rising bills and environmental harm.

À lire aussi :
No wonder England’s water needs cleaning up – most sewage discharges aren’t even classified as pollution incidents

The government also promises more joined‑up and longer‑term regional planning for water. Solutions don’t just involve tightening regulations and enforcement within the water industry. Everything from agricultural fertilisers, road runoff and chemical factory waste can contribute to pollution. Preventing the release of contaminants is vital, before pollution reaches the water treatment system.

But some of the most pressing challenges appear to receive surprisingly little attention. Climate change, for example, is mentioned only once in the government’s 53‑page white paper, in a brief statement about “future‑proofing” the regulatory framework against emerging pressures.

That omission matters. Changing rainfall patterns are already increasing sewage discharges, placing additional strain on ageing infrastructure. Periods of low river flow and drought make pollution events more damaging, not less, because contaminants are more concentrated in a smaller volume of water. Water scarcity, meanwhile, will intensify demand for water and competition between households, agriculture and industry. Clean water is becoming even more valuable as a commodity.

Ignored warning signs

Ofwat reports from more than 20 years ago warned that climate change would require long‑term planning and major infrastructure investment. The Ofwat annual reports for 2007-08 states: “We have also started to develop guidance for companies to assess the robustness of their infrastructure to extreme events so that they can take best account of the challenges of climate change in planning and delivering services to consumers.” The industry failed to respond and the regulator failed to regulate.

After three decades without a single new reservoir being built, the government is now legislating for several over the coming years – a tacit admission that those warnings were ignored.

The government argues that a new, integrated regulator will provide greater stability, transparency and a clearer view of both economic and environmental performance. That ambition will only be realised if transparency is actively safeguarded.

Decisions about whether revenue is directed towards shareholder returns, infrastructure investment or environmental protection will increasingly sit within a single body. This makes scrutiny of that internal decision-making crucial.

The reforms promise coherence and long‑term thinking. Whether they deliver genuine environmental improvement – or simply a more streamlined version of the status quo – will depend on how robustly the new system is designed, and whose interests it ultimately serves.

Nasa is developing ways to use nuclear power to send spacecraft to their destinations. Nuclear propulsion could greatly reduce the journey time to Mars, perhaps cutting a voyage of more than six months to three or four months.

The idea of nuclear propulsion in space goes back to the cold war. But Nasa has been pursuing it more aggressively since Jared Isaacman took over as the agency’s chief in December 2025. Isaacman is a well-known advocate of the technology and says it can “truly unlock humankind’s ability to explore among the stars”.

In March 2026, the agency even announced an uncrewed, nuclear-powered mission to the red planet, targeted for late 2028.

Every spacecraft begins its journey fighting Earth’s gravity by burning chemical fuel. Rockets mix fuel with an oxidiser, ignite them, and force the expanding gas through a nozzle. According to Isaac Newton’s third law, when gas pushes downward, the rocket gets an equal push upward.

Chemical propulsion is powerful, reliable, and quite simply the only practical way to leave Earth’s gravity. But it comes with a severe limitation. Rockets must carry both their fuel and, in most cases, the oxidiser needed to burn it.

That means much of a rocket’s mass at launch is propellant, not payload. The longer and more ambitious the journey, the more propellant is needed, and the heavier the rocket becomes.

Mars is far enough away that a long journey time, the threat to astronauts from cosmic radiation, the mass required to carry life-support systems and constraints on the return journey all pose serious problems for planning a mission.

This is why engineers keep looking for more sustainable alternatives to chemical rockets.

Two technologies

Nasa’s space nuclear propulsion programme distinguishes between two main
approaches: thermal propulsion and electric propulsion.

Nuclear thermal propulsion follows a three-step process. First, the nuclear reactor inside the engine splits uranium atoms to generate massive amounts of heat. Second, liquid hydrogen is pumped through the reactor core, where it flash boils and expands into a high-pressure gas. Third, this super-heated gas is blasted out of a nozzle at high velocities to push the spacecraft forward.

According to the US Department of Energy, nuclear thermal propulsion can reduce travel times to Mars by up to 25% and, more importantly, limit a crew’s exposure to cosmic radiation. It would also widen the launch windows in which spacecraft can feasibly fly to Mars.

These depend on alignments of Earth and Mars that come along every couple of years. Greater flexibility with launch windows would allow astronauts to abort missions and return to Earth if necessary.

Nuclear electric propulsion, on the other hand, uses a nuclear reactor to generate electricity. This powers a type of engine called an ion thruster that accelerates charged atoms (like xenon) out of a nozzle. If nuclear thermal propulsion is the sprint approach, nuclear electric propulsion is the marathon option. Nuclear electric propulsion produces very low thrust, but it can run continuously for years.

This fuel efficient technology is perfect for sending robot explorers or heavy cargo (like habitats and food supplies) to Mars months before the humans arrive. In deep space, a small thrust applied for a long time can matter enormously.

Advertisement

A chemical rocket is like a powerful kick. Nuclear electric propulsion is more like a persistent hand on the shoulder.

It could make it easier to move heavy cargo through deep space, provide abundant onboard power, and remain effective far from the Sun, where the energy available to solar arrays is weaker.

This is the main idea behind Nasa’s Space Reactor-1 Freedom mission. SR-1 Freedom is a nuclear electric propulsion mission, which Nasa is currently targeting for launch in December 2028.

It would be the first nuclear-powered interplanetary spacecraft. It will journey to Mars to prove that nuclear energy can provide the sustained, high-efficiency power needed for deep space travel.

On arrival at Mars, roughly one year after its launch, SR-1 Freedom is expected to deploy the Skyfall payload. This is a set of small helicopter drones that will scout the Martian surface.

Nasa says the mission will establish nuclear hardware that can be used on other flights. It could also create a regulatory precedent and activate an industrial base for future systems based on nuclear fission.

For human exploration, the combination of both nuclear electric propulsion and nuclear thermal propulsion is very attractive. Because nuclear electric propulsion is incredibly fuel-efficient, it can move massive amounts of weight (habitats, years of food, rovers, and life-support machinery) using very little propellant.

It might not matter so much if cargo takes more than nine months to arrive on Mars. But our fragile human bodies mean that longer stays in space increase the risk of cancer from cosmic radiation and cause bone and muscle loss.

The second of these issues is because bones and muscles are not being exercised in microgravity. Nuclear thermal propulsion provides the high thrust needed to reach Mars in three to four months, drastically reducing these health risks.

Steep path

Despite the clear benefits, the path to the launch pad is steep, and the 2028 launch of SR-1 Freedom appears incredibly ambitious. A nuclear electric spacecraft needs a reactor, shielding, heat management, power conversion, radiators, electric thrusters, control systems and fault tolerance. Each of these components of the mission requires testing and careful integration for them to work together.

Reactor heat must be controlled without damaging other components. Thrusters
must operate reliably for months. Other factors can interact in ways that only emerge when spacecraft subsystems are put together. If SR-1 Freedom is to make its December 2028 window, Nasa has very little time to assemble a mission that would normally require years of design, integration and review.

Nuclear propulsion has spent more than 60 years somewhere between engineering reality and technological myth – even though the physics has always been sound.

What has proved harder is making the technology safe, affordable, licensable (able to meet regulatory safety standards) and ready to fly on a real mission schedule. So far, the US has launched only one fission reactor into orbit, SNAP-10A, in 1965.

SR-1 Freedom could create the pathway for more capable systems to follow. Nuclear electric propulsion will not make Mars easy. But it might start to break down barriers to travelling to Mars, and that is a prospect we should be excited about.

“The whole experience has been very traumatic for all involved. It was a case of sliding doors, right place, right time.”

A paediatric nurse has been recognised for her outstanding bravery after helping to save the lives of a family of five young children last summer.

The extraordinary sea rescue took place on the July 13 2025 at Rossglass beach in Co Down. Although the tide was initially out, it began to turn as the children, who are all siblings, went for a swim.

The Newcastle Coastguard team was called to the beach near Downpatrick at around 9.30pm after reports that the five children – Catherine, Cecilia, Mary, Maria and their brother Francis Smyth from Ballynoe – had been caught out by the rising tide.

READ MORE: ‘My dental issues turned out to be mouth cancer and the diagnosis felt like a punch’READ MORE: ‘I was diagnosed with this common cancer after spotting a sign that I initially dismissed’

After two initial responders from the Coastguard team arrived at the beach, they found the children had been brought ashore by two off-duty nurses who spotted that the children were in danger and went into the sea to bring them to safety.

Veronica Sloan, together with friend and fellow Belfast sea swimmer Sinéad Deane, acted immediately. Wading into the water, they first reached Francis, Maria, and Cecilia, sending them safely back to their mother.

Veronica, carrying her phone in a waterproof bag, called 999 from knee-deep in the sea, triggering a rescue operation.

Meanwhile, Sinéad swam out to Mary and Catherine, who were treading water, and got the children back to shore with Veronica. Both ladies helped keep them safe and provided essential care until Coastguard and emergency service teams arrived.

Both Veronica and Sinéad were recently awarded Honorary Testimonials from the Royal Humane Society for their courageous actions and also received Certificates of Recognition from the Coastguard and the Royal Lifesaving Society.

A special letter from the President of Ireland, Catherine Connolly, was also gifted to the pair.

Veronica, Ards Hospital’s Community Children’s Deputy Sister said she and Sinéad’s experience was very much a case of “right place, right time.”

Veronica said: “The whole experience has been very traumatic for all involved. It was a case of sliding doors, right place, right time. Myself and Sinéad’s nursing skills played a big part that night in keeping the children safe until help arrived.

Advertisement

“I feel very proud to have been presented an extremely special certificate by my mother Mary, herself a nurse of 48 years. I feel very overwhelmed and honoured to have been presented with these acknowledgements especially from the Chief of the Coastguard of Scotland and Northern Ireland and the President of Ireland.”

South Eastern Trust Executive Director of Nursing David Robinson said: “I’m so proud of Veronica. There is no doubt that her courage and quick thinking – and that of her friend Sinéad too – helped save the lives of five children. They both deserve to be honoured for their incredible bravery last year.”

To ensure you don’t miss out on all the latest from Belfast Live, be sure to make us your preferred source on Google.