Labour-led Kirklees Council has been on a cutting spree of public services. It’s also seeking to put key services into private hands, including two dementia care homes. But local campaigners have been raising serious concerns about this for many months. And now, they have launched legal action against the decision at the High Court.
Kirklees Council: rotten
Families that the council’s privatisation efforts would impact have now:
instructed expert public law and human rights lawyers at Irwin Mitchell to investigate their concerns over these proposals. They argue that while the decision was stated to have been made on a financial basis, there remains a lack of evidence to support this.
This latest legal challenge comes after campaigners fought an initial proposal in 2023 to close the homes, which resulted in the council being forced to retreat and the care homes were kept open.
Associate Solicitor Rebecca Chapman clarifies that:
We previously wrote to Kirklees Council to this effect, but privatisation is still set to go ahead. We’ve therefore now applied for a judicial review.
The Friends of Castle Grange and Claremont House say that the privatisation plan “extracts local wealth from Kirklees” which “could and should be staying” in the area. This happens around the country.
They have presented an alternative, however.
There is another way, if the council listens
The Friends of Castle Grange and Claremont House have a serious and popular alternative proposal. They want “a Community Interest Company (CIC) to take over the two dementia care homes”. They raised it with Kirklees Council councillors back in May but got no acknowledgement. Independent councillors have previously accused the Labour-run council of consistently failing to listen to residents.
Now, in a new letter, the campaigners have again explained their plan, saying:
We propose a community-led, non-profit alternative to protect and enhance dementia care at Claremont House and Castle Grange. By forming a CIC, we can work with the Council to sustain high standards, reduce costs, and mobilise local people. Our team brings experience in care, governance, and leadership, and we’re backed by Social Enterprise UK (SEUK), Locala, Local Services 2 You (LS2Y) and others.
They insist that the proposal “keeps the homes in community hands”, “aligns with the Council’s own strategy” of “local wealth building, social value, and community-led ownership”, and “avoids a costly legal dispute”.
Avalon Rawling, on behalf of the group, says in the letter:
You have a clear choice
Work with us to build something that reflects your stated values, saves public money, and keeps care local and accountable.
Or push ahead with a sale that contradicts your own strategy, erodes public trust, and hands over yet another public asset to an extractive financial model.
Rawling stresses:
This isn’t protest for protest’s sake. It’s a viable plan, backed by sector experts, local leaders, and national social enterprise organisations.
Local people are mobilising for change
The campaigners have received the support of the People’s Alliance for Change and Equality (PACE), which sought to lobby councillors outside their Wednesday 16 July meeting.
PACE has been connecting campaigners, trade unionists, and politicians across Kirklees in opposition to war, cuts, and racism. Jeremy Corbyn supported its official launch back in May, as an example of how “this whole cause is coming together” to challenge Labour’s embrace of war and cuts under prime minister Keir Starmer.
Kirklees Council is a good example of how Labour across the country has adopted the austerity ideology and is refusing to listen to local people. But its councillors should be aware that, if they continue to ignore residents, the 2026 local election is a perfect opportunity for voters to hold them to account.
Featured image via the Canary
