Tag: Reform UK

You cannot Build the Future with the Architects of the Past

It’s been quite a week for Reform, and without the current political backdrop, the events unfolding could have been enough to suggest that the evolution of the Reform project would grind to a halt – no matter what came next.

Until now, the party – new in name only – has been riding high in the polls, cultivating the appearance of a government‑in‑waiting that could do no wrong. Their greatest advantage has been simple: unlike Labour, the Conservatives or the Liberal Democrats, Reform has not yet been involved in creating the problems that have brought the country to its knees.

For many voters, that alone has been enough. It’s why so many have been willing to overlook the party’s patchy record in local government since taking over a number of councils last May.

But for others, things have never been so straightforward. A growing list of unsettling questions has followed the current party of Nigel Farage, particularly around its fixation on grand, US‑style DOGE ‘solutions’ and other plans for the future such as parachuting in business‑world advisers to take charge where they already recognise that inexperienced politicians cannot.

These announcements may sound impressive to a disillusioned electorate, but – like the words and policies of every government in recent living memory – they tend to obscure reality rather than confront it head on.

The name “Reform” has always been a question in itself. But its evolution is even more important to consider now, given its position on the political right.

Reform was born of the Brexit Party, which was itself born of UKIP (the pre‑2016, EU Referendum version), which itself emerged from the often‑forgotten Anti‑Federalist League.

Many of the same people have moved through each iteration. And while today’s Reform claims to draw support from across the political spectrum, its origins lie firmly in the fissures of the Conservative Party. Cracks visible since the time of Heath, that widened after Thatcher’s departure and during Major’s distinctly EU-phile premiership.

What began as an anti‑EU movement became a home for many disenfranchised Conservatives – including Farage himself. However, beyond the anti‑EU narrative that he and others have pushed so effectively, there has never been much inclination to challenge how the system itself works when you get into the mechanics of how everything really functions and who it all serves.

Those who have watched closely – the language, the policies, the motivations, the hands being shaken – could always see that “Reform” risked being a deeply misleading name.

Instead of providing inspiration and genuine reason for hope, each new development has instead reinforced the fear that this movement is less about genuine reform and more about resetting the same establishment machinery under a different banner – essentially being about preserving everything in our system of economics and governance that is fundamentally wrong and doing the most harm.

So, when Laila Cunningham was announced as the London mayoral candidate a few days ago, there was reason to wonder if this might be the moment something changed – and be a sign that Reform could still recalibrate and chart a different course. However, within days, the party took a massive and arguably defining leap backwards, confirming once again that any hopes for the moment were misplaced and those ongoing concerns have been right all along.

Nadhim Zahawi’s defection from the Conservatives – bringing with him a pile of political baggage symbolising everything wrong with not just the Tories but the entire political class – was the moment any germinating bubble burst.

The shift in messaging across the media landscape was also immediate. And anyone at Reform HQ would have done well to heed the sudden change in tone emerging from sources that had previously been supportive to them that sat outside the echo chamber of dedicated ‘reformists’ who still believe that Farage’s machine is capable of doing no wrong.

Then came Robert Jenrick. His “sacking” and expulsion from the Conservatives morphed into a full Reform defection in under six hours yesterday.

Like Zahawi, Jenrick was deeply embedded in everything the Johnson and Sunak governments were about. And the circumstances and emerging detail of his departure suggest a politician looking backwards to more of where we have already been; not forwards, as few outside politics really doubt will need to be the direction of travel – built on a definable break with and departure from the past.

Reform now faces a critical question: with its growing (re)alignment to establishment figures and money‑centric politics, is it just becoming a reformed version of the very party that it was ostensibly re-formed to replace?

The identity crisis within conservatism and the political right that has existed since the days of the Common Market – now seems to be reappearing within Reform. And with each defection eagerly embraced by Farage, and in ways that suggest they were always part of the very same machine, just with different interpretations of how it should work, the chance of a genuinely different future emerging from the right appears to be quickly slipping away.

In the end, it all comes back to the same unavoidable truth:

You cannot build the future with the architects of the past.

Reform’s recruitment strategy signals a retreat into old habits, and their words and policies suggest they will either fall into line with the current establishment trajectory or simply trash whatever remains after Labour has finished with it – IF they take power after the General Election takes place – as many people desperate for change still hope they will do.

Regrettably, those tired and bewildered people who believe they are the answer may not see it or wish to accept it, but Reform, Reconservatives, Reformatives, ReCons, Conservatives 2.0, or whatever they really are in their current form isn’t what the UK or anyone genuinely need.

There is nothing about them that suggests that they are willing, able or indeed ready to deliver on behalf of us all.

Boldness and clarity are essential for building a better future. Not a thickening cloud of uncertainty, pinned by figures from the past that people looking forward know it would be much healthier to leave behind.

Reform and the Architects of the Past PDF_Vers3_19Jan26Download

Strategy or Happenstance? Reform UKs London Mayoral Choice and the Dynamics Left Unspoken

Reform UK’s decision to put forward Laila Cunningham as its candidate for London Mayor marks an unexpected turn in the capital’s political landscape. The announcement immediately drew attention – not only because Cunningham is a relatively new figure in frontline politics, but because her selection comes at a time when both major parties have struggled to understand the unique dynamics of London’s electorate.

For years, the Conservatives have attempted to unseat Sadiq Khan with candidates who, regardless of their individual strengths, were never positioned to succeed. London’s mayoral race is shaped by a distinctive blend of demographics, political culture, and electoral behaviour that the party has repeatedly misread. The result has been a series of campaigns that failed to resonate with the city’s diverse and often unpredictable voter base.

Against this backdrop, Reform UK’s choice of Cunningham raises questions. Ant Middleton, who had openly expressed interest in the role, had long understood that the decision would not fall in his favour. Cunningham’s media visibility may have played a part, but Reform’s leadership appears to believe her candidacy offers something more -perhaps a chance to broaden the party’s appeal or to challenge assumptions about who speaks for London. This is a bold calculation, especially with polling currently placing Reform at 19%, well behind Labour’s 32%.

The reaction to Cunningham’s Muslim background was swift and, in many quarters, hostile. It reflects a broader climate of suspicion that has grown around anything involving Muslims in public life. A counter‑establishment narrative has taken hold in parts of the electorate, one that frames Muslims as central to every perceived societal problem and warns of an imminent cultural takeover. These fears, though unfounded, have become politically potent.

Compounding the issue is the behaviour of public institutions. Across the UK, officials have often responded to sensitive cultural or religious matters with caution bordering on paralysis. This has created the impression – fair or not – that Muslims receive special treatment or are shielded from scrutiny. In such an environment, the emergence of a Muslim woman as a high‑profile political candidate becomes, for some, a symbol of the very anxieties they already hold.

Yet this interpretation overlooks a more grounded reality: many Muslims in Britain want to contribute to a future rooted in the country’s historic values and civic culture.

Cunningham’s candidacy could, if handled well, offer an opportunity to rethink the role of Muslims in public life and to challenge the simplistic narratives that have dominated recent debate.

Understanding the tension between perception and reality requires examining how Britain’s current image of Islam was formed. Over decades, geopolitical events, media coverage, and political rhetoric have shaped a picture that often bears little resemblance to the lived experiences of most Muslims.

The same system that has left many British citizens feeling ignored or exploited has also inflicted deep harm on communities abroad, pushing some toward ideologies that would otherwise hold little appeal.

Commentators such as Douglas Murray have highlighted a central challenge within Islam: its foundational texts were written for a world vastly different from today, and some interpretations insist these texts are immutable.

This creates a tension between traditionalist readings and the expectations of a modern, pluralistic society.

But this challenge is not unique to Islam; all religions grapple with the task of reconciling ancient teachings with contemporary realities.

Historically, religions have served as social frameworks – systems that guide behaviour, shape norms, and maintain order. They have been used to protect communities, but also to control them.

When people look back at periods in which Islamic empires flourished, they often point to eras when religious teachings were applied most literally. For some Muslims, this reinforces the belief that returning to those values is the path to renewal.

However, the rise of Islamic militancy cannot be understood without acknowledging the role of Western intervention. Wars, regime changes, resource extraction, and the installation of compliant leaders have destabilised regions and eroded local cultures.

While Western societies were encouraged to embrace consumerism and individualism, other nations experienced upheaval, corruption, and violence – often with Western support or involvement.

In this context, strict religious frameworks can become appealing to those who feel their societies have been dismantled.

This dynamic has fuelled a misconception in the West: that the conflict is between Muslims and non‑Muslims.

In reality, the tension lies between militant interpretations of Islam and the global systems – economic, political, and military – that have shaped the modern world.

Yet many people struggle to distinguish between extremists and ordinary Muslims, just as they struggle to see how Western policies have contributed to the anger and disillusionment that some now express.

The absence of political leadership on these issues has only deepened the divide. Few leaders are willing to speak openly about the historical and structural forces at play.

Silence has become the norm, not because the issues are too complex, but because acknowledging them would challenge the interests of those who benefit from the status quo.

Meanwhile, the system that created these tensions is showing signs of strain. Economic instability, cultural fragmentation, and declining trust in institutions suggest that a new approach is needed – one rooted in community, shared values, and a commitment to the common good.

Such a future must include Muslims who are willing to reinterpret their faith in ways that align with a modern, secular society.

In this context, Reform UK’s selection of Laila Cunningham may prove more significant than it first appears.

Whether by strategic design or political opportunism, the party has taken a step that could reshape public debate. Whether they are ready for the responsibility – or whether they will ever win the chance to exercise it – is another question entirely.

Strategy or Happenstance PDF_Vers1_8Jan26Download

Plastic Productivity and the Debt Trap: What the November Budget Won’t Fix

Governments do not collapse in the same way that individuals or businesses do. If they did, the United Kingdom would have gone under financially long ago. Instead, the state continues to function by rolling debt forward, reshaping obligations, and presenting the appearance of stability. For ordinary people, however, the rules are very different. When we cannot meet our commitments, we fail — unless someone steps in to bail us out.

Meeting financial obligations requires honesty. You must know whether you can truly pay your debts or whether survival depends on wishful thinking. Throughout history, people and businesses have thrived or failed for both good and bad reasons. As long as they appear to function, few question what lies beneath.

For tradesmen, small business owners, and entrepreneurs, the reality is harsh. None of us are “too big to fail.” Once obligations can no longer be met, collapse follows unless a benefactor intervenes.

We like to believe the same standards apply to everyone, whether sweeping streets or running government. Yet elites have always bent rules to their advantage. They forget that all people, high or low, share the same human experience. Power corrupts, and politicians often forget they were elected simply to fill a seat, not because they are uniquely qualified to decide what is best for everyone.

The shift to fiat money in 1971 changed everything. It allowed governments, banks, and corporations to manipulate the system, creating the illusion of endless funds. Behind closed doors, decisions were shaped by business and banking interests, while politicians no longer had to worry about the true responsibilities of leadership.

Debt became hidden behind GDP figures. Growth and transaction volumes disguised the reality of an exploding debt pile. To the untrained eye, it looked as though debt was shrinking, when in fact it was spiralling out of control.

This illusion was sustained by what might be called “plastic productivity.”* Assets and infrastructure were bought cheaply, production was outsourced overseas, and consumers were encouraged to buy more and more goods they didn’t need. People became indebted to the same banks that lent to government, yet could just about service their loans. It seemed as though prosperity was endless, and few questioned the narrative.

But the system was never sustainable. Its architects knew it would transfer wealth and ownership to a small elite. By making money and material wealth addictive, they ensured control. With industries hollowed out, productivity now depends almost entirely on expanding debt — by government, business, and individuals alike.

Politicians face a broken system. To keep the machinery of government running, they must tax normal people more heavily. Yet much of public spending delivers little benefit. Policies have been rewritten, words twisted, and meanings changed to allow politicians to cling to power while the wealthy grow richer. Assets of real value have been transferred to people who could never have owned them otherwise.

If the system collapses, the establishment will impose new rules. They may impoverish citizens further, leaving people no choice but to accept whatever is dictated. Many politicians may not even understand the system they oversee. They follow instructions blindly, blamed for decisions that are not theirs, lacking the skills to lead differently.

The situation could drag on for months or years. Collapse may come when the public finally says “enough,” or when the establishment has drained the country dry. Even if a new government is elected — Reform UK, Nigel Farage, or anyone else — they will face the same reality. Cutting spending or taxes cannot fix a nation that is broke and owns nothing. Wealth has already been transferred to lenders.

The system is broken. We must either accept subjugation under a corrupt structure built on trickery, or take a leap of faith and start again from scratch.

***

*”Plastic productivity” refers to the illusion of economic growth created by outsourcing production, encouraging over‑consumption, and sustaining debt, rather than building genuine, sustainable value. It’s not about plastics as a material, but about a system that mimics productivity while hollowing out real industries and transferring wealth.

How the UK was led into the fiscal-driven Armageddon we are now within
The harmful hidden meaning of ‘Growth’
The Local Economy & Governance System | Online Text
Plastic Productivity and The Debt Trap PDF_Vers1_ 21Nov25Download

Yes, Reform are looking good. But the Tories could out reform Reform, IF they can remember what being conservative really is

Reform’s performance in the Local and Helsby and Runcorn by Elections really does look good.

Anyone looking on can immediately see why so many of the political pundits and members of the opinionati are now backing Reform for a similarly groundbreaking General Election result in 2029.

The uncomfortable truth that many supporters will fail to recognise is the only reason that Reform could achieve a seismic turnaround of the kind that would instantaneously drop Nigel Farage into No.10, would be that when compared to all the others, Reform could still be the only real unknown quantity, and therefore different enough to hoover up the majority of a very fatigued Electorates votes.

Unfortunately for the Electorate, without a significant change in their direction, voting Reform into power at the next General Election would once again be voting without due regard for the Law of Unintended Consequences. Just as it was last July when those who did vote put Labour into Government.

Nonetheless, it could and may well happen.

The real depth and direction of Reform are being hidden by Britain’s Political Perfect Storm

It won’t matter what problems the new Reform Administrations in Local Government create, being directed from Reform HQ, as if everything must now be run and controlled from the very top.

The unavoidable disintegration of the UK public sector that is already well underway will almost certainly hide whatever Reform Councils do from public scrutiny and view.

Because Labour, the Tories and Lib Dem Councils are going to struggle in this climate either not to go bankrupt or find other ways to avoid royally stuffing things up.

Reform aren’t reforming anything other than the public discourse over the issues that the majority of people can see and associate with the effects of the problems that are effecting society.

No matter how far detached those perspectives might be focused from the real cause.

Farage’s approach might at best be viewed as becoming increasingly aligned with the establishment and the global thinking that sits behind so many of the problems and the direction of travel that even this Labour government has.

The irony of this should not be lost, that whilst the parts of the political right that are falling in behind Reform either believe Brexit didn’t happen or that under a Reform government Brexiteers will get to finish the job, the reality is that everything that drove the EU project that Farage’s UKIP and Brexit Party so vocally championed against, also had globalism and the centralised global political model at its heart.

Once it becomes clear that a UK version of the Trumpian DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) has no basis within the realities that underpin how our current dysfunctional public sector works, there may well be a moment when those Reformers with elected roles, who are taking their responsibilities to local electors seriously, will realise that there are many things that can still be done. Whilst there are many others that simply cannot.

At some point, the rather large penny must drop, that there is a very careful and considered game to be played that without otherwise torching the entire system and structure of government delivery and bringing it all to a halt, will require the buy-in of key Government officers, nonetheless.

To those watching closely, Farage has already shown his hand.

Whilst it might not be prudent to visit the bookies and begin trying to get odds just yet, as far as the next General Election goes, whenever that actually will be, the perfect storm that has engulfed British politics may well deliver a Reform win.

But it will be the U.K. and our people, rather than whatever is left of the political opposition, that will lose in that Election if Reform have ‘won’ under their current modus operandi and plans.

A Zero-Sum Game?

A rather interesting perspective of the seemingly unassailable position that Reform now has, is that as far as the future goes for the Tories, they currently face a zero-sum game. One that applies whether they capitulate to Reform or carry on as they have done before. As they clearly are continuing to do so, now.

Yes, there remains truth in the suggestion that Reform might never govern without the cooperation or collaboration of today’s Tories in some way.

However, Farage is unlikely to ever accept anything less than remaining in control. And as head of any collaboration and apparent PM in waiting, the real difficulties will begin for us all just as soon as the leadership has a lucid post-victory moment. Probably not unlike like Starmer et al did on the 5th of July last year, when those who had arrived in No.10 realised that unless they were big enough to risk precipitating an immediate collapse of the entire system, pretty much everything would still need to go on as before, and that even though they were in government, they themselves would be required simply to do as they are told.

Picture it now; a coalition that includes what is left of the Conservative Party, all subservient to a government of the kind that will almost certainly be filled with very angry activists. Ideologues who will have been promised much from outside of power, who took it all at face value; all without any of the understanding of how government really works. People who will quickly be looking for someone else to blame.

Now may be the Tories only available Watershed Moment

To say that the choice the Tories have sits between change immediately or die, might sound extreme. But it is a genuine reflection on where the future of this once revered political machine now lies.

The way the Tories would now out reform Reform, would be to reject and distance themselves from the establishment, globalist and accepted positions on just about everything. And not just say, but put everything about the UK and our people, first.

The choice to change cannot mean anything other than putting people and our communities back at the very heart of everything they do.

The Conservatives must return to the basic principles of conservatism and remember what it is to lead and deliver for others, selflessly, and with the key motivation to conserve.

The caveat would be that the Conservatives will also be required to restore and return a model of U.K. governance and related infrastructure to us that can recapture the sense of cultural belonging and shared feeling that our system is fair, balanced and just.

The point being missed across all of British politics today, is that by engaging the public correctly and re enfranchising people and communities appropriately and restoring real trust, people would quickly focus on a very different model of political engagement.

They would not need the myths, false promises and clever narratives to explain away the pain that disenfranchisement has caused for so many before.

Can the Tories actually change, rather than just talk it up?

Whilst being able to stand up and say ‘We have for too long got this all wrong’ is a very important part of getting any credibility back, it will be the actions of Today’s Conservative Party that count.

The rump of what’s left of the Conservative Party must stop pretending that with the level of uncertainty in the world as we have now, they actually have 4 years to try out and give wasted chances to new leaders who still believe that all the Tories need do to remain relevant, is wait until the political merry-go-round does its thing and it’s ‘their turn’ to return to power, once again.

No politician who is a genuine public servant has time to waste. And as it would be correct to say to any would-be political leaders who are ready and willing to do the right thing by the people who put them there, the time to change and begin working as they always should have, is now.

The Contemporary Politicians Dilemma
No, the UK doesn’t need DOGE. We need an entirely different approach to restoring Public Service provision
The unfolding tragedy of the UKs political right
The Way of Awakened Politics for Good Government | Full Text
Tory Reform PDF_Vers1_17Jan26Download

Our Communities are the only place that a workable political solution can begin

Any Political Solution to the crisis we are in must develop and grow from our communities and grassroots; NOT from any existing Party that still wants to rule everyone Top-Down

One of the key problems with UK Politics today is that it operates as almost the mirror image of wider culture, where most people fall into the trap of believing that their own perspective is the right one. But that anyone with an alternative view of any kind – even in just the smallest of ways, is or will be fundamentally wrong about everything else, too.

Yes, you could easily argue that this is how tribes and groups work.

But politics or rather the UK political system is supposed to be about delivering public policy that is created and then implemented in the best interests of ALL British People.

The one thing that we can be sure of is that when it comes to the political classes who have been running Westminster and our local Councils for decades, there is very little about any of it – apart from the Election campaigns, that has anything to do with or what is best for us.

As I have been discussing in some of my recent blogs, time has now run out for the way that government and our economic system runs. Neoliberalism and everything such as MMT, FIAT money, and the increasingly illogically impractical schemes like Net Zero and everything that pushes people and businesses into being reliant on credit are no longer sustainable.

That is why everything is now in the process of crashing around the Labour Government’s head.

Yes, the politicians in power are incompetent.

No, the mess we are in didn’t begin the day after Labour were elected to power and Starmer arrived in No.10.

And No, not Labour, nor the Tories, the Liberal Democrats, Reform or any other group of politicians currently looking ahead to the next General Election are going to offer and deliver to us anything different. Certainly not in any way that the UK actually needs.

For a time, I was open to the idea that Reform could find itself pursuing a different way. One that would offer the cross-tribal consensus and answers that the UK now needs.

Instead, it has become clear that the mechanics of this 4th evolution of the anti-EU movement certainly hasn’t moved on in any kind of people-centric direction.

Instead, Reform is just reforming itself, but in ways that have a very familiar likeness to political parties that have been in power before, who have increasingly aligned themselves and been led by the machinations of the establishment instead.

The mess over Rupert Lowe and the inescapable optics suggesting that at every level of the Reform Party, the whole thing is all about Nigel Farage, really does speak volumes for itself.

That’s before taking the time to read the outpourings of words from former party activists and ‘officers’ who have recently walked away. Just like better known voices associated with Reform such as those of Howard Cox and Ben Habib.

If any of the names instantly trigger feelings that suggest you have taken a side as you read – no matter the reason, it is exactly that kind of emotion that is our collective problem.

Disagreement over the smallest of things shuts so many of us down to the reality that we all have views about different things that we might never agree on. But when it comes down to all the things that are actually important, there is an awful lot of commonalities between all of us to be found.

Difficult to hear though it might be, it is the division that is deliberately sown between us over issues that we do have in common – by them being presented in ways that make them appear and trigger us as if they are something else – that really plays into the hands of the incompetent political classes that we regrettably have.

As things stand, and without a lot of us choosing to approach our relationship with politics very differently, the same people dividing us and guiding us to hate people we should not have any hate for, are set to keep guiding the ship that we are all beginning to sink on. And they will happily continue to do so, until the whole thing actually goes down.

Westminster is just the tip of the ruling iceberg that we can actually see.

Behind central government sits all the things like power, influence and the wealth accumulation that money controls and which is carefully kept outside of open view.

Because the truth is that the only people who benefit from us continuing to elect politicians who are under the spell of the establishment are those politicians and all those who are benefiting from the continuation of the establishment itself.

Whilst there is very good reason to believe that the wheels could fall off this broken bus at any moment in time, for those who have been aware and watching the direction of travel of the UK (and for that matter the whole of the Western world) for a considerable period of time, both the Global Financial Crisis and then the responses to the Covid Pandemic could, and arguably should, have already been the catalysts that introduced a genuinely new way of doing governance to the UK.

That these two massive events didn’t doesn’t indicate that change cannot or will not come.

The fact that we have been led to believe that what the politicians have done in response is in any way normal just tells us even more about how deeply embedded those who genuinely believe or work with this Top-Down, them vs us culture really are, right across the establishment.

We can see just how far they are prepared to take things in their attempts to stop the whole thing from crashing down, even now. Indeed, they are growing so desperate to maintain The System, they are even attacking the people who their ‘tribe’ have always typically helped.

Whilst the talk of absolutes will certainly sound like a contradiction to the words used as I began writing this Blog above, the one dividing line that we really do have no choice but to observe and then decide upon, is which side we sit between the establishment and all it stands for, and on the other side, the people and what putting people, our communities and the environment surrounding the places where we live and work, first.

Whilst even the Tories are successfully making themselves sound very plausible, just 8 months on from losing power, in the context of everything that the Labour Government is doing wrong, none of these political parties – and that almost certainly now includes Reform, show any sign of genuinely offering an alternative to establishment-directed public policy today.

However, it isn’t today and what is now past that we need to worry about. The most important thing is the future, and specifically what happens when we reach the next General Election and what must be ‘our time’.

The UK and we as its people cannot afford another General Election result that delivers power to any group – whether elected directly, or assembled as a result of some kind of post-election ‘deal’, that then goes on to do whatever the hell it likes.

No political party out there today, currently canvassing for votes in this years Local Elections is offering to do anything in any different kind of way.

We know this, because the way that they are running their election campaigns right now; how they are communicating and most importantly, how they are engaging with real people outside the bubbles of their own members and activists, is exactly the same as it has always been before.

To put it bluntly, we can no longer afford to take the risk that comes with accepting a choice of political candidates in any election, that not us, but the political parties themselves actually choose.

Change will not come in the way that we now so desperately need it, if we keep on doing politics at every level in the UK in exactly the same way!

It is our communities and the people who are around us every day who should be selecting the people who will represent us at all levels of government.

Not people we don’t know beyond the pictures, websites, social media and TV screens.

We need public representatives to represent us who have genuine skin in our game. People who are answerable only to us and who are committed to delivering locality-centric democracy, that is the only way that democracy can genuinely thrive, survive and most importantly, work.

Whilst government and the public sector really do now need to undergo massive change, the reality is that our communities could be working together to select and elect non-party candidates in all elections, right now.

We certainly don’t need any kind of change to the electoral system that just favours the election of more incompetent candidates. Ambitious and self-serving politicians whose actions will be made even worse by the guaranteed requirement for compromise on public policy that schemes like Proportional Representation as a replacement for First Past the Post would bring.

Power MUST come back to the people. Not through carefully crafted labels like ‘devolution’ and ‘devolved power’ that is nothing more than Regional Centralisation sold to us with a very misleading name.

The power – OUR POWER is already ours and that power can be made to work for us right now. IF we choose to use it. Look beyond the manufactured differences. And focus on working together, on the important things that we all have in common, and to deliver a new world and way of being that is happy, healthy, safe, secure and governs life with fairness, balance and justice for us all.

Anyone can begin this process of change and the appointment of new candidates to become the public representatives and politicians who will create and deliver our new future, right now. And we need them to, IF we are going to experience beneficial change.

That change  will only be certain if we all change the way that we think. What we can be sure of, however, is that a good future for us all doesn’t and will not start where anything ‘new’ for the politicians and voices that we already recognise as public figures begins.

A Community Route | Full Text
The Grassroots Manifesto | Full Text
Where the political solution MUST begin PDF_Vers1_25Mar25Download