Reform, Restore, Recycle: Britain’s Politics is Stuck on Endless Repeat

At the beginning of 2025, I wrote about what was becoming a slow‑motion tragedy on the political right.

I said then that the Conservatives and Reform UK would eventually have to face a truth they’ve spent years avoiding: if they ever wanted to achieve anything meaningful, they would have to work together.

Instead, they’ve done the opposite.

Back then, the loudest voices talking about new right‑leaning movements were Andrew Tate and Dominic Cummings. Both have since drifted away. Into the vacuum has stepped Rupert Lowe MP with his Restore concept – and with the launch of the Restore Britain Party over the weekend, the whole thing has taken on a shape that is chaotic, predictable, and depressingly familiar.

And let’s be honest: even the supposed “amalgamation” with Advance UK hasn’t been confirmed. That alone tells you everything about the egos involved. Even when the opportunity to unite is staring them in the face, they still can’t bring themselves to compromise.

Everyone wants to lead. Nobody wants to work together. It’s the same behaviour that caused this mess in the first place.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives – who bear as much responsibility for the state of the country as the current government – are quietly reinventing themselves. They are using the passage of time as camouflage, hoping the public forgets that many of the very people speaking for them today were the ones making the decisions yesterday. And now, in a twist that should surprise nobody, a steady stream of Conservatives have jumped to Reform.

If anything exposes the illusion that Reform is “anti‑establishment,” it’s that.

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

Yet here they are – simply moving to a new office and repainting the sign above the door.

People already disillusioned with Reform have rushed to declare that the “real solution” has finally arrived. And Lowe has certainly played to that crowd, posting content all weekend that feels like a direct challenge to Nigel Farage – almost a competition to see who can best bottle the private frustrations being whispered at breakfast tables across the country. The things people genuinely worry about but would never dare say out loud for fear of being cancelled or whatever sharpened edge of political correctness the establishment decides to use next.

Alex Phillips – both a Reform‑aligned commentator and a Talk Radio presenter – probably captured best what many on the right were thinking. Her view was blunt: the damage is done, and splitting the vote like this may simply hand a coalition of the left an easy win.

But here’s the part nobody wants to hear.

The idea that only the left can make things worse after the next general election is a fantasy. Because no matter which party, group or ideology we’re offered at the ballot box in the system we have today, the outcomes for real people, businesses and communities end up being exactly the same.

Supporters of Reform, Restore or any new right‑leaning movement will insist otherwise.

They’re different! They’ll put us first! They know what we need!

But these are the same lines you’ll hear from supporters of the Conservatives, Labour, the Lib Dems, the Greens. It’s what you’ll hear from every party that claims to be offering something new or different while operating inside the same political culture and the same centralised system.

And while all eyes are glued to the chaos on the right – the personalities, the posturing, the endless parade of “new movements” – the political landscape is shifting beneath our feet. The reinstated local elections, the Gorton & Denton by‑election, the daily realignments and defections – they’re not the story. They’re the timestamp. They’re the scenery that shows how fast everything is moving.

The left is wobbling too – but the right is louder.

The spectacle is drowning out the substance. And that’s the point.

The fragmentation of the right is not the cause of our political crisis. It is the symptom.

The cause is the paradigm that every party – left, right and everything in between – is trapped inside.

And unless we confront that, nothing changes.

These are the things anyone who wants genuine change has to think about:

Why Nothing Changes – No Matter Who You Vote For

If you want to understand why nothing changes, start here:

1. The Political Class

Politicians care more about holding power than delivering outcomes.
Parties choose candidates precisely because they’ll obey, not because they’ll represent.
Politics today is about process, performance and control – not results.
When ego enters the room, truth leaves it.
Anyone who wants to “be a leader” instead of serving the outcome is unfit to lead.

2. The System We’re Trapped In

Every party serves the establishment because they’re all chained to the same tool: money.
The system is built on centralisation – and centralisation kills real democracy.
Every part of the political machine is shaped by money and the power culture around it.
You can have a money‑centric system or a people‑centric system – but never both.
Capitalism and socialism both end up in the same place: centralised control of everyone and everything.

3. Representation and Decision‑Making

Decisions are always better when made by the people they affect.
We don’t need national parties; we need power returned to the local level.
Politicians rely on theories about how the world should work instead of how it actually does.

4. Society and Power

People know best, but politicians stopped listening long ago.
Crushing the independence of others is the reflex of the weak, not the strong.

The Paradigm Is the Problem

The fragmentation of the right isn’t the story. It’s the warning sign.

What’s happening on the right is simply the first place the cracks are showing. It’s the most visible example of a much deeper problem – the same problem that affects every party, every ideology and every attempt at “reform.”

All political solutions today are sold as different, but they’re built on the same foundations. They all operate inside the same paradigm. They all accept the same assumptions about value, power, centralisation and the money‑centric system that shapes everything.

And because they all share the same foundation, they all produce the same outcomes.

This is why nothing ever changes.

This is why every “new movement” ends up looking like the old one.

This is why the right is tearing itself apart – not because its ideas are unique, but because its solutions are indistinguishable from the system it claims to oppose.

The real divide in politics isn’t left versus right anymore. It’s paradigm versus paradigm.

Until we recognise that the system itself – the assumptions beneath it, the structures that shape it, the money‑centric worldview that defines it – is the problem, no election, no party and no new political brand will deliver meaningful change.

The right can keep rearranging the furniture.

The left can keep repainting the walls.

Everyone can keep arguing about where the chairs should go.

But the room is still the same room. And the room is the problem.

The only way anything truly changes is by stepping beyond the paradigm we’re trapped in – and finally walking through the doorway we’ve been ignoring for far too long.

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_8Jan26 Download

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.

https://adamtugwell.blog/2025/03/24/how-the-uk-was-led-into-the-fiscal-driven-armageddon-we-are-now-within/

https://adamtugwell.blog/2024/12/06/the-harmful-truths-that-are-hidden-behind-political-growth/

The Local Economy & Governance System | Online Text

Plastic Productivity and The Debt Trap PDF_Vers1_ 21Nov25 Download

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 4^th 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

Officially NONE OF THE ABOVE | Full Text

Where the political solution MUST begin PDF_Vers1_25Mar25 Download

No, the UK doesn’t need DOGE. We need an entirely different approach to restoring Public Service provision

Depending upon which side of the fashionable side of the divide you currently sit on, you could be looking in horror at the work and changes that Elon Musk has already made to US Federal or government spending structures.

Alternatively, and as many on the right of the UKs political spectrum currently are, you might be so enthralled by how the sweeping changes of the new Trump administration looks, that you are already championing a similar approach for the UKs Public Sector, just as soon as the next government has been installed.

That wastage, the pursuit of projects that should never have been pursued, and the existence of many public servants who have never once served the best interests of the public at all is a problem across government, public services, NGOs and anywhere that the public purse picks up the bill across the UK, is most certainly true.

However, to suggest that ‘the problem’ would be solved, merely by taking an arbitrary glance at what money has and is being spent on, then stopping the cheques without question where anything doesn’t resonate, is utterly foolish.

Expecting some unseen force to pick up the slack from any action that could shut down public service provision overnight, is the food upon which anarchy and civil unrest are built on.

Those seriously minded about finding the solutions to the mess that the UK is now in would do well to remember that sharing a language and words that we use with our American cousins is in many respects where the real similarities between the way that we are governed and how our very different countries are run simply ends.

Whilst many of us fall into the trap at election time of believing that we are voting for one Prime Minister or another, the UK doesn’t have a Presidential system like the United States.

Even though it can be interpreted as being exactly that way, when one minute Rishi Sunak goes and is replaced just an hour later by Keir Starmer in No.10.

The sweeping powers that the American President appears to have just don’t manifest in the UK in anything like the same way – even if that’s how they genuinely work in the USA.

A mistake that we can be reasonably confident that most of the Prime Ministers over the past 3 decades are likely to have made would be that they have headed from The Palace to No.10, with the belief that once the famous door closes behind them, it will be as simple as saying whatever they want to say, and that whatever they then goes’.

No decision can be made in any form of government without consequences – as many of us like our Farmers are now openly in the process of finding out.

Yet many would be amazed at how simple many of the politicians that we have today really believe that making reasoned and meaningful change in and across government really is.

To say that the public sector is a monster of our politicians’ own making would be an understatement of seismic proportions.

But to begin to understand what anyone who really wants to ‘fix’ anything is up against, it is essential to recognise that the public sector is little more than a patchwork of massive, money-burning fiefdoms, where nothing more than overarching ‘policy’ direction is set and paid for by central government (That’s the Westminster lot).

Every little thing that can be interpreted and managed in some way differently, will be. To suit the needs of an overwhelmingly protectionist sector that has truly forgotten what it was created for.

Decisions overtly made by public representatives are followed and implemented in ways that would only ever be recognised as being corrupt if and when it could be proven that the decisions made were directly paid for.

If the reader can appreciate this, it is also just as important to understand that very little of anything the public sector does is technically or legally wrong. Because the system, the rules, the regulations and the directions that they are given have evolved over decades of time so that all of these organisations can apparently be run in any way that those managing them choose, as long as it appears that they are doing what they have been told.

The reason that the public sector serves itself isn’t because the Councillors, Mayors, Boards, CEOs and Executives have all decided that they will go it alone.

It’s because the UK has been a rudderless ship when it comes to leadership at the very top of government for so long that the system is now one that it is almost impossible for anyone at the very top to lead.

The UKs public sector and system of government delivery has become far too centralised and hierarchical for the distance between decision maker and decision implementor to work efficiently and work in the best interests of all those who genuinely need it in any way.

No, it’s not as simple as placing someone at the head of government who means what they say. Even though there are many existing and would-be politicians who are desperate for us all to see it that way.

Besides the fact that the UKs ‘executive’ really should always understand what they are doing, the technical structure of government and service delivery it ‘leads’ also needs to be of a size and nature where decision making is genuinely in touch with reality.

Public delivery systems need to respond and feedback in ways that are not only seen as being effective, but actually do work.

If you are minded that it’s the delivery that is the most important thing when it comes to Public Service provision, you may also be able to see that it’s the way that our government is structured, that is and has led to the problems that we now have, right from the very start.

Centralisation of power has created circumstances where poor politicians can hide the poor decisions that they make. Because the chain of authority is simply too big for whoever is genuinely responsible for the damage that is caused by ineptitude to take the blame.

Lack of real accountability is a problem throughout the public sector as a direct result. And when public servants look for an example to follow, many see what today’s politicians are doing, rather than what they are saying they are doing, and then interpret that model of behaviour as being perfectly acceptable to define how they approach their own workload.

So, whilst the talk coming from Reform, what is left of the Tories and what we identify currently as the ‘right’ may be suggesting that they all intend taking an axe to all that’s wrong with the UKs public sector, the hard truth that sits behind the veil of electioneering rhetoric is the problems we face are much more severe and structurally embedded than anyone is currently prepared to publicly admit.

Knee-jerk cost reducing strategies enacted in isolation will end up hurting people, if not actually leading to chaos. And as public policy solutions go, a DOGE for the UK will not really take anyone wishing to be successful in government all that far at all.

The correct solutions for everyone are not always obvious. But fools with power will inevitably believe that they are.

The problem also isn’t a new one. It’s just that it is becoming clearer to normal people today in ways that it never has done before.

The system works as it does, because it benefits certain interests for it to do so. People have always missed out. But the number has steadily increased to the level where the problems caused can be seen today. Because every lie has to be hidden by many others, until no lie can hide the others anymore.

***

I first saw these issues over 25 years ago running charity-based services that were funded by public sector partners and then as a local government officer where I designed and set up a service to benefit not-for-profit organisations. I quickly realised that the system at that time was likely to have been four times as productive with a quarter of the people, if it wasn’t protectionist in every conceivable sense and encouraged public servants to serve the public rather than the organisations themselves.

Twelve years as a Councillor with four as a Licensing Chair served to develop my view and understanding much further and I have previously written in detail about the problem and will link those blogs below.

Jail terms for public servants who overlook their safeguarding responsibilities sounds tough. But if the cause of the problem is actually government wide, should David Cameron be volunteering himself for 5 years in prison rather than another jolly in No. 10?

Public outcry over Grenfell may ensure prosecutions, but the root causes of public sector indifference are cultural and injustices are destined to continue