A Selfie with Claire Coutinho MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Energy at lunch organised by the Taxpayer's Alliance. She was magnificent, a true Conservative. I am sure she will be a Star of the future! Thank you to John O'Connell and Clare Rusbridge for organising the lunch which was splendid. The Taxpayer's Alliance is a great pressure group. It does a terrific amount of essential research on all government expenditure and well worthy of support.
Rational Optimism - Mark Littlewood speaks to Matt Ridley:
Can Government Expenditure be cut?
Click on : Mark Littlewood speaks to Matt Ridley
Democracy can only work in a legal and social culture
where there is freedom of thought, speech and association, uncontrolled access
to reliable information and a large tolerance of political dissent.
The opposite of democracy
is some form of authoritarian government.
It is of course possible
for democracies to confer considerable coercive power on the state without
losing their democratic character. It
has happened in wartime and it happened during the Covid-19 pandemic. But there is a point beyond which the
systematic application of coercion is no longer consistent with any notion of
collective self government. The fact
that it is hard to define where that point lies does not mean that there isn’t
one. A degree of respect for individual
autonomy seems to be a necessary feature of anything which deserves to be
called a democracy.
The chief enemies of
democracy are economic insecurity, intolerance and fear. Economic insecurity heightens concern about
inequality, yet inequality is an inevitable consequence of liberty. It reflects the diversity, energy, ambition
and enthusiasm of disparate human beings in any society in which these
qualities are not artificially suppressed.
In particular, it is a natural consequence of innovation, which is a
necessary condition of economic growth but inevitably disrupts the existing
distribution of wealth.
What is clear is that
when growth falters, people become more interested in the distribution of
income and wealth. This can poison
democratic politics, whether it is justified or not. Extremes of inequality can be socially
disruptive, promoting resentments that undermine the sense of shared identity
that is the foundation of any democracy.
Fear is another enemy of
democracy. People who are frightened
will submit to an authoritarian regime that offers them security against some
real or imagined threat. Historically
the threat has usually been war, but the real threat to democracies survival is
not major disasters like war. It is
comparatively minor perils, that in the nature of things occur more
frequently. We crave protection from
many risks that are inherent in life itself: financial loss, economic
insecurity, crime, sexual violence and abuse, accidental injury. Even the Covid-19 Pandemic, serious as it
was, was well within the broad range of mortal diseases with which human beings
have always had to live. People call
upon the state to save us from these things.
The problem of
intolerance or when it reaches a sufficient scale, polarisation, in many ways is the biggest threat to
democracy. It is not oppression by the
state, but the intolerance of our fellow citizens. John Stuart Mill foresaw that the main
threat to democracy’s survival would be the conformity imposed by public
opinion.
Demonstrations such as
those organised by Extinction rebellion are based on the notion that the
campaigners point of view is the only legitimate one. It is therefore perfectly legitimate to
bully people and disrupt their lives until they submit, instead of resorting to
ordinary democratic procedures. This is
the mentality of terrorists, but without the violence. Democracy can only survive if our
differences are transcended by our common acceptance of the legitimacy of the
decision making process, even when we disagree profoundly with the outcome. This implicit bargain breaks down if people
feel more strongly about the issues than they do about the democratic
procedures for settling them.
Direct action assesses
the value of democratic institutions by one criteria only, namely the degree to
which the activists programme has
prevailed. The contempt for politics
expressed by so many activists is potentially a mortal threat to our democracy.
Aristotle put his finger
on the reason why many people reject democracy. They feel alienated from the
political class that democracies inevitably generate. They do not regard politicians as representative
of themselves, even if they have voted for them.
Citizens assemblies are
currently the favourite proposals for circumventing professional politics, but
they are not chosen by the electorate and are not answerable to anyone. They therefore have no democratic legitimacy. Citizens assemblies by definition lack the
experience that enables professional politicians to assess what they are being
told. They are heavily dependent on the
expert advisors who endeavour to analyse the options and their consequences. The system is too vulnerable to manipulation
and facile solutions.
Whatever one thinks of
our politicians it is an inescapable truth that we cannot have democracy
without politics or politics without politicians! Democracy is an efficient way of getting rid
of unsatisfactory governments without violence.
There are three reasons
why people ought to believe in democracy.
It is the best protection we have for liberty. The creation of a political class may well
be the chief merit of democracy. Democracies
are usually more efficient.
Democracy requires a
common loyalty to the decision making process, which is strong enough to
transcend people’s disagreements about particular issues. That depends on a common sense of identity
and a large measure of solidarity. This
sense of solidarity exists only at the level of the nation state.
The transition from democracy to dictatorship is generally
smooth and unnoticed. It is easy to
sleepwalk into it. The outward forms and
the language of politics are unchanged.
Democracy is not formally abolished but quietly redefined. It ceases to be a method of government but
becomes a set of political values like communism or human rights which are said
to represent the peoples true wishes without regard to anything the people may
have chosen for themselves.
The United Kingdom
is slowly but surely going down this path towards an authoritarian state. Will the people wake up in time to stop it?
Do Moral Principles affect our politics and if so what are they?
In his book The Righteous Mind the author Jonathan Haidt sets out six moral principles. They are:
· Care/harm evolved in response to the challenge of caring for vulnerable children. It makes us sensitive to signs of suffering and need, it makes us despise cruelty and want to care for those who are suffering.
· Liberty/oppression shows concerns about political equality and are related to a dislike of oppression and a concern for victims, and no desire for reciprocity.
· Fairness/cheating evolved in response to the challenge of reaping the rewards of cooperation without getting exploited by free riders It makes us sensitive to indications that another person is likely to be a good (or bad partner) for collaboration and reciprocal altruism. It makes us want to shun or punish cheaters. It is primarily about proportionality. When a few members of a group contribute far more than the others most adults do not want to see the benefits distributed equally.
L Loyalty/betrayal evolved in response to the challenge of forming and maintaining coalitions. It makes us sensitive to signs that another person is (or is not) a team player. It makes us reward the team player and it makes us want to hurt, ostracize those who betray us or our group.
· Authority/subversion evolved in response to the challenge of forging relationships that will benefit us within social hierarchies. It make us sensitive to signs of rank or status and to signs that other people are (or are not) behaving properly, given their position.
· Sanctity/degradation evolved initially in response to the dilemma, and then the broader challenge of living in a world of parasites. It makes us wary of a diverse array of symbolic objects and threats. It makes it possible for people to invest objects with irrational and extreme values- both positive and negative – which are important for binding groups together.
It appears that people rely upon these principles in different ways or to different degrees. Socialists rely primarily on the Care and Liberty principles. Whereas those on the right of politics use all six. If so, does that give Conservative politicians a broader variety of ways to connect with voters?
The political left tend to rest most strongly on the Care/harm and Liberty/oppression principles. These support ideals of social justice, which emphasize compassion for the poor and a struggle for equality among the groups that comprise society. Social justice groups emphasize solidarity – they call for people to come together to fight the oppression of bullying domineering elites.
Everyone cares about Care/harm but the political left turn out to be more disturbed by signs of violence and suffering compared to Conservatives.
Everyone care about Liberty/oppression but the left are most concerned about the rights of certain vulnerable groups ( e.g. racial minorities, children, animals) and they look to government to defend the weak against oppression by the strong. Conservatives, in contrast, hold more traditional ideas of liberty as the right to be left alone and they resent programmes that use government to infringe on their liberties in order to protect the groups that the left most care about. For example, small business owners support Conservatives because they resent government telling them how to run their businesses under its banner of protecting workers, minorities, consumers and the environment.
The Fairness/cheating principal is about proportionality. It is about making sure that people get what they deserve. Everyone cares about proportionality, everyone gets angry when people take more than they deserve, but Conservatives care more. Employees who work the hardest should be paid the most. The left are ambivalent but Conservatives in contrast endorse this enthusiastically.
Conservatives think it is self evident that responses to crimes should be based on proportionality, as shown in the slogan “Three strikes and you’re out” Yet the political left are uncomfortable with retribution. After all retribution causes ham and harm activates the Care/harm principle.
The remaining three moral principles show the biggest and most consistent partisan differences. The political left are ambivalent about these principles at best, whereas Conservatives embrace them.
The political left embrace the three moral principles of Care/harm, Liberty/oppression and Fairness/cheating but are often willing to trade away fairness when it conflicts with compassion or with their fight against oppression. Conservatives believe in all six moral principles although they are more willing to sacrifice Care and let some people get hurt in order to achieve their many other moral principles.
Moral psychology can help to explain why the Labour Party has had so much difficulty connecting with voters, whilst Conservatives speak more directly to the voters because they have a better grasp of the theory of moral principles because they trigger every single principle.
One of the great puzzles about democracy at the moment is why rural and working class voters choose to vote Conservative when it is Labour that wants to redistribute money more evenly? Labour often say that Conservatives have duped these people into voting against their economic self interest, but from the perspective of Moral Principles, rural and working class voters were in fact voting for their moral interests. They don’t want to eat at expensive restaurant, they don’t want their nation to devote itself primarily to the care of victims and the pursuit of social justice.
For 130 years the Conservative Party understood these Moral Principles and targeted the voters accordingly, which is why it dominated UK politics during this period. Unfortunately it lost sight of them in the last 25 years and has suffered accordingly. The question is can it recover and get them back?
The Conservatives have one further problem. They have allowed their membership to decline to an insignificant level. This is fatal. People love groups, we develop our virtues in groups, even though these groups necessarily exclude non-members. If you destroy your group you dissolve all internal structure, you destroy your moral capital.
Real Conservatives understand this point. The subdivisions add up to the greater whole. Edmund Burke said it in 1790:
To be attached to the subdivision (e.g. Christian Conservatives, Conservative Friends of Israel etc.) to love the little platoons we belong to in society, is the first principle (the germ as it were) of public affections. It is the first link in the series by which we proceed towards a love to our country, and to mankind.
Mark Littlewood of Popcon talks with Jonathan Gullis. Click on the heading below:
So That was 2025
A Tale of Two Cities
by Charles Dickens
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times,
it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness,
it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity,
it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of Hope,
it was the winter of despair.
See the following video:
John Strafford addresses the Campaign for Conservative Democracy meeting held on 13th December
"How Democracies Die"
by
Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt
In their book "How Democracies Die" the authors say:
"Blatant dictatorship- in the form of fascism, communism, or military rule - has disappeared across much of the world. Military coups and other violent seizures of power are rare. Most countries hold regular elections. Democracies still die, but by different means. Since the Cold War, most democratic breakdowns have been caused not by generals and soldiers but by elected governments themselves. Elected leaders have subverted democratic institutions in Georgia, Hungary, Nicaragua, Peru, the Philippines, Russia, Sri Lanka and Turkey. Democratic backsliding today begins at the ballot box."
At the meeting of the Campaign for Conservative Democracy held on December 13 2025 I put to the audience the four criteria set out by Levitsky and Ziblatt which they say are the warning signs that a country is moving towards dictatorship, and asked the audience whether they thought that the United Kingdom met this criteria? The audience agreed that the United Kingdom met all the criteria. What a worry! The four warning signs are as follow:
1. Rejection of (or weak commitment to) democratic rules of the game.
Example; Do they suggest a need for antidemocratic measures, such as cancelling elections, violating or suspending the constitution, banning certain organisations or restricting basic civil or political rights?
2. Denial of the legitimacy of political opponents.
Example: Do they baselessly suggest that their rivals are foreign agents, in that they are secretly working in alliance with (or the employ of) a foreign government - usually an enemy one?
3. Toleration or encouragement of violence.
Example: Have they tacitly endorsed violence by their supporters by refusing to unambiguously condemn it and punish it?
4. Readiness to curtail civil liberties of opponents, including media.
Example: Have they supported laws or policies that restrict civil liberties, such as expanded libel or defamation laws, or laws restricting protest, criticism of the government, or certain civic or political organisations?
https://fb.watch/E8_qrAU83W/
.png)
Chatting with Danny Kruger MP at the Taxpayers Alliance Christmas Reception.
Last week Caroline and I were delighted to be invited by the Taxpayers Alliance to their Christmas reception at a magnificent house in Chelsea. The guest speaker was Danny Kruger MP. As I have know Danny for twenty years I took the opportunity to ask him whether the Reform Party would move towards becoming a democratic Party controlled by it's members rather than the dual Dictatorship which it was at present? He told me that he thought that Reform would move in that direction but it would take time.
Their biggest organisation problem at present was in conducting due diligence on all the Parliamentary Candidates and Council Candidates which they are working hard to get in place and this is their priority!
The day Conservative Party members elected the Party Chairman!
At the Gerrards Cross Conservatives dinner on 27 November 2025, John Strafford asked Dr. David Starkey whether, now that The President of the United States and the Reform Party oppose the policy of Net Zero and the Conservative Party is moving in that direction, can King Charles II continue to advocate a policy of Net Zero, thus interfering in the political process, unlike his mother Queen Elizabeth II, who always stayed neutral, and the King is therefore creating a constitutional crisis.? David Starkey's answer was "Yes, it will create a Constitutional crisis and the Prime Minister will have to have privately, a firm word with him!".
Reform are gearing themselves up to fighting
a National ground campaign in the General Election. They recognise that members are an essential
element in this and motivating them is critical. In marginal seats members are essential and
in todays scenario every seat is a marginal seat. Reform are even targeting traditionally strong
Conservative seats like Beaconsfield.
Unfortunately the Conservative Party continues to treat its members with
contempt. Unless the Conservative Party
embraces democracy within the Party, it will rue
the day when it decided to take away all members rights. I show below recent emails I have received
from Reform:
|
Dear John, It's been a busy month for our Beaconsfield constituency
REFORM branch, and we are delighted to announce that we have some key events
and dates for your diary between now and Christmas. Many more events are
planned for 2026, and I can't wait to be able to share these with you. We are a young branch that needs to be general election
ready. We need to build strong teams of volunteers in each area for
canvassing, leafleting, fundraising, campaigning and event organisation. If
you have a little time to spare, please email me. TRAINING GIVEN We are holding a one-hour volunteer training session on
Sunday 2nd November 1-2pm in Bourne End. Your branch truly needs YOU! We need
to ensure our constituency turns turquoise! Contact me if you would like to
attend. Here are some key dates for your diary and opportunities to
get involved. Reform UK Action Day – 25th October 2025 - volunteers
needed On this day, REFORM UK HQ wants every branch, that's more
than 450 nationwide, out in full force! We rely on volunteers to help us
engage with the public, recruit new members, and collect donations. CAN YOU
HELP US ON THIS DAY? If so, please contact me with times of the day you are
available. Let's make this the biggest one-day membership surge in British
political history. WE NEED YOUR HELP TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. It's our mission to be visible and accessible to all our
wards within our constituency. Please note the following event dates. Further
information will be sent out soon: - • Wednesday 26th November, 7.30-9pm - 'Meet
& Greet' in Beaconsfield Town Centre. Come and meet your branch team.
Further plans tbc. • Sunday 2ndNovember1-2pm - Canvassing
training in Bourne End. Followed by canvassing as a group between 2-4pm for
those who can continue. Gathering voting intention data is key to our
success in any upcoming election. Can you spare some time to help us? Join
our friendly volunteers to further our work. • Thursday 11th December 7.30pm - Branch
Christmas celebration. Details coming soon. In addition to our regular branch meetings and events we
plan on hosting smaller and informal socials across pubs, cafe's and
restaurants in all of our constituency wards. Do you know of a suitable,
ideally REFORM friendly venue near you? Please let us know. If you are not yet a member and would like to be, or you
can donate to help us buy necessary leaflets and materials, please
click here. Wishing you all a wonderful week. Kind regards Chair Beaconsfield Constituency A few days later I received the following: |
Dear John,
TODAY is our BIG Reform UK 2025 Action Day.
Today marks the biggest coordinated campaign day
in our party’s history.
We need every member, supporter, and volunteer out on
the ground helping to grow Britain’s fastest-growing political movement.
If you know someone - a friend, family member,
or neighbour - who shares our values, forward them this email or send them this
link xxxxxxx so they can join Reform UK today. Together, we can make
history.
What’s Happening Today
✅
An incredible 450 Reform UK branches across the UK will be setting up stalls,
tables, and street presence. The aim
of the day is to sign up as many new members as we possibly can.
📱
Supporters will be encouraged to sign up at the stalls, but can also join or
donate via the Reform Go app and the Reform UK website throughout
the day.
Live National Broadcast & £5,000
Branch Prize
To celebrate our Action Day, I will be hosting a live
two-hour broadcast from our London HQ. I’m also delighted to confirm that
Jeremy Kyle will be joining us as co-host from a Reform UK Bus on the South
Coast and the fabulous Darren Grimes will be co-hosting from Durham. What
could possibly go wrong?
We will have reporters around the country, our
fantastic MPs and activists and elected representatives all joining the
broadcast.
We need to unleash your competitive spirit
💰
To add competition to the day, we are offering a £5,000 CASH PRIZE for
the branch that signs up the most new members in a single day. It’s all to play
for!
📊
A live leader board will track the top-performing branches in real time
during the broadcast.
How You Can Take Part
Whether you’re a long-time supporter or new to our
party, we want you involved today:
Join your local branch at their street stall or
community event.
Bring a friend, a neighbour, or a family member and get them signed up.
Share photos, videos, and updates throughout the day using #ReformActionDay.
Today, let's show just how widespread support is
for Reform UK across the country. We want this day to be as successful as we
can make it, so please get involved in any way you can and let's have a great
day!
Best,
Dr David Bull
Chairman
Reform UK
COVID Freedoms Lost
Speech by John Strafford and response by Joy Morrissey MP
Conservative Party Conference 2021
At a meeting of the Farnham Conservatives, where the guest speaker was Kevin Richardson, a former Mayor from Chicago. I told him I supported most of what Donald Trump is doing but I often didn't like the way he express himself! Thanks to David Moore for organising!
What a lovely surprise to receive the following yesterday on my birthday!
Rt Hon Kemi Badenoch MP
Leader of the Conservative Party
Dear John,
On behalf of the entire Conservative family, I would like to wish you a very Happy Birthday.
I also want to take this moment to thank you for continuing to support our party. Members like you play a critical role and even more so as we renew our party to take us from Opposition back into Government.
But for today John I hope you enjoy your special day.
Do you remember what Conservative Party Conferences were like? A Trip down Memory Lane.
REFORM PARTY ISSUES NEW RULES
Last year the Reform Party introduced a Constitution which was passed by the members of the Party in General Meeting. The Constitution was 17 pages in length. Since then the Party Board, on which a majority of the members are appointed by Nigel Farage issued the Rules for the election of Party Board members (just three of them, so they do not form a majority) and the Rules for Branches/Constituency Associations, (22 pages long) without going back to the members for their approval! Thus the Dictatorship of Nigel Farage and Zia Yusuk who control the Party continues. This is not the way a democratic political Party works! Members have no say on policy and organisation is effectively controlled by the Leader who has a majority of his appointments on the Party Board. Eventually the members will realise this and start to walk away from the Party. In May 2025 the Party claimed to have over 230,000 members. According to the Rules for the election of the Party Board this is now 227,000.
The Reform Party are repeating the error which the Conservative Party has made, (the Original Conservative Constitution was 55 pages long, today it is over 150 pages long) creating a vast bureaucratic organisation controlled by the elite.
Not all is bad in the changes which have been introduced by Reform:
Rules for the election of the Party Board
First of all congratulations, the three members of the Party Board are to be elected directly by the ordinary Party members in a nationwide ballot. This is in stark contrast to the Conservative Party which has no members directly elected to their Party Board by ordinary Party members.
The bad news is that under the rules each candidate must
1.1.3. pay a £100 non-refundable application fee and,
1.1.4. like anyone standing for election for the Party, pass the vetting process.
The vetting process at the moment is very extensive including, we are told, psychiatric testing, so much so that it is said that it will be simplified!
The question is: Who judges the results of the process and are they accountable to the members?
Branch/Constituency Rules
Here the position is mixed. There are some very good detailed rules which the Conservative Party should look at and incorporate within its own Constitution. However there are also some rules which strengthen the dictatorial control of the Party by the Party Board and ultimately Nigel Farage and Zia Yusuk!
Rules:
4.13 Branch Officers must sign an NDA (Non Disclosure Agreement) and will complete Party-approved GDPR training prior to their confirmation and prior to gaining access to any Party systems.
The wording of the NDA is not given but generally Non Disclosure Agreements are used by very powerful people to stop not so powerful people speaking out. For transparency the wording of an NDA should be shown so members can judge whether it is reasonable.
4.15 A National or Regional Director may at their sole discretion, replace and/or remove any interim Branch Officer for any reason they consider pertinent.
Nowhere in the Party’s Constitution does it mention National or Regional Director so presumably these have been created and appointed by the Party Board without reference to the membership so who are they accountable to?
5.7 is a strange requirement and indicates that the Party hierarchy do not trust the members!
National/Regional Directors are not elected, they are appointed, At any time they can come in to a branch and take the position of chair to control meetings. This is control freakery at its worst!
ALL SPEAKERS MUST BE APPROVED. Reform don't trust their branches organising speakers, they must be approved now by HQ. This is extraordinary. Once again the lack of trust by the hierarchy is highlighted by this clause!
15 Waiver
15.1 The Party Chairman, Vice Chairman, National Directors, and their duly authorised appointees, may at their absolute discretion, revoke, suspend or waive any Branch Rule at any time with or without notice.
This says it all For the avoidance of any doubt we the Party hierarchy can do what ever we please and the ordinary Party member has no recourse. This is called dictatorship. It isn’t democracy!
