Time for the Alternative Vote? (Episode 4)

 Yes to AV

Time For The Alternative Vote? (Episode 3)

 Hung Parliaments!

Time For The Alternative Vote? (Episode 2)

 Only Three Countries have the Alternative Vote! 

Time for the Alternative vote? Episode 1

 If we had the Alternative Vote system for a General Election, today we would probably have a right of centre government.   Perhaps we should reconsider this!   View from 1 minute 28 seconds in:

Strafford questions for Kwasi Kwarteng and his response!

 The Straffords put the following questions to Kwasi Kwarteng. See his response:

Caroline: " Is it good for democracy that one man who has only been in parliament for a week can become Prime Minister?"

John: "Kwasi, you and Liz Truss were well and truly stitched up. Ritchie wanted to be Prime Minister, the Labour Party wanted to blame the Conservatives for financial incompetence and Andrew Bailey wanted to blame you for his own incompetence, because the Bank of England's own pension scheme was about to go bust! When did you realise you had become part of an Establishment coup?"

Click on site below:

Straffords put questions to Kwasi Kwarteng and his response!

Conservative Party set out it's strategic proposals for a Party Constitution!

 In early 1998 the Conservative Party set out it's strategic proposals for a Party Constitution. Only problem is that no one had seen the document. Archie Norman sets out his views. John Strafford responds!

Nadim Zahawi : How do you stop big financial donors taking over the Reform Party

 

Discussion between Nadim Zahawi and Mark Littlewood.   I asked the question "How can you stop the Reform Party being taken over by big financial donors, who when in control will then determine policy".

https://youtu.be/_thSAxaZu9Y?si=dA53e7bsdXlEFwzP&t=2305

Climate Change! What has Happened?

 The following is from Liam Fox's book "The Coming Storm" :

"The scorching summer of 1858 brought things to crisis point.   In June with temperatures averaging 34 to 36 degrees in the shade and up to 48 degrees in the sun, the dry conditions saw the river levels drop to such a low level that raw effluent from the city sewers lay on the riverbanks.   It was the beginning of what became know as the "Great Stink".   Charles Dickens wrote " I can certify that the offensive smells, even in that short whiff, have been of a most head and stomach distending nature"."

What has happened to Climate Change in the time since then?

Should the Conservative Party work with the Reform Party?

Should the Conservative Party work together with the Reform Party?

Mark Littlewood discusses with James Frayne.

Click below to see:

https://youtu.be/UGSQNxCoFnk?si=kSiNhw7_kWOcqItF

Is it any wonder new homes are not being built?

 Is it any wonder new homes are not being built?   

Here is part of a list Southwark Council requires from a developer when submitting a planning application; (Daily Telegraph25 April 2026).   It is estimated that these will involve over a thousand pages of documentation and involve a great deal of expense employing experts to compile these reports!

• Whole life cycle carbon assessment.
• Circular economy statement.
• Be seen energy monitoring spreadsheet.
• Urban greening factor assessment.
• Air quality positive assessment.
• Micro-climate assessment.
• Townscape visual impact assessment.
• Biodiversity net gain assessment.
• Business relocation strategy (if any small shops might be displaced).
• BREEM pre-assessment (a sustainability certification pre-check before building has started).
• Student management plan (including arrangements for short-term holiday rentals during vacations).
• Bat survey (required where development might affect bats' foraging or commuting habitats).
• Archaeological evaluation report.
• Sport and leisure facilities assessment (if any existing sports facilities are affected).
• Trip generation report (a full traffic study).

In the first quarter of this year 23 of London's 32 boroughs started no new homes.

Private housing starts in the capital have plummeted by 84% since 2015.

Equality of outcomes or Equality of opportunity – You Decide!

 

Equality of outcomes or Equality of opportunity – You Decide!

Excerpt from

Crime and Punishment

By

Fyodor Dostoevsky

“In earlier times it was said to me: “Love your  neighbour” and I acted on it, what was the result?    The result was that I divided my cloak with my neighbour and we were both left half naked, for according to the Russian proverb: “If you run after two hares, you will catch neither.” Science, however, says: love yourself first of all, for everything in the world is based on personal interest.   If you love yourself alone, you will conduct your affairs properly, and your cloak will remain whole.   Economic truth adds that the more private enterprises are established, and the more, so to say, whole cloaks there are in a society, the firmer will be its foundations and the more will be undertaken for the common good.   That is to say, that by the very fact of devoting my gains solely and exclusively to myself, I am at the same time benefiting the whole community, and ensuring that my neighbour receives something better than half a torn cloak, and that not by private, isolated bounty, but as a consequence of the general economic advancement.   The idea is simple, but, unfortunately, has been too long in finding acceptance, obscured as it is by vaporous ideals and misguided enthusiasms, a certain keenness of intellect, it would seem is necessary.”

 

Constituency Associations - the key to success! Edmund Burke!

 Constituency Associations - the key to success!

In 1790 Edmund Burke said:

To be attached to the subdivision, to love the little platoon we belong to in society is the first principle of public affections.   It is the first link in the series by which we proceed towards a love to our country and to mankind.

What if Tony Blair had won the Beaconsfield by-election

     Last week I was at the Oxford Literary Festival to hear former Labour MP Alan Johnson interview former Conservative MP Savid Javid.   Very enjoyable.   Afterwards I had a lovely conversation with Alan Johnson. We reminisced about the Beaconsfield by-election in 1982 when Tim Smith Conservative) won against Tony Blair (Labour) and Paul Tyler ( Liberal).   At that time I was the Treasurer of the Beaconsfield Constituency Conservative Association.

    Alan lived in the Britwell Council Estate which was divided between Slough and Beaconsfield.   He told me he lived in the Slough part.   However his job then was as a postman and he delivered post to Littleworth Common which was in Beaconsfield.

    I told Alan about meeting Paul Tyler ( now Lord Tyler) some years later when he told me the following story: "When Tony Blair was Prime Minister he invited Paul to a reception in 10 Downing St.   Tony and Paul had a chat about the Beaconsfield by-election.   Paul asked Tony what would have happened if Tony had won the by-election?   Tony's reply was:  I would have been certain to have lost the seat at the next General Election in 1983.   Cherie and I had an agreement that only one of us would be an MP at any one time and we would take it in turn to stand for parliament, so if I lost the Beaconsfield seat it would have been Cherie's turn to be an MP and she would have got a safe Labour seat and I would not have become Prime Minister!"

So history is made.   Can you imagine what life would have been like if Cherie had become Prime Minister instead of Tony?   Alan chuckled when he heard this!

                                            

John Strafford with Alan Johnson at the Oxford Literary Festival. 27 Mar 26

Question to Douglas Carswell - Who would you vote for? Interesting answer!

Mark Littlewood of Popcon speaks with Douglas Carswell. I put the Question to Douglas: Which political Party would you join today and who would you vote for?   Interesting answer! Click below:

 Question to Douglas Carswell 

Mark Littlewood speaks to Andrew Rosindell MP. Will Reform UK become a democratic Party?

 9 Mar 26

Mark Littlewood speaks to Andrew Rosindell MP.   I asked Andrew whether Reform UK will become a democratic Party?

Click here: https://youtu.be/JB7NJ87-jOU?si=f-ZalzzPmcO3eAmA&t=1826 

A Question to Lord Lamont and Adam Ridley about the OBR

 

10 March 2026

Fantastic night at a packed-out IEA as the Margaret Thatcher Centre launched our Living History series with a detailed examination of Sir Geoffrey Howe's 1981 Budget. The panel included the Rt Hon Sir Jeremy Hunt MP with The Rt Hon Lord Lamont of Lerwick and Sir Adam Ridley. Dr Tim Aker Academic Director of the Margaret Thatcher Centre chaired the. A lively Q&A session followed. My question was “Mervyn King, the former Governor of the Bank of England said that “No economist is capable of forecasting the state of the economy for more than one year in advance. Five year forecasts always show the difficult decisions like cutting expenditure and reducing borrowings in the fourth and fifth years which with continuous revisions the cuts and reductions never happen. Do the panel agree, and if so shouldn’t the OBR restrict its forecasts to one year?

Norman Lamont said that the OBR needs reform but he would keep it!   Adam Ridley said he would keep it but we needed good economists!   Earlier in the meeting it was pointed out that 364 economists opposed Geffrey Howes budget in 1981 which was the turning point in the economic fortunes of the United Kingdom!

So where are the "good economists?"

Mark Littlewood speaks with Toby Young - Anonymous Tweets?

 Should Tweets be allowed to be anonymous or should people be named?

Click below to see Toby Young's answer!

Mark Littlewood speaks with Toby Young

UK Politics needs a deep clean

 

The following is an edited extract from an article by John Penrose on the Capx web site

                      UK Politics needs a deep clean

Why Labour’s integrity reforms fall short

For example, the new rules to stop severance payments for Ministers who take plush jobs lobbying parts of government they were leading a few months before are welcome but too weak. They won’t stop anyone whose new job pays more than the severance they’re losing; they ought to cover senior political advisers as well as Ministers; and the equivalent rules for senior Whitehall mandarins aren’t always enforced properly either.

The transparency improvements which have been promised to show who has met Government Ministers and mandarins, and what was discussed, are essential and welcome. But they need to cover political advisers as well, and need to be searchable to ensure there’s no special treatment or access for people who’ve made political donations. And the same goes for the promised new rules controlling who sees secret Government briefings, so they can’t be shared for profit – as the police are investigating in the latest Mandelson case.

Equally, some rules on conflicts of interest look too narrow if they assume political favours are only done for profit. There are plenty of reasons why non-profits like charities, labour unions and religious bodies also want to bend the ears of Ministers, mandarins and advisers. Most will be fine but, inevitably, a few won’t. So assuming they are all pure as the driven snow just because there’s no profit involved is naïve and dangerous.

Political honours fuel charges of cronyism

Political honours should be included in the reforms and pared back sharply. Otherwise, every New Year and King’s Birthday Honours list will continue to attract accusations of cronyism. Such claims undermine what ought to be a joyful celebration of British achievement and public service. Instead of showing that our country is a genuinely fair and meritocratic aristocracy of talent, the current system reinforces the perception that we are a society where a gilded elite rewards its friends.

Last but not least, all these risks aren’t confined to Westminster and Whitehall either. Quangos, devolved governments and local councils are all vulnerable in one way or another, so any integrity reset needs to cover them thoroughly, rather than leaving reforms to an unspecified date that may never come.

If the Government is serious about tackling the integrity crisis in UK politics and restoring public trust, it will need more than symbolic reform. An integrity reset is still possible and, given this Government’s ever-growing list of scandals, it’s probably more important than ever. But this time, it will take an even bigger bucket of disinfectant to get the job done.

Money and Politics Public support for reform!

 38 degrees has published the following on their web site.   It should raise concerns with anyone who believes in democracy.   Time for Action!

38degrees.org.uk 

Money and Politics

The scale of the problem

In recent years, British political parties have become increasingly reliant on a very small number of extremely wealthy donors. These donations are legal, but their size and concentration raise serious questions about influence, access and fairness.

[i] In late 2025, Reform UK received a record £9 million donation from Christopher Harborne, a multi‑millionaire crypto investor who has lived in Thailand for around 20 years.

[ii] This single donation was larger than the total donations received by the Liberal Democrats and the Green Party combined in 2025. Harborne has now provided almost two‑thirds of all the money Reform UK has ever raised. In total, more than 75% of Reform's funding has come from just three men.

[iii] This pattern is not confined to one party. Big money is rapidly reshaping the base of all political parties. Labour In the year leading up to the 2024 general election, Labour received £13 million from companies — more than it received from all trade unions combined. This was the first time in British history that corporate donations to Labour exceeded funding from the trade union movement. The largest single donation in Labour’s history was made during this period: £4 million from Quadrature Capital, a hedge fund whose parent company is based in the Cayman Islands.

Conservatives In the same pre‑election year, just three donors provided more than half of the Conservatives’ £52 million campaign funds. The largest donor was The Phoenix Partnership, a company that supplies software to the NHS, which gave £15 million in a single year. Across all major parties, election campaigning is increasingly funded by a handful of individuals and corporations with extraordinary financial resources. This is no longer a party-political issue but a systemic feature of how British politics is now funded.

Why this matters

When political parties depend on a small number of very wealthy donors, several risks arise: Disproportionate influence – A few individuals can gain far greater access and influence than ordinary voters.

Policy distortion – Parties may become more responsive to donors’ interests than to public priorities.

Public trust – Large donations undermine confidence that politics is fair and not for sale. At a time when trust in political institutions is fragile, the perception that money buys access is profoundly damaging to Parliament’s legitimacy.

These risks are intensified in an international context where billionaire‑owned tech platforms and cross‑border wealth increasingly shape political debate. Under current law, there is no meaningful upper limit on how much a single individual can give to a political party. This leaves the UK unusually exposed to financial capture. For example, if Elon Musk were to carry through with his promise to donate $100 million to a UK party, this would represent around 0.014% of his personal wealth — the equivalent of £5.60 for someone earning £40,000 a year — but could radically reshape British politics. The growing use of cryptocurrency in political donations introduces an additional risk: funds that are harder to trace, easier to move across borders, and more difficult for regulators and the public to scrutinise.

Public support for reform 

Public concern about big money in politics is strong and consistent. A Survation poll for 38 Degrees found that 57% of adults support a legal cap on political donations, while only 7% oppose it. Nearly one‑third (31%) say they strongly support a cap. 

A separate YouGov poll found that just 13% of people think individuals should be allowed to donate unlimited sums to political parties. Public mobilisation is already under way: So far, 84,267 people have signed a 38 Degrees and Democracy for Sale petition calling for a cap on political donations. 

These figures show a clear public mandate for reform. Action in the Elections Bill to address this issue would respond directly to a widely held public concern and demonstrate that Parliament is serious about tackling the role of big money in politics.

Meeting with Claire Coutinho MP - a great Conservative

 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.