croydonconstitutionalists

Max Stenner Chair of Christian Democracy UK

“Christian Democracy has long been a strong presence on the continent, but it never truly gained ground in the UK… Our mission is to change that by applying traditional Christian principles within a modern democratic framework”

We first spoke with you when you were the SDP Coordinator in Dorset in January last year. Can you tell us a bit about your political journey since then?

When you last interviewed me, I was serving as Dorset County Coordinator for the Social Democratic Party. During the general election, I managed six campaigns—two of which delivered some of the party’s best results nationally. However, after the election I began to doubt both the SDP’s direction and its prospects for real electoral success. This led me to leave the party and rejoin Reform UK in October of last year.

Since then, I have managed a local election campaign for Reform in Wiltshire, where our candidate secured second place with over a quarter of the vote, beating the Liberal Democrats. At present, most of my political work is focused on my think tank, Christian Democracy UK, which I founded last month. Alongside that, I remain active as a member of my local branch of the New Culture Forum.

“True freedom and flourishing are found in strong families, vibrant local communities, and a society rooted in mutual responsibility”

You’re the Chair of Christian Democracy UK. Can you tell us about the organisation and what its aims are?

The group exists to promote the values of traditional Christianity across all areas of policy, rooted in the philosophy of Christian Democracy. Emerging in 19th-century Europe, Christian Democracy has long been a strong presence on the continent, but it never truly gained ground in the UK, where politics has been largely secular in outlook. Our mission is to change that by applying traditional Christian principles within a modern democratic framework.

Our core tenets include:

Sanctity of Life: We believe every human being is created in the image of God, giving each person inherent dignity and value. From this conviction flows our consistent life ethic—opposing abortion, euthanasia, and capital punishment alike.
Communitarianism: We affirm that people are deeply connected and must work together for the common good—not out of vague compassion, but as members of one human family. True freedom and flourishing are found in strong families, vibrant local communities, and a society rooted in mutual responsibility, with special care for the most vulnerable and marginalised.
Secure Borders: Loving our neighbour also means protecting our communities, families, and the common good. Mass immigration places enormous strain on housing, services, and social cohesion. While compassion remains essential, it must be balanced with justice, order, and responsibility towards our own citizens and the health of our nation.
Social Market Economy: Guided by the principle of distributism, we believe the world’s productive assets should be widely owned rather than concentrated in the hands of the few. We reject both state socialism and unrestrained free-market capitalism, embracing a ‘third way’ that upholds private property, ensures fair taxation (with the wealthiest contributing more), and guarantees social protections for those unable to participate in the labour market.
Stewardship: Humanity has been entrusted with the care of God’s creation. We reject selfish exploitation of the natural world, instead promoting a balanced approach that recognises human beings as stewards, not owners. Environmental policy should be wise and proportionate—protecting creation without imposing extreme measures, such as rigid Net Zero targets, that risk severe economic and social disruption.

Unlike many Christian groups that focus solely on moral and social issues, we apply Christian principles comprehensively—across economics, housing, energy, foreign policy, and more. On some issues we may lean towards centre-left solutions, while maintaining a firm social conservatism on others.

Our vision is to represent the sensible centre—a movement uniting Christians across the political spectrum, challenging the excessive individualism and materialism of today, and rejecting the extremes of both left and right.

How do you see Christian Democracy UK fitting in with the political parties we have today?

We are a cross-party pressure group – with active members in seven political parties, including the three largest parties by membership (Reform UK, Labour and the Conservatives). Our role is not to replace existing parties but to introduce a distinctly Christian democratic perspective into their debates and policies.

We seek to shape the national conversation by reminding politicians of the moral and spiritual dimensions of political life, whether on economics, family, community, or national culture. By working across party lines, we can advocate for the communitarian principles of Christian social teaching in a way that transcends partisan divides. Our mission is to ensure that Christian values are not side lined but actively shape Britain’s political future – which is particularly important in a nation where religion has experienced a sharp decline in recent years.

What areas do you think a Christian perspective can inform policy across a range of parties?

A Christian perspective can inform policy across every area of public life, not just the moral sphere. Questions of economics, welfare, housing, education, foreign affairs, and even environmental stewardship are ultimately questions of human dignity, the common good, and our responsibilities before God.

While groups on both the left and right often reduce politics to snappy slogans and populism, we insist that politics is first about people—the flourishing of families, communities, and society rooted in truth. From distributist economics to strengthening the traditional family unit, from just foreign policy to care for creation, we believe Christian principles offer a unifying and humanising vision that can enrich and correct the political debates across the spectrum.

“We affirm the free practice of religion as a cornerstone of democracy and human dignity. However, we also reject the notion that this requires a faithless public square”

What stance does Christian Democracy UK take on working with other religious communities?

First and foremost, we are a Christian organisation, rooted in the teaching and tradition of the Church. Our mission is to apply Christian Democratic principles to public life, and so naturally our membership is overwhelmingly made up of practicing Christians. That said, we welcome support and contributions from those of other faiths—or even of no faith—who share our vision for the common good.

We affirm the free practice of religion as a cornerstone of democracy and human dignity. However, we also reject the notion that this requires a faithless public square. We believe Christianity, as Britain’s historic faith, has a rightful role in shaping public life and guiding policy, alongside a recognition of religious freedom for all.

“This resurgence is encouraging, because it shows that the next generation is not turning its back on faith altogether, but is instead rediscovering it as an anchor in turbulent times”

What do you think is the outlook for Christianity in the UK today, and what are any positive trends?

Of course, there are challenges when looking at the outlook for Christianity today. The 2021 census recorded the lowest proportion of people identifying as Christian in our history, while the numbers of the irreligious and other faiths continue to rise. Attendance in the Church of England has fallen to record lows, with many parishes struggling to keep their doors open.

Yet, alongside these concerns, there are real signs of hope. In the past few years we’ve seen a marked rise in youth attendance at church. Among young men, the figure has risen from just 8% in 2018 to 20% in 2025, with young women also increasing to 12% over the same period. This resurgence is encouraging, because it shows that the next generation is not turning its back on faith altogether, but is instead rediscovering it as an anchor in turbulent times.

Many young men in particular are looking for a rooted alternative to the instability and hostility of secular liberal culture, which often treats them with suspicion for who they are. For them, Christianity offers a way back to tradition, responsibility, and community – and a faith that can give real meaning to their lives.

How can people get in touch if they want to know more?

If you’d like to get involved, there are several ways to do so. You can reach me directly at max.stenner@icloud.com to express interest in joining our working group, or follow us on Twitter/X at @christdemsuk to stay up to date with our latest announcements and publications.

Our official launch will take place at the New Culture Forum’s Christianity and Politics Conference on 30 September 2025, held at Woodhouse Gardens Pavilion, Blandford Forum, at 7pm. The event will feature a keynote address from myself, alongside Adam Smith-Connor (noted for his arrest for silent prayer) and Tyler White, Leader of the National Distributist Party. Attendance is free and open to all—details can be found on the poster below. If you’d like to reserve a place, simply email me.

Why do so many children have ‘issues’?

Crispin Williams writes about a social problem facing our children.

“It is a major problem of our times. And apparently getting worse. Social services cannot cope, waiting lists for assessments are impossibly long”

There are probably statistics to prove it but anecdotal evidence is rife enough to believe that a vastly increased number of children experience some sort of mental health issue than in the past. Be it ADHD, autism, anything else on the ‘spectrum’ or just undiagnosed bad or unconventional behaviour. My own son had major issues (eventually diagnosed as ADHD and autism) when he was younger and I was absolutely amazed by the number of people I spoke to who had a child, grandchild or other relative – or the child of a close friend or neighbour – who had these type of issues.

It is a major problem of our times. And apparently getting worse. Social services cannot cope, waiting lists for assessments are impossibly long, help and interventions are so thinly spread as to be useless and those children who do get assessed are swamping schools with ever-increasing numbers of EHCPs (Education, Health and Care Plans).

“Surely, a major study is called for”

But why? What research has been done? Probably bits and pieces into possible causes but has anyone looked at every single possibility? Surely, a major study is called for.

Below, and definitely in no particular order, I suggest a list of factors that might be responsible or partly responsible. I would like to see them all investigated, whatever the cost. Understanding the root of the problem would be a necessary start to addressing it.

“Children are easily overwhelmed by too much information and nowadays they are swamped with stories of world affairs, politics and other goings-on”

Parenting: including lack of parental interaction due to parents being busy at work, etc. and the effects of single-parent families.

Lack of discipline: at home and at school.

Diet: there are so many additives in our food these days.

Social media: I don’t need to explain.

Overload of information: a child expert recently said to me that it should be a parent’s job to keep a child’s world small. Children are easily overwhelmed by too much information and nowadays they are swamped with stories of world affairs, politics and other goings-on of no direct relevance to them.

Radio waves: maybe a conspiracy-type theory but the air never used to be crammed full of mobile phone signals.

The reader may well be able to add to this list but the point is made. For the sake of all of us, we need to get to the bottom of the matter.

Main image created using Grok.

TRIAL BY JURY: AN ESSENTIAL SAFEGUARD FOR A FREE SOCIETY

‘I consider Trial by Jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution’ — Thomas Jefferson

When our memories grow short, long-fought-for rights can easily be abandoned, once-valued principles all but forgotten.

One such principle is that sovereignty^[1] resides in the people. The people are the creators of government, and thus superior to their creation. A corollary of this superiority is that people have the rightful power to check^[2] their own government, to keep it within the bounds of what is lawful and constitutional.

“The right to trial by a jury of one’s peers is enshrined in Magna Carta and is, according to that constitutional document, an everlasting birthright of the people of this land”

The right to trial by jury in criminal cases stands as one of the most effective checks against the tyranny of government. It is, as Winston Churchill put it, the ‘supreme protection invented by the British people for ordinary individuals against the state’.^[3] The right to trial by a jury of one’s peers is enshrined in Magna Carta^[4] and is, according to that constitutional document, an everlasting birthright of the people of this land.^[5]

Sir William Blackstone, the English jurist, judge and politician, wisely warned us of those who would seek to erode or do away with the ‘sacred bulwark’ of trial by jury by appeals to convenience:

‘Trial by jury ever has been, and I trust ever will be, looked upon as the glory of the English law…So that the liberties of England cannot but subsist so long as this palladium remains sacred and inviolate; not only from all open attacks (which none will be so hardy as to make), but also from secret machinations, which may sap and undermine it; by introducing new and arbitrary methods of trial; by justices of the peace, commissioners of revenue, and courts of conscience. And however convenient these may appear at first (as doubtless all arbitrary powers, well executed, are the most convenient) yet let it be remembered, that delays and little inconveniences in the forms of justice, are the price that all free nations must pay for their liberty in more substantial matters; that these inroads into the sacred bulwark of the nation are fundamentally opposite to the spirit of our constitution; and that, though begun in trifles, the precedent may gradually increase and spread, to the utter disuse of juries in questions of the most momentous concern.’^[6]

And A.V. Dicey, the much-quoted British jurist and constitutional law theorist, confirmed this hard-won right:

‘The right to personal liberty is, in a legal sense, enjoyed by every Englishman, and means in substance a right not to be subjected to imprisonment, arrest, or other physical coercion in any manner that does not admit of legal justification. This right is secured, not only by those definite provisions of the law which prohibit such acts as wrongful imprisonment, but also by the system of trial by jury, which secures that no man can be punished for a crime unless twelve of his fellow countrymen are convinced of his guilt.’^[7]

“Being randomly selected, the jurors are independent of the government and thus bear no vested interest in it”

A jury is a tribune of the people (or country).^[8] Being randomly selected, the jurors are independent of the government and thus bear no vested interest in it. Further, they are representative of the full range of views, morality and common sense that exist among the people.

A recurring principle of Common Law is that the power to make decisions of great importance and consequence is retained by the people and never delegated to government. Thus a jury is convened to make decisions regarding the fate of those accused of breaking the law. This decision is so vital that it is not entrusted to government. The jury stands supreme.^[9] It is a check upon governmental abuse of power.

“If the jury feels a law is unjust, or that a law has been unjustly applied, then they in effect throw the case out of court by voting ‘not guilty’ and thus ensure corrupt laws (and the corrupt application of laws) work no ill upon the people”

Under its full and (I would submit) rightful power, the jury may:

1. Have all evidence made available to them. If the Government have the power to set the rules by which evidence may be introduced, then it might as well be given the power to frame someone. All the lawfully gathered evidence must be made available to the jury.

2. Deliberate in secret. The jury must be free to meet and discuss their thoughts in secret, in a spirit of safety, knowing that they will not be influenced, punished or harassed, either at that time or in the future, by government or its agents. Attempts by government and its officials to interfere with or observe jury deliberations are wholly unacceptable to a free and fair trial.

3. Not be punished in any way by the Court. Again, for a free and fair trial, the jury must not fear any form of punishment or penalty for performing their duty.

4. By unanimous consent, vote the accused ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’ of wrongdoing, regardless of whether they think the accused has broken the law or not. Government may not bind the conscience of the jury. If the jury feels a law is unjust, or that a law has been unjustly applied, then they in effect throw the case out of court by voting ‘not guilty’ and thus ensure corrupt laws (and the corrupt application of laws) work no ill upon the people. This is called jury nullification because the law is nullified.^[10]

If this were otherwise, especially in regard to the latter point, the jury would serve no purpose in providing a check on government; if it was forced to vote a certain way it would become a mere tool for enforcing the laws of the government of the day. The jury therefore decides if someone is guilty of wrongdoing, not of acting illegally.

Lord Camden, debating in the House of Lords in 1792, gave the following cogent argument for this very principle. The record states that he said, ‘he must contend that the jury had an undoubted right to form their verdict themselves according to their consciences, applying the law to the fact. If it were otherwise, the first principle of the law of England would be defeated and overthrown. If the twelve judges were to assert the contrary again and again, he would deny it utterly, because every Englishman was to be tried by his country; and who was his country but his twelve peers, sworn to condemn or acquit according to their consciences? If the opposite doctrine were to obtain, trial by jury would be a nominal trial, a mere form; for, in fact, the judge, and not the jury, would try the man. He would contend for the truth of this argument to the latest hour of his life, manibus pedibusque. With regard to the judge stating to the jury what the law was upon each particular case, it was his undoubted duty so to do; but, having done so, the jury were to take both law and fact into their consideration, and to exercise their discretion and discharge their consciences.’^[11]

Recent changes also need to be reversed by:

(1) ensuring jurors are nearer to the original concept of ‘peers’—that is, those of the same social status and general background (the principle being that jurors can relate to the accused);

(2) ensuring jury members are of sufficient experience to be considered mature (jurors can, of course, still be challenged by those representing the accused and accuser to ensure fairness);

(3) requiring that the guilty verdict be by unanimous consent—if even one juror doubts guilt, that should be sufficient to dismiss the case.

On this last point, William Blackstone stated:

‘It is the most transcendent privilege which any subject can enjoy, or wish for, that he cannot be affected either in his property, his liberty, or his person, but by the unanimous consent of twelve of his neighbours and equals. A constitution, that I may venture to affirm has, under providence, secured the just liberties of this nation for a long succession of ages.’ ^[12]

The jury is a powerful tribune in preserving liberty, for without its unanimous consent the government may punish no person, and all its unjust laws and oppressive application of laws are of no effect. Trial by jury is the final legal check on tyranny and thus a hallmark and safeguard of a truly free people. It is thus vital that we defend this right for ourselves and our children.

Darren Andrews is a writer and the author of Rights Made Simple: A No-nonsense Definition of Rights in Less than 2000 Words

End Notes

1. Sovereignty has reference to that which is superior or supreme, it is nothing more or less than the power of self-determination. All sovereignty resides in the individual because it is individuals who possess free will. National sovereignty, for example, is only a representation of the individual sovereignty of each citizen of that society.

2. ‘The right to bear arms, the right of juries to nullify the law, and the right of revolution all have the same root: the inalienable right of the people to control the government when they believe it has become destructive of their liberties.’ (The Rise and Fall of Jury Nullification by James Ostrowski, see Recommended Reading below).

3. ‘…the great principle of Habeas Corpus and Trial by Jury…are the supreme protection invented by the British people for ordinary individuals against the state. The power of the executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him judgment by his peers for an indefinite period, is in the highest degree odious, and is the foundation of all totalitarian governments.’ (Winston Churchill, minute to the Home Secretary, 21st November 1943; emphasis added).

4. ‘No freeman shall be taken, imprisoned, or disseized [dispossessed], or outlawed, or exiled, or in any way harmed—nor will we go upon [condemn] or send upon [imprison] him—save by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land.’ (Magna Carta AD 1215, Clause 39).

5. ‘…men in our kingdom shall have and hold all the aforesaid liberties, rights and concessions well and peacefully, freely and quietly, fully and completely, for themselves and their heirs from us and our heirs, in all matters and in all places for ever…’ (Magna Carta, AD 1215, Clause 63). Those rights include the right to due process of law, the right to trial by jury, and the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

6. William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book 4, Chapter 27

7. A.V. Dicey, An Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, 10th ed. (London: Macmillan, 1959), p. 207.

8. A jury trial is a trial by country (as opposed to a trial by government). Towers wrote: ‘And in all pleas of the crown, the prisoner is said to put himself for trial upon his country; which is explained and referred by the clerk of the court, to be meant of the jury, saying to them, “which country you are”.’ (An Enquiry Into the Question, Whether Juries are, or are not, Judges of Law, As well as of Fact; With a particular Reference to The Case of Libels, Joseph Towers, 1764; available on-line at http://www.constitution.org/jury/cmt/towers/towers.htm). Lysander Spooner wrote: ‘The object of this trial “by the country,” or by the people, in preference to a trial by the government, is to guard against every species of oppression by the government. In order to effect this end, it is indispensable that the people, or “the country,” judge of and determine their own liberties against the government; instead of the government’s judging of and determining its own powers over the people. How is it possible that juries can do anything to protect the liberties of the people against the government; if they are not allowed to determine what those liberties are? Any government, that is its own judge of, and determines authoritatively for the people, what are its own powers over the people, is an absolute government of course. It has all the powers that it chooses to exercise. There is no other—or at least no more accurate—definition of a despotism than this.’ (An Essay on the Trial By Jury by Lysander Spooner; see Recommended Reading below).

9. ‘The power that puts the jury above the law can never safely be entrusted to a single person or to an institution, no matter how great or how good. For it is an absolute power and, given time, absolute power corrupts absolutely. But jurors are anonymous characters who meet upon random and unexpected summons to a single task (or perhaps a few), whose accomplishment is their dissolution. Power lies beneath their feet but they tread on it so swiftly that they are not burnt.’ (The Conscience of the Jury, The Right Honourable Lord Devlin, Law Quarterly Review, July 1991, Vol. 107, p. 404 as quoted in Reclaim the Law (see Recommended Reading below)).

10. ‘For more than six hundred years—that is, since Magna Carta, in 1215—there has been no clearer principle of English or American constitutional law, than that, in criminal cases, it is not only the right and duty of juries to judge what are the facts, what is the law, and what was the moral intent of the accused; but that it is also their right, and their primary and paramount duty, to judge of the justice of the law, and to hold all laws invalid, that are, in their opinion, unjust or oppressive, and all persons guiltless in violating, or resisting the execution of, such laws.’ (An Essay on the Trial by Jury, 1852, Lysander Spooner; see below). Compare this with the following extract from the Report of the FCDA, Europe; Cannabis, the Facts, Human Rights and the Law: ‘In the governance of men and women, few if any matters are of greater consequence than the diligence and precision with which the judiciary observe and adhere to the civilised code long established for the determination of an accused person’s guilt or innocence. At least the equal of all other aspects of importance of this code is the Right and Duty of the jury to judge of the justice of the law. All governments, comprised of as they are of human beings, are fallible. Governments are capable of passing bad or oppressive (i.e. illegal) laws, and authorising and organising the enforcement of such bad laws. If juries were limited in their role to decide guilt or innocence only on the evidence produced by the state prosecutor of whether the accused had broken a law or not, any jury acting in this restricted way would not be able to protect good fellow Citizens from unjust laws or oppressions of the state. These inadequate ‘show trials’ are observed to take place in the tyrannies of totalitarian dictatorships and are traditionally scorned for the mockery of justice that they are when compared to the democratic high standards Trial by Jury. Some term other than Trial by Jury is necessary to describe a court ritual enacted where in the jury is not informed of the jurors Right and Duty to judge on the justice of law, without which real Trial by Jury cannot be said to have taken place’. (ISBN: 0-954421-1-6. On-line reference: http://www.ccguide.org/fcda.php).

11. 29 Parliamentary History 1535, 1536; final emphasis added.

12. William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book 4, p. 379 (Oxford, 1769).

Recommended Reading

Reclaim the Law (article) http://www.flyingfish.org.uk/articles/excuse/lawful.htm

An Essay on the Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner (PDF essay) https://www.lysanderspooner.org/s/An-Essay-on-the-Trial-by-Jury.pdf

The Rise and Fall of Jury Nullification by James Ostrowski (PDF essay) http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/15_2/15_2_3.pdf

Fully Informed Jury Association (organisation)
Highly recommended and informative web site concerning fully informing juries as to their rights and duties. https://fija.org/

Original Image from: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Trial_by_Jury_Usher.jpg

For God and My Country – Kampala, Uganda

When Douglas Adams wrote about the bureaucratic and officious Vogon in The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, I can only assume he had just experienced passport control at Entebbe International Airport, the airport for Kampala. Once navigated, I met-up with the hotel driver.

As a former British Protectorate, Uganda reassuringly drives on the correct side of the road. You might not be aware of this when you see the ubiquitous motorcycles traveling the roads, but broadly they do. The driver pointed out we were on a Chinese built highway, the tolls from which would apparently go back to China for 50 years. The original roads still existed and were busier but for those who paid (the hotel driver chose the route) this was by far the quicker option. This has always struck me as a good way of getting roads built in the UK. With no money in the Treasury, we could upgrade our network with private enterprise to fund toll roads for those willing to pay. In what was a theme, once he had established I wasn’t American, the driver wanted to talk football, and about his love of Arsenal.

“Armed guards at the front of every major building and indeed my hotel, didn’t fill one with a sense of confidence”

Growing up next door to a Ugandan Asian family, like many my first thought of Uganda is of Idi Amin. Amin ruled the country from 1971 to 1979, despite his relatively short period of rule, and its ending over 45 years ago, the shadow of his time can still be felt. Uganda has one of the fastest growing economies in Africa, at about 6% per annum. Kampala the capital, however, feels part of a chaotic country. Armed guards at the front of every major building and indeed my hotel, didn’t fill one with a sense of confidence. Also as pre-warned the safety evident in Kigali is not readily felt here.

The new morning brought about a tour of some major sites and a chance to experience rush hour traffic. It is unfair to compare most countries roads with the UK which are some of the safest in the world. I am used to countries where people drive in a more disorderly fashion, however this is normally done at a slow or at least slower speed than we tend to drive in the UK. In Kampala the omnipresent motorcycles drive not only with little concern for the rules of the road, but they drive at speed!

“The people I met were overwhelmingly polite and friendly, but my tour driver told me not to open the windows in busy places”

Peoples Christianity and Islamic faiths are very openly displayed here, given the risk from traffic, I can fully understand this. The people I met were overwhelmingly polite and friendly, but my tour driver told me not to open the windows in busy places. I noticed when we stopped in traffic, he and other drivers would make sure the central locking was engaged.

Kampala has stark contrasts between modern high rises, more historic buildings, low rise small business blocks and areas that have the look of shanty towns. At one point on our tour, Google maps was telling the driver to turn onto a new road, one that I could see displayed on the map. “Road”, interesting terminology to describe the deep ditched mud path in front of me. This was not in the countryside or even the suburbs, this was half a mile from the British and Rwandan High Commissions in the centre of the city.

“I encountered some of the friendliest and open people I have ever met. The markets are crowded and full of people wanting a sale but also contain some amazing fresh fruit and great conversations”

A walking tour gave a great opportunity to see more of the city up close. One guide was keen to point out you must never trust a zebra crossing in Africa, and once you learnt to navigate them having three motorcycles driving at you from two different directions was not so concerning! My experience was Ugandans are outwardly tough, the Luganda language spoken by locals appears brusque. Yet also I encountered some of the friendliest and open people I have ever met. The markets are crowded and full of people wanting a sale but also contain some amazing fresh fruit and great conversations. One market I visited was full of second-hand clothes, originated in western countries and transported by the Red Cross. I was told the number of donated clothes overwhelms those in need, and these are often meant to be burned but make their way via criminals to the markets. I personally thought this was a great use of the clothes, as someone who has donated my share of old cloth, why not let someone make a few bob from it. I would hope they can find a way to take out the criminals and let some free enterprise flourish.

Arriving during an election period (local and a general election are being held in January 2026 and have a long run in), provided an opportunity to learn about the local politics. Uganda however is not a place it’s wise to ask too deeply about political leanings. The country has a president who is both head of state and head of government. Yoweri Museveni (M7 as he is known) has been the president since 1986. The Parliament of 557 members is elected with a mix of constituency, woman only, and other group representatives. Freedom of the press is limited, although both online and in the street, I did see papers appearing to criticise the government.

Still, it was interesting to see the election posters adorn many of the streets for both national and local elections. The posters make politics appear more straightforward than in the UK with many candidates calling for a ‘Protest Vote’ and a range of parties running including one straightforwardly called the Peasants Party. One driver I asked told me the election campaigns were everywhere, with occasions of people fighting each other. He went on to say he didn’t get political and “as long as the country is peaceful, I’m good”. Uganda has never had a peaceful transition of power, and perhaps the best summary came from a visit to the statue of Luhondeza. He was the first gorilla who, with his family group, allowed people to get close to take photos. This action (or rather his lack of it) opened tourism to large parts of Uganda. It is said he has done more for the people of Uganda than any president had.

Central Kampala has a very distinct uptown district, full of shops apparently only government officials can afford to use and a clearly poorer but more colourful downtown area. I was told getting a good job “is not easy, you have to be connected. Someone in the Government has to know you”. You also need to speak 3 languages, the local language Luganda, used for business and most interactions. Swahili, spoken by the Army and used for unity within it’s ranks and to connect with other East African armed forces, and finally English.

Some interesting discoveries for me included the separately owned Catholic and Anglican banks, used by their respective communities. Strange though this may seem, it was not so long ago here, that this distinction was common for the Royal Bank of, and Bank of Scotland. It’s important to show respect to your elders, when arranging a taxi for me my guide needed to chat to the elderly taxi drivers for a while to show them some respect before passing them business. One of the things you notice is what a young country this is, with a ‘old’ building being pointed out to me from 1930, and an ‘old’ market from the early 1900s. I visited the historic site of the Basilica of the Uganda Martyrs, Namugongo, where 25 martyrs were killed for refusing to renounce their Christianity. An event that happened only in 1885.

“Despite being a republic, Uganda has at least 5 kingdoms. Kampala is in the largest and the one the country gets its name from, ‘Buganda'”

No visit to Kampala is complete without a stop at the Gaddafi National Mosque, yes that Gaddafi. The National Mosque of Uganda as it is also known, has a capacity of 25,000 (although not for the first time what I was told and what I can verify online differs). Opened in 2008, work was started in 1972 by Idi Amin, stopped in 1976, and in the early 2000s Colonel Gaddafi picked up the effort to complete the build. Sitting on Kampala Hill and with a 272-step minaret it can be seen from many vantage points across the city.

Despite being a republic, Uganda has at least 5 kingdoms. Kampala is in the largest and the one the country gets its name from, ‘Buganda’. The Kingdom has had 36 Kings in an 800 year period, and old Kings, are said not to have died, but only, to have gotten lost. The first son never becomes King but is instead an advisor to the second son who takes on the role. The Kabaka Palace, located in the city and modelled on the Royal Mile in Edinburgh, looks down to the Kingdoms Parliament. The road between the two buildings has a prominent roundabout with a gate used only by the Kings car. The King is said to only go in straight lines, and as such he needs a path through the roundabout.

The Palace, and Kingdom has been part of many political events since independence, but now they are ceremonial, and the Parliament discusses only cultural issues. My guide was trying to explain that although she is Ugandan, she sees her main identity as Bugandan, with her Ugandan identity being secondary. She had thought these multiple identities might be difficult for someone who is both an Englishman and a Brit to grasp.

Sadly, part of the history of the Palace was the site serving as the torture chambers for Idi Amin. Milton Obote was the second and seventh President of Uganda. His first period of office, and his actions towards the opposition was so bad people initially celebrated when Idi Amin overthrew him. I asked a guide if he was any different the second time, the guide said yes, as the second time “he had grudges”. Still Amin was by far worse, the small concrete basements in the Palace grounds would hold 100 people in them. The last one of which would have people piled up to die, to make room for more to come in. In this you could see the marks of people clawing to get out on the walls. It is believed some 25,000 people died in these chambers, just some of the 100,000 – 500,000 people who were killed by his period in power. Despite this some people in Uganda still think he was a good leader, although these are apparently mainly the families of those who were given the businesses of the Asians who he expelled.

“these very slums reflect the rapid urban growth and increased prosperity of the country”

The Kampala metropolitan area of ~8 million people is a crazy, busy city. People in bright modern clothes can be seen exiting slum housing, but these very slums reflect the rapid urban growth and increased prosperity of the country. The number of motorcycles (and I might add repair shops) indicates the level of industriousness in the country. Hopefully the economic progress can be coupled with some political progress for a more stable and peaceful future.

Unity, Work, Patriotism – Kigali, Rwanda

First impressions count they say, well my first impression of travelling to Kigali International Airport impressed. So many countries could learn a thing or two from their arrivals. Exiting the plane, you are straight to passport control, which is staffed sufficiently for the number of arrivals. Once through, bags arrived quickly, and you are straight through customs to exit with hotel pick-up drivers waiting and a taxi rank nearby.

I appreciate the numbers through an airport matter for this. But not having to walk miles through an airport or to a taxi rank positioned as far as possible from arriving passengers is quite the pleasant surprise. It’s almost as if making people feel welcome is, welcoming. One thing to add, Rwanda has a closed currency with the Rwandan Franc not readily available to purchase overseas. So, at the exit of the airport they have a bureau de change, handily positioned to remind those of us about to walkout with no local currency.

“On the journey into the city, we quickly bonded over the international language of football”

Hotel pick-up was smooth and as my first trip to Rwanda the driver and greeter were keen to speak with me. On the journey into the city, we quickly bonded over the international language of football. The driver was a Liverpool fan, and the greeter was a Manchester City one. Both were suitably impressed I had a Crystal Palace season ticket. They were keen to talk about Arsenal, one of the majorly supported clubs in the country. Also, one who advertise ‘Visit Rwanda’ on their shirt. We spoke about who might contend for the league title this year, and all laughed at Manchester United, the other majorly supported club in Rwanda.

The extent to which European but especially Premier League football is followed here is astonishing. English football (along with the odd Barcelona and Bayer Munich) shirts are commonplace to see in the streets. All my guides on tours spoke to me about football after finding out I was from England. The hotel restaurant I was staying at had constant reruns of Premier League matches. The laughing at Man U became a theme. Including with the guide who as a Man U fan felt deeply embarrassed by their lack of success in recent years.

“I also wanted to be somewhere where the economy was on the up and people looked forward to a brighter future, so getting out of Labour’s Britain was a must!”

You might wonder what took me to Rwanda. Well, I fancied a city break. No gorillas in the mist or safari for me. I wanted to see a rapidly developing city in an economically growing state. With the capital being voted a top 3 city for travellers in Africa, and a country with the continents 6^th fastest growth rate at ~8%, Kigali fitted the bill. I also wanted to be somewhere where the economy was on the up and people looked forward to a brighter future, so getting out of Labour’s Britain was a must!

Whenever I visit a country, I like to find out a little about the local politics. Given the tragic events of the early 90s, here one must tread carefully. On the journey to the hotel, I was already being regaled about what a great man the President, Paul Kagame is. On arrival at the hotel the Presidents picture was centred above the check-in desk. On two subsequent tours the guides were keen to tell me what a good government they had and how it was focused on Security, Education and Health.

It’s worth noting Wikipedia states “Rwanda has low corruption levels relative to most other African countries; in 2014, Transparency International ranked Rwanda as the fifth-cleanest out of 47 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa and 55th-cleanest out of 175 in the world.”

My general impression was that there is much love and respect for the President. Still, it’s important to say, Rwanda is an authoritarian, de facto one-party state. I could read about this and criticism of the government on the internet from my hotel room. This is something, post the Online Safety Act, I’m less sure about in the UK. However, given the events of the genocide in April 1994, one can understand why many of the people of Rwanda are keen to have strong, stable government.

“Rush hours see busy roads full of taxi motorcycles. These dart around seemingly driving at anyone and anything until it moves!”

One of the immediate impressions was the youth and vibrancy of Rwanda. The median age at 20 years old is a full 20 years younger than the average age in the UK. Rush hours see busy roads full of taxi motorcycles. These dart around seemingly driving at anyone and anything until it moves! Another immediate impression is how green the city is. Houses rather than blocks of flats are the main accommodation, and the main streets are tree lined.

“Women would walk down the street carrying heavy loads on their heads with a mobile phone in hand. Mobile phones were everywhere, and the country seems to run off ‘WhatsApp’”

Kigali is named after the largest hill in the area. It is all hills, and the views are amazing from almost any point. The outdoor feel and developing nature of the city, made it to me seem somewhat of a cross section between Goa and a Spanish island. Murals are commonplace often reflecting on the rebuilding post genocide. The mix of old and new was all around. Driving down the modern roads you often see a street cleaner brushing away the sands and earth with a very traditional brush akin to a witch’s broom. Women would walk down the street carrying heavy loads on their heads with a mobile phone in hand. Mobile phones were everywhere, and the country seems to run off ‘WhatsApp’. This was how all my tour guides contacted me, and whose logo was used on many a shop and even for the hotels lift maintenance. Although I had mobile data, Wi-Fi was commonly available.

The streets were safe to walk, although I did attract some attention in the downtown and market areas. This was unsurprisingly less true in the areas frequented by ex-pats. Although the country has rapid growth, my impression was alongside unemployment, there is a fair amount of underemployment. On a brief visit outside the city, you could see a drop in wealth. Motorcycle taxis turned into bicycle taxis, and the streets were full of impressive shop fronts to not so impressive buildings. This compared to a city with a mix of very modern and older but still good conditioned buildings. All this said, I saw none of the slums I’ve seen in other developing nations but did see lots of new building work and rapid development.

“The music in them blended seamlessly between western and African tunes. The short walks between bars were along what felt like very safe streets with taxis if needed, readily available”

An organised tour of some of the nightlife took in a few spots. All were more like Mediterranean restaurants with entertainment, than like a pub in the UK. The music in them blended seamlessly between western and African tunes. The short walks between bars were along what felt like very safe streets with taxis if needed, readily available. The only challenge was the steep hills, made no easier by the cheap and strong drink available.

Sadly, no visit to Rwanda is complete without visiting some of the memorials of the genocide from the early 90s. It’s worth first noting some background on the country. Rwanda is populated by Bantu peoples who are believed to have arrived in the area about 1000 BC. Originally the people were organised into clans with countries beginning to emerge in the 1600s. The Kingdom of Rwanda emerged as the dominant state and reached its greatest extent during the 19th century.

The Berlin Conference of 1884 assigned the territory to the German Empire, although the first European to cross Rwanda didn’t do so until 10 years later. In World War 1 Belgian invaded Rwanda, and from 1922 ruled under League of Nations mandate. During the colonial period Rwanda was ruled though its monarchy which continued until a referendum voted for its abolition in 1961, a year before its independence from Belgium.

“I neither have the knowledge or desire to write extensively about the genocide in 94. I will however mention a few of the sad memories I will take away”

Rwanda’s relationship with Belgium is complex, many in the country speak French and the memorial to the Belgium UN Peacekeepers in Kigali is well respected. There are also some Belgium cultural references around. However diplomatic relations were severed in March this year over actions in the Congo.

I neither have the knowledge or desire to write extensively about the genocide in 94. I will however mention a few of the sad memories I will take away. The Ntarama Church Memorial has a stain still on the wall of the Sunday School from the blood of the children whose heads were smashed against it. I was told the militia had felt it was a waste of bullets to shoot the children. Many of the sites had piles of victims clothing still covered in blood, this included clothing of children and babies. One site had 5000 bodies buried in it, with 300 recently added after being discovered earlier this year in a pit, next to the site of a roadblock used in April 94. Another site had 45,000 bodies in it, with 10,000 having been killed on site.

Some of the identifiable remains were in rows of family coffins you were invited to walk down. Many were not identified as the whole families had died. One site had a display cabinet with about 140 skulls on display where you could see the club, arrow, and machete marks that had killed them. The Kigali Genocide Memorial had pictures of those mutilated, the worst being those of the children on a looping video which no one I saw, me included, could stomach to watch all of.

“The MDR, one of the major political factions in Rwanda at the time had a motto of “Death or life. We will triumph”. As I said, the warning signs were there”

The stories of the events leading up to the genocide gave me many thoughts to ponder a few of which are below:

I was previously unaware of the extent of atrocities committed before 94 (notably in 92 but at other times as well). The warning signs were there.
We should take extremists seriously. The MDR, one of the major political factions in Rwanda at the time had a motto of “Death or life. We will triumph”. As I said, the warning signs were there.
Sometimes it takes force to deal with evil. Instead at the time the UN was drawing down it’s force of Peacekeepers in a country with no peace.
The use of roadblocks and identity papers to single out Tutsis from the population highlighted to me the systemic risk of national identity cards.

“my break wasn’t about the past. It was about seeing a burgeoning city of today with a bright future”

However, my break wasn’t about the past. It was about seeing a burgeoning city of today with a bright future. The untold story of the 21^st Century has been the massive economic boom seen in Africa. Rwanda is very much part of that. Kigali International is a major hub airport for the region, and various conversations suggested there is a lot of trade and personal connections with nearby countries.

My one concern was how much change was government led. My impression was there was more room for private enterprise to keep growing the economy. If current growth rates are sustained in 10 years, the economy will have double in size. Rwandans are proud of the rebuilding their country has undergone and the high level of safety in the country. It would be great to make a future trip to see that progress. For now, however, next stop Kampala.

An interview with Mike Swadling of Croydon Constitutionalists – with Politics in Pubs

As enthusiastic advocates of free speech and open debate we are happy to support Politics in Pubs. This is a growing network of local groups who meet up every month to talk about politics. Like us, they value the freedom to question and to speak openly, want to play a part in the development of Britain and believe that the current political system is broken.

We are a member of their network so if you don’t live in our area you may be able to find a similar group near to you. Have a look on their map to see if there is one in your area but if not why not start your own group? You only need a few people to get started and Politics in Pubs will help you promote it. If you already have your own free speech group why not join the network? It’s completely free!

Mike was interviewed by the group and spoke about why we do this and some of the challenges running a free speech group. Interview at https://politicsinpubs.org.uk/an-interview-with-mike-swadling-of-croydon-constitutionalists/

Press Release from Rupert Lowe MP, ‘Restore Britain’ Movement

Rupert Lowe MP Launches ‘Restore Britain’ Movement today with the Press Release as below:

“Low tax, small state, slash immigration, protect British culture, restore Christian principles, carpet-bomb the cancer of wokery, fight lawfare, empower individual enterprise, and plenty more“

Today, we are launching Restore Britain – a movement for those who believe that we need to fundamentally change the way Britain is governed.

We will build a policy platform, together. A movement will be created, together. A path will be forged, together. This is not a political party, but a fundamentally different way of doing things.

Members from political parties are very welcome to join us on this journey, if they share our values and want to be part of a bottom-up movement that has the potential to transform Britain.

I do not have all the answers. I am not a politician. I find myself in Parliament, independent and isolated without a party. But strangely, during my time in politics, I have never felt more part of a team. There are good, talented, dedicated people all over the country who are tired of petty Westminster politics. Now is not the time for another political party. It is our job to bring people together, providing a vehicle that can deliver the radical restoration that is required.

But I need your help.

Restore Britain will be built on a very different model. As a member of Restore Britain, you will have the opportunity to vote on the policies and principles that you believe in. With this data, we will put pressure on the Government and other political parties to recognise and act on the will of the British people.

Initial policies will be released over the coming weeks to be approved by you, our members.

Low tax, small state, slash immigration, protect British culture, restore Christian principles, carpet-bomb the cancer of wokery, fight lawfare, empower individual enterprise, and plenty more. We will provide substance, detail, a plan.

Where appropriate – private prosecutions will be launched, legal challenges brought, and judicial reviews funded. We will fund independent investigative journalists to root out corruption, and an FOI taskforce to expose Government waste. A unit specifically for whistleblowers will be established to amplify their concerns.

2029 is the ultimate objective, but that does not mean we cannot effect real and positive change in the next four years. If we don’t, there won’t be a Britain to restore.

Being in Parliament, I am uniquely positioned to hold the Government to account. Our independent Rape Gang Inquiry is the most successful crowdfunding effort in British political history helping to force the Government’s hand on holding a national inquiry, and in less than 24 hours, our parliamentary petition to release Lucy Connolly received over 100,000 signatures.

Just think what we could achieve if we were doing that every week.

We won’t talk, we will do, we will act, we will deliver.

Being a member will give you a real say in how the movement progresses and evolves – direct democracy.

We must aim, together, to implement The Great Repeal Act in 2029, that can then be followed by national restoration. Your country, your responsibility.

Let’s Restore Britain.

Rupert

https://www.restorebritain.org.uk

“We must aim, together, to implement The Great Repeal Act in 2029, that can then be followed by national restoration. Your country, your responsibility“

Steve Davison of Politics in Pubs and Baffled by Science

Steve Davison is a founder of Politics in Pubs, a network we’ve joined. Steve also writes and releases videos as Baffled by Science. We speak to Steve about these and more.

“One of the things that stood out was how conservatives, socialists, libertarians and even communists, could enjoy a drink together and have a healthy, friendly debate – something increasingly unusual today”

We first meet you through Politics in Pubs, can you tell our readers a bit about the group and how you got involved?

Certainly. Politics in Pubs is a free speech group that meets monthly in pubs around the country to discuss topic political and cultural issues. Our members come from across the political spectrum and in general feel that the current political system is broken.

The founding members were involved in the Manchester Leavers of Britain campaign and forged a great relationship during that time. One of the things that stood out was how conservatives, socialists, libertarians and even communists, could enjoy a drink together and have a healthy, friendly debate – something increasingly unusual today.

When the referendum result came in, we wondered whether there would be a way to keep the group going. After discussions over a BBQ one afternoon, t’committee (as we came to be called) decided that yes, we really valued the forum and wanted to keep it going.

However, we couldn’t be called “Leavers” anymore, particularly as we wanted to grow the group irrespective of political affiliation and Brexit preference. The name “Politics in Pubs” fell out of a brainstorming session during the BBQ. It answers two obvious questions: what do we do and where do we do it? We also really wanted to help preserve our pub culture when the hospitality industry is under threat as never before.

Our members value the freedom to question and to speak openly – we don’t record meetings or name individuals if they prefer us not. Many of our members are active in other areas such as voluntary community groups, campaigning groups and a variety of political parties. These are people who do give a damn and want to have an impact on Britain’s future direction. We look for opportunities to influence, learn from each other as well as network with groups and organisations across the country who share similar aims to our own – which is how we met your group.

We carried on meeting in a variety of pubs around North Manchester, beginning in November 2021. We struggled at first because with the referendum over we didn’t have a focus for discussion but kept the meetings going with members leading discussion on topics that we chose at each meeting. Then in January 2023 we had our first guest speaker, and this became the model for future meetings. Attendance grew to a regular 20-30 people, and we started a new group in Newcastle which has become very popular.

In terms of people on t’committee, we have a great chairperson who keeps meetings running smoothly. We also have an amazing secretary who produces engaging write-ups of every meeting and a keen treasurer who looks after our funds which all come from voluntary member donations. My background is in IT, so I put together our website which acts as the hub for communicating with members and subscribers around the country.

What have been some highlights from your discussions and debates?

That’s a really hard one. We are very lucky to have had some fantastic speakers leading really challenging debates on a wide variety of controversial topics including the pandemic response, gender identity ideology, 15-minute cities, Net Zero, trust in the media, assisted dying, devolution, the future of NATO and voting reform.

We have also provided a forum for political parties to let us know what they are up to and have been following Reform UK and the SDP for some time. We have struggled to get speakers from the mainstream parties – though they are very welcome. That said, we do have a meeting with Graham Stringer coming up, but he’s a bit of a maverick in the Labour Party, someone who isn’t afraid to speak his mind.

Our most recent discussion on whether AI can save democracy was fascinating and caused a lot of heated debate. However, there have been disappointments. A local humanist came to tell us that god doesn’t exist. He also said we should follow the experts who say the world is doomed by climate change. He just couldn’t see the irony!

“there is plenty of evidence contradicting the idea of catastrophic man-made global warming. This was the first time I really came to appreciate how much we are lied to by the media and politicians”

You have a Substack and YouTube channel ‘Baffled by Science’ what’s the idea behind the channel?

At the moment “Baffled by Science” is more a vehicle to help me maintain my sanity than a serious attempt to influence the world! I have been interested in climate change for over 30 years. I studied physics at university, gaining a D.Phil. in physics in the 80’s. Although my area of research wasn’t directly in climate physics I worked in related areas and have a good grasp of the issues involved in analysing data and building climate models.

For quite a while I went along with the mainstream narrative because I just hadn’t had time to look at climate specifically. I didn’t need to – there was plenty of information out there and I had no reason to distrust it. That changed suddenly as a result of a challenge over a beer in the pub.

I suggested to a friend that we needed to take every opportunity to go skiing as a result of global warming meaning there soon wouldn’t be any more snow in the alps. This still makes me cringe when I think about this. Anyway, my friend was having none of it, simply saying there was plenty of data to the contrary if only I looked. I took the challenge and went off thinking how easy this was going to be.

I will never forget the shock of actually doing the research for the first time and very quickly finding multiple sources of data and analysis showing that there is plenty of evidence contradicting the idea of catastrophic man-made global warming. This was the first time I really came to appreciate how much we are lied to by the media and politicians. Once that happens you start to question everything you see and read.

This doesn’t mean that the climate isn’t changing of course. However, I found that it isn’t changing as much as the models predict and isn’t changing unusually – looking back over longer timescales. I also found that there are plenty of natural explanations for observed warming.

None of this is communicated to the public but policy makers have channelled trillions of dollars into projects around the world, supposedly to save the planet. Many of these projects will likely make things worse since the renewable energy brings many issues, not least being expensive, intermittent and challenging to balance on the grid. And don’t get me started on EVs. Clearly many people support this with the best intentions but equally there are many people with vested interests making fortunes on the back of things like carbon trading and renewable subsidies.

Rather than try and convince people about the realistic state of climate science and its dismal communication, I decided to start blogging about the consequences of implementing policies based on a false premise. I have been highly influenced in this respect by organisations like the Global Policy Warming Foundation, the Renewable Energy Foundation, along with energy bloggers like David Turver, Kathryn Porter, Richard Lyon and Paul Homewood.

I don’t expect it to become wildly popular but the process of writing and video making, employing AI tools to assist with the research and video production, is a very creative and enjoyable experience. It will be some time before I have that gold plaque on the bookcase, but I’ll keep at it.

“This is interesting as a stress test, but clearly unrealistic as the most likely scenario. It is disturbing therefore that advocacy groups, the media and policy makers concentrate on this scenario. In the process we generate hopelessly unrealistic policy, such as Net Zero by 2030”

You have a new video on ‘Hot climate models and unrealistic assumptions’, can you tell us what it’s about?

This is one of the many areas where science results are communicated badly to the public, often deliberately so. Unless you have been involved in writing computer models it can be very difficult to appreciate how to respond to the results they generate.

A good case in point would be the pandemic predictions produced by Niall Fergusson at Imperial College. It turns out that his model assumptions were unrealistic. However, at no point did he make clear to policy makers the uncertainty inherent in his forecasts. It’s hard to estimate the incredible damage done by not challenging his assumptions. We need to appreciate that models are at best a method to better understand what might happen if certain other things happen.

Climate models are exactly the same. They are made up of physically based equations (our best guesses for how climate really works) as well as multiple assumptions about how different parts of the climate interact. These include thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, radiative transfer, cloud microphysics and geophysics (my specialism) plus a several more.

However, under no circumstances can they be regarded as providing an true and accurate representation of the climate – it is simply too complex. These models are refined regularly, but recently some of them were found to run hot, predicting unrealistic high temperatures. For the first time, scientists on both sides of the debate agreed that this is a problem.

On top of these equations, the models are also run under a number of scenarios which describe how socio-economic and technical factors will change over time. These scenarios are called Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) and describe future high, medium and low emissions scenarios. The worst-case scenario, RCP 8.5, imagines a future with continued high emissions including a massive increase in coal use. This is interesting as a stress test, but clearly unrealistic as the most likely scenario. It is disturbing therefore that advocacy groups, the media and policy makers concentrate on this scenario. In the process we generate hopelessly unrealistic policy, such as Net Zero by 2030.

The societal consequences of this will be profound as I discuss in another video “A Review of the iron law of energy”. Not only are we squandering huge resources tackling a non-existent problem, but we are also starving capital from projects that could make guaranteed improvements to human health and prosperity.

“the new wind farm is being developed to meet an arbitrary government target. It will produce very expensive energy as a result of public subsidies. It will have no impact on the global temperature”

⁠Your involved in a big campaign against a new wind farm between Edenfield, Rawtenstall and Rochdale. What are your main objections to the wind farm?

Fundamentally the new wind farm is being developed to meet an arbitrary government target. It will produce very expensive energy as a result of public subsidies. It will have no impact on the global temperature but will do massive damage to our unique peat moorland – something the government has separately committed to protecting!

It will be located either side of and cross an old, cobbled road called the Cotton Famine Road. This is a reminder of the harsh times cotton workers had to endure during the Cotton Famine in their support of the abolition of slavery and is unique in linking the American Civil War to social changes in our own country. In order to alleviate the poverty, the mill workers were engaged in a huge public works project, laying over 300,000 stone setts across the moor. Walking or riding up this road is a really moving experience. The wind farm will completely destroy the peace and tranquillity of this incredible heritage asset.

Our local MPs, Labour, are strongly supportive of the proposals. This includes my own MP, Elsie Blundell, who described the importance of the Cotton Famine Road in her maiden speech! Both local councils, Labour controlled, are desperate for the funding that the wind farm would bring them. Draw your own conclusions!

Are there any last thoughts you would like to leave our readers with?

Nothing profound! I recommend finding groups like ours and yours to meet up and debate, learn new things and of course, simply to socialise. I have made many new friends through Politics in Pubs, all of them deeply concerned about the state of our country and keen to see things improve for the better.

The other thing I would say, as a counter to the too common attitude of “why bother voting”, is that we are demonstrably going through a period of profound change. The two-party system is dead – in fact those two parties are already on life support. They just don’t realise it. Who would have thought that even a couple of years ago?

Eight rights you think you have, but don’t (and how a constitution can help)

Ben Allsop the Wessex Coordinator of the Libertarian Party UK writes about Eight rights you think you have, but don’t (and how a constitution can help).

“Laws such as the Communications Act 2003 or the Public Order Acts give police and other bodies the legal ability to punish and silence citizens for speaking their mind”

As a party, we are fighting to finally form a codified constitution in the United Kingdom. To highlight why we need one, here are eight fundamental rights that almost everyone values (and may already believe they have), but the British government violates routinely.

Freedom of Expression – This is an obvious one, but well worth starting with. Currently, British citizens have no right to freedom of expression, also referred to as ‘freedom of speech’. Laws such as the Communications Act 2003 or the Public Order Acts give police and other bodies the legal ability to punish and silence citizens for speaking their minds.

Freedom of Information – The other side of the ‘free speech’ coin. The ability to receive information is just as if not more vital than the ability to broadcast it. But British citizens are simply not allowed to know certain things. For instance, the possession of ‘The Anarchist Cookbook’ is illegal to own in this country under the Terrorism Act 2000. The state also routinely practices censorship through OFCOM, which can now mandate social media companies to remove ‘legal but harmful’ material’.

Presumption of Innocence – Surely not, I hear you cry. Well, the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 enables government agencies to monitor your communications which in the past would have required at least reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing. More worryingly, civil asset forfeiture laws allow police and even local councils to seize property if they suspect it to be the proceeds of crime. Note that there is no requirement of proof or even conviction for alleged crimes. Suspicion alone is enough to remove property from the accused.

“The government can and does practice compulsory purchase in the UK. Not to mention the fact that it forced businesses to close during the pandemic”

Property Rights – As they say, “if you can’t keep it, it isn’t really yours.” The government can and does practice compulsory purchase in the UK. Not to mention the fact that it forced businesses to close during the pandemic. In addition, several laws such as The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018, Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019, and more, all allow the government to seize and freeze assets without so much as a hearing. Even in cases where the accused has been cleared of wrongdoing, they may still be expected to make a time-consuming and expensive claim through the court to retrieve their property.

Right to Privacy – Long dismissed as a wacky conspiracy theory, the reality of mass surveillance became common knowledge with the leaking of NSA documents by Edward Snowden and others. As well as the US, the UK was also active in collecting massive amounts of data extracted from and intercepted between its own people. Since then, the British government has passed legislation such as the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 which overtly bestowed itself with the power to spy on us all.

Self-sufficiency – Who hasn’t dreamed of buying a plot of forest, building yourself a cabin and living out your years on nature’s doorstep? And like many dreams, this one gets a kicking from the government too. Planning permission, green belt and AONB designations, building restrictions, land use restrictions, environmental health and waste rules, council tax and residency enforcement, service access and identity issues will all conspire to make living off-grid a legal impossibility in the UK. ‘Pay your taxes or live on the street’ are the only options we get.

“The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 made making noise during a protest or violating undisclosed restrictions both arrestable offences”

Right to Protest – Under the guise of tackling the life-endangering protests by ‘Just Stop Oil’ a few years ago, the government was able to introduce sweeping new powers which had the ability to crush future protests. The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 made making noise during a protest or violating undisclosed restrictions both arrestable offences. These powers were further expanded by the Public Order Act 2023, which allowed the state to ban people without a criminal conviction from protesting and ridiculously, made it an offense to carry a bike lock to a protest.

Popular Sovereignty – We all know that in a democracy, the people are sovereign. All authority is derived from the consent of the people after all. Except, at least in the UK, that isn’t true. Of course, for the past century or so adults in the UK have been able to influence the composition of parliament. But only one of two chambers of it. Sovereignty in the UK actually lies with parliament itself. Parliamentary sovereignty allows parliament to pass any law without judicial or public scrutiny with a simple majority. You are one act of parliament away from living under a dictatorship. I hope that I’m not alone in saying that that terrifies me.

At the end of the day, a codified constitution is just a piece of paper. There can never be any foolproof way of keeping out authoritarianism. But anything that makes the sudden or gradual seizure of power more difficult for governments may one day prove to be a godsend. So please support us in our fight for a constitution, help prevent tyranny and reverse the progress already made towards it…while you still can.

This post can also be found at https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1274615394293394&id=100052348363639&mibextid=wwXIfr&rdid=Bc8xyHo1zQ4TWm3j#.

Press Release from Nik Stewert, Reform UK Croydon

Reform UK’s Croydon Branch have todays issued a Press Release as below:

ReForm UK have launched their Federation in Croydon to cover the constituencies of Croydon South, Croydon East, Croydon West and parts of Streatham & Croydon North.

Nik Stewert, former chairman of the Conservative Federation has been appointed as Chairman of the Federation. Nik said, “I am delighted to be asked to head up the Federation in Croydon and support the work of our hard working MP’s in Parliament and to give the people of Croydon a clear choice at the next local, mayor and national elections.”

“For too long now both Labour and the Conservatives have ruined local services and bankrupted the Council with ridiculous schemes like Brick by Brick leaving residents to pay for the disastrous mistakes they have presided over – both blaming each other. What is clear is that Croydon needs a new start – local Councillors who hold the employees of the borough Council to account and stop wasteful spending. It is clear – Croydon needs ReForm.”

ReForm UK is inviting residents who want to see change to join them in campaigning for a definitive change – to bring spending into line, redevelop our Town Centre and make Croydon a place to be proud of.