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.
“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 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”
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?
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.
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.
We spoke with Adam before the recent local elections when he was a candidate for the SDP in the Totteridge and Bowerdean ward of High Wycombe, for Buckinghamshire Council. We catch-up with him for his tales from the campaign trail.
“I am incredibly grateful to everyone who came up to High Wycombe to support me, especially since it’s an absolute hike to campaign in my ward”
You ran in the elections in May. Looking back what is your main memory of the campaign?
The feeling of achievement when I finished leafleting, my feet were killing me, I had one volunteer left and we’d just put through my last leaflet, and I was just so happy to have managed to reach my goal of covering the whole ward in SDP leaflets. I am incredibly grateful to everyone who came up to High Wycombe to support me, especially since it’s an absolute hike to campaign in my ward (It’s not called High Wycombe for no reason!)
The seat was won by Wycombe Independent’s and has received some press coverage. Did you have much interaction with other candidates or parties during the campaign?
My ward was a battleground between the Liberal Democrats and the Wycombe Independents with the occasional Labour sign. The Conservatives and Reform were non-existent and didn’t even turn up to the count. I interacted with all three of the other parties who actually turned up and put some work in and I got on very well with all of them.
The thing about local elections is that they all wanted to improve our local area, they just differed on how that should be done, so I appreciated the camaraderie.
The Lib Dems in particular were very kind to me, and they actually stood up for me online! I got a lot of abuse and harassment from Reform voters on Facebook but the Lib Dems and some of the other Buckinghamshire Independents supported me in my comment section. The abuse from Reform supporters was a bit of an eye-opener for me. As a party we get a lot of comments about how we should work with them or alternatively, merge, however after what I experienced I am disinclined towards that now.
“I only received one comment on the doorstop about Gaza, and I responded with SDP policy, that the issues in the Middle East won’t be solved in Buckinghamshire”
Do you have any funny stories or interesting encounters from campaigning?
I received a vaguely threatening email from the Palestine Solidarity Campaign in High Wycombe about signing their petition to force Buckinghamshire Council to disinvest from Israeli companies. I ignored it because I don’t engage in sectarian politics that has nothing to do with our local area, however, because I did so, my name and picture appeared in red in a video that the PSC produced, so that was an interesting experience!
I only received one comment on the doorstop about Gaza, and I responded with SDP policy, that the issues in the Middle East won’t be solved in Buckinghamshire and that we take a pro-British foreign policy outlook. I also ended up quoting Treebeard from Lord of the Rings at the gent who asked me the question – “I am on nobody’s side, because nobody is on my side” and he actually went from being a bit aggressive about the issue to then nodding, saying fair enough and asking me about potholes and the police!
What would you say to anyone thinking of becoming a candidate?
If anyone is tired of the situation in our nation and wants to try and improve things, but is scared to take a stance, don’t be. There’s a buildup and an almost fearful atmosphere about being a candidate, and the day before my first leafletting activity I was actively terrified of what I would face. However, with the support from both my partner and my party I managed to get out and face it, and I found that actually it wasn’t too bad! It’s quite an enjoyable experience and makes you feel like you -can- make a difference.
“Now it’s all about long term growth and building up the party infrastructure in High Wycombe”
What are your hopes now for your involvement in politics, for Totteridge and Bowerdean, for High Wycombe, and for Buckinghamshire?
I received 34 votes in the election, not an amazing result by any margin but I was only 96 votes behind the Conservatives, so I’ll take that. Now it’s all about long term growth and building up the party infrastructure in High Wycombe. This town is crying out for competent leadership and investment in its future, and I believe that the SDP can provide that, we just need to grow our membership in the area.
I have also started up a full-time position within the party as it’s Campaigns Organiser, I will be working on the ground across the country to help improve our chances of winning elections and providing this country with a genuine alternative political choice. Reform have shown that they don’t have the ability to maintain a coherent policy or governmental position and I worry that as time goes on, all of the councils that flipped to them will struggle to function.
The SDP is on the rise, it’ll take time and a lot of hard work, but it will be worth it and we will break through. We have to, the country and our very future depends on it.
“In our selected areas we see 54 staff paid more than the PM. These are largely Chief Executives, but also include 12 Chief Medical Officers, 2 Finance Directors…”
NHS England might be in the process of being abolished by the Labour Government, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t many others in the NHS receiving large remunerations on the taxpayer. The TaxPayers’ Alliance (TPA) recently published their NHS Rich List 2025, which “examines the remuneration of senior managers across NHS trusts in 2023-24 and compares it with their trust’s performance on A&E and referral to treatment (RTT) waiting times for January 2025.”
The full research and dataset breakdown the details across the country. Below, we look at some notable numbers for more local NHS Trusts identified as being in London, Surrey, Kent and across Sussex.
“Director of Communications and Engagement, Chief of People and Culture, Executive Director of People and Culture, and Director of Communications and Improvement, all paid over £100,000 per annum”
Salary
Nationally there are 469 employees paid more than the April 2024, Prime Ministerial salary entitlement of £172,153. In our selected areas we see 54 staff paid more than the PM. These are largely Chief Executives, but also include 12 Chief Medical Officers, 2 Finance Directors, 6 people in roles that include ‘Deputy’ in the title, and 3 Chief Nurse’s. These are all no doubt demanding high ranking roles, but in a near monopoly national health care system, do they need to be paid more than the Prime Minister?
The Chief People Officer of the University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust was also paid more than the Prime Minister. Is this a reasonable salary for an HR role? This was one of 19 roles across London, Surrey, Kent and Sussex where the job roles of Chief People Officer, Chief Communications Officer, Director of People, and the godawful titles of Director of Communications and Engagement, Chief of People and Culture, Executive Director of People and Culture, and Director of Communications and Improvement, all paid over £100,000 per annum.
Salary over £220K in our area:
NHS TRUST
Title
Salary
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON HOSPITALS NHS FOUNDATION TRUST
Chief executive
£282,500
LONDON NORTH WEST UNIVERSITY HEALTHCARE NHS TRUST
Chief executive officer
£252,500
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON HOSPITALS NHS FOUNDATION TRUST
Medical director
£237,500
EAST KENT HOSPITALS UNIVERSITY NHS FOUNDATION TRUST
Chief executive
£237,500
ROYAL FREE LONDON NHS FOUNDATION TRUST
Group chief executive
£237,500
ROYAL FREE LONDON NHS FOUNDATION TRUST
Royal Free Hospital chief executive
£237,500
Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
Chief medical officer
£237,500
UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS SUSSEX NHS FOUNDATION TRUST
Chief medical officer
£232,500
LONDON NORTH WEST UNIVERSITY HEALTHCARE NHS TRUST
Medical director
£227,500
EAST SUSSEX HEALTHCARE NHS TRUST
Chief medical officer
£222,500
UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS SUSSEX NHS FOUNDATION TRUST
Chief executive
£222,500
EAST SUSSEX HEALTHCARE NHS TRUST
Chief executive
£222,500
South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
Chief executive
£222,500
“one can’t help but wonder if the people of North East London sleep better at night knowing that the local NHS Executive Director of People and Culture received over £400K in pension related benefits”
Total Remuneration
Salary, especially in these senior NHS Trust roles is only one part of the remuneration received. Pension is also a significant part of the payments made. Looking at our area, one can’t help but wonder if the people of North East London sleep better at night knowing that the local NHS Executive Director of People and Culture received over £400K in pension related benefits. Are the people of Sussex benefiting from improvements to the University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust service thanks to the Chief Governance Officer’s £251,250 pension related benefits?
More locally no doubt the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust was contractually obliged to pay over £530K in Pension benefits to their Acting Chief Medical Officer and Chief Operating Officer, but is this appropriate use of taxpayers money to provide “NHS mental health services” to “the community in Lambeth, Southwark, Lewisham and Croydon”.
Remuneration (with Salary and Pension details) over £300K in our area:
NHS TRUST
Title
Salary
Pension related benefits
Overall Total
North East London NHS Foundation Trust
Executive director of people and culture
£142,500
£441,250
£582,500
LONDON NORTH WEST UNIVERSITY HEALTHCARE NHS TRUST
Chief executive officer
£252,500
£171,250
£422,500
UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS SUSSEX NHS FOUNDATION TRUST
Chief governance officer
£162,500
£251,250
£ 412,500
Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
Chief executive
£212,500
£176,250
£387,500
South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
Acting chief medical officer
£147,500
£228,750
£377,500
South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
Chief operating officer
£62,500
£301,250
£362,500
Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
Chief nursing officer
£142,500
£208,750
£352,500
ROYAL SURREY COUNTY HOSPITAL NHS FOUNDATION TRUST
Finance director
£187,500
£153,750
£342,500
Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
Chief nursing officer
£127,500
£203,750
£332,500
Bang for the buck
Where NHS Trusts are delivering excellent service for the patient, these payments, even at the taxpayers’ expense could well be justified. The TPAs full research breaks this down at a national level and the results don’t look promising.
We are joined by Mark Johnson, Conservative Councillor for Shirley North in Croydon and Brexiteer. We reminisce about the 2016 Referendum campaign and discuss his experiences as a Croydon councillor.
In the aftermath of the May 1st Local Elections, Mal McDermott writes about our interesting times.
“I do know a demand curve when I see one. The questions they are asking, and the change they are demanding have support”
You can’t hide behind FPTP during council elections. You can’t pretend Reform are just six loonies in a pub somewhere. You have to now sit down with them or watch them sit where you used to sit. Labour and the Tories only have themselves to blame for this and now this is where it has gotten to.
I don’t support Reform, and I don’t like Farage. but I do know a demand curve when I see one. The questions they are asking, and the change they are demanding have support. Much more than the big two parties wanted to admit.
People are fed up being told from on high that the government knows what’s best when they’re getting poorer, when they read about child abuse in the news, when they see collusion and cover up followed by collusion and cover up. That goes for anything, social care, finances, safety, defence, the list is endless.
The Tories had 12 years; they messed up entirely. Labour are closing in on a year now and it’s been a catastrophe. The state has failed everyone to the extent where a huge chunk of the population doesn’t want to work.
Why would they? So they can get a go nowhere job to pay extortionate rent to someone who is richer than God. “Its a big club and you ain’t in it” as Carlin put it. And this is what happens.
“The Tories had 12 years; they messed up entirely. Labour are closing in on a year now and it’s been a catastrophe. The state has failed everyone”
Farage and Reform need to deliver now as well. They can’t just be upset, and they’ll need to make choices. Every choice comes with its opportunity cost, and they will carefully need to select who to alienate. What will that look like? We’re going to find out. The double meaning of “may you live in interesting times” comes to mind.
It’s about to get pretty interesting. If you were on the fence about moving because of Reform, now would be the time to go. If you were thinking about a political career in the next big thing, now would be the time to sign up (to LPUK of course!). The future is now as they say.
“What will that look like? We’re going to find out. The double meaning of “may you live in interesting times” comes to mind”
Among the many hotly debated subjects in our area, one that is frequently returned to is the question of if towns like Coulsdon and Purley are part of London or Surrey.
When debating anything the proposition or debate subject is always talked over. What does it mean to be ‘part of’? How do you define Surrey or London? Indeed, how do you define the towns of Coulsdon and Purley?
“Postal addresses with Coulsdon in the name appear now in the London Borough’s of Croydon, Sutton and some in the Surrey borough of Reigate and Banstead”
Coulsdon for instance used to refer to the area now known as Old Coulsdon and also separately the Parish of Coulsdon, which includes much of Purley. Coulsdon town centre today was once referred to as Smitham. Are they the same area or different areas today? If they are different where’s the boundary? Postal addresses with Coulsdon in the name appear now in the London Borough’s of Croydon, Sutton and some in the Surrey borough of Reigate and Banstead.
London refers officially to both the City of London, and Greater London. Although it is often used as shorthand to cover variously the Cities of London and Westminster, and anything in about Zones 1 and 2 of the London Underground.
Surrey as a name originated as the southern portion of the Middle Saxon territory. Coulsdon and Purley were part of the Hundred (county division) of Surrey called Wallington. These for local government purposes were largely self-administrating, the limited county wide governance was focused mainly on keeping the peace.
“With the population of the Croydon Rural District doubling from 1901 to 1911, the Coulsdon and Purley Urban District was formed. The new local authority set itself up in new offices on Brighton Road”
Local government resembling what we know today first came to London and Surrey with the Local Government Act 1888. This formed both the London and Surrey County Council’s. The act also formed the County Borough of Croydon which whilst technically in Surrey, was not under the jurisdiction of either Surrey or London councils. The County Borough of Croydon included parts of Purley. The rest of Purley, all Coulsdon and areas such as Addington, Beddington, Mitcham and Wallington all formed part of the Croydon Rural District within Surrey. To add to the confusion, the district headquartered in Croydon Town Hall.
With the population of the Croydon Rural District doubling from 1901 to 1911, the Coulsdon and Purley Urban District was formed. The new local authority set itself up in new offices on Brighton Road at the junction of Old Lodge Lane. By this stage it is difficult to say Coulsdon and Purley are meaningfully part of Surrey.
“As a result of the act in 1965 the new London Borough of Croydon was formed merging the old County Borough of Croydon with the Coulsdon and Purley Urban District to form a new entity”
The debate on being part of London or Surrey really became settled as part of the London Government Act 1963. The act set up the Greater London Council (GLC), and the 32 new London borough councils. As a result of the act in 1965 the new London Borough of Croydon was formed merging the old County Borough of Croydon with the Coulsdon and Purley Urban District to form a new entity which was entirely part of London.
Perhaps more controversial than if Coulsdon and Purley are part of London or Surrey, is the question of the merger with Croydon. There is many a resident of the old urban district that will speak of their town playing second fiddle to the districts in the centre and north of the borough. Machinations at Croydon Council in recent years with the council declaring de facto bankruptcy, has only sharpened the desire among many to separate to the pre 65 boundaries. Be they 1 or 2 boroughs, they are both undeniably part of London. Residents have voted for members of the GLC, the GLA, and Mayor of London. Much as most of West London was once part of Middlesex, East London Essex, Bromley was once part of Kent, and Kingson once part of Surrey they are all now part of London.
“Our towns were no doubt once part of a Middle Saxon kingdom, and were likely once ruled by Frithuwold of Chertsey the King of Surrey in the late 7th Century”
This leaves the thorny issue of postal addresses. Many of us will sign off with a postal address of ‘Coulsdon, Surrey’ or ‘Purley, Surrey’, and of course we have Croydon rather than London Post Codes. The simple explanation here is the postcode system is independent of political boundaries and are based on the areas ‘Post Town’. An example of this is the Redhill (RH) postcode area, this as you might expect includes Redhill, but also Gatwick (RH6), Oxted (RH8), and Haywards Heath (RH16 and 17), none of which are part of the town Redhill. The district covers parts of Surrey, and East and West Sussex.
Our towns were no doubt once part of a Middle Saxon kingdom, and were likely once ruled by Frithuwold of Chertsey the King of Surrey in the late 7th Century AD. Like so much this has passed to history, with the expansion of London, Coulsdon and Purley became subsumed in the great metropolis. Whilst our area may no longer have its own King, let’s hope it long retains its own character.
Arlene Dearlove is the Reform UK candidate for the 22nd May, Carshalton South and Clockhouse ward by-election in the London Borough of Sutton. We spoke with Arlene about her decision to stand.
“I have been involved in the local community as a provider of not-for-profit social care and support to our most vulnerable members of society for over 27 years”
Can you introduce yourself to our readers, and tell us what made you decide to run?
I have been involved in the local community as a provider of not-for-profit social care and support to our most vulnerable members of society for over 27 years. In this role I assist children and young people with profound physical and sensory difficulties to access local services and activities. Also, for over 17 years I have been running day services, offering respite to families with activities including horticulture, cooking, baking, pottery and skills for living.
I am a Christian and my faith is my foundation as I seek to serve the local community to the best of my ability. It is a real privilege to be the local Reform candidate for the upcoming council election.
“We feel the council didn’t fully back us when we raised concerns over ULEZ, and we don’t feel the council is backing residents over concerns on crime and anti-social behaviour”
You’re the candidate for Carshalton South and Clockhouse ward. What are the main concerns in the area?
Carshalton South and Clockhouse ward is such an interesting and varied ward covering the Clockhouse area in Coulsdon, the countryside Little Woodcote and Carshalton Beeches.
I live in the ward, and I know many people feel ignored by Sutton Council, which is increasingly complacent after many years of LibDem councils. We feel the council didn’t fully back us when we raised concerns over ULEZ, and we don’t feel the council is backing residents over concerns on crime and anti-social behaviour.
I will speak up for residents’ day to day concerns and be your voice for Reform on the Council.
“Businesses are both crucial to our local economy and the employment of our local work force. It is essential that they get the support and help they need to thrive and bolster our community”
What do you see as the major issues more widely in Sutton and if elected what do you hope to champion?
There are 3 main areas I will focus on.
Community Support Networks
I want to establish communication links with residents to tackle issues that affect us all, from housing to potholes.
Protection and support for our local businesses and public houses
Businesses are both crucial to our local economy and the employment of our local work force. It is essential that they get the support and help they need to thrive and bolster our community. The effect of ULEZ expansion and ongoing uncoordinated roadworks, is having a dire effect on footfall.
Tackling crime with the Safer Neighbourhood teams
As a priority, I will work closely with residents and the police to ensure our safety as the incidents of all kinds of criminal activities and anti-social behaviour are increasing.
How can people find out more or get involved in the campaign?
