Rupert Lowe MP send the following release on Thursday 8th January.
“Viable, hard-working firms that have been ground down year after year and are now being pushed too far”
Over 5,500 small business owners from across Britain have signed an open letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, calling for an urgent review of the upcoming business rates revaluation, warning that it could force thousands of businesses to close.
The letter, organised by Rupert Lowe MP, has been signed by pub landlords, cafe owners, shopkeepers and local employers who say they are already at breaking point after a decade of rising costs and economic shocks.
It calls on Rachel Reeves to undertake an urgent review of the impact of the revaluation on small businesses and to introduce meaningful mitigation to prevent widespread closures.
Commenting on the response, Rupert Lowe MP said:
“The scale of the response speaks for itself. Over 5,500 businesses, and the number continues to grow. Viable, hard-working firms that have been ground down year after year and are now being pushed too far.
Business rates punish physical presence. They punish community businesses. And unless the Chancellor acts quickly, we will see permanent closures on high streets across the country. It will be apocalyptic, I promise you that.”
“They punish community businesses. And unless the Chancellor acts quickly, we will see permanent closures on high streets across the country”
We are business owners – pubs, cafes, shops and local employers – who have kept going through a brutal decade.
We’ve dealt with rising rents, soaring energy bills, higher insurance, inflation, staffing pressures, Covid debt, and additional tax. We adapted, borrowed, cut our own wages and worked longer hours just to stay open.
Now we’re facing a business rates revaluation that, for many of us, will be the final straw.
Business rates are a fixed cost we can’t avoid. We can’t move online or relocate to a warehouse. We trade from real premises, on real high streets, serving real communities.
We are being punished for doing so.
This is about survival. For many businesses, even a modest rise means slashing staff, cutting hours, raising prices, or closing altogether.
We’re asking for fairness and common sense.
Please carry out an urgent review of the impact of the business rates revaluation on small businesses and put proper mitigation in place.
If our businesses go, they will not come back.
==================
“This is about survival. For many businesses, even a modest rise means slashing staff, cutting hours, raising prices, or closing altogether.”
Alex Zychowski leader of the Libertarian Party UK writes a New Years message for Libertarians.
“This general malaise is symptomatic of the decline of the UK – years old, and now accelerated under Starmer.”
Returning to the UK from a winter-sun holiday on New Year’s Eve was a nasty shock to the system. The transition from 22°C and sunshine to a below-freezing Gatwick Airport was bad enough; having to wait 40 minutes on the tarmac because the electric stairs for disembarkation had failed “due to the cold weather” simply added to it. We were left with an extended opportunity to mull our impending return to work and taxation – to finance Labour’s bloated welfare state and the lives of the workshy and economically illiterate.
While browsing the web in the queue for passport control two news stories stood out. First, that 2025 was a record year for Channel crossings: 41,000+ people welcomed into the UK illegally and ferried to NHS appointments by taxi at taxpayers’ expense. Second, that Labour want to extend Digital ID to children at birth. Reading this news as a law-abiding taxpayer while waiting for an Orwellian facial-recognition scan as a condition of entry to the very country whose (selectively deployed) surveillance infrastructure we are forced to fund, it was little wonder smiles were hard to come by on the faces of fellow festive-season travellers. This general malaise is symptomatic of the decline of the UK – years old, and now accelerated under Starmer.
“astronomical energy costs that are now amongst the highest in the world – courtesy of net-zero zealotry – while punters in Beijing and Baltimore sit toasty and warm.”
New Year’s Day was lunch with the extended family in a country pub. The venue was cold, the twelve of us huddled together, eating with our coats on. Uncle Mark’s sausages arrived undercooked and were promptly sent back to the kitchen; part of me felt sorry about the additional energy cost now incurred for the proper preparation of a portion of bangers and mash. A quick browse of Wetherspoon News reminds one that the hospitality sector effectively subsidises energy-intensive industries through the Energy and Trade Intensive Industries scheme, as government would rather prop up unprofitable industries at others’ expense than tackle the inflation-driving, astronomical energy costs that are now amongst the highest in the world – courtesy of net-zero zealotry – while punters in Beijing and Baltimore sit toasty and warm.
May 2026 was supposed to be an opportunity for the electorate to deal another blow to Starmer with the local elections. A whole raft of these are now slated to be cancelled, despite the protestations of the usually compliant Electoral Commission. Barely a peep on this assault on our democracy from the Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation, which since Covid has become nothing more than a taxpayer-funded mouthpiece for state-approved narratives.
The year ahead may look bleak, then – but the LPUK are here and as active as ever, driving forward with our message of change and hope.
Join as a member for just £27.50 a year, and enjoy the privilege of proposing and voting on policy from the comfort of your own home as we update our manifesto in online sessions.
“A whole raft of these are now slated to be cancelled, despite the protestations of the usually compliant Electoral Commission. Barely a peep on this assault on our democracy from the Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation”
Stand for us where local elections are still taking place; star on our new podcast Give Freedom a Chance; or help produce content for our social-media channels.
Join us in Manchester on 7th February and in London on 25th April as we protest the cancellation of elections and the imposition of a Digital ID.
Authoritarianism flourishes only where the people quietly tolerate the erosion of their freedoms. We must be the change we wish to see in the world.
Alex Zychowski
“Stand for us where local elections are still taking place”
Ben Allsop the Wessex Coordinator of the Libertarian Party UK writes some of his New Years Resolutions.
“the government will find any excuse to tax and spend, regardless of the efficacy of such policies. I intend to close those gaps as much as I can by giving to worthy causes, donating blood and hopefully finding the time to volunteer”
A year ago, I set out five new year’s resolutions for the British public in 2025:
Stop Tolerating Dishonesty
Treat Taxation as Theft
Practice Individual Responsibility
Live and Let Live
Vote Libertarian
How do you think we did? How did you do? Is there anything you would like to see added to this list for the new year?
I have two of my own personal resolutions which I hope I can share.
Firstly, I would like to do more for charitable causes. As I said in my previous post, the government will find any excuse to tax and spend, regardless of the efficacy of such policies. I intend to close those gaps as much as I can by giving to worthy causes, donating blood and hopefully finding the time to volunteer once again.
Secondly, I will try to be more positive in my political activism. It is easy to adopt a cynical, sneering attitude when it comes to political commentary. There is much to be cynical about and to sneer at after all. But I am ultimately a libertarian because I have faith in the goodness of (most) human beings. A few comments over the past year have quite rightly pointed out that where criticism is given, so should solutions. So, I will endeavour to show that safety and prosperity arise because of freedom, not in spite of it. That’s not to say that I will be kind to aspiring tyrants. But I hope I can do more to convince others that there is another, brighter path forwards.
“as Joseph de Maistre said, “Every country has the government it deserves”. It is on the British public to be better then perhaps. Change is always bottom up, not top down”
Happy new year fellow libertarians! As we now find ourselves in the ‘Monday’ of months, it’s important to keep our spirits up. Granted, it’s difficult to do given the current political and economic climate. Starmer’s new year’s message was particularly nauseating. When I heard, “until you can look forward and believe in the promise and the prosperity of Britain again, then this government will fight for you,” I couldn’t help but think of “the beatings will continue until morale improves”. Needless to say, the Labour government has proven to be an utter failure in just six months. But, as Joseph de Maistre said, “Every country has the government it deserves”. It is on the British public to be better then perhaps. Change is always bottom up, not top down. So let us take this opportunity to set out five political new year’s resolutions for Britain and her electorate.
Stop Tolerating Dishonesty
We’ve had our fair share of dishonest prime ministers. The covid era and Johnson’s infamous cake ambush come sharply to mind. But few Prime Ministers have been so blatantly dishonest as Keir Starmer. He lied to his own party, promising to abolish tuition fees and then almost immediately reversed his stance upon taking over as party leader. He promised not to raise taxes on working people, only to do exactly that at the first opportunity once in power. Even the IFS have called Reeves’ claim that a £22bn black hole was covered up by the previous government a lie. Lying seems particularly chronic in the current regime. And why wouldn’t it be? It wins elections and currently has virtually no costs. In a just world, being caught lying to the public would be an instantly career ending event for any politician. If we ever want the status quo to change, it has to start from the bottom up. Any politician that has lied should be instantly unelectable. Any party that tolerates liars should face electoral oblivion. That is the only way we will see any semblance of honesty in politics.
“The analogy that comes to my mind is of fire. A little is vital to sustain society, but any more than strictly necessary is always disastrous”
Treat Taxation as Theft
The difference between sex and rape is consent. The difference between work and slavery is consent. The difference between tax and theft is… well you see the problem. There’s a good chance that I’m preaching to the choir here, but it really does seem incredible how tolerant the general population is to tax increases from a political system that takes far more than it gives. Tax is theft and theft is evil, but it is sometimes the lesser of two evils. Libertarians understand this. But far from making us tolerant of taxation, this belief forces us to resist unnecessary levels of tax we see today. The analogy that comes to my mind is of fire. A little is vital to sustain society, but any more than strictly necessary is always disastrous. I believe that most people actually agree when it comes to their own money. The issue arises when politicians impose tax hikes on specific groups knowing that the rest of the population will do little to resist. Of course, they will get around to you sooner or later in Niemölleran fashion. Everyone should be protesting the tax hikes on farmers for instance, and in return, farmers should refrain from calling for import tariffs. In the end, the only winner is the state, unless we learn to treat tax for what it is.
Practice Individual Responsibility
“Ask not what your country can do for you-” I like to end the famous JFK quote there. After all, service to your country should be entirely voluntary. It is the widely held belief that the government is responsible for maintaining every aspect of our lives that we have ponzi schemes masquerading as state pensions and countless laws criminalising victimless crimes such as cannabis use. Of course not everyone is capable of practicing individual responsibility. Children, the elderly and the mentally and physically disabled may need help and in some cases require restrictions for their own good if they are not of sound mind or maturity. But for everyone else, responsibility for oneself should be the default position. That means enduring the costs of one’s own mistakes but reaping the benefits of success. After all, the lack of this kind of accountability directly led to the financial crash in 2008, with banks enjoying the benefits of risky behaviour in full knowledge that governments would never let them fail. It’s difficult not to imagine that similar perverse incentives motivate crime and dubious increases in the long term ‘sick’ since covid. But far from being a battlecry for the selfish and greedy, individual responsibility means taking positive action yourself to help others and fix problems. Instead of calling for the state to do more for whatever cause interests you, and taking their share along the way, cut out the middleman and make a change yourself. Donate to a dog shelter, volunteer at a food bank, pick up litter as you walk by. The more you leave to the government, the bigger it gets and the less gets done.
“far from being a battlecry for the selfish and greedy, individual responsibility means taking positive action yourself to help others and fix problems”
Live and Let Live
As well as accepting individual responsibility, the flip side of that coin is the allowance of others to make decisions for themselves. For most people, political decisions seem to come down to banning things they find unpleasant whilst seeking public funding for those things that they enjoy. A common misconception is that the support for the freedom to do a thing equates to support for the thing itself. Smoking for instance is extremely harmful and on a personal level, I would implore anyone reading this to quit if they can. But I wholeheartedly oppose the upcoming ageist smoking ban. The only guiding principle for banning certain behaviours should be the prevention of harm to others. It may be difficult sometimes, but we will all be much freer if we learn to live and let live.
Vote Libertarian
If I may be so bold, I would like to suggest voting for the Libertarian Party UK if possible in the next year and beyond. We are the only party committed to the principles of Libertarianism. But we can’t make a change without your support. There is no such thing as a wasted vote. Very few votes ever manage to tip the scales in an election, but every vote sends a signal. So don’t compromise, vote for who you want to represent you. If you get the chance, vote libertarian in your next by-election, local elections etc. If we don’t have a candidate in your area, it could be you making the breakthrough into public service wearing a lion on your chest. Consider joining if you aren’t a member already and if you fancy writing articles like this, we’re always looking for new voices.
Once again, on behalf of the Libertarian Party UK and myself, have a happy new year.
“If we don’t have a candidate in your area, it could be you making the breakthrough into public service wearing a lion on your chest”
Croydon Council has been making waves on social media for the high levels of Redacted payments in its published data.
Croydon like all councils are required to published details of payments over £500. These payments includes details of the expense type, the budget, the amount, dates, and importantly the payee.
Some payee details are always redacted, this is done to protect individuals or highly sensitive information. But we have seen an increased redaction of payments at Croydon Council, and wrote about this problem in both September and April 2025
New research by Lee Nallalingham published on X/Twitter shows that in this financial year Croydon Council are redacting information at a far higher rate than most councils in London. Lee’s tweet explains this as below:
=====================
BREAKING: Croydon Council has paid £316m to “redacted” suppliers so far this financial year.
That’s 49,224 redacted payments – over half of ALL payments the council has made, as per data available to mid December.
For context: The average London council made around £40m in redacted payments over the same period, roughly 8.6% of total spend.
Croydon’s figures are on another planet in comparison.
If you’re wondering how they ended up £1bn in debt and bankrupt three times, this is probably a good place to start.
I’m not accusing anyone of illegality. But numbers like this, combined with Croydon’s track record, are impossible to ignore.
The council has serious questions to answer.
=====================
Redacting information at almost 6 times the rate of the average London council doesn’t inspire confidence, and makes one wonder – what are Croydon Council hiding?
On Jan 5th, the SDP issued the following Press Release:
“It is now public knowledge that Labour plotted to make this momentous change behind voters’ backs by abusing the Private Members’ Bill process”
The SDP recognises Assisted Dying as a conscience issue. However, if it is to be introduced it must be done so humanely, with utmost precaution and with well-funded alternatives in place. To our regret – and in a process that amounts to an affront to democracy – the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has failed to attain the necessary standard for legislation of this importance.
It is now public knowledge that Labour plotted to make this momentous change behind voters’ backs by abusing the Private Members’ Bill process. As a result of this subterfuge, in place of the thoroughgoing processes on which Government Bills run, they have relied on the inadequate vehicle of a Private Members Bill. It has veered through Parliament with naive drafting, partisan sponsorship, and with reckless disregard for the impact on the values and integrity of the NHS, its staff and wider networks of caring and safeguarding.
“The extensions to eligibility for Assisted Dying seen in other jurisdictions might arise in Britain at the mere stroke of a Minister’s pen – a bleak and anti-democratic prospect”
Professional associations of those who work in these end-of-life situations and know how vulnerable those affected can be – from elder charities to coroners – have almost unanimously objected to the way this Bill handles the key issues. Their constructive suggestions have been set aside and disregarded.
In place of firm guard rails in law, this Bill leaves far too much to the whim of any existing or future Secretary of State. The extensions to eligibility for Assisted Dying seen in other jurisdictions might arise in Britain at the mere stroke of a Minister’s pen – a bleak and anti-democratic prospect.
The Government must finally accept that this is a wholly inappropriate approach for such a weighty matter. End-of-Life healthcare is a strategic, structural issue, not simply a question of individual autonomy. There is no true choice for individuals so long as the only alternative to early death is the inhumanity and neglect experienced by many senior citizens. This shameful little Bill sheds our social duties and shrugs off responsibility for caring for our most vulnerable fellow citizens. It satisfies neither those who favour nor those who oppose a right to euthanasia.
If Assisted Dying is ever to be brought into law in Britain it must be done so with requisite deliberation, proper consideration and with all of the necessary safeguards in place. The approach chosen and promoted by the government is demonstrably failing to achieve any of these and must be abandoned.
“This shameful little Bill sheds our social duties and shrugs off responsibility for caring for our most vulnerable fellow citizens”
We were recently joined from the United States by Lisa Ekman, author of Deprogramming Democrats & unEducating the Elites: How I Escaped the Progressive Cult. Here is Part 2 of our wide ranging interview with Lisa.
We were recently joined from the United States by Lisa Ekman, author of Deprogramming Democrats & unEducating the Elites: How I Escaped the Progressive Cult. Here is Part 1 of our wide ranging interview with Lisa.
The budget again confirmed the Labour Governments plan to introduce a Digital ID system, at a staggering provisionally forecast cost of £1.8billion. Below is the SDP Press Release from September which sums up many of the condemnations of these plans.
“Existing “right to work” checks are more than sufficient to stop the employment of illegal aliens. The government should instead crackdown on black market and gig economy firms”
William Clouston, SDP Leader:
“The SDP is the party of the patriotic state. We accept that sometimes individual liberties must be balanced against collective goods. But what collective good does digital ID solve? It does not solve the challenge of illegal migration – which is a problem only due to weak elites that refuse to use the tools they already have.
“Instead, I believe this new digital ID scheme is a desperate move by a teetering government to keep key backers of the Starmer government on-side. Big tech firms, and the sinister interest groups that have benefitted from their largesse, are turning the screws to force an expensive, insecure, and pointless digital ID system on the public while the political opportunity still remains. It must be rejected.”
London (26 September 2025) – The Social Democratic Party (SDP), Britain’s party of the patriotic state, opposes the government’s planned digital ID system – on four main grounds.
First, the SDP rejects the claim that such a system is necessary to reduce illegal migration. Existing “right to work” checks are more than sufficient to stop the employment of illegal aliens. The government should instead crackdown on black market and gig economy firms that fail to enforce existing right to work checks. Such a crackdown, paired with the detention and deportation of all illegal arrivals into Britain, would end the crisis of illegal migration.
Secondly, rather than being in the interests of the British people, the planned digital ID system exists to further the interests of multinational technology firms. The main domestic champion of digital ID, the Tony Blair Institute, has received several millions of pounds in donations since 2021 from Larry Ellison, co-founder and executive chairman of Oracle. Oracle may be a vendor for much of the enterprise database software that will underpin the government’s digital ID system.
“the system’s implementation will represent a wealth transfer in the order of tens of billions of pounds from the British people to Silicon Valley software firms”
Thirdly, the new digital ID system represents a blatant attempt at state capture by big tech. As constituted, the system’s implementation will represent a wealth transfer in the order of tens of billions of pounds from the British people to Silicon Valley software firms and contractors. The digital ID system will also grant big tech unprecedented access to vast amounts of data on the British public, allowing significant opportunities for profit at our collective expense.
Finally, the planned digital ID system is a security risk of unprecedented proportions. One Login, the existing system which will underpin the digital ID scheme, is riddled with fundamental security flaws. Many of the contractors for One Login have not undergone basic security vetting, with much of the development having been outsourced to Romania. Internal simulations of a cyberattack have shown that One Login can be commandeered by external actors to produce fake IDs, shut down the system nation-wide, and steal the IDs of millions of British citizens.
“The digital ID system will also grant big tech unprecedented access to vast amounts of data on the British public”
The Libertarian Party UK published the note below following the budget.
“the budget ensures rising wages and inflation push more people into higher tax brackets without the need for an explicit rate rise. This is effectively a hidden tax increase”
Well, what a slap in the face for working people yesterday, as Rachel Reeves unveiled the heftiest tax rises in decades. A quick run-down of some of the LPUK NCC’s response to the budget announcement:
For London and South East co-ordinator Marco Bocci, Reeves’ claim that “We beat the forecasts and we will beat them again” is “the best phrase of the budget yet. She should do stand up comedy, Rachel from accounts.”
Let’s pick apart some of the main points:
𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗵-𝘁𝗮𝘅𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘃𝗶𝗮 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝘇𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱𝘀
By freezing income-tax and National Insurance thresholds until 2031, the budget ensures rising wages and inflation push more people into higher tax brackets without the need for an explicit rate rise. This is effectively a hidden tax increase, subverting transparency and voter consent.
Raising taxes on dividend income, property and investment returns (plus a “mansion tax” on high-value homes) deters capital formation, penalises asset ownership and discourages saving. This amounts to state appropriation of individuals’ legitimately earned returns.
“taxing a previously legal and popular method of efficient retirement saving. This closes off a voluntary, private route to long-term financial security”
Anything above that limit will now attract full employee and employer NI, effectively taxing a previously legal and popular method of efficient retirement saving. This closes off a voluntary, private route to long-term financial security, raises the cost of saving, and pushes individuals towards greater reliance on state-approved pension structures rather than personal choice.
𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗿𝗲𝗱𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗯𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘄𝗲𝗹𝗳𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴
The abolition of the two-child benefit cap and increased welfare, while framed as support for “vulnerable families,” expands the size and scope of the welfare state. This redistributive spending infringes on property rights and encourages dependency on the state.
𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗺𝘂𝗺 𝘄𝗮𝗴𝗲
Raising the over-21 rate to £12.71 an hour from April 2026 will only put more pressure on already struggling employers to increase wages for others, and is a de-facto endorsement of rising unemployment. The resulting inflationary pressure will only further deepen the cost of living crisis.
For Chairman Andrew Withers, “The overall picture is sucking £26bn out of the productive economy to prop up a dying Welfare State all in the name of ‘fairness.’ The main beneficiaries will not be children in poverty, but the employment of tens of thousands of middle class bureaucrats working in quangos.”
“The overall picture is sucking £26bn out of the productive economy to prop up a dying Welfare State”
Mercia co-ordinator Martin Day congratulates Reeves on “hammering the poor hardest in an effort to balance the books. Government spending MUST be cut.”
Though a separate issue, party leader Alex Zychowski notes that “yesterday – the day before the budget – Labour signalled their intention to abolish trial by jury – an insidious attempt to use the assault on our paychecks to take the light off this egregious assault on our ancient freedoms.”
More on that in the coming days, but to close our analysis, a simple but accurate summary from Northern co-ordinator Dan Clarke: “this budget is a disgrace.”
“hammering the poor hardest in an effort to balance the books. Government spending MUST be cut.”
