Way back in 2002 Conservative politician Theresa May warned hge Tories that they should be careful not to be seen as "the nasty party,"
Sadly , eleven years later, as Home Secretary, she was the one to hire lorries to tour areas of high immigration with posters threatening people who might not be legally here to "Go Home of Face Arrest."
Under May the Home Office deliberately tied to create a Hostile Environment. " It was officially intended to deter those whose legal presence might be questionable, but in practice tends to create hostility towards and uncertainty within all those communities who "look a bit different."
And last Thursday 7th May 2026 the acceptability of this policy was confirmed by just about half those who took part in the election.
The combined support for the Conservatives, who have moved even further to the right under Kemi Badenoch, and Nigel Farage's Reform party, was 47%. This is massive compared with the raggle-taggle support of the Labour Party (15%) and the Liberal Democrats and Greens each with 14%.
The right wing massive superiority will not go unnoticed by the whichever Tory leader survives to the next general election, and the triumphant Nigel Farage.
Yet are we really so nasty as a nation? What has happened to our much-vaunted virtues of tolerance and belief in fair play, not to mention our Judaeo-Christian heritage?
The division in British politics were ably described in an article by Andy Beckett in the Guardian on the day before the election:
“On one side are millions of left-leaning Britons whose economic prospects are worsening, whose anxieties about climate change are rising, whose horror at Israeli and the US’s wars is absolute, and whose alienation from the compromises of conventional Labour politics is deep. . . . . .
. . . .another [is] a coalition of interests, including the right wing media, the right of Labour, the Tory party, corporate lobbyists, defenders of Israel and the Anglo-American “special relationship”, and supposedly realistic centrists from the pages of the Financial Times to the deep-state recesses of Whitehall. Protecting the status quo against the disruptive plans of the left has been one of this loose and adaptable establishment’s main priorities for decades, arguably for centuries. And it has rarely been defeated in this struggle.”
One can quibble about the details (I don‘t believe all “progressive’s” economic prospects are worsening. Some of us are very comfortably situated) but the gist, especially the summary of the forces of the establishment, has the ring of truth.
That right-wing coalition is now led by a charlatan whose greatest gift is persuasive communication by appealing to our lowest instincts. He is also good a gaining financial support from those interested in maintaining their own positions financial advantage. Not all of them may love in this country
Form where did all the money to finance Reform's incredibly successful campaign come?
Whether Sir Keir Starmer survives as Prime Minister or not,the Labour Government with its massive parliamentary majority should waste no time in imposing the strictest possible rules for donations to and the financing of political parties.
The rich and unaccountable should not be allowed to use their money to poison the electorate.
I am reluctant to accept that we are really a nasty people - but we are easily led astray.
Reform’s rise has come from tapping into divisions that have been deepening for years. Social media ‘silos’ make this even sharper. We are increasingly living inside echo chambers where anger is amplified, ‘others’ are blamed, and complex problems are reduced to simple villains. That dynamic rewards parties and personalities who are good at confrontation, provocation and scapegoating, not necessarily those who can govern.
ReplyDeleteBut now that Reform controls more councils, the dynamic changes. Campaigning and governing are completely different skill sets. Winning arguments online or on TV is one thing, running services, managing budgets, negotiating with unions, and making trade‑offs that affect real people’s lives is something else entirely. Councils can’t be run on slogans. They require competence, patience, and the ability to solve problems that don’t have easy answers.
Nigel Farage has been extremely effective at shaping debates and dominating media space, but it’s also true that he has never had to run a public service, manage a large organisation or deliver day‑to‑day governance. That’s not a personal attack, it’s simply a factual distinction between political communication and political administration. And it’s not unique to him. Many politicians across parties are skilled at winning arguments but have limited experience of actually delivering solutions.
The test for Reform now is whether they can move from oppositional politics to operational competence. It’s one thing to point at problems and say “this is broken”, it’s another to fix them under financial pressure, legal constraints, and public scrutiny. Once you hold power, even at local level, you can’t rely on blaming ‘others’ or the system. You have to show you can run things.
As a slight aside, it is starling that voters in places such as Barnsley and Wakefield, whose councils are now under the control of Reform, could countenance voting for a
party to the right of Margaret Thatcher. Her name, and to an extent that of the Conservative Party, remains unmentionable on the streets of Castleford, Featherstone, Hoyland, Darfield and Great Houghton. Perhaps this is evidence that the far left and the far right do eventually meet at the edges.
The test for Reform now is whether they can move from oppositional politics to operational competence. It’s one thing to point at problems and say “this is broken”, it’s another to fix them under financial pressure, legal constraints, and public scrutiny. Once you hold power, even at local level, you can’t rely on blaming ‘others’ or the system. You have to show you can run things.
DeleteThe thing about this is that (thanks in large part to the majority of local council spending nowadays being mandated by central government) most councils are badly-run and have been for decades.
The rubbish is piling up in the streets in Bristol and Birmingham. Northampton has issued a ‘we are bust’ notice twice, Croydon three times. All over the country roads are disintegrating. And all that before Reform even arrived on the scene.
If Reform took over previously well-run councils and everything fell apart, today would be one thing. But that’s not the scenario we’re talking about, is it? Reform is coming into a situation where nothing already works.
What will really matter is not whether Reform can fix it — they can’t — but whether they can sell the story of why they can’t fix it, because of all the mandated spending on social care and SEND and ridiculous Equality Act-driven backdated pay awards, and how truly fixing things requires them to be put in charge in Westminster so that they can make the needed changes to the primary legislation which is screwing up local council budgeting.
If they can do that, they stand a good chance of getting into power at the next general election (either alone or with some kind of electoral pact with the Conservatives, perhaps CSU/CDU style).
It is already well known why they “can’t fix it”. Social care remains the biggest millstone for councils, a problem that national governments keep kicking into the long grass. Reform offer no solutions to that. George Osborne’s austerity measues blew massive holes in council budgets (ironically for the owner of this blog during coalition with the Liberal Democrats). Boris Johnson said he would fix social care “once and for all” and did precisely nothing. The idea that Reform or a right wing coalition would sort social care/council funding is for the birds. Look at what they’re doing in areas they already control and get back to us. Kent County Council, for example, is a clown show.
DeleteOne of the reasons we are relying on immigration is our ageing population. Reform’s answer to this is? Deportations.
It is already well known why they “can’t fix it”. Social care remains the biggest millstone for councils, a problem that national governments keep kicking into the long grass. Reform offer no solutions to that.
DeleteThey offer no solutions — yet. But given national governments of both Conservative and Labour have failed to solve it after promising they would, if they do come up with a proposed solution (eg, a compulsory insurance system - real insurance, not ‘National Insurance’ which despite the name is a tax to fund current spending) then they at least have not blown their credibility like the other parties have.
One of the reasons we are relying on immigration is our ageing population. Reform’s answer to this is? Deportations.
Well yes. On this they are absolutely right. Because research is showing what everyone knows intuitively: that if you solve a manpower shortage by bringing in low-paid foreign workers, then you have to deport those workers before they become old and eligible for benefits from the state. Otherwise they cost the treasury much more, totalled over their lifetime, than they save in the years when they are working cheaply.
Oh, and you absolutely cannot let your cheap foreign workers bring in unproductive dependents, because that multiplies the drain on the treasury as those dependents cost money (for education in the case of children, care in the case of the sick and elderly) without even providing the cheap labour benefit of the principal cheap foreign workers.
DeleteSo yes you absolutely do have to deport the unproductive dependents ASAP, as well as the workers once they have reached the stage where they begin to cost the treasury more than they have saved.
How do you propose to solve the manpower shortage? Who’s paying the higher wages to wipe backsides in nursing homes? Ask the people of Barnsley and Wakefield if they’d like a few more percentage points on the social care precept in their Council Tax bills or if they’re willing to forego 22% of their earnings for an American style insurance system. (National Insurance is currently around 8% of UK earnings). Are you willing to pay more?
DeleteHow do you propose to solve the manpower shortage?
DeleteA very good question. I wouldn’t say that foreign workers can’t be part of the answer, and I don’t think Reform UK would say that either, it’s just that the deal has to be significantly different and the conditions significantly tighter than in the past:
- visas strictly time-limited, with no or very limited possibilities for extension.
- no route to ILR, and people on those visas are banned from claiming asylum
- absolutely no dependents
- no recourse to public funds, without any of the current loopholes, eg imminent destitution
- if they lose the job they were brought to do, the visa ends immediately
- (very important) actual enforcement of deportations at the end of the visa, with severe punishments (as well as deportation) for overstayers.
Basically the deal has to be, and credibility be, that you come here to work in the care sector for five or ten years and then you go home, no exceptions.
But that’s only part of the answer. Another part has to be to force the domestic workforce back to work. Since the end of the lockdowns there has been a massive increase in the proportion of the population who report as economically inactive, ie, not in work or looking for work. A lot of those are on long-term sickness benefits. Now some of those are genuinely physically unable to work; but a lot are self-reporting made-up diseases like mental health. They need to be told that if they are physically able to work they must work or starve. That would expend the labour pool.
if they’re willing to forego 22% of their earnings for an American style insurance system
DeleteAre you not aware that there exist insurance systems other than the American-style one, and some of them are significantly more efficient than the American one?
This is hilarious. You really think the only possible reasons someone might vote for either the Conservatives or Reform is that they are (a) racist or (b) hoodwinked?
ReplyDeleteI can sure you that there are millions of people who vote for both of those parties who are neither racist nor stupid nor gullible.
But, so long as you can’t empathise with your opponents you will continue to lose, so do please keep on with that.