“I felt I could make a difference. “ – an interview with ThreeCommas

Photos: Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley campaigns for U.S. Senate  seat | Politics | stltoday.com

In an exclusive interview with the Telegraph, the LPUK’s newest Deputy Leader has dived into the issues that matter to him and on his future plans for politics . Up first was the rather obvious question of what made him join the libertarians in the first place

What made you join the LPUK in the first place?

Growing up in Manchester I always had a keen interest in politics because of how they affected my family and the people around me. I always felt that to truly benefit the people a government should cut red tape, keep taxes low, and focus on the issues that matter most to the people. These values aligned greatly with the LPUK and once I joined the party I felt right at home with the wonderful people inside the party. Before my election to be MP for Manchester, the seat had long been held by parties on the left-most notably the Green Party. I know that people were feeling let down by the Greens and parties on the left in my home town and I felt I could make a difference. That’s what led me to lead a grassroots Libertarian campaign in Manchester.

Where on the political spectrum would you place yourself?

I’m not the biggest fan of the political spectrum because I believe it tends to divide people and make politicians become entrenched in their views rather than try and reach bipartisan solutions. At the end of the day, we have so much in common rather than what may divide us politically or ideologically. That being set I am most aligned with a Libertarian Individualist mindset. I want a small government that emphasizes individual freedom through its policies.

What made you run for the Deputy Leadership of the LPUK? Was this your first attempt?

This wasn’t my first race for DL, I ran once before and lost a close race. I think that race helped prepare me for this one and people had more confidence in me as a result of that. What made me run is that I believed I could help the party write a new chapter in our history. So far we have always been in opposition or a junior partner in government but I think as the nation realizes the two-party system has failed them they will support the LPUK. As DL I wanted to lead the party there and I was able to win the support of my fellow party members who believed in me as well.

Where do you see yourself in the next 10-20 years given your rather quick rise in politics?

I entered politics because I wanted to make a difference for my home and help the country find its direction. I’ll continue that fight for progress as DL and certainly as long as I am an MP. That being said politics not an easy job and so I hope that in the next 10 to 20 years I can be retired from politics in good conscience and that I was able to create some of that change. I would ideally like to be as far away from Westminster as possible and spent my time with my kids and hopefully grandchildren as well.

If you somehow became PM but could enact one policy , which one would it be?

An issue I have long been passionate about is justice reform. Thousands of people every year are affected by justice system whether it’s interactions with the police or the courts. Currently, as it stands there’s a number of issues that I would like to address such as prison reform, case overload, and more. Reforming the justice system to make sure we have a functioning system while at the same time protecting the rights of all is not an easy task that can be done in a day but if I were Prime Minister I would certainly be able to lead a substantial effort to make a difference.

Where do you see Libertarianism in Britain going in the future?

Going forward I think the future of Britain is Libertarianism. People have already began to see that the old two party system which has dominated British politics for far too long is broken. The results at the last general election only confirmed that fact. As we head into the future I hope to see renewed support for the LPUK and our core values of individual freedom and keeping the government off the back of ordinary folk. I think that libertarianism will be embraced across the UK and I hope to lead the LPUK so we can serve the country as people see our vision for this great country.

Thank you, that’s everything we have time for today.

Telegraph constituency polling 10/21/2020

1. Somerset and Bristol – Libertarian hold

The seat of the long-time LPUK Leader and Deputy Prime Minister /u/Friedmanite19 appears to have taken his message to heart as should an election occur today Friedmanite would win his seat with almost 44% of the vote alone up from 37% in the previous Sun constituency polling and with well over 50% should the Conservatives endorse the incumbent. This seat is as safe as it gets as barring a concentrated effort by both the Opposition and the

Conservatives to unseat the DPM our experts do not believe it is possible for the Libertarians to lose this. Of note however is the polling of the PPUK, which puts them safely in third place in this seat above both the Labor and Liberal Democrats. LPUK hold

2.Sussex –  Libertarian hold

Sussex is an even safer Libertarian safe seat, which shows no signs of flipping any time soon with the incumbent Minister of State for School Standards /u/CaptainRabbit1234  seeming unbeatable come election day, garnering over 56% of the vote and bagging the seat LPUK for several terms to come.

What is interesting though is the performance of left-wing parties within this seat. Left-wing voters within Sussex prefer either the more moderate Liberal Democrats or the hard-left solidarity with both parties outpolling Labour at 10 and 6 percent respectively. LPUK hold

3.Essex – Conservative Hold

The seat of the now notorious Chief Whip of the Blurple coalition /u/BrexitGlory. He appears to enjoy a rather large lead of almost 16 points ahead of the Labour party and there seems to be no real challenge facing him. In comparison with the last polls support for Mr. Glory has – more or less remained steady while support for both Labour and the LPUK has fallen by 7 and 11 points with support being more or less distributed among the smaller left-wing parties and Coalition!. All in all, barring a strong  Labour with support from the smaller left-wing parties it seems like BrexitGlory can enjoy not only a good drink but also smooth sailing through the next general election.Conservative hold

4. Birmingham Solihull and Coventry – LPUK lean

The seat held by the former Foreign Secretary and current Liberal Democrat Foreign affairs spokesperson /u/Model-Willem is the first truly marginal seat in this set of constituency polls. As of today, the Libertarians have a polling lead in this seat , however, the margins of error within these seats are relatively large and thus it’s hard for pollsters to accurately predict which of the two parties is in the lead.

It is also worth noting that both Solidarity and Coalition have also been doing quite well in this seat and thus in a general election scenario it’s likely that the endorsements of these two parties could determine the outcome of this race. Possible Libertarian Gain 

5. Leicestershire  – Conservative lean

A seat currently held by Conservative /u/JDeany02, with a relatively strong Conservative lead of over 6% ahead of the Liberal Democrats, with Labour at a distant third. The telegraph predicts this to be a narrow Conservative hold. Conservative hold

6.Lanarkshire and the borders – tossup
This is  a three-way marginal seat, with a story to boot. As of today it is held by the junior Labour MP /u/yimir_.  Currently   the Conservatives are ahead however their lead is quite small and could easily be overturned by either Labour or the Libertarians given they could secure the support of moderate swing voters that may make or break a run in this Scottish seat.

Smaller parties however find themselves in a less than desirable situation in this seat as none of them appear to have a realistic chance at winning this seat – too close to call with a slight conservative lean

7. Overall polling

In this set of polls, the Libertarian and Conservative Parties maintain their majority quite easily with Labour and the LibDems battling it out for the third place,however, the Liberal Democrats come ahead by almost 2%. If such polling holds up at the national level then the Labour Party will truly be in trouble, due to the party’s ever-narrowing support base and Solidarity’s aggressive push for dominance on the British left.

Minor Parties appear to more or less remain constant, with the Progressive Party gaining 2% in this polling and the DRF being all ,but wiped out, owing to the seat selection favoring seats predominantly in the East of England that favor the PPUK and the LPUK. Solidarity seems to have suffered in this polling, although this could quite easily be attributed to the seat selection at play as well. All in all the incumbent Conservative-Libertarian coalition is popular with the voters and is cruising towards re-election, while a left-wing government appears more distant than ever…

The left is wrong about Channel 4 – opinion

Get in touch | Channel 4

The left is wrong about Channel 4 – opinion 

It is often the argument of the left that privatisation of Channel 4 as a supposedly ‘healthy’ entity makes no sense, that privatisation will end the edgy alternative content the channel produces. Yet, what these arguments miss is that a debate ought not to be framed in the terms of whether the channel ought to be privatised or not, but whether there is a good reason to keep it within the hands of the state at all. 

Why? Because the very same principle applies to the rest of the economy and our broader political systems.. Government ownership has never been the default option even on the fringes of hard left British politics. Any proposed nationalisations, like for instance the nationalisation of British Steel have some sort of reason, such as to protect  jobs or supposedly improve workers rights. The same principles ought also to apply to Channel 4 which, despite the cries of many on the left, is in a good financial shape under the commercial model, with a surplus in the millions.

According to its 2018 annual report C4 is already running a 5 million surplus and that number is likely to grow over the next several years. On the other viewership figures have been steadily declining from  11.4 per cent in 2010 to 10.9 per cent in 2014.

Channel 4 is already exposed to  commercial risks, that is it operates under a for-profit model but invests all of that back into the Channel meaning that there are no tangible benefits for the taxpayer. However it also relies on ad revenue to fund it and unlike other larger mobile broadcasters could potentially face severe financial hardships should a downturn in this market occur. A company or investor with deep pockets could alleviate that concern and provide much needed investment to expand and revitalise the network. A feat that is simply impossible under the current ownership model without funds being transferred from the Exchequer and consequently taxpayers’ pockets. 

A private Channel 4 would avoid such an issue and would benefit greatly from vertical integration with a larger broadcaster such as Viacom and would be far more resilient than it is under the status quo.

It is also worth noting that C4 is also not the most efficient of broadcasters as, according to the former Chief Executive of Channel 5 David Elstein, savings of between 130 and almost 200 million pounds could be made within Channel 4 without impacting the quality and funding of programming.

Many on the left have also decried privatisation by claiming that a privatised C4 would face major cuts to programming or would otherwise lose its character. This is a fallacy, as under the current privatisation bill, the public remit is to be retained and,thus, Ofcom would have powers to protect such a remit. Furthermore there is little to no incentive for any potential buyer to weaken the Channel 4 brand as the last thing investors would want would be to decimate the brand of C4 and potentially jeopardise their multibillion investment.

There is also the question of whether the remit even fit for purpose in its current form as according to Mr. Elstein : “The only formal remit it has is to broadcast four hours of peak time news per week, which it has done since the day it launched … and to ensure that 35 percent of its commissions come from outside the M25. That is all it has to do. There is no money attached to those obligations. Channel 4 spends £50 million a year on news and current affairs. If it spent less, nobody could do anything about it. If it cut it in half, nobody could do anything about it.”

A potential sale could perhaps be used to strengthen this formal remit, by re-introducing certain quotas or requirements for the broadcaster to produce and broadcast minority content. Something which many on the left of the House at least claim to support. Yet these very same members also wish to see the rather lacklustre remit upheld .

An argument also made against the privatisation is that to make way for profits and dividends cuts would have to be made to content spending.  This is the assumption made by many of those opposed to the privatisation. Is it true however? The vast majority of potential buyers already operate on small profit margins of several percent and there is nothing to indicate that a privatised Channel 4 would not behave in a similar manner .

Such a possibility is also acknowledged by Channel 4’s own report on the issue as the potential case 3 with a 20% increase  in overall content spend and projected growth in revenues with a different  scenario assuming a bleak 44% cut to UK content spending with broadly similar revenues

This scenario however  assumes that the government would deliberately weaken or abolish C4’s remit and that a potential buyer would actively pursue cuts to content and thus short-term gains.Both of these assumptions are lofty at best as the government has not removed the remit and could seek to strengthen it in the future. Cuts to content spending are also questionable as large enough savings could already be made by improving the administrative efficiency and utilising synergy strategies.It is also worth noting  that several of the potential purchasers do not issue dividends at all.

As of today the  privatisation bill is guaranteed to pass and it may well be the beginning of a new and better Channel four with a stronger remit and larger viewership.


 Brooks, G. Barwise, P. (2016) The Consequences of Privatising Channel 4, London: Channel 4.

 Elstien, D. (2016, March) Channel 4: the case for privatisation, Retrieved from: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ourbeeb/channel-4-case-for-privatisation/

 Elstien, D. (2016), A privatised future for Channel 4? Chapter 2: Government position and ownership models, London, House of Lords.

Politics of the mob- why the government should not cave into the Nature Revolution demands opinion

Throw the Book at the Rioters - The Bulwark

It is not unusual for disgruntled voters and activists to protest a particular government policy or a controversial event. In fact the right to assembly is one of the single greatest democratic rights we have as British citizens, further guaranteed by the article 20  of the universal declaration of human rights. 

Article 20.

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.”

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

What happens however when we see a peaceful assembly devolves into a violent stampede? When elected politicians are being physically assaulted by extremists in a bid to terrorise the government into backing their policies? The fact that Nature Rebellion are protesting is trying to be used as an actual argument of substance in our parliament and this is shocking. Let me be clear members of the opposition can say we sicken them, they can get arrested and support throwing eggs at people they don’t agree with but this government will not bow down to intimidation. 

Throughout the debate I was rather shocked to see several high profile Opposition spokespeople including the principal speaker of the green party and the now infamous ChainChompsky of Solidarity attempting to push the demands of the NR movement in an effort to make the case against the government’s bill. 

What I found particularly revolting about these remarks is how easy the Opposition were willing to embrace the questionable rhetoric and actions of the Nature Revolution protests when it suited their agenda. Their supposed willingness to allow a relatively small and well-organised group of 18 thousand to dictate public policy against the wishes of almost 51% of registered voters voting for the current government.

Let us not forget that the supposedly “terrified” protestors have attacked the Justice Secretary , repeatedly insulted and attacked our police officers who were simply doing their job. There were also the destructive NR policies that would see tremendous harm inflicted upon our economy and the communities , harm which the hard-left have at least partly embraced. In an era of growing international tensions and the ominous threat of climate change it is simply disheartening to see the left and the hard-left to abandon the opinions and interests of millions of hard-working Britons in favour of pleasing an increasingly violent and vocal minority , especially when that appeasement comes at the price of the wellbeing of their own constituents.

In a democracy we have an elected government and we do not make policy based on hard-left protestors with ridiculous demands. The left is trying to console themselves after a historic election defeat and think that a few thousand extremists gives them a mandate to inflict their radical agenda. I can assure members it doesn’t because when push comes to shove our elected MP’s will be there to ensure we have a sane climate policy based on science and what the country want instead of a few protestors.

Tales from the backbench – a sit down with /u/ Dominion_of_Canda

Canada PM Stephen Harper announces cabinet shuffle - The Economic Times

The Telegraph had a sit down with one of the LPUK’s most influential backbenchers and former UKIP leader /u/Dominion_of_Canada to discuss how  the political landscape has shifted since the UKIP days

You are quite an experienced politician with a career going back to the UKIP days ,while also serving as the leader of UKIP , do you think that the Libertarians have filled that niche that UKIP used to hold?”

 I believe the LPUK absolutely has and indeed gone above and beyond. The LPUK has held firm to a staunchly pro brexit position and has shown itself ready to make a success of brexit. I feel my brexit positions fit right in with the rest of the party, ready to uphold our sovereignty while keeping positive relations with the EU. Successive governments, specifically those the LPUK have been part of, have ensured brexit went ahead. The party’s positions are quite similar as well, but have refined them in a way UKIP had not gotten the chance to do. UKIP’s existence was based around brexit, regardless of it’s other policy positions. The LPUK has been able to prioritize those policy positions without the branding problem UKIP faced. Similarly to UKIP, the party contains a mix of libertarianism and conservatism, united around patriotism and the desire for a strong economy. I feel right at home here

“With the resounding LPUK victory and a promise of more to come , do you think that a government consisting purely of Libertarians is feasible?” 

Such an outcome is definitely possible, and looking at these recent polls I have to say it’s looking highly likely in fact. The LPUK has a great deal of momentum and I believe the next round of national polls will show us continuing our pre-election surge! Fried has done an amazing job leading the party to its current position and with the other parties suffering defections, an LPUK leading the polls I think is very likely to happen either now or very soon. The Conservatives have managed to form a government on their own with the type of seat numbers the LPUK may soon be expecting, an LPUK Prime Minister is on the horizon, and personally this makes me very excited!

 What’s your stance on it? the gradual moderation of conservative politics and what appears to be a shift to the left under the Clegg gov?

 The Conservatives are of course free to shift their ideology to reflect the membership but who can say if that is the reason or if it had been reflecting a top down change. Regardless, I don’t think the shift to the left in favour of the Liberal Democrats has achieved anything or paid off for them. The Clegg government didn’t do them any favours in stopping Labour from supporting a vote of non-confidence, and only sought to alienate the LPUK at the time as well. Now the Lib Dems have lurched leftwards and themselves are appearing less willing to work with the tories. Really I don’t think those moves have been worth it, and I believe they should stick with their true allies on the right where we can get conservative policy done..