Which means they won’t get it then! 🤣

adjust that camera's settings

… Then Vote: REFORM UK All the other parties have repeatedly failed to keep their promises to British citizens (especially about immigration number’s). 😡

Halal meat is not imported; it is slaughtered here in the UK by Halal Food Authority-certified abattoirs.

Are we really going to do the same for kosher meat too?

Great post 💪

Absolutely, only started listening to this one but so glad they have William on. He seems like a proper political leader.

I just have to stop thinking of morons such as the likes of Shirley Williams when I hear 'sdp'.

@@golfbulldog Unfortunately they believe in proportional representation.

​@@Ruda-n4hMost European countries use the system because it is the fairest and likely, best system in use for politics.

Met William at the NCF conference in Birmingham, he is a grand fella, in stature and mannerisms. Very thoughtful and intelligent. The problem I have with the SDP is this: I only have William to judge it by. The rest of any potential leadership could be crazy for all I know. I haven't seen any that spring to mind so far.

whilst advertising those crappy jobs as 'exciting career opportunities'.

Unfortunately people made the argument at the time but there was no means of stopping it. The Tory party are the party of the money power. It was Thatcher who freed the City boys to move money wherever they wanted around the world and it was Major who signed GATT into law paving the way for hyper-globalisation Teddy and Jimmy Goldsmith were the only two "conservatives" who spoke out against this. Teddy actually said in the BBC documentary "Icon Earth", "well, they'll say to the people of the Western world, we can make these products in places where people will work for 20, 30, 40 times less and we'll sell them in places where they'll pay very much more. So we don't need you. And we can't afford a welfare state and if you don't like it, we have a big police force"

Unfortunately they are trapped inside the NeoCon paradigm. From Ukraine ( a NeoCon backed coup ) to support for Zionism. But VERY good on economics and immigration

I think most of us are like that. The problem is the right worship the likes of Thatcher or Milton Freedman who have created many of the problems we suffer today! The modern left are progressives, not a socialist amongst them. Socialists wouldn't have the border wide open like we have today. The people they want to look after are those who rent property and sell labour, mass migration is only good for those who lease property and buy labour.

I believe "Reform" plan to stand a candidate in every constituency, which I personally think is a stupid idea, but I've read that that's what they plan to do.

⁠They should definitely run for every seat.Don’t want disappoint people. You will get to see the bigger vote if everyone gets a chance to vote.Cost money.Still.I think it is a good idea.

Very true. So did his brother Teddy.

The SDP are very much pro Israel

You will only split the vote!

@@saltburner2 Split what vote?

Vote for what you believe in.

@@peterchristian541 I am, for the first time in my life I'll be voting for something I believe in. I've joined the SDP, I'll be voting for the SDP!

​@@aitukI see them as the best option. Will they have candidates in all areas? Coulston speaks the most sense. He believes in the nation.

Unless in a key target Reform seat, why not waste your vote on SDP, get enough people to vote for Coulston led party. For once, let's vote for someone great rather than voting out of fear of avoiding something

I don't think that SDP is likely to win any seats as it's not popular enough in the main. I expect its vote share to increase but it doesn't have the popular appeal of Reform. Even Reform will struggle getting seats but I expect it might get a few regardless.

@@someguy7564 so let reform target a few key seats, but at least cite for SDP if you think they are the best and you are nitnin a key Reform targeted seat.

@@golfbulldog I think there is already an agreement that either party will not stand in seats the other is expected to do well in

@@someguy7564 thanks

M T was addressing the economic circumstances of forty years ago, regardless of whether or not she did so in the right way, is just history now

At least you knew she was in control!

@@simonstones1918 I have my doubts a person like her would want the job today

@@secretsteven4535 The economic circumstances did not require deliberating making millions of people unemployed and then blowing the North Sea oil money on social security payments for them to stave off mass violence. And then vilifying those same communities where drugs just so happened to start appearing - the money from which was laundered through the City I'm sorry it's not history, we still very much live with the consequences and we're going to find out the very hardest of ways when the s---t hits the fan with the countries where so many of our products now come from, especially medicines

@@simonstones1918 She put the banks in control

No politician who decries the emancipation of women is going to get elected. He did, however, mention the breakdown of the family unit as a key cause for concern.

@@unicron2109 If Western society eventually comes to its senses, there will be a time when politicians can be honest about the disaster that is feminism.

While I’d agree that the prevailing economic model has presented challenges in respect of family life, your claim that ‘emancipation of women’ is the ‘real’ (presumably sole) cause of ‘ruination’ sounds unhinged. None of us will be on board if what you have in mind is chattel status or coverture. Does your wife share your views, sir?

@rachLXXVII When you say "none of us", are you referring to you and everyone else? Do you speak for everyone apart from me? What I have in mind is the difference between men and women. This difference is best recognised, celebrated, and embodied in society by means of different roles. Your use of the word 'unhinged' is irrelevant where sober and rational debate is concerned. You asking me about what my wife (if indeed I have one) thinks about my views perfectly illustrates the difference I am referring to when it comes to men and women, particularly in the case of rational argument.

@@rachLXXVII People like him hate women having lives/ roles outside of housewife and childrearing. They want us back in the kitchen, just look at Poland and the US Bible belt.

Change to RESTORE UK

@@golfbulldog BETTER!

@@Excommunicated-ei1ep the reclaim, Reform and heritage parties just sound too "swivel-eyed" to actually be taken seriously. Coulston and his admiration for Singapore shows that he gets how tough a future leader needs to be. Singapore got battered into prosperity. Lee Kuan Yew was a tough bloke and said "no" many, many times to people who wanted to enjoy the easy life rather than live for the prosperity of the nation and the future citizens. This kind of conversation needs to be heard, I don't see Farage or anyone else on the established Tory Right being able to come up with this stuff.

​@@EJS1972he is on e verge of having a nationalist and socialist party... and we are close to names that can't be used... but there are aspects of that concept which are needed to Restore UK. Global free markets will sweep away any residual national assets unless we are careful.

@@golfbulldog I don’t agree with the “Swivel Eyed” Description of those other Parties, they’re just as Valid a choice as this party, because I’d sooner Patriotic British Voters, go Vote for this Party or those others? Than to go Vote, for either Team Blue or Team Red tbh? Which is also better than to go Spoil a Ballot Paper, at the Ballot Station…which is what I would do, before i ever Vote for ANY Pro-EU/WEF Political Party in 2024!

The issue with single families is that the last time this was a topic it was just the Tories needing a scapegoat because their spiv mates had pushed interest rates up. It became about single mums claiming benefits rather than promoting marriage and stable relationships. There were actual Right wingers who burst a blood vessel to defend men who wouldn't pay for the upkeep of their kids. All they actually did was make women with children poorer at a time when there wasn't enough jobs for everyone. It really was nasty and it's why they got the name the "nasty party"

They haven’t had any MPs so how could they have a voting record?

@@maxpatterson1699 Interesting......

Spot on.

Well she did, as no other politician would have tried to win them back with military force. In the long term it liberated Argentina from the Junta transformed the country and the Falklands too. What a bunch of bellheads those Argies were.

The Foreign Office had been trying to get rid of them for years and then her right hand man Nick Ridley went down there to tell the islanders they had to accept Lease Back and they sent him away with a flea in his ear. If you read some of the newer stuff that's been published it's pretty clear the British state knew the Argentines were preparing to invade and we even had at least one submarine offshore watching it all happen with an SBS team onshore who didn't take part in the Marines' heroic defence (contrary to the actual historical narrative they killed / injured scores of Argentines) So, it seems pretty likely that the State plus One Nation Tories were happy to see her humiliated by the invasion. It was probably only Sir Henry Leech who convinced her that the islands must be retaken otherwise the country's reputation would be finished. His personal reason for doing this was to save the Navy from the planned Thatcherite cuts. Re the 1983 election, it doesn't seem to be the case that the Tories got a post war bounce. More likely it was the case that inflation was coming down and the opposition was split between the most Left wing ever Labour government and the newly formed SDP

I could hear it fine! Turn up your volume.

Similar regarding social policy yes, though they have differing economics

Not on economics mate

You would need a major sense of national pride as part of the solution. Perhaps some economic partnership scheme for employees, like John Lewis? And pick leaders and managers who feel like they're spending their own money when spending tax money.

Energy should never have been loss making. Even though I'm a full-time capitalist (no bailouts), I agree with taking energy under govt ownership. You actually play smart. The Tories should have taken a stake in BP when the pandemic hit. It was dirt cheap. You keep the same management with market salaries which are high I'll admit. Full ownership would be profitable for UK Plc. Debt raised AAA all secured by the state. Safe returns for the general public to hold the debt. The aim is to secure energy, and that means having assets abroad. The railways are easy. The losses are larger in the private sector with twice the ticket price. Of course the Tories were very naiive when they sold off the real estate. Think Liverpool Street station etc. Personally I like William. He talks sense. It's only when you sanction Russian energy you end up shooting yourself in the foot.

Something like this maybe...You nationalise all the companies, break them down in to smaller companies that focus on specific things and then set them in competition against each other. Bonuses get paid according to how the company performs in relation to a minimum bar and the other companies across a series of metrics. Senior managements pensions need to be linked to the current and future performance with some clever math (basically it needs to be set to avoid people dropping in, squeezing the system for higher bonuses, then walking away before the xxxx hits the fan). Each company needs to allowed to fail.

The utilities are not the same as industry. The utilities, especially gas and water, were very well run. Look what's just happened with Thames Water. The Tories are quite happy for State owned companies to control our utilities so it's literally insane that money is leaving the country like that. Industry is a different matter but don't forget the City banks weren't exactly queuing up to invest. As for industrial relations - the unions have long since admitted they made huge mistakes.

@@jonathan5677 The problem you've got with no bailouts mate is the money power doesn't care about the "free market" when its their wealth which is imploding in value. We've doubled the national debt to prop up their paper assets and we've printed £885 bn in QE so the Hedge Funds and banks can buy up hundreds of thousands of properties.

No thanks - don’t want Thatcherite economics.

@@EJS1972 I dont think I could vote for any party that has the word "Social" In its title

​@@nw8000what if you thought of them as the National Democratic Party...with some aspects of social welfare and collective national ownership of iconic industries?

@@golfbulldog Then I would think of them as Commie Bastards

But are they a better party??

@@golfbulldog hard to say. Also depends who is standing. Will the sdp stand everywhere?

Because the system has decided Reform is an acceptable challenger to Labcon.

@@mrror8933 Perhaps. I don't have much time for Tice

That's Reform mate

It just means you’ve not been very politically informed! ;-)

@@barriewood9336 It is true that I only pay attention to the things that matter. Whoever William Clouston is he doesn't matter! 😊

I'd rather this man than the likes of Boris Johnson for example. I don't require my PM to be a children's party entertainer.

​@@jumblestiltskin1365agreed

We're not looking for a song and dance man, but someone who can get practical common sense things done. He's got more intelligence than 99% of the dullards in the Commons.

@@Ruda-n4h You're never going to knock down the red wall with a damp squib. What good is being intelligent if you're too boring for anybody to take notice.

@@bengray4149 That's a problem with our post war, pop culture. People don't have the maturity or attention span to take anyone in unless they;ve seem them on 'Strictly.' Clement Atlee was pretty boring and what 'charismatic' politician has ever been any good - 'Bliar,' Johnson.' A reckoning is coming.