The Conservative answer should not be a return to liberal complacency. Nor a race to outflank Reform on rhetorical hardness, because they will always go further. In this immigration debate, the Conservative answer should be stronger integration.
Britain needs a more muscular vision of identity rooted in commitment. Pride cannot reside only in the vestiges of cultural triumphs abroad. It must inspire loyalty at home too.
Breaking the doom-loop of depressing political narrative – harnessed and driven by parties’ agendas- to look different, sound different and offer something new, would, in fact, be a welcome change.
The UK risks becoming an AI laggard, with less advanced models available for British consumers. Ironically, one of the biggest losers will be the creative industry, which is already relying on cutting-edge AI to produce world-leading films and music.
As China and Russia and India build closer links in Britain there are more pressing matters than strategic relevance and a coherent China policy: ministerial musical chairs, another governing party talking to itself, and the ‘Mandelson Distraction’.
Britain once led the world in industry, science, and sport – not by accident, but through ambition, struggle, and a culture of excellence. That culture is now dead. We have built a society that fears competition and therefore avoids it at any cost.
We need a new planning deal for rural Britain. One that supports gentle density, enables business-led development, and recognises that real countryside isn’t a disused car park in Zone 6, immortalised by the CPRE as if it were the Garden of the Hesperides.
So far the international reaction has been relatively muted – probably because of a lack of “bandwidth” and this has allowed the regime to consolidate its power.
Even if Reeves U-turns and announces the funding tomorrow, Britain would not get its exascale computer up and running until 2027 at the earliest. In the meantime, the world’s tech heavyweights will surge ahead and Labour Britain becomes a footnote in the future of digital development.
If the government wants to boost productivity and reduce welfare bills, the answer is right in front of us: support people aged 55–65 to stay active and employed. The gains are economic, social, and personal.
Rather than banning new types of sword, we need to wean ourselves off these blunt parliamentary instruments.
Industrial electricity prices rose by 48.7 per cent between 2010 and 2021. Commercial sector prices rose by 34.3 per cent. Household prices rose by 38.4 per cent.
The effect on the culture of the House deriving from the involvement of the hereditary peers, of all parties, should not be underestimated.
This is not a dispute on policy but on priorities, and I suspect Thatcher herself might tell you that the contemporary Conservative version of the ancient Japanese rice festival is emblematic of the wrong one.
Next time you hear “I’m never buying an EV” or “you won’t catch me driving one of those plug-in things”, you might be listening to an enlightened futurist, not a frustrated Luddite.