r/tories

In my opinion, Thatcher's proposed poll tax would have been so much better than the current system.

The way I see it, services provided by the council are split into roughly 2 categories:

1. Services which benefit everyone more or less equally, eg filling potholes or bin collections. It doesn't make sense to make the better off pay far more for this just because they happen to have more money - otherwise why not do the same for things like the BBC? Of course everyone recognises that with that, everyone gets the same product, so everyone should pay the same.
2. Services which only benefit the poorest, eg disability/SEND needs and, worst of all in my opinion, council housing. Just think: those who either pay their own mortgage or rent have to pay a tax to subsidise those who get it for free! (However I agree that some genuinely vulnerable people need social housing). Making the richest pay the most for something that only the poorest get access to is a double-whammy of unfairness, in my Thatcherite opinion.

Also, just think how absurd it is for young ppl deciding whether to move out of their parents' home: they will have to pay council tax if they do, despite having far less disposable income! This isn't to say they should be exempt, just that the current set-up makes zero sense.

I'm sure many on here will agree with this, but what are everyone's thoughts on this?

I know kemi is quite popular but I was wondering if anyone had someone else they would prefer as leader. Personally i would want either sir Geoffrey Cox or Jacob Rees Mogg as the leader.

I want to know how it could impacted the UK today, how many seats in 2024 election and positions on bi-election they'll going to win, and also the way they're going to govern?

I don't mind admitting that the Covid madness - with its complete lack of respect for people's personal freedoms - has scarred me politically. It made me lurch to the right and I am a (very unenthusiastic) Reform voter largely because of the fact they (or their previous incarnation) were the only party arguing against the draconian measures.
I like a lot of what Kemi has to say, principally about personal freedom and personal responsibility, but I cannot ignore the fact she voted in favour of Covid vaccine passports in December 2021.
So, the question is, would she, and any Tory government, still impose the suppression of society on us all under the same circumstances* ? And does she regret voting in favour of vaccine passports in Dec 2021 (which was so late in the pandemic that it was totally unnecessary anyway ! ).

* i.e. a theoretical future virus with a less than1% death rate and, just as significantly, is not indiscriminate.

Bought Journalists, common reform voters, political commentators are all pushing this narrative that Kemi would eventually fold to Farage and form a coalition.

It’s becoming increasingly clear that a party who were eager to see Tories downfall just a year ago, are now hoping to form a coalition.

As their populist influence slips away and Kemi’s reputation in Parliament slowly solidifies, Farage’s camp and the media connection he’s coerced into bed, are all interrogating Kemi every chance they get to consider an “inevitable” coalition.

They are a laughing stock that Kemi keeps on exposing.

Any Tory member that continues to fall for this charade should be purged out of the party, weak-minded and easily influenced by the loud mouths in the room.

Given it’s a quiet Sunday afternoon, I thought it might be interesting to word vomit a few thoughts on the current Tory/Reform news and in so doing, maybe create some food for thought!

Tl;dr: a pact would overwhelmingly benefit Reform if successful, massively put off Reform/Tory voters, is shortsighted if Reform fails, ignores history and policy differences, galvanises the left, and is generally a lazy solution.

Once again, the spectre of a mythical Tory/Reform pact has emerged - conveniently when Reform is on a slight downwards trajectory, and Tories on a slight upwards one. The main arguments for this are, as far as I can see, two fold:

1. A Tory/Reform pact would stop a left-wing coalition of getting in.

2. Reform and the Tories share a lot of policies/instincts - namely those to do with immigration.

The first argument is, I think, stronger. There is evidence already from Caerphilly, Gorton and Denton, and now Makerfield, that what you might dub “the left” (rightfully including the Lib Dems) are willing to work together to prevent Reform from winning through tactical voting. More accurately, left-wing voters are willing to vote for any party which stops Reform. This helps explain why the Labour/Lib Dem vote in Caerphilly and G&D as well as the Green/Lib Dem vote in Makerfield collapsed.

The argument goes that this will happen writ large in the next GE, whenever that is. I think that is highly likely at this point in time. As a result, it could be argued that if the Tories/Reform did the same, then the “the right” could win instead and stop what I am sure would be a terrible weird lefty coalition government. This has been called “unite the right”. Nonetheless, this is not without issues.

Firstly: a pact would MASSIVELY benefit Reform as, let’s be honest give the current polling, the vast majority of seats to be stood down would be current Tory seats/areas. As a result, Reform would win a big majority and have no need for the Conservatives once in power. Given I am sure a big Reform majority would also be terrible for this country, that’s not an ideal outcome. (I will not go into why I think a Reform win would be terrible here, as that is a separate argument). As the result the question becomes: why would any Tory sign up for a deal so massively against their long-term interests?

Secondly: as Kemi has pointed out, voters are not football cards to be traded. Just because someone votes Reform, does not mean they’ll vote Tory and vice versa. This can be seen most acutely in the Red Wall and Wales - voters that would never (or very rarely) vote Tory are nonetheless happy to vote Reform. Conversely, those London-based Tories, or Tories in the Home Counties are more likely to switch to Lib Dem, or not vote at all, rather than vote Reform.

This would, in essence, damage both parties - both potential Tory AND Reform voters would be put off voting if they know the OTHER party is involved. If you vote Reform, you vote Reform because THAT is who you want to vote for - and same with Tory voters. I know, for a fact, (because I am one) that there are Tory voters who would not vote at all in the next GE if a grubby deal is done with Reform that puts Farage in No.10. If that means the Conservative Party slides into irrelevance, so be it. I’d rather we go down fighting, rather than betray those that genuinely believe in the Conservatives.

Thirdly: a week is a long time in politics. If you’d said a year ago that Reform would have slid to within 5 points of the Tories (and even being beaten by Labour in some polls), and that Kemi would be the most popular party leader, you’d be called mad. But that is what has happened. How do we know this time next year Reform could be ever lower? Do we really want to tie our mast together with another ship that could very well be sinking? Especially as it may damage the brand of both parties. Moreover, Reform has shown itself to be pretty amateurish (see candidate vetting) - which makes sense given how new they are. Inviting that kind of chaos in is asking for trouble.

Fourthly: the history between Reform and the Tories. It would be an understatement to say there is bad blood between the parties. Reform is on the record saying they want to destroy and/or replace the Tories. How exactly would a deal work in that context? Would voters be expected to ignore all the mud slinging of the last few years? Reform voters would likely find this especially unpalatable given Farage and co have been particularly disparaging of the last few Tory governments and the so-called “Uni Party”…which Reform would now be joining.

Fifthly: policy differences. Whilst on immigration the Tories and Reform are broadly aligned, otherwise the picture is mixed. Both parties want to reduce welfare by getting people off benefits, but that’s a change from the previous Reform stance on the two child benefit cap. Reform has also indicated it would be open to nationalisation - not exactly Tory aligned there. What about defence? Or foreign policy? Or health? Reform do not, as of yet, have any individuals in those roles. As a result, they have no coherent policy ideas in these areas - how exactly could a deal be done when we do not know what they think? What if a Reform defence spokesperson is anti-NATO or anti-Ukraine? Does Reform want to increase defence spending, and if so, how?

In addition, Tory and Reform voters have different priorities. Those Reform voters in the north may want better public services, re-industrialisation, and are not as concerned with raising taxes and a bigger state. Conversely, Tory voters down south may want lower taxes, and a smaller state - and are less fussed about public services. The only thing that really unites voters is: less legal/illegal immigration. These are broad strokes, but my point is: you cannot assume all Tory/Reform voters all want the same things.

Sixthly: a united Right would galvanise the Left even more in the face of a new threat. This would make tactical voting even MORE likely. With the Tory/Reform voters now also potentially not voting because of general anti-deal sentiment, then the dreadful Left coalition could win even more.

Seventhly (and mercifully finally): uniting the right is not the answer. As Kemi has said, and I am paraphrasing: it’s not about uniting the right, it’s about uniting the country. When did we stop trying to convince people to vote for us, and instead just pointed to the other lot and shouted “they’ll be worse!”? That’s how Labour won the last election, and look how it has worked out for them. The answer is not a back room deal because we can’t be bothered to figure out how to convince people to vote for us, and on the contrary, actively encourage them to vote for another party (a party that has said it wants to destroy us) because that’s easier than hard work. If that is the case, then frankly we deserve to lose.

I have no idea how the next election is going to play out. It’s possible a left-wing coalition will win, and will probably collapse quickly because the constituent parts realise the only thing that actually unites them is “Reform bad”. It’s possible Reform will win big, and then realise that governing is hard, thankless, and requires extensive political experience - the kind they do not have.

However, whatever happens, I want the Conservative Party (as small or as large as it turns out to be) to be able stand proud and state that people voted FOR them, their ideals and their policies - and not for some shady, shortsighted deal.

(Here ends the incoherent rantings. If I’ve missed any points, or you agree/disagree, let me know!)