On the morning of June 24^th a graphic ran on social media showing the past referendum results from across Europe where the electorate had voted against EU plans only to be told to vote again or, worse, were completely ignored. Remainers shared this post as a beacon of hope that all was not lost, not realising they were highlighting the very democratic deficit that made us campaign so hard to leave.

The people of Britain have every right to fear Brexit will be overturned, The EU has ‘previous’ on this (which is putting it mildly). From Denmark’s verdict on Maastricht and the French/Dutch dismissal of the EU constitution and right up to Greek people’s rejection of bailout terms in 2015 the European Union has consistently displayed a flagrant disregard for democracy. The EU’s endemic lack of democratic accountability is well known but to ignore the direct democracy of countless referendums exhibits a particular brand of contempt for the people.

While The Daily Mail may have been wrong to point the finger at the high court judges who ruled parliament must be consulted on Brexit they were right to voice the concerns of millions that this is the beginning of the guerrilla war the ‘Continuity Remainers’ are mounting to ensure we stay in the shackles of the EU.

When the last few months have seen a relentless narrative of, “thick, racist plebs can’t be trusted to vote,” when senior figures from the Tories, Labour, Lid Dems and SNP are openly discussing a second referendum or even ignoring the result altogether and when the leader of the opposition says he is prepared to lead his party against article 50, is it any wonder that Brexiteers smell an establishment stitch up?

As establishment archetypes go you can’t get much better than a high court judge, the epitome of a detached elite who know nothing of the lives of the 17 million people who voted leave. Any tabloid writer who missed that one would be ashamed of themselves. Every pantomime needs a villain and this lot brought their own costumes!

While the Left wing media continues to give unreserved airtime and column inches to unrepentant remainers I would argue the Mail has a duty to continue representing the well-founded concerns of millions of Leavers. Continued public pressure is the only way to guarantee Brexit. We’re not crackpot conspiracy theorists – we’ve seen the mothership land before.

The Remainers seem to be under the illusion that if we can just climb into a customized Delorean and travel back in time to June 22^nd everything will be OK again. They are completely blind to the consequences of us failing to leave the EU, how dangerous it will be to once again ignore the views of a section of the population who feared they would never be heard.

We now live in a different country, and not the proto-third reich that the Guardian would have you believe, but a country where there is real hope for the first time in a generation that politics actually works. The consequences of ignoring the result for constitutional democracy in the UK could be absolutely dire, worse than the most absurd, fantastical predictions the Remain campaign made about the aftermath of brexit. The genie has been released and it will not go back into the bottle.

The only thing worse than the Remainers getting their own way is the silver medal that they are content to accept. There is quite obviously a concerted effort to ensure that if we cannot remain they will make Brexit as difficult as possible, hoping to create catastrophic economic uncertainty so in a couple of years they can smugly claim, “Told you so!”

No matter how messy Brexit gets Anna Soubry, Nick Clegg and David Lammy will still enjoy lives of plenty with big houses, German cars and foreign holidays. The fact that they are happy not only to ignore the views of ordinary people but also to jeopardise their futures simply to defend their own egos and reputations is abhorrent. I dearly hope their constituents remember this.

Martin was a lifelong Socialist who saw the error of his ways, making a sharp right turn. Follow him on Twitter: @righturn79

 Follow @con4lib on Twitter

Like Conservatives for Liberty on Facebook

The views expressed in this article are that of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Conservatives for Liberty

I must confess I was never the biggest Game of Thrones fan. I thought it was all right and I kept up with it so I could avoid the social stigma of being the only person in the office not to have seen it – Westeros Leprosy if you like – but that all changed after I binged on the last series this week (we probably would have managed it over a couple of nights had it not been for our own little Wildlings demanding bedtime stories).

Season 6 blew me away and not just the epic scale of it, which is pretty much guaranteed given the enormous budget. Acting, costume, direction, make-up, location, lighting, photography, script, plot – everything about it oozed quality and the emotional engagement with the characters was like nothing I had experienced since The Sopranos.

As I sat drained and exhausted after episode ten I couldn’t help but ask one simple question – How did telly become so damn good?

21^st Century TV has just been immense. The Sopranos, The Wire, Breaking Bad, Dexter, Borgen, The Bridge, Lost, True Detective, Fargo, Stranger Things, Six feet Under, Deadwood, 24, Boardwalk Empire, Band of Brothers, Arrested Development…I could go on (No, I really could. And every one of you has just thought of five shows I’ve forgotten about).

And it’s not just high profile imports – Peaky Blinders, Life on Mars, The Office, Peep show, Shameless, Humans, Top Boy, Sherlock, Luther, Misfits, The Inbetweeners, This is England, Rev. and Broadchurch all show that the Brits can hold their own too.*

The sheer volume of high quality, prestige dramas on offer at the moment is absolutely mouthwatering. We never have to tolerate crap again.

And, let’s be honest about it, that’s exactly what telly used to be – crap. Our eyes glaze over and we go all nostalgic for the TV of our youth but the fact is most of it was bloody atrocious. Can you believe that 20-30 years ago Bruce Forsyth’s faux exasperation at a tattooed sheet welder’s inability to throw a clay pot was considered prime time entertainment? Not to mention the excruciating sight of 60 year old Barbara from Pontefract scoring 19 on Bullseye (and narrowly missing the studio lights with her 3^rd dart).

And soap operas! Jesus H Christ! How much of our lives did we waste watching soaps? Up to 2 hours a night and double that on a Bank Holiday. I would rather spend Christmas day at Jeremy Corbyn’s for a nut roast followed by selected readings from Das Kapital than watch 4 hours of Soaps. Even with John McDonnell getting lairy after finishing his contraband hip flask of Bells.

I know it wasn’t all bad but even the good stuff was tainted, compromised in some way, and never as good as you remember it. I Claudius was a masterpiece but most school productions have better sets, if it wasn’t Muhammad Ali or Billy Connolly every Parkinson interview was basically the same (“Tell me about your roots Orson/Bing/Emu”) and I dare you to try a Morecambe and Wise Christmas Special on youtube. You won’t last 10 minutes.

So what happened? How did we go from The Queen Vic to Queen Cersei? From Jack and Vera to Tony and Carmella?

Once again it is the wonder of the market.

The truth is that back then we simply had no choice. With only three or four channels you were a prisoner to the whims of a handful of producers. The highest viewing figure in UK TV history for a non-live event is for a 1979 episode of the appalling BBC Sitcom To the Manor Born. Nearly 24 million people endured the season one finale, in no small part due to the fact that ITV was off the air due to a lengthy strike.

In an age of Online, On Demand, downloading and streaming, where the viewer is in command of a limitless catalogue of entertainment, poor quality will no longer suffice. Our living room sofas have now become X-Factor style judging panels where we can instantly call time on anything that doesn’t cut it and bring on a fresh competitor. Now that’s what I call Power to the People!

The TV companies have responded to this devastatingly responsive market place by increasingly the quality of their product immeasurably and as budgets have increased the creative prestige and artistic influence has risen accordingly. In the 80s Nick Nolte and Jeff Bridges turned down Miami Vice as TV lacked the remuneration or the kudos of the big screen. Now Hollywood struggles to prise the talent away from our beloved box. Indeed this market is so receptive that HBO were able to produce Game of Thrones season 6 before the book was even written. Such is the power of capitalism.

So if a Lefty ever tries to portray Corbyn as a bearded Daenerys Targaryen, storming into the capital to free the slaves, remind them that without capitalism the Khaleesi would be nothing more than a figment of George. R. R. Martin’s imagination.

*No, I didn’t forget Downton Abbey. Downton is the exception that proves the rule.

Martin was a lifelong Socialist who saw the error of his ways, making a sharp right turn. Follow him on Twitter: @righturn79

 Follow @con4lib on Twitter

Like Conservatives for Liberty on Facebook

The views expressed in this article are that of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Conservatives for Liberty

One of the most commendable reasons that many gave for voting Leave was that in a post brexit Britain government could hack away at the litany of regulations that shackle British enterprise, the quicksand in which so many small businesses are lost before they ever have a chance.

The ‘Revelation’ that Andrea Leadsom once urged the government to, “Scrap the entire burden of regulation on micro-businesses with three employees or fewer,” is a perfect example of the pro-business attitude that is crucial to our future outside of the EU. The left is obviously frothing at the mouth at the prospect of a potential Prime Minister ripping away maternity, pension and minimum wage rights. But I say that these ideas should form the basis of a nascent discussion about how to we can help business to thrive in a post-EU Britain.

The benefits could be enormous. How many businesses could finally breathe without the restriction of overregulation? How many shop-front sandwich bars could then compete with Starbucks? How many micro-pubs could undercut Wetherspoons? How many ‘Mom-&-Pop’ bakeries could hold their own against Greggs? These proposals could herald a new era of competition and choice like never before, arresting the sorry decline of our high streets and reinvigorating the communities they support. Imagine an explosion of enterprise and commerce right on your doorstep! A ‘Big Bang’ for the common man.

Regulation always favours the big boys, the corporations rub their hands with glee at every EU diktat knowing it’ll wipe away another layer of competition and ensure their continued dominance of the market. Leadsom’s ideas offer hope to thousands of small businesses across the country who are eternally discouraged from expansion due to the fear of opening the Pandora’s box of employment law, not to mention those that never get off the ground in the first place – all those hopes and dreams that end up in the bank manager’s shredder.

In the absence of a minimum wage we could finally have a real labour market in which people are paid an appropriate price for their worth, rather than everyone being put on minimum wage straight out of school and being stuck there for fifteen years. Innovation would be a necessity for recruitment, profit share agreements and performance related pay are but two ways that employers could attract staff. But also consider the allure of being present at the start of a new venture and helping to shape its future. And remember the more successful these employees make the company the sooner these firms will have to increase their workforce, they would therefore be earning for themselves the more generous employment rights of larger companies.

There is obviously the possibility of exploitation but these issues can be mitigated by the policy’s implementation. To soften the predictable cries of ‘Modern Slavery’ from the left anyone refusing a job with a micro-business could not be liable for benefits sanctions. But also if we were to think openly about deregulation what about loosening the legislation on cash-in-hand payment for casual and part time labour? Does anyone really have a problem with someone on the dole doing Friday night in your local chippy? Legalised but ‘Undeclared’ work could fill the void in many household budgets that further welfare reforms may create and I for one would much rather people supplemented their dole with work rather than trawling through the Citizens’ Advice leaflets to see if they can claim even more, especially when being in some form of work in the first place raises the chance that they will achieve full time employment. This could be a real, organic ‘Welfare-to-Work’ programme.

It is the self-employed who dragged this country out of recession, the courageous entrepreneurs who often sacrifice much at great personal risk to strike out on their own. Their contribution to our country, in economic, social and cultural terms, is unfathomable. They are the backbone of our nation – the drive, the vision, the confidence, the creativity, the accomplishment to which we all aspire. They deserve every support possible and they have every right to expect it from the Conservative party.

Whatever the result of the leadership election Andrea Leadsom has displayed the radical vision that is needed to take advantage of our new-found freedoms and to give employers and employees, consumers and producers, the dynamic, flexible marketplace that the country craves. Regardless of the outcome of the leadership contest her voice should be heard in the future.

Martin was a lifelong Socialist who saw the error of his ways, making a sharp right turn. Follow him on Twitter: @righturn79

 Follow @con4lib on Twitter

Like Conservatives for Liberty on Facebook

The views expressed in this article are that of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Conservatives for Liberty

In November 2007 my grandmother died a protracted, agonising, unnecessary death on ward 11 of Mid Staffs Hospital. My mother, appalled by the ‘Care’ that she received, placed an ad in the local paper appealing for anyone else who had suffered there. Her phone did not stop ringing for 3 days.

She has spent the last 9 years fighting for patient safety and opposing the culture of denial and obfuscation at the heart of the NHS. There have been three inquiries into Mid Staffs, each uncovering grievous errors in patient safety; none of which would have come to light without my mother’s intervention. She has made an indelible difference to patient safety in the UK and her efforts were recognised in 2014 when she was awarded a CBE for services to the elderly.

Her journey has not been easy. From the very beginning she has faced denial, disbelief and open hostility – such is the lot of anyone who dares to question the eternal virtue of ‘Mother NHS’. She has been hounded in the street, trolled viciously and incessantly online by both the general public and medical professionals, suffered hundreds of nuisance callers and been spat at in the supermarket. This November it will be nine years since my Nan’s death and my mother still has to clean faeces and graffiti off her gravestone.

Such is the level of devotion to the NHS, such is the illogical loyalty that both staff and public feel towards it that any criticism is brutally suppressed. This defence mechanism is ingrained into its very nature. Every story in the press that is anything but a paean of praise is immediately written off as right wing propaganda, part of the mainstream media conspiracy rather than the general public’s right to a transparent and reflective service.

When the Healthcare Commission published its initial report into Mid Staffs the trust’s first response was not to rectify the problems but to spend £1,000,000 commissioning Birmingham University to compile a rebuttal.

One million pounds! One million pounds that could have been spent on doctors and nurses, crutches and casts, Scalpels and forceps. Even a new coffee machine in the canteen would have been a better deal for the public than a study that refuted the claims of another Taxpayer-funded body, in turn making it even more difficult to highlight poor care through the haze of institutional ambivalence.

I understand my family has a unique experience of the ‘Cult of the NHS’, but it is an increasingly common one and if just one person has to go through this, it is one too many.

Healthcare should be about the patient… and nothing more. While we have a venerated NHS this is impossible. The institution always comes first. It is too monolithic, too omnipotent for its identity ever to be subordinated to the needs of those it serves. In its current guise there will always be fanatics who will never admit to shortcomings no matter what evidence is put in front of them, ‘NHS Daesh’ who will never allow the truth to censure their ideology. In this culture true patient-centred care might as well be a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

Countries with systems based on universal health insurance do not experience the same problems. In France, Germany, The Netherlands, Belgium, Australia and Japan healthcare is not politicised and treatment is widely regarded as superior. An insurance based system healthcare costs as much as it needs to and is not constrained by the political tennis match that sees budgets ebb and flow, forcing the NHS into a permanent state of inadequacy, struggling to deliver 21^st century services through a process of rationing that has changed little since the 1950s. It is interesting to remember here that while the Left regards Europe as being more socially progressive and compassionate than the UK, and are willing to hand over sovereignty as a result, they see Europe’s preferred form of healthcare as nothing more than the machination of satanic capitalists.

Of course the Labour party will do everything in its power, legal or otherwise, to prevent this from ever happening. Privatisation is the dog whistle they have been blowing since the 1970s and there is no way they will allow their ballot box trump card to be removed from the game.

This battle will not easily be won. We are confronting the full weight of the Labour movement and the public opinion it has manipulated for decades. When it finally comes the denouement will make the miners’ strike look like a teddy bears’ picnic. But it is a struggle we can no longer avoid.

We all have a duty to challenge the preconceptions of socialised medicine and to increase awareness of the superior alternative. Those who can see the folly of our current system must do more to turn public opinion against it.

Conservatives have traditionally been coy on the topic for fear of reprisals at the ballot box, only daring to mention the dreaded ‘P’ word amongst close friends behind firmly closed doors.  But our reticence plays into Labour’s hands, easily construed as a hidden agenda. The left has owned the narrative on healthcare for far too long and it is time we had the courage of our convictions to speak freely and openly about the benefits of privatised healthcare.

So the next time a colleague starts talking about how wonderful the NHS is, don’t stare at your shoes, mumble and change the subject. Speak up, speak out and fly the flag proudly for the death of the NHS.

Martin is a lifelong Socialist who saw the error of his ways, making a sharp right turn. Follow him on Twitter: @righturn79

Follow @con4lib on Twitter

Like Conservatives for Liberty on Facebook

The views expressed in this article are that of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Conservatives for Liberty

Do you remember the British police state of 1998? Do you remember churches, mosques and synagogues being boarded up? Do you remember the closed, juryless courts arbitrarily condemning people to death by hanging? Do you remember Angela’s Ashes tossed onto towering bonfires? Do you remember policemen beating teenagers for listening to Oasis?  Do you remember the places in your town where you weren’t allowed to go? Or the people you weren’t allowed to mix with? Or Employ? Or marry?

No, neither do I. In fact the country I remember in 1998 was doing pretty well as far as human rights were concerned and a large chunk of the world, including some cultured corners of Europe, admired the UK as a beacon of liberty and justice. The howls of indignation from the Left at the idea the Conservatives are ’Scrapping human rights’, a laughable charge which cedes almost supernatural power to the Tories, is both inaccurate and dangerous and just another example of Left wing scaremongering from a fragmented, bruised opposition that simply seeks to smear rather than engage in a process of debate.

The Conservatives are not scrapping human rights; they are trying to replace the 1998 Human Rights Act. For the vast majority of British citizens the Human Rights Act made absolutely no difference to their life, in either a practical or theoretical way. Our rights were protected in innumerable ways in English common law and whilst it may have made sense to bring those rights together the sweep of the HRA was far too broad and the terms far too vague for it to be the conclusive piece of human rights legislation that it was intended to be.

It also inadvertently created a constitutional anomaly. As a product of the nebulous nature of the HRA it places judges above politicians in terms of actual law making. The ambiguity of the HRA means that their judgments are not simply establishing precedent, they are in fact defining, even shaping, law. Some may think it a good thing that there is a body above politicians, a higher authority supervising their dirty, grubby world but never forget that we elect MPs to make the laws we want and a chap in a funny wig should never be able to breach this time-honoured custom.

You are worried about elitism? The Conservatives are just a bunch of toffs who don’t understand the real world? Compared to the collective bevy of high court judges the Tory front bench looks like the cheap seats at the World Darts Championships!

I don’t need the ‘Usual suspect’, left wing ‘Slebs’ telling me how wonderful the HRA is, I understand it has protected and defended some of the most vulnerable people in our society. This is to be applauded and celebrated.  But if we are to accept individual cases where the act has worked well they must also accept the individual cases where the act has failed.

It doesn’t take Sherlock Holmes to uncover cases where the HRA has protected terrorists, violent criminals and sex offenders in a way that is wholly incompatible with British values. With this in mind surely it is right to seek to improve our human rights legislation so we can achieve the dual aims of protecting the weak whilst dealing firmly with the social deviants who have abused the very notion of civil liberties.

The HRA is not a sacred cow; it is a curate’s egg and we cannot continue to pretend that it is a flawless piece of legislation and carry on as if everything is ok while the will of the people is ignored by judges protecting the rights of those who have completely disregarded the rights of others.

Scrapping the HRA will be no mean feat; especially when the SNP plan to do all they can to once again defy the democratic will of the British people, but the imperfections of the act are so glaring it would be negligent not to even attempt to improve on it. The blind support of the left for the HRA is even more alarming when you consider they are not prepared to enter into any debate to create a superior alternative. This displays the sanctimonious arrogance that the left is increasingly comfortable with and provides further proof of just how far their beliefs are from the beating pulse of our nation.

Martin was a lifelong Socialist who saw the error of his ways, making a sharp right turn. Follow him on Twitter: @righturn79

Follow @con4lib on Twitter

Like Conservatives for Liberty on Facebook

The views expressed in this article are that of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Conservatives for Liberty

On Wednesday Andy Burnham stood up in the commons and delivered what the Mirror described as a, “Passionate and visceral,” speech in response to the Hillsborough inquest verdict. He decried the way a public body had sought to defend itself rather than the people it was intended to serve. He denounced how the media was used to smear the victims and their families, convincing millions of their guilt. He condemned the absence of accountability and justice. He commended the relatives who had fought for so long against seemingly insurmountable odds and an overwhelming culture of disbelief and denial.

At least I thought it was Andy Burnham, but surely it couldn’t be, could it? Surely it couldn’t be the same Andy Burnham who was instrumental in the Labour Government’s attempts to cover up the Mid Staffs Hospital scandal? Surely this wasn’t the Health Secretary who refused to grant a full public inquiry into the events at Mid Staffs, preferring one held in secret to spare the Labour party’s blushes? Surely it’s not the same man accused of leaning on inspection officials to prevent problems coming to light? Surely not the same man who claimed Stafford was an isolated case and ignored the warning of Professor Sir Brian Jarman, former president of the BMA, about potentially similar mortality rates across the country? Surely it’s not the same Andy Burnham who refused to meet with the CureTheNHS victims’ group, preferring instead to call the police on a group of vulnerable, mostly elderly people suffering in silent agony the loss of their loved ones?

The reason Andy Burnham can stand up in parliament and speak with such authority about government cover ups is that he was at the centre of the biggest one this century. Mid Staffs is the 21^st century’s Hillsborough – A public institution prepared to do anything to defend itself, twisted media coverage, relatives who faced a wall of indifference and disdain and who still wait for justice. Two working class tragedies with power and influence on one side and ordinary people on the other.

That a man so tainted by involvement in institutional wrongdoing should act as a spokesperson for the victims of Hillsborough is an insult to everyone who died that day in Sheffield.

It is the careerist opportunism we have come to expect from Burnham, attempting to rebuild his reputation by associating with such a noble, finally vindicated cause, deftly positioning himself to take over when Jeremy Corbyn finally realises he’s really just an old man who escaped from the day centre.

Should we really be surprised? The man will say or do anything for power, as evidenced by his derisory attempt to talk about immigration during the Labour leadership contest. I imagine him performing bushtucker trials on I’m a Labour MP, Get Me Out of Here! Ant & Dec would announce, “So Andy for 500 more votes in Leigh, which could offset boundary changes, you need to eat a kilo of Kangaroo shit.” He’d be finished before they started the clock. And he wouldn’t miss a crumb.

The most galling thing is the way he has tried to cast himself as a working class lad, a class comrade with the victims at Hillsborough. A life spent at Cambridge and Westminster does not a working class hero make and while his accent may deceive make no mistake – Burnham is no man of the people. He’s about as working class as a bottle of Pinot Grigio. The man has a thousand faces which he chooses to deploy depending on the necessity of the situation.  Exigency rules Burnham, not principle, not belief, not social justice and certainly not class.

Many left wing commentators have sought to group Hillsborough together with the events of the Miner’s strike, the Wapping print dispute, the Stockport Messenger dispute and even the Jimmy Saville case to paint a picture of Thatcher’s Britain as a police state controlled by a powerful elite. They conveniently forget that under Labour we not only saw the Mid Staffs disaster but also the phone hacking scandal and the death of David Kelly. Those in power will always be tempted to abuse it, that is why they must be open to public scrutiny, and it is for this reason we must never allow Burnham to walk away from his shameful past.

Martin is a lifelong Socialist who saw the error of his ways, making a sharp right turn. Follow him on Twitter: @righturn79

Follow @con4lib on Twitter

Like Conservatives for Liberty on Facebook

The views expressed in this article are that of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Conservatives for Liberty