The outcome of the 2024 General Election precipitated the current crisis on the Right of British politics: How can the Right now win the next General Election? That however is a tactical problem; the strategic issue is : What exactly does the Right stand for; what exactly should it seek to implement ?
On June 23rd 2016, the British electorate told the world it wanted to be British, not European; it confirmed the Brexit Referendum result in a General Election after 3 years of Remain Establishment resistance to Brexit: the electorate gave Boris Johnson a decisive, unexpected 80 seat majority in the Commons on the strength of his promise to get Brexit done. The Right is duty bound to implement the logic of Brexit. The British Constitutional palimpsest must be restored to its original state: the alien overwriting of European innovation erased.
Membership of the European Convention on Human Rights and the associated Court at Strasbourg must end. Every constitutional reform since 1997 must be repealed. Devolution, the Supreme Court, and the piece-meal, fiddling with the House of Lords. Ditto the 1998 Human Rights Act. Ditto the 2010 Equality Act. All the associated Agencies created to embed the new culture in our administration of government must also be abolished.
The submission of the historic British (essentially English) Constitution to alien, ideologically inspired and unrealistic European innovation must end. Such submission was unconstitutional in the first place.
To achieve this, the Right must renew its faith in that tradition. It must alter the paradigm of debate and talk common sense. It needs the courage to wipe away Woke infiltration and to restore the vital Christian ethos. It must reject the constitutional disaster of the last 3 decades and grasp the four fundamentals of Faith, Family, Flag, and Freedom – liberty according to our heritage in Magna Carta and the constitutionally critical 1689 Declaration of Right.
The Church of England is a cornerstone institution in our historic constitution. It has a vital role to play. Its identity and function is to be the Church of our historic nation. But will it again believe in the God of the Bible, and desist from philosophical theology and atheistic woke culture? Will it restore the 1611 Authorised Version of the Bible and the 1662 Book of Common Prayer – the spiritual foundations for the 1689 Declaration of Right and subsequent landmark reign of William and Mary? Will it teach us to worship God as revealed in the Bible ? Will it stop appeasing the whims of fallen humanity?
Thou shalt have no other gods before Me…
Family is the bedrock and building block of the nation. The Right must promote Family and condemn outright every law, agency or policy acting to destroy it. Parents must retain the final say concerning the welfare of their children. Responsibility and Duty must displace the mentality and priority of extremist individualism.
To do that we need to cultivate a Christian mentality in society, especially in our schools. Comparative theology and other religions may be appropriate studies at university; they have no place in schools. Take France. When Secretary of State for education in 2023, Gabriel Attal stated in the Assemblée Nationale that the purpose of French schools is to produce citizens of the Republic. Why should we be ashamed to give British children the benefit of their national heritage ? It is their birthright. Christian culture and family values must determine the moral climate and practice of Britain to save it from prevalent degradation.
Moral truth must inform our laws and our culture.
So too must the Christian attitude of grace. A pre-eminent Christian ethos can establish the proper demarcation between what is the province of Society and State, and what belongs to the domain of individual private life.
Teleology is strategically vital. The Materialist teleology dictating the western worldview and ethics today is egocentric: its anarchic consequences are evident in increasing crime and unbridled greed. The teleology of the Christian paradigm, however, teaches that we shall answer to God. It engenders responsibility and accountability. It is civilising. In this paradigm the individual is expected to take responsibility for their life, and to be mindful of how their actions impact others.
Issues such as homosexuality or induced abortion, then, are not matters for criminal law. They are not matters for the State to Judge. They are matters for personal conscience and decision, as too are philosophical and religious beliefs.
Christianity provides society and government with a clear moral framework combined with a tolerant, open culture to encourage responsible attitudes. The individual will answer to God on the Day of Judgement. A society expressing the grace of a loving and moral God must take such an attitude while upholding a clear moral code for public policy.
I don’t believe in either abortion or homosexuality. Nor do I believe in Philosophy or any other religion. I believe wholeheartedly in Christianity: a gracious God calls us to obey and to take responsibility in our own lives.
As a minister of God, the State must conduct itself according to God’s rules and temperament, not according to the anarchic ambitions of the sinful heart. The State is duty bound to wield the sword of justice: victims and society must be protected and the criminal mentality punished – might is not right! Zero tolerance and tough sentences defend the victim and discipline the criminal. Good order is the foundation of all good things wrote Edmund Burke.
But Officialdom in Western society today holds an alien and unrealistic Creed. It exhibits a religious zeal to police individual conscience. Such was the mindset of James II. The Christian reign of William & Mary turned its back on that, setting England irrevocably on the path to tolerance and liberty. In the decades following, Frenchmen marvelled: Voltaire praised English liberty and Montesquieu cited England as an example of the healthy constitutional balance between legislature, executive and judiciary.
But in Britain today, these strategic, historic truths are censored. The 1689 Declaration of Right should be front and centre in our legal, historical and political understanding. But British universities and government have evidently buried this document as inconvenient and irrelevant.
The historic nature and identity of Britain is Protestant Christian: not Islamic, Atheist or anything else. That Christian tradition should be the norm. It should again mark out Britain as distinct from non-Christian nations. Tolerance and forgiveness; care for the vulnerable; compassion, not condemnation. Love your neighbour as yourself. Jesus Christ is our model.
The traditional British conception and practice of freedom predates all European Declarations of Rights. That tradition ensured our rights, not via a deified State condescension, but as an inheritance no government may destroy. Our rights originate in the repeated affirmation of Magna Carta in the 13th century and the definitive affirmation of our national constitution by the Declaration of Right in 1689. That point had to be made explicit to the encroaching, domineering European Project in 1988 when Margaret Thatcher made her Bruges speech on the 300th anniversary of the deliverance of England from a tyrannical, ideologically intolerant Executive. In the face of ideological disruption, that speech asserted what really matters and what cannot be surrendered under any circumstances.
The Right-wing deals with the world as it really is; it eschews reform according to artificial, innovative, ideological imperatives. 1689 was an adjustment to guarantee traditional customs, religion and freedoms going forward. The Right reforms to conserve. So, the Right today must not only restore the historic British constitution but make it relevant going forward – relevant to a free people who, by definition, must consent and approve. Radical change is therefore urgent.
A wholly locally financed county and borough government would account correctly to its electorate. The Privy Council and its judicial committee are opaque and unaccountable: abolish them and transfer their duties to a dedicated Parliamentary committee. The House of Lords should be a streamlined, 300 seat chamber renewed by one third every 5 years from party lists according to the percentage of votes cast for each party in the previous General Election. In addition, Anglican Bishops would continue to sit ex officio but without voting rights.
The Executive should be constrained by defining its income constitutionally. Taxation should be simplified and limited to an income tax, a transaction tax, and a local levy to finance all local government spending. Rates capped at 10%. All government borrowing phased out over 10/20 years. A free and responsible people should dispose of their own income, and the State which serves them constrained constitutionally to prevent the ideological excesses we are all so familiar with.
A sovereign United Kingdom helped frame post-war Treaties on European Human Rights – treaties now highjacked by Ideologues to Political Ends. It was a freedom loving Britain which stood against Fascism, Nazism and Communism. The Common law and Westminster parliamentary model have proved an incalculable blessing to millions around the world. It was the British tradition of freedom and justice which the young people of Hong Kong were desperate to retain in 2019.
These are the terms and convictions on which the Right must now talk and act.
the substance of this post was submitted as an article to The Critic magazine on August 22nd 2025 but I have had no response. I publish an improved version here because of the significance of the content. I reassert the classic understanding of the foundations of the English-British Constitution which are being ignored in all current discussion; I make radical and ideologically coherent proposals about taxation; I propose a completely new idea for the reform of the House of Lords – a proposal which is virutally costless yet simple and democratic: that the composition of voting members of the House of Lords should reflect the proportions of the vote for each party in previous General Elections (Independent candidates treated together as a party for such purpose). Who knows, the Critic may yet be prepared to give this post the publicity it surely merits.
GRC Friday 3rd October 2025
DEUS ERGO SUMUS 