What Do You Know About Your Political Representative?
I am writing this post from the perspective of a UK citizen, but the sentiments expressed are applicable to anyone who lives in a country where you have democratically elected local political representation. IE someone who is supposed to advocate on behalf of your community or for you personally as the duly elected political representative. Here in the UK, the country is divided into 650 constituencies, each returning one Member of Parliament. Irrespective of whether you voted for your MP or whether you support the political party that they belong to, they are obliged to represent you and advocate on your behalf, if you request it. Such is the relationship in principle between constituents and MPs in the UK. It is important to be aware that your local MP is not a delegate whose sole purpose is to represent majority constituency views. Under the UK political system, an MP makes decisions on behalf of constituents and can take a position counter to local opinion, if they feel that is in the best interest of the constituency.
I am writing this post from the perspective of a UK citizen, but the sentiments expressed are applicable to anyone who lives in a country where you have democratically elected local political representation. IE someone who is supposed to advocate on behalf of your community or for you personally as the duly elected political representative. Here in the UK, the country is divided into 650 constituencies, each returning one Member of Parliament. Irrespective of whether you voted for your MP or whether you support the political party that they belong to, they are obliged to represent you and advocate on your behalf, if you request it. Such is the relationship in principle between constituents and MPs in the UK. It is important to be aware that your local MP is not a delegate whose sole purpose is to represent majority constituency views. Under the UK political system, an MP makes decisions on behalf of constituents and can take a position counter to local opinion, if they feel that is in the best interest of the constituency.
Towards the end of 2021 our local MP and former cabinet minister James Brokenshire sadly died. Subsequently there was a by-election and Louie French was duly elected. Old Bexley and Sidcup constituency is considered a “safe seat” for the Conservative Party, although it should be noted that their majority dropped by 20%. This however is more to do with the electorate's dissatisfaction with the government and the state of UK politics, rather than a reflection upon Mr French. As an ex-councillor Mr French has already experience of local borough politics and it would appear, judging from his website, that he is primarily focused on addressing the needs of his constituents. He is currently campaigning for increased local funding and is against cuts to local services such as transport, healthcare and local policing. This is further reflected in his contributions to parliamentary debates which also shows an interest in animal welfare.
At present Mr French is a backbench MP and does not hold a ministerial position. Hence it is perfectly reasonable to see him advocate in such a practical fashion for the constituency that he represents. However, Mr French is a Conservative MP and as such is expected by default to vote with the government on any legislation they plan to pass. As a constituent of Old Bexley and Sidcup, I am curious to know what views Mr French holds on the major issues facing the UK at present. Although there is “government policy” and the official “party line”, there is not a consensus on taxation, public spending, Brexit and the cost of living crisis among MPs. The Conservative Party is currently rife with factions across a spectrum of right wing views. It should also be noted that in the General Election of 2019 the party effectively expelled all moderates and centrists. Hence I am keen to know where Mr French fits into this political landscape at present.
For the sake of transparency, I am not a supporter or member of any UK political party and vote tactically. I don’t subscribe to trite, blanket narratives such as “all politicians are liars” or “they’re just as bad as each other”. Such comments are designed to avoid any difficult thinking, to opt out of any responsibility as a voter and simply maintain the status quo. I am sceptical but not cynical and like logical, reasoned debate, driven by critical thinking. I despise the “footballification” of politics and blinkered tribalism. There are politicians that I admire and respect on both sides of the house, which reflects my own broad and diverse political outlook. Thus I want to know where Mr French stands on the UK Online Safety Bill, the Policing Bill, Brexit, trade deals, taxation, the current wave of strikes, the future of the NHS and much more. Because I’ve looked online and I can find little or no information regarding these points.
Louie French had only been a MP for 6 months last year, when Boris Johnson was ousted from office as Prime Minister. During the tumultuous events of last summer, I did not hear Mr French express any opinion on the matter. Was he unhappy with the PM’s conduct or did he see no problem at all? It is important to know because for myself and many other constituents, the PM’s behaviour was beyond the pale. Hence we expected some sort of indication of Mr French’s opinion. He has already said he has no intention of being a “career politician”, thus I see no reason why he needs to be deliberately ambiguous in what he says. One of the things that I dislike most about contemporary politics is the manner in which many MPs refuse to commit to any position or opinion, for fear that it may “come back to haunt them”. “Cakeism” is self-serving and a sad indictment of character.
And so we arrive at the point of this post. What do you know about your political representative? Because I believe if you are the right person to represent the needs of your local community at any level, then I think you need to be transparent in your views. I accept that someone can change their views and am politically and emotionally mature enough to see that as a positive thing. When facts change it is logical to change your mind. I will also concede that on some of the more “complex” political and social issues, it is a valid stance to still be “collating” your opinion. But I won’t accept that it is reasonable to willfully avoid expressing a view or an opinion, purely as a political tool and a matter of convenience. If an MP is effectively “too afraid” to say what they think, then perhaps they should reconsider their career. I for one would not want to be represented by such an individual.
Therefore I think it is fair to ask your political representative what they personally believe in, so you can assess them politically and get a measure of their character. I would also argue that you also need to know about their business interests and affiliations. Naturally, my outlook will put me at odds with current political practices. UK politics at times strives to exist separate from reality and observable facts. It tries to be everything to everyone, while simultaneously committing to nothing, yet claiming the exact opposite. Hence maintaining a coherent position is an anathema and political kryptonite. Yet that is what I and much of the electorate want. Because if you don’t say what you mean, how can you mean what you say? I shall monitor Mr French over the course of 2023 to see if he does express a view on anything other than his established brief. I may even ask him, as one of his constituents. Sadly, I don’t feel optimistic about the outcome.
Yesterday afternoon, Nigel Farage the Member of Parliament for Clacton and leader of the Reform Party, held a press conference in which he declared that he would be resigning his seat and thus triggering a by-election. He cited the following list of grievances that have led to him making this decision. That the Parliamentary standards investigations were being politicised, the media and other parties were conducting a coordinated campaign against him and that he had endured years of threats and physical attacks. He further asserted that his family’s privacy and safety had been breached as well. He finished by alleging that the political system was repeatedly changing rules to obstruct Reform and that he was the most attacked politician in the UK. Rather than be judged by the legacy media and the “establishment”, he would rather put the issue of his political integrity to the electorate of Clacton. He even offered to pay for the cost of the by-election.
UK Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer has resigned and intends to leave office before the parliamentary summer recess. By then Andy Burnham will more than likely be voted leader of the Labour Party and by default will become the new Prime Minister. Due to the current size of the incumbent Government’s majority, there is no pressing reason for a General Election that the UK’s right wing tabloid press is currently calling for. Whether this provides the Government with the reset they’re hoping for when Parliament reconvenes in autumn remains to be seen. With seven Prime Ministers coming and going in a decade, there are some serious questions to be asked about the current state of UK politics. However, the mechanics of contemporary politics, the decline of clearly defined ideologies and the people that seek elected office to be our leaders are only half of the problem. The other major impediment to the UK’s democracy functioning properly is the electorate.
Andy Burnham successfully won the Makerfield by-election yesterday, returning him to the House of Commons as a member of Parliament after holding the position of Mayor of Manchester for the past nine years. Prior to this, Burnham was Labour MP for Leigh from 2001 and 2017. He served in both the Tony Blair and Gordon Brown administrations and has held such senior governmental posts as Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and Secretary of State for Health. His return to Parliamentary politics is likely to result in a leadership challenge to incumbent Prime Minister Keir Starmer. When speaking after winning yesterday’s by-election Burnham spoke of “a final chance for change” the current trajectory of the present Labour Government. However, I don’t wish to focus on any of this at present. I am far more interested in the above picture, taken as the results were announced and what it says about UK politics.
The UK Government has formerly announced its intention to ban under-16s from using social media. This is due to increasing public pressure that “something must be done” about the perceived iniquities of many online platforms. However, as with most complex social problems of this nature, no one has any clear or practical ideas as to what that “something” is. It remains a nebulous, non-specific panacea and clearly someone else’s job to identify and implement. As ever, why choose a nuanced and multifaceted solution to a complex problem, when it is far easier and politically expedient to just “ban” something. The former requires effort and a degree of thinking. If such an approach fails it also means that those who came up with it now carry the can. The latter dumps the problem in the lap of various third parties, who can then be conveniently blamed when the ill conceived policy fails.
Every Thursday, Mrs P volunteers at a food bank that is run from a local church; Avery Hill Christian Fellowship. Today there was a shortage of staff so I agreed to help out. It proved to be an equitable arrangement as she collated the various orders and I packed the bags and took them to the respective clients. The food bank itself is organised and administered by the Trussell Trust, a UK based NGO and charity providing emergency food and support to people locked in poverty. It is open for 2 to 3 hours a week depending upon demand. During today’s session we served just six people. Some weeks its can be triple that amount. Upon closure, a member of staff from the Trussel Trust did a stock take and collated a list of what was needed. This is provided by various local church communities via parishioners donations, as well as local supermarkets who have an arrangement with the trust to provide surplus stock or good approaching the end of their sales window.
Under the First Past the Post electoral system, the candidate(s) receiving the highest number of votes in each constituency are elected. This system is used in the UK during general elections and in some local elections, such as those recently conducted in England. An alternative approach is the system of proportional representation, which aims to allocate seats in a manner that reflects the popularity of various parties. Both the Scottish Parliament and the Senedd in Wales employ systems of Proportional Representation. Historically, first-past-the-post has been seen as advantageous for the Conservative and Labour parties. It poses challenges for smaller parties whose votes are distributed evenly across different regions, making it difficult for them to secure seats. This dynamic effectively prevents potential competitors to the Conservatives and Labour from succeeding electorally. Consequently, due to this situation, voters may hesitate to support these smaller parties from the outset.
There are local elections being held across the UK today. Voters in Scotland and Wales will elect representatives to their respective national parliaments, while in England the voting is for local councils and regional mayors. These are the first major elections to be held in the UK since the 2024 General Election which saw the Conservative government of fourteen years, fall to the Labour Party. Midterm elections are often a litmus test for how the electorate think the national government are performing although local issues are also a major factor. The consensus among political journalists and commentators is that the incumbent government is polling extremely poorly and will subsequently face a backlash. In recent years the UK has seen a decline in traditional two party voting with Reform UK and the Greens gaining significant traction among the electorate. Hence today’s elections may well see both these parties make significant gains.
Our household is currently trying to reduce our monthly overheads in response to the ever increasing cost of living. April is not that far away and a great many service providers will increase their rates and tariff as the new financial year begins. Then there is the ongoing effects, both direct and indirect, of inflation to consider. Although the UK inflation rate is dropping, currently sitting at 3.4% in December 2025, food inflation remains higher at 4.5%. Being based in the UK, salaries and billed services tend to be administered monthly. You get paid usually at the end of the months and bills can turn up at any point, depending upon when you started a service. Any payments coming from central government, such as state pension or other benefits, are paid every 4 weeks. This means that there are 13 payments in a year. I thought it pertinent to clarify this point as other countries, such as the USA, favour a fortnightly financial cycle. Hence as a household we work around a monthly budget.
I don’t know if you have noticed that there are quite a lot of companies that have names taken from Tolkien’s Legendarium. At first glance, this seems innocuous enough. Tolkien’s writings grew in popularity over the seventies and eighties but since the release of the film trilogy at the start of the twenty-first century, his work has become more well known and been assimilated into our wider pop culture. Hence, it seems quite logical that a startup tech company, for example, would choose a name from his writings. No doubt the founders grew up reading The Lord of the Rings and are fans. That all seems plausible. However if you take a further look, it gets somewhat more complex. Here are four companies that have Tolkien based names.
“Managed decline” is a phrase that refers to the processes associated with the end of a specific lifecycle, with the goal of minimizing costs or other forms of loss. The concept originated in business where it referred to the management of companies and industries. More recently it is used in wider contexts. The concept gained prominence with regard to urban policy, particularly in the UK during the eighties when several major cities suffered economic and political collapse. Of late, the term has been applied to the UK, encompassing a systematic weakening of the economy, social structures, and cultural values, as well as its global political and diplomatic force. In each case, managed decline involves making strategic choices about resource allocation and accepting the consequences of those decisions. It is a complex issue with ethical and practical considerations, often sparking debate about the best way to address decline and reverse the process.
I still maintain a legacy presence on Twitter/X and I follow my local MP (member of Parliament) Louie French. It’s not something I especially relish as I am not a supporter of the Conservative party (or any other) and I did not vote for him in the last election. I just like to know what he is up to as he is the political representative for our constituency. As the Conservatives are out of power at present, to all intent and purposes, Mr French is a backbench MP although he has a minor position as Shadow Parliamentary Undersecretary (Culture, Media and Sport). However, with that being said he is hardly a key member of the shadow cabinet. Hence he focuses on constituency work and that which is generated by his shadow posting. He will also lend his voice, when required, to any major policy decision or statement made by his party.
Sunday 6th April is the start of a new financial year, here in the UK. According to data from numerous financial and economic institutions, an estimated million plus households will be facing annual increases of £400 to £500 as the proverbial “cost of living” goes up. Everything from Council Tax to Mobile and Broadband costs are being increased. Future cost hikes are expected in our energy and water utilities. As bills start going up across the country today, average wages remain stagnant. Middle-income and poorer households have been worst hit by this wage related issue. Hence the tabloid press have labelled the start of the new financial year as “Awful April”. Hyperbole aside, this is a very real issue which due to its complex, global causes, doesn’t have a quick fix solution.
I consider myself to be a grounded, rational individual. I am not excessively emotional. I like facts, data and reason as opposed to hyperbole, rhetoric and bluster. That being said, I am aware that the world is an imperfect place. Opinions are often not based upon empirical fact but personal perspective. Hence many people experience reality differently to me. They are driven by their feelings and other factors. However, despite these differences in philosophy, for most of my life the world has remained functional and over time slowly improved in subtle ways. Deference to expertise, a sense of community and basic pragmatism meant that people broadly pulled in the same direction. Of course there has always been dissent but it has been within a stable system. However, of late I feel that this era is now finally over. Things are no longer stable. We live in an uncertain world.
Newspapers were an integral part of UK culture in the seventies. During the week, they were delivered prior to going to work, so you would peruse them over breakfast. Alternatively you would buy one en route to your place of employment and read it on the bus or train. In a world before 24 hour, rolling news, they were the primary means of keeping the public abreast of events and as such, enjoyed a substantial audience. On occasions a newspaper story could make or break a political career or launch a crusading campaign to address a social ill. Newspapers were a force to be reckoned with and therefore a significant part of the socio-political landscape. However, due to a strong union presence within the workforce, the UKs newspapers often lagged behind other industries with regard to the technology.
The First Past the Post (FPTP) electoral system used in the United Kingdom, as well as in several other countries such as the US and India, has both advantages and disadvantages. However, despite being a simple and straightforward system it has been abandoned by many democracies in favour of more proportional and equitable methods. The primary criticism against FPTP is that it allows a minority of the electorate to return a majority government. Since 1935, there have been majority governments 90% of the time, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. At present, the current UK government has a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share.
Politicians have a distinct way of talking when being interviewed or giving a press conference. It is often characterised by a strategic use of language, centred around rhetorical devices, persuasion techniques and a careful framing of messages. Direct answers to questions are usually avoided, with tangential responses being preferred. Opinions and specific perspectives are frequently presented as facts. There is also a propensity to focus on “problems” and apportioning blame, rather than “solutions”. It’s important to note that the use of language in politics is a complex and dynamic process influenced by various factors, including cultural context, media dynamics, and the evolving political landscape. Different politicians may employ different communication strategies based on their individual styles and objectives. Here are some key aspects of how politicians use language:
The United Kingdom is one of the few democratic countries in the world that does not have a single, written constitution. Others include Canada, New Zealand and Israel. To date, its constitution is a combination of written and unwritten sources, including statutes, common law, conventions and somewhat esoterically, royal prerogatives. The reason for this is predominantly historical. Since 1688, Britain has not experienced a revolution or regime change, which often leads to a constitutional initiative, such as the American or the French Revolution. Britain’s constitution has evolved slowly over time under relative stability and as such, it has never been deemed necessary to list the fundamental laws and principles of the country's political system.
On Friday 15th September the former actor and comedian turned internet social commentator, Russell Brand, released a video on his YouTube channel addressing allegations about his personal life, ahead of a forthcoming UK current affairs documentary. Brand vehemently denied what he described as “very serious criminal allegations”. The following day Channel Four broadcast “Russell Brand: In Plain Sight”. During the course of the program Brand was accused by one woman of rape and by three others of sexual assaults, and emotional abuse between 2006 and 2013. During the course of the week, further claims have been made against him and that his “predatory” behaviour was an open secret within the TV industry. Furthermore, women would warn each other in advance if they had any dealing with him. All of which has played out against a mixture of broadsheet analysis, tabloid hyperbole, performative politics and internet bluster.
For those who live outside of the UK, let me categorically state that Brexit has broken British politics. Prior to 2016, national politics still broadly functioned along traditional party political lines, with income and class substantially determining voter allegiance. The big three cities (London, Birmingham and Liverpool) maintained their liberal dispositions and Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales were dominated by their regional politics. Brexit changed all this creating fault lines that fell outside of the existing political status quo. Opinions differed based upon where you lived, how politically literate you were and even education. Your party political allegiance no longer indicated what stance you took on this matter. Furthermore, the discourse around this complex subject was quickly debased into a bipartisan culture war that was toxic and dangerous.
Okay, keep up as there’s a lot of ground to cover. The UK government is currently suffering in the opinion polls and after 13 years in office, is facing potential oblivion at the next general election. In an attempt to shore up support among the party faithful, the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, is currently pursuing a hardline with regard to immigration. According to Ipsos, as a political issue about 29% of the electorate consider immigration to be a major problem. The remainder either think current levels are manageable or have no substantive view on the matter. However, as a “culture war” issue that can be weaponized by the tabloid press, which often has direct links to the Conservative Party in the UK, immigration is a hill to die upon. Hence you will find a lot of rhetoric that is anti-immigration and any contrary view is tarred with trite pejorative terms such as “lefty”, “liberal” and “woke”.
Last April, the Election Act 2022 became law within the UK. The Act introduced a requirement for all those voting in-person to produce photo identification when attending a polling station. This is the first time that such an ID has been required. Prior to this, voters could either bring their polling card to verify their identity at the polling station, or confirm their registered address from the electoral roll with staff. Now a UK driving licence or passport are considered the primary means of identity. A list of additional photo identification that has been deemed acceptable, is available on the UK government website. For those members of the electorate who do not have any of the qualifying ID, there is a Voter Authority Certificate available, which can be applied for online. This photo ID is linked to the applicants National Insurance Number. For further impartial information on photo ID and registering to vote, visit the The Electoral Commission website.
I am writing this post from the perspective of a UK citizen, but the sentiments expressed are applicable to anyone who lives in a country where you have democratically elected local political representation. IE someone who is supposed to advocate on behalf of your community or for you personally as the duly elected political representative. Here in the UK, the country is divided into 650 constituencies, each returning one Member of Parliament. Irrespective of whether you voted for your MP or whether you support the political party that they belong to, they are obliged to represent you and advocate on your behalf, if you request it. Such is the relationship in principle between constituents and MPs in the UK. It is important to be aware that your local MP is not a delegate whose sole purpose is to represent majority constituency views. Under the UK political system, an MP makes decisions on behalf of constituents and can take a position counter to local opinion, if they feel that is in the best interest of the constituency.
It is difficult to write about the state of UK politics with any degree of intellectual rigour when the entire situation has become so utterly farcical. My initial reaction to the recent departure of Liz Truss after just 45 days in office, was to laugh with abject scorn and derision. She was destined to fail due to utter lack of ability. However, there is still the outstanding matter of the country lacking a credible and functional government to address inflation, the cost of living crisis and resolve all the issues stemming from Brexit. There are problematic national and international events taking place that need addressing. A united, pragmatic and empathetic government is required to solve both these short term and long term needs. Sadly, the governing party is riven with opposing factions and there is no commonly held policy or underlying ideology. The PM may well have changed but the underlying flaws remain.
Conservative Party has been in government in the UK since 2010. During that time there have been three Prime Ministers. Today we moved onto the fourth. After Boris Johnson resigned on 7th July, the nation has had to endure a tedious two month process in which the Conservative Party elects a new leader. That person then becomes the PM by default. Many readers unfamiliar with the UK political system may be surprised that a change of leader has not led to a General Election. That is because the Conservative Party still holds a parliamentary majority of 71 elected Members of Parliament. Hence it is still constitutionally quite able to govern, despite Boris Johnson being forced from office. Therefore party members vote for a new party leader who gets the top job by default. Remember that in the UK, the Prime Minister is not the head of state and does not have the executive powers of a President.
I try to keep my thoughts on political matters to a minimum here at Contains Moderate Peril, mainly because UK politics and the current state of discourse associated with it has become an absolute shit show in recent years. Brexit broke traditional politics and has made matters far more tribal and partisan. The two main parties have declined from having clear ideologies, identities and manifestos, to becoming either a lobby group for the specific demographic group that supports them, or a conflicted, divided and schizoid shadow of its former self. I’ll let you work out which is which. Politics is no longer about governing a nation for the benefit of all its citizens. Now you simply pick a side and join the ongoing culture war against everyone and everything else. This rotten system produces rotten leaders. Hence, when Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson became Prime Minister in December 2019, it was clear that the nation was taking a major risk on such a man. His failings as a politician and a person are a matter of public record for anyone who has the eyes to see them.
The title for this post is a quote from The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien. I’ve used it as a verbal cue to try and give readers an overview of the point I’m striving to convey. Because I want to talk about modern life in western civilization, specifically its complexity and increasing uncertainty. If you’re extremely wealthy you can mitigate these two points but I’m working on the premise that most of the people who read Contains Moderate Peril are not. The blogging community, of which I am a participant, is a diverse group but from what I’ve observed it’s not populated by millionaires. In fact most of the people I know, both online and in person, are just holding down a job, trying to keep a roof over their head and pay the bills. Often they’re doing the job they do in default of anything else and they’re at the very least ambivalent towards it. The pandemic has also brought home how fragile so-called “normality” is. Modern politics are also volatile and life in general just doesn’t seem as certain as it was twenty years ago.
The Conservative Party successfully held onto their “safe seat” of Old Bexley and Sidcup in yesterday’s closely watched by-election. However their overall majority was reduced by more than half amid a very low voter turnout. Conservative councillor Louie French becomes the country’s newest MP after winning 11,189 votes, more than 50 per cent of those cast, in the seat previously held by the former cabinet minister James Brokenshire. Mr Brokenshire died in October from lung cancer aged 53. The closest challenger was Labour’s Daniel Francis, who secured 6,711 as the Tory majority fell from nearly 19,000 to 4,478, the equivalent of a vote share swing of 10 per cent to Labour. Turnout in the constituency was just 34%, down from the almost 70% who voted in the 2019 general election.
Old Bexley and Sidcup By-election Part 3
The Conservative Party successfully held onto their “safe seat” of Old Bexley and Sidcup in yesterday’s closely watched by-election. However their overall majority was reduced by more than half amid a very low voter turnout. Conservative councillor Louie French becomes the country’s newest MP after winning 11,189 votes, more than 50 per cent of those cast, in the seat previously held by the former cabinet minister James Brokenshire. Mr Brokenshire died in October from lung cancer aged 53. The closest challenger was Labour’s Daniel Francis, who secured 6,711 as the Tory majority fell from nearly 19,000 to 4,478, the equivalent of a vote share swing of 10 per cent to Labour. Turnout in the constituency was just 34%, down from the almost 70% who voted in the 2019 general election.
The Conservative Party successfully held onto their “safe seat” of Old Bexley and Sidcup in yesterday’s closely watched by-election. However their overall majority was reduced by more than half amid a very low voter turnout. Conservative councillor Louie French becomes the country’s newest MP after winning 11,189 votes, more than 50 per cent of those cast, in the seat previously held by the former cabinet minister James Brokenshire. Mr Brokenshire died in October from lung cancer aged 53. The closest challenger was Labour’s Daniel Francis, who secured 6,711 as the Tory majority fell from nearly 19,000 to 4,478, the equivalent of a vote share swing of 10 per cent to Labour. Turnout in the constituency was just 34%, down from the almost 70% who voted in the 2019 general election.
The results subsequently saw positive statements made by both the Conservatives and Labour. Mr French stated that such a victory for a sitting government was “almost unheard of”. Ellie Reeves MP, Labour's political lead for the 2021 Old Bexley and Sidcup by-election, remarked “There’s been a 10% swing over to Labour this evening”. Reform UK, formerly the Brexit Party, came third with 6.6% of the vote, with the party's leader and candidate Richard Tice describing it as a "massive result". Speaking after the results were announced, Mr Tice claimed “The reduction in the Conservatives’ majority in Old Bexley and Sidcup is a rejection of Boris Johnson personally because the Prime Minister is now viewed as a liability, not an asset in Tory heartlands”. The Green Party and Liberal Democrats both lost their deposits as they polled under 5% of the votes.
Old Bexley and Sidcup by-election 2021 results:
Louie French (Con) 11,189 (51.48%, -13.06%)
Daniel Francis (Lab) 6,711 (30.88%, +7.40%)
Richard Tice (Reform) 1,432 (6.59%)
Jonathan Rooks (Green) 830 (3.82%, +0.62%)
Simone Reynolds (Lib Dem) 647 (2.98%, -5.31%)
Elaine Cheeseman (Eng Dem) 271 (1.25%)
John Poynton (UKIP) 184 (0.85%)
Richard Hewison (Rejoin) 151 (0.69%)
David Kurten (Heritage) 116 (0.53%)
Carol Valinejad (CPA) 108 (0.50%)
Mad Mike Young (Loony) 94 (0.43%)
Although the retention of the constituency is a relief for the Conservative Party, the reduction in majority and the dismal voter turnout cannot be ignored. It is extremely disheartening to see two thirds of the electorate deciding not to bother to vote. COVID-19 and poor weather are convenient excuses but both those factors did not deter voters two years ago in the General Election of 12th December 2019. Brexit was a pressing political issue at the time but the demographics of a constituency such as Old Bexley and Sidcup means that they usually make an effort to vote. Hence such voter apathy is food for thought. Doorstep canvassing by all parties discovered a growing sense of disillusionment with the lack of political direction of the government and the inadequacy of the Prime Minister himself. Yet that despondency did not translate into votes for alternative parties.
As a floating voter who has no strong political attachment to either of the two main parties, I have reached a point where none of the choices available on the ballot paper seem appropriate or desirable. I did vote in this election but it had zero impact, due to the “winner takes all” approach that is entrenched in the UK’s political system. Unless you live in a marginal seat, voting against a majority incumbent is effectively redundant. Therefore, with a vote that feels meaningless and a paucity of parties to choose from, I fully understand why people turn their backs on politics. Especially the under 30 year olds. All the canvassing that I saw taking place seemed to be undertaken by the over 40s and pitched at a similar age demographic and above. All too often, UK politics just seems to be a form of lobbying for specific socioeconomic groups. Sadly, I do not see the situation improving anytime soon.
As for Louie French, it will be interesting to follow his voting record in parliament in the months to come to see where he fits within the spectrum of modern Conservatism. At present, as a new MP he is naturally focused upon the needs of his constituents. In his victory speech Mr French stated he will “work tirelessly to repay the trust you put in me”. But I am more intrigued to learn what his position is on several major forthcoming pieces of legislation, such as the UK Online Safety Bill and the new Policing Bill with its potential restrictions regarding the right to protest. I think his voting intentions along with the way he conducts his MPs finances will provide a measure of the man. I also suspect that despite the current drop in the overall majority for this MP, this may well increase in two year’s time when the next General Election is held.
If you visit the websites for such UK tabloid newspapers as the Daily Express or the Daily Mail you will no doubt encounter prominent stories about Megan Markle, Nigel Farage and “immigrants”. If these two august institutions are short of column inches, they’ll run a piece about how some former celebrity has had the unmitigated gall and temerity to get old. I mean WTF? How dare they do what human beings are genetically disposed to do. It’s outrageous. Similarly, head over to the Unherd website and you’ll find foam flecked tirades regarding spurious points of contention over dubious subjects. Often the topic being harangued is incredibly niche and I’ve never heard of it before or even considered it being a thing. These sort of talking points are not about informing, debating and most certainly aren’t about thinking. They exist to provoke reactions.
Yesterday afternoon, Nigel Farage the Member of Parliament for Clacton and leader of the Reform Party, held a press conference in which he declared that he would be resigning his seat and thus triggering a by-election. He cited the following list of grievances that have led to him making this decision. That the Parliamentary standards investigations were being politicised, the media and other parties were conducting a coordinated campaign against him and that he had endured years of threats and physical attacks. He further asserted that his family’s privacy and safety had been breached as well. He finished by alleging that the political system was repeatedly changing rules to obstruct Reform and that he was the most attacked politician in the UK. Rather than be judged by the legacy media and the “establishment”, he would rather put the issue of his political integrity to the electorate of Clacton. He even offered to pay for the cost of the by-election.
UK Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer has resigned and intends to leave office before the parliamentary summer recess. By then Andy Burnham will more than likely be voted leader of the Labour Party and by default will become the new Prime Minister. Due to the current size of the incumbent Government’s majority, there is no pressing reason for a General Election that the UK’s right wing tabloid press is currently calling for. Whether this provides the Government with the reset they’re hoping for when Parliament reconvenes in autumn remains to be seen. With seven Prime Ministers coming and going in a decade, there are some serious questions to be asked about the current state of UK politics. However, the mechanics of contemporary politics, the decline of clearly defined ideologies and the people that seek elected office to be our leaders are only half of the problem. The other major impediment to the UK’s democracy functioning properly is the electorate.
Andy Burnham successfully won the Makerfield by-election yesterday, returning him to the House of Commons as a member of Parliament after holding the position of Mayor of Manchester for the past nine years. Prior to this, Burnham was Labour MP for Leigh from 2001 and 2017. He served in both the Tony Blair and Gordon Brown administrations and has held such senior governmental posts as Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and Secretary of State for Health. His return to Parliamentary politics is likely to result in a leadership challenge to incumbent Prime Minister Keir Starmer. When speaking after winning yesterday’s by-election Burnham spoke of “a final chance for change” the current trajectory of the present Labour Government. However, I don’t wish to focus on any of this at present. I am far more interested in the above picture, taken as the results were announced and what it says about UK politics.
The UK Government has formerly announced its intention to ban under-16s from using social media. This is due to increasing public pressure that “something must be done” about the perceived iniquities of many online platforms. However, as with most complex social problems of this nature, no one has any clear or practical ideas as to what that “something” is. It remains a nebulous, non-specific panacea and clearly someone else’s job to identify and implement. As ever, why choose a nuanced and multifaceted solution to a complex problem, when it is far easier and politically expedient to just “ban” something. The former requires effort and a degree of thinking. If such an approach fails it also means that those who came up with it now carry the can. The latter dumps the problem in the lap of various third parties, who can then be conveniently blamed when the ill conceived policy fails.
Every Thursday, Mrs P volunteers at a food bank that is run from a local church; Avery Hill Christian Fellowship. Today there was a shortage of staff so I agreed to help out. It proved to be an equitable arrangement as she collated the various orders and I packed the bags and took them to the respective clients. The food bank itself is organised and administered by the Trussell Trust, a UK based NGO and charity providing emergency food and support to people locked in poverty. It is open for 2 to 3 hours a week depending upon demand. During today’s session we served just six people. Some weeks its can be triple that amount. Upon closure, a member of staff from the Trussel Trust did a stock take and collated a list of what was needed. This is provided by various local church communities via parishioners donations, as well as local supermarkets who have an arrangement with the trust to provide surplus stock or good approaching the end of their sales window.
Under the First Past the Post electoral system, the candidate(s) receiving the highest number of votes in each constituency are elected. This system is used in the UK during general elections and in some local elections, such as those recently conducted in England. An alternative approach is the system of proportional representation, which aims to allocate seats in a manner that reflects the popularity of various parties. Both the Scottish Parliament and the Senedd in Wales employ systems of Proportional Representation. Historically, first-past-the-post has been seen as advantageous for the Conservative and Labour parties. It poses challenges for smaller parties whose votes are distributed evenly across different regions, making it difficult for them to secure seats. This dynamic effectively prevents potential competitors to the Conservatives and Labour from succeeding electorally. Consequently, due to this situation, voters may hesitate to support these smaller parties from the outset.
There are local elections being held across the UK today. Voters in Scotland and Wales will elect representatives to their respective national parliaments, while in England the voting is for local councils and regional mayors. These are the first major elections to be held in the UK since the 2024 General Election which saw the Conservative government of fourteen years, fall to the Labour Party. Midterm elections are often a litmus test for how the electorate think the national government are performing although local issues are also a major factor. The consensus among political journalists and commentators is that the incumbent government is polling extremely poorly and will subsequently face a backlash. In recent years the UK has seen a decline in traditional two party voting with Reform UK and the Greens gaining significant traction among the electorate. Hence today’s elections may well see both these parties make significant gains.
Our household is currently trying to reduce our monthly overheads in response to the ever increasing cost of living. April is not that far away and a great many service providers will increase their rates and tariff as the new financial year begins. Then there is the ongoing effects, both direct and indirect, of inflation to consider. Although the UK inflation rate is dropping, currently sitting at 3.4% in December 2025, food inflation remains higher at 4.5%. Being based in the UK, salaries and billed services tend to be administered monthly. You get paid usually at the end of the months and bills can turn up at any point, depending upon when you started a service. Any payments coming from central government, such as state pension or other benefits, are paid every 4 weeks. This means that there are 13 payments in a year. I thought it pertinent to clarify this point as other countries, such as the USA, favour a fortnightly financial cycle. Hence as a household we work around a monthly budget.
I don’t know if you have noticed that there are quite a lot of companies that have names taken from Tolkien’s Legendarium. At first glance, this seems innocuous enough. Tolkien’s writings grew in popularity over the seventies and eighties but since the release of the film trilogy at the start of the twenty-first century, his work has become more well known and been assimilated into our wider pop culture. Hence, it seems quite logical that a startup tech company, for example, would choose a name from his writings. No doubt the founders grew up reading The Lord of the Rings and are fans. That all seems plausible. However if you take a further look, it gets somewhat more complex. Here are four companies that have Tolkien based names.
“Managed decline” is a phrase that refers to the processes associated with the end of a specific lifecycle, with the goal of minimizing costs or other forms of loss. The concept originated in business where it referred to the management of companies and industries. More recently it is used in wider contexts. The concept gained prominence with regard to urban policy, particularly in the UK during the eighties when several major cities suffered economic and political collapse. Of late, the term has been applied to the UK, encompassing a systematic weakening of the economy, social structures, and cultural values, as well as its global political and diplomatic force. In each case, managed decline involves making strategic choices about resource allocation and accepting the consequences of those decisions. It is a complex issue with ethical and practical considerations, often sparking debate about the best way to address decline and reverse the process.
I still maintain a legacy presence on Twitter/X and I follow my local MP (member of Parliament) Louie French. It’s not something I especially relish as I am not a supporter of the Conservative party (or any other) and I did not vote for him in the last election. I just like to know what he is up to as he is the political representative for our constituency. As the Conservatives are out of power at present, to all intent and purposes, Mr French is a backbench MP although he has a minor position as Shadow Parliamentary Undersecretary (Culture, Media and Sport). However, with that being said he is hardly a key member of the shadow cabinet. Hence he focuses on constituency work and that which is generated by his shadow posting. He will also lend his voice, when required, to any major policy decision or statement made by his party.
Sunday 6th April is the start of a new financial year, here in the UK. According to data from numerous financial and economic institutions, an estimated million plus households will be facing annual increases of £400 to £500 as the proverbial “cost of living” goes up. Everything from Council Tax to Mobile and Broadband costs are being increased. Future cost hikes are expected in our energy and water utilities. As bills start going up across the country today, average wages remain stagnant. Middle-income and poorer households have been worst hit by this wage related issue. Hence the tabloid press have labelled the start of the new financial year as “Awful April”. Hyperbole aside, this is a very real issue which due to its complex, global causes, doesn’t have a quick fix solution.
I consider myself to be a grounded, rational individual. I am not excessively emotional. I like facts, data and reason as opposed to hyperbole, rhetoric and bluster. That being said, I am aware that the world is an imperfect place. Opinions are often not based upon empirical fact but personal perspective. Hence many people experience reality differently to me. They are driven by their feelings and other factors. However, despite these differences in philosophy, for most of my life the world has remained functional and over time slowly improved in subtle ways. Deference to expertise, a sense of community and basic pragmatism meant that people broadly pulled in the same direction. Of course there has always been dissent but it has been within a stable system. However, of late I feel that this era is now finally over. Things are no longer stable. We live in an uncertain world.
Newspapers were an integral part of UK culture in the seventies. During the week, they were delivered prior to going to work, so you would peruse them over breakfast. Alternatively you would buy one en route to your place of employment and read it on the bus or train. In a world before 24 hour, rolling news, they were the primary means of keeping the public abreast of events and as such, enjoyed a substantial audience. On occasions a newspaper story could make or break a political career or launch a crusading campaign to address a social ill. Newspapers were a force to be reckoned with and therefore a significant part of the socio-political landscape. However, due to a strong union presence within the workforce, the UKs newspapers often lagged behind other industries with regard to the technology.
The First Past the Post (FPTP) electoral system used in the United Kingdom, as well as in several other countries such as the US and India, has both advantages and disadvantages. However, despite being a simple and straightforward system it has been abandoned by many democracies in favour of more proportional and equitable methods. The primary criticism against FPTP is that it allows a minority of the electorate to return a majority government. Since 1935, there have been majority governments 90% of the time, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. At present, the current UK government has a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share.
Politicians have a distinct way of talking when being interviewed or giving a press conference. It is often characterised by a strategic use of language, centred around rhetorical devices, persuasion techniques and a careful framing of messages. Direct answers to questions are usually avoided, with tangential responses being preferred. Opinions and specific perspectives are frequently presented as facts. There is also a propensity to focus on “problems” and apportioning blame, rather than “solutions”. It’s important to note that the use of language in politics is a complex and dynamic process influenced by various factors, including cultural context, media dynamics, and the evolving political landscape. Different politicians may employ different communication strategies based on their individual styles and objectives. Here are some key aspects of how politicians use language:
The United Kingdom is one of the few democratic countries in the world that does not have a single, written constitution. Others include Canada, New Zealand and Israel. To date, its constitution is a combination of written and unwritten sources, including statutes, common law, conventions and somewhat esoterically, royal prerogatives. The reason for this is predominantly historical. Since 1688, Britain has not experienced a revolution or regime change, which often leads to a constitutional initiative, such as the American or the French Revolution. Britain’s constitution has evolved slowly over time under relative stability and as such, it has never been deemed necessary to list the fundamental laws and principles of the country's political system.
On Friday 15th September the former actor and comedian turned internet social commentator, Russell Brand, released a video on his YouTube channel addressing allegations about his personal life, ahead of a forthcoming UK current affairs documentary. Brand vehemently denied what he described as “very serious criminal allegations”. The following day Channel Four broadcast “Russell Brand: In Plain Sight”. During the course of the program Brand was accused by one woman of rape and by three others of sexual assaults, and emotional abuse between 2006 and 2013. During the course of the week, further claims have been made against him and that his “predatory” behaviour was an open secret within the TV industry. Furthermore, women would warn each other in advance if they had any dealing with him. All of which has played out against a mixture of broadsheet analysis, tabloid hyperbole, performative politics and internet bluster.
For those who live outside of the UK, let me categorically state that Brexit has broken British politics. Prior to 2016, national politics still broadly functioned along traditional party political lines, with income and class substantially determining voter allegiance. The big three cities (London, Birmingham and Liverpool) maintained their liberal dispositions and Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales were dominated by their regional politics. Brexit changed all this creating fault lines that fell outside of the existing political status quo. Opinions differed based upon where you lived, how politically literate you were and even education. Your party political allegiance no longer indicated what stance you took on this matter. Furthermore, the discourse around this complex subject was quickly debased into a bipartisan culture war that was toxic and dangerous.
Okay, keep up as there’s a lot of ground to cover. The UK government is currently suffering in the opinion polls and after 13 years in office, is facing potential oblivion at the next general election. In an attempt to shore up support among the party faithful, the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, is currently pursuing a hardline with regard to immigration. According to Ipsos, as a political issue about 29% of the electorate consider immigration to be a major problem. The remainder either think current levels are manageable or have no substantive view on the matter. However, as a “culture war” issue that can be weaponized by the tabloid press, which often has direct links to the Conservative Party in the UK, immigration is a hill to die upon. Hence you will find a lot of rhetoric that is anti-immigration and any contrary view is tarred with trite pejorative terms such as “lefty”, “liberal” and “woke”.
Last April, the Election Act 2022 became law within the UK. The Act introduced a requirement for all those voting in-person to produce photo identification when attending a polling station. This is the first time that such an ID has been required. Prior to this, voters could either bring their polling card to verify their identity at the polling station, or confirm their registered address from the electoral roll with staff. Now a UK driving licence or passport are considered the primary means of identity. A list of additional photo identification that has been deemed acceptable, is available on the UK government website. For those members of the electorate who do not have any of the qualifying ID, there is a Voter Authority Certificate available, which can be applied for online. This photo ID is linked to the applicants National Insurance Number. For further impartial information on photo ID and registering to vote, visit the The Electoral Commission website.
I am writing this post from the perspective of a UK citizen, but the sentiments expressed are applicable to anyone who lives in a country where you have democratically elected local political representation. IE someone who is supposed to advocate on behalf of your community or for you personally as the duly elected political representative. Here in the UK, the country is divided into 650 constituencies, each returning one Member of Parliament. Irrespective of whether you voted for your MP or whether you support the political party that they belong to, they are obliged to represent you and advocate on your behalf, if you request it. Such is the relationship in principle between constituents and MPs in the UK. It is important to be aware that your local MP is not a delegate whose sole purpose is to represent majority constituency views. Under the UK political system, an MP makes decisions on behalf of constituents and can take a position counter to local opinion, if they feel that is in the best interest of the constituency.
It is difficult to write about the state of UK politics with any degree of intellectual rigour when the entire situation has become so utterly farcical. My initial reaction to the recent departure of Liz Truss after just 45 days in office, was to laugh with abject scorn and derision. She was destined to fail due to utter lack of ability. However, there is still the outstanding matter of the country lacking a credible and functional government to address inflation, the cost of living crisis and resolve all the issues stemming from Brexit. There are problematic national and international events taking place that need addressing. A united, pragmatic and empathetic government is required to solve both these short term and long term needs. Sadly, the governing party is riven with opposing factions and there is no commonly held policy or underlying ideology. The PM may well have changed but the underlying flaws remain.
Conservative Party has been in government in the UK since 2010. During that time there have been three Prime Ministers. Today we moved onto the fourth. After Boris Johnson resigned on 7th July, the nation has had to endure a tedious two month process in which the Conservative Party elects a new leader. That person then becomes the PM by default. Many readers unfamiliar with the UK political system may be surprised that a change of leader has not led to a General Election. That is because the Conservative Party still holds a parliamentary majority of 71 elected Members of Parliament. Hence it is still constitutionally quite able to govern, despite Boris Johnson being forced from office. Therefore party members vote for a new party leader who gets the top job by default. Remember that in the UK, the Prime Minister is not the head of state and does not have the executive powers of a President.
I try to keep my thoughts on political matters to a minimum here at Contains Moderate Peril, mainly because UK politics and the current state of discourse associated with it has become an absolute shit show in recent years. Brexit broke traditional politics and has made matters far more tribal and partisan. The two main parties have declined from having clear ideologies, identities and manifestos, to becoming either a lobby group for the specific demographic group that supports them, or a conflicted, divided and schizoid shadow of its former self. I’ll let you work out which is which. Politics is no longer about governing a nation for the benefit of all its citizens. Now you simply pick a side and join the ongoing culture war against everyone and everything else. This rotten system produces rotten leaders. Hence, when Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson became Prime Minister in December 2019, it was clear that the nation was taking a major risk on such a man. His failings as a politician and a person are a matter of public record for anyone who has the eyes to see them.
The title for this post is a quote from The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien. I’ve used it as a verbal cue to try and give readers an overview of the point I’m striving to convey. Because I want to talk about modern life in western civilization, specifically its complexity and increasing uncertainty. If you’re extremely wealthy you can mitigate these two points but I’m working on the premise that most of the people who read Contains Moderate Peril are not. The blogging community, of which I am a participant, is a diverse group but from what I’ve observed it’s not populated by millionaires. In fact most of the people I know, both online and in person, are just holding down a job, trying to keep a roof over their head and pay the bills. Often they’re doing the job they do in default of anything else and they’re at the very least ambivalent towards it. The pandemic has also brought home how fragile so-called “normality” is. Modern politics are also volatile and life in general just doesn’t seem as certain as it was twenty years ago.
The Conservative Party successfully held onto their “safe seat” of Old Bexley and Sidcup in yesterday’s closely watched by-election. However their overall majority was reduced by more than half amid a very low voter turnout. Conservative councillor Louie French becomes the country’s newest MP after winning 11,189 votes, more than 50 per cent of those cast, in the seat previously held by the former cabinet minister James Brokenshire. Mr Brokenshire died in October from lung cancer aged 53. The closest challenger was Labour’s Daniel Francis, who secured 6,711 as the Tory majority fell from nearly 19,000 to 4,478, the equivalent of a vote share swing of 10 per cent to Labour. Turnout in the constituency was just 34%, down from the almost 70% who voted in the 2019 general election.
Old Bexley and Sidcup By-election Part 2
Political events in the constituency of Old Bexley and Sidcup have moved forward in the last few weeks, following on from the death of incumbent MP James Brokenshire on 8th of October. Although no formal announcement has yet been made regarding the date of the forthcoming by-election, the major political parties have started announcing the names of their respective candidates. There were initial concerns among some constituents that this safe Conservative Party seat may have been used as a means of parachuting in a candidate favoured by central office, rather than one determined by the local Conservative Association. Fortunately, that has not been the case. The UK Government currently enjoys a parliamentary majority of 79 seats and is therefore not in any urgent need of fast pathing further political allies.
Political events in the constituency of Old Bexley and Sidcup have moved forward in the last few weeks, following on from the death of incumbent MP James Brokenshire on 8th of October. Although no formal announcement has yet been made regarding the date of the forthcoming by-election, the major political parties have started announcing the names of their respective candidates. There were initial concerns among some constituents that this safe Conservative Party seat may have been used as a means of parachuting in a candidate favoured by central office, rather than one determined by the local Conservative Association. Fortunately, that has not been the case. The UK Government currently enjoys a parliamentary majority of 79 seats and is therefore not in any urgent need of fast pathing further political allies.
At present three candidates have been confirmed as standing for election. Louie French who is standing for The Conservative Party. Mr French has been a Bexley councillor for the last eight years and was Deputy Leader of Bexley Council from 2018 to 2021. He is a resident of the Borough and has a background in the financial services industry, working in the City of London. The late James Brokenshire was both a friend and mentor to Louie, therefore from a party political perspective, he is a logical choice to stand as The Conservative Party candidate. His existing familiarity with the borough and its constituents offers practical continuity. Considering the voting habits of constituents and the historical track record of by-elections held in Old Bexley and Sidcup, unless something radical occurs it is safe to consider that Louie French is the favourite candidate to win the seat.
Daniel Francis, a Bexley councillor and former leader of Bexley’s Labour group on the council, has been selected as Labour’s parliamentary candidate for the upcoming Old by-election. Daniel Francis represents Belvedere Ward on Bexley Council and grew up locally. He is married with two primary school aged children, one of whom has cerebral palsy and he campaigns on accessibility issues. Mr Francis served as leader of Bexley Labour group from 2017 to 2021 and is the shadow cabinet member for environment, transport and leisure. He was first elected to the council in 2000. In the 2019 election, Labour polled 23.5% of the vote. Since the constituency of Old Bexley and Sidcup was created in 1983 the electorate has only elected Conservative Members of Parliament.
The third candidate to be announced is Richard Tice, the leader of the party Reform UK. Formerly known as the Brexit Party, Reform UK is now presenting itself as a broader political entity with policies encompassing wider and more traditional issues. The party lost its 29 MEPs when the UK left the EU on 31 January 2020. At present it has three councillors nationally. Reform UK has been seeking parliamentary seats since 2019 but has not been successful so far. Mr Tice is a British businessman and CEO of the property investment firm. It will be interesting to see whether the presence of Richard Tice as both a candidate and the leader of his party will gain any traction with constituents and whether Reform UK can transition successfully from a single issue party. Furthermore, will his participation in the by-election increase media attention?
If you visit the websites for such UK tabloid newspapers as the Daily Express or the Daily Mail you will no doubt encounter prominent stories about Megan Markle, Nigel Farage and “immigrants”. If these two august institutions are short of column inches, they’ll run a piece about how some former celebrity has had the unmitigated gall and temerity to get old. I mean WTF? How dare they do what human beings are genetically disposed to do. It’s outrageous. Similarly, head over to the Unherd website and you’ll find foam flecked tirades regarding spurious points of contention over dubious subjects. Often the topic being harangued is incredibly niche and I’ve never heard of it before or even considered it being a thing. These sort of talking points are not about informing, debating and most certainly aren’t about thinking. They exist to provoke reactions.
Yesterday afternoon, Nigel Farage the Member of Parliament for Clacton and leader of the Reform Party, held a press conference in which he declared that he would be resigning his seat and thus triggering a by-election. He cited the following list of grievances that have led to him making this decision. That the Parliamentary standards investigations were being politicised, the media and other parties were conducting a coordinated campaign against him and that he had endured years of threats and physical attacks. He further asserted that his family’s privacy and safety had been breached as well. He finished by alleging that the political system was repeatedly changing rules to obstruct Reform and that he was the most attacked politician in the UK. Rather than be judged by the legacy media and the “establishment”, he would rather put the issue of his political integrity to the electorate of Clacton. He even offered to pay for the cost of the by-election.
UK Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer has resigned and intends to leave office before the parliamentary summer recess. By then Andy Burnham will more than likely be voted leader of the Labour Party and by default will become the new Prime Minister. Due to the current size of the incumbent Government’s majority, there is no pressing reason for a General Election that the UK’s right wing tabloid press is currently calling for. Whether this provides the Government with the reset they’re hoping for when Parliament reconvenes in autumn remains to be seen. With seven Prime Ministers coming and going in a decade, there are some serious questions to be asked about the current state of UK politics. However, the mechanics of contemporary politics, the decline of clearly defined ideologies and the people that seek elected office to be our leaders are only half of the problem. The other major impediment to the UK’s democracy functioning properly is the electorate.
Andy Burnham successfully won the Makerfield by-election yesterday, returning him to the House of Commons as a member of Parliament after holding the position of Mayor of Manchester for the past nine years. Prior to this, Burnham was Labour MP for Leigh from 2001 and 2017. He served in both the Tony Blair and Gordon Brown administrations and has held such senior governmental posts as Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and Secretary of State for Health. His return to Parliamentary politics is likely to result in a leadership challenge to incumbent Prime Minister Keir Starmer. When speaking after winning yesterday’s by-election Burnham spoke of “a final chance for change” the current trajectory of the present Labour Government. However, I don’t wish to focus on any of this at present. I am far more interested in the above picture, taken as the results were announced and what it says about UK politics.
The UK Government has formerly announced its intention to ban under-16s from using social media. This is due to increasing public pressure that “something must be done” about the perceived iniquities of many online platforms. However, as with most complex social problems of this nature, no one has any clear or practical ideas as to what that “something” is. It remains a nebulous, non-specific panacea and clearly someone else’s job to identify and implement. As ever, why choose a nuanced and multifaceted solution to a complex problem, when it is far easier and politically expedient to just “ban” something. The former requires effort and a degree of thinking. If such an approach fails it also means that those who came up with it now carry the can. The latter dumps the problem in the lap of various third parties, who can then be conveniently blamed when the ill conceived policy fails.
Every Thursday, Mrs P volunteers at a food bank that is run from a local church; Avery Hill Christian Fellowship. Today there was a shortage of staff so I agreed to help out. It proved to be an equitable arrangement as she collated the various orders and I packed the bags and took them to the respective clients. The food bank itself is organised and administered by the Trussell Trust, a UK based NGO and charity providing emergency food and support to people locked in poverty. It is open for 2 to 3 hours a week depending upon demand. During today’s session we served just six people. Some weeks its can be triple that amount. Upon closure, a member of staff from the Trussel Trust did a stock take and collated a list of what was needed. This is provided by various local church communities via parishioners donations, as well as local supermarkets who have an arrangement with the trust to provide surplus stock or good approaching the end of their sales window.
Under the First Past the Post electoral system, the candidate(s) receiving the highest number of votes in each constituency are elected. This system is used in the UK during general elections and in some local elections, such as those recently conducted in England. An alternative approach is the system of proportional representation, which aims to allocate seats in a manner that reflects the popularity of various parties. Both the Scottish Parliament and the Senedd in Wales employ systems of Proportional Representation. Historically, first-past-the-post has been seen as advantageous for the Conservative and Labour parties. It poses challenges for smaller parties whose votes are distributed evenly across different regions, making it difficult for them to secure seats. This dynamic effectively prevents potential competitors to the Conservatives and Labour from succeeding electorally. Consequently, due to this situation, voters may hesitate to support these smaller parties from the outset.
There are local elections being held across the UK today. Voters in Scotland and Wales will elect representatives to their respective national parliaments, while in England the voting is for local councils and regional mayors. These are the first major elections to be held in the UK since the 2024 General Election which saw the Conservative government of fourteen years, fall to the Labour Party. Midterm elections are often a litmus test for how the electorate think the national government are performing although local issues are also a major factor. The consensus among political journalists and commentators is that the incumbent government is polling extremely poorly and will subsequently face a backlash. In recent years the UK has seen a decline in traditional two party voting with Reform UK and the Greens gaining significant traction among the electorate. Hence today’s elections may well see both these parties make significant gains.
Our household is currently trying to reduce our monthly overheads in response to the ever increasing cost of living. April is not that far away and a great many service providers will increase their rates and tariff as the new financial year begins. Then there is the ongoing effects, both direct and indirect, of inflation to consider. Although the UK inflation rate is dropping, currently sitting at 3.4% in December 2025, food inflation remains higher at 4.5%. Being based in the UK, salaries and billed services tend to be administered monthly. You get paid usually at the end of the months and bills can turn up at any point, depending upon when you started a service. Any payments coming from central government, such as state pension or other benefits, are paid every 4 weeks. This means that there are 13 payments in a year. I thought it pertinent to clarify this point as other countries, such as the USA, favour a fortnightly financial cycle. Hence as a household we work around a monthly budget.
I don’t know if you have noticed that there are quite a lot of companies that have names taken from Tolkien’s Legendarium. At first glance, this seems innocuous enough. Tolkien’s writings grew in popularity over the seventies and eighties but since the release of the film trilogy at the start of the twenty-first century, his work has become more well known and been assimilated into our wider pop culture. Hence, it seems quite logical that a startup tech company, for example, would choose a name from his writings. No doubt the founders grew up reading The Lord of the Rings and are fans. That all seems plausible. However if you take a further look, it gets somewhat more complex. Here are four companies that have Tolkien based names.
“Managed decline” is a phrase that refers to the processes associated with the end of a specific lifecycle, with the goal of minimizing costs or other forms of loss. The concept originated in business where it referred to the management of companies and industries. More recently it is used in wider contexts. The concept gained prominence with regard to urban policy, particularly in the UK during the eighties when several major cities suffered economic and political collapse. Of late, the term has been applied to the UK, encompassing a systematic weakening of the economy, social structures, and cultural values, as well as its global political and diplomatic force. In each case, managed decline involves making strategic choices about resource allocation and accepting the consequences of those decisions. It is a complex issue with ethical and practical considerations, often sparking debate about the best way to address decline and reverse the process.
I still maintain a legacy presence on Twitter/X and I follow my local MP (member of Parliament) Louie French. It’s not something I especially relish as I am not a supporter of the Conservative party (or any other) and I did not vote for him in the last election. I just like to know what he is up to as he is the political representative for our constituency. As the Conservatives are out of power at present, to all intent and purposes, Mr French is a backbench MP although he has a minor position as Shadow Parliamentary Undersecretary (Culture, Media and Sport). However, with that being said he is hardly a key member of the shadow cabinet. Hence he focuses on constituency work and that which is generated by his shadow posting. He will also lend his voice, when required, to any major policy decision or statement made by his party.
Sunday 6th April is the start of a new financial year, here in the UK. According to data from numerous financial and economic institutions, an estimated million plus households will be facing annual increases of £400 to £500 as the proverbial “cost of living” goes up. Everything from Council Tax to Mobile and Broadband costs are being increased. Future cost hikes are expected in our energy and water utilities. As bills start going up across the country today, average wages remain stagnant. Middle-income and poorer households have been worst hit by this wage related issue. Hence the tabloid press have labelled the start of the new financial year as “Awful April”. Hyperbole aside, this is a very real issue which due to its complex, global causes, doesn’t have a quick fix solution.
I consider myself to be a grounded, rational individual. I am not excessively emotional. I like facts, data and reason as opposed to hyperbole, rhetoric and bluster. That being said, I am aware that the world is an imperfect place. Opinions are often not based upon empirical fact but personal perspective. Hence many people experience reality differently to me. They are driven by their feelings and other factors. However, despite these differences in philosophy, for most of my life the world has remained functional and over time slowly improved in subtle ways. Deference to expertise, a sense of community and basic pragmatism meant that people broadly pulled in the same direction. Of course there has always been dissent but it has been within a stable system. However, of late I feel that this era is now finally over. Things are no longer stable. We live in an uncertain world.
Newspapers were an integral part of UK culture in the seventies. During the week, they were delivered prior to going to work, so you would peruse them over breakfast. Alternatively you would buy one en route to your place of employment and read it on the bus or train. In a world before 24 hour, rolling news, they were the primary means of keeping the public abreast of events and as such, enjoyed a substantial audience. On occasions a newspaper story could make or break a political career or launch a crusading campaign to address a social ill. Newspapers were a force to be reckoned with and therefore a significant part of the socio-political landscape. However, due to a strong union presence within the workforce, the UKs newspapers often lagged behind other industries with regard to the technology.
The First Past the Post (FPTP) electoral system used in the United Kingdom, as well as in several other countries such as the US and India, has both advantages and disadvantages. However, despite being a simple and straightforward system it has been abandoned by many democracies in favour of more proportional and equitable methods. The primary criticism against FPTP is that it allows a minority of the electorate to return a majority government. Since 1935, there have been majority governments 90% of the time, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. At present, the current UK government has a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share.
Politicians have a distinct way of talking when being interviewed or giving a press conference. It is often characterised by a strategic use of language, centred around rhetorical devices, persuasion techniques and a careful framing of messages. Direct answers to questions are usually avoided, with tangential responses being preferred. Opinions and specific perspectives are frequently presented as facts. There is also a propensity to focus on “problems” and apportioning blame, rather than “solutions”. It’s important to note that the use of language in politics is a complex and dynamic process influenced by various factors, including cultural context, media dynamics, and the evolving political landscape. Different politicians may employ different communication strategies based on their individual styles and objectives. Here are some key aspects of how politicians use language:
The United Kingdom is one of the few democratic countries in the world that does not have a single, written constitution. Others include Canada, New Zealand and Israel. To date, its constitution is a combination of written and unwritten sources, including statutes, common law, conventions and somewhat esoterically, royal prerogatives. The reason for this is predominantly historical. Since 1688, Britain has not experienced a revolution or regime change, which often leads to a constitutional initiative, such as the American or the French Revolution. Britain’s constitution has evolved slowly over time under relative stability and as such, it has never been deemed necessary to list the fundamental laws and principles of the country's political system.
On Friday 15th September the former actor and comedian turned internet social commentator, Russell Brand, released a video on his YouTube channel addressing allegations about his personal life, ahead of a forthcoming UK current affairs documentary. Brand vehemently denied what he described as “very serious criminal allegations”. The following day Channel Four broadcast “Russell Brand: In Plain Sight”. During the course of the program Brand was accused by one woman of rape and by three others of sexual assaults, and emotional abuse between 2006 and 2013. During the course of the week, further claims have been made against him and that his “predatory” behaviour was an open secret within the TV industry. Furthermore, women would warn each other in advance if they had any dealing with him. All of which has played out against a mixture of broadsheet analysis, tabloid hyperbole, performative politics and internet bluster.
For those who live outside of the UK, let me categorically state that Brexit has broken British politics. Prior to 2016, national politics still broadly functioned along traditional party political lines, with income and class substantially determining voter allegiance. The big three cities (London, Birmingham and Liverpool) maintained their liberal dispositions and Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales were dominated by their regional politics. Brexit changed all this creating fault lines that fell outside of the existing political status quo. Opinions differed based upon where you lived, how politically literate you were and even education. Your party political allegiance no longer indicated what stance you took on this matter. Furthermore, the discourse around this complex subject was quickly debased into a bipartisan culture war that was toxic and dangerous.
Okay, keep up as there’s a lot of ground to cover. The UK government is currently suffering in the opinion polls and after 13 years in office, is facing potential oblivion at the next general election. In an attempt to shore up support among the party faithful, the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, is currently pursuing a hardline with regard to immigration. According to Ipsos, as a political issue about 29% of the electorate consider immigration to be a major problem. The remainder either think current levels are manageable or have no substantive view on the matter. However, as a “culture war” issue that can be weaponized by the tabloid press, which often has direct links to the Conservative Party in the UK, immigration is a hill to die upon. Hence you will find a lot of rhetoric that is anti-immigration and any contrary view is tarred with trite pejorative terms such as “lefty”, “liberal” and “woke”.
Last April, the Election Act 2022 became law within the UK. The Act introduced a requirement for all those voting in-person to produce photo identification when attending a polling station. This is the first time that such an ID has been required. Prior to this, voters could either bring their polling card to verify their identity at the polling station, or confirm their registered address from the electoral roll with staff. Now a UK driving licence or passport are considered the primary means of identity. A list of additional photo identification that has been deemed acceptable, is available on the UK government website. For those members of the electorate who do not have any of the qualifying ID, there is a Voter Authority Certificate available, which can be applied for online. This photo ID is linked to the applicants National Insurance Number. For further impartial information on photo ID and registering to vote, visit the The Electoral Commission website.
I am writing this post from the perspective of a UK citizen, but the sentiments expressed are applicable to anyone who lives in a country where you have democratically elected local political representation. IE someone who is supposed to advocate on behalf of your community or for you personally as the duly elected political representative. Here in the UK, the country is divided into 650 constituencies, each returning one Member of Parliament. Irrespective of whether you voted for your MP or whether you support the political party that they belong to, they are obliged to represent you and advocate on your behalf, if you request it. Such is the relationship in principle between constituents and MPs in the UK. It is important to be aware that your local MP is not a delegate whose sole purpose is to represent majority constituency views. Under the UK political system, an MP makes decisions on behalf of constituents and can take a position counter to local opinion, if they feel that is in the best interest of the constituency.
It is difficult to write about the state of UK politics with any degree of intellectual rigour when the entire situation has become so utterly farcical. My initial reaction to the recent departure of Liz Truss after just 45 days in office, was to laugh with abject scorn and derision. She was destined to fail due to utter lack of ability. However, there is still the outstanding matter of the country lacking a credible and functional government to address inflation, the cost of living crisis and resolve all the issues stemming from Brexit. There are problematic national and international events taking place that need addressing. A united, pragmatic and empathetic government is required to solve both these short term and long term needs. Sadly, the governing party is riven with opposing factions and there is no commonly held policy or underlying ideology. The PM may well have changed but the underlying flaws remain.
Conservative Party has been in government in the UK since 2010. During that time there have been three Prime Ministers. Today we moved onto the fourth. After Boris Johnson resigned on 7th July, the nation has had to endure a tedious two month process in which the Conservative Party elects a new leader. That person then becomes the PM by default. Many readers unfamiliar with the UK political system may be surprised that a change of leader has not led to a General Election. That is because the Conservative Party still holds a parliamentary majority of 71 elected Members of Parliament. Hence it is still constitutionally quite able to govern, despite Boris Johnson being forced from office. Therefore party members vote for a new party leader who gets the top job by default. Remember that in the UK, the Prime Minister is not the head of state and does not have the executive powers of a President.
I try to keep my thoughts on political matters to a minimum here at Contains Moderate Peril, mainly because UK politics and the current state of discourse associated with it has become an absolute shit show in recent years. Brexit broke traditional politics and has made matters far more tribal and partisan. The two main parties have declined from having clear ideologies, identities and manifestos, to becoming either a lobby group for the specific demographic group that supports them, or a conflicted, divided and schizoid shadow of its former self. I’ll let you work out which is which. Politics is no longer about governing a nation for the benefit of all its citizens. Now you simply pick a side and join the ongoing culture war against everyone and everything else. This rotten system produces rotten leaders. Hence, when Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson became Prime Minister in December 2019, it was clear that the nation was taking a major risk on such a man. His failings as a politician and a person are a matter of public record for anyone who has the eyes to see them.
The title for this post is a quote from The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien. I’ve used it as a verbal cue to try and give readers an overview of the point I’m striving to convey. Because I want to talk about modern life in western civilization, specifically its complexity and increasing uncertainty. If you’re extremely wealthy you can mitigate these two points but I’m working on the premise that most of the people who read Contains Moderate Peril are not. The blogging community, of which I am a participant, is a diverse group but from what I’ve observed it’s not populated by millionaires. In fact most of the people I know, both online and in person, are just holding down a job, trying to keep a roof over their head and pay the bills. Often they’re doing the job they do in default of anything else and they’re at the very least ambivalent towards it. The pandemic has also brought home how fragile so-called “normality” is. Modern politics are also volatile and life in general just doesn’t seem as certain as it was twenty years ago.
The Conservative Party successfully held onto their “safe seat” of Old Bexley and Sidcup in yesterday’s closely watched by-election. However their overall majority was reduced by more than half amid a very low voter turnout. Conservative councillor Louie French becomes the country’s newest MP after winning 11,189 votes, more than 50 per cent of those cast, in the seat previously held by the former cabinet minister James Brokenshire. Mr Brokenshire died in October from lung cancer aged 53. The closest challenger was Labour’s Daniel Francis, who secured 6,711 as the Tory majority fell from nearly 19,000 to 4,478, the equivalent of a vote share swing of 10 per cent to Labour. Turnout in the constituency was just 34%, down from the almost 70% who voted in the 2019 general election.
Old Bexley and Sidcup By-election Part 1
Last week James Brokenshire, MP for the constituency of Old Bexley and Sidcup, died of lung cancer at the age of 53. He had held this parliamentary seat since 2010 and maintained a strong majority throughout the 2015, 2017 and 2019 general elections. Hence the constituency of Old Bexley and Sidcup is considered a “safe seat” for the Conservative Party. In fact it has only ever returned MPs from that party since its creation in 1983. As a result of Mr Brokenshire’s death, there will now be a by-election held in the constituency of Old Bexley and Sidcup to return a new MP to parliament. What makes this local election a little more interesting than usual, is that it will not be taking place against a wider ongoing national election. Therefore, there is scope that local issues may well play a greater part in the electioneering of all participating parties.
Last week James Brokenshire, MP for the constituency of Old Bexley and Sidcup, died of lung cancer at the age of 53. He had held this parliamentary seat since 2010 and maintained a strong majority throughout the 2015, 2017 and 2019 general elections. Hence the constituency of Old Bexley and Sidcup is considered a “safe seat” for the Conservative Party. In fact it has only ever returned MPs from that party since its creation in 1983. As a result of Mr Brokenshire’s death, there will now be a by-election held in the constituency of Old Bexley and Sidcup to return a new MP to parliament. What makes this local election a little more interesting than usual, is that it will not be taking place against a wider ongoing national election. Therefore, there is scope that local issues may well play a greater part in the electioneering of all participating parties.
The parliamentary procedure for holding a by-election are as follows. The Chief Whip of the political party whose MP held the vacant seat starts the process by “moving the Writ”. This is a motion requesting “that the Speaker do issue his Warrant to the Clerk of the Crown to make out a new Writ for the electing of a Member to serve in this present Parliament for the constituency of .... in the room of…”. The Speaker puts the question to MPs to decide whether to agree to the motion. If MPs agree it becomes an Order for the Speaker. The Speaker then issues a Warrant to the Clerk of the Crown who then sends the writ to the Returning Officer, who is responsible for the administration of the by-election. A new Writ is usually issued within three months of the vacancy. The by-election timetable is between 21 and 27 working days from the issuing of the writ.
As the current UK government enjoys a majority of over 80 seats, there is no pressing political need to hold this by-election as soon as possible. Therefore it seems logical that it will more than likely happen in early 2022. However, nothing is in tablets of stone so there is a possibility it could take place prior to Christmas, as did the last General election in 2019. A more important factor than the prospective date, is the issue of the candidates fielded by each respective party. As mentioned previously, Old Bexley and Sidcup is a safe seat for the Conservative Party. Hence, it is broadly expected that whoever becomes the Conservative candidate will subsequently win the by-election, due to the established voting patterns of the constituents. Old Bexley and Sidcup is a predominantly white, middle-class suburb of South-East London and as such is seen as a Tory “heartland”.
Like any political party, the Conservatives have their own unique set of rules with regard to candidate selection. In the past, Conservative party selection was largely in the control of the local Constituency Associations, however there was an approved list held at party HQ to be considered. In recent years the approved list has been replaced and a more equitable assessment board convened ensuring greater ethnic diversity and more female representation. However, local Constituency Associations still have a major say in candidate selection. Therefore under normal circumstances, there shouldn’t be any controversy surrounding the new Conservative candidate. However, the current Prime Minister Boris Johnson isn’t known for being a “stickler for the rules”. There is a degree of concern among the constituents of Old Bexley and Sidcup, as to whether a candidate could be “imposed” and parachuted into a convenient safe seat.
Time will tell as to what happens next. There is scope for the entire by-election to be a straightforward and uncontroversial process. Equally, things may go the opposite way. UK politics have become very unsettled in the last six years, Traditional voting patterns, party loyalties and general public opinions have shifted and not necessarily along traditional party lines. Furthermore, the Conservative party has radically changed since 2019. Many moderate MPs did not stand for re-election in the last general election. Although Old Bexley and Sidcup may still be a Tory safe seat, that doesn’t mean that the constituency is by default, well disposed toward Boris Johnson and his particular brand of politics. It will be interesting to see if such sentiments are reflected in the by-election.
If you visit the websites for such UK tabloid newspapers as the Daily Express or the Daily Mail you will no doubt encounter prominent stories about Megan Markle, Nigel Farage and “immigrants”. If these two august institutions are short of column inches, they’ll run a piece about how some former celebrity has had the unmitigated gall and temerity to get old. I mean WTF? How dare they do what human beings are genetically disposed to do. It’s outrageous. Similarly, head over to the Unherd website and you’ll find foam flecked tirades regarding spurious points of contention over dubious subjects. Often the topic being harangued is incredibly niche and I’ve never heard of it before or even considered it being a thing. These sort of talking points are not about informing, debating and most certainly aren’t about thinking. They exist to provoke reactions.
Yesterday afternoon, Nigel Farage the Member of Parliament for Clacton and leader of the Reform Party, held a press conference in which he declared that he would be resigning his seat and thus triggering a by-election. He cited the following list of grievances that have led to him making this decision. That the Parliamentary standards investigations were being politicised, the media and other parties were conducting a coordinated campaign against him and that he had endured years of threats and physical attacks. He further asserted that his family’s privacy and safety had been breached as well. He finished by alleging that the political system was repeatedly changing rules to obstruct Reform and that he was the most attacked politician in the UK. Rather than be judged by the legacy media and the “establishment”, he would rather put the issue of his political integrity to the electorate of Clacton. He even offered to pay for the cost of the by-election.
UK Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer has resigned and intends to leave office before the parliamentary summer recess. By then Andy Burnham will more than likely be voted leader of the Labour Party and by default will become the new Prime Minister. Due to the current size of the incumbent Government’s majority, there is no pressing reason for a General Election that the UK’s right wing tabloid press is currently calling for. Whether this provides the Government with the reset they’re hoping for when Parliament reconvenes in autumn remains to be seen. With seven Prime Ministers coming and going in a decade, there are some serious questions to be asked about the current state of UK politics. However, the mechanics of contemporary politics, the decline of clearly defined ideologies and the people that seek elected office to be our leaders are only half of the problem. The other major impediment to the UK’s democracy functioning properly is the electorate.
Andy Burnham successfully won the Makerfield by-election yesterday, returning him to the House of Commons as a member of Parliament after holding the position of Mayor of Manchester for the past nine years. Prior to this, Burnham was Labour MP for Leigh from 2001 and 2017. He served in both the Tony Blair and Gordon Brown administrations and has held such senior governmental posts as Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and Secretary of State for Health. His return to Parliamentary politics is likely to result in a leadership challenge to incumbent Prime Minister Keir Starmer. When speaking after winning yesterday’s by-election Burnham spoke of “a final chance for change” the current trajectory of the present Labour Government. However, I don’t wish to focus on any of this at present. I am far more interested in the above picture, taken as the results were announced and what it says about UK politics.
The UK Government has formerly announced its intention to ban under-16s from using social media. This is due to increasing public pressure that “something must be done” about the perceived iniquities of many online platforms. However, as with most complex social problems of this nature, no one has any clear or practical ideas as to what that “something” is. It remains a nebulous, non-specific panacea and clearly someone else’s job to identify and implement. As ever, why choose a nuanced and multifaceted solution to a complex problem, when it is far easier and politically expedient to just “ban” something. The former requires effort and a degree of thinking. If such an approach fails it also means that those who came up with it now carry the can. The latter dumps the problem in the lap of various third parties, who can then be conveniently blamed when the ill conceived policy fails.
Every Thursday, Mrs P volunteers at a food bank that is run from a local church; Avery Hill Christian Fellowship. Today there was a shortage of staff so I agreed to help out. It proved to be an equitable arrangement as she collated the various orders and I packed the bags and took them to the respective clients. The food bank itself is organised and administered by the Trussell Trust, a UK based NGO and charity providing emergency food and support to people locked in poverty. It is open for 2 to 3 hours a week depending upon demand. During today’s session we served just six people. Some weeks its can be triple that amount. Upon closure, a member of staff from the Trussel Trust did a stock take and collated a list of what was needed. This is provided by various local church communities via parishioners donations, as well as local supermarkets who have an arrangement with the trust to provide surplus stock or good approaching the end of their sales window.
Under the First Past the Post electoral system, the candidate(s) receiving the highest number of votes in each constituency are elected. This system is used in the UK during general elections and in some local elections, such as those recently conducted in England. An alternative approach is the system of proportional representation, which aims to allocate seats in a manner that reflects the popularity of various parties. Both the Scottish Parliament and the Senedd in Wales employ systems of Proportional Representation. Historically, first-past-the-post has been seen as advantageous for the Conservative and Labour parties. It poses challenges for smaller parties whose votes are distributed evenly across different regions, making it difficult for them to secure seats. This dynamic effectively prevents potential competitors to the Conservatives and Labour from succeeding electorally. Consequently, due to this situation, voters may hesitate to support these smaller parties from the outset.
There are local elections being held across the UK today. Voters in Scotland and Wales will elect representatives to their respective national parliaments, while in England the voting is for local councils and regional mayors. These are the first major elections to be held in the UK since the 2024 General Election which saw the Conservative government of fourteen years, fall to the Labour Party. Midterm elections are often a litmus test for how the electorate think the national government are performing although local issues are also a major factor. The consensus among political journalists and commentators is that the incumbent government is polling extremely poorly and will subsequently face a backlash. In recent years the UK has seen a decline in traditional two party voting with Reform UK and the Greens gaining significant traction among the electorate. Hence today’s elections may well see both these parties make significant gains.
Our household is currently trying to reduce our monthly overheads in response to the ever increasing cost of living. April is not that far away and a great many service providers will increase their rates and tariff as the new financial year begins. Then there is the ongoing effects, both direct and indirect, of inflation to consider. Although the UK inflation rate is dropping, currently sitting at 3.4% in December 2025, food inflation remains higher at 4.5%. Being based in the UK, salaries and billed services tend to be administered monthly. You get paid usually at the end of the months and bills can turn up at any point, depending upon when you started a service. Any payments coming from central government, such as state pension or other benefits, are paid every 4 weeks. This means that there are 13 payments in a year. I thought it pertinent to clarify this point as other countries, such as the USA, favour a fortnightly financial cycle. Hence as a household we work around a monthly budget.
I don’t know if you have noticed that there are quite a lot of companies that have names taken from Tolkien’s Legendarium. At first glance, this seems innocuous enough. Tolkien’s writings grew in popularity over the seventies and eighties but since the release of the film trilogy at the start of the twenty-first century, his work has become more well known and been assimilated into our wider pop culture. Hence, it seems quite logical that a startup tech company, for example, would choose a name from his writings. No doubt the founders grew up reading The Lord of the Rings and are fans. That all seems plausible. However if you take a further look, it gets somewhat more complex. Here are four companies that have Tolkien based names.
“Managed decline” is a phrase that refers to the processes associated with the end of a specific lifecycle, with the goal of minimizing costs or other forms of loss. The concept originated in business where it referred to the management of companies and industries. More recently it is used in wider contexts. The concept gained prominence with regard to urban policy, particularly in the UK during the eighties when several major cities suffered economic and political collapse. Of late, the term has been applied to the UK, encompassing a systematic weakening of the economy, social structures, and cultural values, as well as its global political and diplomatic force. In each case, managed decline involves making strategic choices about resource allocation and accepting the consequences of those decisions. It is a complex issue with ethical and practical considerations, often sparking debate about the best way to address decline and reverse the process.
I still maintain a legacy presence on Twitter/X and I follow my local MP (member of Parliament) Louie French. It’s not something I especially relish as I am not a supporter of the Conservative party (or any other) and I did not vote for him in the last election. I just like to know what he is up to as he is the political representative for our constituency. As the Conservatives are out of power at present, to all intent and purposes, Mr French is a backbench MP although he has a minor position as Shadow Parliamentary Undersecretary (Culture, Media and Sport). However, with that being said he is hardly a key member of the shadow cabinet. Hence he focuses on constituency work and that which is generated by his shadow posting. He will also lend his voice, when required, to any major policy decision or statement made by his party.
Sunday 6th April is the start of a new financial year, here in the UK. According to data from numerous financial and economic institutions, an estimated million plus households will be facing annual increases of £400 to £500 as the proverbial “cost of living” goes up. Everything from Council Tax to Mobile and Broadband costs are being increased. Future cost hikes are expected in our energy and water utilities. As bills start going up across the country today, average wages remain stagnant. Middle-income and poorer households have been worst hit by this wage related issue. Hence the tabloid press have labelled the start of the new financial year as “Awful April”. Hyperbole aside, this is a very real issue which due to its complex, global causes, doesn’t have a quick fix solution.
I consider myself to be a grounded, rational individual. I am not excessively emotional. I like facts, data and reason as opposed to hyperbole, rhetoric and bluster. That being said, I am aware that the world is an imperfect place. Opinions are often not based upon empirical fact but personal perspective. Hence many people experience reality differently to me. They are driven by their feelings and other factors. However, despite these differences in philosophy, for most of my life the world has remained functional and over time slowly improved in subtle ways. Deference to expertise, a sense of community and basic pragmatism meant that people broadly pulled in the same direction. Of course there has always been dissent but it has been within a stable system. However, of late I feel that this era is now finally over. Things are no longer stable. We live in an uncertain world.
Newspapers were an integral part of UK culture in the seventies. During the week, they were delivered prior to going to work, so you would peruse them over breakfast. Alternatively you would buy one en route to your place of employment and read it on the bus or train. In a world before 24 hour, rolling news, they were the primary means of keeping the public abreast of events and as such, enjoyed a substantial audience. On occasions a newspaper story could make or break a political career or launch a crusading campaign to address a social ill. Newspapers were a force to be reckoned with and therefore a significant part of the socio-political landscape. However, due to a strong union presence within the workforce, the UKs newspapers often lagged behind other industries with regard to the technology.
The First Past the Post (FPTP) electoral system used in the United Kingdom, as well as in several other countries such as the US and India, has both advantages and disadvantages. However, despite being a simple and straightforward system it has been abandoned by many democracies in favour of more proportional and equitable methods. The primary criticism against FPTP is that it allows a minority of the electorate to return a majority government. Since 1935, there have been majority governments 90% of the time, but not one of them had the support of a majority of voters. At present, the current UK government has a majority of seats with just 43.6% of the votes. In the 2019 election they gained an extra 48 seats despite an increase of only 1.2% of the vote share.
Politicians have a distinct way of talking when being interviewed or giving a press conference. It is often characterised by a strategic use of language, centred around rhetorical devices, persuasion techniques and a careful framing of messages. Direct answers to questions are usually avoided, with tangential responses being preferred. Opinions and specific perspectives are frequently presented as facts. There is also a propensity to focus on “problems” and apportioning blame, rather than “solutions”. It’s important to note that the use of language in politics is a complex and dynamic process influenced by various factors, including cultural context, media dynamics, and the evolving political landscape. Different politicians may employ different communication strategies based on their individual styles and objectives. Here are some key aspects of how politicians use language:
The United Kingdom is one of the few democratic countries in the world that does not have a single, written constitution. Others include Canada, New Zealand and Israel. To date, its constitution is a combination of written and unwritten sources, including statutes, common law, conventions and somewhat esoterically, royal prerogatives. The reason for this is predominantly historical. Since 1688, Britain has not experienced a revolution or regime change, which often leads to a constitutional initiative, such as the American or the French Revolution. Britain’s constitution has evolved slowly over time under relative stability and as such, it has never been deemed necessary to list the fundamental laws and principles of the country's political system.
On Friday 15th September the former actor and comedian turned internet social commentator, Russell Brand, released a video on his YouTube channel addressing allegations about his personal life, ahead of a forthcoming UK current affairs documentary. Brand vehemently denied what he described as “very serious criminal allegations”. The following day Channel Four broadcast “Russell Brand: In Plain Sight”. During the course of the program Brand was accused by one woman of rape and by three others of sexual assaults, and emotional abuse between 2006 and 2013. During the course of the week, further claims have been made against him and that his “predatory” behaviour was an open secret within the TV industry. Furthermore, women would warn each other in advance if they had any dealing with him. All of which has played out against a mixture of broadsheet analysis, tabloid hyperbole, performative politics and internet bluster.
For those who live outside of the UK, let me categorically state that Brexit has broken British politics. Prior to 2016, national politics still broadly functioned along traditional party political lines, with income and class substantially determining voter allegiance. The big three cities (London, Birmingham and Liverpool) maintained their liberal dispositions and Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales were dominated by their regional politics. Brexit changed all this creating fault lines that fell outside of the existing political status quo. Opinions differed based upon where you lived, how politically literate you were and even education. Your party political allegiance no longer indicated what stance you took on this matter. Furthermore, the discourse around this complex subject was quickly debased into a bipartisan culture war that was toxic and dangerous.
Okay, keep up as there’s a lot of ground to cover. The UK government is currently suffering in the opinion polls and after 13 years in office, is facing potential oblivion at the next general election. In an attempt to shore up support among the party faithful, the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, is currently pursuing a hardline with regard to immigration. According to Ipsos, as a political issue about 29% of the electorate consider immigration to be a major problem. The remainder either think current levels are manageable or have no substantive view on the matter. However, as a “culture war” issue that can be weaponized by the tabloid press, which often has direct links to the Conservative Party in the UK, immigration is a hill to die upon. Hence you will find a lot of rhetoric that is anti-immigration and any contrary view is tarred with trite pejorative terms such as “lefty”, “liberal” and “woke”.
Last April, the Election Act 2022 became law within the UK. The Act introduced a requirement for all those voting in-person to produce photo identification when attending a polling station. This is the first time that such an ID has been required. Prior to this, voters could either bring their polling card to verify their identity at the polling station, or confirm their registered address from the electoral roll with staff. Now a UK driving licence or passport are considered the primary means of identity. A list of additional photo identification that has been deemed acceptable, is available on the UK government website. For those members of the electorate who do not have any of the qualifying ID, there is a Voter Authority Certificate available, which can be applied for online. This photo ID is linked to the applicants National Insurance Number. For further impartial information on photo ID and registering to vote, visit the The Electoral Commission website.
I am writing this post from the perspective of a UK citizen, but the sentiments expressed are applicable to anyone who lives in a country where you have democratically elected local political representation. IE someone who is supposed to advocate on behalf of your community or for you personally as the duly elected political representative. Here in the UK, the country is divided into 650 constituencies, each returning one Member of Parliament. Irrespective of whether you voted for your MP or whether you support the political party that they belong to, they are obliged to represent you and advocate on your behalf, if you request it. Such is the relationship in principle between constituents and MPs in the UK. It is important to be aware that your local MP is not a delegate whose sole purpose is to represent majority constituency views. Under the UK political system, an MP makes decisions on behalf of constituents and can take a position counter to local opinion, if they feel that is in the best interest of the constituency.
It is difficult to write about the state of UK politics with any degree of intellectual rigour when the entire situation has become so utterly farcical. My initial reaction to the recent departure of Liz Truss after just 45 days in office, was to laugh with abject scorn and derision. She was destined to fail due to utter lack of ability. However, there is still the outstanding matter of the country lacking a credible and functional government to address inflation, the cost of living crisis and resolve all the issues stemming from Brexit. There are problematic national and international events taking place that need addressing. A united, pragmatic and empathetic government is required to solve both these short term and long term needs. Sadly, the governing party is riven with opposing factions and there is no commonly held policy or underlying ideology. The PM may well have changed but the underlying flaws remain.
Conservative Party has been in government in the UK since 2010. During that time there have been three Prime Ministers. Today we moved onto the fourth. After Boris Johnson resigned on 7th July, the nation has had to endure a tedious two month process in which the Conservative Party elects a new leader. That person then becomes the PM by default. Many readers unfamiliar with the UK political system may be surprised that a change of leader has not led to a General Election. That is because the Conservative Party still holds a parliamentary majority of 71 elected Members of Parliament. Hence it is still constitutionally quite able to govern, despite Boris Johnson being forced from office. Therefore party members vote for a new party leader who gets the top job by default. Remember that in the UK, the Prime Minister is not the head of state and does not have the executive powers of a President.
I try to keep my thoughts on political matters to a minimum here at Contains Moderate Peril, mainly because UK politics and the current state of discourse associated with it has become an absolute shit show in recent years. Brexit broke traditional politics and has made matters far more tribal and partisan. The two main parties have declined from having clear ideologies, identities and manifestos, to becoming either a lobby group for the specific demographic group that supports them, or a conflicted, divided and schizoid shadow of its former self. I’ll let you work out which is which. Politics is no longer about governing a nation for the benefit of all its citizens. Now you simply pick a side and join the ongoing culture war against everyone and everything else. This rotten system produces rotten leaders. Hence, when Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson became Prime Minister in December 2019, it was clear that the nation was taking a major risk on such a man. His failings as a politician and a person are a matter of public record for anyone who has the eyes to see them.
The title for this post is a quote from The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien. I’ve used it as a verbal cue to try and give readers an overview of the point I’m striving to convey. Because I want to talk about modern life in western civilization, specifically its complexity and increasing uncertainty. If you’re extremely wealthy you can mitigate these two points but I’m working on the premise that most of the people who read Contains Moderate Peril are not. The blogging community, of which I am a participant, is a diverse group but from what I’ve observed it’s not populated by millionaires. In fact most of the people I know, both online and in person, are just holding down a job, trying to keep a roof over their head and pay the bills. Often they’re doing the job they do in default of anything else and they’re at the very least ambivalent towards it. The pandemic has also brought home how fragile so-called “normality” is. Modern politics are also volatile and life in general just doesn’t seem as certain as it was twenty years ago.
The Conservative Party successfully held onto their “safe seat” of Old Bexley and Sidcup in yesterday’s closely watched by-election. However their overall majority was reduced by more than half amid a very low voter turnout. Conservative councillor Louie French becomes the country’s newest MP after winning 11,189 votes, more than 50 per cent of those cast, in the seat previously held by the former cabinet minister James Brokenshire. Mr Brokenshire died in October from lung cancer aged 53. The closest challenger was Labour’s Daniel Francis, who secured 6,711 as the Tory majority fell from nearly 19,000 to 4,478, the equivalent of a vote share swing of 10 per cent to Labour. Turnout in the constituency was just 34%, down from the almost 70% who voted in the 2019 general election.
If you visit the websites for such UK tabloid newspapers as the Daily Express or the Daily Mail you will no doubt encounter prominent stories about Megan Markle, Nigel Farage and “immigrants”. If these two august institutions are short of column inches, they’ll run a piece about how some former celebrity has had the unmitigated gall and temerity to get old. I mean WTF? How dare they do what human beings are genetically disposed to do. It’s outrageous. Similarly, head over to the Unherd website and you’ll find foam flecked tirades regarding spurious points of contention over dubious subjects. Often the topic being harangued is incredibly niche and I’ve never heard of it before or even considered it being a thing. These sort of talking points are not about informing, debating and most certainly aren’t about thinking. They exist to provoke reactions.