Why can this happen?

Reform UK have been accused of “declaring war on British workers” over plans to scrap new employment rights if they win the next general election.

Deputy leader Richard Tice will unveil the policy in a major speech on Tuesday setting out the party’s right-wing approach to growing the economy and tackling the cost of living.

Tice, who is Reform’s business, trade and energy spokesman, will promise to bring in a Great Repeal Bill to scrap new employment rights rules introduced by Labour.

It would also get rid of the government’s pledge to achieve Net Zero by 2050 and improved rights for renters.

Tice will say those policies are “all well intentioned but kill jobs, hinder growth, investment and prosperity”.

“This will all help lower inflation and bring down bills for consumers,” he will say.

But Labour chair Anna Turley said: “Reform have formally declared war on British workers. Nigel Farage and his cronies want to rip up hard-won workers’ rights on parental leave, sick pay, and would cut up to a million clean energy jobs in the process.

“Reform have revealed whose side they’re on – and it’s not working people. And it’s families up and down the country who’d be left paying a very heavy price.

“While Reform shout from the sidelines, this Labour government is delivering the biggest uplift in workers’ rights in a generation, reducing the cost of energy bills for working families and delivering the stability businesses need to unlock economic growth across the UK.”

xavierarnau via Getty Images

1. They may struggle with complex family dynamics

2. They may deal with family ‘hierarchies’

3. They may crave the attention they didn’t get growing up

Holger Leue via Getty Images

4, They may struggle to set boundaries

5. Or they may crave more connection

6. They may struggle to form an individual identity

middelveld via Getty Images

7. They may present with generational trauma

It was at 25-years-old that Kemi Badenoch joined the Conservative Party – for the partying. “Socialising, drinks, hanging out with other young people,” she recalls, and it was how she eventually met her husband, Hamish, at the Dulwich and West Norwood Conservative Club.

Two decades on, she is drafting policy for that same cohort and attempting to make the party’s youth wing – the Young Conservatives – fun again. The sort of thing a 25-year-old Kemi might actually have turned up to.

Over the weekend the party unveiled its New Deal for Young people, with Badenoch vowing to cut student loan interest and boost apprenticeships. The thinking, one Tory source insists, is not “cynical politics” but to “do what is right for the country”.

“Yes, young people are not our traditional voters but we have got to move away from thinking about whether this hits the core voter demographic with policy and instead focus on whether it deals with systemic issues.”

It builds on the back of other policies like scrapping stamp duty – and, I’m told, “you can expect more… our direction of travel speaks for itself”, with this referred to as only Step 1.

“We knew we were dealing with a tricky one given when Plan 2 came in but it demonstrates we  are not going to shy away from dealing with issues people are facing just because it happened under the old Tory Party. We are going to right some wrongs.”

Policy chief Neil O’Brien, who has had a big hand in the new approach, made as much clear when pressed by Sophy Ridge on Sky. Asked whether the original policy had been a mistake, he said yes – and that he would apologise to students burdened with loan debts.

A member of CCHQ source frames it more broadly: “It comes down to what the core values are that we hold true: aspiration, being a contributing member of society, having barriers to growth and opportunity removed – anything we see that get in the way of that, we’re going to go after.”

A forthcoming report from Next Gen Tories leans heavily on the same themes: aspiration, wealth creation – particularly housing and infrastructure – and community. The argument is that the party must offer more than a narrow economic pitch; it must articulate a case for civic life too.

Next Gen Tories’ James Cowling, tells me: “We’re massively heading in the right direction. Kemi’s recognised that we need to restore the link between hard work and rewards. The next big step is a serious plan for housing and infrastructure, which will make us the only serious party in UK politics.”

There has been increased engagement from CCHQ with the group around policy announcements like cutting student loan interest, and a sense that the party has understood the intellectual arguments for change.

As another Tory source tells me, there is a political incentive as “more in detail polling shows that high earners in their 30s and 40s are low hanging fruit” for the party to go after.

It is alongside this policy push that an effort has been made to reenergise the Young Conservatives, the party’s official youth section – 120 years since the party’s first youth wing was launched. One CCHQ staffer admits the organisation had “rather been abandoned”. When Fred Lynam – who works between CCHQ and Badenoch’s parliamentary office, and has been spearheading the latest efforts – checked the website earlier last year, it still featured photographs of former leader Rishi Sunak.

There are now signs of life: a newly formed national management executive held its first meeting earlier this month. Some branches – in Camden and Barnet, at UEA and in Norfolk – were already active, but there was little structure. Badenoch has made a point of engaging, attending London drinks and a pub event at conference. I’m told she “wants it to be fun”.

The age cap has been lifted from 25 to 30 to widen the pool. More resources and professional support are being channelled in from HQ. There is talk of changing the image to show that the YCs are populated by “normal people”.

A new committee has been formed, with Kevin Ghateh elected as the interim-chair. He tells me that “if it’s an environment full of young people, we want it to be that way – not pretend to be anything else,” hence throwing parties like their one at Christmas with DJs and karaoke, and an event this weekend where they have booked out a nightclub in Birmingham til 2am.

Hugo Rasenberg, the group’s comms and social media member, adds: “We want a cultural change within the organisation to make it open and accessible, not people turning up in a three-piece suit.”

He sees a chance to “seize the obvious gap in the market” politically. “Young people are more aspirational than ever,” Rasenberg says, “it has taken until the past 12 months for the party to wake up to that”.

Ghateh thinks there has been a “key difference in before and after” Badenoch took the reigns “when it comes to engagement with the YCs”.

“It’s definitely a good start. It has been quite rare for the party to actually be developing policy for young people. I just hope there’s more.”

Festus Akinbusoye was the Conservative Bedfordshire Police and Crime Commissioner from 2021 to 2024.

The architectural serenity of Westminster offers a rare vantage point from which to observe the escalating friction defining modern London. While this borough where I live has maintained a commitment to fluid movement, our neighbours have succumbed to an orthodoxy that treats the city as a static laboratory rather than a vibrant economy.

The proliferation of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) – especially in our poorest boroughs, has evolved from a well-intentioned environmental trial, into a religion of automated enforcement that disproportionately penalises those who can least afford the price of admission to our roads.

The human cost of this experiment is most visible in the levels of unpaid fines. Recent data published in the Telegraph reveals a deepening crisis of legitimacy in the capital, with barely 60 per cent of the Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) issued for LTN infractions over the last five years being settled by motorists. This widespread non-compliance suggests that we are not witnessing a wave of casual lawbreaking, but rather a profound grassroots rejection and anger toward a policy that feels predatory rather than protective. For a delivery driver in a place like Newham where I grew up, or a tradesman in Tower Hamlets where I went to school – boroughs consistently ranked within the most deprived 10 per cent of local authorities in England; a single camera-generated fine could represent a significant portion of their daily take-home pay.

There is however an uncomfortable paradox at the heart of the “quiet streets” movement: the displacement of congestion from affluent residential enclaves onto the arterial boundary roads where the working poor reside and take buses.

Rosamund Kissi-Debrah, whose advocacy following the tragic death of her daughter Ella, has become a cornerstone of the clean air debate. She has rightly raised concerns, and warned that current LTN strategies risk becoming a whitewash if they merely move the problem around the corner, which they do. When traffic is funnelled onto main roads, it is the residents of social housing blocks and the commuters waiting at bus stops who inhale the concentrated fumes of idling vehicles.

The economic paralysis resulting from these barriers is quantifiable. The Tom Tom Traffic Index has consistently crowned London the slowest capital city in the world, with drivers losing up to 141 hours to congestion annually. It now takes an average of 3 minutes and 38 seconds to travel just 1km (0.6 miles) in central London. The worst period in 2025 was during the train strikes.

There is data also directly linking the slowdown in traffic in London to increasing installation of LTNs. It is however surprising to note efforts made by the Mayor’s office to suppress evidence which showed that LTNs did not reduce car use as was initially promised. I wonder why. Cars do not simply vanish from existence because of flower boxes installed on roads.

These disruptive schemes have devastating effects on the public transport network that the Mayor claims to champion. Data highlighted by the London Assembly Conservative Group shows that bus speeds have plummeted in areas where LTNs have been implemented without adequate mitigation; turning a simple cross-town journey into a gruelling endurance test for those with the patience of a biblical Job.

There is also a direct cost to the public purse for this. As bus journeys take longer due to congestion, passenger numbers are falling too. Why take a bus when you can get to your destination faster through other modes of travel? The Mayor is now subsiding London’s buses to the tune of £1.2 billion a year.

This is more than a transportation and ideological issue, it is also an assault on the social mobility of the capital. The “laptop class” may enjoy the newfound silence of their ‘walled’ cul-de-sacs, but the electrician navigating a labyrinth of bollards to reach a job site, or the night-shift nurse whose commute has doubled in distance is paying a hidden tax on their time and productivity.

Small businesses, already reeling from inflationary pressures, find their supply chains strangled and their customer footfall eroded by a design that treats the economy as an afterthought. Rather than pursuing a policy of managed immobility, we should be investing in the technological and natural solutions that provide clean air without social exclusion.

We must pivot from restrictive, punitive measures that disproportionately squeeze lower-income households toward a strategy built on common-sense and innovation. Instead of “barricaded zones” and daily fines, a truly progressive vision prioritises the rapid expansion of green canopies to act as natural carbon sinks and the roll-out of AI-driven traffic management to dissolve congestion without blocking trade. Investment in infrastructure for electric commercial fleets and making public transport much more reliable, safe, and efficient should be key areas of focus – not more LTNs.

The burgeoning rebellion on our streets from Hackney to Lambeth; Tower Hamlets to Ealing, and the mounting legal challenges against these schemes should serve as a warning to policymakers. People are fed up with all these punishing restrictions and punitive measures.

Enough is enough.

Bradley Fage is a Senior Researcher at City Hall Conservatives and a current School Governor.

New polling released last month reveals a striking and largely overlooked reality – the Conservative Party is now only the fifth most popular party among teachers. It is one of the most alarming political findings I have seen in years. The data suggests that a historic eight in ten teachers would vote for parties on the left of British politics, even Reform now poll ahead of the Conservatives.

For anyone who cares about the future of our education system, this should serve as a wake-up call.

For decades, teachers have overwhelmingly backed Labour and other left-wing parties. But this has not always been a simple left versus right narrative. In the late 1970s, around 60 per cent of primary teachers and 45 per cent of secondary teachers planned to vote for Margaret Thatcher’s Conservatives. The profession was once far more politically competitive. These voters can be won back with the right policies for schools – and Labour’s offer has not kept pace.

Schools are facing their biggest challenges in a generation. There are more than 400 fewer full-time equivalent teachers than in 2023, over 100 private schools have closed since Labour’s “schools tax”, and recruitment and retention continue to deteriorate. At the same time, smartphones, social media, and online culture are reshaping classroom life at extraordinary speed. Behavioural standards are harder to maintain. Authority is more fragile. The demands on teachers grow year by year.

As a school governor and former chair, I have seen these pressures first hand. Conversations in governing body meetings are no longer just about improvement and aspiration, but about staffing gaps, budget strain and how to manage the growing complexity of pupil behaviour in a digital age.

And yet the political conversation feels strangely muted, with little in the way of decisive, practical solutions.

Teachers are not searching for ideology. They are searching for certainty, protection and policies that allow them to do their jobs well. That is where the Conservatives are beginning to make a serious case.

First, smartphones in schools. Constant access to devices undermines attention, disrupts lessons, and fuels behavioural problems. Years of non-binding Department for Education guidance have failed to shift the dial. Under the leadership of Shadow Education Secretary Laura Trott, the Conservatives have backed a clear, enforceable smartphone ban – giving schools legislative backing rather than leaving heads and teachers to fight this battle alone. This is not about control for its own sake; it is about restoring calm, focus and authority in classrooms. Labour, by contrast, has largely sidestepped the issue, offering little beyond warm words for guidance that many teachers regard as ineffective.

Second, school autonomy. Labour’s proposed Schools Bill risks capping the size of successful schools, preventing popular and high-performing institutions from expanding while effectively steering pupils towards weaker alternatives. At a time when pupil numbers are falling and schools should be adapting flexibly to demand, this approach appears counterproductive. Conservatives have pushed back against such restrictions, defending the principle that good schools should be allowed to grow. Teachers want the freedom to lead thriving institutions without being suffocated by bureaucracy – and that freedom matters.

Finally, Labour’s decision to impose VAT on private schools – often described as the “schools tax” – risks destabilising the wider education system. Many teachers rely on private schools for additional employment, specialist training or professional collaboration. Early indications point to school closures and pupil displacement, placing additional strain on an already stretched state sector. A policy designed to draw political dividing lines does little to improve classroom conditions. Conservatives, by contrast, argue for strengthening the system without creating new pressures elsewhere.

The lesson is clear.

Teachers are not voting Conservative – not yet. But the argument for doing so is stronger now than at any point in a generation. While Labour and the Greens rely on historic loyalties and rhetorical positioning, Conservatives are advancing concrete proposals: enforceable rules on smartphones, protection for school autonomy, and maintaining private provision as a choice for parents and pupils.

For teachers, the choice is becoming less ideological and more practical. Which policies will make classrooms safer, schools stronger and the profession sustainable?

If you care about certainty in your classroom, freedom for your school and serious answers to the challenges education now faces, it may be time to reconsider old assumptions. The Conservative Party is no longer simply an alternative – it is positioning itself as the only party offering the clearest response to the problems teachers confront every day.

In news that appears to have been entirely ignored by corporate British media, Israel’s four-man bobsled team has been disqualified from the Winter Olympics – for lying.

The four men were lying near the bottom of the rankings after their first two runs and wanted to bring in the team’s substitute, Druze Ward Fawarseh. But the rules only allow for an alternate to step in if one of the starting team is injured or sick. So the Israelis claimed that Uri Zisman was sick – but got found out and disqualified.

Who called it first?

While UK mainstream media have ignored it completely, their Israeli counterparts are trying to portray it as Israeli fair play. Supposedly, team bosses heard about the cheating and withdrew their own team. But an official disqualification can only be imposed by official Olympic judges.

If this pattern has a familiar feel, that’s because it is familiar. All too familiar. Israel slaughtered hundreds of its own people on 7 October 2023 under the so-called ‘Hannibal directive‘. To (unsuccessfully) cover its tracks, the occupation regime and its mouthpieces made up atrocity propaganda about rapes, and about beheaded or cooked babies.

Deja vu

None of it – literally not a word of it – was true. There were no beheaded babies. None were put in ovens. There were no rapes. But that, the UK and other western media were all too happy to amplify.

They still do, even though the claims have been completely debunked. Even Israeli government and military figures have admitted the Israeli military killed most Israelis who died that day. No wonder they are ignoring this latest admission of lying.

Featured image via the Canary