Total Visits

Wednesday, 23 June 2021




I have listened and read Mainstream Media comments and analysis about the Chesham and Amersham By-Election result, in which the Conservative and Labour parties were thrust aside by the Liberal Democrats.  The striking thing about all of this is its lack of honest and/or competent analysis.


It is suggested that large numbers of Conservative voters transferred their vote and voted for the Liberal Democrats in order to vote against HS2 and against development on the Green Belt around Chesham and Amersham. This is a wholly unbelievable and fantastical analysis.


The first point to make is that the Liberal Democrats would be very unlikely beneficiaries of such a vote shift, since they are, as a Party, in favour of HS2.  They are also in favour of the Mass Immigration, which has resulted in 15 million or so migrants coming into the country and led to the demand to now build, in effect, two Greater Londons in the South East of England.  All three of the LibLabCon British Establishment parties are equally complicit in the mass immigration agenda, as are the Greens (aka “Communists”?) who are even more enthusiastic about there being “No Borders”. 


The second point to consider is that for those of us who have done any actual canvassing (which seems, on the basis of what has passed for analysis, as if that excludes all those who have vented their opinions) would know that it is highly unlikely that large numbers of Conservative voters would vote for any other party.


The third point to note is that all of the Mainstream Media analysis seems to be based upon no analysis of the actual voting figures and is almost entirely fact free. 


I have compared the 2019 General Election results in Chesham and Amersham and the 2021 By-election results which I think vividly show that the two main things which happened in the By-election are as follows:-


1.    The “Progressive”/Leftist/openly Multi-culturalist, Green, Liberal Democrats and Labour votes remained remarkably similar in number in both elections.  The difference in the By-Election, is that the Liberal Democrats were successful in getting most of those voters to vote for them. 

2.    The next thing that is strikingly obvious is that there was a dramatic decline in the percentage of turnout.  The reduced numbers of those who voted closely correlates with the reduced Conservative vote.


These results strongly corroborate the idea that the Liberal Democrats’ campaign strategy was highly successful, but not in the way reported in the Mainstream Media. 


The Liberal Democrats seem to have adopted a two-pronged strategy.  The first to persuade all of the Leftist voters to vote for them and secondly to demotivate the Conservative voters.


As usual, of course, we have had some ridiculous comments about majorities of votes in the Media.  The figures of course don’t bear out any idea that there has actually been a Majority, since the Liberal Democrats got 21,517 votes out of a total electorate of 72,828, which is, of course, just under 30% of the electorate.  In what world of mathematical illiteracy would under 30% be called a Majority? That is if it wasn’t politically expedient to do so!


I think it is interesting and informative to see that the actual percentage of “Progressive” voters, within even a comfortably prosperous, quite middle class commuter area like Chesham and Amersham, is less than 30%. 


Compare this with the proportion of the electorate in most of England who showed themselves to still be patriotic by voting for “Leave” in the European Referendum. 


In most constituencies in England over 50% of the electorate voted for “Leave”.  This suggests an election winning strategy for patriots which is the mirror of the Liberal Democrats’ one, i.e. suppress the Progressive vote and aim to focus the Patriotic voter on one candidate. 


Interestingly, as the Liberal Democrats have been the focus of success in this case, that shows that this candidate no longer needs to be one of the two principal British Political Establishment parties. 


It also shows that Conservative voters are in a transitional period of weakening loyalty to the Conservative Party. 


This is perfectly rational, since the Conservative Party nationally does not stand for anything that any sensible conservative minded voter would actually personally support. 


Any signs of the dissolution of the Conservative/Labour stranglehold on English politics can only be strongly welcomed by any real patriot!


Here is the actual numbers compared between the two election results in Chesham and Amersham:-







14,627                    Liberal Democrats votes             

  7,166                    Labour votes

  3,042                    Green votes


24,835                    Total “progressive” votes

                    (Conservative votes 30,850)


(No other candidates)


55,978                    Total vote

76.8%           Turnout




21,517          Liberal Democrats votes             

     622                    Labour votes

  1480           Green votes


23,619                    Total “progressive” votes (plus c.800 split among other candidates)

                    (Conservative votes           13,489)


37,954                    Total votes cast

52%             Turnout





18,020                    Fewer votes overall

17,361                    Fewer Conservative votes



Monday, 29 March 2021

Essex Police Commissioner election

Essex Police Commissioner

My nomination papers have now been accepted to stand for the Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner for Essex, or as I prefer the more manageable title, Police Commissioner for Essex. 


If elected to a Police Commissionership it would give us considerable power and influence over key aspects of the State’s enforcement ability.  So if you are in Essex or nearby please do come forward to help us, in this case, in Essex


Here is a reminder of our manifesto positions:-

1.6 The English Flag

1.6.1 We call for the compulsory flying of the English flag, the cross of St George, on all state-maintained public buildings in England.

2.11 Policing


2.11.1 Policing is an increasingly difficult job due to changes in our society, which now lacks the social cohesion and shared values that once gave us a mostly peaceful and well-ordered way of life. Our cities have become places where it is impossible to perform traditional communal policing.


2.11.2 English Democrats seek a return to a system of policing which recognises the principle that all citizens are treated equally. In their efforts to prevent crime and catch criminals the police should not be hindered and demoralised by unreasonable ideological constraints.


2.11.3 We should not lose sight of the fact that the basis for the maintenance of law and order in England rests on a firm foundation of active participation by law-abiding citizens. A relationship of trust and co-operation between citizens and police is essential to effective policing and the prevention of crime. With that in mind, it is reasonable to expect that policing should not be oppressive. The aim is a peaceable society in which liberty and justice can flourish.


2.11.4 It is essential that the police force be adequately trained and resourced.


2.11.5 Police forces should be more democratically accountable than at present. This would require the election of Chief Constables or the Police Authorities which appoint them.


2.11.6 English Democrats call for the creation of a scheme enabling businesses to pay for their security staff to train and register as Special Constables, their powers of arrest applying to their place of work and its neighbouring streets.

Such registered security staff would be subject to Police staff performance monitoring and discipline.


2.12 The Legal System


2.12.1 The primary role of a legal system is to provide the means for settling disputes. It should enable those who suffer loss, in the form personal injury, theft, or damage to property, to be properly compensated by the party at fault. Laws, and the penalties for breaking them, should comply with the principles of natural justice. As societies have become more complex, so have their law codes. To a great extent, this is unavoidable.


2.12.2 However, states and their governing elites are extending the reach of law into areas that infringe upon individual liberties. The result is a body of law which is more restrictive and complex than it need be.

Many of the customs and principles of English law are being undermined in the political quest for greater conformity with Continental ideas and practices. Law is being used as a tool for imposing dogma. One of the consequences of these changes is that the police are increasingly being made the enforcers of political doctrine and moving further away from their traditional role of upholding the delicate balance between Order and Liberty.


2.12.3 To obtain justice, citizens must feel able to consult and employ the services of the legal profession. Many people are deterred from this by the procedures and costs of the present legal system. Improvements have been made in recent years but more needs to be done to make the system user friendly and efficient.


2.13.4 The English Democrats favours less law and a simplification of law. There are far too many matters currently covered by the criminal law. There should be a drastic reduction and rationalisation of the number and extent of criminal offences.


2.13.5 We must reform the jury system but not abandon it because the jury provides a democratic check on the legal system. The law is not the property of lawyers; it belongs to the people and should serve their needs.

Our preference is for a return to comprehensible, just and effective law. Given its current chaotic state, the law should be codified.


2.13.6 Once the criminal law has been properly codified, the English Democrats would ensure that the criminal law is vigorously policed and enforced.


2.13.7 Except in an emergency there should be a single annual implementation date for new law. This will help rectify the current muddled situation where no one can be sure, without considerable effort or expense, whether a clause of a new Act has been brought into force or not. Also, some rules, for example the Civil Procedure Rules, are being rewritten so frequently that new editions are being published more than once a month! This lead, not surprisingly, to the shameful situation where no-one, not even the judiciary, can be sure of the current rule in force without first making unreasonable efforts to research the point.


2.13.8 To avoid such excessive complexity developing again, a monitoring system should be devised which ensures that new law is unambiguously comprehensible and properly and efficiently enforceable. This could be a function of a reformed Second Chamber.


2.13.9 The English Democrats respect the right of victims of crime to defend themselves and their property against criminals. The English Democrats would extend the right of self-help. People should be allowed to use simple non-lethal means of self-defence such as pepper sprays, or CS gas sprays. The Government has the right to request the National Standards Authority to prepare reasonable Standards for the preparation of such devices. They may pass a law that requires the manufacturers of such products to follow the national standards. Such devices should be no more harmful than tasers currently used by the Police The police in England seem increasingly unwilling and unable to help our people when attacked or burgled. So, if elected, our Police Commissioner candidates will require their Chief Constables to grant firearms and shotgun licences for personal protection, as well as CS gas and pepper spray items (of the sort commonly available over the counter on the Continent). These will be for the purposes of citizens protecting themselves and their property.

This is in accordance with the actual law. We will direct Police Constables to ignore the unlawful Home Office, politically motivated, guidance to the contrary. The English Democrats respect the rights of citizens who are victims of crime to defend themselves and their property against criminals. The English Democrats regard this as no more than the traditional English right of self-help. Furthermore it will be Force policy that no police officer who is called to a scene of a burglary or other situation where a victim of crime has defended themselves or their property against a criminal or criminals shall be permitted to arrest the victim. If, in breach of this policy a police officer does arrest the victim, then the Chief Constable will be directed to indicate to that officer that their chances of promotion within that constabulary are thereby ended. Any Chief Constable instructed as above who does not comply with our Police Commissioner’s instructions shall be forthwith dismissed by our Police Commissioner.


2.13.10 The English Democrats believe that every victim of a criminal offence should have the right to address the court on the question of sentence and for the court to be required to bear the victim's views in mind when passing sentence.


2.13.11 It is not acceptable that 100,000 hardened criminals commit over half of all crime in the U.K. Once a criminal is identified as beyond effective rehabilitation he or she must be kept out of the community until no longer a risk.


2.13.12 Prisons should be designed and equipped so that prisoners are not subject to degrading conditions. Prison space should be increased rather than release offenders early, and there should be sufficient prison space to allow the imprisonment of deserving offenders.


3.19 Political Correctness

3.19.1 The English Democrats share the public concerns as to the harm caused to our society by political correctness.

3.19.2 The English Democrats unreservedly condemn this intolerant creed. We reject the self-righteousness of political correctness and condemn the ideology as an evil. Political correctness is incompatible with a free and democratic society.

3.19.3 One key aspect of political correctness is that a person, an institution or a government is politically correct when they cease to represent the interests of the majority, and become focused on the deliberate subversion of English national culture and interests, the denigration of English history and of the English themselves, and the promotion of the objectives of minority pressure groups.

3.19.4 Political correctness is grounded in the capture of state institutions, with official spokespeople, legislative powers and sanctions for breaches of political correctness. It is this capture of state institutions which makes political correctness so oppressive and dangerous. This must end.

3.19.5 The English Democrats will take whatsoever measures are necessary to remove political correctness from both national and local government, including the various quangos and other government bodies funded either directly or indirectly by the taxpayer. These measures will include the following three steps: Firstly, those educational establishments, legal establishments, quangos, departments or other government organisations that are promoting political correctness will be fundamentally reconstituted and/or have their funding withdrawn or, where appropriate and if possible, be closed down. In particular, the so-called Commission for Equality and Human Rights will be closed. Private organisations that promote political correctness will not be awarded government contracts. Secondly, the English Democrats recognise that those institutions that are run by state appointees are the most detached from public opinion and are more likely to become politically correct. The English Democrats will, where practical, ensure that senior public employees, such as police chief constables and senior judges, are democratically approved by the community they serve. This will be achieved either via direct elections or via approval by democratically elected representatives. Many senior public posts will be subject to a maximum occupancy period, for such senior public employees to be accountable to the public will form a part of a bulwark against political correctness. Thirdly, the English Democrats will carry out a review of all laws and regulations, and will amend or, where appropriate and if possible, completely repeal those laws and regulations that foster and promote political correctness.

3.20 St George’s Day

3.20.1 The people of England should be able to celebrate St George’s day as a National Holiday.