Tomorrow the PCS civil servants’ union is debating a motion to ‘counter a hostile Reform government’ with ‘sustained industrial action’: they are planning to go on strike if we win. This is Reform’s response.
Any civil servant who seeks to undermine ministerial authority and the impartiality of the Civil Service through unlawful strike action will no longer have a job to return to.
The Civil Service exists to implement the will of the government of the day. Its staff must do what duly-elected ministers ask them to do, within the law - or leave.
By publicly confirming the reason for future industrial action as opposition to a specific ‘hostile’ government, the PCS have ensured their strikes cannot be considered a ‘trade dispute’ and would be unprotected and unlawful.
Under section 12.1.21 of the CSMC, no appeals to the Civil Service Appeal Board will be possible in this situation. As the Shadow Home Secretary already set out, pension entitlements and any entitlement to redundancy pay may also be lost.
Those who do choose to strike because, like the PCS, they disagree with the democratic decision of the British people are not only taking part in unlawful industrial action but are also in breach of the Terms & Conditions of their employment, specifically section 4.1.3 (b) of the Civil Service Management Code (CSMC): “civil servants must not take part in any political or public activity which compromises, or might be seen to compromise, their impartial service to the Government of the day or any future Government”.
The fact is under a Reform UK government the Civil Service will be a much better workplace than it is today. Our plans will deliver a smaller and more highly skilled Civil Service where good work is rewarded and officials are able to make a real difference to people’s lives.
A union that prioritised its own members would recognise that our agenda will be the most pro-worker in recent political history. We’re happy to work with any fair-minded trade union to develop policies to support workers.
But, if the PCS don’t wish to engage reasonably they should know that we will turn their anti-democratic motion into a resounding win for a Reform UK government, the taxpayer, and the British people.
After nearly a year’s worth of investigation, @ZickZaggurat and I are preparing the release of a comprehensive report on the NGO-Charity industrial complex. We have mapped out networks, noted common operating models, and identified when the state is at war with itself.
@ZackPolanski - this is magnificent. Three things I can’t deny:
1. It is a video.
2. You are wearing a jacket.
3. Then you aren’t.
4. Then you are again.
Unfortunately that’s where the accuracy ends.
A few corrections for you:
Peter Thiel is not our CEO. Alex Karp is — and has been for 20+ years. (A lifelong Democrat, for anyone keeping score.)
We are not a “spyware company.” Spyware is malware. Malware is illegal. Calling a software company spyware is, technically, defamatory (don’t worry, we are not suing).
We don’t build surveillance technology. We build software that helps organisations make sense of data they already hold. Not the same thing.
There was no “private tour” of our HQ. There was a public photocall to which the media came. Hence, why there are so many pictures of the event.
Our MOD contract is not “the biggest defence contract in UK history.” Ajax armoured vehicles = £5.5bn. Dreadnought submarines = £31bn. We’re grateful for the work, but let’s keep a sense of scale.
We have no more access to NHS data than Microsoft has to the contents of your Word documents. I think you know this by now.
We don’t have access to patient medical records. Same story.
I agree that “nothing matters more than our health.” Which makes it worth reminding you of what Palantir’s software is actually doing in the NHS right now:
->110,000 additional operations
->15% fewer delayed hospital discharges
->7% more patients finding out within 28 days whether they have cancer
Respect again for what you did with that jacket.
No 10 is *not disputing* extraordinary claim in @spectator that Rachel Reeves is blocking defence funding because of the MoD’s poor record on ‘gender parity’ issues. Asked twice, the PM’s spokesman declines to comment on ‘speculation’…
When you set aside money for retirement, you might expect that it will be invested in a way that will generate the most money for you.
But thanks to environmental and diversity rules, you could end up with nearly £200,000 less by the time that you retire.
It’s totally absurd.
🚨EXCLUSIVE🚨
A group of former Army chiefs has accused Sir Keir Starmer’s Government of having “no moral backbone” over its “grotesquely unfair” pursuit of Troubles veterans.
The retired generals said they feared that Labour’s Troubles bill could lead to a wave of “witch hunts” against Northern Irelandveterans, exposing retired troops to years of spurious persecution in the courts.
Meanwhile, SAS veterans are preparing an unprecedented revolt against potential “show trials”, boycotting inquest hearings should key changes not be made to Labour’s bill.
Full story: https://t.co/1mBuFLhB5j
We already have "market access" to the Single Market via a free trade deal. We are being asked to pay for market access that we already have, and to follow rules that will harm British interests and the British economy.
Read our recent briefing:
https://t.co/AKN6DXRtkO
💷The British public save into their pensions with a basic expectation—that their money will be invested to maximise their retirement wealth.
As our latest paper lays clear, this is not happening. ESG makes us poorer.
The Fiduciary Duty has died in Britain. It must be revived.
💷Proud to launch our latest paper The Death of the Fiduciary Duty by @jamesd_graham with a foreword by @desireefixler.
The paper reveals that ESG investing could cost the average Brit £178,000.
Endorsements from @griffitha and @TiceRichard.
Watch here to find out more 👇
✒️Our latest @Substack is live.
@dampierguy writes about the jobs that migrants will leave behind.
This question was raised by the newest Green Party MP. Guy addresses the 'lump of labour fallacy' here.
Read now 👇
https://t.co/uzu2SoYze9
A new report by the Henry Jackson society nails the issue of the Chagos Islands and Starmer’s ceding them to Mauritius
“Britain has long supported international law and the rules-based order, but there is a growing danger that international institutions are being used as instruments of geopolitical pressure. The UK was never legally compelled to surrender the Chagos Islands, yet we appear to be treating an advisory opinion as though it overrides our own strategic judgment. Decisions about Britain’s security and sovereign territory should ultimately be made in London, not outsourced to politicised processes within the UN system.”
Removing hereditary Peers from the House of Lords means that the Upper Chamber will increasingly be filled with political appointees.
Hereditaries owed no loyalty to a party. Their sole responsibility was to the British people.
To lose them is a great shame.
Any reversal by the UK on its 2025 agreement with Mauritius would be read as a conscious decision to prioritize Western security interests over international law and sovereignty.
https://t.co/fgwDWkMHz3
Westminster’s Net Zero obsession is fuelling Britain's cost of living crisis!
We are impoverishing ourselves while China - powered by coal - expands its industry, reaps the economic gains, and sees its emissions continue to rise.
Video credit: @gray_alexander1
“It’s a dreadful piece of legislation… Everyone should be equal under the law. Full stop.”
Former Conservative cabinet minister, Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, tells @vicderbyshire why he supports Reform UK’s proposal to repeal the Equality Act.
#Newsnight
Powerful condemnation of Keir Starmer’s Chagos surrender deal from over 80 British and US political leaders, former defence chiefs, retired admirals, generals and national security officials.
Time for The White House to sink the Chagos deal and protect Diego Garcia.