The Manifesto Project

Policy and reform approaches for the new right

[HeliOps Magazine @HeliOpsMagazine]

The UK's New Medium Helicopter programme was meant to be a quick fix. Five years later, the fleet has shrunk from 44 planned aircraft to just 23 AW149s, with deliveries not due until 2030–33. How did it go so wrong? Read the full analysis on Antares.

[The Manifesto Project @policyprojectX]

Improved higher education policy...

https://t.co/2EdBnJqjA6

[Michael Reiners @MCRReiners]

'They were simply doing a difficult job' wears increasingly thin. Their job, and the powers which encompass the job (PACE, POA), require considerable alteration.

@FUDdaily has some concrete recommendations in this realm, found in @policyprojectX's policing policy, here: https://t.co/qKwIZRynHY

[James Stevens 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇬🇧 @TheFrogDies]

@MCRReiners @VolvoMan17 @FUDdaily @policyprojectX I think a big part of the problem is that the average Bobby just isn't smart enough to understand the complexities of the legislation they are being expected to police. Those framing the law needs to consider this far more when writing it in the first place

[The Manifesto Project @policyprojectX]

New culture policy - DCMS/BBC reform etc...

https://t.co/f0WZzT9hmj

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

Just spent some time upgrading agriculture policy. I've established a pretty good working methodology now. Grok comes in very useful. It's not as simple as just telling it to write a section. You first have to write a framework based on your existing knowledge. You then have to outline your values and red lines, what you want it to ignore (particularly the agri lobby climate dogma), and know which sources to point it at. You then have to interrogate and verify responses. It's then a question of homing in on what is substantive and what's filler. I want it to be comprehensive but not uselessly verbose. As ever, I'm open to feedback.
https://t.co/vj46Ur6nnb

[Ben Pile @clim8resistance]

Carney was -- and probably still is -- one of the major architects of Net Zero.

Much of what he built, much of in it Mike Bloomberg's interests, has indeed come crashing down. But much of it remains.

He's just buying time, that's all. Carney hasn't changed.

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

Having a bash at transport policy for the Manifesto Project. Not generally one of my strong areas which is why I procrastinated over it for so long, but I've found the website of @RichardWellings enormously useful. He's one of the very few bold thinkers in this area. I'm not completely aligned with his ultra-libertarian way of thinking, but policy travel in the opposite direction has strangled British productivity. Here's where I'm up to...

https://t.co/3tLjB8cmm6

Any feedback appreciated.

[Ancient Mariner @pegge49]

Six new Air Defence Destroyers, but I thought the UK Govt said real warships were obsolete and drones were the future....
What a serious Navy/Govt taking defence seriously looks.

Note:
The South Korean Navy has 2x LPH, 20x SSK, 13x DDG and 17x FF/FFGS

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

Just been updating the defence policy for the Manifesto Project in the wake of the Defence Investment Plan. It's now a complete re-write. It's been a steep learning curve from which I have reached three basic conclusions:

1. Defence policy is hard
2. Defence policy is boring
3. I shouldn't write it

That said, it needs to be done, so here is my provisional attempt...
https://t.co/qKHxpQTpdO

[Kathryn Porter @KathrynPorter26]

In the past couple of weeks we've seen some worrying trends on the GB power grid with unprecedented summer margin notices and three occasions on which system operator @neso_energy was forced to ask the EU to lift intraday interconnector trading limits

But more worrying is what hasn't been widely reported - on 23 June there was persistent low frequency through the evening which NESO eventually solved by curtailing exports

Not by buying the capacity back, but by requesting "Emergency Assistance" - these aren't really requests - although the other TSO can reject the request it can't stop NESO from turning the flow off at the exit substation

Why is this worrying?

1. NESO didn't issue any warnings to the market that GB margins were tight yet it was unable to keep frequency within the safe operating limit - why not?

2. By cutting off exports to the Netherlands and France, in the absence of any system warnings, NESO has just made cutting off exports part of the normal operational toolkit. As we rely on imports in winter we might regret this move as the other countries will feel far more able to reduce their exports to us after this move

3. Did the absence of any warnings issued by NESO mean it didn't see the tight margins coming ie was it due to forecasting errors?

4. Was the system actually secure during this period? Was NESO compliant with the SQSS (requirement to at all times hold enough reserve to cover the loss of the single largest infeed - I doubt it since at times during the say the demand forecast error was higher than the required reserve holding)? Were any transmission constraints violated?

The fact there has been no discussion of this by NESO is also worrying. NESO seems to think if it keeps quiet about its challenges nobody will notice

But the demand forecasting errors are growing, as the system becomes more complex. The maximum error so far this year is almost 4x the SQSS!!

And that's the average over half an hour - the instantaneous error is likely far higher. And of course NESO balances the grid from instant to instant, not over half hours

So can NESO actually PROVE it can run the grid securely? Everyone assumes it can because we haven't had a blackout. But the absence of a disaster is not the same as safety - running into traffic isn't safe just because you're not run over every time you do it

@ofgem @energygovuk @ClaireCoutinho @AndrewBowie_MP @NJ_Timothy @griffitha @cmackinlay @DavidGHFrost @mattwridley @TiceRichard @Iromg @AllisonPearson @EdConwaySky @afneil @MerrynSW @mattotele @jonathan_leake

https://t.co/w96n6LRCyk

[Richard North @ollieparrot]

The Ministry of Defence is attempting to pre-define and build rigid, multi-billion-pound systems for a hypothetical future war that it wants to fight, rather than fight the actual war on the ground where the enemy gets a vote.

Reality is such a bitch.

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

Is British policing broken beyond repair?
https://t.co/8212Jm3Fnp

[The Manifesto Project @policyprojectX]

We’ve set out a plan to fix British policing. Here are the main measures:

We will scrap Police and Crime Commissioners and replace them with local Policing and Crime Boards. These boards will be tied directly to local authorities, include magistrates, and have real powers to set policing priorities in their area.

We will break up oversized police forces and local authorities where they are too large to be properly accountable. This includes splitting up Birmingham and Manchester councils. We will also abolish all regional mayors.

In London, we will dismantle the Metropolitan Police and create four separate commands answerable to the boroughs. We will establish a new London-wide armed force for serious threats, riot control and counter-terrorism, with similar capabilities in other major cities.

We will create a paid Police Reserve, primarily drawn from ex-forces and ex-police officers, who will commit to a set number of hours per year. Volunteers will be restricted to low-risk support roles and will not be used to plug gaps on the beat.

We will end two-tier policing. New national guidance will require consistent enforcement regardless of political cause or identity. Chief Constables will be held accountable, and major public order operations will be subject to post-incident review.

We will abolish non-crime hate incidents and destroy all existing records. Political symbols and badges, including rainbow flags, will be banned on officers and police vehicles.

We will create a permanent multi-agency taskforce, modelled on the FBI, with powers to direct local forces against grooming gangs, organised crime and money laundering on the high street.

We will establish a National Police Leadership Academy, modelled on Sandhurst, to train future senior officers in operational command, public order, and resistance to political pressure.

We will strengthen HMICFRS by making responses to its recommendations mandatory. In cases of serious and persistent failure, Chief Constables will face real consequences, including loss of pension entitlements and a permanent bar from senior roles in policing.

We will offload non-core work such as mental health crises and social disputes to other agencies. Police officers should focus on preventing and investigating crime, not acting as social workers or default first responders.

We will restore visible, local policing by rebuilding police stations and ensuring officers work regular beats, particularly in high-crime areas.

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

I wasn't impressed by Restore's verbose policing policy. When you break it down, at least half the document is padding with a completely unrealistic and pointless implementation plan. Most of all, it's badly structured and badly written, lacking any obvious appreciation of the state we're in, or how the government intends to reform policing.

In my view, the 2026 Home Office white paper is the basis from which to build a policy response. Many of the gripes Restore raises about British policing are already well understood by the Home Office, and some of the measures the government's white paper proposes are actually quite sensible. Others, not so much. It is for political parties to look at the current state of play, and outline their course corrections rather than creating blue-sky fantasy blueprints based on hackneyed nostalgia.

As far as a policy outline goes, I think you can do a lot more with a lot less. Spurred by Restore's effort, I put a few hours into updating the policing section on the Manifesto Project, linking it with the broader ambitions for a right wing government.

Part of the problem with our police is a lack of of a driving mission, which explains its structural incoherence. The mission should dictate the structure. Restore, instead, opts for an ideological restructure to "restore" the police to a previous iteration - when modern Britain requires a much more mission driven approach - namely that of tackling the rampant organised crime and other issues related to mass immigration.

My effort is still a work in progress. Running at nearly seven thousand words, I could easily expand it to be twice as long and still come in at half the length of Restore's paper, while saying a great deal more. Readability, I think, is key, though its a moot point since the brains of Restore supporters capsize at the sight of a five paragraph tweet. They're not going to read either.

For my part, it's a just worthwhile thought exercise, and unlike Restore, I actually welcome ferocious criticism. Lastly, before anyone accuses me of using ChatGPT, I don't use it at all. I do consult Grok for advice on structure, flow and clarity, though I ignore a lot of its advice because its too timid in its choice of language.

My main difference in approach, policy wise, is that I don't place the same emphasis on present day gripes such as "woke police" and I don't think fixing the police in isolation is going to make much of a difference. Unless you also have a plan to fix the courts, the prisons, addiction services, local authority enforcement systems, welfare, and much else, even the best police force is just going to be sweeping leaves on a windy day. That's why a joined-up manifesto is necessary. Addressing policy in distinct silos is where politics as a whole is going wrong.

https://t.co/wXeZMp2yG8

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

I wasn't impressed by Restore's verbose policing policy. When you break it down, at least half the document is padding with a completely unrealistic and pointless implementation plan. Most of all, it's badly structured and badly written, lacking any obvious appreciation of the state we're in, or how the government intends to reform policing.

In my view, the 2026 Home Office white paper is the basis from which to build a policy response. Many of the gripes Restore raises about British policing are already well understood by the Home Office, and some of the measures the government's white paper proposes are actually quite sensible. Others, not so much. It is for political parties to look at the current state of play, and outline their course corrections rather than creating blue-sky fantasy blueprints based on hackneyed nostalgia.

As far as a policy outline goes, I think you can do a lot more with a lot less. Spurred by Restore's effort, I put a few hours into updating the policing section on the Manifesto Project, linking it with the broader ambitions for a right wing government.

Part of the problem with our police is a lack of of a driving mission, which explains its structural incoherence. The mission should dictate the structure. Restore, instead, opts for an ideological restructure to "restore" the police to a previous iteration - when modern Britain requires a much more mission driven approach - namely that of tackling the rampant organised crime and other issues related to mass immigration.

My effort is still a work in progress. Running at nearly seven thousand words, I could easily expand it to be twice as long and still come in at half the length of Restore's paper, while saying a great deal more. Readability, I think, is key, though its a moot point since the brains of Restore supporters capsize at the sight of a five paragraph tweet. They're not going to read either.

For my part, it's a just worthwhile thought exercise, and unlike Restore, I actually welcome ferocious criticism. Lastly, before anyone accuses me of using ChatGPT, I don't use it at all. I do consult Grok for advice on structure, flow and clarity, though I ignore a lot of its advice because its too timid in its choice of language.

My main difference in approach, policy wise, is that I don't place the same emphasis on present day gripes such as "woke police" and I don't think fixing the police in isolation is going to make much of a difference. Unless you also have a plan to fix the courts, the prisons, addiction services, local authority enforcement systems, welfare, and much else, even the best police force is just going to be sweeping leaves on a windy day. That's why a joined-up manifesto is necessary. Addressing policy in distinct silos is where politics as a whole is going wrong.

https://t.co/wXeZMp2yG8

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

Makerfield: the one everyone got wrong

https://t.co/xdVIDLfmj2

[Kellie-Jay Keen @ThePosieParker]

This is a sublime take down of Gary’s “economics”.

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

Why Reform won't fix immigration

https://t.co/YQb86tOvUg

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

This should be of much more interest to parties of the right because a big part of the "hostile environment" that remigrationists propose is just enforcing the laws we already have. Without trading standards officers and EHOs, there is nobody to detect black market halal meat, overcrowded HMOs, dodgy take-aways, and crooked vape shops.

[The Manifesto Project @policyprojectX]

A big part of the "hostile environment" is just enforcing the laws we already have.

[Pete North @FUDdaily]

https://t.co/JKdKVs4d1e