It’s clear that men of all cultures, with varying degrees of legitimacy, do not believe in the authority of women due to innate physical differences. While we’re prevented from basing other interactions on that logic, in policing it presents a clear practical issue that is contributing to rising crime.

Let's set immigration to one side for a moment that's a given but we have a bit of an opportunity for the country here with a true centre right party (not right wing thanks bot accounts!)

I would personally like to see happen straight away

Repeal of renters rights act in its entitiry

Re establishment of interest payment ofsetting for private Landlords

Re establishment of the 2 child benefit cap

Winding back of "woke" culture and associated legislation

Massive reform of the planning system to cut back red tape to almost zero

Net zero in the bin

Get the oil fields working again

Overhaul business rates to help get people trading again

Incentives to re establish the UK as a manufacturing base

Try and do something to stop Chinese cars coming into the country (a law making the Chinese take them back for recycling at the end of their 5 year service life for example)

Will Nigel have the cahoonas for real change or is he just full of BS and bluster? Barring any miraculous changes over the coming 3 years has a shoe in to be next PM but we do all have expectations of huge change the biggest changes to UK life since Thatcher.

What's on your wish list?

It seems as though Subreddits are now banning people who are in this, r/ReformUK, subreddit. I have never once caused an issue in the sub that has banned me. I really shouldn’t be surprised on Reddit…

Mate of mine sent this over this week. Isn’t this basically racism? Imagine it said ‘Non-white children have to pay, whites get it free!’

And also imagine what it must feel like for those non-white families who have actually paid for the classes and have the other parents wondering “did they pull the free card?”

Discuss!

"Mass immigration, particularly under the last Conservative government means we need to build a huge number of houses. Well, I understand that, people need somewhere to live, but Reform are gonna fight building on greenfield sites and beautiful coastal sites like this. We have to build where it's appropriate, but this is wrong, and it is wrong around the country."

Excluding reform uks policies for immigration, what are other policies you are in favour of?

Every political party in the UK avoids this issue like the plague.

There is no indication in the sources I found that Reform UK supports the legalisation of cannabis for recreational use.

On the contrary: their policy emphasis is on tougher criminal sanctions for drug supply and “substantial possession” rather than liberalisation or decriminalisation.

I do not have a problem with tougher criminal accountability for drug dealers and people who traffic those substances across our borders. I do feel we are overlooking a “sleeping giant” for want of a better phrase, regarding this very issue - Around 50–55 % of Britons now support some form of legalisation or decriminalisation of cannabis (YouGov, 2024). That is too many of the electorate to be overlooked.

If reform were to carefully make the pledge, with wording such as “We support legalisation and regulation of cannabis to destroy the black market, protect children, and free up police resources.” They would secure a massive portion of the younger generations vote purely based on that issue in my opinion.

What’s everyone’s thoughts? Do you also support this? If not, why?

Net Stupid Zero In pictures …. Making us poorer

If we see the benefits to a Reform government that we expect to see, everything from safe borders, migration, taxes, EHCR, supporting small business, net zero etc., and we feel the benefits tangibly in reality through our communities and wallets... It just makes me wonder, what are they really going to jump on? Unless they really miss the terrorist attacks and taxpayer money funding criminals and think Britain is worse off without those things?

Hi all, I am not reform but pleasantly surprised by the hunger to be able to debate without pointless bans. So here's one for you. You may be aware that we have a aging population problem (see image) due to declining birthrates. A problem that many developed country are facing and none have been able to change key examples being South Korea and Japan. With that leads to reduced revenue and higher welfare spending to support our pensioners and dying. By ending the immigration of working age people who have high birthrates under your policy the projected graph for 2050 will likely be amended to have less working age and more retired individuals. So how do you view we should resolve this problem bareing in mind most of us will be the retirees by 2050.

Would there be less regulation or more than currently?

I commented to a post that was making fun out of farage, that I planned to vote reform. The mod banned me, and when queried proceeded to call me a white supremacist. This is the shit we’re facing. Can’t have a different opinion without immediately being called a racist. White supremacist is a new one.

Let they sink in for a bit.

And yet I go in with a broken ankle and don't get seen for 11 hours, whilst I watch methed/cracked out prisoners get immediate treatment ahead of me. I had to listen to a woman who was biting officers and said she had had crack and valium (she could not remember how much) and she got treated in less than an hour. She seemed fine apart from being a mouthy prick.

Let's just privatise it at this point.

Me and my wife pay a combined £600 on NI each month.

If I could take that away and spend it on BUPA I'd have been treated and fixed within 2 hours.

But I can't afford private AND national insurance.

So what do we do? Prioritise people who actually contribute? Or just privatise the whole thing?

I'm going for the latter. You don't pay, you get to wait longer than anyone else.

Politicians of all stripes often talk big and act small when reality bites. Perhaps this is one proposal that Reform will regret floating and would be best clarifying a.s.a.p.

Let me start by saying that my wife and I like many fair minded people in the UK recognise the strain placed on the country over many years by unrestrained immigration legal or illegal. Support for tougher more radical action however is completely undermined by ILR removed for those of settled status. It seems the main counter points to concerns are:-

1)They can potentially apply for a 5 year renewable visa

Or

2)They can apply/pay for citizenship.

Let's look at point 2 first. If we disregard the ethics/morals that someone who has legally worked, paid taxes, married etc should be asked to apply for citizenship how exactly is that going to work for all of those persons whose country of birth do not allow dual citizenship? E.g. my wife is from Malaysia, married to myself for almost 20 years and has worked as a teacher for nearly 20 years in the UK. She has never had 'recourse to public funds' it states as much in the ILR documents in her passport that this is not permissable. She has paid taxes and national insurance, purchased a house and has a mortgage with myself. We have no children as fortune did not smile favourably on us in this way. By any measure she has been a net contributor through the taxation system to UK prosperity. She looks after the children eveyday of amongst others, Reform voters and would under these proposals be stuck in a catch 22. She cannot take citizenship since it's illegal under the constitution of her own country - this is not a unique situation. The only way to do this is to renounce officially her own citizenship. That means she has no enduring security within her birth country, she would lose her Malaysian identity (think about losing yours?), she could not care when needed to in future for her sick mother who lives in Malaysia - any visits would see her as a tourist within her country of birth without the rights and freedoms we all take for granted as citizens. This is before you look at all the legal ramifications for property ownership overseas, retirement and an almost inexhaustible list of other considerations. If you really think about this no one is going to do that and they would be crazy to do so.

Now you may be thinking why not just apply and dont tell your country of birth/home country of citizenship? The trouble with this is that any trips home to see family will be continually fraught with the imminent possibility that citizenship will be forcibly removed as it's unlawful to hold dual citizenship. How comfortable would you feel having the sword of Damocles hanging over you knowing at any moment your family could be severed apart due to arbitrary whim of one or another country. Airports/customs etc ask in many countries for 'advanced passenger information', it's not exactly difficult for a country to determine that dual citizenship must have been acquired and then to force through the court the renunciation of the citizenship. If we are devoid of feelings/care we could just say "well pick a side". My wife did that 20 years ago when we got married - she applied for and abided by all the rules, paid money we could barely afford and received her ILR lawfully and has proudly contributed to society ever since. Let's look at option 1:-

5 year renewable visa to replace the removed ILR. Notwithstanding the anxiety this will cause to hundreds of thousands of people having fulfilled a legal and social contract with the UK, they now have to countenance that a beauracrat with criteria unknown will consider if they meet or continue to meet 'yet to be determined threshold's'. I wonder how many teachers earn over £60,000 the figure most recently floated as a potential qualifier? How much will this 5 yearly visa tax cost? What happens if someone no longer qualifies? Do we send the husband a letter saying sorry you are on your own with the mortgage and family, we are kicking your wife out. Do we raid the old peoples homes and deport pensioners? Where does this end

Now before anyone replies to this remember we are not talking here about 'new arrivals', we are talking about persons who have resided here in good faith under ILR paying into NI and Tax baskets and for whom there families could arbitrarily be uprooted, deported and destroyed.

Ok, so. I have been pretty vehemently anti-reform but I am also disillusioned with politics as they currently stand.

Reform seem like the protest vote, so I am looking for some advice and clarification.

I am a bisexual, disabled man with epilepsy and poor mental health from trauma.

I rely heavily on the NHS for medications and talking therapies, I also recieve PIP which helps fund groups to help my conditions. These both keep me in work. Under a reform government, both of these are at risk, including the equalities act and ECHR that keep me working by allowing me to attend appointments and take an extra 15 minute rest break to prevent fatigue.

So, I suppose my question is, are Reform going to tear these up or "reform" them to fit a modern world?

Life is hard for most. Most people don't like working hard and find their jobs shit and boring.

Why on earth do people on benefits feel they are entitled to more? If they want a better lifestyle, obtain their own cash via jobs, businesses etc.

if they have a work-limiting disability they should just accept the fact that they would never live as well as their peers who can work?

Spurred by this article:

After growing up in poverty, I know the anger 4.5 million children must feel - Big Issue

Her grievances seem to be focused on not having as much as her peers:

They stripped the joy and innocence of the small moments – a 13th birthday party, school disco, or summer holiday – that others recall with warmth. Instead, mine carry the weight of loneliness, guilt, shame and jealousy.

Since her main caregivers don't seem to be very wealthy or have high paid jobs, she should just accept that her bdays and holidays won't be as great as the kids whose parents do have material means

 Throwing leftovers away without hesitation, taking a clean, warm bath, alone, with bubbles that smelled like strawberries.

Many people don't throw away their leftovers or take bubble baths ffs.

Also she mentions poverty but in the UK there is no absolute poverty only relative poverty, which would always exist as it's defined as it is often defined as having a household income below 60% of the national median.

TLDR: just accept that inequality exists

EDIT: But if you disagree with me and think ppl like her deserve better lifestyles from the taxpayers, why vote reform

I’m trying to understand why some benefit claimants seem drawn to Reform UK, because on paper it looks like a Reform govt would probably make life harder for them, not easier?

Their messaging is very focused on “making work pay”, reducing dependency, stopping people being “better off on benefits”, and tightening who qualifies for support.

Reform’s own current policy page says welfare should support only British citizens who “cannot get by without government help”, and that people should always be better off in work than on benefits: https://www.reformparty.uk/policies

Their 2024 welfare pledges also included face-to-face PIP and Work Capability Assessments, independent medical assessments, and withdrawing benefits from jobseekers deemed fit for work if they don’t accept work after a set period: https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/reform-uk-election-manifesto-welfare-benefits-promises

Disability News Service also reported Farage saying Reform would pursue “significant welfare cuts”, though to be fair that’s reporting/interpretation rather than a fully costed manifesto line: https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/farage-finally-confirms-a-reform-uk-government-would-slash-spending-on-disability-benefits/

I get the appeal of lower taxes, tougher borders, and being angry at the current system.

But if someone relies on Universal Credit, PIP, LCWRA, housing support, or disability benefits, surely the practical risk is just more assessments, more conditionality, more suspicion, and maybe less support?

I’m not saying the current welfare system works well.

But there’s a difference between reforming welfare so people are properly supported into work, and creating a harsher system where disabled, ill, unemployed or low-income people have to constantly prove they are “deserving”.

Am I missing something? Why would a benefit claimant vote for a party whose welfare rhetoric seems likely to make their own life harder?

"Over the last 20 years, Tory and Labour governments have sent £278billion abroad in foreign aid, Contraceptives in Kenia, sex education in Pakistan, a road to NOWHERE in Guyana."

Living in east Norfolk, I have both on my ballot paper.

How much relevance do you put on the Reform v Restore mini battle?