Douglas

Nadine, stop it. You know Rupert offered discussions. Of course there was an opening position. Any idea that position could not be explored requires a degree of naivety that Nigel does not have. He apparently knows the art of the deal and he knows politics. But, nonetheless, the answer was an emphatic no. Second, we are not steeling votes from Reform. People are voting for us because they prefer our offer - vision, sincerity, credibility, attention to detail, planning, consistency and courage - not because we are nicking Reform’s votes. Third, arguably the reason Labour has an unassailable majority in the HoC now is the fact the message from Reform HQ in 2024 was “Ignore Labour. Don’t worry about them. All that matters is that we have to punish, ideally annihilate the Tories”. Nigel et al knew exactly what they were doing. I can’t forgive them that. They wanted a) to destroy the Tories and remove them as opposition b) usher in a disastrous Labour government. The combination would leave only Reform on the field for the next election. Fourth, it seems Reform’s strategy is to to destroy everyone else and remove them from the field so that they get a free pass and don’t need to worry about the boring, unglamorous work of consistency, detail and planning. I, for one, believe that’s exactly what the Conservatives relied on for 14 years i.e. blame everyone but themselves, promise a lot of tough sounding policies, dominate the field with those, fail to pay attention to detail and planning… The result? We’re now living in a house that’s falling down around us. Reform will be similar but worse, because if they were to get into power, they’d have no plan, tell the public the “establishment” was obstructing them, go to war with the civil service, courts, Lords and everyone else, break a lot and still have no idea how to fix it. I believe that approach - making tough, decisive sounding pledges amongst loads of theatre, without having a detailed and comprehensive plan to do it - is fundamentally dishonest. It is deception. It is not credible and it is not to be trusted. So, no. Restore Britain is not splitting the vote. Restore Britain is presenting a different, deeper offer to the British people. The aims may be similar, but the method is altogether more thought through, detailed and credible. The character of the offer itself is intrinsically less performative and theatrical, and more sincere. To complain we’re splitting the vote is like McDonalds complaining because some people prefer Burger King. Both sell burgers, but people have their preferences. Nonetheless, our proposal to discuss possible collaboration remains on the table. That said Nadine, the increasing attacks and threats directed at us, which I realise are part of the strategy I mentioned earlier, and which are encouraged by senior people in your Party, are only serving to deepen divisions and make any potential collaboration more difficult, not less. So, truly, it is the leadership of Reform that stands in the way of collaboration and therefore risks - again - another Labour victory.