The Battle of Ideas Comes to Manchester
There was a lively discussion at the first Battle of Ideas in Manchester, but the left isn’t ready for Reform.
In another break from critiquing Net Zero policy, I want to give my thoughts on the first Manchester Battle of Ideas satellite event, held at the Ape and Apple pub on Tuesday 4th Nov 2025. It was titled ‘Flags, Boats and Votes - Are patriotism and the nation state back?’. I went with my wife and we were joined by many familiar faces from Politics in Pubs, Cancelling Cancel Culture and the Women’s Rights Network, amongst others.
The venue was almost sold out for a very reasonable £5 a ticket, particularly given the quality of the speakers on the panel. There were many new faces, and some people had travelled a long way to be there. Overall, the event was a great addition to the Manchester debating scene, and with a further full-day event planned for next year, free speech has had another boost. The Ape and Apple proved to be a great venue, and I even discovered a Joseph Holt’s beer that I actually liked, called Chorlton Pale Ale. Years of moaning about this chain’s beers are over – some friends will be delighted by that.
Several challenges were posed for the event, including this one:
Does nationalism still retain its worrying, discredited associations with everything from racism to warmongering to football hooliganism? Or is nationalism a return to our democratic roots, a force capable of forging national solidarity that can overcome the divisive fragmentation of demographic, cultural, ethnic, identitarian and political changes that have left citizens feeling like strangers in their own land? Can political elites learn to love their country again, and allow national interest to guide policies in the best interest of their nation state?
I won’t go into the details of the individual responses, but all contributions were filmed and will be available on-line. Overall, it was a fascinating event and there was a wide-ranging discussion with nothing off-limits. My final impression was that most people in the room had no issue with the rise of nationalism (if it doesn’t spill over into civil unrest) and the increasing importance of the nation state. Many seemed to agree that this is a natural consequence after years of ordinary people being ignored by a disconnected elite. That said I felt somewhat frustrated by the end as I’ll discuss shortly.
First up was Peter Ramsay, who is Professor of Law at the London School of Economics and Political Science. He is the author of The Insecurity State and co-author of Taking Control: Sovereignty and Democracy After Brexit. He was a founder of The Full Brexit network and is co-chair of LSE’s Academic Freedom staff network.
The second speaker, Graham Stringer, is the Labour MP for Blackley and Middleton South. Graham is a well-known and respected maverick who continually surprises me that he hasn’t had the whip withdrawn yet. Graham is an excellent speaker, who doesn’t appear to use notes, an ability he shares with Nigel Farage – though he won’t appreciate the comparison.
The last speaker, Tallulah Sutton, is a Sociology and Politics researcher at the University of Cambridge. Both Peter and Graham have spoken at Politics in Pubs, but this was the first time I had heard Tallulah speak. She is a “local lass” from Salford who has excelled academically. She maintains strong connections with the city.
I managed to get a question in by the end of the evening – which I put to Graham Stringer. I was prompted by the consensus on the panel concerning Reform being likely to fail if they win the next election. As a Reform member, this obviously caught my attention and made me appreciate the left-wing bias of the panel – something the organisers may want to consider for future events.
Peter Ramsay was the first to bring up Reform, claiming that if they win the next election, they will probably fail in government because the civil service will undermine their efforts. The other panellists agreed. Graham Stringer was particularly scathing, pointing to Reform’s lack of experience and expertise. I found this fascinating. If Reform are seen as disruptors but still cannot get to grips with the civil service, then who could? Certainly not Labour, nor the Conservatives. We have all the evidence we need on that score.
My question to Graham went something along the lines of:
“You think Reform will fail because they won’t have the expertise to manage the Civil Service. However, this is a problem that Reform are well aware of and have spoken about extensively. One of their solutions will be to bring experts into the cabinet from outside the parliament, who have specific skills and experience. There should be many experienced parliamentarians, “elderly stateman”, around who could lend a hand in the national interest. I wonder whether we might find one of those around here?”
This got a wry grin from Graham and a few laughs from the audience but the panel’s responses, particularly Graham’s felt somewhat dismissive. The panellists were unanimously against the idea of bringing in experts, something they felt would be anti-democratic.
I previously asked Graham a related question at an earlier Politics in Pubs event he spoke at. I had challenged him on why he was still in the Labour Party given he is at odds with the Labour party line on almost every policy area and appears to support most Reform policies. At the time, he talked about being too old to change – which I had felt was a sad but honest answer. This time he made a football team analogy, likening my question to asking him whether he should switch from supporting Manchester United to City.
This was disappointing and I challenged him later at the bar. To his credit he readily admitted that it might not have been the best analogy. Unfortunately, we didn’t get the chance to discuss further but I left feeling unsatisfied and somewhat frustrated by the discussion. I’ll explain why.
As a country we face what many feel is an existential crisis. The economy is falling off a cliff, not least driven by a deranged Net Zero energy policy and stubbornly high inflation. Uncontrolled mass immigration is another major drag on the economy, and worse, could lead to civil disorder. Public sector jobs have ballooned, national debt is out of control and UK productivity is a sick joke. I could go on.
Since Brexit, the country has become divided to the point where family members can’t speak to each other simply because they have different views. I just don’t want to live in a Faulty Towers’ society where I have to tell my wife “I slipped up and mentioned rape gangs to the kids, but I think I got away with it”.
Given this is where we have ended up, one of the panel asked how can we overcome this divide in society? I don’t remember any solid answers being offered. However, if a Labour maverick like Graham Stringer can’t look beyond party loyalty, then what chance is there that an answer will emerge?
I have come across this attitude before as I wrote about here, from a local Conservative councillor friend. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. If you have committed your working life to one party, it must be hard to imagine changing. But what is the alternative?
Neither Graham Stringer nor my friend are ready to face the reality of what is likely to happen to their parties at the next election. The electorate is not going to reward their blind faith and loyalty. Reform may not have all the answers, but I don’t see a better alternative and things are getting desperate. If you like, think of Reform as the ‘Hail Mary’ option.
As a sidenote, we have many friends in the SDP who are offering some well thought out and detailed policies. However, they have no chance of electoral success in 2029, even though the rise of Reform is opening up the political space for smaller parties. Unfortunately, only the Greens and Liberal Democrats seem to be capitalising on this at the moment. Next time round, who knows?
And why should a cabinet with half being appointed as experts from outside the House of Commons be seen as anti-democratic? So many decisions are already taken by unaccountable QUANGOs and supra-national bodies such as the EU, ECHR and the WEF. Cabinet positions are filled with a never-ending stream of temporary Secretaries of State with no accountability and no experience or real grasp of their portfolios. Reform is already highlighting its likely approach in speeches and papers – giving the electorate a clear picture of what is coming. I suspect the electorate will not just welcome a new approach – they will demand it.
You may disagree, which is fine. However, if you cannot see yourself voting for Reform or at least working with them in the national interest, then you have to come up with your own credible plan. If that plan depends on somehow transforming the old parties, full of careerists and increasingly sectarian politics, then I could not take you seriously.
Thanks to all involved
These events are not easy to put on and I must acknowledge the fantastic work done by Hilary Salt, Sebastian ‘Token Man’ Moore, Jude McGill and Jaydee. Also, thanks to the panellists who gave up their time and travelled from far afield to help push forward the debate on the rising tide of patriotism. And finally, many thanks to the brilliant staff at the Ape and Apple. It can be very difficult to find venues to host free speech events. Hopefully this won’t be the last here.
Date for your diary
This excellent event will be followed up by a full-day event on Saturday 7th March 2026.