Sovereignty: ‘The State vs the People’

‘Define or be damned’ wrote the English essayist and social commentator William Hazlitt (1778-1830), emphasising the importance of precise language and clear thought when communicating with others.

Nowhere is this clarity of definition more important than in relation to the issue of sovereignty which defines us as a nation state and under which all of us including the governments we elect are supposed to operate.

Indeed such is the importance of the subject that we have dedicated an entire campaign – Stand for Our Sovereignty – to its cause.

The intention of this piece is not to cover each and every aspect of the subject in great detail but to provide a broad landscape to illustrate the magnitude of the challenges now facing us as we seek to defend our long-held sovereign rights against a global elite who seem all too happy to consign them to the dustbin of history.

 

A sovereign people

In the first place it is vital to stress the difference between political and parliamentary sovereignty. Parliament has no authority except through the consent of the British people. In that sense political sovereignty is superior to parliamentary sovereignty since it is we the voters who ultimately decide which party runs the country and on what terms.

We lend our support to that governing party for up to five years during which they carry out their manifesto commitments before seeking our permission to re-elect them or vote them out as the case may be.

Time and again however, Parliament has sought to sidestep the British people by handing over our sovereign rights to a series of unelected domestic and international bodies without our consent and very often to our detriment.

Indeed such is the damage being done to the country as a result of policies which no-one voted for that fundamental questions about the legitimacy of the democratic system are now being raised. If we allow this to continue, we may lose our sovereign rights entirely by which time it may be too late.

We therefore urge all our readers to spread the word and join our vital campaign. It really is that important.

 

Free speech

Nowhere is this threat to our individual liberties better illustrated that on the issue of free speech. Most of us would regard the right to freedom of expression as an unquestionable and sovereign right – indeed many would say it defines us as a people.

In recent years however we have witnessed a worrying trend of UK citizens being arrested for simply expressing an opinion deemed to be ‘offensive’. The roll-call of well-known figures who have succumbed to the new thought police is as familiar as it is depressing:  Kathleen Stock, Allison Pearson, Lucy Connolly and now, outrageously, Graham Linehan, a comedy script-writer and author of Father Ted who was greeted at Heathrow airport by FIVE armed police officers for writing an ‘offensive’ tweet while he was still in the United States.

Shocking as these events are, the people in question had a public profile and were able to use the media to publicise their cases. But how many members of the general public with no recourse to the media could also have their collar felt at any moment and be subjected to the most appalling state coercion?  Who will come to their rescue?

 

‘Culture & Capture’

What’s more, ‘offensive’ opinions in one area can easily be mapped across to ‘offensive’ views in another. Before you know it every school, hospital, college, university and business  will find itself under the watchful eye of a state apparatchik. Reports suggest that transgender men are still being treated as women in some NHS wards despite the Supreme Court ruling earlier this year that ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ refer exclusively to biological sex not gender identity.

In education, more and more parents are considering home-schooling because they are so concerned about the propaganda their children are being fed at school. Ideological capture is even worse in our higher education system as the nature of ongoing student protests from net zero to Palestine can testify.

And now, shockingly, we hear of the death of Charlie Kirk, a champion of free speech and open dialogue who was shot dead while taking part in a debate at Utah Valley University campus in the United States.  We can only pray that such an appalling event never takes place over here.

If you want to destroy an individual’s personal liberty, his ‘sovereign’ freedom, you do so by curtailing his capacity to think freely or to express himself without fear. This is now happening and is rife across our institutions.

The situation is no better in the public realm either. From the state of the economy to crime and mass immigration, vital issues are either ignored by the mainstream media or covered in such a way as to provide a grotesque distortion of the truth. Why?

Because they don’t chime with the views of those who determine the news agenda which has moved further and further away from the common-sense instincts of the British people. The public know they are being gas-lit and yet the pretence continues. Whatever happened to brave and impartial journalism?

Small wonder so many people are refusing to renew their TV licences and are searching elsewhere for alternative news outlets.

 

Borders & Immigration

It hardly needs spelling out, but a nation which cannot control its borders is no longer sovereign. It was a major reason so many voted Brexit during the Referendum, so exasperated had they become by the huge numbers pouring into the country from Eastern Europe.

It beggars belief therefore that the numbers arriving in the country since we left the European Union have dwarfed those that went before. The ‘Boris Wave’ will go down in Conservative Party infamy, along with Neville Chamberlain’s ‘Peace for our time.’

Moreover, at no point have the electorate ever voted for mass, uncontrolled immigration in any general election. Each and every government for the past twenty years has vowed to reduce the numbers coming over but all to no avail.

If ever there was a clear and unambiguous breach of the most basic sovereign pledge of any government to keep its citizens safe, this is surely it. Is it any wonder that trust in our political establishment has now reached an all-time low?

Yet still they come…

---

The unelected state

One of the many insidious constitutional developments to have occurred over the past thirty years has been the proliferation of quangos – quasi-autonomous-non-governmental organizations. Initially introduced to provide ministerial advice across a range of departments, they have grown into a monstrous leviathan – unaccountable, unwieldy and hugely expensive to run.

And there are so many of them! Natural England, Highways England, Skills England, Historic England, NHS England (thankfully now abolished), the NHS Pay Review Body, the Health & Safety Executive, the Office for Budget Responsibility, the Independent Office for Police Conduct, the Sentencing Council, the Judicial Appointments Commission, Great British Energy. And on and on and on.

At the last count there were 20 non-ministerial bodies and  417 agencies and other public bodies, though that figure may now be even higher.

Their effect on our democracy has been particularly damaging because they take the politics out of vital decision-making. Instead of debating matters openly across the Chamber and allowing members to scrutinise legislation on the floor of the House, ministers pass that responsibility up the line to unelected experts whose rulings are treated as definitive. But that itself raises a whole host of other questions, such as who controls the experts, what is their remit and the terms of reference by which they arrive at their decisions.

In handing responsibility for awkward decisions to unelected bodies, ministers are surrendering their political accountability to others, creating yet further obstacles to open, sovereign, democratic government. Small wonder people have so little faith in the system.

The same pattern is true across our unelected institutions as well, notably the judiciary and the civil service. There is not the time nor the space to devote a detailed account of civil service obstructionism or judicial overreach. Suffice to say we can all now see the extent to which both branches are now providing a serious barrier to open and efficient government, whether it be egregious decisions by courts on the rights of illegal migrants, or the sclerotic nature of the Home Office in relation to processing asylum claims.

Neither department is working in the interests of the British people. Rather, they seem to be actively working against the national interest in what is fast becoming a constitutional conspiracy as well as a political crisis.

 

Globalism

The same tendency towards national self-harm can also be found in our dealings on the international stage.

The most distressing episode currently being played out before us, is the British government’s shameful decision to hand control of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius.

Our affiliate Brexit Facts4EU.Org has been commendable in exposing the magnitude of this betrayal. More than 40 senior British MPs, peers, former ministers, and national security leaders have appealed directly to U.S. President Trump to intervene in and stop the UK Government’s plan to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius which, they say would “gravely undermine” both UK and U.S. security interests by threatening the future of the Diego Garcia military base.

Can one conceive of anything so stupid, so self-defeating, so treacherous?

A sorry tale of surrender has also taken place on the island of Gibraltar where the new agreement between the UK, the EU and Spain announced in June this year, removes checks on people and goods at the land border between Spain and Gibraltar. Key aspects include maintaining the Schengen Area by having Spanish officials conducting checks at Gibraltar’s port and airport and establishing a customs union between Gibraltar and the EU. But we are assured, Gibraltar’s sovereignty remains protected and unchanged!

Finally we see a similar high-handed approach being taken in the Middle East where our Prime Minister has taken it upon himself to formally recognise the state of Palestine even though it possesses none of the characteristics of a nation-state such as borders or even a government.

Such a move is also highly partisan and politically foolish.  It is strongly opposed by swathes of the British electorate as well as our principal allies in the region, Israel and the United States, without whose support the pledge remains entirely symbolic.

Perhaps the most damning indictment comes from those most affected by this decision, the Jewish people themselves.  The Board of Deputies of British Jews expressed the views of millions throughout the world in its response on Twitter/X.

“There will be deep dismay at the Prime Minister’s announcement across the Jewish community and among family members of hostages. As we feared and warned, the way the UK has chosen to recognise a Palestinian state has done nothing to advance a ceasefire, free the hostages, stop the suffering of Palestinians in the Gaza strip, or advance long-term peace.  It may have set those goals back, by reducing pressure on Hamas and enabling them to claim recognition as the ‘fruits’ of its violence and intransigence.” (21.09.25)

 

The EU

The British people have also witnessed their government treading a path back inside the EU’s orbit in blatant contravention of their manifesto promise not to challenge the result of the Brexit Referendum. Instead, we are told, Britain is seeking ‘dynamic alignment’ to minimise cross-border friction in trade between ourselves and our European partners.

Perhaps the most symbolic illustration of this Brexit betrayal was the decision by the government to extend the EU’s fishing rights in UK waters for a further TWELVE years, in clear breach of the 2020 UK-EU agreement which would have ended EU fishing in 2026.

 

‘Poorer and colder’

This desire to curry favour abroad while punishing our own at home can also be seen in our current energy policy. So anxious are ministers to appear worthy on the world stage they are happy to sacrifice the British economy on the altar of Net-Zero rather than pursue a pragmatic course between renewables on the one hand and fossil fuel production on the other. The UK now has some of the most expensive energy in the developed world which inevitably impacts across the economy, pushing up prices everywhere and leaving the British people both poorer and colder.

 

European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

Much has been said and written about the ECHR and the manner in which its terms and conditions are now interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Conceived after WWII to protect human rights and freedoms of everyone within the Council of Europe, it is now being used as a shelter for anyone throughout the world to claim asylum in Europe.

With Britain now being invaded on a daily basis by Channel migrants, there are urgent calls to reform or revoke the Treaty whose terms are now being interpreted in ways that were never conceived when it was originally drafted.

Such is the power of the human rights lobby however that the UK government now finds itself at loggerheads with its own legal system which seems determined to find in favour of illegal migrants even if it comes at the cost and security of local communities throughout the UK.

However, no government can continue to ignore the widespread outrage that has greeted these decisions. The protests and occasional outbreaks of violence we have seen over the past twelve months mask a deep, deep dissatisfaction with the current status quo.

 

Conclusion

Taken as a whole, the picture that emerges in relation to the state of our sovereignty is a depressing one. In area after area of personal and public life, the rights and freedoms which we once took for granted are being destroyed or undermined.

Whether it’s in relation to free speech, or to our national institutions, or to issues of domestic and  international security,  a deep malaise now hangs over the country. It is as if those whom we have placed in charge seem to be doing their level-best to discharge their responsibilities by handing over control of whole areas of our public life to unelected bodies whose priorities are different from ours.

The result is a toxic political environment where trust breaks down and anger and impatience reach breaking point. Unless and until those in charge understand that their power derives solely from those who elect them this feeling of resentment will continue to rise.

No one wishes to see our once proud country descend into civil unrest. But it is up to all of us to remind our rulers that their first and overriding duty is to uphold the sovereign democratic rights of those who put them there. Only then can we hope to build a better future.

 

  By Ben Philips, Deputy Chairman and Comms Director, CIBUK

 

Main image: montage © CIBUK.Org 2025