Christian Ursilva, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
In an era of geopolitical uncertainty, economic stagnation, and institutional bloat, the United Kingdom stands at a crossroads. The nation’s governance has been eroded by decades of incremental changes that have diluted parliamentary supremacy, entangled it in foreign jurisdictions, and prioritized abstract international ideals over the tangible needs of its citizens. This article explores why the UK urgently needs comprehensive reform, rooted in a historical pattern of resisting foreign interference, and how modern supranational entities continue to exert control—often through taxation, regulation, and judicial overreach—that serves external agendas rather than the prosperity and security of the British people. Central to this reform is the recognition that democracy, though imperfect, functions best when those exercising power are elected by the people and can be held accountable or removed through the ballot box, ensuring government remains a servant of the public will rather than an unyielding elite imposition.
Historical Context: A Legacy of Defending Against Foreign Meddling
The UK’s constitutional evolution has long been shaped by a fierce determination to shield its sovereignty from external powers seeking to tax, control, or subvert its people. This resistance is etched into foundational documents, born from real threats of foreign domination.
Consider the **English Bill of Rights 1689**, a cornerstone of British liberty enacted after the Glorious Revolution. The document famously declares: “No foreign prince, person, prelate, state or potentate hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm.” This clause was no abstract principle; it was a direct rebuke to **Papal interference** from Rome, which had historically claimed authority over English monarchs and subjects. Popes like Pius V excommunicated Elizabeth I in 1570, inciting rebellion and invasion plots, while aligning with Catholic powers like Spain and France to undermine Protestant England.
Such meddling wasn’t merely spiritual—it had profound economic and political ramifications. Foreign prelates and princes sought to impose taxes and tributes indirectly through loyalists or by destabilizing the realm, diverting resources from English coffers to Vatican or continental treasuries. The Tudors and Stuarts faced constant threats: Jesuit infiltrators promoting Catholic uprisings, alliances with foreign courts that drained national wealth through wars or subsidies, and attempts to control trade routes for the benefit of rival empires. The 1689 Bill, alongside the Act of Settlement 1701, enshrined Protestant succession and parliamentary oversight to prevent such external puppeteering, ensuring that governance served the “good of the people” rather than distant potentates.
This pattern echoes earlier struggles, such as the **Magna Carta 1215**, which curbed King John’s arbitrary taxation influenced by papal demands, or the **Reformation under Henry VIII**, where dissolving monasteries reclaimed vast lands and revenues from Rome’s grasp. Time and again, foreign entities—whether religious or imperial—aimed to extract wealth and loyalty from the English people, often under guises of moral or universal authority. These interventions rarely benefited ordinary citizens; instead, they fueled division, poverty, and conflict, enriching elites abroad while burdening the realm.
Philosopher John Locke, whose ideas influenced these developments, underscored the need for accountable government: “Where-ever law ends, tyranny begins, if the law be transgressed to another’s harm; and whosoever in authority exceeds the power given him by the law… ceases in that to be a magistrate; and, acting without authority, may be opposed.” Locke’s emphasis on the social contract—where sovereignty resides in the people, who delegate power to elected representatives—highlights the democratic imperative: rulers must be removable to prevent foreign or domestic overreach.
The lesson is clear: When foreign powers meddle, they do so to control resources and populations for their own ends—taxing through indirect means like trade monopolies or ecclesiastical tithes, and eroding self-determination in ways that stifle national prosperity.
Modern Parallels: Supranational Control and the Erosion of Sovereignty
Fast-forward to the 21st century, and the threats have evolved from overt papal decrees to subtle supranational frameworks. Bodies like the ‘European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)’ and lingering EU regulations represent a contemporary form of foreign meddling, imposing controls that tax and regulate the UK in ways not conducive to its people’s good.
The ECHR, incorporated via the ‘Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA)’, exemplifies this. Ostensibly a safeguard against tyranny, it introduces the “ludicrous concept of the universal human being”—an abstract, borderless entitlement to rights that overrides national priorities. This socialist-inspired universalism, with echoes of Fabian gradualism (permeating institutions for egalitarian ends), detaches rights from citizenship and duties, allowing foreign courts in Strasbourg to veto UK policies on migration, security, and welfare. For instance, Article 8 (family life) has blocked deportations of serious criminals, straining public resources and safety—effectively taxing British taxpayers to subsidize individuals with no reciprocal contribution to society.
Similarly, the **Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (CRA)** perverted centuries of common law by creating the Supreme Court and diminishing the Lord Chancellor’s role, enhancing judicial independence at the expense of executive accountability. This Blair-era “reform” aligned with ECHR norms but empowered judges to engage in activist rulings, second-guessing elected governments through expanded judicial review. The result? Delays in critical policies like energy infrastructure or border controls, costing billions in lost opportunities and legal fees—another form of indirect taxation on the populace.
EU legacies persist too, despite Brexit. Regulations tied to trade deals, such as carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAM), impose tariffs and compliance costs that hike energy prices for UK households and industries. These aren’t designed for British benefit; they serve continental agendas, like Germany’s green transition or France’s protectionism, forcing the UK to subsidize foreign priorities through higher taxes and bills. Supranational organizations dilute sovereignty by “pooling” it—a euphemism for ceding control—allowing distant bureaucrats to meddle in domestic affairs under guises of harmony or rights.
Historian David Starkey captures this erosion: “The fundamental basis of English freedom is the idea of Representative government… freedom is not democracy; it is this idea of representative government.” Starkey argues that modern Britain has strayed from this, with Blair’s reforms dismantling parliamentary sovereignty and politicizing the judiciary, leading to a system where unelected bodies rule by decree. He warns: “Does Brexit mean nothing to you? Did she die in vain?”—emphasizing how supranational ties continue to undermine the restoration of national control.
This control isn’t benevolent. It stifles reindustrialization, burdens SMEs with red tape, and perpetuates unemployment in deprived regions. Energy dependence on volatile imports, constrained by net-zero targets influenced by international pacts, leaves the UK vulnerable to foreign shocks—taxing citizens through inflated bills while enriching producers abroad. As history shows, such meddling prioritizes external ideologies over national welfare, echoing papal tributes in modern regulatory form.
The Imperfect Yet Essential Role of Democracy in Reform
Democracy, though imperfect and prone to the “rapid, turbulent, and uncertain violence of a flood” as Robert Peel warned in reference to public opinion post-Reform Bill, remains the bedrock of accountable governance. Its flaws—such as short-term populism or factional division—are outweighed by its core strength: ensuring that those wielding power are elected by the people and can be removed through free and fair elections. This principle prevents the concentration of authority in unelected hands, whether foreign potentates or domestic elites, and aligns government with the will of the governed.
Benjamin Disraeli echoed this in his assertion: “I repeat… that all power is a trust; that we are accountable for its exercise; that from the people, and for the people all springs, and all must exist.” Disraeli’s “one-nation” conservatism emphasized that true sovereignty flows from the electorate, with opposition essential: “No government can be long secure without formidable opposition.” John Locke further grounded this in natural rights: “The legislative cannot transfer the power of making laws to any other hands: for it being but a delegated power from the people, they who have it cannot pass it over to others.” Locke’s vision demands that power remains revocable, safeguarding against tyranny.
In today’s UK, this democratic essence has been undermined by supranational and judicial encroachments, where unelected judges or foreign courts override elected parliaments. Reform must restore this balance, ensuring decisions on taxation, borders, and security reflect the electorate’s mandate, not abstract universals.
Why the UK Needs Urgent Reform: Restoring Sovereignty for the People’s Good
Reform is essential to break this cycle. The UK must reclaim absolute sovereignty—indivisible and unpooled—to prioritize its people’s security, prosperity, and self-sufficiency.
First, repeal the HRA and CRA to restore parliamentary supremacy and common law traditions. Withdraw from the ECHR to eliminate foreign judicial vetoes, ensuring rights are balanced with duties and national interests. This would end the “universal human” abstraction, focusing protections on British citizens.
Second, overhaul institutions bloated by supranational influences: Slim the Cabinet Office to a lean secretariat, cut Foreign Office admin by 90%, and reform the Home Office to employ only British-born citizens of good character. Defund NGOs that amplify foreign agendas, and mutualize the BBC’s commercial arms while curbing Ofcom’s overreach.
Third, prioritize energy as national security. Short-term: Secure imports from reliable partners like the US, Norway, and Qatar. Medium-term: Exploit North Sea resources, decoupling from prices. Long-term: Build nuclear and renewables with resolved storage. This creates high-paid jobs in heartlands, combating multi-generational unemployment and fostering self-sufficiency—mirroring how Norway’s oil wealth benefited its people, not foreign potentates.
Reform the Lords for accountability, mandate constitutional competence for parliamentarians, and flood the zone with rapid changes to outpace opposition. These steps reverse Blair-era perversions, ensuring governance serves the British people, not abstract universals or foreign interests. As Peel advocated: “Agitation is the marshalling of the conscience of a nation to mold its laws,” channeling public will through elected channels for cautious reform.
Conclusion: A Call to Restoration
The UK’s history teaches that foreign meddling—whether papal, imperial, or supranational—inevitably seeks to tax and control for external gain, not domestic good. By reforming now, Britain can restore its sovereignty, secure its energy future, and empower its people. As the 1689 Bill reminds us, no foreign entity should hold jurisdiction here. Disraeli’s wisdom rings true: “In a progressive country change is constant; change is inevitable.” The time for bold action is now—to build a self-reliant nation where prosperity flows to its citizens, not abroad, under a democracy where power is truly accountable.
© Roger Mellie 2026
