Make a difference!

All of our institutions have been "occupied" and turned against us. Can we coerce the government of the UK to work on behalf of the voters, for a change?

We have an RNLI now putting people in danger. A National Trust that can't be trusted with our heritage.

A Foreign Office that eschews the national interest and is now fronted by an unelected politician that ran away from responsibility to deliver the biggest expression of the will of the people in 50 years.

A Labour party that hates the working class.  A homophobic gay rights organisation.  Universities that refuse to question orthodoxy.  A border force and judiciary that shows little ability or appetite for enforcing the border - and much of the law.

An established Church that dislikes Christianity. An army that disapproves of patriotism. An air force that doesn't like its white pilots. A parliament that hates democracy.

A race relations industry that promotes racism. A farming lobby that hates farmers and agriculture. A bird charity that loves wind turbines.

You will be aware that the level of disenchantment with our political class has never been so high. Newspapers quote levels of 80% or more! We do not believe offering a new political party with “politicians” will win favour, even if one could devise a new party dogma to promise utopia. 

Our proposal is to offer an alternative to party politics with no politicians, and indeed, no politics!
“Will of the Electorate”(WOTE) aims to deliver the government services the electorate desires, as efficiently and as effectively as it can, within the resources available.
Determining the Will of the Electorate will not be simple or quick, decades of ignorance and misinformation will need to be repaired. Then how one discovers the Will has to be researched and refined. 100% plebiscites, are feasible using mobile phones etc, though focus groups, longitudinal studies and other modern sophisticated tools should also be used.

WOTE initially proposed to help put up a candidate in all 650 constituencies. Every candidate having signed a declaration that they will not impose their personal views over those of the Electorate when implementing policy.
With policy not being determined by the MPs, the MPs can be anyone who qualifies, they are simply ciphers for the Electorate. Thus we propose to recruit candidates who may be either students and the retired. Both of whom have “nothing to lose”.
(Initial test marketing demonstrated that those in careers are too risk-averse, not a surprise given the intolerant and combative nature of modern political discourse).
But the idea of herding and helping 650 independent candidates was a huge one, that is not necessary anyway - since the likelihood of a hung parliament with no overall majority is gathering pace.
A block of 10-30 MPs who are committed to taking the direction of their electorate, would create an interesting new and unfamiliar dynamic in Westminster: honesty and transparency.   
The idea that electors will get to have a continual influence - not just one shot every 5 years - ought to be a major incentive to support our strategy.

The failure of political parties to focus on the basic services we expect of a government (security, health, justice and "common goods") leaves these matters open to a new approach. Endless national and local government failures demonstrate that our present political class is ineffective at delivering,  “They can’t even fix the potholes in the road!”
The litany of regulators who impose burdens on the honest yet fail to prosecute the villains, leaves a wide range of targets

Subtly and corollaries
Some policies are impossible for politicians to deal with. What the NHS treats and doesn’t treat makes the minister, or anyone else, a target. Using the electorate to decide not only removes the target, it also provides societal  “ownership” to the decision. Where social policy starts and ends are also interesting points.

While rules for common issues can be formulated, can one train the electorate to determine exceptional policy? e.g. Use of violence such as use of the armed forces?  Can a "mission-driven" WOTE "federation" do any worse than the procession of "Blair's Heirs" and inept uniparty regimes featuring recycled dogma? All have been beholden to the (undemocratic!) high priesthood of globalisation, that we have seen evolve since 1997.

The WOTE mission is simply to do what the people want done, and remove all obstacles in the way. aims to provide efficient and common sense government without the millstone of dogmatic politics