In February of this year, Anthony Royd relaunched the “Is It Me!” website with two pivotal articles: The UK Government’s Monetary Policy and The Royd Monetary Policy. These works were underpinned by factual analysis and a basic understanding of economics, presenting a comprehensive critique of the UK’s monetary policy and offering an alternative approach.

Royd’s analysis dissected the UK Government’s current monetary policy, particularly highlighting its role in exacerbating inflation and increasing the national debt burden. His research revealed how the Bank of England’s decisions have shifted government debt from fixed-rate to higher floating-rate borrowing, which fluctuates with the Bank’s high interest rates. One of the key points was the significant cost to the public purse—£11 billion as of November 2022—due to losses on the Asset Purchase Facility (APF). Worse, projections suggest that these costs could balloon to over £230 billion in the next decade.

The APF losses will result in higher taxation, because the Treasury indemnifies the APF against losses, these costs ultimately fall on the taxpayer.

All of the above means there is very little chance of governance that is able to maintain stability in the banking system, reduce the tax burden, control inflation in a manner that avoids increasing the burden on working families and the vulnerable, while stimulating growth by providing protections and incentives for small and medium-sized businesses.

In contrast, ‘The Royd Monetary Policy’ is a forward-looking proposal that aims to balance economic growth with social well-being. It includes a thoughtful approach to monetary policy levers, housing market dynamics, and sectoral focus, along with the adoption of alternative metrics like the Thriving Places Index (TPI). The policy proposes reducing mortgage interest rates to sustainable levels and stimulating growth by using Bank of England Discounted Rates to support economic sectors that significantly contribute to the UK economy. Additionally, it seeks to boost central bank reserves and improve the UK’s sovereign credit rating, which would help lower interest rates on national debt.

One of the key elements of the Royd monetary policy is also in “The Reform’s Contract.” Central to this is the proposal to reverse the Bank of England’s practice of paying interest on nearly £700 billion in its Asset Purchase Facility—assets acquired during the quantitative easing program. This single policy change could release substantial funds to meet the Treasury’s obligations.

In response to a snap General Election, Royd published a third article addressing the challenges posed by scandals and ethical lapses in politics. He emphasised that transparency, accountability, and ethical leadership are critical to rebuilding trust and restoring confidence in the political process. To this end, he introduced the “Anthony Royd Hierarchy of Moral and Ethical Attributes for Politicians,” a structured framework for evaluating the behaviour and actions of political candidates.

His hope was that voters would prioritise electing individuals who embody these values, rather than simply voting along party lines.

In July, Royd proposed reducing the school leaving age to 16 for students not pursuing A-levels or university degrees. This initiative aims to help students secure entry-level jobs and apprenticeships more quickly, offering a faster route to professional qualifications and employment in high-demand sectors.

However, he also recognised the importance of continuing education for students interested in academic pathways, ensuring that critical skill gaps are not created in areas requiring advanced knowledge and critical thinking.

The accompanying commentary in this article took a critical view of the political establishment, challenging the party whip system and the control exerted over political governance by Civil Service mandarins. Royd argued that regardless of the political party in power, economic outcomes remain the same, a phenomenon he attributes to the influence of the Bank of England and the Treasury.

Through an audit-like approach, he concluded that the true source of the UK’s recurring financial crises since the 1960s lies in the actions of these unelected elites, rather than in the policies of different governments.

Royd also contested the media’s narrative that supporting Brexit is a far-right position, instead asserting that Brexit represents centrist values. In his view, because Brexit was a free vote in support of common values, it commanded support from all political parties and non—these—place the Conservative Party on the extreme right and the Labour Party on the extreme left.

Finally, the most recent article offers a ground-breaking solution to the illegal migrant and refugee crisis, further continuing the journey towards a more equitable and rational approach to the complex issues facing the UK today.

This winter, the UK faces a crisis that could result in unnecessary suffering and loss of life. Our country’s vulnerable populations—particularly the elderly, low-paid workers, and families with young children—are at risk of hyperthermia and starvation due to rising fuel costs and inadequate government support. The failure to address these issues will have tragic consequences, and we must take action to prevent them.

At the heart of this crisis is a financial mismanagement that needs to be corrected. The so-called £22 billion “Black Hole” in the budget is a myth. Instead, what we have is an out-of-control Central Bank and a Treasury team failing in its duty to provide sound advice to the Chancellor.

They should ensure that fiscal policy is responsibly managed and communicated to the Bank of England. Yet, the solution to this issue is within reach:— reverting the Bank Levy to ‘Non-Remunerated Reserves’ would provide more Taxable income for HMT, because this prevents the banks deducting the levy from their profits to reduce their tax—thereby increasing taxable income for HMT—and more cash is available to fund the budget, by not paying interest on deposits in its Asset Purchase Facility (APF). £31.5 billion could be raised, based on current interest rates, more than enough to cover the £22 billion shortfall.

Despite the urgency of the situation, both the Prime Minister and the Chancellor seem impervious to any criticism or advice that doesn’t align with their narrow Civil Service mindset. Their failure to act responsibly could result in loss of life, and this is where we, as British citizens, must intervene.

The decision to implement these changes through Statutory Instrument 2024 No. 869, implemented at 2.30 p.m. on 22nd August 2024 (view PDF online Sections 6 to 9), effective 16th September, was made by officials who seem indifferent to its consequences.

Estimates of fuel poverty in the UK range from the government’s 3.1 million to National Energy Action’s 6.7 million, and the government’s method for arriving at its lower figure has been questioned by the document’s author.

While Labour promises winter relief targeted at the poorest, questions remain unanswered. What does “the poorest” even mean? Will this aid be means-tested or limited to current benefit claimants? If so, what about the £22.7 billion in benefits that go unclaimed each year? Will those who fall through the cracks simply perish, uncounted in the statistics of fuel poverty deaths?

While Labour promises winter relief targeted at the poorest, questions remain unanswered. What does “the poorest” even mean? Will this aid be means-tested or limited to current benefit claimants? If so, what about the £22.7 billion in benefits that go unclaimed each year? Will those who fall through the cracks simply perish, uncounted in the statistics of fuel poverty deaths?

This is a call to action. If you care about the future of our country, if you care about the lives of vulnerable people, please share this message widely. Contact your MP, local government officials, and political party activists. Demand that they act now to prevent a preventable tragedy. Together, we can make a difference.