The government has today announced plans for a “patriotic renewal” of Britain’s communities. Ministers say the policy is about strengthening social cohesion and promoting the “shared values” that unite us as a nation.
Fine words, for sure. But what exactly does it mean in practice? Because when politicians start talking about patriotism in this context, it can sometimes feel worryingly close to the language of the populist Right. Too often “patriotic renewal” becomes shorthand for cultural suspicion – a politics that encourages people to look sideways at their neighbours and ask whether they quite belong.
That isn’t renewal. It’s division.
If the government truly wants to renew our communities, the starting point should be far more practical-and far less rhetorical. For over a decade before the last election, Britain experienced the hollowing-out of local life. Libraries closed. Youth clubs disappeared (something I have consistently rallied against, in speeches at Lib Dem Conferences, meetings at Parliament, and so on). SureStart centres were stripped away. Community centres were sold off. High streets declined. The public spaces where people naturally come together were slowly dismantled.
That is where the real damage to community happened. Because communities are not built by speeches about national identity. They are built in the everyday spaces where people meet one another as neighbours and citizens. The library where children discover books and older residents escape loneliness. The youth club where teenagers find friendship, guidance, and opportunity. The SureStart centre where struggling parents receive the support that helps families to thrive.
These institutions are the quiet infrastructure of community life. When they disappear, social bonds weaken and people feel ever more isolated from one another. Rebuilding them would be a far more meaningful form of patriotic renewal than any number of snazzy slogans.
There is also a deeper point here. Britain’s communities have never depended on everyone looking, sounding, or believing in the same things. In fact, the opposite is true. This country works best when people from different backgrounds live side by side, united not by uniformity but by shared values – fairness, decency, mutual respect and the simple belief that we all belong here.
Most people in Britain are fundamentally good hearted. They want to get on with their lives, support their neighbours, and contribute to the places they call home. They don’t need politicians encouraging suspicion or cultural anxiety. They need investment in the things that bring people together. That is what a truly liberal patriotism (for want of a better word) looks like. It is confident enough to celebrate diversity, rather than fear it. It understands that belonging is strengthened not by policing identity, but by building shared spaces and shared opportunities. And it recognises a simple truth about this country: our diversity has never been our weakness. It has always been our strength.
If the government genuinely wants a renewal of community life, it should start there. Reopen the libraries. Restore the youth clubs. Rebuild the SureStart centres. Strengthen our high streets. Because strong communities are not created by telling people how to be patriotic. They are created by giving people the tools to build a shared life together.
Support for British citizens abroad is not conditional – and must never be so
Ed Davey sparked controversy this past week when he appeared to suggest that British citizens in places like Dubai (where my own sister, brother-in-law, and their family live) should pay UK taxes if they expect the protection of Britain’s armed forces in times of crisis.
I have huge respect for Ed. But on this occasion, I believe he is simply wrong. British citizenship is not a transactional relationship with the State. The rights and freedoms that come with holding a British passport do not depend on where you live, how much tax you pay, or whether politicians depend on your life choices. They are rights that exist because you are a British citizen.
Hundreds and thousands of our fellow citizens live and work in Dubai. They are teachers (like my sister), engineers, entrepreneurs, and professionals building lives for themselves and their families.
In a crisis, like that currently engulfing the Middle East, Britain has a duty to help them should they require it – not to interrogate their tax arrangements first.
Citizenship should unite us. It should never become a conditional contract.
Free Larry!
At a time when Elon Musk proclaims himself a champion of free speech, it seems rather absurd that the X account of Downing Street’s famous Chief Mouser, Larry, has reportedly been locked. Even if a human writes the posts, the account brings joy to the nation. Restore it immediately.
Free Larry!
* Mathew Hulbert is a former Councillor, is a regular commentator on TV and Radio, and is Co-Host of the Political Frenemies podcast.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
Debt-ridden graduates claim they are seen as cash cows
Why non-fiction books need their indexes
Changes in status: Local Elections wrap up
Tom Bailey
Daniel Walker
Matt (Bristol)
Hywel
6 Comments
If values are ‘shared’, why does the government need to promote them?
Truth is, the government realises the the country does not have ‘shared values’ and is actively trying promote the values it supports.
Mathew Hulbert is correct whe he states, “SureStart centres have been stripped away”.
As a former Lib Dem Cabinet Member for Social Work up until 2012, I’m embarrassed to recall that the Sutton Trust reported,
“during the Coalition government (2010–2015), Sure Start experienced significant funding cuts, a loss of ring-fenced budgets, and a shift from universal to targeted services, resulting in the closure of hundreds of centres. Budgets were reduced by over a third, leading to over 400 closures in the first two years alone”.
There are fences to mend, Mathew.
I do not see a need for the use of the word ‘patriotic’; the need is simply for government support and devolution of resources to enable people to renew their communities. Communities cannot be renewed from above but they can be hindered or destroyed from above.
As to united by shared values, that is true but as Joan points out we need a clear steer as to what these values are. This must include unity with diversity. Once you have leadership that seeks to impose uniformity (which is what Reform UK wants to do) then you hinder and even destroy unity.
It is always disappointing to see Lib Dems choosing to believe that a person’s rights are inherited at birth and last forever irrespective of what an individual choses to do while their responsibilities to help pay for those rights are non existent – someone else can always pay.
If people choose to leave the UK in order to earn more money, live a more affluent lifestyle in another country where taxes are kept low by oil revenues (destroying the planet for later generations), supported by very badly paid and extremely poorly treated working people from the third world, and avoiding paying any British taxes, they have to accept that the UK is not a Miss Bountiful who will tend to their every need.
Just because some of us have friends and family there, is not a good reason to make everyone who choses to remain here and make the best of the bad mess the UK is in, have to pay for their decision.
Mathew, I am very much with you regarding the importance of building community. But I find your second section in stark contrast. How can one be a citizen of a community if one neither participates in it nor contributes to it? So I am am close to David Evans ‘s view on that piece.
To my mind this article comes across as too suspicious of the word, ‘patriotism’. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with patriotism. Millions of UK citizens love and feel intensely loyal to their country, as well as proud of its history etc. In just the same way that probably billions of people around the world feel the same sense of patriotism towards their own countries. Of course it is possible for politicians to take advantage of patriotism, or for patriotism to turn into an ugly dislike of things foreign or of different cultures, and we should be ready to call that out when it happens. But there’s no need to go looking for it when it hasn’t happened!
Having said that, Labour’s use of the term ‘patriotic renewal’ does seem odd in the context of rebuilding communities. ‘Patriotism’ and ‘communities’ are not the same thing. I suspect this is, Labour spin doctors imagining that if they randomly stick the word ‘patriotic’ into a few names, that’ll magically make those policies sound more attractive to Reform-leaning voters. I doubt it’ll work – it just sounds too obviously like spin, and most people would rather see the Government actually delivering better lives for everyone.