There is something deeply revealing about the way some left-wing activists, campaign groups and politically motivated Wikipedia editors talk about the Great British PAC.
They seem determined to place us into a neat little political box, regardless of the evidence staring them in the face. The problem is that we simply do not fit the caricature they have created.
The Great British PAC is not a political party. We do not stand candidates. We do not demand ideological conformity. We are a growing movement of people from different political backgrounds who believe Britain is worth fighting for and that our country deserves better than the stale, tribal politics that has dominated public life for far too long.
Personally, I am a Conservative Party member. I believe in common-sense conservatism and make no apology for that. But I have never believed that wisdom, patriotism or good ideas belong exclusively to any one political party.
The Great British PAC reflects that belief. I am fortunate to be surrounded by an advisory board, directors, advisers, campaigners and supporters from a wide range of political backgrounds. Some are Conservatives. Some have Labour roots. Some support Reform. Some are Liberal Democrats. Others have never belonged to a political party at all.
If a Labour MP has a good idea that benefits our country, I will support it. If a Liberal Democrat peer is making the right argument, I will support them. If an independent campaigner is fighting for a cause that serves the national interest, I will gladly work alongside them.
My loyalty is not blindly to a political tribe. My loyalty is to my country.
That principle sits at the heart of everything the Great British PAC does. We judge ideas on their merit, not on the colour of the rosette worn by the person proposing them.
What unites us is not party loyalty. It is a shared belief in sovereignty, democracy, free speech, accountability and the future of our country.
That is why attempts to portray the Great British PAC as belonging to one narrow political tribe are so absurd. We are building something much broader than that. We are bringing together patriots from across the political spectrum who understand that the United Kingdom faces challenges far bigger than party politics.
Our campaign against Keir Starmer’s dreadful Chagos surrender provides the perfect example.
If the Great British PAC really was the organisation our critics try to portray, the Chagos campaign could never have happened. The reality is exactly the opposite. For more than a year, people from different political backgrounds have come together to oppose what many regard as one of the most extraordinary acts of national self-harm undertaken by a British government in modern times.
Conservatives have played a role. Liberal Democrats have played a role. The DUP has played a role. Reform figures have played a role. Even Labour MPs such as Graham Stringer have played an important role and provided invaluable support. Alongside them have been lawyers, military experts, academics, peers and Chagossian representatives, all united by a shared belief that British territory should not be handed away without proper scrutiny and without the consent of the people who call those islands home.
Many of us disagree on countless other political issues. Yet on Chagos we have stood shoulder to shoulder because some causes are bigger than party politics. This campaign has demonstrated exactly what the Great British PAC was created to achieve: bringing together patriots from different political traditions in defence of Britain’s sovereignty, democratic accountability and the rights of the Chagossian people.
Without that cross-party effort, the deal would already have been ratified. It could have happened last summer. It could have happened again in the autumn. It could have happened again in March. At each stage, people from different political traditions worked together to keep asking difficult questions, tabling amendments, introducing legislation and demanding proper accountability.
That broad coalition has been invaluable.
When concerns are raised by people from across the political spectrum, it becomes much harder for ministers to dismiss them as party politics. It gives campaigns credibility, it attracts attention and it helps ensure important issues receive the scrutiny they deserve. Time and again over the past year, we have seen what can be achieved when people put country before party.
And let me be clear, the Great British PAC is not in the business of flattering politicians. We are here to do the hard work. We research. We campaign. We draft proposals. We develop solutions. We help build the arguments.
But the politicians who have supported us deserve enormous credit because they have been willing to take those arguments into Parliament, challenge ministers, table amendments and keep difficult issues alive when it would have been easier to stay silent.
It has been a genuine partnership. We have provided energy, ideas and determination. They have provided the parliamentary platform and the political courage to act. Together, we have achieved far more than either could have achieved alone.
That is what country before party looks like in practice.
This campaign continues today. On July 15, another significant legal battle begins as Chagossians continue their fight to remain on the islands they call home.
Once again, we find ourselves part of a remarkable cross-party alliance. Alongside the outstanding legal team stand MPs and peers from different political traditions who have put principle before party and have been willing to fight for what they believe is right.
Their support has been invaluable. It demonstrates precisely why the Great British PAC’s approach works. When good people come together around a just cause, political labels become far less important than the outcome.
The Great British PAC will continue standing shoulder to shoulder with them, just as we have from the beginning. Together, we will keep fighting for the Chagossian people, for Britain’s sovereignty and for the principle that governments should never be allowed to give away British territory without proper scrutiny and accountability.
These are not the actions of a partisan movement. They are certainly not the actions of an extremist movement. They are the actions of people who care about the United Kingdom and who are prepared to work with anyone, regardless of political affiliation, if it helps advance the national interest.
Which is why I find it so extraordinary when I see attempts to attach simplistic labels to our organisation.
Groups such as Hope Not Hate have made a habit of attaching labels such as “far right” to individuals, organisations and campaigns that challenge their worldview. Those descriptions are then repeated by activists, campaigners and sometimes journalists until they begin to take on a life of their own. Wikipedia, which many people still assume to be politically neutral, often becomes part of that ecosystem. A description appears in one place, is repeated somewhere else, and before long it is treated as an established fact rather than a contested political opinion.
The objective is obvious. If you cannot defeat an argument, it is often easier to delegitimise the person making it. Rather than debating ideas, you attach a label and hope that people stop listening.
But labels are not evidence. The facts remain stubborn things.
I’ll say it again… the Great British PAC works with people from different political parties. The Great British PAC has supporters from across the political spectrum. The Great British PAC has spent the last year helping lead one of the most significant cross-party campaigns in Britain. Those facts do not disappear simply because somebody edits a Wikipedia page, changes a link or writes a hostile article.
Perhaps some activists genuinely do not understand what we are building. Perhaps they cannot imagine people putting country before party because they have spent too long viewing politics as a tribal contest. Or perhaps they understand perfectly well and simply find it threatening.
The Great British PAC is growing. Every week more people join us. Some are Conservatives. Some support Reform. Some vote Labour. Some vote Liberal Democrat. Many have never been politically active before. What unites them is not ideology but patriotism, a belief that Britain is worth defending and that ordinary people deserve a stronger voice in public life.
That, perhaps, is what troubles our critics most. Because what we are building is something they cannot easily explain away.
People are tired of being told who they are supposed to support and who they are supposed to hate. They are tired of being forced into political camps. They are tired of a political class that seems more interested in party advantage than the national interest.
More and more people are recognising that you can disagree on some issues while still working together on others. You can vote differently and still love your country. You can come from different political traditions and still fight for the same cause.
The activists may not like it. The smear merchants may not like it. The Wikipedia warriors certainly do not seem to like it. That is their problem, not ours.
We will continue putting country before party. We will continue defending British sovereignty. We will continue standing with the Chagossian people. We will continue working with good people wherever we find them. And we will continue challenging those who seek to mislead the public about who we are and what we stand for.
The Great British PAC is not going away. In fact, we are only just getting started.
And that, perhaps, is what worries our critics most.
By Claire Bullivant, CEO of the Great British PAC
