From Whitehall to Wokehall: how civil servants are already plotting to block Reform

Insiders reveal how the establishment is already planning to thwart the people

---

Matt Goodwin’s newsletter goes to 91,400 subscribers from 183 countries. Inner Circle and Paid subscribers get access to every single post, the entire archive, events, comments, and help us spread our message. You can join us on YouTube, Insta, TikTok, X and Facebook. We will always tell you the truth.

---

Here is something you might have missed.

According to the Politico website, UK civil servants are discussing whether to quit their jobs if Nigel Farage and Reform win the next election.

Why? Because Reform’s policies to end mass uncontrolled immigration and do whatever is necessary to stop the boats will, some say, “mess with our consciences”.

Let’s be blunt.

If this is true, then it is very good news.

Not because people should be hounded out of a job — but because it exposes a deeper and long-running rot inside the British state which I have highlighted before.

A politically neutral, taxpayer-funded civil service should not be packed to the rafters with left-wing woke activists who have the arrogance to think they have a moral veto over the democratic choices of the British people.

Civil servants are not elected. They are not meant to rule.

Their role is to serve the government of the day — whether Reform, Tory, Labour, whatever — and, in turn, the taxpaying citizens who elected that government.

If civil servants cannot do their job, they should leave and they should take their political beliefs with them.

This should not be controversial. It is the constitutional settlement.

And yet, here we are.

Civil servants, whose salaries are paid by the hardworking British people, either agonising about Reform’s policies, plotting to remain in post so they can “blunt” Reform’s plans, or preparing their CVs in case voters choose the “wrong” outcome.

Just think about what that means.

Unelected, unaccountable state bureaucrats openly signalling - in advance - they may refuse to serve a democratically elected government because they dislike its policies.

This is not neutrality.

It reflects the blatant, public politicisation of our deep state public institutions —institutions in which, I have already pointed out, 75% of workers are on the left.

Nor is this new.

We saw the same thing during the Rwanda policy row, when civil servants openly threatened industrial action over the then-Tory government’s plans to do what the British people were asking them to do —stop illegal immigration.

That episode should have set loud alarm bells ringing. Why?

Because the state was no longer merely advising ministers; it was actively resisting them on ideological grounds.

We saw it, too, during the Brexit wars.

Senior officials dragging their feet, leaking relentlessly, and worked to dilute or delay policies they personally opposed—often briefing against their own ministers.

The people, of course, were told time and time again this was about “competence” or “process”. But in reality, it was about politics and woke resistance.

And we saw it in Nick Timothy’s devastating report into the dire state of the Home Office, which revealed that civil servants who have been tasked with controlling the borders were spending their time in “listening circles” to discuss their feelings, while senior mandarins who had completely failed to perform their tasks were given enormous bonuses and paid more than the prime minister.

And now we are seeing it once more.

The idea—floated approvingly in some quarters—that civil servants should stay in post to “blunt the edges” of a Reform government is especially revealing.

This is not an impartial state - it is sabotage by stealth, an unelected regime that believes it has the moral authority to block what millions of people want.

To be fair, some voices quoted by Politico still get this right. Some say civil servants who cannot serve the government of the day should not remain in post.

They are absolutely correct.

A neutral civil service is not one that quietly pushes on the radical progressive orthodoxy in Westminster and resists anything that challenges it - it is one that implements policy faithfully, regardless of personal belief.

But I fear such voices are a minority in Whitehall - sorry, Wokehall - which is why Reform’s plans to fundamentally overhaul the civil service are so important.

If Reform do win the next election, it would not be a coup. It would be democracy.

If that prospect sends woke civil servants scurrying for the exits then that tells us something important: too many people in Whitehall no longer see themselves as servants of the British public, but as guardians of a particular worldview.

So yes—if some choose to leave, so be it. We should welcome their departure. Because a smaller, more professional, and genuinely neutral civil service - one that respects democracy and the people - is precisely what we were supposed to have all along.

---

---