The by-election in Runcorn and Helsby – triggered by Labour MP Mike Amesbury resigning following his conviction – is scheduled for 1 May 2025. North West Bylines approached all fifteen candidates by email, asking them ten questions to better understand their plans for the constituency and the country.
We sent out emails – and gathered the replies
Of the fifteen candidates, eight answered. These are listed alphabetically by first name. All quotes used are taken directly from their replies, but in some cases the replies were so long we had to pick the main points to publish here..
- Chris Copeman (Green Party)
- Dan Clarke (Liberal Party)
- Graham Moore (English Constitution Party)
- Jason Hughes (Volt UK;
- John Stevens, (Rejoin EU)
- Michael Williams (Independent0
- Paul Duffy (Liberal Democrats)
- Paul Murphy (Social Democratic Party)
- Peter Ford (Workers Party)
The Monster Raving Loony Party didn’t answer any specific questions, but they do have a mini-manifesto.
The Conservative Party acknowledged our email and stated Sean Houlston’s team would respond when they got a chance – but no response followed.
We were unable to secure a working email address for Alan McKie (Independent), and no election officer was listed to contact.
No replies were received from Catherine Anne Blaiklock (English Democrats), Karen Shore (Labour), and Sarah Pochin (Reform UK).
What do you see as the most critical issue in this election?
- Chris Copeman: The cost of living. The Green Party want to see more social housing being built, rent controls, a mass home insulation programme and better funding of public services. A wealth tax on individuals with a net value over £10 million could fund a lot of this.
- Dan Clarke: The most important issue in this election is the cost-of-living crisis. Taxes up, energy bills up, water bills up, council tax up. Unfortunately wages and pensions have not kept up.
- Graham Moore: Immigration and justice – detain and deport in order to protect English people. Fight against authoritarian overreach.
- Jason Hughes: Unite with Europe in order to improve the economy to benefit everyone.
- John Stevens: Get closer to the EU, for our economy and European defense
- Michael Williams: The continued erosion of public trust in politics. People feel that they have no choice but to vote for candidates that they don’t want. There is a strong feeling that our elected leaders do not represent us.
- Paul Duffy: Improve the economy and stop the welfare cuts. Protect pensioners and the disabled.
- Paul Murphy: Treat the UK as our home, not like a business opportunity like the leading parties appear to be doing.
- Peter Ford: Combat the cost-of-living crisis.
How would you address the NHS’s challenges, and what would your priorities be?
- Chris Copeman: We need to increase funding but also make sure that a creeping privatisation is not allowed to happen.
- Dan Clarke: There is no easy or overnight fix for the NHS. It was my party, the Liberal Party under parliamentarian Sir William Beveridge, that wrote the white paper in 1942, known as the Beveridge Report titled:’ Social insurance and allied services’ that Labour implemented a couple of years later. The NHS does need to be reviewed and reformed if it is to continue. we cannot continue to tinker around the edges.
- Graham Moore: Training English people to work in the NHS and prevent disease by increasing individual responsibility and improve nutrition.
- Jason Hughes: Listen to doctors and nurses about what the NHS needs and look at examples of healthcare in other countries.
- John Stevens: Invest, stop selling off services, partner the NHS with science and pharmaceutical industries.
- Michael Williams: The NHS is not broken. Should I be elected I will offer up a private members bill aimed at better reallocating community funding offered by developments (such as those happening in our constituency: HyNet, solar farms, carbon spur pipeline etc.), towards areas of greater public need.
- Paul Duffy: Invest in social care to free up beds and time in the NHS.
- Paul Murphy: Reform the NHS to be fit for this century. Not removing free care at the point of need.
- Peter Ford: Resist privatisation.
Should we strengthen ties with Europe or the USA?
- Chris Copeman: Leaving Europe has cost the country billions. Brexit was a disaster. Europe are our most important trading partner so we need closer ties with Europe. Trump’s mercantilism demonstrated by recent tariffs shows that we cannot rely on trade with the USA at present, but we still need to try and maintain a good relationship for numerous reasons.
- Dan Clarke: We should not have to be forced to choose between America and Europe. We should have a strong standing relationship with both.
- Graham Moore: The USA, they are our natural allies. The EU is an administrative law system – freedom’s at stake.
- Jason Hughes: Europe. United we stand, divided we fall. We can no longer rely on the USA.
- John Stevens: Europe. We are a European country, and a closer relationship with the US must be very one-sided and could easily, as Trump is demonstrating, amount to vassalage.
- Michael Williams: It’s not a choice we have to make.
- Paul Duffy: We need close relationships to both, and would like a customs union with the EU
- Paul Murphy: We need to find our own path, picking one side would not be in the UK’s best interest.
- Peter Ford: neither. Brexit was the correct choice and we do not want our hand tied in foreign policy.
Is net zero a smart plan for the country or just a costly scam?
- Chris Copeman: Net zero is an essential path for future generations to have a reasonable future. We need to insulate our homes and electrify our transport systems.
- Dan Clarke: Net Zero if economic responsibility is applied then yes it’s the right plan. However we cannot push ahead with net zero if it will make the poor poorer. Technology today is far cleaner, efficient and effective than technology twenty years ago.
- Graham Moore: It’s a massively expensive fraud. Net zero is an academic con.
- Jason Hughes: It is not a hoax, don’t be deceived. Climate change is real, but we need to solve this problem across borders.
- John Stevens: Net zero arose from the growing concern over climate change. It is the regulatory tool to force the objective to have renewable energy as new cheap energy. We must not renounce it.
- Michael Williams: Out of those two options I would lean more towards the ‘right plan’ but I don’t believe that plans are currently including people as much as they should. I am a supporter of ideas such as the mooted regional energy pricing plan. A prominent feature on the landscape in the constituency is the Frodsham Marshes windfarm.
- Paul Duffy: It is the right plan that doesn’t go far enough. Green jobs are part of the future, I want to fight to bring green jobs to Runcorn and Helsby.
- Paul Murphy: Global net zero is a great target and something the UK should be working to achieve. However, blindly crippling the economy to be the only country in the world that achieves net zero is a terrible idea.
- Peter Ford: Households in Runcorn and Helsby will on average be facing bills of £600 next year just to subsidise wind and solar. That is not climate justice, that is climate injustice.
How do we balance social media’s benefits with its risks?
- Chris Copeman: The Green Party would push for strong data protection regulations. I will push for effective regulation of both traditional and social media, safeguarding our democracy and the spaces for shared cultural expression.
- Dan Clarke: Social media is a blessing and a curse. It’s a blessing as people find social media as a means to connect, but also has a downside of foul players, with online abuse or misinformation. There does need to be a responsible amount of regulation and protections in place, while protecting free speech.
- Graham Moore: Leave people alone and let innovators do their thing. Over regulation’s the real problem.
- Jason Hughes: Moderation needs to be much stronger, there should be zero tolerance on disinformation campaigns. There needs to be a much more regulated, social media ecosystem for children.
- John Stevens: Regulation. The EU’s approach is greatly superior in its protection of citizens than that of the US.
- Michael Williams: I feel that there is scope to regulate how social media rewards content without impacting free speech.
- Paul Duffy: Social media can be, or certainly was, a positive useful tool to communicate. There is no easy answer except through education.
- Paul Murphy: Social media can be a great place. It can also be incredibly toxic. Social Media is not going away, SM companies are commercial enterprises and the government needs to stop thinking that social media represents the nation.
- Peter Ford: I come down on the freedom side of the balance. The establishment fears social media and will use any excuse to muzzle it.
Are taxes inherently bad? Who should bear the biggest burden?
- Chris Copeman: We should tax the very wealthy more who often pay less as a proportion of their income than the less wealthy. The Greens want to introduce a wealth tax so that anyone with wealth of more than £10 million will pay a 1% tax per year on this wealth. Billionaires would pay a 2% tax on their wealth.
- Dan Clarke: Taxes are a necessary evil. We cannot bring about prosperity with high taxation. We need to simplify our taxation system. Merge income tax and NICs into one tax, while increasing the tax threshold to £20,000. We at the Liberal Party believe in bringing our tax system into the 21st century. This includes the abolition of council tax and replacing it with a fairer Land Value tax. We should close all legal tax loopholes.
- Graham Moore: Taxes are always a negative – they fuel bloated government. We need a decentralized monetary setup, not a City of London central bank.
- Jason Hughes: Working hard should be rewarded. Tax rates for low and middle-income households should be as low as possible.. The super wealthy should pay much more.
- John Stevens: Tax is essential to a civilised society. Taxes should be paid by those who can most afford to do so.
- Michael Williams: Taxes are not a bad thing. Yes, it’s true no-one likes paying them, but as a friend of mine said recently, taxation is the subscription you pay for being a citizen. My personal preference would be to more effectively combine corporate and income taxation.
- Paul Duffy: Taxes are a necessary part of life if people want decent public services. Huge corporations that are making billions and billions of dollars should contribute fairly.
- Paul Murphy: What is bad is when tax money goes to waste. As for who should pay – we all should.
- Peter Ford: High taxes are as bad for the working class as they are for anybody.
Should we boost our military to counter Russia?
- Chris Copeman: We do need to increase defence spending because of the threat from Russia and to support Ukraine. We need closer ties with Europe to be part of a European defence programme.
- Dan Clarke: It needs to be an international effort to deter Russia. Yes we need to increase our defence budget. We also have to acknowledge warfare has changed, we need to invest in greater protections against attacks such as cyber attacks.
- Graham Moore: Russia’s not the threat – immigration is, as history shows. We should revive the English militia tradition instead.
- Jason Hughes: We can longer rely on the USA. A united Europe has the equipment and personnel to become a world-class military. United we stand, divided we fall.
- John Stevens: Yes. Including nuclear weapons.
- Michael Williams: We should meet the requirements set out as part of NATO membership, and we should attempt to expand NATO. One thing that has to be learned from the war in Ukraine is that our existing armed forces are potentially prepared for the wrong conflicts. Rather than ‘rearming’ we should be ‘right-arming’.
- Paul Duffy: Yes 100%. The Lib Dems are calling for a rise in defence spending to 3% not the current 2.5% to combat the threat from Russia.
- Paul Murphy: We live in an increasingly dangerous world, we should rearm to protect ourselves from those who wish us harm.
- Peter Ford: Does Russia need detering? When it struggles already to overcome a puny Ukraine next door? The WPB is the only party that puts peacemaking at the heart of its offer.
Can privatised water companies ever ensure clean lakes and rivers?
- Chris Copeman: No, we need to nationalise our water companies.A third of our water bills are going to pay off debts racked up by the privatised water companies.
- Dan Clarke: Yes and no. In theory yes, unfortunately in practice no. My personal belief is that any private water company caught polluting our rivers should not only face a fine, the CEO/head of the company should face criminal charges.
- Graham Moore: No chance. They’ve proven that already.
- Jason Hughes: No. Especially not when the primary focus of a water company is profit, not service.
- John Stevens: In theory yes, but in practice, no. Natural monopolies of social amenities should generally be in public ownership.
- Michael Williams: I’m a believer that some industries will work better if privatised, and some will not. I believe that we have seen that a privatised water system combined with insufficient regulation will not work. If ever there were a case for nationalisation, the very water we drink has to be a prime candidate.
- Paul Duffy: Regarding clean waterways and lakes, the Lib Dems are calling for OFWAT to be replaced immediately with a new effective regulator.
- Paul Murphy: No, privatised companies have a legal requirement to maximise investor income, clean lakes and rivers are simply an overhead.
- Peter Ford: Probably not.
Is there a “right” level of immigration?
- Chris Copeman: Immigration supports essential services and other industries such as agriculture. Our universities depend on income from foreign students who increase our world standing when they return home. Our economy is boosted by the net benefit that most immigrants provide to this country with tax paid and entrepreneurial and research inputs to industry.
- Dan Clarke: High skilled immigration yes, as the country requires. Mass unskilled immigration no. We need to stop and discourage mass unskilled immigration while attracting the skill sets our country requires to grow.
- Graham Moore: No. We need a total halt – then reverse it. No one born to non-English parents should hold power or profit here.
- Jason Hughes: We need a system that is fair and controlled. We welcome those who need our support, and we will rapidly return those who seek to undermine our society.
- John Stevens: Of course. An economy such as ours will always need some imported labour. The imported labour we need should be under arrangements which are as flexible and responsive to the market as possible.
- Michael Williams: Yes. Immigration is an issue because of unfairness and inequality. In Runcorn & Helsby less than 5% of people were born abroad and less than 3% don’t speak English as a first language. This means that the issues we have with our public services are not a result of immigration, but of decades of under-investment.
- Paul Duffy: Would say there can be an ‘acceptable’ level of immigration. We need staff from outside of the UK.
- Paul Murphy: Yes. All immigration is not bad, but uncontrolled immigration is bad.
- Peter Ford: Of course there can be.
Devolution or levelling up – especially after the HS2 Manchester leg was scrapped?
- Chris Copeman: Devolving powers locally is a good idea in principle, but there is a danger that the devolution proposed by the government is poorly thought out and will mean loss of local democracy without providing much local spending power.
- Dan Clarke: We at the Liberal Party believe in devolution and leveling up. We want to see a Minister of the North, whose role is to make sure that the North of England is on parity with London and the southeast in terms of investment. HS2 is too London centric. Yes we do need to increase High speed rail, but we need to update our creaking rail infrastructure across the whole country first. We need to increase rail capacity between all the main hubs whether that be Liverpool, Manchester, Crewe, Birmingham, Leeds and so on.
- Graham Moore: Levelling up is a myth – they’re really levelling us down to London’s baseline. Distributed government’s the answer, plus an English parliament and scrapping the Act of Union.
- Jason Hughes: Levelling up is somewhat artificial. What is needed is for local regions to have much more control of their finances and decision making.
- John Stevens: What is needed is a high-speed rail project linking Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds and Sheffield.
- Michael Williams: Devolution as it actually enfranchises, rather than patronises, the local population.
- Paul Duffy: I am a passionate supporter of the Northern Powerhouse initiative. We also have to start again on the HS2 railway finishing in the north of England.
- Paul Murphy: HS2 always struck me as a very London-centric idea of levelling up. “What the North really needs is faster trains to London”. The SDP indeed believes in devolution.
- Peter Ford: Levelling up was only ever a Johnsonian trick to fool Northern voters.
Unfortunately, the other candidates – including those from the major parliamentary parties – did not respond to our questions. You may wish to raise these questions, along with your own, directly with them.
