11/06/2026
Gary Ha I would just like to commend this gentleman on a comment he has recently written on one of our posts about Rupert Lowe.
Firstly, I would like to show people one of Gary’s comments by posting it underneath as his points are fantastic, then I would like to openly share our reply as I feel that rather than trying to respond to every single individual on every single post with things along the same lines as this, they can see what we have to say here. But firstly, this is how you form a debate or raise a concern properly without hurling insults at members of the page and making accusations of us being racists, fascists and so on and so forth. I have nothing but respect for people like this, so thank you, Gary. Here is Gary’s comment…
“Winsford Guardians
Respectfully, I don’t think people have misunderstood what they’ve seen.
Your page says it exists to provide a calm night-time presence, help women and children get home safely, and serve the whole Winsford community. That’s something people of all political views can support.
A Labour supporter, Conservative supporter, Reform supporter or someone with no political views at all can support helping women get home safely. Once the page starts endorsing politicians, it stops being a neutral community project and becomes a political platform.
The issue is that you’ve now moved from community safety into political campaigning. Telling followers that Rupert Lowe is “the only man speaking sense” and that “we must do everything we can to get this man into power” isn’t a community safety message, it’s a political endorsement.
When a page presents itself as representing the whole community but starts campaigning for a specific politician, people are entitled to question whether it is still politically neutral, inclusive and welcoming to everyone in Winsford.
Since you’ve said your mission is protecting women, families and children, there’s another legitimate question. How does publicly campaigning for Rupert Lowe align with that mission when a KC-led investigation reportedly found “credible evidence of unlawful harassment” involving two female employees? Mr Lowe denies the allegations, but if you’re asking the community to support him because he represents your values, surely people are entitled to ask whether those allegations are relevant to a page that claims to champion women’s safety.
This isn’t about whether someone supports Labour, the Conservatives, Reform or any other party. It’s about whether a community safety organisation that asks for the trust of the entire town should be using that position to campaign for politicians at all.
You can’t ask people to separate the politics from the organisation when the organisation itself has chosen to make political endorsements. Those questions come with the territory.”
And here is my reply for you, Gary.
Gary, you see this response? This is the type of response I have absolutely no problem engaging with all day. Respectful, honest, well structured with real points that have been made and no insulting, aggressive, labelling or judging comments. You’re generally a bit concerned and are taking the time to validly express your views in an open and honest manner and I have nothing but respect for that. Whether at the end of this we agree or not, is irrelevant. I completely respect that you can engage in a conversation properly and respectfully without calling people fascists, racist and so on and so forth and it’s a breath of fresh air. So firstly; thank you. I’ll try my best to answer as best as I can.
I understand the point you’re making, and on the face of it I can see why some people would draw the conclusion that we’ve become political. However, from our perspective, the mission has never changed and neither have the concerns that led to this page being created in the first place.
The Winsford Guardians were formed because ordinary people were increasingly concerned about community safety, particularly the safety of women, children and vulnerable people. Everything we’ve done since day one has been centred around that objective. The patrols, the awareness posts, the conversations with residents and the presence on the streets all stem from the same concern: keeping people safe.
Where we may differ is on the question of politics. I don’t personally believe that discussing the causes of crime, public safety, policing, immigration, justice or social issues can be completely separated from politics because politicians are ultimately the people making decisions that influence those areas. If someone believes certain policies are contributing to problems in our communities, it’s not unreasonable for them to express support for politicians they feel are addressing those concerns.
That doesn’t mean we suddenly stop caring about or helping people who vote differently. If a Labour voter needed assistance getting home safely, we’d help them. If a Conservative voter needed assistance, we’d help them. If a Reform voter needed assistance, we’d help them. If someone had never voted in their life, we’d help them too. The service we provide, and the people we look out for, are not determined by political affiliation.
You say that a community organisation should represent everyone. I agree. But representing everyone doesn’t necessarily mean every individual involved must keep all political opinions private. The important question is whether those opinions change how we treat people in practice. I can say with complete honesty that our commitment to helping people in Winsford does not depend on how they vote or what they believe politically.
As for Rupert Lowe, people are obviously entitled to disagree with our view of him. That’s politics. People support different politicians for different reasons. We expressed support because we believe he is speaking about issues that concern us. Others may strongly disagree and that’s their right.
Regarding the allegations you mentioned, you’re also correct that people are entitled to ask questions. Equally, I think it’s important that allegations and findings are discussed carefully and fairly. Mr Lowe denies wrongdoing, and I’m not in a position to determine guilt or innocence. Like most people, I can only look at the information available and form my own opinion. Reasonable people can reach different conclusions on that.
Ultimately though, the key point I would make is this: judge us by our actions.
Judge us by whether we’re out on the streets when people need help.
Judge us by whether we’re treating people fairly.
Judge us by whether we’re making Winsford safer.
Judge us by whether we’re there when vulnerable people need assistance.
If we ever stop doing those things, then criticism would be justified. But supporting a politician because we believe they are addressing issues that concern us does not mean we’ve abandoned the reason we started this page.
You may still disagree with that, and that’s absolutely fine. But I do appreciate you raising the point respectfully and giving me the opportunity to explain our position rather than simply trading insults. Those kinds of conversations are far more valuable for everyone involved.
I hope this clears a few things up for people.
Be more like Gary.
