Reform is different from other political parties in a number of ways – most notably in that it is not a political party at all. It is a limited company, with shareholders. Party members are subscribers (or customers, I guess) and have no say over policy.

In this spirit, there is no “manifesto”. Instead we get something labelled “our contract with you” – a proposed contract between a limited company and the UK for the job of being a government.

I’m sure the Competition and Markets Authority will have views.

To Reform, universities are a risk – a substrate to spread “woke ideology” throughout Britain. In that spirit, a promise to cut funding to providers that undermine free speech, allow political bias, or spread cancel culture, is proposed as a mitigation (the government’s “Free Speech Act” is, apparently, toothless).

Elsewhere things get a bit more confused. Universities “must” provide two-year graduate courses – the terminology is imprecise, but it feels like this is something like Jo Johnson’s “accelerated degree” plans.

And on student finance, the plan is to extend repayment periods to 45 years (meaning an average 21 year old graduate could still be making payments at the age of 66. There’s also a promise to scrap interest rates on student loans, something that (if we assume what is meant is that the repayable amount rises with inflation only) has already happened. The exception is for healthcare – fees would be written off pro-rata over 10 years of NHS service for doctors, nurses, and medical staff. A degree, meanwhile, will no longer be required for entry to the College of Policing.

Undergraduate numbers would be restricted “well below current levels” (an appeal is made to the “rip-off courses” discourses), via minimum entry standards. These would also be linked to the ability to recruit internationally – though with more restrictions on dependents, and a curtailed graduate route (restricted to essential skills only), it is likely that international study would become less attractive anyway.