So, three months on from the General Election of 4 July, Jolyon Maugham KC and his (Not Very) Good Law Project have finally launched their first crowdfunded legal challenge of the Starmer era.

It’s been a torrid three months for Jolyon, what with his arse being handed to him on a plate by Wes Streeting in the High Court, his grandly-announced “fortnight” off X/Twitter lasting almost nine weeks, and his least favourite ‘transphobic hate groups’ – the fabulous Sex Matters and LGB Alliance – legally besting him in the Supreme Court.

It’s also been a torrid three months for Keir Starmer, of course, what with all the revelations of freebies, his Chief of Staff failing to last the new Government’s first 100 days, and his approval rating sinking faster and deeper than a lead balloon dropped in the Mariana Trench. Indeed, Starmer is now more unpopular than Nigel Farage.

However, the GLP’s new crowdfunder, launched on Wednesday, is not to ‘use the law’ to stop Starmer’s punishment beating of pensioners, or hold chancellor Rachel Reeves to account for her failure to appoint Jolyon as her powerful Covid Corruption Commissioner with powerful powers. Rather, it’s to … er … push Nigel Farage to improve Reform UK’s compliance with the famously dull General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). It’s what people voted for on 4 July, or something.

Yes, you read that right. Having got thousands of midwits to pointlessly send data Subject Access Requests (SARs) to five political parties – including Reform – during the General Election campaign, to no apparent purpose, the GLP is now “putting together a group claim” to … force Reform to introduce “systems and procedures” to deal with those pointless SARs. Democracy is saved!

For this confected exercise in performative futility – [Shurely ‘combating the rise of the far right’? Ed] – Jolyon and the GLP want £30,000 (until such time as they inevitably raise that target to £50,000). And they will most likely get it, and more, because this is clearly what the midwits have been waiting for since 4 July. Within 24 hours, more than 900 of them had donated a stonking £16,500, and this morning the crowdfunder stands at £22,330 from 1,225 midwits.

The crowdfunder text states that the GLP is “mounting a group action where GLP is the ‘Representative organisation’ under Article 80(1). The solicitors are Pallas LLP and current counsel is Jason Coppel KC. The legal team is acting under a conditional funding agreement, which means they only get paid if we win the case. Your donations will help to protect the GLP against any potential adverse legal costs that could arise, should we fail to be successful in this case.” And an email sent to some or all of the 300,000 people on the GLP’s mailing list on 9 October states that the GLP “has just taken the first step in a legal process against Nigel Farage’s Reform UK”.

Presumably, the 1,225 midwits who’ve donated to the crowdfunder so far all knew, without having to be told, that “Article 80(1)” is Article 80(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – the GDPR is not actually mentioned in the crowdfunder text. There is no outline or explanation of the legal process that the GLP will be following, or what “first formal step” has just been taken (despite a video posted on X/Twitter by the GLP on 9 October referring to and showing the first page of a pre-action protocol letter sent to Reform on 8 October). So it is entirely unclear from the crowfunder text whether, for example, the GLP’s group action is seeking a compliance order under section 167 of the Data Protection Act 2018, or a claim for compensation under section 168 of the 2018 Act, or both. And one has to wonder how many of the 1,225 midwits understand or are even aware of the difference.

Furthermore, there is no indication of the legal action’s prospects of success, or the likely magnitude of any “potential adverse legal costs”, should the challenge fail. So it could be said that potential donors to the crowdfunder have not been given all of the material information that they need to make an informed decision about whether to donate and, if so, how much to donate.

Details, schmetails. All that matters is that the GLP is giving the midwits a chance to “take the fight to Farage”. And Jolyon is back in his comfort zone.

[Update, 22 October: Today is the deadline set by the GLP for Reform to respond to the GLP’s pre-action protocol letter of 8 October, which is still not mentioned or linked to in the crowdfunder text, but is now linked to in a ‘case overview’ published separately on the GLP’s website. The crowdfunder has now raised £25,889 from 1,401 midwits.]

[Update, 12 November: It is now three weeks since the passing of that deadline for Reform to respond to the GLP’s letter before action, but there’s been no update or other indication from the GLP on whether – and if so how – Reform have responded. On 22 October, a further email to some or all of the GLP’s 300,000-strong mailing list generated a second wave of some 600 donations, but as of today the crowdfunder is flatlining at £37,006 from 2,004 midwits.]

[Update, 9 January: It is now three months since the GLP filmed themselves delivering their pre-action protocol letter by hand to Reform’s registered office in City Road – too posh to post! – and there’s still no news on whether or not Reform even bothered to reply. The campaign page on the GLP’s website has not been updated, the GLP haven’t promoted the crowdfunder – also not updated – on X/Twitter since 27 October, despite posting numerous, unrelated pops at Nigel Farage, and there have only been six donations (totalling just £226) to the crowdfunder since 1 December. It’s almost as if the GLP take their midwit supporters for granted.]

More news on this fearless fight against Faragist fascism as I get it. In the meantime, here’s my updated Table of Failure and Futility. The launch of the Reform UK data crowdfunder – the GLP’s 74th crowdfunder since March 2017 – has taken the total sum grifted since March 2017 past the milestone of £5.5 million. Just imagine what that money might have achieved for vulnerable people, in the hands of a half-decent law centre.