Nov 25 2009
UKIP does not help Euroscepticism
I have been very tolerant of UKIP contributors on this site, allowing them to make their case and to attack the Conservatives as they choose. I have done so because I do agree that we need to prevent a European supersate enveloping Britiain and undermining our inheritance of democratic self government and because I believe in democratic exchanges. Unfortunately, the more I read their words the more I conclude that they are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Their case is based on two falsehoods. The first is that a vote for UKIP will take the UK out of the EU. It never has, and on current polls is miles away from doing so. To make that a honest proposition UKIP would need to be polling 40-45%. It is currently polling 3%. Far from strengthening the Eurosceptic cause, this specialist Eurosceptic party claims an embarrassingly small portion of the vote allowing federalists to say it proves people are not very worried about the issue. They ignore the much larger Eurosceptic vote accruing to the Conservatives, as this is a broadly based party that has a following on many issues.
The second is the proposition that a vote for UKIP will force the Conservatives to be more Eurosceptic. Instead UKIP targets mainly Conservatives. If it detaches the strongest Eurosceptics from the Conservative party to itself, far from making the Conservative party more Eurosceptic it makes it slightly less Eurosceptic in its membership each time it does it. By showing how little support its cause has it fails to bully the Conservative leadership, who see most of the extra votes they need to win a General Election in the poll findings of the Greens, the Lib Dems and Labour.
The UKIP experiment aimed to detach leading Eurosceptic MPs to itself in the Commons. The Eurosceptic cause has found its strongest advocates in Conservative MPs like Bill Cash, Philip Davies and David Heathcote Amory. None of these has joined UKIP. None of them are “careerists,” as UKIP likes to sugggest of any Conservative who fails to defect. UKIP needs to think again, instead of attacking the people most like to further its aim of power back from Brussels. There is a democractic Eurosceptic opposition to the Labour and Liberal Democrat federalists in the Commons. It is not UKIP. Why doesn’t UKIP turn up the heat on the federalists who have done most to damage our constitution, the federalists in the current UK government?
John Redwood has been the Member of Parliament for Wokingham since 1987. First attending Kent College, Canterbury, he graduated from Magdalen College...
Can’t you see that if your Party kept to its word and gave us an honest referendum on our relationship with the EU, which you yourself said it would, then this issue would evaporate? Simples, as they say.
Reply
pipesmoker Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
Spot on Jim. I am not a UKIP supporter but I will not vote for the Conservatives again until I get that assurance. I have since Heath’s treachery in the belief that they were the only party to right the wrong he did voted for them. and sooner or later they will have to grasp the nettle?
I admire JR but, constrained by party politics, his post is just more of the same?
It’s crunch time and this loyal voter will stay at home until they do the decent thing.
Reply
Ross J Warren Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 8:40 am
“Heath’s treachery”, This suggests to me that even if you had a fresh referendum today, you would only be happy if the nation voted with your beliefs. Our entry into the Common market was about as democratic as it gets. Treachery is the wrong word however you look at this issue.
Reply
APL Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 10:37 am
Ross J Warren: “Treachery is the wrong word however you look at this issue.”
Heath: “No loss of essential soverengty”
In the light of the *fact* that European Union law now takes precedent over United Kingdom law.
How would you characterise the behavior of an individual who knowingly misleads the population of his country to facilitate the take over of that country by a foreign power?
‘Treachery’ is the correct word to use.
pipesmoker Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 10:54 am
Not true, I would accept the outcome of a simple referendum on this country’s continued membership of the European Union and that is all I seek. I may not be happy with the result but I would accept it and consider it the end of the matter.
Harold Wilson’s referendum on our entry into the Common Market was about his so called re-negotiated terms and there hasn’t been one on our membership of the European Union. Treachery, well Edward Heath promised he would not take this country into the Common Market without the wholehearted consent of parliament and the the public and he had neither and that was dishonest as he admitted on television many years later.
It is ironic that there is now talk of adding a question, in Scotland, on the General Election ballot paper about their continued membership of the UK to decide that issue. The same should be done in respect of the EU.
Natalie Drest Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Heath’s manifesto 1970 said nothing about joining the EEC, merely negotiating a deal, which would be put to the country. Any deal would have to be approved by a substantial majority in Parliament.
Heath got his deal, there would be no loss of sovereignty, and there was no such thing as a common fisheries policy. All MP’s swear an oath of allegiance, and swear not to compromise the sovereignty of the nation as does the Queen.
His substantial majority was 8 votes, in a house that his party had a more than 50 majority… That sounds like a technical loss, he couldn’t even persuade his own MP’s!
Norway decided not to join, on the basis that the Common Fisheries Pollicy would deprive them of their most precious market (before the oil!).
When asked in an interview in 1990 whether he knew about the Common Fisheries policy and the loss of sovereignty that our joining of the EEC would involve; Heath replied of course!
Sounds like treachery to me!
Natalie Drest Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
And mendacious too!
Derek W. Buxton Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Wrong, I clearly remember the referendum. It was about membership of a free market organisation, nothing more, or so we were told. That was a blatant lie. It was sold on a false declaration and therefore was illegal. The lies started by Heath have been carried on ever since, and are still being parrotted.
The EU, as it has now become was never explaind to the people nor was their consent asked. It is not and never will be a free trade organisation, for, as we now know, that was never the intention. Nor is it democratic in any way whatsoever, again that is what was intended from the start. And I am afraid that the current “conservative leadership” are happy to go along with it.
Reply: the referendum debate was led by PM Wilson, not Heath.
Ross J Warren Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
“free market organisation, nothing more, or so we were told”
It was certainly sold that way to the nation, I agree. I do feel it’s a bit unlikely that Ted, was deliberately misleading us, rather that later treaties have eroded the simple ambitions of the common market. I will agree that the way Lisbon was forced on the nation was wrong. However even now the concept of a common market is an appealing one. I take it most Conservatives are comfortable with the principles of free trade, and would not wish to end trade with Europe. I am as euro-sceptic as anyone, but even so I don’t believe withdraw, would be either easy or sensible right now.
Lockduart Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
I agree but I stopped voting Tory when Cameron became the leader and changed the direction of the Party
Reply
Sadly, a vote for UKIP is part of the problem, not part of the solution. The problem is how to get rid of a hated Labour government which has brought the country to its knees and will do incalculable further damage if re-elected. The Labour position is helped by a skewed electoral system which is said to give it an advantage of up to 40 seats and the votes it can expect from its client state and bloated public sector, both of which have been created at taxpayer expense.
The next election is the one where the UKIP supporters should vote Conservative. The worst possible outcome for a Eurosceptic is five years of another Labour government led by Gordon Brown. If you think that the Labour Party has already sold the farm to Brussels just wait and see what EU horrors which will be visited on the British public by another Labour term of office. If you want another Labour government voting UKIP is the second best way of achieving it. The best way would be to vote Labour.
Reply
A.Sedgwick Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
I suspect in the booth many life long Tories will go that route whilst grumbling vehemently. It will be one hell of a gamble against simply offering a referendum. The odds do not justify the risk Cameron is taking.
Reply
Al Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 12:32 am
Why get rid of a hated Labour government to replace it with Liberal or Conservative administrations which seem so similar? Ok, maybe DC wouldn’t have made so many economic errors and wasted so much money but only months ago he was promising to match Brown’s spending.
My area had six ‘Out of EU’ candidates in June which polled 80,000 votes, add these to the UKIP candidate and they’d become a close second to the winning Convservative. I am not counting the 100,000+ BNP votes in that either! Given that some of the Lib, Green and Tory voters may also vote against EU in a referendum gives way way over half the voters. Bet DC would love 45% of the vote never mind 50.
John, your party can kill off UKIP and the others (and some of the BNP vote) just by offering an in/out referendum and making us believe that cast iron Dave would truly follow the wishes of the populace. They may even vote to stay in!
As ever, rather than spamming your blog I am mainly following a line of communication to an MP. Hopefully you or your moderator takes note of input from voters even away from Wokingham.
Reply: I moderate this. I remember hearing before that if the Tories opposed the Euro in principle Eurosceptics would rejoin. Then we were told if we voted against Nice, then Amsterdam in the Commons they would rejoin. Then it was oppose Lisbon in the Commons and vote for a referendum on it. We did all those things, but for a small minority it makes no difference. It’s never enough.
Reply
Simon Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 5:20 am
If you vote Tory your life and the life of the country will not change in any significant or tangible way. It won’t make any difference whether the Tories or Labour win. On the other hand a vote for UKIP will bring about real change. They offer hope where all the main three parties just offer more of the same.
Reply
JR: In practical terms your logic is quite correct. However, the EU problem has become emotive, which means people are going to make less rational choices.
Many of the respondents to this site are not suggesting that they will vote UKIP in order to see them elected. As you point out, that would be absurd. It is that many of us see EU interference as a spectre that pushes the UK in a direction that we do not want to go.
The EU now has priority over UK law – that was the largest betrayal of the electorate by Mr Brown. As such, even if we have a Conservative government, we expect that the EU will force certain issues upon us.
Recently, the EU said that we had to stop supporting the banks. I didn’t want them to be supported as they are, and would like the liability taken from the tax-payer. However, there are good and bad ways of going about this, especially when you consider the timing of selling the “assets”. The UK Government of the day painted us into this corner, and the UK Government of the day (even if changed by election in the interim) should be the ones judging if the paint has dried.
Our hope was that Mr Cameron would put UK interests first, with the EU further down the list. We were delighted when he offered us a choice. I am of that generation that has never been asked, being too young to vote when Mr Heath was in office.
I was brought up during Mrs Thatcher’s heyday; my father was self-employed, and with that back-drop I learned that the priority was to take responsibility for your own way in this world. I still subscribe to that philosophy, which is why I like the idea of Small Government. The problem is that Mr Cameron’s Small Government is irrelevant if the massive EU Government is in ultimate power, so what is the point in casting that vote?
So, why vote UKIP? Were I asked by a polling company, I would tell them that this would be my choice. I don’t want to vote against a Conservative government that has the best chance of restoring the economy, but nor do I want to vote for Europe that will ultimately smother it. So, if there were a General Election today, I suspect that I wouldn’t bother casting my vote.
Reply
I agree with you on this, but the thing that makes me want to UKIP (well for Mr Farrage) is that he seems to be the only big name politican prepared to stick two fingers up at the anti-smoking lobby, who I see as an affront to freedom and democracy.
How the British civil service can give taxpayer money to organisations that fund international lobby groups to intervene in the domestic political affairs of our European friends is beyond me.
Having said that smoking is not the number one issue we face and the tories get my £25 a year and X at the ballot box at present.
Reply
NickW Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 10:57 am
UKIP can do everybody a favour by taking votes off the B-P in Labour areas.
All they need to do is to point out that smoking might not be allowed in working men’s clubs and pubs, but Labour MPs have exempted themselves from the law and can still have a cigarette with their pint in the House of Commons Bars.
Labour voters won’t ever vote Tory but their loyalties would allow them to support UKIP.
Socialism has made Blair, Mandelson and Prescott (and probably quite a few others), millionaires.
Mandelson now goes on shooting parties with the Rothschilds and Saif Gaddaffi; all paid for and supported by the council house voter.
All UKIP needs to do is to tell it to the Labour voter the way it is.
Why are the Tories so shy of pointing out the truth of the socialist millionaires? They should be proud of the way they and their families made money- by investing, by hard work- by offering employment to others.
Compare that to the way that Blair, Mandelson and Prescott made their millions.
Reply
JR: “allowing them to make their case and to attack the Conservatives as they choose.”
A former Tory voter, there is nothing I would like more than to vote for an unambiguously Eurosceptic patriotic Tory party. Unfortunately no such party exists. I am tired of the bait and switch game, just as you are tired of people pointing out the dishonesty of the Tory position on the European Union.
No one knowing you history of voting on the European Union doubts your personal position on the EU.
However too often the Tory party has dangled a little juicy tidbit in front of voters – Howard put forward reform of CFP, for example. Only to have it snatched away by the next Tory Leader that happens to wrest control of the party from the membership.
You may resent people pointing out the disingenuous behavior of the Tory party leadership.
Saying as you often do, “Cameron is a EuroSceptic leader” is no use when we see his actions. The old saying – actions speak louder than words is something Cameron should reflect on if he wishes to destroy UKIP.
Speaking not as a UKIP voter but as a former Tory voter that is sick of the dishonest machinations of an unprincipled leadership, I attack the Tory party because I want IT to change so I can vote for you lot once again.
Mr Redwood, you have often said you are in the party to change from within. THEN LETS SEE SOME OF THAT CHANGE!!
All I see is rabid europhiles in the shadow cabinet. That is not change that is business as usual for the Tory party.
Reply
Dr Bernard Juby Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
I agree. Whever I get the monthly questionnaire I always put “Give us the Referendum you promised us” in all of the “Other” boxes.
I also fail to understand why UKIP opposes any Eurosceptic Candidates of whatever party when it should concentrate on opposing the arch-federalists. Long ago I went to a Euro hustings where candidate after candidate expounded their Eurosceptic credentials when I knew only too well that they were federalists to the core. Talk about a Parliamentary inexactitude. They even fought tooth and nail to stay in the EPP. No names – no pack drill but their actions give them away.
If MPs and so-called MEPs want to regain the trust of the British people then they must start calling a spade a spade and not the proverbial shovel!
Reply
You make some very good points, but please look at my dilemma:
1. When I ask my present (Tory) MP of his attitude on the EU issue, I would expect him to make some eurosceptic noises expressed in much the same words as David Cameron has uttered.
2. Assuming a Conservative government next year, my MP will doubtless be hoping for a job from the leadership. He may have to live in hope for a while, perhaps even a year or more, but he is unlikely to wish to upset Cameron by going out on a limb on Europe, no matter how strongly eurosceptic he may feel.
3. So I can have little faith in this issue being pursued by a Conservative government, at least for several years, there being no likely pressure from sitting MPs to force the leadership into effective action.
4. I know of no organised, powerful lobby within the Tories, despite a few courageous but disparate souls voicing their euroscepticism. Anyway, I can’t vote for a lobby.
4. The only time UK citizens may themselves apply pressure is at election time. Once the government is elected, we lose all our leverage. I can see no way of applying leverage simply by voting Conservative—that gives out no message.
I suppose the real answer is that I am no longer a Conservative, since the Party no longer meets my aspirations. It’s depressing.
Reply
Cliff Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
You may well still be a Conservative, just like me however, I personally don’t feel, under Mr Cameron, that the party is still Conservative.
The EUSSR question is one that has upset many traditional Conservatives, including me however, a march towards a PC Blue Labour by Mr Cameron has also upset many of the party faithful.
I read on many sites how much bad feeling there is towards Mr Cameron’s personal version of conservatism and I don’t know whether those views are held by the majority of Conservertive supporters or not however, what I can say, is that amongst my friends and family, those views are universally held.
Labour and all it stood for was destroyed by Mr Blair and I feel Mr Cameron is doing the same to us under the banner of modernisation. We need to get over a strong traditional Conservative set of policies that have served the nation as a whole well in years gone by and that includes a healthy amount of British patoritism and euro-sceptism. The country has had enough of PC Nu Labour and its anti Britain agenda, we do not need another dose of it but under Mr Cameron and Blue labour.
The problem I have is this; Mr Redwood is my local MP and a jolly good one he is too but, should I vote for him at the next election, just as I always have in the past, I feel I will be endorsing Mr Cameron’s version of Conservatism which I can’t….I don’t want five more years of labour nor do I want a PC Blue Labour government…So what can I do? No real choice means no real democracy.
With the mess Labour has made of our country, we should be miles ahead in the polls but, we are not….The membership should be asking why that is the case and I suspect the answer is that many people see little difference between the party leaders and policies and, in a crisis, perhaps many think better the devil you know…..I feel we are ahead in the polls despite our leader, not because of him.
We need a strong PM that puts our national interest first and, in my opinion, Mr Cameron is unlikely to be that person.
I want to vote Conservative again but I am not prepared to vote tactically just to keep another party out or massage a party leader’s ego.
Reply
James Morrison Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Well said Cliff, I totally agree with everything you’ve written!
I am a Tory voter, or at least I have been in the past, convinced that there is a huge number of conservative (small ‘c’) voters out there, desperate for representation in parliament, but with no-one stepping to fill this gap. This allows the dregs such as UKIP and the BNP to increase their miniscule share of the vote, because they may have one or two policies that fit.
Despite Labour’s large numerical advantage, DC’s version of the Conservative party have been woeful in opposition, so why should, or would, I believe they would be any different in government.
We have a stark choice – vote Labour, Tories, one of the other minority parties, or don’t vote at all. I believe the right to vote is very important, but by the same token, the right NOT to vote is equally so. If the alternative is to vote for a movement/direction you simply do not agree with, or do not have any faith in, then why vote at all!?
Personally I would be pleased to see the Tories lose the next election – if it meant they might ditch the “heir to Blair”, and revert to GENUINE conservatism. Yes, it would mean five more painful years of New Labour (assuming they could last that long), but right now, from where I’m sitting, so does voting Conservative.
Reply
Lockduart Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Do not refer to me as dregs.As an ex Tory I too have principles they just do not coincide with the current Conservative ones.
The besy recruiter for UKIP is Eric Pickles whose arrogent attitute is driving loyalists away.
A.Sedgwick Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
“can say, is that amongst my friends and family, those views are universally held.” I concur with my circle – I don’t think the parliamentary party has got the measure of dissatisfaction with DC.
Reply
alan jutson Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 6:55 pm
Cliff
JR is my Mp as well.
He will get my vote simply because I believe he is the best man for the job, he is also likely to get voted into power because he is a Conservative, although sadly perhaps he will not be at the heart of it (as it would seem his face or views do not fit for some reason) Perhaps because he is prepared to speak his mind from time – time
Do you think JR has a better chance of changing things, or do you really think Bill Blogs or whoever UKIP put up have.
Its that simple really.
Reply
Cliff. Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 10:40 am
I take your point, JR is and always has been a good local MP however, his views are incompatable with Mr Cameron’s version of Conservatism and therefore stands little chance of being listened to by the leadership. Some one, like John, that thinks for themselves and expresses an opinion, in my view, does not appear to be thought off as a party player….In modern party politics there is only one view that seems to count…The leader’s.
The main point I was trying, somewhat clumsily perhaps, to make was that modern politics is driven by both the media and presidential style party leaders….Both Brown and Cameron will not tolerate views or opinions contary to theirs…They have effectively killed off debate within the parties….John’s own political views are very close to my own however, Mr Cameron’s views are often alien to mine and because of the way modern political parties act and conduct themselves, a vote for John will effectively be endorsing Mr Cameron’s version of Conservatism. We have gone too far to the left and too PC. The hated A list policy is a prime example….Mr Cameron talks about more power locally but then dictates to local associations which candidates they must choose not based on merit, which was always the Conservative way, but based on gender, ethnicity or other non relevant criteria…That is the type of PC nonsense one would expect from Labour, not the Conservative Party….Did Mrs T need a helping hand up?…No, of course not, she got there on merit!!
The problem for me is that despite being in opposition, we have not been vocal and critical enough of government policy, we have adopted far too often a kind of “Me too” approach. The current government has destroyed both our economy and nation but, some of the blame must also be bourne by our leadership because they have sat back and let them destroy Britain without putting up much of a fight.
I don’t think anyone else would do a better job locally than John and I am sure he will get re-elected when ever Mr Brown has the guts to or is forced to, call an election however, a reduced majority may well make Mr Cameron take note or perhaps make others in the party question why people have been forced away from backing the party, despite the mess Labour have made whilst in government……As previously stated, given the mess created by Labour, we should be miles ahead in the polls but we are not…Those in the Westminster village need to ask why!!
Duyfken Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 11:30 am
Of course, if JR were my MP, I’d vote for him without doubt.
Don’t mistake UKIP voters for UKIP supporters.
UKIP is a synonim for NONE OF THE ABOVE. In the absence of NONE OF THE ABOVE on their voting slips where else are they to make their mark ? Especially if the definitely don’t want to vote Conservative.
Please give some credit where it’s due. After decades of being ignored by all main parties and seeing their culture derided and attacked with no-one to defend them (Tories take note) please respect that they are still too decent and fair minded to resort to the racialist BNP.
You underestimate the majority of people and their concerns – and that makes YOU the ‘problem and not the solution.’
Reply
Lockduart Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
I agree with your main point
Reply
As for UKIP detaching strong Eurosceptics from the Tory party ?
The sooner the Tories split the better for British democracy. And the more Europhile the Tories become the fewer core voters will remain.
And the Conservative leadership seeing “extra votes they need to win the next General Election in the poll findings of the Greens, Lib Dem and Labour” ?
I know. That’s why I don’t vote Tory anymore. They are trying to capture the votes of people whose opinions differ greatly from my own – in doing so they have been dragged to the left of the political spectrum out of my reach.
To Tory voters everywhere: If you want your democracy back you really have to stop voting Tory. It may seem that this comes with a risk attached – but when you analyse it … the reason you don’t have a say is because Tories are not really interested in you.
John Redwood has just admitted it on his blog.
“…extra votes they need to win the next General Election in the poll findings of the Greens, Lib Dem and Labour”
Reply
APL Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 11:10 am
Kevin Peat: “John Redwood has just admitted it on his blog.”
Good point Kevin. The Tories under Cameron have been captured by the likes of Zak Goldsmith and are now hoping after years of trying to ape New Labour and steal their voters, to ape the Greens and steal theirs instead. The former strategy has clearly failed the latter will fail too.
It is a foolish policy. There are millions of people out here who don’t vote. The Tories need to be going after that group. Reincentivise those people to vote.
They don’t bother to vote because:
1. The major parties look much the same.
2. None of the major parties articulate a patriotic, non racist, non PC agenda.
Reply
I agree with you on both points John, but UKIP is a protest vote, or threat of a vote, because people, are very angry at David Cameron’s position on the EU, and rightly so in my opinion.
Rather than saying don’t vote for UKIP, the Conservatives need to give people some hope and some trust that they will not only hold back the EU tide, but turn it. Your party’s record on the EU is not particularly encouraging.
The UKIP vote is actually in your hands, because we all can see that the Conservatives have the best chance of winning. But we want our country back from the theives who have taken it – and David Cameron does not show signs he understands that !!
Reply
As a fervent EU-sceptic, I sincerely hope that the Conservatives win the next election with a solid mandate, and use that to renegotiate the UK’s relationship with the EU.
I have sympathy with those who doubt Cameron will do it, but I suspect that he might pleasantly surprise us all. If he does not, he knows that he will have an uncontrollable party, fully supported by the people. If he does, and the EU refuses to cooperate, that will stoke up public demand for an in/out vote. At present, there is plenty of frustration with the EU, but the size of the “don’t knows” in every poll on an in/out suggests that public demand to leave the EU is not yet overwhelming.
As for UKIP: I don’t think it is ridiculous to speculate that UKIP could become the largest UK party in the EU Parliament, if (big if) the Conservatives fail to follow up on their EU promises. The Conservatives clearly attracted the EU-sceptic vote in 2009. If the Conservatives do not keep faith with those voters in power, then UKIP will be the obvious beneficiary in the next (2014) EP elections.
However in order for voters to be able to make that judgment, you first have to see what the Conservatives actually do in power, which implies that the Conservatives have to win the election with a strong mandate.
Reply
What you are saying is the pragmatists view. That a vote for UKIP is a wasted vote and therefore voters would be better off voting Conservative.
That opinion is to be expected from a Conversative MP, but it is depressing to hear from you. The argument is basically — the party you might wish to vote for is so small that it’s pointless to vote for them, so you must like it or lump it with one of the big three.
I’m sorry to say that that is the reason our country is in such a state. The vast majority of MPs know that their seat is secure (only 30% of seats changed hands in the landslide 1997 election), so they have no incentive to match their behaviour to what the voters actually want. It would be better for politics if we had more shades of grey in those safe seats.
Let’s imagine that the Conservatives broke up into Social Conservatives, Economic Conservatives and Libertarians. In those seats that are currently safe-Tory, people would have the ability to choose the party that matched their opinions more closely.
It’s even a classic logic error — the fallacy of the distributed middle. It’s the same justification for why minority targets should be met: because it’s more representative. The idea that simply because a candidate is from the same ethnic background or gender group as myself means that they will match my views is patently ridiculous. As is the idea that my views are accurately represented by one of three broad groups.
Since it is impossible for my views to be represented precisely by anyone other than me, and an MP must represent more than just me, it is obviously a necessity that there be some grouping, but to three groups — no. My view is that our parliament doesn’t have enough different views. I would much prefer to see a parliament with ten different parties, it would make it much harder to pass laws (which it should be). Further, given a random topic, we would be more likely to get MPs who are passionate about that topic, rather than the swarm-debates we get now.
To address your point about the relative proportion of Euroscepticism in the Tory party — you have erected a straw man. Perhaps a UKIP voter doesn’t care how eurosceptic the Tories are, perhaps he cares how eurosceptic his parliament is? In which case, what does it matter to him whether the seat is Tory or UKIP? Perhaps also, a vote for UKIP in a safe Tory seat would make the Tories take the issue more seriously. The UKIP candidate won’t get in, but if it reduced the Tory margin sufficiently that the Tory candidate had to make concessions to eurosceptics then democracy would have been served marvellously.
I understand that you must take a party line, and see it from a purely tactical point of view; but I believe that we would have a better country if everybody voted, and they voted for the candidate that most impressed them rather than worrying about what party they came from.
Reply: I do not have to take the party line. I have come to these conclusions as someone who wants less Brussels government. I am fed up with Eurosceptics having no power to influence these mattters.
Reply
Robert Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
John, to be honest the Tory party has absolutely nothing to be proud about on Europe. In fact, like the the other side it has been as guilty in deceiving the electorate. So exactly what will the Tories do to reverse what they have been complicit to when in Government? Sadly, actions speak louder than words and we have not seen to much of that even when last in Government, in fact Major did the reverse ramming through Maastricht. When will our Parliament get the powers to truly govern us again? I don’t hold much hope from a party which does not really understand its irrelevance even if it gets elected unless it reverses the powers that have been transferred to Brussels. I will vote for the party that best represents my beliefs, we all pragmatic but should we really vote for a party that does not reflect many of our deeply held beliefs? No. Politics is due a a rapid realignment, I have had a enough of paying for failure, redistribution in all its forms, dumbing down and focus group politics. Honesty is so lacking in mainstream politics it beggars belief.
Reply
Derek W. Buxton Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
You, Robert are quite correct, the “conservative party” started the rot and have carried on adding to it.
It should be noted that Owen Patterson (I believe) produced a paper on the CFP, how to get some control back I believe, which Cameron promptly shelved and changed Patterson’s brief. That is not the action of the sceptic floated by many. Says it all really.
Reply
Now that the Lisbon Treaty/constitution is law (1 Dec) a new stage can begin. For starters the EU is already in the World’s top league and will be able to play a more active role making our region more important still. This zone of liberal democracies is the champion for civil rights and equality. Along with these freedoms the region has some of the world’s highest standards of living. It is because of these factors that the EU is such a magnet for migrants and why immigration control throughout the EU is so important.
It requires very capable people for the top posts and it won’t be long before assessments will be made about our own Baroness Ashton and Belgium’s Herman Van Rompuy, the President.
A new European diplomatic service will establish offices in all countries and High Representative Ms Ashton should expect unanimous support from all member state governments for her foreign policy.
The extent and speed of this development or lack thereof will determine the High Representative’s achievement in establishing the EU as a global player.
We should all wish HR Ashton well.
Reply
Amanda Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 11:14 am
What I wish Mrs YouGov, ex CND, proud of never being elected, Stonewall politician of the year, who drove the Lisbon Treaty through the Lords against the wishes of the people of the UK, is everything she fully, and rightfully deserves!! And if there is a God, she will.
Reply
adam Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 12:09 am
Yuck. EU group think, political speak.
I think i am going to be sick
Reply
John Redwood,
I am not a UKIP member, or member of any party for that matter, but I have done my best to promote UKIP at EU election and find myself doing the same for general election. That is, I am a voter who will not just sit back and allow the major parties to continue destroying our nation, a natione built by people not governments, and no government possesses the right to surrender control and sovereignty of our nation to a foreign power (EU).
I noted you showed how UKIP is polling, but I raised this point with you before. Everywhere I look people are supporting UKIP, and many NL and Tories are defecting to UKIP. Are you denying this fact?
Governments have been decieving the British people about the EU since its inception, and our own governments allowed MI6 to support the EU and mislead the British people. Our own security services have been compromised, and what of those foreign powers, allies, our friends the USA. What of the CIA involvement? Facts reported and supported of which can still be found with the tabloid archives.
Politicians are elected to represent the people, to be our voice, and what do we see, the majority of MPs voting to deprive us of our voice ( link to ReferednumList.com ).
I am voting UKIP and I am far from alone.
Reply
Your last sentence is so revealing in showing that the Conservative leadership, as many suspect, is not Eurosceptic at all. By continually attacking UKIP your party shows that it is contemptuous of those who regard our loss of democracy to an anti-democratic body as a major issue and also that you fear UKIP. The more you pursue this line the more Conservative votes you risk moving to UKIP. The Conservatives may well be a much more broadly based party but many don’t yet have the confidence that it is up to the task ahead.
Reply
Sorry John
Just off to catch a plane to Munich. Love Germany, like the Germans – but don’t want to be ruled by them. And I’d like a say in the matter. The Tories won’t let us have a say ‘because Cameron thinks the UK belongs in the EU.’ ‘Nuff said.
Bye
Reply
Yet again John is “on the money”, as far as I am concerned. We are democrats, and we have tolerated UKIP’s many posters and their increasingly shrill attacks on our party and our young dynamic Leadership. However they have often flooded our sites with repetitive attacks, that offer nothing new, but which take up a great deal of activists time, in countering. Like so many Conservatives I am Euro-sceptic and would far prefer the E.U. to be a trading block, not an Empire by the back door.
Many are taken in by UKIP and its claim to be anti-European, but those lucky few UKIP MEPS, have taken up their seats and have not refused a single penny of salary.
As John rightly says they are part of the problem, and offer no real solutions.
Indeed a vote for UKIP at the next GE, might as well be a vote for labour. I have often urged UKIP members to come home, and lobby in the normal manner for the changes that they, and many of us, want in our relationship with the E.U. The simple fact is UKIP will not succeed in bullying or harassing our Leadership into an In/Out referendum at this time. D.C. has promised not to let the matter drop and has also indicated that we will be looking at the treaty of Rome itself for amendments. This being the so called “autistic” polices of a few days back. The more strong euro sceptics that remain outside the Conservative party the more dilute that movement is within. Of course Conservatives should be loyal and get D.C. elected, but this row has gone on long enough.We need all true Conservatives to be inside our great party, not outside screaming at a wall that will not listen. Rather they should be inside lobbying in the proper and time-honoured way. Democracy is about far more than the voices of a few thousand, even a few tens of thousands. UKIP has never been anything more than a pressure group, set up by a few well healed, but disillusioned Tories. It is a great shame that it has been so successful in it black propaganda aimed at this party in the main. The sad truth being that had we not been split by the E.U. Row, we would most likely have been the party in power when Lisbon was still fightable, of course we cannot second guess how a referendum would have gone, but we most certainly would have run one.
Reply
waramess Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Democracy is about one man one vote and each individuals right to be heard should be respected.
Reply
Ross J Warren Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Which it is, and which we respect. Even so the UKIP tactic of flooding sites, distorts the debate. Very few UKIP posters use their real names and it is clear that many pretend to be many different people. This is confirmed by examination of IP address information.
Reply
Robert Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
Ross – the Tories record on Europe is appalling , enough said.
waramess Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 8:41 am
I read political blogs and the responses because I value other peoples opinions, although it is true that I do sometimes have my own.
I honestly have not detected what you say on this blog and I read all the comments
Ross J Warren Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 9:45 am
I have been a long time commentator at Conservative home, and we suffer a lot if there is any thread associated with the E.U. Indeed almost any thread will be targeted by a few determined to get their UKIP inspired views across. I am a democrat but even so I find it very irksome, to see UKIP-webmaster as an example posting on a regular basis on a conservative site. Maybe Conhome is targeted more than most, but I also note that when ever D.C. sends out an e-mail, he is receives very many unhelpful comments, often by names I see over and over. Of course we do not want to stifle democratic debate, but there are times when it makes many of the activists very grumpy indeed. Having spent a number of days recently doing my best to get across the positives of D.C. policy direction, maybe I have become rather more irritated than usual. Of course I do not want to stop anyone expressing a view but those who stoop to multiple names are very annoying.
adam Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 12:36 am
i somewhat agree with John
i am not sure i agree with you
Reply
Ross J Warren Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 8:42 am
Almost the same thing I would have thought, but if yourwould like to clarify?
Reply
Ross J Warren Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 9:03 am
Whoops My bad!
Would you like to clarify?
The premise to Mr Redwood’s position here relies on the pre-supposition that only the Conservative party has credibility because of poll projections. In some democracies polls ahead of elections are banned because they can sway voters away from voting in what they believe in. Tactical voting gives a mandate to governments based upon an unrepresentative electoral will.
UKIP won 25% of the popular vote in the European elections, more than the Labour party polled. That was prior to the Conservative back-track post Lisbon ratification. We could realistically estimate that support for UKIP is higher now. We can deduce that the difference between 3% prediction at a General Election and 25% from the European election is purely because of the FPP system compared to the PR system. The Conservatives are happy to make plain the inherent unfairness of the electoral boundaries that skew heavily in Labour’s favour at General elections and yet are happy to exploit the FPP system bias against smaller parties when it suits them. The Conservatives, are simply trying to leverage on the inherent unfairness of the system to their own advantage, by pressurising the electorate to abandon principle in favour of electoral voting tactics. It is quite possible that the Conservatives could win more votes at the forthcoming election but Labour could get more seats.
It would be better if the Conservative party sought support based upon their policies alone. If they lose voters to other parties then that is a natural democratic process. If they want them back they should adapt themselves, not seek to exploit technical shortfalls in the system itself to pressurise voters to support them.
Reply
SJB Reply:
November 28th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
I agree that the Conservative Party may win the popular vote yet obtain fewer MPs than Labour. This is what happened in the February 1974 ‘Who Governs Britain?’ General Election.
http://www.ukpolitical.info/1974Feb.htm
btw, UKIP only achieved a 16.5% share of the vote in the 2009 European Election.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/elections/euro/09/html/ukregion_999999.stm
Reply
I see your point.
However, if disgust with the undemocratic EU project runs deep (as it does with me), what is a chap to do?
Your party are showing themselves as ‘liberal’ on the EU issue as any of the other main parties.
So, UKIP or BNP – what do you suggest?
Reply
Ross J Warren Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 11:26 am
Here we go again another classic example of the tolerance we democrats show and the utterly narrow minded response of the UKIP, BNP clones who have nothing to offer but emotional blackmail. To put it in its most basic terms you and so many like you are saying “The Conservatives will not commit to an IN/OUT referendum, So what am I do do, waste my vote” Frankly that is your choice, but if you imagine that John Redwood a loyal and good Conservative would back you, or encourage you to vote for either of the parties you mention, then frankly you have lost the plot. Saying that its clear already from your post, that you have not looked at what D.C. has said, but when did an emotional blackmailer care about the victim. In this case the victim will be yourself if you succeed in bringing about a hung parliament. 25% at the European election included the vote of people like myself before I got the message and stopped listening to the whining of the very few, fooled by UKIP.
Reply
Stephen Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
I strongly recommend that you give YOUR opinion.
Don’t try to give mine. You don’t know me and don’t know what I think.
Your comment about blackmail is insulting.
Reply
Mike Stallard Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
I am going to give the Conservatives just one more chance myself. BUT let me quote from the BNP website:
“Accordingly, a BNP government will withdraw from the European Union.
In place of the EU, a BNP government will aim towards greater national self-sufficiency, and work to restore Britain’s family and trading ties with Australia, Canada and New Zealand, and to trade with the rest of the world as it suits us.”
Pretty definite, I should have thought?
Ross J Warren Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 10:05 pm
Funny I thought you wanted our opinion on how to vote. However I will rephrase my reply and apologises ”if” I have miss judged you, as yet another person trying to distort the discussion, with a completely unwelcome misdirection (there has been so much of it about recently) Of course the answer is vote conservative. As a vote for UKIP is a vote for labour and a vote for BNP is beneath my contempt.
I think your assessment of UKIP is spot on, but I believe that UKIP is only there gathering the support that it has because the Conservatives have not had a crystal clear strategy regarding the EU.
We’re in the present predicament, because of both Labour and Conservative governments.
Life so often seems to balance the books and in this regard the Conservatives have got what they deserve, with the advent and support for UKIP and it may cost them valuable seats.
Mrs Thatcher and Mr Major signed up to various treaties, whilst making anti federalist rhetoric.
David Cameron’s proposal to hold referenda on any future treaties and attempt to regain some powers in probably about the best that we can achieve now.
Reply
Ross J Warren Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 11:31 am
“David Cameron’s proposal to hold referenda on any future treaties and attempt to regain some powers in probably about the best that we can achieve now.”
I am less pessimistic about this being the “best” we can achieve. If we are in power and the lobbying within is strong, then we will negotiated far more than “some powers”. Of course if all the lobbying is outside of the party, or is just mindless and uncompromising inside, being Democrats we will assume that there is no real hunger for large scale change and act accordingly.Either way the real home for strong and vanilla Euro-sceptics is inside the party.
Reply
alan jutson Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
Yes it is, but not at any cost Warren.
DC is not loved as much as he thinks out here in the big wide World, or amongst many small “c” Conservatives who feel they have lost the plot with ever leftish thoughts (calling it the middle ground)
Blair is GONE, he has been EXPOSED for what he was, so has BROWN, they were both spin doctors who did not deliver anything other than misery for most hard working people, why the bloody hell does Cameron want to emulate these people.
I would have though he would want to distance himself as far as possible AWAY from them. The sooner he realises this then the better for all of us.
At the moment he is probably the best of a bad bunch.
How sad is that for UK PLC.
Reply
Ross J Warren Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 9:00 am
Either Ross, or Mr Warren, saying that it is a mistake that happens a lot with my name as both parts are often Surnames/Christian names. I like D.C. a great deal, but of course politics has become a very discredited business. I do think that he panders rather to much to the press, but as our press has become so aggressive it’s hardly surprising. Dave is very young as for that matter is George and William is only 50 something, hardly baby’s in a game that requires a lot of even the most experienced.
I do agree about Blair finally being exposed, and I do note that he ducked out of Parliament in great haste. Blair in his own way was a class act, and we are going to suffer for him and Brown for at least a decade, most likely two. My only concern is that we have a relatively inexperienced team at the top. Which is why I would like to see John Redwood back in the cabinet, and also John Major, two very different Conservatives I agree, but a balanced cabinet Government, rather than a PM who does what he/she wants would be good for the nation I believe. I think D.C. will completely different once he has been in power for a year or so, and has a few victory’s under his belt. Of course right now the priority is staying elect-able and I think mistakes are being made due to a misunderstanding of the political demographics of our land. Far more of us are Conservatives/Liberals than anything else but the Socialists have penetrated the press and other media, and so for now, we are playing by their rules. I would far prefer for us to be called GB plc btw J
alan jutson Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Apologies Ross no offence about the name intended.
Its what happens when you post in haste, and do not check names properly.
As you say both could be Christian names. But I guess like me, you have been called worse !!!!!!!!
Reply
Ross J Warren Reply:
November 27th, 2009 at 8:41 am
Thanks for taking the time to apologies, that is always appreciated. I thought that was most likely the case, and I do understand.
Indeed like yourself I have been called far far worse things.
Have a great day Alan!
APL Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Bill: “David Cameron’s proposal to hold referenda on any future treaties and attempt to regain some powers in probably about the best that we can achieve now.”
Unfortunately such an offer is both disengenious and WORTHLESS.
Post Lisbon there will be no more treaties, there is no need for any more treaties. The European Union now has a foreign minister the so called ‘High representitive’, but the significiance seems to be lost on most. I am confident not David Cameron.
The whole concept of a Treaty is of an agreement between two sovereign states. With the Lisbon Treaty the EU has taken ‘legal personallity’ and assumed the status of a sovereign state.
That means its components – that is us – have been absorbed. Which in turn means no more treaties between what were the former states of the the European Union.
So while Mr Cameron has promised there will be a vote on the next treaty negotiated between the former European Union member states in future, he made that promise full in the knowledge there never ever will be such a treaty to put to a referendum.
Mr. Redwood, kindly confirm or refute this point.
Reply: On the contrary, there are bound to be more Treaties, starting with Accession Treaties for new members.
Reply
APL Reply:
November 27th, 2009 at 7:52 am
JR: “On the contrary, there are bound to be more Treaties ..”
On the contrary, post Lisbon, woth its newly established legal entity the European Union will negotiate accession of any applicant countries. Hence it now has a ‘High representative’ AKA a foreign minister and diplomatic corp.
Reply
APL Reply:
December 1st, 2009 at 11:21 pm
APL: “Mr Cameron [ .. ] made that promise full in the knowledge there never ever will be such a treaty to put to a referendum.”
JR: “On the contrary, there are bound to be more Treaties, starting with accession Treaties for new members.”
APL: “[ ] post Lisbon with its newly established legal entity the European Union will negotiate accession of any applicant countries.”
It is usually fairly futile to simply contradict each other, but in support of my assertion that the European Union has finally gained ‘legal personality’ I cite the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, Dec 26 1933.
The convention sets out the definition, rights and duties of statehood. Article 1, sets out the four criteria for statehood:
The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.
We know the European Union has had three of the former for some time, although (b) does change from time to time. The Lisbon Treaty brings into effect the last, the capacity to enter into relations with other states in the person of the foreign minister, what else could a foreign minister be for but for entering into relations with other states?
Reply
Additional to my comment above is the fundamental issue of trust. Fine words butter no parsnips, and if Conservative voters cannot trust their leaders to deliver on the promise of a referendum, then why should they trust them to deliver on any of their promises?
You should surely be using your blog to argue the ideas, not to marginalise people or parties whom actually represent your fundamental ideas anyway against a leadership which doesn’t!
As an average Tory voter for the last 30-odd years, my present outlook is as follows if the Conservatives win:
Will we still be paying high taxes to pour into Banks and the hopeless Public Sector wasteland? Probably yes.
Will we have any retrenchment from the intrusive nature of our Society? Perhaps in principle, but the need for tax-grab will necessitate that being put “on-hold” for now. Keep those speed-cameras rolling, boys.
Will there be any substantive differences in Tory policy on NHS and education from Labour’s? Probably just tweaking, with no real cost savings.
Will there be any fundamental difference in the way Parliament is run whether there is a Tory or Labour majority? No.
Will there be any fundamental difference in our relationship with Europe compared with now? No, but a lot of old Labour cronies will be milking the Brussels system and keeping an eye on Dave and Co. to make sure they toe the line.
There is a democratic deficit here. There are no parties with the possible exception of UKIP representing these positions in an honest way at the moment.
Reply
What UKIP does do is present the Europhobic case to the public. As a supporter of the EU I find Nigel Farage’s statements irritating, illogical, and wrong, but even I cannot deny that he puts his case across well.
He gets much of the authority to make these points in public from his election to the EU Parliament, an institution that he then denounces as undemocratic, whereas if he had to depend on the UK Parliament, which I presume he regards as the true expression of the UK electorate, for his authority he would have no basis to be heard. It sometimes seems a strange world.
Reply
adam Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 12:52 am
“…his election to the EU Parliament, an institution that he then denounces as undemocratic, ”
surely the EU itself, not the parliament
Reply
Alan Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
You make a fair point, although it is not a distinction that I have noticed Mr Farage make. I took his denunciations as applying to all parts of the EU.
So, if the European Parliament is democratic, and the European Council is democratic (consisting as it does of heads of government of democratic countries – the President does not of course have a vote, as I am sure all are aware), that only leaves the European Commission that can be accused of lack of democracy. And even that has one member from each country. And all it can do is propose things, which have to be agreed by the other two.
Reply
What you are saying is “trust us”. Sorry, we don’t! History shows that all parties rein back on Euroscepticism once they are in power. All parties continue to give away our freedoms and sovereignty. Why should we believe Cameron of the ‘cast iron’ referendum commitment will be any different? I don’t believe the Conservatives can or will restore ANYTHING back to UK from the EU. Don’t you understand that the restoration of our democracy and freedom is more important than ANYTHING?
Reply
Quite right, John. They help euro-federalist Labour and LibDem MPs to get elected and harm the Eurosceptic cause even more than when they are bringing a whole new meaning to the phrase “conviction politics”.
PS I hope you are aware, therefore, that many “UKIP supporters” on the blogosphere are actually Labourites trying to split the anti-Labour vote.
Reply
John,
May I comment as one who had always voted Conservative from 1960, when first eligible, until 2005.
In effect, what you are stating is that one can only vote for the Conservatives if holding Eurosceptic beliefs. That would seem a tad dictatorial and presumptive, especially when the Conservative Party are anything but Eurosceptic. By what right do you, as a person and forgetting your political affiliation, presume that the three main parties have a divine right to the electorate’s vote – which is what you appear to be proposing.
On facts I must dispute your percentages. Accepting a poll’s findings are dependent on the question asked, perhaps the latest poll by political betting – http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2009/11/24/now-the-detail-from-last-nights-pb-poll/ – may force you to change the statement you make about the level of support Ukip has.
It is my belief that, come the General election, you may find the level of support for other parties to be far higher than anyone would have thought possible.
To say that Ukip targets mainly Conservatives is as far from the truth as it is for the Conservative Party to maintain it is Eurosceptic, in that Ukip targets both Labour and LibDems also. If the Conservative Party were truly eurosceptic they would promise a referendum, immediately on gaining power, on Britain’s membership of the EU. That is a promise that both Labour and the LibDems should also offer, on the basis that political parties are elected on the supposition that they are supposed to represent the majority will of the people. The majority of the people want that referendum – or have the three main parties, as I suggested earlier – all assumed a dictatorial attitude and only believe that they can decide what the electorate should have? Therein could well lie the public’s disapproval of modern-day politics and politicians.
The fact that you seem to feel your blog is being taken over by Ukip and its supporters for a referendum means that that is caused by the Conservative Party’s position and policy on the EU. The remedy therefore lies in the hands of you and your party.
Just a few thoughts that you may care to debate?
Reply
Any move to UKIP by disaffected Tory voters is just that. No point at all in attacking UKIP because, as you say, their support presently is minimal. Better to look inward to discover why previously staunch supporters are moving away.
Where disagreement with Tory policy and or leadership is so profound, it leaves only two options: the first is to withold ones vote and the other is to find a party to vote for that comes closer to ones beliefs.
I suspect there will be many like me who will make the decision late in the day and who might, if their numbers are sufficiently great, have a considerable destabilising effect on the electoral output.
Reply
Sorry John but you’re utterly wrong. Any Tory MP who signs up to Better Off Out – and therefore agrees with UKIP’s stance – gets the luxury of UKIP not standing against them at the next General Election. One such example is Phillip Davies, who you mentioned. So you’re talking rubbish really.
Remember, UKIP is not eurosceptic like you, it’s eurorealist. We want to leave the EU while you think we can reform it. These are two totally different outlooks.
Reply
May I commend your toleration and regard for free speech. This makes this blog interesting both in substance and in the myriad of replies. Indeed the substance of debate here is better than anything tired, formulaic old TV shows churn out on Thursday evenings or indeed some of your fellow MP’s will allow.
One particular Labour MP (whose name will be withheld to protect the guilty) is appalling in this regard, blatantly censoring awkward stuff.
Reply
APL Reply:
November 27th, 2009 at 7:54 am
Stuart Fairney: “May I commend your toleration and regard for free speech.”
One thing about Mr Redwood, he is a democrat. But I second your sentiments.
Reply
I am an active Conservative and always have been – and so I agree with a lot of what you say here.
But I must add that I hate ‘tactical voting’. People should vote for the party that is closest to their views, not take a jaded position and vote for somebody else in order to ‘win’.
I like David Cameron; he’s a great speaker, a good leader, and an intelligent and charismatic man. But he had a decision to make recently and he made, in my opinion, the wrong one.
The reason I didn’t defect to UKIP is because I believe I have as much right as David Cameron to call myself a Conservative. And I intend to work for change from within the party I love.
But I do fully understand why some people feel that now UKIP are closer to their views than we are. They have to make their own decision and we should respect the one they make.
To UKIPPers on here I would just say this: If you all came back to the Conservatives tomorrow we would have an enormous B.O.O. power base within the party and an incredible opportunity to change the party’s stance. You may say this is unlikely – but it’s much MORE likely than UKIP winning a General Election, or even getting a handful of MPs elected.
Reply
Mick Anderson Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
“If you all came back to the Conservatives” – as you point out, many of those here talking about a UKIP protest vote were once Conservatives voters. To turn your thoughts around, even when we were supporting the Conservatives, it was still not enough to encourage the party leaders towards a sufficiently Eurosceptic position.
I can accept the point that as Lisbon has been ratified, there is little point on a vote on that specific Treaty. OK, on what can we be offered a vote? The carrot has already been dangled in front of us. To take it away at this stage smacks of the double-dealing we suffer from the Mr Brown; not what we expect from the Leader of the Opposition.
The vast majority of those advocating a UKIP vote only need the Conservative promise of a referendum that we believed had been made to us. This made the withdrawal of that promise doubly disappointing.
Being vocal at the margins is our way of trying to achieve what we think is just – a proper choice on one of the over-riding political issues of our time. Surely it makes sense to try and put things in place before the election, when the politicians might still be listening to us?
Reply
JimF Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 6:55 pm
Mick
I think a referendum covering our relationship with the EU would satisfy most ex-Tory voters. Tick box for each area to be repatriated, with a final question asking whether withdrawal would be favoured if this cannot be achieved by 01.06.2013, for example.
Reply
adam Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 1:11 am
look at UKIP support in the EU elections compared to the nationals, how many have really left?
They seem to tread water.
Reply
Mick Anderson Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 9:28 am
Adam, you’re probably right. The thing with a “protest party” is that doesn’t have the core support of one of the long-established parties.
I rather like JimFs idea of tick-box repatriation of powers, and if Mr Cameron offered something like this it would probably effectively wipe out both UKIP and the BNP. My suspicion is that anyone ticking one of the boxes would probably tick them all, but perhaps I’m being too cynical.
Many of the the votes claimed for UKIP will probably fail to materialise in a General Election. But what else are disaffected Tory voters supposed to tell the pollsters, in the absence of a “none of the above” vote?
Reply
At the European Elections UKIP were second to the Conservatives with 16% of the vote and 13 seats.
UKIP is a one trick pony and we, the people, are not dumb it is a means to an end. An end denied by the main parties for reasons of timidity and the risk of party political splits. Opinion polls show a small majority would favour going back to an EFTA relationship and support leaving the bureaucratic, costly and corrupt EU with its unapproved accounts. The next Lisbons are the requirement to join the Euro and accept another 100 million people into the EU – bunk beds all round!
Reply
Thanks for your mail and response to one of my posts and the inordinate amount of time you are spending on us ukippers. As ever, your arguments are intelligent and persuasive. Just as we are in a dilemma, I fully understand the dilemma that you, Douglas Carswell, Dan Hannan and similar find yourselves in and I do respect your position of party loyalty and trying to solve the problem from within. But most of the rest of us are simple, patriotic voters, not Party animals. We have not moved away from the Conservative Party, the CP has moved away from us. It doesn’ matter how big the CP eurosceptic intake at the next election is when David Cameron has as much stated that he’ll not have sceptics on his front bench.
We’re all looking for a line-in-the-sand, robust postition from the party; promises honoured on our position in the EU; some sense of hope that the CP in goverment will at least start to claw our independence back. None of these things pertain. We are aching to vote Conservative again, but for the EU problem, believe me. As I said previously, the Conservative Party created UKIP and it could make it go away again.
Reply
I voted UKIP in the euro elections because I wanted to send a message to the Tory party, and I think that UKIP’s second place has certainly done that. I will be voting Con next year because we now have some concrete eurosceptic policies. However, what has been offered is the LEAST of what I would accept. It is all very well to suggest fighting the sceptic battle within the Tory party, but I simply disagree with you if you think the current Tory policy is sufficient. Given that integration is increasing constantly, to suggest we all get around a big Tory table and have a chat for a few years is to suggest we aquiesce in the loss of our country.
Reply
APL Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
ThomasM: “It is all very well to suggest fighting the sceptic battle within the Tory party ..”
The problem here is that Cameron has made himself a hostage to his front bench Europhiles. Supposing, just supposing for a minute, John Redwood is right and Cameron is a Eurosceptic. Yea, I know unlikely, but bear with me.
So the first time Cameron decides to take an Eurosceptic stance on a particular issue. BAM!!! Kenneth Clarke resigns.
Brave Sir Cameron soldiers on, next policy that could be interpreted as Eurosceptic BAM!!! the next Europhilic cabinet member resigns.
This would go on and on the press would have a field day. Talk about death by a thousand cuts.
This is why I know Cameron is not Eurosceptic, he has loaded his shadow front bench with Europhiles each of whom is quite prepared to hold Mr Cameron and the Tory party hostage.
In short, Cameron has no intention of that scenario ever coming to pass.
Reply
“Already in Bern a growing number of politicians are now openly questioning whether the bilateral path is reaching its limits, and whether Switzerland’s sovereignty might not be better served as a member of the EU.” World Radio.
Oh why can’t we be like Switzerland!
Reply
Stuart Fairney Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Why indeed, although I will believe a Swiss entry when I see it. They showed enormous strength and independence in resisting the Nazis 1939-45 so I really can’t see this.
The story rather strikes me as planted because when ever you see “growing numbers of people” not referenced or in any way identifed, that’s a sure sign that the story is made-up.
Reply
adam Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 1:20 am
or spin doctor propaganda preparing the course for a policy announcement
Reply
EUKIP – The ”European Union, Keep It Paying” Party
Reply
My first and last post on here.
If it wasn’t for UKIP there would be no Euroscepticism, especially the fake sort as found in the conservatives.
I sense that the Tories are trying to scare their core voters into not voting for us which is the reason for this article.
Reply
Mike Stallard Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
I have noticed that two of your UKIP MEPs have been done for corruption for relatively small amounts. (Yes but it is the Principle!)
I have read Marta Andreasen’s excellent book. Is this another stitch up?
(I also notice that Lord Kinnoch and his Lady Wife have cleared (a substantial sum from EU payments for their jobs-ed), Lord Mandelson (has also been well paid for work for the EU -ed), and that the Chair of NHS Herts, I forget her name, is on a salary which is about three times that of our PM. But, she’s worth it.)
Reply
adam Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 1:24 am
The culture in the EU is one of (patronage and inducements-ed). This enables the executive to ‘burn’ who they want, when they want.
All Eurosceptic MEPs entering the EU/UN system, must understand this.
Reply
APL Reply:
November 27th, 2009 at 7:59 am
Adam: “The culture in the EU is one of (patronage and inducements -ed).”
It is worth pointing out that yes, some UKIP MEPs are now proven corrupt. But there are a couple of Peers* of the House of Lords who have been drawn to the attention of the Police in this country. We know that a significant proportion of MPs are subject to as our editor points out (patronage and inducements), too.
*not nearly enough in my opinion.
(A strongly worded contribution claiming UKIP ends up helping the federalists, not stopping the EU project. ed)
Reply
It is difficult to see what is wrong with David Cameron’s stance on Europe: William Hague staked everything electorally on the anti-Europe card and lost.And he was the most able political leader around at the time .
Are you so sure the voters are so worked up about Europe?Strikes me not.
Moreover the future of Euro-federalism is surely on hold after Sarkozy and Merkel blocked Blair in favour of nonentities and a continuation of a Europe of the nations.
Why don’t the UKIP -minded vote No2EU? Nominate John Redwood to discreetly encourage this party in order to take votes off the Labour Party at the same rate that UKIP takes votes off his own.
Reply
adam Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 1:31 am
This Belgium guy is a Bilderberger, federalist who wants an EU tax.
The EU is never ‘on hold.’
This country may revolve around Tony Blair but the EU doesn’t.
Indeed one of the MEPs told Farage after his latest speech complaining about them, that they were chosen because they were low key and could pursue the EU agenda more quietly.
A founding tactic of the EU has been to avoid publicity as much as possible. This was the instruction in the original CIA memo that went round to key politicians in the 50s, as the Telegraph newspaper reported a few years ago.
Reply
If you look at the survey data available on young people, you will see that the typical anti-European is a male who has not particularly good educational qualifications and therefore poor future opportunities in the job market and and who sees Europe as a threat. Conversely, the typical pro-European is a female and has high educational qualifications, entertains humanitarian and green values and sees Europe as an opportunity. The writers in this column see the debate in terms of finance and political control whereas the younger people look at Europe in terms of the career opportunities that it offers them as well as the likelihood that it will offer a convenient travel in the future. In other words young people are not concerned with politics but concerned with Europe has a facilitator of their current lifestyles.
Reply
Scepticism – which means “being in doubt” – is temporarily healthy. That is, if it is maturing into decision. As a permanent condition, it is a form of mental illness.
UKIP is in no doubt about the European Union, and – Mr Redwood is quite right – it is curing the electorate’s doubt, on this subject.
Reply
Collis Gretton Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
Latest MORI poll. Ukip 3%. The electorate are really behind this joke party for the coming General Election.
Reply
UKIP supporters probable know when to vote UKIP which is at the European Elections where the % share of those that bother to vote is much greater. This vote undoubtedly at present swings back to the Conservatives at other elections.
My concern is that the current way of selecting MP’s in the Consevative Party leads me to conclude (hopefully wrongly) that the Conservative Party has accepted PR will be extended beyond the Euro elctions in future. Support for minority parties would likley increas then. At present I can only see UKIP voting spoiling a few seats which other parties might take which should of turned Conservative. Whether that will make a difference is debatable.
Reply
It is amusing that this article should appear the day that Hague announced his plans to ‘green’ the EU budget. How can anyone possibly claim this is a eurosceptic party? And this shortly after the climategate debacle!
Reply
JR: “None of them are “careerists,” as UKIP likes to sugggest of any Conservative who fails to defect.”
This article really hits the mother lode Mr Redwood you have, perhaps unwittingly hit on the root cause of the disconnect between MPs and the population at large.
MPs mostly are fully employed by Parliament, they go to functions in SW1 and mix with the great and good, while claiming their expenses and managing their tax funded property portfolio.
In short, the life of an MP is utterly utterly unlike that of the vast majority of the population.
I blame the professional political class and salaried MPs.
Reply
adam Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 1:41 am
Also, UKIP was founded by Alan Sked, who, the internet tells me, was a member of ‘The British American Project for the Successor Generation’ which is an elitist confab thats has produced a number of new labour loons. He is now an LSE professor to top it off.
Reply
As one of David Cameron’s own constituents, and a former member of Witney Conservative Association I shall be voting UKIP next year.
Before Cameron was selected we had Shaun Woodward who thought his goals would be better achieved if he defected to Labour. At least he went alone. Not only has Cameron defected to Labour policies (is there a single policy anyone can name in which he proposes doing something different, as opposed to doing the same thing more slowly or quickly?), he has taken the party previously known as Conservative with him.
I don’t expect many here to agree with me, but the best hope for Britain is that UKIP take enough votes to deny Cameron victory (we have nothing to lose as policies will be constant whoever wins). That will cause the Conservative party to tear itself apart: the Cameroons will defect to their natural home in the Labour party while the Conservatives will (I hope) make common cause with UKIP (either join UKIP or form a new party – Cameron has so soiled the Conservative brand the party will have to be wound up). The new party will offer a centre right alternative to the “consensus” we have been offered since 2001 (you know the one; the consensus that disenfranchises 40% of the electorate because theer is no one speaking for them, so they stay home).
The next government will be formed by a party winning only 20% of the available votes (Blair was elected in 2005 with 24%, but the turnout will be even lower in 2010). If only half of those who stay at home because they don’t want to vote for the Lib/Lab/Con centre left “consensus” were to turn out and vote for the “unelectable” UKIP there will be a lot of very surprised expressions at Conservative Party headquarters. If only half of those intending to vote Conservative vote for Conservative policies (they can be found on the UKIP website, it is not a one trick pony) instead of the Conservative name allied with Labour policies, the same is possible. Oh, please let me be there to see Cameron’s face as he realises he has managed to lose Witney! But that is a dream.
Reply: This is all very silly. David Cameron espouses many Conservative views which differentiate him from Labour under Mr Brown. Politics is very unlikely to evolve in the way you suggest. Try understanding what the polls are telling us.
Reply
A.Sedgwick Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
Yes, everything has a lifecycle even political parties and their realignment has been creeping forward since the failed SDP breakaway, which was an honest attempt to marginalise the failed Labour Party. The more cunning 1994 gang of four had a better plan and have been amazingly successful in sidelining real Conservative policies to the point they elected a self proclaimed Bair2 as leader – imitation and flattery. If Cameron loses the election it is possible the Conservatives will become more honest and divide between a right wing party and the Libdems, where Cameron really belongs.
Reply
MarkE Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 11:11 am
John: you assert “David Cameron espouses many Conservative views which differentiate him from Labour under Mr Brown” but give no examples. When Dan Hannan spoke the truth about the NHS Cameron was quick to say he will not reform the NHS because it is so perfect as to be beyond criticism (maybe if you are a high profile politician you do get decent care from your local NHS); he can do nothing about immigration, because most immigrants come from within the EU and the British regional “government” isn’t allowed to do anything to reduce that; he has bought the great AGW scam hook line and sinker so we can expect no remission from the higher taxes and increase in state control that will bring; when asked an explicit question he refuses to consider significant public sector job losses (he can’t lose the votes of the holders of one million Labour party sinecures, they’ll never vote against their contracts); he even says he will not reverse the 50% tax band even though he also says he knows it will reduce the tax take!
Politics may not evolve as I suggest, but evolve it must. It is inconceivable that the current situation of two and a half parties clustered on the centre left and almost half the electorate not voting, will continue indefinitely.
Reply
John,
Can I first state that I have the utmost respect for your own thinking on this, as on many other subjects. Anyone who has followed your career knows that you are no apologist for the burgeoning European superstate.
I do think, though, that in the light of the Lisbon Treaty becoming law, the term “Eurosceptic” is now redundant. One is either in favour of having one’s national legislature and executive subordinate to the EU – which is a valid position and I applaud those with the honesty to admit they hold it – or one is opposed to the idea. I am the latter. I do not have any “doubts” about the EU, which is the natural position of a sceptic. Indeed, having a little knowledge of what Jean Monnet had in mind for the European project, having also read what Peter Shore and Enoch Powell among others had to say in the 1970s explicitly warning about what would come to pass and, more recently, having listened to the utterances of our new “president”, Mr van Rompuy, and Baroness Ashton, I am viscerally hostile to any British involvement in the entire project. Moreover, I do not believe it is in the interests of our elected representatives to negotiate with such an organization. Why? Because the EU clearly has an agenda which supercedes the wishes of the people it is supposed to represent. This is no alarmist conspiracy theory: it is backed up by hard evidence. We in Britain have never been asked to sign up to a political union; no one under the age of 52 has even been asked to vote on whether they want an economic union. Furthermore, in the last twenty years, each and every national plebiscite that has been held in which the people are asked to relinquish any sovereign powers to Brussels has elicited the answer “no”, or the electorate have been asked to vote again until they say yes. So the EU most assuredly does not enjoy the suport of the people. This is a supranational oligarchy, pure and simple, and a reversion of our own Bill of Rights of 1689: “And I do declare that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state or potentate hath or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm”.
So when I listen to the Conservative party leader stand up and boldly proclaim that he will “never again” allow such a transfer of powers to happen, and he will do his utmost to win back this, and introduce that parliamentary act etc. etc. I am afraid I am left with the impression that he is not being entirely honest with us. He, as an intelligent man, knows that the deal is now done. He is merely trying to convey an impression to the voters that he, David Cameron, means business. Well, if he meant business, he would remind Brussels that no parliament in Britain may bind its successor, and that accordingly he will offer the people a referendum addressing our new relationship with the EU post Lisbon within three months of taking office. But, because of the supremacy of EU law over our own, he can’t. So, therefore, there is only one viable “eurosceptic” route available to him, which is to offer an In/Out referendum, with both sides enjoying equal funding. This he does have the power to deliver on, and I suspect it would deliver him and the resulting Conservative government a landslide. Why doesn’t he?
If you can answer that question, you may stop me voting UKIP in a few months’ time.
Reply
Peter Harper (UKIP) Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
Scaroth, yours is a wonderful post: tremendous stuff!
Question (1): since the majority of Brits want to free our country from the shackles of the European Union (EU), why will David Cameron not make it a manifesto pledge (no, please don’t laugh) to give the people a referendum on Britain’s continued membership of/subservience to the EU?
Answer (1): since poll after poll tells us that the vote would favour withdrawal, logic and common-sense tell us that Mr. C desperately wants GB to remain bound by the EU and will not risk being forced to lead the British people to freedom under any circumstances – even if it would lead to many more votes for the Conservative Party and the assurance of a large majoirty at the 2010 General Election.
Question (2): why did Messrs Cameron and Hague make such a great noise before June’s EU Elections about their determination to give us a Referendum, then renege on this after those Elections were over?
Answer (2): because they knew that a huge number of people would vote UKIP if they told them the truth about the Conservative leadership’s determination to stay firmly allied to the EU and to deny the British people the chance to vote to leave it.
Summary: -
The Tories, under Ted Heath, took Britain into the European Union (EU) under a pack of lies which he later admitted to; Margaret Thatcher and John Major signed us up to further treaties; yet Conservative leaders still pretend to be fighting for Britain against complete takeover by the corrupt, dishonest, bureaucratic EU. The policies that most Conservative members believe in now belong to another party: the UK Independence Party.
Mr. Cameron must know that the Lisbon Treaty implements a law that means that no more treaties ever need to be put before “Member States”: that the EU Commission can henceforth make laws as it wants, without ever again having to refer to politicians representing those Member States. He must also know that he would have to beg the leaders of the other EU Member States for their permission to take back any powers for the UK Government; that, under the EU laws to which we are now signed, he cannot make any unilateral demands of any kind. (If he doesn’t know, someone should tell him; if he does know, then he’s an extraordinarily dishonest man, unworthy of a job as a cashier, let alone PM.)
Huge numbers of people split their votes between the Conservatives and UKIP in the Euro-Elections because, in each case, they believed that they were voting for a party that sincerely wants to restore governance of Britain to our own Parliament, for a party that would offer them a choice between chains and freedom. They now know that the Conservative leaders shamelessly lied to them: I believe that, at the coming General Election, the British people will show what they think of those who deceived them last time.
New Labour or Blue Labour (or Liberal yellow) won’t make any difference within the EUSSR: it’s UKIP or its EU!
Reply: Polls do not show that those wanting out of the EU would win an In Out referendum. Mr Cameron led the party to speak and vote against Lisbon and in favour of a referendum. He also intervened to try to get the Czechs to hold out so we could have a referendum if we won the Election.
Reply
Mark Parker Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 8:50 am
Well said!
I agree totally.
Only it would be BNP he would stop me voting, not UKIP.
Reply
John I think you are spot on, and if you read all these posting on here you would think that UKIP would have 25% of the votes at the coming election, when in fact they will be lucky to get 5%.
I when younger I voted for Wilson, move onto David Owen, and when they joined the Lib Dems I moved over to the Tory party. In the 80s and early 90s a large number of people did the same thing, but when Blair came on the scene a large number went over to him. So I am the type of people that we need to bring over in large numbers so to win the next elections, but I see some of you do not want them as you think they are not true Tories. David Cameron knows that to win these voters over he needs to speak to them as one of them, and not as a UKIP type.
Of course I agree with you on most points about Europe, but I do not think that leaving it is the answer, but to change it from within.
Reply
JimF Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
John
I used to think that, too. Then you come to realise that the Kinnocks, Mandelsons, “Baroness” Ashtons of this world ingratiate themselves into senior positions in this organisation, when their UK electorate are sick of them. They are no friends of change from within. They are a mix of apologists for socialism, unilateral disarmament and complex bureaucracy to prevent change in the way you suggest.
Reply
John Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Who sent Kinnock off to Europe, John Major.
I agree with you that these are no friends of change, but Kinnocks, Mandelsons, “Baroness” Ashtons only Ashton is there at present. I think seeing these type in Europe is a big reason why people are against the EU.
This is another reason why we must win this election to stop Brown sending any more of these types over there, and start sending more of the people there that are looking to change it.
Reply
Robert Reply:
November 25th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
A policy that has failed for 30 years – the false grail! Have you learned nothing?
Reply
John Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 10:11 am
I think you have to look at when we went in, by then a number of countries had set the rules, and we stood on the edge looking on.
The EC has worked for a number of countries, it has also ensured that we have had no wars in Europe. The down turn is we do not have seemed to have got in there to fight our corner.
So lets see how David Cameron does, and I think he will be our best PM since Mrs Thatcher to be in there fighting our corner.
Think if you let Brown win the election then that failed 30 years will be 35 years.
Reply
Citizen Responsible Reply:
November 27th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
I don’t feel that the EU can take all the credit for “ensuring that we have had no wars in Europe”. What about NATO’s contribution? Which reminds me of the first NATO Secretary General’s statement that the organisation’s goal was to “keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down”.
Of course that was 60 years ago.
adam Reply:
November 27th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
Civil wars are always the most violent and the EU cant prevent those
DBC Reed
“Why don’t the UKIP -minded vote No2EU? Nominate John Redwood to discreetly encourage this party in order to take votes off the Labour Party at the same rate that UKIP takes votes off his own.”
Why do we need a new party for that? Take one look at the BNP website and you will find only one policy that would fail to find favour with any Labour supporter. The BNP really are the Labour party plus a hard line on immigration.
With reference to my earlier post, I believe a low turnout next year will favour smaller parties (they are better at mobilising their supporters). I have £5 saying the BNP will have an MP in the next parliament (I won’t bet on UKIP as I don’t want to jinx them).
Reply
David Cameron wants to fix his attentions on the economy. Your very strong point is just that: the economy. Look at the number of comments on your (excellent) blogs about, for instance, Baron Myners. Now look at the vast number of comments on UKIP and the EU.
The sheer passion above should be telling you something. Dan Hannan’s blogs usually have at least 100 comments every time on the EU. The Taxpayers’ Alliance (economic comments) isn’t nearly that popular.
What that shows, I am not sure. Maybe we are all wrong and looking in the wrong place. Or maybe not.
There is nothing in this for me, so all allow me to give this reference to a free book on leaving the EU. It deals with all the major objections face on.
http://www.greateudebate.com/order/
Reply
Unfortunately you Mr Redwood are not the leader of your party and do not set the polices, were you things might be different, as it is Mr Cameron has decided he does not need the Eusceptic vote to get him into no 10; that being the case one wonders where the problem lies with UKIP? So what if the votes rejected by the Conservative leadership go to another party even if that party cannot win, at least we wont be voting for more of the same.
I would rather turn your suggestion round it is not UKIP which is splitting the vote but the Conservatives masquerading as an EUsceptic party when it obviously is not.
Sorry if you want the votes then give us the polices and a very clear statement of intent, if you wont do that then take the medicine of seats lost, it is your party leadership which is after all intent on putting the EU on the back burner for five years.
Reply
UKIp beat Lab and Limp-Dem into third and fourth place in the EU elections. Incidently the elections where your party was still promising a referendum on the Lisbon Con treaty. had you overlooked these two factors John ? Why can they not repeat this second place in a british General election ? as you are well aware this can not be done because of the FPTP electoral system which gives the my turn next LabCon alliance a stranglehold on parliament. Why not bemoan this anti democratic system under which you flourish instead criticising a small party with two hands tied behind its back ?
introduce PR ,light blue touch paper and stand well back.
The clapped out rusting hulks of the 20th century (LiblabCon) would rapidly fade ,just leaving a ghastly memory for us all to deal with.
Reply
JR: You and the rest of the Tories just don’t get it. Just like MPS didn’t get the public mood when the expenses scandal broke. All we heard then was “It was within the rules” You just don’t get it.
True UKIP is currently polling 3-5% but come the election they may well be very different. Can the Tories really afford to allow this to slip away from them. In a stoke they could add 5% and probably a great deal more, just by saying we will let the public decide.
Why are the public good enough to decide if we have a Tory or Labour Government, but not able to decide if we should stay in Europe?
I used to vote Conservative, but they just don’t get it!
Reply
Say what you like about the UKIP, but i wish the Conservatives had a leader like Mr Farrage,even if you only half believe what he is saying(as believing nothing our other MPs are saying)it makes ones heart sing to hear him say it!
Reply
As so many have said here we cannot trust the tories to do the right thing and get this country out of the EU. IF you can renege on your promise of a referendum you can renege on anything. And Cameron is pro-EU in that he has said that he thinks Britain’s membership is good for us and leaving is not on HIS agenda. His promise of referenda on any new Treaties is hollow and shows how ignorant he is – with the self-amending clause of Lisbon there never will be another treaty. His promise of renegotiating powers back from Brussels shows he has not grasped what Lisbon is all about. They are all empty promises. No wonder we will vote UKIP who tell us the TRUTH.
Reply
Your argument would be more convincing if the Conservative party leadership listened to its own members’ views on the EU. Not only does it ignore those views but it has made it increasingly difficult for those who wish to withdraw from the EU or even drastically reduce the EU’s powers over us to become parliamentary candidates, unless they are MPs already.
Reply
The problem with UKIP is the refusal to be more selective about where to field parliamentary candidates. That’s partly because of the (admittedly sometimes rather naive) enthusiasm of the members, and partly because the level of national media coverage, and in particular the number of general election broadcasts, gained by a party depends on the number of candidates it has put up.
(Personally I’d remove the second half of the second reason by completely banning national election broadcasts as giving an unfair advantage to large party candidates over small party and independent candidates, but clearly the large parties would never allow that to happen as it would erode their dominant position.)
A more selective approach might see, for example, UKIP still putting up a candidate in Wokingham, but not in Eastleigh.
On the basis that in 2005 JR’s majority was a healthy 7,240 votes, despite the UKIP candidate getting 994 votes, and so a repeat intervention by a UKIP candidate at the next election would be unlikely to threaten his position but would allow the voters to hear important views and arguments which he could not or would not express – and why should they not be allowed to hear those views and arguments? – while on the other hand ensuring the removal of the eurofanatic Huhne from the House of Commons should take priority over informing the voters in Eastleigh.
Unfortunately it’s impossible to get most UKIP members to go along with that kind of reasoning, not least because they know which political party a) first got us embroiled in the unwanted process of “ever closer union” with our European neighbours, and b) is adamant that we must remain embroiled in that process.
Reply
There should be no need for UKIP. People should be able to rely on the Tory Party to uphold British independence. Sadly, anyone standing up for Britain inside Cameron’s Tory Party will be pilloried as a xenophobe or racist. It’s no good citing the existence of a few Eurosceptics – they just look like the Conservative analogue of the Communist idea of “useful idiots”. The fact that Bill Cash is Eurosceptic is no evidence that the Tory Party can be regarded as such. Indeed the high ranking of Europhiles like Eric(Pickles-ed), Pat McLoughlin and Ken Clarke prove the point.
It is a nice theory John but it won’t wash.
Reply
APL Reply:
November 27th, 2009 at 8:04 am
Socrates: “It’s no good citing the existence of a few Eurosceptics – they just look like the Conservative analogue of the Communist idea of “useful idiots”.”
It is so sad, but that is the conclusion I have held for some time.
Socrates: “It is a nice theory John but it won’t wash.”
Exactly, Mr. Redwood mocks himself and thinking voters by proposing it.
Reply
APL Reply:
November 28th, 2009 at 10:01 am
Socrates: “There should be no need for UKIP. People should be able to rely on the Tory Party to uphold British independence.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6935779.ece
Given the offer, six months ago of a deal by Lord Pearson now leader of UKIP to STAND DOWN UKIP in the next UK general election in exchange for a referendum should the Tory party form the next government, the ‘patriotic’ Tory party decline.
That seems like a cost free bargin for a Eurosceptic Tory party.
Rather than helping the Eurosceptic cause, the Tories would rather whinge about why “UKIP does not help Euroscepticism” because they undermine the Tory vote.
Given that Pearson is telling the truth, we must conclude that Cameron, Strathclyde ( who has form undermining the UK constitution ) are not.
More evidence that the Tory party at the top level is not Eurosceptic nor a patriotic party, but quite the opposite.
JR: “David Cameron is a Eurosceptic ..”
Don’t make me laugh.
Socrates: “It’s no good citing the existence of a few Eurosceptics – they just look like the Conservative analogue of the Communist idea of “useful idiots”.”
Now confirmed as fact rather than supposition.
Reply
APL Reply:
November 28th, 2009 at 10:04 am
Also, this news item indicates that Cameron was planning to smash his ‘Cast Iron guarantee’ at least six months ago.
Reply
I made the following comments rather late on to an older posting, but they are just as relevant to this. I am not a UKIP supporter but I am not happy with the present position adopted by the Conservative party:
I would like to be reassured by your words, John, but I have been told that there is no realistic hope of the Conservatives being able to negotiate return of powers to the UK as the system has “ensured” that this cannot happen. If that were true, then the only option is complete withdrawal. I still think that Cameron does not fully comprehend how angry people are re the perceived U turn on the Lisbon Treaty and that he is going to lose so many votes in significant seats. Many people just took his statement at apparent face value and after all the years of spin by this government they are not at all interested in the subtle interpretation of what was actually said – put simply they have had enough and are not prepared to be conciliatory or reasonable. They feel deceived and feel that the Cons. are no better than Labour. I trawl through a lot of websites and comments and this feeling is very widespread, alongside huge concerns re immigration. One hears that those at Cons. HQ are concerned and genuinely puzzled why the voters don’t take more to Cameron – to me it is obvious. It is not the fact that they don’t “take to” Cameron – the real point is that they don’t take to his particular policies on issues which are key to voters i.e. the apparent betrayal on Lisbon and the lack of decisiveness on cutting immigration dramatically.
Reply
Don’t forget this guy. UKIP is just another party for sad (people-ed) not unlike the like BNP.
Reply
John, you ask:
“Why doesn’t UKIP turn up the heat on the federalists who have done most to damage our constitution, the federalists in the current UK government?”
The simple answer is that they are fundamentalists.
By definition, they cannot compromise. Fundamentalists see absolutes in everything. Just look at Christian fundamentalists in the US and Islamic fundamentalists world-wide.
It is ironic that, by being so black and white they will probably move Euro-Federalism forward if they prevent a Tory government next May.
One thing I know for sure. If there is a Tory government next year, there will never be another EU treaty ceding further powers to the EU super state. If they tried it, they would never get into power again. That’s why I’ll be voting Tory (fat good it will do me – and the Tories – as I live in Ed Balls constituency).
I’m not for withdrawal from the EU per se. I would like more powers brought back to national parliaments (anyone remember subsidiarity? – The con used to get Maastricht through). However, if I had to chose between withdrawal and a true united states of Europe, I’d vote to pull out.
Reply
Peter Harper (UKIP) Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
HOW THE EU’S CONSTITUTION – courtesy of the Lisbon Treaty- BINDS US
Mr. Chaytor, here I repeat two very simple – but terrifying – statements of fact: -
1. The Lisbon Treaty implements a law that means that no more treaties ever need to be put before “Member States”: that the EU Commission can henceforth make laws as it wants, without ever again having to refer to politicians representing those Member States.
2. Anyone wishing to take back any governmental powers for their national government would have to beg the leaders of the other EU Member States for their permission to do so: under the EU laws to which we are now signed, no unilateral demands of any kind can be made.
It’s as simple as that.
(If you can disprove this, I would be extremely grateful: I would certainly sleep much better at nights if I found that neither of the above statements is true, and I could stop spending many hours each day trying to make intelligent people aware of what I believe to be CLEAR AND IRREFUTABLE FACTS.)
In the absence of correction: those who wish to support the march to bind Great Britain into a European Union Republic should make a logical argument based upon the TRUTH.
It is clear that the truth is not what the EU Gestapo want anyone to hear: a massive financial burden; unlimited mass immigration (with a plethora of huge, attendant, social and economic problems); private enterprise-crushing bureaucracy; “Human Rights” laws (for criminals); and “Health & Safety” laws (for insurance claimants) are what we get from the EU. I wonder why they don’t want us to talk about it?
Oh, I forgot: “The benefits of EU-membership are obvious!” – rather like the Emperor’s New Clothes.
Reply
Mark Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Don’t give up hope on (seeing the political reversal of-ed) Balls:
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2009/11/20/is-ed-balls-more-vulnerable-than-we-thought/
Reply
adam Reply:
November 27th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
It is the EU that is fundamentalist.
Not those who oppose it
Reply
The Tories all miss the core issue, which is governance, or the relationship of a government to those whom it governs. This is defined by the constitution of whatever nation is in question, and the law upholding it. They may emerge from an AK47, or have a
We have now lived without revolution for 320 years, longer by far than anybody else, because our constitution, devised in 1688 by men who had experienced a civil war with a casualty rate higher, as a percentage of the population, than WW1, who had seen a King turn into a Dictator, civil war as a consequence, and his conqueror, Cromwell, do likewise as a Talebanic version were not going to allow to happen again. Their intention was to make sure no person could
ever again dictate to the British people. This they did by the division
of powers, and granting custody of the sovereignty of these islands to the electorate, who can accordingly sack those who would tax us and make our laws. We live in “civil liberty’ restrained ,until recently, only by laws made on behalf of the community, which uphold our individual rights and liberties equally against eachother, and most importantly, individually and collectively against the otherwise unrestrained powers of the State.
To sum it, we live as a free people governed by consent. Nobody, from the monarch in his or private capacity downwards, is above the law. We stand equal before it. We may do anything we want to provided it is not against the law. This liberty is the key to long term economic success. Liberty, though it is but an idea, and without form, is the most precious thing that any man can hold, and the only thing that all,men, without exception, long for above all else on being deprived of it. Look at the Iranians, Tibetans, Chinese, Burmese, take one step back, and ask yourself what you think you are doing. They want to sack their governments but cannot. We give up that right on December 1st 2009.
The constitution of 1688 and the law upholding it, in so far as it has not already been destroyed, effectively ends on December 1st 2009.
We cease to be able to sack those who will tax us and make our laws. To be sure we can dismiss MPs, but since they will soon be unable either to originate, or alter, any laws of the slightest importance proposed by the Kommissariat, and are already in all but name a one party LibLabCon government on all matters EU in their devotion to rubber stamping such laws, one is again driven to wondering what they think they are doing.
We are to be governed by unelected, unaccountable, lawmaking bureaucrats all of whom from Presidentissimo to lavatory cleaner have a life time guarantee of immunity from prosecution. Their legal system will imposed upon us. It has nothing in common with ours, being descended from those of a warlord or control freak, as tweaked by Napoleon. It is designed to enhance the power of the State over the citizen, and administered by career judges and prosecutors/investigating judges who never do defence work. You may be arrested on suspicion and held in custody at their pleasure – two and a half years is quite common. Released without charge you cannot claim compensation as they are all “untouchable”.
The English constitution of 1688 is arguably the greatest practical and intellectual achievement of men in the history of mankind. The liberty it created is unique to the English speaking world.
To what end do you destroy it?
Reply
I am a psychotherapist and counsellor and when quickly helping my clients get better I look for their pattern matching – what they are responding to today which reminds them at an unconscious level of their past.
What we conservatives have to realise is that our conservatism came from the cathartic experience of Margaret Thatcher. But she was not a conservative in the traditional mould. Also the majority in this country (who grew up into adulthood in the 1980s,1990s and 2000s and not the 1960s and 1970s) and who never knew the pain and defeat of the immediate post war years recoil against the hardness of Thatcher and still see her in current Tory party.
Cameron’s natural instint is to return to the Conservatism of pre Thatcher. He also has lived with the pain of three election defeats. He is also a member of the political class with no real roots but who knows full well (and not just from focus groups) how the middle ground views the Tories. Indeed as a 40 something he may well sympathise with therm.
So he will disappoint trad Tories – but if he feeds us and our yearning for Thatcherism he will lose the election. It is as simple as that. But even though he will disappoint us, we may be pleasantly surprised and for sure he will do a much better job that another five Labour years which could destroy us.
Reply
John Reply:
November 26th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Must say I agree 100% with you, and we must all play as a team here, and we can win.
Reply
You have often used the phrase “They just don’t get it”.
In this instance, I must apply it to the Conservative party. For many of us (and I’m not a UKIP member), the most important decision that could be made by parliament would be to get out of the EU. Compared with this, everything else, including the economic situation is unimportant. Indeed, I believe that the EU is in part responsible for this situation.
Whilst I would prefer to see the Tories in power rather than Labour, neither party is now offering any hope of withdrawing from the EU and thus my only option is to vote UKIP. The longer term hope is that if the Tories lose, or if there is a hung parliament, they might realise where a large part of their vote has gone and make some genuine moves in that direction.
Labour, however is likely to have a simi;ar problem with the BNP in some areas. I am aware of people who would not vote Tory and so have indicated they will support the BNP as an alternative to Labour which they feel has let them down over emigration.
Perhaps the Tories will pick up some of these seats!
Reply
A good article but I would add that Ukip are damaging their own apparent cause of opposing EU federalism (which is also my aim) even more than just the points made here. Why? Well pursuing a referendum is a waste of time and counter-productive. Not just because a post ratification referendum is inherently rather silly but because referendums are turning out to be helping the EU and not addressing the real issues. An In/Out referendum would almost certainly lead to an In vote. People, especially in a recession, would not vote to leave the EU and indeed there are often issues about getting people to vote for a negative proposition anyway. I’m sure the EU would be delighted with such a simplistic result and confirming their aim. But more deeply it doesn’t address what the problem is with the EU which is the way it is conducting itself. More than a few times the analogy has been used by Eurosceptics that we are on a speeding train. Of all the things that you could sensibly do about that situation, holding a ballot of passengers on one of the carriages is not one of them. Clearly you have to persuade enough of the passeengers on a number of carriages that there is another course and speed and then for the majority to persuade the engine driver and stoker.
Reply
I must say all of the above makes interesting reading, apart from some nauseating Tory run-of-the-mill attack UKIP rubbish. Plain fact is, the Tories are running scared of UKIP, because they know in their hearts that we are going to take a bucketload of votes from them, especially in marginals where they are already vulnerable. I don’t know where Redwood gets his “3%” for UKIP when the latest opinion poll put us at 6% and rising strongly. Cameron has blown it where the EU is concerned. I was a Tory councillor for 6 years and am proud to have defected to UKIP. As for the nonsense about being a “one-trick pony”, I suggest those tired old Tories that think that have a look at our website where they can see our policies in full. Oh and don’t try the old trick either about UKIP/BNP. People aren’t daft and know we are poles apart. We aren’t racist for one thing.
Reply
John Redwood , YOU might agree that we need to prevent the European supersate enveloping Britiain and undermining our inheritance of democratic self government but the Conservative Party do not !!
Why won’t they just commit to an ”in or out referendum ? ”
They would win a landslide election and kill of the UKIP threat but no Dave is to frightened he’ll loose.
So instead he carrys on ingnoring the demands of 72% of the population
Reply
adam Reply:
November 27th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
Is an in out referendum really best?
Does it mean that all future governments are bound to obey it
Reply
UKIP has been a fast growing party, those who write it off are making a mistake
Reply
I think the general consensus here is that a vote for UKIP is a vote from the conservatives, this may have been true in the past, but not any more, there are far more people from a labour voting background who are seriously eurosceptic, regulations from the EU have effected every working person in this country, also the social exclusion felt by many through social engineering such as the smoking ban which has taken away any vestige of fairplay and destroyed many parts of the hospitality industry.
The conservative’s have not said we will change these law’s which restrict personal choice and regulations which make it increasingly difficult to work.
In the past election there were very few people standing for UKIP, in the coming election UKIP will have a ppc for the majority of seats.
Maybe in a hung parliament UKIP may just swing the balance.
Reply
All of this is ignoring what is, to my mind, UKIP’s greatest strength : they are not taken in by the global warming scam.
Reply
Sorry John,
For once you are out of touch.
I, like many many others want to vote for a small state, local democracy, free market, non EU small government party, with grammar school education .
What the Gordon/Dave Party BOTH offer is Federal EU, big state, no democracy, Keynesian economics, state work, windmills and 50 p tax rates, comprehensive propaganda education
If you don’t believe that is what you will get from a tory government, go and look at the actions of Tory Kent County Council or Tory Maidstone Borough Council.
Yes, under our corrupt democracy the fringe parties don’t stand a chance ( maybe that’s why fewer and fewer vote).
What would actually be good John, is if some of those politicians that spout the freedom, democracy and free market mantra ACTUALLY lived up to it. I won’t hold my breath, but I will vote UKIP it’s my way of telling the undemocratic, safe seat, A list Conservative Party what I think of them. That’s after 12 years of the most useless, lying and corrupt government the UK has ever seen. Which may give you some idea of the depth of feeling of those of us on the Libertarian/right of British politics
Reply
I wish I could agree with John as he has always had my respect and if Tory politicians were like John then I would be a Tory.
The fact is that Tory MEPs (except 3) are not interested in saving the UK from the clutches of the EU.
The way in which they vote and speak makes that point.
To vote Tory is to endorse the EU takeover.
MIKE NATTRASS MEP
Reply
adam Reply:
November 27th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
but if UKIP go down the anti immigration route, you risk damaging the work thats been done so far.
The BBC wants to connect you to the BNP.
Reply
The issue John is quite simple. You are clearly a Euro sceptic but many of your party colleagues are committed to the EU in a proportion and to a degree which far exceeds that of voting Tories. Most importantly it seems to voters like me that your leader does not articulate the position of the party as clearly as you and frankly when he does try I for one have problems believing him.
The Tory party I believe is just as detached from its own voter base as the Labour party. This lack of respect for the traditional values of their supporters on both the left and right of politics is a problem few politicians are willing to either concede or deal with.
Open primaries would resolve the issue and precisely because of that I suspect we will never get them.
I can understand your frustration with the UKIP voters John but their existence and that of the BNP owe their entire existence to the simple fact that the vast majority of your fellow Parliamentarians hold the electors in contempt. The protest vote is mere reciprocation.
When your fellows start to listen to what their voters think instead of telling them what they ’should’ think, the party will be on safer ground.
I speak with feeling as my electorate is Stroud where the Labour Candidate only won his seat because UKIP took votes from the Tory.
Reply
The establishment are trying to kill off the smaller parties by devious means.
The LibDems get to keep £2.4m of (questionable-ed) money but a genuine donation to UKIP gets snaffled by the Electoral Commission instead of a small fine which would have been more appropriate.
This will strengthen my support for UKIP.
Reply
David Cameron’s stance as to what he would do as Prime Minister regarding re-negotiating the UK’s position within the EU reminds me of Michael Foot. In the run up to the (1982?) general election Foot was searching for a way to reconcile two contradictory positions on the UK’s nuclear deterrent. His solution was to state that upon becoming Prime Minister he would not abolish the nuclear deterrent, but that he had no intention of ever using it. And at a stroke he was fatally compromised.
Reply
So what you’re saying, John, is that everyone who wants the UK to leave the EU should vote for a party that supports continued membership of the EU in case the votes for the party that will take us out of the EU means another party that supports the EU will win instead.
So, basically, we should vote for the Tories who want to keep the UK in the EU rather than vote for UKIP which will take us out of the EU in case the votes for UKIP means the Labour Party, which also wants to keep us in the EU, wins.
Anyone who votes for a party that doesn’t represent their views just to keep out another party that doesn’t represent their views when there is a party out there that does needs their head looking into. I want out of the EU, the Tories don’t, UKIP does, therefore I will vote UKIP and any eurosceptic who does vote for the Tories knowing that it’s a vote for greater EU integration, just because they don’t want Liebour to win, is a pillock.
Reply
I can see the argument for accepting the EU Constitution (may as well call a spade a spade) as a fait accompli but I’d like a little more detail on what counts as a ‘major decision’ that David Cameron has now promised us to have a say in in the future. Will it be only on matters that directly affects us or also in matters that indirectly effect us?
In particular I’m thiking of further enlargement of the EU. No doubt Turkey will continue to press for membership and when that happens no doubt former USSR republics will also come knocking – Azerbeijan with it’s oil & gas reserves spring to mind, Georgia, etc. I’d personally like to have a vote in any further enlargement but politicians could argue that since this does not impact directly on UK legislature powers that a referendum will be denied us. It’s this type of political sleight of hand that worries me.
Reply: My view is any new country accession Treaty should be put to the vote of the electorate, especially as they often come with additonal powers for the EU
Reply
Is 147 (and counting) your biggest ever comments response?
Reply: Yes
Reply
I’m afraid I cant agree John.
I disagree with the EUphile Mantra that EUrope can be reformed from within.
That being the case, there is limit as to how long I can remain within the Conservative party, hoping to reform that from within.
I cant agree with your UKIP conclusions either.
If, no matter what, we promise to vote for the Conservatives, what power do we have?
On that bargaining position Cast Iron David would be able to make us the most integrationist member of Euroslavia.
That we will see 5 more years of labour rather than 15 years of Pro EU integration Cast Iron David isnt a particularly irrational response given the circumstances.
The Problem is simply that the EU is not a single issue, its every issue.
People are raving about Goves half hearted Education reforms, but theres no reason the EU cant implement a Common Educational Policy and decree that a primary school is from 4-9 and will consist of two seperate classes for each year group of 27 students in a room of dimensions X by Y by Z, they will follow the following curriculem with these lessons at these times of the day, terms will be between the following dates.
Why not?
The EU has said what lightbulbs I am allowed to use, why not the dimensions of school buildings?
Reply
APL Reply:
November 29th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
Dominicj: “The Problem is simply that the EU is not a single issue, its every issue.”
Exactly, well said sir.
Reply
Mr Redwood,
I disagree. Parliamentary democracy is now so unrepresentative, unaccountable and incapable of reform that there is no other solution for the British people than to vote for the non main-stream parties, all three of these are essentially similar flavours of the same status quo of old fashioned parliamentary politics. The three main parties are hardly distinguishable any more and they have no obligation to keep to a manifesto pledge either.
David Cameron wants to engage more with voters, yet he has said quite categorically that he will not give a ‘yes/no’ vote on the Treaty of Rome (of which Lisbon is now part). Furthermore he says Tories wish to engage with the electorate but in reality a ‘yes/no’ vote in a national election for a slightly different flavour parliamentary politics every five years is hardly engaging the public in a free and open debate on the issues that matter to them. It is not social democracy with an issues based agenda, it is a closed form of unrepresentative politics that puts party before taxpayer/voter. The veil and veneer of acceptability has worn thin. With power shifting to Brussels why do we have any MPs at all?
In view of the fact that UKIP is now the only viable party (other than the BNP) which has a clearly defined aim of exiting the EU, it is clear that there is only really one set of choices for the voter. Elect more of the same tax and spend traditionalists or vote to leave Europe, for UK self-determination; and then focus on our own much needed urgent political and economic reform.
We need a new system fit for the twenty-first century and not seventeenth century politics that are now totally out of step with public needs, financially and morally bankrupt and devoid of any remorse or penitence for the series of expense scandals, tax evasions, self-indulgent pensions, allowance and grants and flagrant disregard for the taxpayer’s position. In the end, it is all take, take, take with no financial accountability.
Leaving the EU is not anti-European, it is simply about putting British interests first and not wasting our money subsidising developing nations in emerging economies at the expense of the UK taxpayer and to UK living standards.
Enough is enough.
Parliament: ‘NOT IN MY NAME’
Reply
The title of Mr Redwoods entry today should read “UKIP Does not help the Conservative Party”. It’s all very entertaining yet another individual having a go at UKIP but the facts are that UKIP came second in the last European Elections even beating the current Labour government! With 2.5 million voters making their mark Mr Redwood you should be worried. The public is increasingly fed up to the back teeth with professional politicians who appear to be milking the tax payer for everything, promising the world and failing on a grand scale once they get power. UKIP may not be big (but we are growing) we may not have much cash and we don’t have the party “spin” machines of the old three main parties but we have fire in our blood by the bucket full and it we can stop a tory getting into power (the tories sold us out to Europe in the first place) in a so called safe Conservative seat then so be it. We will fight the pro eourpean LibLab/SNP/Con party when ever and where ever we can. The freedom and democracy of our country comes before you Mr Redwood and way before any political party and that includes UKIP!
Reply
UKIP offered to disband if Cameron held Lisbon referendum
The UK Independence Party offered to disband if David Cameron agreed to hold a referendum on the ratified Lisbon treaty.
Lord Pearson of Rannoch, UKIP’s newly elected leader, says in an interview with The Times today that he proposed the deal after the party’s strong showing in the European elections.
He reveals that he approached Lord Strathclyde, the Tory leader in the Lords, six months ago and asked him to tell Mr Cameron that if he guaranteed a referendum and gave the Conservative Party a free vote then UKIP would disband and its members stand down. He received no answer. Several months later Mr Cameron announced that the Tories would not hold a referendum.
Lord Pearson adds: “A referendum on a ratified Lisbon Treaty would have become about in or out, which is why the political class wouldn’t do it.”
Lord Pearson says that he was acting on behalf of his predecessor, Nigel Farage, when the overture was made.
Last night Mr Farage confirmed that the meeting took place with his blessing, although he argued that the offer was to withdraw the party from the general election rather than to disband. Lord Strathclyde also confirmed that the meeting took place.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6935779.ece
Reply
A message to all you wavering Tory Voters – get real and be prepared to stand up to the plate! The only way to rid this once great country of the severe menace to our future posed by the slightest chance of an OLD LABOUR victory is to vote Tory at the next election. So stop waffling about the EU and concentrate on the big picture.
Reply
Doesn’t matter how EUrosceptic the Conservative members are, Scameron is the leader and he is taking us deeper into EU Commission’s Union.
I was a tory,
Now I am a UKIPian and proud of it.
Redwood is a nice guy, But Scameron is a Europhile and he’s in charge of EU Policy, not Mr Redwood, nor any other Member.
Election? Bring it on!
Reply
I think somebody within the Tory Party needs to wake up. The people of this country were denied a referendum by Labour . Cameron dithered then did like wise. It is a distinct possibility that the next Election will be used as the referendum we were all denied. Continued membership of the EU can not be a seperate issue from the Economy while we are contributing vast amounts of money which could and should be used to start paying off the National Debt.
Who is going to start talking about the looming energy crisis, we know from experience that Natural Gas will not last for ever. If we lose a secure gas supply will the electric grid be able to cope with the extra demand. Food supply, Immigration, housing, public services are all interconnected issues effecting everybody in this country. A promise of a referendum on continued EU membership (bearing in mind EFTA still exists) and some common sense, joined up thinking will decide where my vote goes – else of course it will have to be UKIP.
Reply