Tuesday, 29 September 2009
A reputable source suggests that the announcement will come in the next couple of days.
Batten is the man that has done what the British government seems incapable of doing - putting a cost on our membership of the European Empire.
He is also the man who exposed the alleged link between Romano Prodi and the KGB, something that was never successfully investigated as the two Russian men that implicated Prodi were conveniently assassinated.
UKIP with Gerard Batten at the helm would certainly worry a lot of people in the European Empire and at home.
The proposals that are being put forward by the Imperial Tax Commissioner would allow any member state to be able to access bank account details (including individual transactions) and tax and salary details for any "EU citizen", supposedly for the purposes of combating VAT fraud.
VAT fraud is of particular interest to the European Empire because VAT receipts are one of the measures used to calculate how much our annual contribution to the imperial budget should be. This is why there is a lower limit of 15% on VAT and why the European Empire has severely restricted the number of items that can be rated at zero VAT.
UKIP MEP, Godfrey Bloom, said:
The idea that the Government is prepared to hand over personal data to Brussels is chilling. Time and time again the state seems to think the answer to every problem is a new database. Then they lose or give away our data.It's a well known fact that most large scale fraud and theft of this type of data is committed from within the organisation in question. You can protect against outside threats with firewalls and physical security and password protection but they're all useless when someone who has legitimate access to that data decides to steal or mis-use it. Giving millions* of people across the EU access to UK tax and bank account details will increase that risk an inconceivable amount - not only will more people have access to the data but leaks will also be harder to find making stealing it lower risk.
* The combined workforce of every government agency involved with tax in every member state runs into the millions. HM Revenue & Customs employs about 100,000 people alone.
Monday, 28 September 2009
The European Empire has decided that listening to music at 89dB for five hours a week for five years can lead to permanent hearing loss and manufacturers should therefore be made to limit their devices so that they can't produce loud noises.
Heavy traffic produces around 90dB of noise so if the European Empire is successful in limiting the volume of MP3 players and phones, they will be unusable if there is traffic nearby.
Mike Nattrass said "Again, the EU is poking its nose in where it does not belong ... our ears".
Sunday, 27 September 2009
If you answered yes to all of the above then I have one more question - why?
The Conservative Party isn't a party for conservatives any more, it's a New Labour clone - Blue Labour. The Conservative Party isn't a party with libertarian ideals any more, it's a party of authoritarians. The Conservative Party isn't a party of small government any more, it want's more and more control over our lives. And the Conservative Party certainly isn't a eurosceptic party any more, David Camoron is a eurofederalist committed to keeping the UK i the European Empire and to ever closer union.
UKIP is what the Conservative Party would be if it was run by conservatives - a right of centre, eurosceptic party committed to small government, low tax, libertarian ideals and national sovereignty.
If you believe in those ideals then a vote for the Conservatives is a wasted vote - a Tory government won't give you any of that. If you're thinking of voting Tory just to get rid of Liebour then that's a wasted vote - you're exchanging one party that doesn't represent you for another party that doesn't represent you.
By rights, David Camoron's dithering and pathetic "we won't let matters rest" policy on the Lisbon Treaty should be tearing the Conservatives apart from the inside. Most members of the Conservative Party are vehemently opposed to handing over the tattered remains of our national sovereignty to the European Empire but they are more interested in getting their party into power in the vain hope that once they're in power they will be able to change Camoron's direction. They're kidding themselves.
Camoron will see a victory at the ballot box as an endorsement of his agenda and the willingness of Tory members to support him throughout the election campaign as an acceptance of the new direction he is taking the party in.
Tories are overjoyed at today's news that Angela Merkel's party has won enough of the vote in the German general election to dump its alliance with the socialists. Forget about the fact that she's a fascist eurofederalist former communist - her party is right wing so it's something to be celebrated. Ignore the fact that she's been instrumental in promoting the EU not-a-constitution and leads the drive for a European Federation regardless of what the people of Europe want - she leads a nominally conservative party so it's a good thing.
Conservative Party members and voters need to look at the bigger picture. A Tory government is going to bring us more of the same - more tax, bigger government, less freedom and a Federal Europe. Instead of voting for the Tories despite the fundamental divergence from what the membership believes in, vote for UKIP because it represents every right thinking man and woman in this country.
Don't be afraid that voting UKIP will weaken the Tory vote and lead to an apocolyptic fourth term for Liebour - get out there and convince the rest of the disaffected Tory membership to vote UKIP as well. There is only one way to stop the forces of eurofederalism and that's to vote UKIP. Put your cross next to any other party and you're not only wasting your vote, you're condemning your country to a certain future as a collection of regions in a European Federation.
Is that what you want? Because it's certainly not what I want. Now pull your socks up, take your fingers out of your ears and give Camoron, Clarke and all the other eurofederalists two fingers.
Saturday, 26 September 2009
UKIP scored another big win in local government with an overwhelming result in the Billericay Town Council by-election last night.Cross-posted
UKIP's Cllr Susan McCaffery won 57% of the vote, more than the total vote of all other candidates combined.
Cllr Peter Reeve, UKIP Regional Organiser for the Eastern Counties said. “We are very proud of Susan for the fantastic result that she and her team have achieved.
"She is passionate about the local people of Billericay and her commitment has been rewarded by the trust that the local community have now placed in her. She will be an excellent voice of the people.
"This is one of a series of big wins for UKIP in local elections across the Eastern Counties. Susan will join the fast-growing team of UKIP councillors who are fighting to restore local democracy and force polticians to start listening to the local community again.
"It is also another nail in the coffin for the Labour Government and the National Socialist BNP."
The result for the Billericay Town Council South West ward by-election was:
480 (UKIP) Cllr Susan McCaffery
Friday, 25 September 2009
UPDATE @ 10PM:
Everything appears to be back online.
This is my first post on here, and whilst its not exactly a excellent first entry, I wasn't aiming for that. Every little helps when keeping people informed!
His opponents are the LibLabCon and a Green candidate.
The big topic of discussion in Wroxham is the building of an eco-town in Rackheath which will site thousands of new houses on green belt land.
The Liebour candidate is in favour of the eco town, the Lib Dim candidate is a 19 year old student at York University 186 miles and 4 and a quarter hours drive away and the Green candidate ... is a Green candidate.
So that leaves the former independent turned Tory District Councillor, Ian Evans, as the only real opposition to UKIP's Glenn Tingle.
The Commission has tried to stop Estonia and Poland from setting its own emmissions quotas for the imperial carbon trading scam set up by the European Empire as a way of raising taxes in the name of saving the planet from global warming.
The Commission decided Estonia and Poland had set their quotas too high so it tried to unilaterally reduce them even though the Directive creating the carbon trading scam says that only member states have the power to allocate quotas and to fix the amount of those quotas.
The EU Court of First Instance uncharacteristically slapped their puppet masters down, telling them they have no legal power to do what they did.
The EU Commission says that it now needs to "revise the allocation procedure" which is imperial babble for "the law is stopping us from doing what we want so we're going to change it".
Wednesday, 23 September 2009
Regulators in the US have already approved the deal between the two American companies but the EU is dragging its heels which Oracle says is costing them $100m a month.
If the two companies merge, it means that Oracle would own both its own Oracle database technology and the mySQL database technology owned by Sun. That would leave Microsoft's SQL Server as the only effective competitor in the market. However, mySQL is a free open-source product which is, in practice, supported by its own user community. Oracle is generally used for enterprise-class solutions in commercial operations whereas mySQL is usually to be found driving websites and non-critical applications.
In reality, there is very little overlap but the European Empire has shown itself to be completely inept as far as technology is concerned and its obsession with interfering with American businesses is beyond a joke.
Monday, 21 September 2009
Should that happen, we might be rid of this nasty treaty by June 2010! Hooray!
Much as Germany did, President Václav Klaus's gambit is to refer the treaty to its constitutional court, aided by loyal senators in the Upper House, to check its compatibility with the Czech constitution. It would be difficult for Eurofanatics to argue against this highly responsible course of action.
The zealots are bound to be in a lather, nevertheless - Barosso and Sarkozy in particular.
Given that Brown's hanging onto power by his chewed fingernails in order to ensure that the treaty is ratified on his watch, the Czech delay makes his remaining in power until the end of the year quite pointless to his baying detractors in the Labour Party.
Might this be a catalyst for another Brown putsch - shortly before or after the Party's conference?
Sunday, 20 September 2009
Note: A few years old, but still worth watching!
As to the stage - words fail one! Perhaps the Libdems urgently need the services of a good PR & Presentation expert, on the basis that the 'setting' should convey a subliminal message. The only message this seems to convey is an example of the number of workable ideas to govern the country that the Libdems possess!
And the message 'Ready to Win' - win what? First prize in the 'Whose going to be the first LibDem MP to get decapitated in the General election coconut shy'?
Richad Dawkins, prominent atheist, speaking on civil liberties says that whilst he is not a member of the party, he has always voted for them. It helped, he said, that Evan Harris is his MP - purleese! So Evan Harris is the Devil incarnate?
To combat the counter-accusations that 'fly-around' during conference season (here and here) we now have Vince accusing the Conservatives of intending to raise VAT to 22.5 or 25 per cent. Knowing that 'cable' is a stitch used in knitting, one has to wonder whether our Vince is the prime example, in the political world, of a 'stitch-up' - but one digresses.
Perhaps he would care to produce the paperwork (dated) and screen-shots of any computer work (time and dated) to prove he has 'been working on this for months' and, if such 'savings' can be made, explain his logic of introducing policies and ideas that wasted the taxpayer's money in the first place - and then allowed the 'waste' to continue?
And he is going to make all this happen, commencing 2011, from the opposition benches? Now that I must see!
Vince Cable, writing in the Mail, demonstrates exactly why their existence is called into question with this article, which proposes 'a ten point plan to save our democracy'.
1. Discussing reforming party funding Cable writes: "It is dangerous and corrupting for parties to depend on large donations from rich donors with a dodgy past, who evade taxes and try to buy influence" So the Liberal Democrats will return the £2.4million pounds donated by Michael Brown?
2. Calling for a reduction in the number of MPs and Peers, Cable writes: "I believe that most MPs do an important job representing their constituents, holding government to account and legislating." Since when did present day MPs 'hold the government to account' and 'legislate'? Firstly, on important matters affecting this country, invariably the House of Commons is virually empty and secondly, as most of our laws emanate from Brussels, what actually do MPs legislate on?
4. Cable wants 'traditional British liberties' defended. Well, Cable could make a start by campaigning against the UK's EU membership, so that we can use imperial measurements and whatever lightbulbs we want - to mention just two 'traditional British liberties' that have been in the news lately!
5. On the subject of MPs expenses Cable does not think the 'public will forget' - too damn right, Vince, we will not! As to accepting the Kelly report, Cable is also advocating the right of an unelected and unaccountable bureaucrat to dictate to the electorate - who are after all the ones who 'provide' all this money - MP's remuneration. 'And our 'views' in all this are where?
6. Making the point that 'Local councils have been stripped of most of their functions by central government' Cable fails to draw the similarity between this and the UK Parliament being stripped of most of its functions by our membership of the EU and, more importantly, the Lisbon Treaty, the two latter subjects being something on which the Liberal Democrats are in favour!
7. Calling for the voting age to be lowered to 16, Cable forgets that to give those who have not yet reached adulthood the opportunity to decide on such weighty matters as who governs us, it would help if those to whom he proposes to give the vote were able to read and write to begin with!
8. The one point in his 'plan' Cable does seem to have got correct, it could be argued, is that of fixed-term parliaments.
9. Discussing the need for the punishment of MPs who abuse their position, Cable is again jumping on the Hannan & Carswell 'bandwagon' by, in effect, wanting a 're-call system'!
10. Arguing for proportional representation - yet again - Cable should, instead, be arguing for open primaries - another Hannan & Carswell idea. He also misses the point that if the Liberal Democrats could only decide what they stood for, what they believed in, more people would wish to vote for them - thus they would gain power regardless of the voting system!
In view of the above - the point of the Liberal Democrat Party is..........................?
Saturday, 19 September 2009
Friday, 18 September 2009
SIR – I cannot understand Craig Heeley's assertion (Letters, September 17) that Conservatives are not debating Europe enough. He need only visit the grassroots website ConservativeHome to see that this is not the case. I am regularly assailed on it for my moderate postings about the workings of the EU by Eurosceptic Tories (and, I suspect, members of Ukip), who argue ferociously against Britain's EU membership.
Those who hope for the day that Britain withdraws from the EU are bound to say that not enough attention is paid to their point of view. But the simple fact is that the Conservative Party has never advocated withdrawal, and David Cameron shows no sign of budging on this fundamental question. On the contrary, Conservatives have just founded a new euro-realist grouping in the European Parliament based on engagement with and radical reform of the EU.
The debate about Europe, it seems, is actually alive and well in the Tory party – even if it's not going the way that the hardline withdrawalists want it to.
Dr Charles Tannock MEP (Con)
A Conservative councillor for the Leyland ward of South Ribble, Councillor Dave Duxbury, defected from the eurofederalist Tories last week because he believes in withdrawal from the EU and small government while the Tories ... well, they don't!
Roger Smith has also been elected to Market Drayton Town Council in Shropshire bringing the total number of UKIP councillors in Market Drayton to three.
Thursday, 17 September 2009
David Campbell Bannerman said: “It was particularly shocking to see Tory MEPs, including those from the Eastern Counties of England such as the newly elected Vicky Ford, on their feet applauding the re-election of an avowed federalist and anti-democrat. This is the man who once infamously threatened the Irish people should they dare to vote against the Lisbon Treaty.
"It beggars belief that a Party that campaigned on a reform of the EU platform in the European Elections can, at the first opportunity, so openly support the federalist agenda. Barroso's manifesto promises ever more EU interference in our domestic affairs through three more Commission posts covering justice, migration and climate action. He wants a common immigration policy and for Britain to accept another 30,000 immigrants a year.
"How can any Tory rise to applaud this new attack on British national control? Like the con of Cameron's insincere referendum promise and vague claims of "not letting matters rest", the Conservatives seem willing to sign up to anything, no matter how bad it is for our country. It's like being back in the 1930s."
Wednesday, 16 September 2009
Despite being the only candidate, they still held a vote to give his appointment a thin veneer of democracy. But he didn't get it all his own way though, 382 MEPs voted for him but 219 voted against.
Once again Emperor Barroso confirmed the federalist agenda of the EU:
Anyone who wants to come on board for this exciting journey, that is the construction of a united Europe, it is with them that I would like to build the necessary consensus to strengthen the European projectThe Tories, naturally, supported Barroso and his eurofederalist agenda.
It scrutinises over 1000 documents a year.
Each document is a separate EU Directive.
Of course the British public are never told what is in these documents.
They come out of the House of Commons as ordinary British laws, and it is impossible for British public ever to discover which laws originated from the European Union.
Anyone in Tamworth who would like to get involved in the branch can get in touch with regional co-ordinator for the West Midlands euroregion, Derek Bennett.
Despite Ganley being a eurofederalist (he mistakenly thinks it can be reformed like the Tories) and a bit of a prima donna, this is good news. I have expressed concerns recently that the Irish might see UKIP's involvement in the Irish referendum as undue interference from imperialists and that has, indeed, been one of the arguments used by the "yes" camp. It also means that the "no" campaign isn't being spearheaded by a party that is fully anti-EU, thus depriving the "yes" campaign of the argument that UKIP is only involved to try and break up the EU (another one they've tried).
Let's hope that Ganley hasn't left it too late to start campaigning for a "no" vote.
Tuesday, 15 September 2009
The West Midlands MEP has today attacked plans to allow product placement on some of Britain’s most popular shows.
In 2007, a European Union directive came into force which permits product placement for commercial purposes in certain programming if national governments allowed it.
Now, it appears the British Government is considering the move which could see regulars in the Rovers Return swapping a pint of Newton & Ridley (fictional tipple used in the soap Coronation Street) for a drink of Carlsberg or John Smith’s.
Implementing the directive could allow the British TV reality programme X-Factor to follow the example of American Idol and product place glasses of Coca Cola on the set and open the floodgates for independent broadcasters to advertise on a massive scale.
Mr Nattrass says British television has always been at the forefront of innovation and has a reputation around the world for delivering high quality programming.
But allowing product placement could tarnish this reputation and lead to television audiences in the UK being bombarded by adverts and plugs for products and famous brands.
“Now the quality of the nation’s television could be undermined thanks to the interfering EU,” said Mr Nattrass.
“Britain is famous for producing high-quality dramas, comedy and entertainment programmes which are also popular with television audiences around the world.
“I understand that struggling independent broadcasters need to raise revenue. The cost of this however, should not be profit-making programming more with an eye on flogging brands of washing powder than plot and content.
“Again this is yet another example of the EU poking its nose in where it does not belong. It is time to say NO to the EU and manage our own affairs.
"If the British people require this (product placement on TV) then it should be obtained via our own Parliament. It should not be dictated to us by the EU hiding behind the simple word ‘directive.’
“It is all too easy, no wonder more than 70 per cent of our law now comes from the EU,” he added.
Derek Bennett EU-Sceptic is an author at Bloggers4UKIP.
This is an interesting idea - UKIP will be led by someone in Westminster, albeit a peer. But will he attract or put off the traditional Liebour voters who are abandoning their party and voting UKIP instead?
That question may well be academic as the election gets closer, of course, as Mandelson is positioning himself as the next leader of the Liebour Party and judging by the amount of times I've seen him in the papers and on the TV in the last few days compared to Gordon Brown, he may well launch his coup attempt before the next election which means it'll be a battle of the lords for the left.
So would I support Lord Pearson's election campaign? I wouldn't oppose it, let's put it that way. But with the state propaganda machine in control of jealous millionaire class warriors like Gordon Brown, Peter Mandelson and John Prescott the fight against UKIP will be a dirty one focussed on "UKIP toffs" just like the last couple of by-elections with Liebour's disastrous "Tory toffs" campaigns.
Sunday, 13 September 2009
Friday, 11 September 2009
Nikki would be an excellent candidate - she calls a spade a spade, she's not afraid of confrontation and she knows more about politics than most of the traitors in Brussels will ever know. The only downside is that she's an MEP and the party leader job is a demanding one.
I might need to revise my shortlist.
Tuesday, 8 September 2009
The enemy within, are the MPs that voted for the Lisbon Treaty without giving us the referendum, that was promised to us in Labour‘s 2005 election manifesto.
They are the enemy within.
Andreasen and Nuttall have apparently had a disagreement over the decision to double the salary of a party official. The NEC agreed to the salary increase and Nuttall awarded it in defiance of Andreasen's objections.
This is a tricky one because ultimately such decisions are down to the Chairman and the NEC but the money man (or woman in this case) generally gets a big say in the matter because there's money involved. I suspect there's more to it than a disagreement over money but I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing. It was positive to have Marta Andreasen as the party Treasurer with her sleaze-busting credentials but I commented at the time of the announcement she was standing as an MEP that I didn't see how she would be able to do the job of an MEP and the job of a Treasurer. Now she can concentrate on being an MEP and we can get a full-time Treasurer.
UKIP's enemies (of which there are many, especially in the LibLabCon-controlled media) will try to paint this as a damning endictment of UKIP and the party's finances but it's clear that Marta Andreasen has resigned as Treasurer, not from the party and because of a disagreement over money, not because she has uncovered fraud.
Monday, 7 September 2009
To listen in, tune to 95.7/96.0 FM if you live in the area or use the listen live/listen again facilities on the BBC Cambridgeshire website at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/cambridgeshire/local_radio/
Sunday, 6 September 2009
It may be a justifiable argument that there is a difference between the matter of the IRA and Libya and Britain's membership of the European Union, however both are important and can therefore be treated as equal where the subject of 'principles' are concerned.
In a Times article of April 29th, 2009 Hague is quoted as saying " that a Tory government would be “active, energetic and engaged members of the EU”,
yet at the same time it is also reported in the same article that:
"He also said that if the treaty were ratified in the run-up to the election or soon afterwards it would not have democratic legitimacy, implying that the British vote would still go ahead. And for the first time he hinted that a referendum could still be promised in the Tory manifesto, even if the treaty had been ratified."
Now far be it for anyone to suggest that a contradiction - even a loss of moral compass - exists here!
Maybe one could go further and remind William Hague of his words to the Conservative Party Conference in 1999? Amongst other things, he said:
"We believe in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland".
Really, Mr Hague? Then should not the United Kingdom come first in your priorities?
"when we're in government the next new EU Treaty must contain a flexibility clause or else I tell you there will be no new Treaty."
Don't see any 'flexibility clause' in the Lisbon Treaty, Mr. Hague so, ratification or not, in your own words we will get a referendum then?
"if you believe in Britain as a country that will work with its neighbours but never submit to being governed by anyone else; if you believe in an independent Britain.Then come with me, and I will give you back your country."
The majority of people do not wish to be governed by anyone else and do still believe in an independent Britain, Mr. Hague - so why should we come with you, as you won't give us back our country, will you?
Coupled with this is the question that if, ten years ago, one believed in one's country, had an aversion to rule from abroad and, as a result, felt that without a 'flexibility clause' there could be no new Treaty, a change of heart cannot just surely be 'opportunism', can it - the prospect of a nice well-paid job, with position, power, status and perks - because it is hard to think of any other reason!
Oops, sorry - forgot we are talking about a Conservative politician here, discussing the EU!
So come on lasses and lads - cheque in the post tomorrow, please?
"Party chiefs are struggling to prepare alternative policy blueprints to unveil to grassroots activists, as the mood in Ireland suggests the vote on October 2 could go either way."
What a surprise - not, that we then have Mark Francois repeating that well-worn line:
"But if the Lisbon Treaty is in force at the time of the next election then in our view political integration would have gone too far, the Treaty would lack democratic legitimacy in this country and we would not let matters rest there. Naturally, we will set out how we plan to take things forward in the manifesto we will put to the British people. We have also consistently made it clear that the restoration of our national control over social and employment legislation would be a major goal for a Conservative government."
One has to say that if Mark Francois had any sense of responsibility and principle he would want 'restoration of national control' over all matters and that that would be the policy of a Conservative government'!
But hey, lets be fair - he is a 'Conservative' MP!
Perhaps it is about time someone took the Conservative Party to court for 'misrepresentation' under the Trades Description Act!
From one of the comments to his article the following link was found relating to a new film to be released on 18th October entitled 'Not Evil Just Wrong'.
For $19.95 a dvd of the film can be pre-ordered here - sounds/looks like a good buy!
A flurry of bets on Farage to win, ConservativeHome's poll showing that 64% of Tories would vote for Farage and heavyweight Tory bloggers pledging support for Farage have brought the odds of Farage winning right down.
I think I'll have a punt myself before they shorten the odds even further!
Making UKIP unelectable in Wales? Tick.
You could be forgiven for wishing he had stayed quiet.
Confidently predicting that Ukip would win seats in the National Assembly at the next general election, he described it as “a system of regionalisation forced upon us by Brussels”.
Right you are, then – the Assembly was forced on us by evil foreigners, rather than, say, being voted for in a referendum.
“The ‘yes’ vote won with the narrowest of majorities. Only one in four people actually voted for the Welsh Assembly.
“What kind of a mandate is that?”
Well, it depends. It’s certainly a much bigger mandate than that of, say, John Bufton, who gained 12.8% of the vote in this year’s election on a 30.4% turnout.
He opposed the building of three new Assembly Government offices in Merthyr Tydfil, Aberystwyth and Llandudno Junction, describing them as “mini parliaments”.
They’re not mini parliaments – they’re civil service offices, built to decentralise government work from Cardiff. Mr Bufton shows he doesn’t know the difference between the National Assembly and the Assembly Government.
Given that one of Ukip’s two councillors in Wales is still under investigation for allegedly posting inappropriate messages on web forums, it’s not been the brightest of starts for the party’s push into Wales.
Like I said yesterday (and several times before), UKIP's devolution policy is out of step with public opinion and is costing us votes. Devolution was brought to Wales following a referendum in which only 25% of the population bothered to vote and only 51% of them voted for it. It was, however, a binding national referendum and the majority voted for devolution. The referendum in 1997 might not have been an overwhelming vote for Welsh home rule but contesting the next election in Wales on a policy of abolishing it will be a referendum on UKIP's devolution policy.
Among Conservatives the figure is 82 per cent – putting more pressure on party leader David Cameron to clarify his position on Europe. Despite campaigning against the Lisbon Treaty – the rehashed EU constitution – the Tories will not say whether they will tear it up in power.
But the furore over the treaty will be re-ignited next month when Ireland holds a second referendum, despite voting against it last year. Labour has denied British voters the chance to vote on the treaty, but today’s survey by Opinium Research suggests Britain could deliver a huge blow to Brussels if ever given the chance to vote on EU membership.
Anger has been fuelled after the Treasury admitted Britain’s net EU contribution will rise by almost 60 per cent to £6.4billion in 2010 – equal to a £260 levy on every British home. UKIP leader Nigel Farage said: “The Irish referendum will put Europe back at the heart of the debate. The question the Tories would rather not face is coming back.”
Saturday, 5 September 2009
Genius. I can see devolution policy soon becoming being the UKIP equivalent of Tory EU policy - the party leadership being out of step with the electorate and their own members.
THE UK Independence Party will be the only main party opposing further powers for the National Assembly at a referendum, its Wales MEP had said.
John Bufton told UKIP’s annual conference: “I am confident we will take up our first seats in the Welsh Assembly following the elections in May 2011.
“We are the only major party to oppose the Welsh Assembly.”.
UKIP members who accept that devolution is here to stay and that opposing it is costing us votes rather than winning them can register their support for the UKIP 1997 Group which advocates equalising devolution in the UK so that all four home nations have devolved parliaments with the same powers as the Scottish Parliament.
No need to spend a fortune on a polling company to find out how many Tories are intending to vote for Farage, ConservativeHome have already got the answer - 64%!
The Tories are more split than ever under the expert leadership of David Camoron. Keep up the good work Dave.
Wrexham FM managers John Humberstone and Roy Norry came upon the idea after observing a virtual blanking of UKIP by the mainstream media. The adverts feature quotes and sound bites from UKIP leader Nigel Farage in what Roy Norry describes as “a powerful series of messages”.
The managers of the radio station checked broadcasting regulations of Internet radio stations and found there is no restriction in place. Roy Norry said “We’re pretty free to do as we wish, and in view of recent media reluctance in general to acknowledge UKIP, and in view of the overtly biased coverage that the BBC gave to everyone except UKIP in the Norwich by-election, I wanted a chance to redress the balance, and as it happens John was thinking along similar lines. There followed a discussion with a UKIP Wales representative who was delighted with the idea”.
The UKIP radio adverts are viewed by the managers of Wrexham FM as “an innovation in online community broadcasting”. Licensed FM stations in the UK which are regulated by Ofcom are not allowed to broadcast political adverts and stations that fail to observe this particular piece of Ofcom code are punished with heavy fines and a possible revocation of their broadcasting license. Roy Norry said “Why shouldn’t bona-fide political parties be allowed to advertise online if they choose to? The rule is as archaic as the one which for years prevented solicitors from advertising on radio stations.
“We are now in the digital age, an age of innovation and an age of pushing new boundaries, and Wrexham FM is once again leading the way in innovative programming by doing something that other radio stations dare not do and cannot do, legally.
“In addition, and just as important, all of my personal dealings with UKIP have been with an army of volunteer workers who live in the community and who work hard for the party because they believe that it will make their community and quality of life better, and that makes local political parties no different to other local community groups who are striving to better their environment through what they believe in, be it religious organisations, charitable groups or social organisations, all of which are allowed to promote themselves on radio. So why can’t local political parties? As far as I’m concerned there is a place for everyone on Wrexham FM if they care to make use of it”.
Tim thinks that Farage is dishonest because he stood for re-election as an MEP 2 months ago and is now standing for election to Westminster. He contrasts this with 3 Tory MEPs who didn't stand for re-election because they were going to stand for election as an MP.
Firstly, you don't vote for a person in EU elections, you vote for a party. People in the South West euroregion that Farage represents voted for UKIP, not for Nigel Farage.
Secondly, Bercow was elected Speaker on 22nd June and the EU election was on 4th June. Farage is standing against Bercow because of his expenses fiddles and failure to do anything as Speaker to improve the reputation of propriety of the House of Commons. How could he have known back in April when the nominations for the EU elections had to be in, that Bercow would be elected Speaker and be crap at the job?
Interesting that there was no suggestion a fortnight ago on ConservativeHome that Councillor Denise Headley is in any way dishonest for being elected a Liebour councillor and then defecting to the Tories. Surely that's a little more "dishonest" than an MEP standing for election as an MP with the intention of unseating the crooked and ineffectual incumbent?
Friday, 4 September 2009
Farage already has the backing of many Tories who would rather see a UKIP MP in Buckingham rather than Berscow and stands a real chance of unseating Berscow as Tories will be able to publically support and campaign on behalf of Farage without breaking the strict rules on Tory Party members supporting a candidate that isn't a Tory because the Speaker doesn't stand as a member of a party.
UKIP without Farage at the helm will be different, that's for sure. It will be a challenge to find someone as media-friendly and confident a speaker as Farage to front the party but UKIP is full of good people and I'm confident that we can find someone to lead us into a historic general election next year from which UKIP will emerge as a serious Westminster power.
Rather than write a leadership obituary (I'll leave that to the newspapers) we will instead kick off the speculation on who will replace Farage as leader. Here is my list of the top five contenders, in no particular order:
Nobody has declared an interest yet so I could be way off the mark but I reckon it'll be one of the above.
UKIP got a reasonable vote share and came in fourth, behind the LibLabCon and in front of the BNP and Greens. A fifth of the number of votes of the winning candidate isn't that bad a result in a by-election that the local Tories campaigned heavily for.
The Tories took 1,042 votes and Liebour took 1,038 - the narrowest of margins masking a big swing. The Lib Dims got just 223 votes compared to 200 for UKIP and 187 for the BNP.
And where were the BBC's 4th party of choice, the Greens? Seventh and last place with just 51 votes, 36 votes behind the independence candidate.
Iain Dale reckons that the swing from Liebour to Tory would translate into a 5,000 majority for the Tory PPC hoping to unseat the Liebour MP down that way. I disagree. A swing from left to right is not uncommon in a parish council election where it doesn't really matter whether the councillor is New Liebour or Blue Liebour. When it comes to an MP, a swing of that proportion is going to come down to a protest vote - either at something the incumbent has done or on ideological grounds such as euroscepticism or immigration.
The Tories will make massive gains in the next election from the general dissatisfaction with Liebour but they have nothing ideological to offer - they are Blue Liebour, socialists with blue ties. They are justified in expecting to wipe out Liebour in the general election (almost everyone will make gains from Liebour) but a relatively insignificant result such as this isn't an indicator of a general election result. It's like comparing apples with pears.
Thursday, 3 September 2009
Wherever Farage decided to stand, it was bound to hit the headlines but standing against Berscow is a definite headline-grabber given that the Speaker always stands uncontested by the big parties by Parliamentary convention.
We're in an era of political firsts at the moment. The party in power at Westminster has come 3rd in an EU election - the only party in the election to come out with less MEPs than they started with - and lost control of every local authority they controlled in England. The 4th largest political party in the UK is one that has no MPs at Westminster and the convention that the Speaker stands for re-election uncontested by major parties is effectively no longer respected having been contested by the SNP twice in the last two elections and will be again by UKIP next year.
Tim Montgomerie, the editor of Conservative Home, says that he'd be tempted to vote for Farage if he was in the constituency. Another Tory blogger, Right to Common Sense says the same thing. Andrew Allison and Dizzy, both heavyweight Tory bloggers, go one step further and say that they would actively campaign for Farage against Bercow. Iain Dale doesn't come out in favour of Farage in so many words but then you often have to read between the lines with Dale and then read between those lines to figure out what he's really thinking. He won't speak out against the Tories while they're on a winning streak but his failure to put down Farage speaks volumes. PoliticalBetting says that Ladbrokes have Farage at 4/1 to beat Bercow.
Farage can count not only on UKIP support during the next election but also on disaffected Tories, most of whom can't stand the fake conservative Bercow. And those Tories that think they can rely on Liebour voters ticking the box for Bercow to keep the seat are deluding themselves. Liebour voters would rather have Nigel Farage MP to fight against next time round than a Tory because they'll see him as a weaker candidate.
I might even have a punt on Farage myself, I reckon he's in with a good chance.
Wednesday, 2 September 2009
John Burke, of Duncummin House, Emly, Co Tipperary, was granted leave to serve short notice on the Taoiseach, Justice Minister and the State of his intended challenge.
Mr Burke told the High Court he believed the Irish electorate had on June 12, 2008, cast their vote in a referendum in which the result was a definite no.
Mr Burke told Judge Liam McKechnie he was seeking a judicial review of the Government's October 2 referendum on the simple grounds that No means No.
He added that no written evidence of legal changes to the Treaty had been put before the electorate.
He said there had been televised handshakes between the Taoiseach and his counterparts in the rest of Europe -- but no presentation of documentation guaranteeing change.
Mr Burke will be allowed to put his case tomorrow, in the presence of State lawyers, for leave to bring a judicial review seeking to strike down the forthcoming Lisbon II referendum.
"That vote still stands and the Taoiseach has since told the electorate they have been misinformed and that they will have to vote until such time as they decide to vote the opposite," Mr Burke told the court.
Mr Burke said the Taoiseach had told the electorate that if they voted again he would assure them that certain crucial issues, which would effect the well-being and stability of Ireland for generations to come, would be legally dismissed from the Treaty.
He had told the electorate they would effectively be voting on an amended treaty to that which they had already rejected.
Mr Burke said that by imposing a second vote on the Irish people the Taoiseach was in direct breach of his duty to uphold the Irish Constitution which could not co-exist with the Lisbon Treaty.
He proposes that the original vote be declared as passed and that the proposed forthcoming referendum be declared unconstitutional.