UKIP still help the federalists

Mr Farage appeared on “Have I got news for you”. His main political message was that Vince Cable is the best of the three “Chancellors”. He was fulsome in his praise of Mr Cable, and gave him strong support against his main rivals.

This just goes to show that UKIP are not dedicated to combatting federalism in the UK. Mr Cable is one of the leading Lib Dem Euro federalists. He not only wanted and voted for all the transfer of powrs that have happened under Nice, Amsterdam and Lisbon, he not only voted against a referendum on Lisbon having promsied one, but he wants the EU to take more of our powers of self government away. He supports the Uk joining the Euro in principle. He is a keen advocate of regional government which represents Brussels remodelling our democracy in a European burreaucratic way. He was the leading advocate of the ruinously expensive and unsuccessful bank nationalisations. He is against cutting National Insurance. He is a strange cheer leader for UKIP

Indeed, UKIP”s whole strategy for this General Election is more of the same. They promise not to stand against strong Eurosceptic other party candidates that can win, yet they are busily putting up UKIP candiates in seats with Conservative candidates who have voted against Nice, Amsterdam and Lisbon, who have voted for a refererendum, and think the UK would be better off out. As expected you can’t trust their word. They are determined to split the Eurosceptic vote in a way which doubtless delights Mr Cable.

Mr Farage is himself standing against the independent Speaker, himself a former Conservative Eurosceptic. This is against the convention of the UK democracy Mr Farage sometimes claims to hold dear. More importantly it means Mr Farage himself, the most newsworthy of the UKIP slate, is not taking the fight to a leading federalist MP and putting him on the spot as to why he has sold the UK down the river and done so much damage to our democracy by giving away so much power. Surely UKIP should be tearing into Lib Dem and Labour federalists who led the charge to damage our democracy by such huge transfers of decision making? Why isn’t Mr Farage standing against Mr Cable, for example?

Judge people by their actions. Mr Farage and his party are just another anti Conservative party. They are not furthering the cause of Uk democracy and independence with their interventions in this UK General election.

This entry was posted in Blog. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

94 Comments

  1. Nick
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 11:08 am | Permalink

    Mr Farage is himself standing against the independent Speaker, himself a former Conservative Eurosceptic. This is against the convention of the UK democracy Mr Farage sometimes claims to hold dear.

    It's shows what UK democracy is. It's a sham.

    Here you want to deny one constituency a vote or a choice that counts.

    ie. That a collection of MPs say that a constituency can't have a vote on the issues because you are going to get an MP of our choice, not your choice.

    The fact that you John think that allowing the voters a choice is a good thing shows that your in cuckoo land on voter choices.

    It's a particularly fascist viewpoint to say that the voters can have a choice so long as we make the choice for them.

    Shame on you

    Reply: You are clearly stung by my criticism that UKIP will not run high profile candidates in high profile campaigns against federalists who have been proiminent MPs. I have no argument against someone standing in the Speaker's constituency if they wish – it is of course their democratic right. But it does speak volumes about UKIP that they decide to run their highest profile candidate against a convention of UK Parliamentary democracy, and against a man who was a Eurosceptic before he became neutral on all issues in order to be able to be Speaker. All that points to them being anti Tory rather than anti federalist.

    • JimF
      Posted April 4, 2010 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

      I think the point that is being made here, and that you clearly don't "get" John, is that most people here now don't give a flying fig for "conventions of UK Parliamentary democracy", as conventions like this have been shown to work against the people who are paying for them, not for them! Please explain just how this particular convention helps promote democracy in the UK.

      • Steve Wokingham
        Posted April 5, 2010 at 12:11 am | Permalink

        I agree, and would like to add; Where are the Tory eurosceptics when you need them. Keeping quiet until after the election?

        DC will be "all right on the night" – I don't believe it.

        Reply: No, we are not keeping quiet – We have published a draft Bill to reassert sovereignty and have kept up pressure for a proper renegotiation – see this site.

        • A T
          Posted April 6, 2010 at 3:08 pm | Permalink

          Hague has also blow away any renegotiation position by stating that there will be no confrontation with the EU.

    • Acorn
      Posted April 5, 2010 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

      Primary elections are a good method of weeding out which candidate the voters want, not the one a party say you will have.

      The Conservatives have used the "open" form of primary for Totnes for 2010 election. The system will be too complicated for the UK electorate I fear. Particularly my favourite system:-
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonpartisan_blanket_

  2. Michael Read
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 12:08 pm | Permalink

    Mr Farage is for the NI cut. He told us so on Radio 4's "Any Questions".

    I didn't misshear.

    One charge you couldn't make against Mr Farage is the possibility of any ambiguity in his point of view. He only does 100 decibel foghorn.

    Farage is also in favour of legalising drugs subject to a Royal Commission. No bloody use to me. But he got his point across, again.

  3. Stuart Fairney
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

    The prefix "former" can be applied to a great many of the speakers positions.

  4. Michael Heaver
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

    I think you'll find those who publicly say that Britain would be better off out of the European Union will not have a UKIP candidate standing against them.

    Put your money where your mouth is John and name a Tory MP in such a position?

  5. Tim Worstall
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    I'm shocked! Shocked I tell you!

    The complaint about Nigel Farage is that he's standing in a seat he thinks he can win.

    What horrors and so unlike any of our other dear politicians.

    The decision of Mr. Redwood to stand for Wokingham rather than Kirkaldy and Cowdenbeath is of course motivated by entirely different considerations.

    Oh yes.

    (Disclosure, yes, I'm in UKIP, have stood for them and used to be a press officer.)

    Reply: The complaint is that UKIP say their aim is to get Eurosceptics into Parliament and get Euro federalists out, so why don't they stand against federalists?

    • Tim Worstall
      Posted April 4, 2010 at 10:10 pm | Permalink

      To which a fair response is that you wish to get G. Brown out of office but yet you don't stand against him.

      I'm normally on your side (despite a cute question I asked you at an ASI meeting) but this particular complaint of yours doesn't work.

  6. gac
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

    It may be convention that the Speaker gets a free passage into Parliament but as Mr Bercow has himself given up some of the conventions of that office, has a 'card carrying' member of the Labour family as his wife, then I think that the Conservative Party in his constituency should be allowed to deselect him as their candidate. He certainly ceased being a Tory long before he was voted into his present office.

    This is to say nothing of his performance in the House, particularly at PMQ's etc, when he allows the PM and Ministers to respond to questions with an anti-Tory rant – whether the rant is false or not!

    In this case perhaps a convention too far?

  7. Derek Buxton
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

    "Convention has it that the Speaker is unopposed", convention has it that we are a "representative democracy" and yet for many years this has not applied. I have no opinions on Farage, UKIP do seem to be the only party that want to do something positive about our membership of the EU. A membership that is costing us dear and is driving us down to third world standards by destroying the things that we gave the world. Such as Democracy, industrialisation, law and order, property rights and let's see wasn't it reffered to as "the mother of Parliaments". Most of these are begining to look like a sick joke as our freedoms are lost and Parliament,….yes where is Parliament these days?

  8. Donna W
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

    "Mr Farage is himself standing against the independent Speaker, himself a former Conservative Eurosceptic. This is against the convention of the UK democracy Mr Farage sometimes claims to hold dear"
    ————-

    And please God the good people of Buckingham vote for Farage and get Bercow out. This 'convention' needs ditching and now. Why should anyone get a free-ride onto the political gravy-train. If the people of Buckingham don't want Bercow, they shouldn't have to have him. It is quite wrong that the Speaker is MP for a Constituency which is then automatically disenfranchised.

    As for UKIP; I will be voting for them. I don't trust Cameron or the Tories one little bit when it comes to the EU. Why? Maastrict.

    We would be Better Off Out and that is what I will be voting for.

    • APL
      Posted April 4, 2010 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

      Donna W: "And please God the good people of Buckingham vote for Farage and get Bercow out. "

      From your lips to God's ear.

      Donna W: "Why should anyone get a free-ride onto the political gravy-train."

      Yes, why indeed? The convention got us a exemplary speaker the last time around didn't it?

      We need a new convention. Perhaps Parliament might nominate a slate of possible speakers who are then offered to the population at large to approve the final candidate.

      The speaker is after all supposed to be interested in the rights and privileges of the house, what better way than to have him accountable to the voting population at large?

      • Alan Wheatley
        Posted April 5, 2010 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

        As to a new convention, how about the Commons "borrowing" a Speaker and Team from the Lords cross-benchers for the duration of a parliament?

    • alan jutson
      Posted April 6, 2010 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

      Donna

      Have some sympathy with your Bercow out campaign, he did not get much support from the Conservatives when elected did he !.

      Think the sensible thing to do other than in the above constituancy is vote Conservative at a General Election and UKIP at the European elections. You then have a REAL CHANCE of limited success in both. IE a pincer movement against Europe and Brown.

  9. Devil's Kitchen
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

    John,

    Are you seriously suggesting that the Tories are an EUsceptic party?

    Remind me, John, which party signed Britain up to…

    • the European Communities Act
    • the Single European Act
    • the Maastricht Treaty

    And don't tell me that John Major wouldn't have taken us into the Euro if the financial mismanagement of the country hadn't forced us to crash out of the ERM.

    Frankly, John, as far as the EU is concerned, the Tories are, at best, all mouth and no trousers and, at worst, liars and hypocrites.

    Reply: I deeply resent your inaccurate rant – I voted No in 1975 and have fought against every transfer of power ever since.

    DK

    • APL
      Posted April 4, 2010 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

      JR: "I deeply resent your inaccurate rant – I voted No in 1975 and have fought against every transfer of power ever since."

      It is obvious to everyone reading your reply that you are trying a little misdirection.

      Your position on the EU is not in doubt, it is the actions of your despicable colleagues who have undermined unity in the party at every opportunity these are the people that have led the party to the state where faced with the worst most incompetent government for fifty years the Tory party can barely pull ten points ahead in the polls on the threshold of an election.

      Sadly, these are the same people who are running the party now.

      I would give a gold sovereign to see some evidence of the much vaunted influence you as a right winger claim to wield within the party.

    • HK
      Posted April 4, 2010 at 7:07 pm | Permalink

      Regrettably, JR, you do not set the Conservative party's policy on the EU.

      If you did, UKIP wouldn't have been the #2 party in the 2009 EU elections, and there would probably be no need for UKIP to even exist.

      The unfortunate fact remains that the Conservatives are an almost unknown quantity on the EU. Personally I would still give them the benefit of the doubt, and I agree with your assessment that a vote for UKIP risks advancing EU integration, by weakening the Conservatives and strengthening the LibDem and Labour parties in the election.

      Nevertheless, the quietness of the Conservatives on the EU since the Lisbon Treaty about-face feeds concerns that it will be more of the same when (if) the Conservatives are in power, which makes an anti-EU protest vote (UKIP) far more attractive.

    • Kevin Peat
      Posted April 4, 2010 at 9:35 pm | Permalink

      Was this a rant against the Tories or a rant against John Redwood ?

      I'm confused by the reply.

  10. Julian
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    JR: when you say Farage's praise of Vince Cable was 'fulsome' do you mean it was enthusiastic? Or do you mean it was insincere? I've noticed the illiterates on the BBC have started to use this word when describing something done with enthusiasm because they don't really know what fulsome means. I can't believe you are illiterate John so I am assuming you mean Farage's praise of Cable was "buttery: unpleasantly and excessively suave or ingratiating in manner or speech". Am I correct?

    • TemporiParendum
      Posted April 8, 2010 at 10:57 am | Permalink

      Julian

      Main Entry: ful·some
      Pronunciation: ˈfu̇l-səm
      Function: adjective
      Etymology: Middle English fulsom copious, cloying, from full + -som -some
      Date: 13th century
      1 a : characterized by abundance : copious b : generous in amount, extent, or spirit <a> c : being full and well developed
      2 : aesthetically, morally, or generally offensive
      3 : exceeding the bounds of good taste : overdone
      4 : excessively complimentary or flattering : effusive

      — ful·some·ly adverb

      — ful·some·ness noun

      usage The senses shown above are the chief living senses of fulsome. Sense 2, which was a generalized term of disparagement in the late 17th century, is the least common of these. Fulsome became a point of dispute when sense 1, thought to be obsolete in the 19th century, began to be revived in the 20th. The dispute was exacerbated by the fact that the large dictionaries of the first half of the century missed the beginnings of the revival. Sense 1 has not only been revived but has spread in its application and continues to do so. The chief danger for the user of fulsome is ambiguity. Unless the context is made very clear, the reader or hearer cannot be sure whether such an expression as “fulsome praise” is meant in sense 1b or in sense 4.

  11. Eric Arthur Blair
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

    Perhaps you could ask Mr. Speaker whether, in his role as Speaker elected to clear up MP sleaze, he has received any correspondence from members of the public alleging that there are many Members of Parliament who have committed treason, sedition, and breached the tenets of the Bill of Rights 1689 in voting for and being complicit in the signing of the Lisbon Treaty…

    If he has received any such correspondence (clue: he has), perhaps you could ask him what he has done about those Members of Parliament?

  12. Ian E
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

    Standing against Bercow is scarcely anti-tory since the bulk of the Conservative Party detest the man. Remind me, perhaps, how many Tory MPs voted for Bercow as Speaker? Was it 3?

  13. Paul from MK UK
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

    All that points to them being anti Tory rather than anti federalist."

    I tend to agree with Nick. Votes belong to voters and it is not for political parties to decide for whom voters can vote. But if we are talking about the Tory Party, UKIP and democracy, this is a rather small issue. UKIP have a clear aim on what to do about the biggest threat to traditional British democracy, the EU.

    I think, that with Cable and Federalism, you are hiding your real concerns – a rise in the popularity of UKIP at the expense of the Tory Party.

    But you cannot blame UKIP when the Tory party's attempt to become a much broader church results in a loss of traditional voters. If so many people who traditionally vote Tory have become so disenchanted, you should be looking inside the party at its leadership and policies, not out.

    A Tory Party that wants people to vote for it should be offering sensible alternative policies, not more of the same Labour ones. Meanwhile ‘Blue/Green’ Cameron seems to want to ‘outdo’ Labour on its EU driven green-policy path to bankrupting Britain with punishing taxes

    Farage gave a good example on the programme when he pointed out that imposing harsh CO2 taxes would have no noticeable impact on Global Warming. Those that have bothered to investigate the science, rather than just accepting a politically motivated agenda touting a cooked up ‘consensus’ realise he was speaking the truth.

    The more you look at UKIP, the more they look to be where the Tory Party should be.
    Reply : UKIP are just trying to wreck the Tories, which I predict they will not do. They should start firing at the federalists for a change.

    • Ian E
      Posted April 4, 2010 at 6:06 pm | Permalink

      I know you are having a tough time here over this issue but, really, to accuse UKIP of trying to destroy the Tory Party is laughable. I seem to recall that Lord Pearson said he would dissolve UKIP if Cameron promised a substantive EU referendum! An instant 4 to 5% boost to the Tory vote instantly available (probably more I suspect).

      Reply: I doubt he meant it or could deliver it. UKIP have made so many offers based on Eurosceptic hurdles, but when the Conservatives jump them they just set another hurdle.

  14. He's Spartacus
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

    John, If you gave us a referendum on EU membership and repealed the 2005 Criminal Justice Act there would be no need for UKIP, and I suspect Nigel would be a member of the Tory Party.

    Meanwhile, he must take the line of least resistance to a seat in the Commons.

    Reply: We have been told so many different stories – rule out the Euro in principle, vote against Lisbon, demand powers back etc etc – but UKIP never means it. They just keep on bashing the one Eurosceptic party that might win

    • Winston's Black
      Posted April 4, 2010 at 5:39 pm | Permalink

      Didn't Malcom Pearson offer the Conservatives an electoral pact on condition they became properly Eurosceptic?

    • Derek Buxton
      Posted April 5, 2010 at 5:12 pm | Permalink

      Sorry John, but can you point to one instance of "EUrosceptism" in you party leadership. All the statements I have heard from both Cameron and Hague have quite clearly been in favour of the EU. They cannot influence it in any way but keep on with this "in Europe but not of it" or somesuch nonsense. The EU does not work like that, it subornes politicians to do it's work for it, they then become part of it.

      The EU works as it was designed to work, that is anti democratic and totally unaccountable to the people.

  15. Antisthenes
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 4:01 pm | Permalink

    Many of UKIP policies resonate with Conservative voters, they see many of their policies as policies that the Conservative should have or adaptions of them at least.

    The EU is a bold concept and has all the trappings of being of immense benefit for all citizens encompassed in it. However it appears to have lost it's way, it is being directed not by democratic will of the people but by fiat and is more interested in imposing authoritarian rule than making life economically and socially better for the European people.

    What is it with politicians why do they always take the stance that they no best. Trust the people for a change and give them back their hard won democratic rights. EU is to Europe what Labour is to Britain. Get rid of Labour then go about changing the EU so that it does that for which it was originally intended.

  16. david
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 4:44 pm | Permalink

    All Farage was saying was that the two with a chance of becoming chancellor were talking total deceptive rubbish.

    You don't still think the Tory party is any sort of opponents of euro-federalism, surely.

    • Tapestry
      Posted April 5, 2010 at 4:12 am | Permalink

      The Euro is unravelling. The EU will not survive the ending of the Euro. UKIP will soon be out of a job. This is their last moment to try yet once more to save the EU in Britain by helping Labour win a fourth time. Gordon Brown and the BBC are providing oxygen by featuring them every day on TV. Poor Fools. Such nice poor fools. But fools. Redwood is right as usual. UKIP helps our enemies, but are not bright enough to realise they are being used.

      • Michele
        Posted April 6, 2010 at 12:25 pm | Permalink

        You may well be right but the Tories don't deserve to get back the UKIP voters as they don't listen and act on what the voters are saying.

  17. Winston's Black
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

    A bit rich for somebody whom supports a party whose leader gave a "cast-iron" guarantee of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty then reneged at the first available opportunity to bleat about breach of Parliamentary convention.

    As regards your smear re Have I Got News For You the party that came second in the EU elections was not even allowed to participate in the rigged fiasco you dignify with the title debate so why shouldn't he express a view as to whom performed best?

    The Conservative Party are just as Europhile as Labour and the Lib Dems they just make a few Eurosceptic noises at election time to rally the grass roots footsoldiers, most of whom think very similarly to UKIP!

  18. Winston's Black
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

    ….."Judge people by their actions. Mr Farage"……

    Heath 1972
    Thatcher 1986
    Major 1992
    Cameron 2009

    I suggest he has done exactly what you advocate!

  19. Stephen
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

    Well Mr Redwood, at least we know which side of the 'Europe' debate UKIP are on.

    • Tapestry
      Posted April 5, 2010 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

      without the EU, UKIP are out of a job. That is why they assist the EU in British elections. Yes. It's entirely clear, yet for some reason, Ukippers don't see or don't want to see. They are the mugs.

      • Stephen
        Posted April 5, 2010 at 6:27 pm | Permalink

        "without the EU, UKIP are out of a job."

        Now you've got it…

        Stephen

  20. Ken Adams
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 5:48 pm | Permalink

    Sorry Mr Redwood I do not see the Tory party as EUsceptic! Some of its members are and some of its MPs like yourself are. But unfortunately that does not seem to permeate upwards to those who are likely to become our next government.

    The argument you advance that UKIP is dividing the EUrosceptic vote should rightly be viewed the other way round, it is the conservatives who are doing exactly that.

  21. Paul Greenwood
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    John
    if DC offered a referendum on EU within the first parliament UKIP supporters would return to the tories .
    Whilst you have been actively fighting against further integration, the leadership hasn't.
    Democracy is about voting for the party who represent your views, if DC wants our votes, then he is the one who has to change, not us !

    • Michele
      Posted April 6, 2010 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

      Precisely. You vote for the party who represent your views.

      There's no listening going on.

      It's very easy to mock UKIP and its supporters and blame them.

  22. Norman
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 6:15 pm | Permalink

    I can understand, and have sympathy with, both sides of the argument. Yes, UKIP should put it's money where it's mouth is and stand against the most federalist candidates but it is their mission to give the European question more prominence and bring it on to the front pages more. They obviously see the best way to do this as Nigel Farage standing against the speaker.

    UKIP know they'll never form a government, they know they'll never have more than a handful of MP's. How are Eurosceptics to achieve their aims? Try to change the Conservative Party from within? The Conservatives, by their words and policies have shown that they are happy with things the way they are and have no plans to change things.

    There will be no referendum on the EU Constitution so where does that leave Eurosceptics to go? It's not a question of no more power are to be given to Europe, there are none left to give in the minds of many.

    • Michele
      Posted April 6, 2010 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

      Yep!

  23. chefdave
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 7:59 pm | Permalink

    This is a great move by Farage.

    I never knew about this little convention until he decided to stand against Bercow, and it demonstrates just how committed he is to smashing the vested interests of those that have done so much to ruin this country.

    Its time a few more politicians showed a bit more UKIPesque courage and started questioning and actively challenging the way we do things around here. Because clearly, what we've been doing up until now hasn't been working.

    • Michele
      Posted April 6, 2010 at 12:32 pm | Permalink

      Say what you will about the bloke but he does speak up for many, many people.

      I don't hear any conversative candidates talking for me – and yet Nigel does so regularly.

      Somebody has to speak out – thank God for him.

  24. Max Van Horn
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 8:43 pm | Permalink

    John, I have been a Conservative voter all of my life.The party no longer represents or reflects my beliefs.In a nut shell…minimum taxation,small government,free trade,anti-state interference,true democracy and out of Federalist Europe now.When the party offers this and not red-toryism I will return to the fold.The Conservative party have deserted me and many like-minded.You have left us no choice.

    • Michele
      Posted April 6, 2010 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

      Totally and why don't they see this. It's so frustrating.

  25. Devil's Kitchen
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 8:59 pm | Permalink

    John,

    "Reply: I deeply resent your inaccurate rant – I voted No in 1975 and have fought against every transfer of power ever since."

    Yes, I know this and I have nothing against you personally—indeed, I supported you in your leadership bid many years ago.

    But I was not talking about your personal record: I was talking, as you were, about the record of the Conservative Party in power.

    So, given that, perhaps you would like to tell me what, exactly, was inaccurate about my "rant"? Do you deny that all of these measures were brought in by the Tory Party?

    If you don't deny this—and, really, I'd find it very difficult to see how you could do so, since they are matters of historical record—then perhaps you could tell me why, precisely, I should believe that the Tories are any more EUsceptic now than they were then?

    DK

    • Tapestry
      Posted April 5, 2010 at 1:50 pm | Permalink

      You should pose your question the other way round. Viz – 'Why should I believe that helping the Labour Party is helpful to the eurosceptic cause?' as that is what your lot are proposing to do.

      You only ever ask one question. This is lop-sided thinking.

      You are prepared to act as helpers to your enemies because you fear your friends might not come to your assistance as fast as you would like.

      You must realise that no party can get past the media gate-keepers with an openly eurosceptic outlook. This is why Redwoods are hidden from view. UKIP gets media purely because stopping the Conservatives is the aim of the BBC and the government.

      I am all for people acting like mugs in a democracy if they wish, but self-righteous mugs do get a little tiresome. The media will not set UKIP up as the power in the land, only use you for now, and make you feel important.

      When the media is kicking your ****, that's when you are doing some good. Right now you get your ****s licked daily.

      Thanks for trying to destroy our one chance of winning our freedom from state totalitarian power in 2010, that is the Conservatives. But let's not ask Ukppers to try to look beneath the surface, or read between lines. Most of them need 3 X magnification just to read the text.

      • Ian B
        Posted April 6, 2010 at 2:58 pm | Permalink

        Anyone who believes that Cameron's maoist wheeze to deluge us with state "activists" is somehow a chance of "winning our freedom from state totalitarian power" is in cloud cuckoo land. Cameron's Tory party is an entirely progressive- that is, moral socialist- party which will only expand the state further, by the underhanded method of using the progressive charity/NGO network to launder the taxpayer funding.

        When the Tories were looking for "clear blue water" those years ago, they could have- had the party as a whole had any ideological backbone- become a real party of individualism, the free market and the ending of vested interests. Instead, the reds have won and are just offering more, ever bigger, government, to "fix the broken Britain" that politicians with the same ideas broke in the first place.

        We cannot keep voting for the same people who, with every parliament elected, expand the totalitarian state and oppress us ever more. Thatcher and Callaghan at least offered a visible political and ideological choice in 1979, whatever one may think of either of them. There is no such ideological choice available now. We can have Big Government, Big Government or, from the liberals, Big Government. Many of the British people are desperate to vote against this received wisdom; of being a moral socialist province of Theeu, but there is no major party offering any such choice; so we have to turn to minor ones just to "send a message" even if they have no hope of winning.

        Whatever Mr Redwood's personal views are, his party does not represent them. Because of our perverse system in which we must vote for local party wallahs to choose the executive, who are then an elective dictatorship until the next election, we have no democratic means of registering our disapproval except to refuse to vote for the b*gg*rs, as a party. My local Tory MP is a decent enough chap, but if I vote for him it will be interpreted as support for Cameron's progressive authoritarianism. So, I must withrdraw my vote from the local MP.

        We only have a choice of the frying pan or the fire at this election. Only a fool votes for the fire to escape the frying pan.

      • Monoi
        Posted April 6, 2010 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

        Self righteous mug? It takes one to know one.

        Your little world is obviously simpler for you to comprehend with a labour/tory divide, but since that divide is hard to see nowadays, even with 3X magnification, why vote tory?

        Maybe it's the 1st time people realise this. That scares the tories, which is good but as they are doing nothing about it, is a bit pointless.

        According to their posters, the people they are after are the ones who never voted tory before.

        So UKip is the next port of call.

      • Mr Ecks
        Posted April 6, 2010 at 4:39 pm | Permalink

        Tapestry

        You must be joking. If "David Cameron's Torys"TM are our only chance against EU tyranny we may as well give up now because he already has. Read between the lines?–yeah I can do that–"I could have said–Yes we will have a referrendum and it will be binding regardless of what the dross of the EU want but instead I came up with waffle about No more loss of and whatever–". That proves your man is going to rip the EU's guts out before his backside has hardly warmed the chair at No 10. And I don't know why I'm so anti-Europe as I am a Dutchman.

  26. Steve Tierney
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

    John, you always make a lot of sense, but this time I think you've talked yourself into a corner.

    I suspect that at this point UKIP are in strategic mode so as to come out after the general election with the most influence and success that they are able.

    I suspect they see a potential for gaining some real momentum this time – galvanised by our previous position on Lisbon.

    I can't say I blame them. As a dedicated Conservative I would obviously prefer they go up in Lib Dem/ Labour battlegrounds. But they really don't generally see us as "allies" anymore. Well, not all of us, anyway, so they'll go up everwhere they think they can make an impact.

    • Michele
      Posted April 6, 2010 at 12:35 pm | Permalink

      Just as anyone would do

  27. Doppelganger
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

    This is the most and perhaps only pathetic post I have read on Mr Redwood's blog. I won't tediously bother repeating others better criticisms. But I will note the so called convention of not standing against the Speaker has been breached before. I cannot think of much better than Bercow being deservedly kicked out of the Commons. John Redwood is one of the few Tory MPs I respect. This post gives me more reason not to vote Conservative.

  28. Kevin Peat
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 9:32 pm | Permalink

    In not having the option to cross 'none of the above' on our voting slips UKIP is seen as a way of registering an anti EU vote. Are you telling us we don't even have this option now ?

    I think that our problems are exacerbated by EU membership. It is disingenuous for the Conservatives to say that they will limit immigration from 'outside the EU'. This promise means nothing at all.

  29. Socrates
    Posted April 4, 2010 at 11:42 pm | Permalink

    Whilst it is politic to attack UKIP as anti Conservative, the real problem in getting their supporters to vote Tory is that they don't trust the Conservatives to be sufficiently eurosceptic. There is little point, as far as they are concerned, in voting Tory so that Cameron can sell the UK out instead of Gordo. Having the current candidate selection committee (all three of them) choosing Conservative candidates is to UKIP supporters the political equivalent of putting King Herod in charge of the maternity ward.

    Having europhiles in charge of choosing conservative candidates is anathema to anyone who might think of supporting the Tories.

    The real problem with the Tory Party's credibility is the number of europhile sleepers lurking in its midst. It is just like the old days with Russian moles.

    Reply: I think you will find the new potential intake of Conservative MPs is very Eurosceptic. The party will not welcome candidates who want the Euro or more transfers of power that Lib dems and Labour want

  30. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 3:09 am | Permalink

    Whether the Conservative Party is a proper Eurosceptic party is something on which the jury is still out. We hear that there will be a renegotiation of our relationship with the EU but little is given of the details and the failure to make it a key issue of the campaign is disheartening. The need is effectively to repeal the Maastricht, Nice, Amsterdam and Lisbon treaties. Publish a draft bill and put a two ring Europe (federal nations, non-federal nations) firmly on the agenda. Then persuade as many nation as possible to follow our lead.

    You have 18 months after taking office. That's all.

    Reply: Bill Cash and I have published a draft Bill to reassert UK sovereignty.

    • Tapestry
      Posted April 5, 2010 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

      The Euro is collapsing. The German constitutional court has forbidden extension of further powers from Lisbon without further treaties to be ratified by the German parliament.

      The Conservatives promise a referendum on all future treaties.

      Throw it all away.

      Well done UKIP, or maybe try reading around the subject of the erosion of EU power taking place, or thinking about how it will happen further. It is pointless in ex[pending political capital in demanding demand repeal of treaties when events are doing most of the work for you.

      UKIP's thought processes ended in 2001, but history moves on.

      A more intelligent UKIP would be greatly appreciated.

      • A T
        Posted April 6, 2010 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

        Tap – the euro is not collapsing – it will be used as a beneficial crisis to push forward EU economic policy integration. That was always the intention – there is no way that those who set up the euro did not foresee as Greece-type event – they may be evil, but they are not stupid.

      • Mr Ecks
        Posted April 6, 2010 at 4:45 pm | Permalink

        The point of Lisbon is that once they have it they don't need any more referendums//da? of any sort so its another worthless promise from Cameron. Tapestry, you shout about us all pulling together but when we win, those like me, who hate the EU and wish us out of it (and indeed I want the EU destroyed totally) will be stabbed in the back as soon as the election is over.

    • Lindsay McDougall
      Posted April 5, 2010 at 3:42 pm | Permalink

      That's a very good start and you are both to be congratulated. However, it will be more effective when it is supported by William Hague and David Cameron, especially if we are elected. A prominent resignation from a Conservative cabinet would be a price worth paying.

  31. adam
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 4:18 am | Permalink

    But no anti EU voter can credibly vote Conservative. The tories are still run by the world order elites, not the british right wing.
    They offer no vision outside of embracing the current world order, run by merchant banks and transnationals via Bilderberg, Davos etc. Not the people

    Tories could offer Nigel Farage a job as a Tory party MP

    in other news:
    The cultural extermination has begun

    "…the mighty English Channel's status could be reduced to that of a mere creek if Brussels has its way.
    Officials want to rename it 'the Anglo-French Pond' as part of a plan to bolster the notion of an EU superstate.

    "More than £1million, much of it coming from the British taxpayer, is being spent drawing up a new map to be distributed to schools and bureaucrats.
    It defies centuries of history by wiping out current national borders to foster 'cultural
    identification' between regions and encourage greater integration. "
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1263468/E

  32. Eotvos
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 7:18 am | Permalink

    Mr Redwood, I really think your time would be better spent on matters other than defending Bercow. (Left out personal attacks on bercow and Martin)

    Reply: If you read what I wrote I am commenting on the actions of Mr Farage and UKIP, not on the qualities of the Speaker. Surely a proper Pull Out Eurosceptic party should stand against prominent Euro federalists to prove it is serious about what it says is its main argument? Seeking to run a campaign about expenses is scarcely wise in view of the history of UKIP MEPs.

  33. Submariner
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 8:31 am | Permalink

    John,
    I think you are missing the point made by many of the posters in this thread. You keep describing the Conservative Party as Eurosceptic. I accept that you personally may be, but you are not the party. I can only judge the party by its actions, and it has a long and sorry record of signing up for further European integration. The Conservatives are responsible for us being bound by the European Communities Act, the Single European Act and the Maastricht Treaty, and show no sign of providing us with an in/out referendum on EU membership. To point that out is hardly a rant.

    Reply: I am talking about my views and actions – from voting "No" in 1975, through opposing all subsequent transfers of power to the EU and helping lead the campaign against the Euro. So why then do UKIP put up a candidate against me?

    • Winston's Black
      Posted April 5, 2010 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

      Mr Redwood

      A lot of Conservatives make Eurosceptic noises at election time but vote and act in a Europhile fashion when it comes to the crunch.

      It is my understanding that UKIP wil not stand against those MPs whom have signed up to BOO (Better Off Out) and have a proven track record of both speaking and ACTING Eurosceptic.

      Have you signed up to BOO or the British Declaration of Independence as organised by Rodney Atkinson and others?

      If the answer to my question is 'no' then that is why UKIP are standing against you I suspect.

      Reply: I have co-sponsored a Bill to Parliament to reassert UK Parliamentary sovereignty – in line with the BDI.

      • Ian B
        Posted April 6, 2010 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

        "I have co-sponsored a Bill to Parliament to reassert UK Parliamentary sovereignty".

        That's very laudable, but doesn't answer the OP's question.

        It's also not much use, frankly. The EU is a federal project. Asking to be in it but not federal is like being in a swimming club and staying out of the pool.

        EUphiles are quite clear- if not particularly forthcoming- about the aim of The Project. It is to create a new federal nation state called The EU (eventually it will probably have another name change to just "Europe"), much like the USA, but without the democracy or constitutional safeguards for citizens.

        Mr Redwood, the only options are to either join the project whole-heartedly, or to leave it. You can't be sovereign in a federal system because by definition there is another sovereign- the federal government- above you. The US states may have thought at one time they were part of a voluntary project "working together", but they found out eventually that they weren't, and that was under a system with, at the outset, much stronger "state's rights" than the EU.

        It's either in or out. Any other position is basically dishonest.

        Reply: Nonsense – the Bill gives embodiment to the Declaration of Independence you asked me to sign, so it is one better than the site. Of course I support a self governing UK, and voted for one in 1975.

    • Derek Buxton
      Posted April 5, 2010 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

      John, sorry to come back but I did not know that UKIP put up a candidate against you, that is perhaps a shame. Except, we know your attitude to the EU, you're against, fair enough, unfortunately the party leadership is not you. And however you look at the weasel words we get from them, they favour the EU. That is why they constantly conflate Europe with the EU. "Yes", the say, " you cannot be against that nice place just across from us", we are not, we are against the rule of the EU.

  34. Iain
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    Its a question of trust, basically we don't trust you lot in Westminster. When we thought we knew the values of the political parties, we find these values are a tradable. When we thought we had a promise, we find these promises are worthless. When we got a manifesto undertaking, we find the undertaking was ratted on. Look at what Cameron has put in place of the referendum he promised us on Lisbon, he promises us to repatriate some ill defined powers, by some unknown method, and some time for him that isn't very urgent. All his 'principled' opposition to Lisbon has melted away, he has bought Lisbon in its entirety, in fact Hague, this so called arch EUsceptic in the Shadow Cabinet, is fully supportive of the EU Foreign Office and is going to second his best people to make it work. Some EUsceptic.

    I bet you that after 4 years of a Conservative Government, not one power worth having will have been repatriated, and we will have sunk ever deeper into EU integration, that is why people look to vote for UKIP, their party stands for something, getting out of the EU, can you say the Conservatives stand for anything worthwhile over the EU, anything that people can trust?

  35. Andrew Duffin
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 10:01 am | Permalink

    "…voted against a referendum on Lisbon having promsied one…"

    Now, who does that remind me of?

  36. Alan
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 10:03 am | Permalink

    As a supporter of the EU I have no problems at all with the eurosceptic vote being 'split' in the coming election. I do however have problems with the implications behind this view of elections.

    Mr Bercow is not standing as a parliamentary candidate. He puts forward no policy on the EU, nor indeed on anything else. That is not a platform on which to be elected to Parliament. No one should vote for someone who has no policies. There is something badly wrong when this is seen not only as normal but as the accepted way of doing things.

    The main political parties do not put forward anyone in opposition to Mr Bercow. That is not right: there will be people in that constituency who want to express their views on whether Labour or Conservatives should be running the country. They are deprived of this opportunity. The main parties are expressing their contempt for the electorate of that constituency.

    This all illustrates very well some parts of what is wrong with a democracy based on constituencies. We need something better and more democratic that enables those of us who live in constituencies which are not marginal or where for one reason or another we cannot affect the outcome to have a say in who governs us.

  37. Ken Adams
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 10:31 am | Permalink

    Mr Redwood you do seem genuinely not to understand why UKIP would field a candidate against someone who is EUsceptic, you keep stressing that UKIP ought to stand against only federalists.

    What you see as an inconstancy is not that at all, it is being realistic, as a Conservative voter I no longer believe the Conservative party will do anything to address the problems of the EU and our democracy, hence from my point of view a vote for them is a wasted vote.

    So by voting against Conservatives we might end up with more federalists in parliament, you need to ask yourself what is the difference between a federalist and a non affective EUsceptic MP, with both we end up with more EU and less democracy in this country.

    So I will be voting for a party that openly and clearly states that if elected it will do something very serious to reverse the drift of power to the EU and would arrange a different and more acceptable relationship with the EU for this country.

    I will not be voting for a party that makes vague empty unsustainable promises about going cap in hand to its masters in Brussels to beg for one or two powers to be returned to our own parliament

  38. waramess
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    If I was the author of this blog I would have to think hard and long about the UKIP support shown here.

    These are not UKIP invaders but almost certainly diisaffected Tory voters who would prefer to be voting mainstream.

    As with all things it is far easier to lose support than to get it back and a material support for UKIP in the next election will certainly be grist for the right wing mill

  39. Peter van Leeuwen
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

    Shoudn't UKIP aspirant MPs stand in constituencies where they make the best chance? With 16 to 17% popular support they have never made it to Westminster yet. As such, their views aren't heard in Westminster. And so they keep bothering us with their clown-like behavior in the European Parliament, not realizing that the European Parliament has no authority to vote on UK cessation. That decision is for Westminster.

  40. Richard
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 1:03 pm | Permalink

    Its interesting that all the responses to this piece above focus on Farage and UKIP. UKIP are an irrelevance – a single issue pressure group like the Greens and the BNP. Scratch the surface and their views are absurd and inconsistent on many subjects, one of which you highlight. Pro-market right wingers who believe in a free society waste their vote by voting UKIP, and make 5 more years of Brown more likely.

    Why arn't more people on to you excellent point that Mr Cable is the intellectual godfather of the catastrophic bank nationalisation policy? There's almost a conspiracy of silence on this. Obviously one doesn't expect, for example, BBC interviewers to raise serious questions on it, but the Tory front bench are remarkably reticent about slamming the policy. As has been pointed out on this site, taxpayers have been lumbered with liabilities of £100bns, with no realistic possibility of exit without substantial losses, and the UK banking industry is now a growth-destroying oligoploy. The authors of this policy – Brown mainly of course, but also supporters like Cable – must be held to account.

    • A T
      Posted April 6, 2010 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

      Re. single issue – I'd take their energy policy over Cameron's. He's set to waste many £10 bn s with windmills and the mind-blowing solar feed-in tariff.

      • Richard
        Posted April 6, 2010 at 6:41 pm | Permalink

        He'll probably find a way of climbing down on this if, as looks likely the theory of AGW turns out to be wrong or at least grossly exaggerated

        • A T
          Posted April 7, 2010 at 10:31 am | Permalink

          It has been shown to so. And he hasn't climbed down, he's upped the ante.

        • A T
          Posted April 7, 2010 at 10:32 am | Permalink

          Sorry – " to be so ".

  41. gac
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    DC could still have a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty/Constitution, should he so wish, on the basis of asking the people how they would have voted if Labour had not reneged on yet another promise.

    A vote winner and commits him to nothing whatever the result.

    Doesn't take a quantum chemist ….

  42. David Ross
    Posted April 5, 2010 at 5:51 pm | Permalink

    This hasn't been a convention for some time now. A quick bit of googling tells me that the SNP stood against Speaker Michael Martin in the 2001 and 2005 elections. They have had parliamentary representation since the 1960s and as we know form a minority government in Edinburgh. It is more accurately, a convention between the 3 main parties.

  43. Nigel Lusby
    Posted April 6, 2010 at 12:47 am | Permalink

    What every UKIP supporter who has attacked John here has refused to address is his central question, which is:

    Why is UKIP determined to field candiates against openly anti-europe Tories rather than against guaranteed pro-europe Labour or Lib-Dems, or indeed ( the few) openly pro-europe Tories?

    Let's put it simply, campaigning against any anti-europe Tory splits the anti-europe vote, and will allow Labour or Lib-dems to win the seat. That will hand Gordon Brown the election, and will ensure the complete opposite of what UKIP claims to want.

    As it stands: A vote for UKIP = more power for Brussels!

    UKIPPERs – if you believe in Britain, vote Conservative!

    • adam
      Posted April 7, 2010 at 3:16 am | Permalink

      You could equally say why do the Conservatives field anti EU candidates, isn't it to steal the natural UKIP vote

  44. ps
    Posted April 6, 2010 at 1:01 am | Permalink

    Labour and Brown are what needs stopping at all cost.

    Europe and the single currency is falling to bits on its own. It is a no growth area drowning in its own bureaucracy.

    China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, Canada, Australia & Far East is where the future growth is coming from. Britain has a much better relationship commercially and culturally with most of these areas than other western countries.

    Please get the conservatives elected and then allow the economy to reintegrate where the UK's natural advantage is. Please make the priority lifting as much unnecessary legislation from business large & small(& from the population) to allow for rapid economic growth in the future.

  45. Derek Buxton
    Posted April 6, 2010 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

    Sorry PS, I fear the EU will continue for some time yet, unfortunately. That is guaranteed given the attitude of the three main parties, they love it. To them, what is not to love, no democracy, no accountability, non-elected officials issuing diktats all waved through on the nod by compliant governments, marvellous for them.

    On the other hand we are paying a stiff price for their love affair, £60billion a year for a start, high food prices, high energy bills, then we have to face the huge cost of carbon reduction, many, many billions of pounds, for what? Looking around one can only conclude that it is in order to destroy the civilisation built by the Western countries over many years. What a sad legacy we have been left by our politicians of all parties, instead of boasting they should be wearing sackcloth and ashes.

  46. A T
    Posted April 6, 2010 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

    I'd have more confidence in UKIP on EU issues than the Conservative Party. Has there been a statement on the suggestion of central economic governance in response to the Greek crisis ?

    • Tapestry
      Posted April 6, 2010 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

      http://the-tap.blogspot.com/2010/04/greece-quits-

      Greece has given up on the Euro and is borrowing in US Dollars. Haven't you noticed?

      • Lindsay McDougall
        Posted April 6, 2010 at 7:37 pm | Permalink

        Greece is borrowing from the IMF (a soft loan?), a fund to which UK taxpayers contribute. Meanwhile, the contribution of the Euro Zone is limited to guarantees that are unlikely to be needed. France and Germany are very good at being 'Communitaire' and holier than thou, except when it costs them money.

        • adam
          Posted April 7, 2010 at 2:12 pm | Permalink

          The IMF get to run the country using our money as the bribe.
          Typical of how we are being exploited.

          Silence on all the real issues from the establishment politicians

  47. A T
    Posted April 6, 2010 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    And going back to the main topic, there has been a perception that Cable is more robust over the need to cut public spending than Osborne has been. Why has that perception been allowed to persist ? We have Cameron saying that the opposite of Big Government is some nebulous concept called Big Society. Yeah, right.

    • adam
      Posted April 7, 2010 at 3:07 am | Permalink

      Apparently he is just in love with that darling Saul Alinksy
      Just like the neo Cons who follow Trotsky
      we now have the neo Cams who follow Alinksy

      and Tim Montgomery wants the internet to be loyal! What about your leadership Tim.

  48. Glyn H
    Posted April 6, 2010 at 11:55 pm | Permalink

    Farage was very good on Any Questions. He was right on the economy, right on drugs, right on immigration; I disagreed with him on daylight saving, but the Scots are welcome to their own time zone. Nick Herbert was weak, Kramer squawked and Peter Hain was, as usual, more full of puss than a boil.

    Although a Tory to my toenails I have not forgotten being hissed at my local executive in 1992 when opposing Maastricht, along with our then PPC. Today you can hardly find a Europhile Tory BUT the policies have not changed. Cameron seems far to Heathish to my mind although better educated. But has he the backbone for the fight to come? Has he a true belief in British Sovereignty? This election indeed is the most important for a generation, and we have to get the malevolent, mendacious, incompetent Brown out.

    However the level of UKIP support you see here, should draw attention to the fact that Tory support is weaker than it should be because the party (to which I no longer pay a subscription) has NOT learned the lessons of the mistakes that Lawson, Hesletine, Major, Clarke (and who pushed Mrs T against her better judgement) etc. made in the past.

    • adam
      Posted April 7, 2010 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

      Ive noticed the BBC, in cohorts with Liars, pushing the other angle, that anti EU voices must be thrown out all together

      Clearly a split is coming.
      It cant go on like this

  49. Jamess
    Posted April 10, 2010 at 3:38 am | Permalink

    Sorry to hear UKIP are running against you. Are they consistently running against the more Euro-sceptic and free-market Conservatives?

    And could you let me know where we can read your draft bill on British Independence?

    Thanks

    Reply: I believe UKIP will oppose a number of Eurosceptic Conservatives. The Bill is in Hansard.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page