The elections confirm we remain under the grip of the EU

 

          A majority of those voting in South Shields voted Labour, the very party that gave away many of our rights to self government in the federalist Treaties of Nice, Amsterdam and Lisbon.  It was also the party that gave away our right to control our own borders, and invited in so many new migrants from the rest of the EU  after years of a more restrained migration policy. A federalist MP replaces a federalist MP who has found a better  job in the USA.

          Meanwhile more people have voted UKIP, just as more people are voting for anti EU establishment parties in Italy and Greece without getting them into government.  The gap between the governed and the governing EU establishment has just got bigger, with the frustrations becoming ever more evident. So far the Conservatives have retained control of 5 Councils, and 2 have passed to no overall control – probably to bureaucrat controlled.

          The truth is EU government is not working in the interests of the voters. It is deeply resented and opposed by many, especially in the Euro zone where it is at its most powerful and most damaging. So far those who oppose it have not found a way to win majorities and turn their anger into practical politics that can solve the problem. The UK ends up with dear energy, too many rules and regulations, and far too much interference in what we can and cannot do, and a split Eurosceptic majority that still does not have a majority where it counts. Greece and Spain end up with more than half their young people unemployed, and with 1 in 8 who want work not finding jobs through the Eurozone as a whole. One quarter of one percent off interest rates will not solve that.

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

204 Comments

  1. me
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 6:22 am | Permalink

    Well done UKIP!

    Just remember folks, the more people vote UKIP, the more chance the Tories will be shaken to their senses.

    • Duyfken
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 6:56 am | Permalink

      me too.

      • Hope
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:02 am | Permalink

        A year to go, in reality, to the next general election. Action is required ASAP from the Tories.

        Cameron let a bill fade away that would bring an in out referendum on the EU. He cannot be trusted. A bit like he claimed people should wear crosses in the work place and the UK solicitors were arguing the exact opposite in the European court. Was he lying or the solicitors acting rogue? Too many pro-European actions to even take him seriously. He is surrounded by pro-European ministers and advisers-even those from the John Major sleaze government which also cost us all a fortune, loss jobs and businesses when he tried to join the EU. Ken Clarke and Heseltine wants the UK in the EU and single currency and he has the temerity to call people clowns or fruit cakes. The man cannot even stay awake on the job, anyone else would be sacked.

        The LibDems are history, mainly through lies, U-turns and hypocrisy. Tories are following their path quite quickly.

        • lifelogic
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:18 am | Permalink

          LibDems are history also because their policies, of being pro non democratic economic disaster EU, tax borrow and waste, ever more regulation and the quack expensive green energy religion are not very popular and just will not work.

          • lifelogic
            Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:19 am | Permalink

            Despite the BBC ramming these views down the public’s throats every day.

          • Bazman
            Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

            I lost count of the number of times the BBC said UKIP has trounced the opposition this morning on the TV Breakfast programme. What sort of plot do you think they are up to and what do they have to gain by saying this?

          • Edward2
            Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:15 pm | Permalink

            Baz, I’m not generally a conspiracy theorist, but I do think there may be one brewing at the BBC over UKIP
            They are suddenly very keen to publicise UKIP in their recent news and current affairs broadcasts and perhaps they think that UKIP are increasingly stealing votes from the Conservatives which will allow in a left wing coalition of Labour and Lib Dems to gain power for a few terms.

          • Jerry
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 7:03 am | Permalink

            @Edward2: “I’m not generally a conspiracy theorist, but I do think there may be one brewing at the BBC over UKIP [conspiracy theory cut]

            Talk about being dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t!…

        • Nick
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:46 am | Permalink

          Correct.

          Its making promises and not keeping them.

          From Cameron with referenda, Clegg on tuition fees, (lie about me deleted-ed)

        • Timaction
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 10:17 am | Permalink

          What we are witnessing is the start of change. The voters in the north have always voted Labour. However, they will start to see there is no difference with the mainstream established Europhile parties. So by next year and the arrival of many more Romanians and Bulgarians they’ll realise that if they want to remain a majority in their own country to vote for the only patriotic party or be assimilated by the EU and its poor neighbours at huge expense and no benefits! We can trade and be friendly without membership and free movement of people and its huge costs to public services and welfare. Cameron must go!

          • Dan H.
            Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

            Until we give councils much greater powers, including the rights to raise local taxes and pay local benefits without let or hindrance from central government, voters will carry on voting for Labour. We really need to give local councils the power to make the lives of their constituents absolutely miserable and permit them to do just this, before the Labour voters of this world will start to connect the act of voting for Socialist twerps with life getting worse in very short order.

          • sjb
            Posted May 3, 2013 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

            The A8 migrants[1] reportedly “paid in via taxes about 30% more than they cost our public services”. Migration Watch do not appear to contest this finding but are more concerned about future costs such as health and pensions.[2] Although my understanding is that most migrants leave the UK once they have earned sufficient money to return home and buy a house, start a business etc.

            [1] Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia
            [2] http://news.migrationwatch.org.uk/2013/04/the-contribution-of-a8-migrants-to-the-uk-public-finances-some-further-comment.html

          • Javelin
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 8:06 am | Permalink

            PS A8 countries. Does not include non-EU countries.

            •Czech Republic
            •Estonia
            •Hungary
            •Latvia
            •Lithuania
            •Poland
            •Slovakia
            •Slovenia

          • lifelogic
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 9:20 am | Permalink

            SJB

            “paid in via taxes about 30% more than they cost our public services”

            Well perhaps, but what they do with these figure is very selective. We all pay far more taxes than we get in services as so much is wasted by government on debt interest, waste, bureaucracy defence, government, green tosh, ……….

            They come up with these figures often by looking just at the direct services education, benefits, health consumed by them not a fair contribution to the huge government overhead overall.

        • uanime5
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

          A bit like he claimed people should wear crosses in the work place and the UK solicitors were arguing the exact opposite in the European court.

          Firstly it was the European Court of Human Rights, which has nothing to do with the EU.

          Secondly while the ECHR did agree that an employer could prevent their employees wearing a cross if there was a danger of it getting caught on something they also found against another employer who banned wearing a cross for reasons of fashion, rather than safety.

          • Richard1
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 8:04 am | Permalink

            Answer to Bazman above: the reason the BBC are so thrilled about UKIP is they see 1983 in reverse – they think UKIP will do for the Tories what the SDP did for Labour, thereby allowing a left wing Labour govt in. Labour under Milliband, now in hock to the public sector unions, is very much to the taste of BBC statists. What they don’t want is a majority Conservative govt.

        • K CHEGWIN
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:27 pm | Permalink

          Once the Bulgarians & Romanians arrive in their hundreds of thousands then UKIP don’t even need to campaign & Dave is toast.

          • lifelogic
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 9:21 am | Permalink

            He is toast already without a UKIP deal and even then probably………

          • Bazman
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

            You hope they will arrive so that this happens. Evidence says this will not be the case. The poor like the rich are not just in a place because of wealth though this is often the main factor.

          • zorro
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 10:13 pm | Permalink

            Bazman, what evidence exactly?

            zorro

          • Bazman
            Posted May 5, 2013 at 11:21 am | Permalink

            Surveys show that Romanians on the whole will only come to the UK if they have a job before coming.and many of those thinking of coming here have professional skills. What type of East Europeans do you think in general comes here?

          • lojolondon
            Posted May 7, 2013 at 9:55 am | Permalink

            Hey, Bazman, I guess that is the same ‘survey’ that showed there are only 12 Polish plumbers in the UK, when it suited the Liebour party to claim so??

    • M Davis
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:59 am | Permalink

      Hear, hear! We need Conservatives to behave like Conservatives and not like Socialists that they seem so desperately trying to become. Socialism does not work except, maybe, in very small doses, in my opinion.

      • lifelogic
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:20 am | Permalink

        Well they might say the odd conservative thing just before elections before ratting on them. That is all you can expect from Cameron.

      • Kenneth
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:23 am | Permalink

        But behaving like socialists gets them on the BBC.

        The BBC’s tail wags the political dog.

        • Bob
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

          @Kenneth
          “But behaving like socialists gets them on the BBC.
          The BBC’s tail wags the political dog.”

          Remind me, who heads the BBC Trust ?

          • lifelogic
            Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:10 pm | Permalink

            Might it be The Right Honourable,The Lord Patten of Barnes
            CH, PC and past European Commissioner.

            Remind me who clearly approved of his appointment?

          • lifelogic
            Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:49 pm | Permalink

            One assumes Patten was the one who approved of the DG contract that meant they had to pay George Entwistle a £450,000 pay off for a few weeks service as DG. Good to see he runs a tight ship.

          • Jagman 84
            Posted May 3, 2013 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

            A Liberal Democrat, masquerading as a Conservative.

      • Bazman
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:20 pm | Permalink

        How about socialism for the rich? Does that work?

    • A Different Simon
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 11:33 am | Permalink

      Quote Me “the more chance the Tories will be shaken to their senses.”

      Why are you finding it so hard to accept that the tory party is finished ?

      Your post suggests you are in denial of the serial betrayal which the conservative party and the other two parties of the unpatriotic alliance have perpetrated against the British people over the past 40 years .

      How many times do you need to be betrayed by the conservative party before you stop giving them one more chance ?

      • Anonymous
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

        “How many times do you need to be betrayed by the conservative party before you stop giving them one more chance ?”

        This is how I feel.

        My vote for UKIP wasn’t so much to solve anything (I think we’ve gone past solving things now) but to seek revenge.

        I can’t hurt the Labour party because I’ve never supported them. So how else can I get through to the Westminster club if not by withdrawing my support from their Tory club-mates/co-conspirators ?

        I intend to vote UKIP in 2015.

        Probably my last chance to have a dig at the political establishment before we go into terminal democratic decline.

      • Tad Davison
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

        Simon,

        One of the tests for insanity, is to do the same thing over and over again, but expect different results. And traditional loyal Tory supporters keep putting their crosses in the same place, without realising they are being had by pinkos in blue clothing. And even Churchill himself once said those who don’t change their mind, don’t think.

        But that rationale can apply equally to those who always vote Labour, despite that Party’s long track record of trashing the economy. It beggars belief really, but some always will be vulnerable conmen, however much we try to make them see sense.

        The difference as I see it, between Labour, the Tories, and the Lib Dems, on one hand, and UKIP on the other, is that the first three have had their chance, and have been found wanting. And there is no point in voting for continued failure. Would a football club manager keep playing a forward who consistently failed to score? Not likely, he’d give someone else a try, as the consequences of procrastination would mean relegation.

        Cameron is that forward who isn’t scoring goals, how ever much he tries to convince us his performances are good, and for some of us, we want Britain to be at the top of the Premier league, not languishing in the lower divisions. Labour would consign us to oblivion, and Cameron’s pro-EU disposition is just making it easy for them.

        Tad

    • Jerry
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 11:46 am | Permalink

      @me: “Well done UKIP!

      For what, loosing another (by-)election, I’ll drink to that! 😛

      Seriously though; OK they so they came a good second in a very safe Labour seat, lots of scope for the protest voter – even among normally (at the GE) Labour vote. Also UKIP seem to have made, on first appraisal, significant Country Council election gains but again these might well be simple mid-term protest votes. Even if these are proper, sustainable, gains how does it take either UKIP or their cause forward, they still do not have any real say, the policies they will have to work within are still being made in Westminster or the EU, these Councillors (even should UKIP win control of a CC) will simply be domestic versions of the UKIP MEP’s, yes they will be able to ‘sound off’ but what else?…

      • Tad Davison
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:20 pm | Permalink

        Jerry,

        The more support in terms of votes, a party has, the more air time they get, so their message reaches a wider audience – with this caveat. I am sick of the number of times the BBC has a discussion on the EU, but only invites participants of a pro-EU nature, and those of a mildly Eurosceptic persuasion. Nothing at all from TRUE Eurosceptics!

        By getting elected, in any capacity and in sufficient numbers, UKIP can legitimately get their agenda broadcast to an even wider audience. They can take their seat at the debating table, and let’s face it, it wouldn’t be hard to better the pro-EU arguments espoused by Labour and the Lib Dems, as after forty years of Britain’s involvement, the thing has only ever delivered disaster.

        I’m just hoping the BBC change tack, and show some balance for a change. This surge in support for UKIP might be catalyst.

        Tad

        • Jerry
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 7:49 am | Permalink

          @Tad Davison: “The more support in terms of votes, a party has, the more air time they get, so their message reaches a wider audience

          That equation only applies at elections, hence why the BNP got a PPB (and were invited onto the BBC’s QT, or was that in response to getting MEP’s elected?). At other times broadcasters are just meant to be ‘balanced’.

          I’m just hoping the BBC change tack, and show some balance for a change. This surge in support for UKIP might be catalyst.

          You mean like giving the Greens, the SLP and other minor parties more (non election period) air time, rather than the wall to wall UKIP (+Tory, Labour & LibDem) coverage they are giving to a party that has yet to gain an MP, but according to your idea the Greens should have far more coverage than UKIP are getting because they have a sitting MP which UKIP do no. Careful for what you wish for! But Tad, I strongly suspect, what you actually want isn’t balance, but biased reporting -like so many political activists seek- towards your own personal political opinions. 🙁

          All that aside, I see Sky News yesterday had a forward prediction for the next GE result based on the voting trends from Thursday’s local elections, guess what, not one UKIP MP on the green benches but due to the split in the right-wing vote (and no doubt the reduction in votes for the LDs) Labour would likely have a 12 seat majority, which in real terms would likely mean an even higher working majority once the votes of other left-leaning MPs are considered.

          As I said, well done UKIP! Best we all start preying that either of the two Ed’s sees the light about the EU and moves the Labour party towards a more eurosceptic/phobic position once again, otherwise who knows who the four nations (of the UK) will be voting for in next – the “President of Europe” or perhaps just ‘approving’ his or her politburo…

  2. MickC
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 6:37 am | Permalink

    Contrary to your assertion, the voters are not the “governed”. Regrettably, the attitude that they are is not confined to the EU, but seems inherent in all political classes, nowhere more so than in the Cameron Tory party.

    The “Princes of Westminster” are there as representatives, not rulers. But you are correct that the gap between the voters and the political class is now huge.

    The success of UKIP may bring reality back to our representatives, although my view is that it will not. The destruction of the Tory party seems inevitable-but that is Cameron’s work, not Farage’s.

    • margaret brandreth-j
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:16 am | Permalink

      This always gets me and I have challenged it several times, however the dictionary definition backs up the notion of the state or country being governed by rule / state laws etc,hence government.

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:21 am | Permalink

      MickC–Agree entirely that Cameron has destroyed the Conservatives. I don’t like his policies and I don’t like him, at least not as PM. His choice of priorities beggars belief and I wish he would resign, after which there would rapidly be some accommodation with UKIP and perhaps the beginnings of a new Party Of The Right. It also beggars belief that it isn’t yet crystal clear that the mass of the people despise Clegg if possible even more. How dare he stand up and tell women that they drop their babies then dash back to work, not to mention his lapdog approach to the EU. That he is allowed to continue part of Government, preventing the Conservatives doing what little they might otherwise do that would make make sense is bonkers. Nigel Farage with his plain dealing will be very good in the next television contest and if Cameron, following his daft conceited decision last time to give equal (or any) time to Clegg, tries to exclude him that too will fly back in his face like so much else.

      Reply A leader with no Commons seats at the last General Election and still no seats today is hardly likely to be in the PM contest on tv.If he were we would have to have the Greens, Monster Raving Loony, English democrats etc

      • JimF
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:27 am | Permalink

        Reply to reply
        It is not about who might be PM. Was Clegg EVER going to be PM? Please get real.

        • Jerry
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 8:02 am | Permalink

          @JimF: “Please get real.

          After you sir…

          Clegg was going to be elected (his constituency was, and still might be, a safe LD seat), more than could be said of Farage or any other UKIP candidate.

          As John said, invite UKIP onto those TV ‘debates’ and every “Leader” of a registered political party standing with more than a set number of candidates standing (more than one, less than six-hundred) would also have a right to be present – also, on the voting figgures of the last GE the Greens actually have more right to have a place than UKIP does.

          • Bob
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 9:07 am | Permalink

            @Jerry
            “the Greens actually have more right to have a place than UKIP does.”

            The electorate don’t agree with you.
            UKIP got four times the Green Party’s vote at the GE!

          • Jerry
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 11:11 am | Permalink

            @Bob: Bull****! Sorry but the electorate, at the individual constituency level do agree with me. Otherwise please do remind us how many elected MP’s the Greens have, and how many elected MP’s the UKIP have?…

          • uanime5
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

            @Bob

            Part of the reason UKIP got a larger percentage of the votes than the Greens was because they had more candidates.

            The Greens had 330 candidates, got 0.9% of the votes (265,243), and 1 MP.

            UKIP had 558 candidates, got 3.1% of the votes (919,471), and no MPs.

            Also the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) had 16 candidates, got 0.6% of the votes (168,216), and 8 MPs. So I guess they should get more media attention than UKIP as half their candidates were elected.

          • Bob
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 9:21 pm | Permalink

            “Bull****” Jerry?

            Not at all. Our electoral system throws up anomalies.
            That’s why the Tories want to redraw boundaries.

            The DUP won 8 times more seats than the Greens with almost half as many votes.

            UKIP got over five times the number of DUP votes but didn’t gain a seat.

            That’s all as may be, but when it comes to the public broadcaster inviting party leaders to debate the issues they should consider the total national level of support not the number of seats won under a skewed system.

          • Bob
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 9:33 pm | Permalink

            @uanime5

            The average number of votes per candidate were:
            UKIP 1648
            Greens 856

            The total votes were:
            UKIP 919,471 3.1%
            Greens 265,243 0.9%

            The fact that the Greens hit a rich seam in Brighton does not make them more representative of the nation than Ukip based on the above data, no more than the DUP should rank higher than the Greens or a local single issue Independent should rank higher than the DUP.

          • Jerry
            Posted May 5, 2013 at 8:35 am | Permalink

            Bob: Thanks for showing the world that you do not understand how the FPTP electoral system works, nor how even any flavour of PR works, we do not elected Presidents in the UK – nationwide total votes cast for a party are irrelevant.

            Thus the Greens do have more right to be on TV debates etc. because they have an MP, unlike UKIP and their bunch of “Hopefuls”.

          • Bob
            Posted May 5, 2013 at 6:38 pm | Permalink

            @Jerry

            Thanks for showing the world that you do not understand that a party with 919,000 votes has more popular support than a single issue party with less than a third as many votes who happened to find a concentration of like minded people in Brighton.

          • Jerry
            Posted May 6, 2013 at 9:06 am | Permalink

            @Bob: In the UK we do not elect either a President or Prime Minister (the latter being an appointee of the party with the largest number of seats or agreed between a coalition), we also use a constituency system at the local level meaning that the candidate with the largest popular vote (the “majority”) wins the seat – the national popular vote figure is thus meaningless and irrelevant to the election result – only being relevant to statistical national trends.

        • Leslie Singleton
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 10:30 am | Permalink

          JimF–I am with you and have been touched by comments about the broadcasters being worried about their independence rather than (about 99% of the decision I should say) their ratings and their desire for theatre not to mention self-importance. Yes I realise that there is some (highly theoretical and unquantifiable) legal requirement but you’d never guess it especially not with the BBC.

      • Mike Wilson
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:55 am | Permalink

        Oh, and what is wrong with the Greens etc. being on the platform? Have you got some God given right to govern? If anyone can put themselves forward as an MP, then they have the same right to be heard as anyone else.

        The first past the post system is a way of trying to form a government – it does not necessarily mean that those who benefit from it have a MANDATE.

        If, for example, 25% of people vote UKIP in 2015 but the first past the post system means they get no MPs – and Labour form a government based on the votes of, say, 30% of the people – that does not legitimise Labour and mean UKIP are not to be heard.

        I think, Mr. Redwood, you still don’t get it. Many, many people are FED UP with your party and the Labour party and the (pathetic, useless) Liberal Democrats.

        Maybe a 25% vote for UKIP and no MPs might finally be the straw that breaks the first past the post camel’s back. I, for one, am really tired of not being listened to.

        I do NOT want more immigration from the EU or anywhere else. I hate the fact that we have unsavoury people from all over the place now running drugs gangs and people trafficking. Surely these are jobs are own people could do just as well.

        I hate the fact that if I return to where I grew up in West London I feel like a stranger in my home town and, to boot, scared to be out after dark. You, Mr. Redwood, the Conservative and Labour parties, have changed this country beyond recognition – and whenever anyone has complained we have been told we are racist.

        Why don’t you do the decent thing and move over to UKIP?

        Reply I fully understand the current position and know what a range of voters think and want. As I voted No in 1975 and have opposed and criticised every Treaty since I think you are criticising the wrong person.

        • Credible
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 6:00 pm | Permalink

          but John, you support the first past the post system which means Mike doesn’t have a voice. Why don’t you campaign for real democracy here before you denounce the the lack of it in EU.

        • K CHEGWIN
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

          Grow a pair Redwood & join the revolution, bring Carswell & Hannan with you.

          Reply I thought I joined the revolution over the EU when I resigned from the Cabinet to save the pound.

        • Jon Burgess
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 12:04 am | Permalink

          Every treaty that is except Maastrict.

      • Roger Farmer
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 10:54 am | Permalink

        It is a forum for policy, ideas and manifesto commitment, nothing to do with who might be PM. It would be very foolish indeed to exclude a head of a party who has already run second in a number of bye-elections and commands 26% of the voting electorate as of today. It would be on a par with the idiot statements of Cameron and Clarke. If the BBC, the Government and Labour try to keep it in house the electorate will see through it from day one.

      • The PrangWizard
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 11:20 am | Permalink

        If we were allowed to hear and see more of the minor parties we may find some of them had something to say which we wanted to hear and which the main parties like to keep off the agenda – one of them has broken through thank goodness. I suspect Mr Redwood you won’t accept it is a ‘breakthrough’ though, but does losing overall control of a Council come close enough to worry you?) If they didn’t they would soon know it. Many people clearly don’t like what the main parties have been saying, it is self evident. Some clowns, some fruitcakes. As I said earlier the Tories are in a ‘muck sweat’.

        • Tad Davison
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

          Good point

          Tad

      • Leslie Singleton
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

        Comment on Reply–Never disagreed with you more. Normally you fall all over yourself to be objective, perhaps to excess I have often thought, but, recently, I repeat it seems to me that your logic has gone all wonky. For a start you do not give the slightest weight to UKIP’s support now running at 25%. Personally I have decided I don’t care much about the goal of the first MP, which doesn’t seem to have done much for the Greens or Respect. That goal has been relegated in my mind to a mere “nice to have”. What we want, and I reckon we have a good chance of soon getting, is another UKIP surge to say 30% and a real breakthrough giving them a whole bunch of MP’s all in one go. The results last night were excellent and, very important, the trend in the UKIP graph is unarguably upwards, which trend, again, you studiously ignore, instead commenting about decades ago. As I say, if Cameron (and you apparently) try to exclude Nigel Farage from the next TV contest you will make fools of yourselves and will regret it in terms of the favourable publicity that that will give him. Put another way, surely you agree that Nigel has more chance of becoming PM than the “confused” Clegg? Whatever you want to say about Nigel he is not confused. Did I read and remember right that the Liberals got a mere 1% in the, to you, you say, all important MP election??

        Reply I agree that Mr Clegg should not appear in a Prime Minister debate. IO think you either have 2 people in the debate, or around 10 plus Leaders, which becomes difficult to have a sensible debate. I join in 7 up debates in my constituency at Election time with all the candidates. It does not allow people to cross examine the two front runners very much, but fairness says that is what you should do.

        • Leslie Singleton
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

          Comment on Reply–All of a sudden you are begging the question whether they are Prime Minister Debates. Surely the very fact that Clegg was allowed in proves the opposite?? I honestly thought that Clegg was invited as Leader of one of the (then) “three main parties” which is a different idea altogether and in the nicest possible way I do not see allowing in the leader of every semi-non-existent party as making much sense–the Government and the Opposition and no others seemed sensible to me at the time. The mould is broken now, however, and the position now as I see it is either 1) there are now four main parties or 2) we stay at three with the Liberals booted out. Makes sense to me. If you are “right” that the last one was a “Prime Minister Debate” that just makes Cameron’s idiocy in agreeing to Clegg’s involvement even more barking mad.

          Reply It was a compromise negotiated between the broadcasters and the political parties, with a very unhappy SNP for example.

          • Leslie Singleton
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 7:58 am | Permalink

            Comment on Reply–This is where someone says, Can you imagine Mrs T letting “the broadcasters”, with their desire for pretty pictures, having any say whatsoever? Meanwhile how do you propose stopping the broadcasters from insisting that Nigel Farage is involved–he and only he can make it interesting and nobody cares what the others have to say. As a commenter elsewhere said, When you read what Nigel Farage has to say, it’s as if you’d written it yourself.

            Reply The decision will again be made following discussions between the broadcasters and the interested parties. Of course the broadcasters have every right to be party to the decision, as they have to uphold standards of independence, relevance and public interest, whilst party leaders are also motivated by their wish to do well relative to their competition. It may be we end up with no debate next time, given the complexities of finding agreement on who should join in.

          • Jerry
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 8:32 am | Permalink

            @Leslie Singleton: Sorry but the whole base point of your argument is wrong (and has been confused by others follow-ups), those TV programmes were Leaders debates, thus Clegg had (and will have) as much right to be on them as either Cameron or Brown, this is why some think that Fargage should have been there too -so until Clegg is replaced or resigns…

            As for your earlier comment about the coalition, if the LD’s are forced from coalition do you really think a minority Tory government will be able to do anything other than loose a vote of confidence – especially as the LDs will be spitting blood and out for revenge, spinning the fact that they have “brought the useless Tory down” and saved the nation from fates fare worse than the Bedroom tax or the Tax Cut for millionaires etc.

            Anyone else fancy a June 2013 general election, I know that Bazman and U5 will, not sure -judging on current voting projections- many on the right do…

          • Jerry
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 11:29 am | Permalink

            Follow-up to my own comment re the “Leaders Debates” and UKIP: Of course Farage would not have been on any such programme in 2010 even had UKIP been asked, as he wasn’t their leader at the time was he – perhaps this is why UKIP (or at least some of their supporters) keep getting muddled on this, why they keep trying to suggest that it was a debate for those who might have become Prime Minister which, in times of (possible) coalition government might be any ‘leader’ of a party group (look at Italy, their new PM wasn’t on the radar), thus just about anyone standing for the UK Parliament could claim a right to stand, any party from the big four through to the SLP and perhaps even the MRLP as John suggested elsewhere in this discussion!

      • zorro
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

        Reply to reply – Reality check – Comparing UKIP with those parties is silly in terms of the number of votes cast.

        But you correct in that there would be no debate….ever……because Cameron is scared stiff of Farage and would probably disintegrate into a pile of wobbly jelly when debating with him. He wouldn’t have the ‘cojones’ to front it up with Farage…..

        zorro

        • zorro
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:49 pm | Permalink

          After all, he was rather flaky when even debating with Brown and Clegg in 2010…..

          zorro

        • lifelogic
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 6:28 pm | Permalink

          Cameron is a good debater but against Farage he would be defending his silly pro EU,fake green, high tax borrow and waste, no control of borders, policies against sensible UKIP ones. His skills on his feet would not be sufficient. He cannot after all think of a single sensible reason against a greater Switzerland or Norway. He would just sound absurd.

          • Jerry
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 8:51 am | Permalink

            @Lifelogic: Having heard Mr Fargage on the election results programme yesterday, I doubt Cameron (or anyone else) would get a word in edgeways, he does have a tendency to …trying to be polite… “hog” such situations…

            As popular as Mr Farage is, in my opinion he is a very poor leader (at times he must be putting off as many people as vote for the party), UKIP needs someone whose personality is somewhere between the foot-stamping of Mr Farage and the overly laid back style of Lord Pearson.

          • zorro
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 10:16 pm | Permalink

            Jerry, it wouldn’t be much of an issue, as Cameron would have very little of value to add……..

            zorro

      • Chris S
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

        John, are you seriously suggesting that, at the General Election, the leader of a party which has been winning 26% of the national vote, ( possibly by then even more ), an MEP who will probably be the leader of the largest group of MEPs from the UK and who leads a party contesting every seat should be excluded from the debate ?

        Have you really thought this through ?

        Clegg was included last time and he had no chance of becoming PM.
        If you exclude Nigel Farage you would have to exclude Clegg or whoever is by then leading the LibDems.

        What you have suggested is seriously undemocratic.

        Reply I did recommend excluding Mr Clegg last time, as I thought it should be between the two men who could be PM. If we want to include a range of other party leaders then you need to have in SNP, Greens, Ulster party leaders etc, so the debate becomes impossible owing to so many people.

        • Credible
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

          John, you love the two party and first past the post system. Never a chance of getting unelected in a safe seat. Tories and Labour alternate in power. Even if voted out you know you can still just come back a few years later when the other lot screw it up. Anyone else shouldn’t get media coverage. Those in power should come from the ‘correct’ social background. Nice cosy set up isn’t it.

        • lifelogic
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 9:26 am | Permalink

          Who but a complete idiot (or LIBDEM supporter) would not have excluded Mr Clegg from the TV debates last time? A real Tory would never have let him and in certainly not on equal terms.

          • zorro
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 10:17 pm | Permalink

            Cameron.

            zorro

      • Bob
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

        Mr Redwood’s allusion to the idea that only Labour or Tories can ever form a government here is very worrying.

        I thought this was supposed to be a democracy.

        Reply So far that has been true. It all depends on how voters vote. Today you either have a Conservative Council, a Labour Council or NOC, so the same happened yesterday.

        • lifelogic
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

          It is called “Brand Inertia” lots of always have and always will voters and the voting system make it very hard to break through.

        • Vanessa
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

          It seems to me that it should be dependent on something like the percentage of the overall vote – say, anything between 20-25%, but if we cannot debate with 8 different leaders it must be between those whose parties have gained a greater percentage from the electorate.

        • Chris S
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:42 pm | Permalink

          I never doubt your honesty and sincerity and by recommending Clegg be excluded from the debates last time you are certainly consistent.

          However it is not up to you or a cozy deal between the Labour and Conservative leadership to decide who can, or cannot, become Prime Minister after a General Election.

          The only genuinely fair way would be to include the leaders of all parties that contest every seat.

          Trouble is, that might mean Nigel Farage debating with himself as none of the three “major parties” put up candidates in every constituency at the last general election !

          It might be inconvenient for the other three “major parties” to have to debate with UKIP but can there be any doubt that a party attracting 26% of the popular vote is by any definition a “major Party ?”

          I suspect that UKIP will emerge as the strongest party in the Euro elections next year. If they do, surely even you will have to take them seriously as a party.

          Reply I think it is a genuinely difficult issue. There need to be criteria that most accept. In the past a combination of how many MPs a party currently has and the outlook for that party in the upcoming Election have been in some kind of relationship which pointed either to having just 2 or maybe 3 Leaders in the debate. The broadcasters were right last time that the 3 Leaders they chose were the leaders of the 3 best performing parties in terms of seats and vote share. If you go over to the idea that any registered party should have its Leader in the debate you end up with a debate between a large n umber of people which may not work well.
          The problem with UKIP is that it has now shown it can attract more votes, but was still fifth in terms of number of Councillors, and still has no MPs. (Conservative 1116, Labour 538,Lib Dem 352,Independents 165, UKIP 147). UKIP of course cites it share of the vote in seats it fought, but because it was unable to fight in a quarter of the seats, its actual overall vote share was lower.

          • Bob
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 10:56 am | Permalink

            Listening to Gordon Brown and David Cameron both agreeing with Nick Clegg the last time around makes me wonder if it might have been better to drop them both and let Nick Clegg debate directly with Nigel Farage. 🙂 Chuckle.

  3. Peter van Leeuwen
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 6:44 am | Permalink

    Did voters turn your elections yesterday into an election about Europe? In a way the blog is suggesting this by its narrow focus on the EU “not working”.

    Reply All elections in the UK are now partly about Europe because the EU is so bossy and dominant in many policy atreas.

    • JimF
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:24 am | Permalink

      No this was about a broader feeling that we have 3 parties in an unspoken Coalition against the interests of the people, be it on the subject of the banks, EU, immigration, green energy, paying down the debt, welfarism….
      And one party speaking for the people on all these things.

      • sjb
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:39 pm | Permalink

        In the Eastleigh by-election – held just two months ago – Lord Ashcroft’s polling found 83% of [UKIP voters] said they were sending a message that they were “unhappy with the party I usually support nationally” and three quarters wanted to show they were “unhappy with all the main parties at the moment”. [1]

        In an earlier poll (n=20,000), Lord Ashcroft concluded: “[T]hose who are attracted to UKIP are more preoccupied than most with immigration, and will occasionally complain about Britain’s contribution to the EU or the international aid budget. But these are often part of a greater dissatisfaction with the way they see things going in Britain […] The idea that UKIP “seem to want to take Britain back to a time when things were done more sensibly”, and that “the bigger parties seem more interested in trendy nonsense than listening to ordinary people” both elicited stronger agreement among UKIP considerers than the party’s policy that Britain should leave the EU.[2]

        [1] http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2013/03/we-know-how-eastleigh-voted-heres-why/#more-2025
        [2] http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2012/12/the-ukip-threat-is-not-about-europe/#more-1866

    • Mike Wilson
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:56 am | Permalink

      No, all elections these days are a judgement on OUR government.

    • Christopher Ekstrom
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

      I believe it is fair to say “the polls were wrong” regarding UKIP! Lady Thatcher must be pulling strings in Heaven! God Bless The Iron Lady. God Bless England.

      Now you have a rough & ready force to sort out the enemy within the (former) Conservative party. Kenny you’ve had your time! Traitors like heseltine & Cast Iron time to book passage to Calais. The Reckoning has begun! God Save the Queen!

      • Lindsay McDougall
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 11:45 pm | Permalink

        Who is this Thatcher woman? Enoch Powell is the patron saint of UKIP. He forced 114 divisions against his own government when the original European Communities Bill was presented in the Commons.

        Mr Redwood laments the fact that the Eurosceptic vote is split, apparently without acknowledging the need for the Conservative Party to harden up its policy and expel pro (Federal) Europeans from the candidates list. It is they who are the loonies and closet racists.

        • Richard1
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 8:15 am | Permalink

          That would be sure way to lose the next election.

    • Electro-Kevin
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

      Mr van Leeuwen – The clue is in the name: United Kingdom Independence Pary.

  4. JimF
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 6:50 am | Permalink

    Of course Labour won South Shields.
    It’s a shame however that Conservative voters spoiled the main Eurosceptic candidate’s chance of winning.

    • lifelogic
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:22 am | Permalink

      Indeed those pesky Tories splitting the anti EU vote!

      • Electro-Kevin
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

        Lifelogic: This has to be the comment of the year !

      • Mark W
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

        In Labour’s northern heartlands and some midlands urban seats the Tories would do well to not stand candidates and let UKIP get elected without the 150 year prejudice that the Tories recieve.

        Last night UKIP would have had an MP elected for Boston and Skegness. They won most seats in the constituency and came a close second in the others. Unless these councillors prove disappointing then it is likely that as there’s now electoral confidence that “the other lot” won’t get in, UKIP will now take this seat at the general election. And when JR is casting his vote on EU matters this MP will be with him in the lobby unlike the current Tory MP.

    • Tedgo
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:33 am | Permalink

      Joe Public missed a trick in not voting for AV.

      • uanime5
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:16 pm | Permalink

        It’s also ironic that the Conservatives campaigned against AV, then started having problems because UKIP is splitting the vote.

      • Dan H.
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

        To understand that AV is better than FPTP requires a voter with an IQ bigger than their shoe size. That AV was so strongly rejected ought to tell you much about the intelligence of the average voter; if you’re still missing my point then ask yourself this: Why does the Labour Party still exist?

        • lifelogic
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 9:30 am | Permalink

          AV would lead to coalition governments – coalitions government, as we see are often dreadful even worse than majority ones.

          • lifelogic
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 9:31 am | Permalink

            Also they give even more power to the party machines.

        • Bob
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 12:22 pm | Permalink

          @Dan H.
          The voters decided that the AV system would have simply replaced one flawed method with another flawed method and were quote angry that £80 million had been wasted on a Hobson’s choice of a referendum.

          At least with FPTP the electorate can vote for their MP rather than having one foisted on them by the Party leaders.
          And the voters get to kick out people like Jackie Smith every five years?

          I am confident that with the average IQ of John Redwood’s readers, we could come up between us with with a superior workable replacement for FPTP. Perhaps a system with some non geographic constituencies such as taxpayers and the military.

          Maybe Mr Redwood will open a fresh blog discussion on the subject?
          but then again I suspect he quite likes the status for obvious reasons.

          Reply I like an individual MP being answerable to a stated constituency. It makes for much better accountability to electors, and less influence from party chiefs.I do not think any change of voting system argument is going to be live in the next two years, so I do not propose to spend any time on it.

          • Bob
            Posted May 4, 2013 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

            Correction: “he quite likes the status quo”

      • Vanessa
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:56 pm | Permalink

        The problem with AV is that anyone voted in is on the Party list and not voted in by the electorate of an area. Depending on where he/she is on the List and the proportion of votes for the Party gets them elected – not by the people in the borough where they are standing even if those people voted overwhelmingly for that person.

        Not a good form of democratic elections – surprise it is used for the EU !

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 10:54 am | Permalink

      Yes, the best thing the Tory party could do now is just GET OUT OF THE WAY and stop trying to block the election of patriotic candidates.

      With Labour starting in such a strong position it wouldn’t have changed the result in South Shields but it would have done in Eastleigh, for which any dispassionate observer would conclude that the second-placed UKIP candidate would have won the seat if the third-placed Tory spoiler candidate hadn’t been there to take votes away from her and allow the LibDem candidate to win.

      If you want to break up the eurofederalist majority in the Commons, JR, the best thing you could do is tell your party that except where it can put up a candidate who sincerely wishes to leave the EU then it should GET OUT OF THE WAY and stop trying to prevent UKIP doing the job.

      • Chris S
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

        Ridiculous

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

          Really?

          Maybe you should wake up and smell the caolitino.

  5. The PrangWizard
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 6:52 am | Permalink

    Grant Shapps on TV this morning says ‘he gets it’. Whether he does or not I don’t know, but he’s using the phrase as if it is current and ‘in touch’, it’s not, it’s an old slogan, and it sounds like it. Just shows how out of touch most of the Conservatives are with what we want. Getting rid of the likes of Ken Clarke will be a start and and a change for the better, and of course dumping the LIbDems.

    • lifelogic
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:17 pm | Permalink

      Grand Shaps was totally useless, not a single mention of the main issues. Namely the EU, democracy, self control, immigration reductions, cheaper energy, lower taxes and less government waste, that I heard. Just the usual hard working guff. I will be amazed if the Tories win anything without a UKIP deal for years and even then they will struggle, this despite the fact the Miliband is useless.

    • cosmic
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:02 pm | Permalink

      Well, he could hardly say he doesn’t ‘get it’.

  6. lifelogic
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:00 am | Permalink

    Meanwhile the Tory reaction so far does not even mention the EU, just repeating the mantra of “hardworking families”. Cameron cannot even say “UKIP” – totally pathetic, but what did Cameron expect we he decided to rat on the voters so blatantly and to call the many ex-Tories as fruitcakes and closet racists.

    This while pretending, totally dishonestly, that he was EU skeptic when really he was just a closet Ted Heath. Clearly the Tories will come after UKIP in the EU elections and we will surely have Labour in 2015.

    As you say:

    The UK ends up with dear energy, too many rules and regulations, and far too much interference in what we can and cannot do, and a split Eurosceptic majority that still does not have a majority where it counts. Greece and Spain end up with more than half their young people unemployed, and with 1 in 8 who want work not finding jobs through the Eurozone as a whole. One quarter of one percent off interest rates will not solve that.

    Yet Cameron can hardly mention the EU let alone do anything.

    Question time last night had four woman on, Harriet Harman, Shirley Williams, Victoria Coren, Justine Greening on with David Starkey as the sole voice of reason. The four women representing the very embodiment of the UK’s and EU’s, “BBC think”, tax borrow and waste, muddled thinking problem. Still it was very funny, Starkey should be on every week with a gang of batty socialists to bait – it would be most entertaining.

    • Bob
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:23 am | Permalink

      Starkey was on good form last night.
      Victoria Coren was being characteristically sneery.

      I disagree with Shirley Williams on virtually everything she says and I can never forgive her for destroying our education system, but at least she doesn’t sneer. She appears to be well intentioned but misguided.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 11:10 am | Permalink

        Ah, Victoria Coren, highly intelligent and well educated woman, champion poker player, who admitted in the run-up to the 2010 general election that she didn’t even know what the “budget deficit” meant.

        • lifelogic
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

          “didn’t even know what the “budget deficit” meant” an ideal panelist for the BBC and Question Time then.

        • Bazman
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

          I would love to ignored by Victoria Coren.

          • Edward2
            Posted May 6, 2013 at 11:22 am | Permalink

            Perhaps she already is ignoring you Baz, because you wouldn’t know if she was would you ? !

          • Bazman
            Posted May 7, 2013 at 5:26 pm | Permalink

            She is not ignoring me as she unfortunately does not know I exist.

      • zorro
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

        Harriet was on good harrietish form, gleefully taking offence at anything that Starkey said, but La Coren was definitely sneering down her nose…..

        zorro

      • sjb
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

        Hang on, Bob. Margaret Thatcher “closed more grammar schools and approved more applications for comprehensives than any other education secretary. “[1]

        Shirley Williams did not become education secretary until September 1976 – two and half years after Mrs T vacated the position.

        [1] http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/features/culture/the-thatcher-revolution-that-wasnt/2003385.article

      • lifelogic
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

        Indeed a well intentioned but misguided, a pleasant, elderly woman who is and has been wrong on almost very issue all her life.

        The road to hell is paved with good intent.

    • Disaffected
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:58 am | Permalink

      Spot on Lifelogic. Do not forget CCHQ called shire Tories the turnip Taliban. A Bill proposing legislation for a referendum was allowed to wither on the vine in April because it was not heard before Westminster broke for recess (allegedly because there was not enough business). This was at the time Cameron was telling everyone he would bring forward legislation to show he was serious about a referendum! If he was genuine why did he not allow the Bill, started in February, to pass in April? Perhaps JR could let us know why Cameron says one thing and acts in contrast when it comes to the EU (including Lisbon Treaty and making no comments about it in 2010 once in office).

      As for the flimsy excuse, that he got a reduction in the EU budget is beyond belief. It was £20 billion more than the UK hoped to pay in 2011 and the EU increased the the UK contribution by £1.3 billion for the 2013 year, no doubt showing Cameron who is boss. The same as last week when the commissioner says he will make it easier for immigrants to find work here in stark contrast to what we were told by Cameron/May two days before. Then the veto that never was, he never fulfilled the second part of his claim to stop Eurozone countries using EU institutions- still waiting. How about preventing the cost of Strasbourg which he lamely gave up not to upset the French? However he rushed through the gay legislation the EU wanted contrary to the majority of the wishes of the UK population.

      I read in the papers today that Somalian offender was prevented from being deported because of his Human Rights. No control of our borders, no control over deporting unwanted people, no control over benefit tourism in the guise of immigration. We even have schools where English is not the prominent language. A school in Peterborough where it is reported none of the 420 pupils speak English- how will reforms help this situation or improve standards? It is an impossible task for teachers because of stupid decisions taken by politicians, who later criticise them for failing standards in schools.

      Reply Mr Cameron was not persuaded to legislate as 100 Conservative MPs proposed in the last session, but nor did he rule it out. He is still considering this idea and the Mandate referendum idea. Both pose issues about what Conservatives Ministers can do in a Caolitino with Eurofederalist Lib dems.

      • Nick
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:45 am | Permalink

        Still paying the EU

        Get out and save even more money.

        Notice too on the immigration debate that they will not ever talk about foreigners here who we don’t need – claiming benefits or those not earning enough

      • Major Frustration
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:51 am | Permalink

        “No control over our borders and no control over deportation” and yet the Government see as important “gay marriage” and selling of the forests and other silly distractions. They are all in another very protected world

        • margaret brandreth-j
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

          Quite..in the NHS I have had to prioritise since 1968. We have to learn how to save lives, preserve lives and then prevent problems occurring. Which ever order you put these three objectives into has its own priority , for example preventing border law breaches might save lives and prevent an overcrowding disaster which puts the whole country at grave risk. If little nurses who are looked down upon can do these things, then magiced away as though the Doctors decide everything , then why can’t these governing bodies use their managing skills at life saving and preservation of a healthy state.

      • Anthem
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 10:41 am | Permalink

        Reply to reply…

        Caolitino“???

        What is this? Sounds like Italian for Coalition or something. You’ve been spending too much time in the company of Europhiles, Mr Redwood.

        • Electro-Kevin
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

          Coalitino – No. Not an Italian coalition, Anthem. It’s the brand of expensive ground coffee that I’ve just spluttered over my keyboard on reading your comment.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 11:32 am | Permalink

        “he never fulfilled the second part of his claim to stop Eurozone countries using EU institutions”

        Worse than that, he has silently allowed a dangerous precedent to be set:
        that at the behest of one EU member state in particular, but pushing along other EU member states largely out of fear, and without any change to the EU treaties, the powers of the ECJ can be arbitrarily extended to allow it to fine a country for a breach of an agreement which is not part of the EU treaties and laws and which has no legal basis in the EU treaties and laws.

        Of course there would be no point in taking this to the ECJ and asking:

        “Do you agree that you can assume this new power, even though there is no legal basis for it in the EU treaties ratified by all the sovereign EU member states, through which this court was created and granted certain defined powers under the fundamental principle of “conferral”?”

        because obviously their answer would be:

        “Yes”

        and they were honest they would add:

        “Actually Germany arbitrarily deciding to give us this new power makes a welcome change from us having to contrive convoluted legal arguments to gradually extend our powers of our own volition.”

      • zorro
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

        Reply to reply – like when hell freezes over…..

        zorro

      • lifelogic
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

        No doubt he will still be thinking about it still when booted out of office in 2015. And why are we in a coalition, because, before the last sitting duck election he ratted on Lisbon, put a fake green, high tax, soft socialist, agenda to the country and gave Clegg equal tv billing. Might that be the reason?

  7. Cheshire Girl
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:13 am | Permalink

    Last nights election results have been disappointing for the Conservatives so far but I think it would be wrong to just dismiss them as a ‘protest vote’ and not too important. They need to wonder why so many of their former supporters have needed to protest and what can they do to address their concerns . The Conservative party has lost half its membership over the past few years. Members who have worked for, and voted for them are now turning away. They can’t afford to wait until 2015 to see if these members will return to the fold. I don’t know what the answer is, but there is obviously something sadly wrong!

    • Bob
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:52 am | Permalink

      @Cheshire Girl

      It’s what happens to organisations that get complacent, and the LibLabCon party is nothing if not complacent.

      Tory voters are not stupid but their blind loyalty to the Party gets in the way of logical thought, just like a battered wife standing by her abusive husband no matter what he does.

      Ukip are the New Conservatives in waiting, and when the remaining Tory loyalists realise they their party cannot win another election I hope they will join the only party that can free us from the EU yoke.

      • lifelogic
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

        It is as Cash says a racing certainty they will lose badly a deal is they only option and even then they will struggle now as Cameron cannot be trusted on inch, other than to continue ratting.

    • Bazman
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:29 pm | Permalink

      Probably died of old age and the younger ones have discovered girls are different. You don’t meet many young Tories in the metal trades…

      • alan jutson
        Posted May 4, 2013 at 8:15 am | Permalink

        Bazman

        “you do not meet many young Tories in the metal trade”.

        Not so sure you are correct.

        They may not be the type of Tories you may have an image of (like perhaps the toffee nosed twerp who lives off mummy and daddy, and who thinks they are the expert on everything, who most of us despise) but rest assured they do exist, at least they did when I was working in the industry many years ago, indeed they still do on countless building sites.

        The Tory party have still to work this one out though, given they, like all of the other Party’s seem to be against manual labour (skilled or not), self employment, or anyone else who attempts to work for themselves.

        UKIP however are connecting with these people, as the three main players are begining to realise.

        • Bazman
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

          Well they do exist of course like Tories in council houses do.

  8. lifelogic
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:17 am | Permalink

    Cameron and Ken Clarke should at least know who to blame for electoral disaster they have inflicted on the party. Who can blame all the fruit cake, clowns and closet racists for not wanting to vote for a federalist, ratting, tax borrow waste and over regulate, expensive energy by design party?

    Alas it is surely too late now to do anything about it.

    • zorro
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:55 pm | Permalink

      It will be enjoyable to see them frantically squirm and some more continued bungling, if not for comedy value. We have to take something positive from their actions……

      zorro

  9. oldtimer
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:24 am | Permalink

    What you say is true. The protest votes do not yet have an effective voice in the legislature in the sense of being able to achieve the changes they seek. Part of the problem, for the Conservative party, is that its leadership is still committed to an EU agenda – free movement across borders, gay marriage, absurd energy policies to name but three – that the disaffected complain about. Until that changes the Conservative party will continue to lose support. How the party adjusts to this new reality is for its MPs to decide. I remain an interested observer.

    • Dan H.
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 4:00 pm | Permalink

      @oldtimer: Point of order here. The gibberingly stupid energy policies of the UK are mostly home-grown stupidity, not EU-derived. The furore about energy-saving lightbulbs was another similar sort of thing; the EU directive said “Use something more efficient than incandescent tungsten”, not “Stick your underpants on your head and rush round banning everything tungsten-derived”. As it happens, tungsten halogens are a bit more efficient, and are visually identical to incandescents.

      Having said this, the EU is not a nice organisation; it is decidedly evil and the sooner we were out of it the better. Do not let EU evil blind you to homegrown evil and stupidity, though.

  10. English Pensioner
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:41 am | Permalink

    It’s not only the EU, UKIP are picking up some traditional Tory policies, such as Grammar Schools, and whilst they admit these are “aspirations”, it’s better to have aspirations than to have no real beliefs which seems to be the Tory position at present.

  11. Steve Cox
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:46 am | Permalink

    There’s still two years until the next election, and at the current rate that the face of British politics is changing I would counsel that it’s very unwise of anybody to simply write UKIP off as a distraction that will rob the Conservatives of a lot of seats but which will fail to win many itself. Two years is a long time in politics, and I feel that Mr. Cameron has unintentionally caused a sea change. He now claims to be focusing on areas of concern to traditional Conservative voters, such as immigration, in an attempt to win back defecting voters. The trouble for him is that people can clearly see his lack of sincerity, and the fact that he has betrayed them so often in the past on matters such as gay marriage, gutting the armed forces, and squandering vast amounts of money on a bloated overseas aid budget, means that they will not give him the benefit of the doubt and return to the Tory fold, at least not while he is in charge. And there is your Catch 22, John. Mr. Farage has said that he would happily consider an alliance with a Eurosceptical Conservative party, but not if it is led by Mr. Cameron. Your only hope of winning the next election is therefore to ditch Mr. Cameron as leader and form an alliance, but there is no chance of the party doing that.

  12. Roy Grainger
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:52 am | Permalink

    Althoug a majority voted for Labour (a somewhat smaller majority than at the general election) that does not mean a majority would vote to stay in the EU. The leaking of Labour support to UKIP, though small, may induce them to support a referendum. If (as you advocated John) people should not have voted for UKIP then I expect Labour would have won with a larger share of the vote (because anti-EU Labour supporters are far less likely to make the jump to the Conservatives with their weak “renegotiate” jam tomorrow stance than to UKIP) and would have had less incentive to change policy. So, following up you question of a few days ago, it was clear success for UKIP though you no doubt will point out the few actual council seats they gained – their success is in setting the agenda and influencing the main two parties.

  13. Brian Tomkinson
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:58 am | Permalink

    Just remind me, who took us in to what is now known as the EU and signed the Maastricht treaty in 1992? Never mind, I have a long memory. Your party is not eurosceptic, never has been and definitely is not under the current leadership. More people certainly voted for UKIP in South Shields, over 3000 more than voted for your candidate! From nowhere they were supported by more than twice as many voters than your candidate. You want the UK to leave the EU but stay a member of a europhile party. Many of us don’t believe the talk of referendum and certainly don’t believe that your party would campaign for a vote to leave the EU in the unlikely event of one being held. What are you going to do to remove us from “the grip of the EU”?

    • Dan
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:19 am | Permalink

      The Tory eurosceptics haven’t the courage to take decisive action and step away from their traitorous party. Party before country.

    • JimF
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:09 am | Permalink

      Yes, the Tories are now caught in a pincer grip of their own making.

      Promising jam tomorrow doesn’t and won’t work, because the electorate sees through it, and it is too late now for them to do anything about the promises they made for this Parliament.

      Not just on the EU, but on lower taxes, lower benefits bill, cutting public sector, cutting regulation, cutting immigration, breaking up banks, stopping the green uneconomic drift, paying down debt, bringing back Grammar schools, removing state snooping and interference.

      As Farage says, it is a mindset, and most leading Tories now aren’t in that mindset.
      We might be clowns, but we might also be right and we’re certainly winning the argument.

    • Anonymous
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

      Southshields Electorate 62,979; Turnout 24,736

      Perhaps many Eurosceptics stayed at home.

  14. Barry Sheridan
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:19 am | Permalink

    Dear Mr Redwood, you run a tolerant blog, which perhaps is just as well given the disaffection amongst the general public for much of the political establishment, attitudes that often reverberate in the responses to your commentary.

    I see once more your able to accurately determine what lies at the heart of these results, an assessment that begs the question, How come the main political party’s leaders cannot? The disappointing answer must centre around arrogant disregard of the how ordinary people see affairs. A situation that seems unlikely to change in the genuine sense because most of those in positions of power today really are paid up believers in the EU dream, a fantasy that is destroying the soul of Europe with its indifference to everyday cares. I admit to constantly finding it incredible that those at the centre of this monstrosity really seem unable to recognise the destructive influences their decision making is having. Certainly I rarely hear of anyone discussing how to turn matters around in a manner that will offer opportunity to the many young people who currently have little chance of making a life for themselves. This spreading stain certainly casts a black shadow over a sub continent that likes to hold itself up as an example to the rest of the world.

  15. Javelin
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:20 am | Permalink

    I just heard Grant say “lots more to do” – I remember New Labour rattling that old line out. What it doesn’t say is we’re changing. Just more of the same. He contradicts that when he says “he gets it” – but he practically choked saying UKIP and didn’t say anything more about what he gets or how he’s going to change. Sad. Really sad to think so many Conservative MPs and Councillors will lose their job today and in the next election because Dave is a follower of national polls rather than a leader of a nation.

  16. Acorn
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:38 am | Permalink

    Nice spin JR, very difficult to hide the elephant, in the room this morning; UKIP. Under your post “No great UKIP breakthrough pending according to polls and press” (Apr 29, 2013), I said “There are a lot of probable voters saying they will vote UKIP, but knowing some voting history in my Parish, I am not convinced they will.” I got that wrong in spades so far.

    You say, “The truth is EU government is not working in the interests of the voters. It is deeply resented and opposed by many, … ” The UK government ain’t working in the interest of voters either; banks yes, voters no. You will have to give out free, those RBS and Lloyds shares to buy back some votes. Keeping in mind that we have already paid for them, as usual.

    • Acorn
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 4:41 pm | Permalink

      You have got to hand it to Nigel Farage. He has taken UKIP from nothing to a quarter of the vote share in what is normally, a conservative shire counties election jamboree. An election anomaly that occurs because of our screwed up local government architecture in England; government of the 99% for the 1% by the 1%.

      As my neighbour said this morning, having woken to a UKIP win our division; ” … from now on, don’t vote for any sitting tenants at District; County or Westminster; it’s the only way we are going to change anything.”

      I had to agree with her.

  17. Tad Davison
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:54 am | Permalink

    With the exception of one, these were all local elections, but the connotations are far-reaching. Note, that people vote by tradition, which is why South Shields keeps voting for Labour MPs. The Tories have traditional seats too, but new traditions are constantly being created, and if people get in the habit of voting UKIP, at whatever level, then the Tories in particular, have a massive long-term problem. And those within the Tory party who dismiss these country-wide results as an irrelevance, are guilty of breath-taking arrogance, because dipping a toe in the water locally, can one day become a wholesale plunge in a General Election.

    Even though the bulk of these elections were local, many of the issues on the doorstep related to the EU either directly or indirectly, especially where immigration is concerned. With the acknowledgement that the three main parties are all basically, if not soundly for the unqualified disaster zone that is the EU, the only alternative for the hapless voter is for more of them to vote UKIP.

    Labour, and the off-the-wall Lib Dems and greens, are unlikely to change direction, but the Tories can, even at the eleventh hour. But who would trust them, especially under the present leader?

    People just aren’t buying the pro-EU parties any more. They can see how the EU steamroller is failing, and are making the move towards someone else.

    Nigel Farage made an appeal to former Tory minister, Michael Portillo, on the BBC’s ‘This Week’ programme last night, and repeated it again this morning. He said, ‘Please! Keep Ken Clarke on your front bench!’

    I would go as far as to say, Clarke isn’t the only one the Tories need to get rid of, there’s a whole raft of them, but as another commenter on these pages rightly said, Cameron likes to keep Clarke there. He dare not get rid of a pro-EU (oh how I would like to use the most appropriate word, but John wouldn’t let me) like Clarke, because Cameron would erode his own powerbase.

    The Tories are still wedded to the EU, but they would like us to think otherwise, so I wonder just how far down the tubes the Tory party needs to go, before it recognises they cannot fool all of the people all of the time?

    And God knows they have already fooled most of the people for most of the time!

    Tad Davison

    Cambridge

    • Kenneth
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:28 am | Permalink

      I don’t agree that the “Tories are still wedded to the EU”.

      I think that the joint effects of the LibDems and the UK civil service are too powerful to overcome.

      • Tad Davison
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 11:49 am | Permalink

        Kenneth,

        I hear what you’re saying, and I have some sympathy with that view, but what is that saying about the strength (or the lack of it) of the Tory leadership?

        A democratically elected politician has a mandate from the people to do as the people wish. The Civil Service are precisely that, servants, and must not be allowed to hold sway.

        As for the Lib Dems, they need to be showed up for what they really are, but I don’t see much evidence of that from the Tory leadership, and that can only be because secretly, the Tory leadership agree with much of what the woollies say. Prove me wrong Cameron!

        The people I really feel for, are the true-blue anti-EU Tories who have fought hard against this lunacy for decades, only to have been proven right by the highly predictable disaster that our EU membership has brought with it.

        On this, I agree with Red Ed Moribund, although in a slightly different context. David Cameron just doesn’t get it. He still has people like Clarke at his right hand. And if the Tories do equally badly in the Euro-elections next year, they won’t have much time to ditch Cameron and the likes of Clarke before the inevitable melt-down at the ensuing General Election.

        Despite the blinkered opinions of some on this blog, who choose not to study historical facts, Labour have been an unmitigated disaster and would be again. We cannot chance that, but somebody has to fight the corner of common sense and reality. Right now, it’s down to UKIP. The Tory front bench just haven’t got the backbone, so little wonder the public are finally turning to someone who has!

        Tad

        • Chris S
          Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:14 pm | Permalink

          Would anyone dare place a substantial wager against UKIP taking 30-40% of the vote at the Euro elections in 2014 ?

  18. Wokingham Mums
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:56 am | Permalink

    Cameron & Co listening now?
    EU Referendum – this term
    Grammar schools – this term
    Immigration controls – this term
    Return to the right – this term
    Distance the Libdems – this term
    Economy results – this term
    Growth & jobs – this term
    All of the above and Cameron gets a next term

    • JimF
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:15 am | Permalink

      Too late
      It’s not going to happen before 2015
      Neither breaking up the banks to liberate them from their rip-off artists

    • Christopher Ekstrom
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 1:08 pm | Permalink

      No “lurch to the Right”. Good: NO little davey boy prancer, Cast Iron main-chancer. Remove this horrible misleader NOW, Mr. Redwood (Et Alia )!!!!

    • alan jutson
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:17 pm | Permalink

      Wokingham Mums

      Most us us would agree with you, but Mr Cameron does not see it this way.

      Thus only if Ed Miliband fails even more than he has already, will Cameron get a chance at a second term.

      Mr Cameron has been too timid for too long.

    • Bazman
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

      All above will prevent all above and woman will feel it the most. Interesting how IDS is against the automatic paying of benefits into childrens main carers account, which is usually the mother in his universal credit fatwa. Wonder why? Is he strengthening the family unit by empowering the man? You have a think girls where this will lead. The pub is a good start. A right wing fantasy with real implications for woman and children.

  19. Kenneth
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:19 am | Permalink

    What is more obvious than ever is that the Conservatives MUST start work with UKIP on a joint strategy to win the next general election. I am sure that neither party can deliver what the country needs on its own. There must be some sort of electoral arrangement and voters need time to get used to the idea.

    Of course, the BBC’s promotion of UKIP which has largely led to a spectacular rise in votes would surely stop once such a pact was made. However it must be done at some time so why not now?

    Me Redwood, you are in a good position to represent the Conservative Party to start ‘formal’ talks with UKIP. Why don’t you suggest it?

    • Mike Wilson
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:59 am | Permalink

      The BBC’s promotion of UKIP? Have you been in the Tardis to a parallel universe?

      This morning on the BBC they had some old bloke from America playing a guitar made from hub caps – or some such nonsense. For the half hour I watched BBC breakfast, the rise of UKIP didn’t get a mention.

      • lifelogic
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:59 pm | Permalink

        This morning some bbc chap was suggesting that UKIP voters are the sort of people who do not take up MMR jabs! Oh well better than Clowns and Racists I suppose. The BBC have over the years been absurdly unfair to UKIP and absurdly pro the green and libdems. Both much smaller now in support terms.

        • Bazman
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 4:01 pm | Permalink

          Which BBC chap and where did you hear it? In a Pub by any chance? Has a point though. They believe in unsubstantiated bigotry and fantasy politics. If they got in tax cuts for the rich, cuts in elf safety, and massive job losses would ensue. Thatchers policies were supported by oil paying the dole money what would thy have? Blame it on the unemployed? I can see why you support them.

          • Edward2
            Posted May 6, 2013 at 11:27 am | Permalink

            It was Nick Robinson who used the MMR analogy and it was on BBC News 24 around lunchtime on the day after the election when the results were being analysed Baz.
            So not in a pub from a man as you suspect, but yet another smear from the establishment.

    • JimF
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 10:22 am | Permalink

      UKIP won’t do any deals with Cameron and his chums. They represent the unacceptable face of Toryism, and really for a decent Coalition to deliver you’d need to have like minds (as now in this Coalition, which is delivering the stasis that the main participants want).

    • scottspeig
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 11:39 am | Permalink

      The problem is of course that UKIP are no longer just “disenfranchised Tories” and if they committed a deal with the Conservative party would end up causing a problem with their own voter base.

      UKIP seem to be making headway in areas that are Tory averse and with certain demographs. Whether they manage to make headway is unclear, but I think they will lose if a deal is wrought. Be interesting to see whether John thinks a deal would be good or bad, but all this implies a deal is even negotiable!

    • Dan
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

      He’d shaft UKIP given half a chance

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

      I’m sure that at the grassroots level there are many decent patriotic people in both parties who would be prepared to co-operate for the national good.

      But at the top level, I wonder what sort of agreement there could ever be between:

      1. The leader of a party which is constitutionally committed to withdrawal from the EU and the restoration of national democratic self-government; and

      2. The leader of a party who is content to see many, maybe now most, of our laws determined by transnational majority voting in EU institutions, and who many see as being a closet eurofederalist and very few would trust to keep his word on anything.

  20. Anthem
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:49 am | Permalink

    A complete lack of direction and principles has now bitten the Conservatives on the backside. They are now in an unwinnable position.

    To side with UKIP at this stage or even to declare an EU Referendum tomorrow would be damaging for them because that would be a demonstration of the reactionary, expedient, range-of-the-moment, populist politics that most people are criticising them for.

    If you want to lead, lead. Nail your colours to the mast, lay your beliefs on the line, lay your principles on the line, let us consider them, vote on them and, if enough of us agree with you, you get in power and then you must stick to them.

    Don’t just make them up as you go along. Whatever the Conservatives do now is only going to be seen as a desperate attempt to cling onto power.

    At this stage, I strongly believe that it is Conservative that is holding back UKIP – not the other way around.

    Many people vote Conservative because they want a return of something like Thatcherism but Thatcher was never a Conservative. The Conservatives never wanted her at the start and they sure as hell didn’t want her in the end.

    The policies need a bit of tweaking but the general thrust of UKIP is very much in line with Thatcherism (pro-Britain, pro-enterprise, lower taxation, smaller government etc). There is a stated intention in there, a set of principles, a direction – everything that Conservatives no longer have.

    I think a lot of Conservatives now have to make a choice and I am talking about the people within the party as well as the voters as they ask themselves the serious question of “What, if anything, does this party stand for these days and do I want to continue to offer it my support?”

    I doubt this comment will get through the moderation but I feel better for having said it… thank you.

    • Ken Adams
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 4:40 pm | Permalink

      “I doubt this comment will get through the moderation but I feel better for having said it… thank you.”

      Anthem, this is John Redwoods Blog, as far as I know, you only ever get blocked if your comment can interpreted as defamation against a named person, that is to protect Mr Redwood from legal challenges.

      • Ross G
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

        Indeed, our host is not without his failings, who is? But he’s a decent bloke who means well and is on the side of the angels, as it were. He’s just been in the Tory party too long. 🙂

      • Anthem
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 11:07 pm | Permalink

        Indeed. I detected an understandable “prickliness” in Mr Redwood’s tone today though and it is to his credit that he has allowed all these pro-UKIP comments through the net although he himself must be hurting.

        Mr Redwood is one of the good guys though and I have always thought so.

        Reply I am not prickly at all. I am glad that electors are now saying clearly they think the issues over too much EU power and imterference that I have highlighted for more than 20 years are important. I now want the enthusiasm to get our democracy back channelled in a way which gives us the power to do so, not splittting the vote so we are furtehr away than ever from solving the crisis. That is why I wish to harness the commonsense of the UK voters directly through an early referendum.

        • Anthem
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

          So, you would like a referendum BEFORE the next GE?

          The other day you were talking about “renegotiation” for now and then leave later if we don’t get what we want. Apologies if I have misunderstood or misinterpreted but I’m a little confused – we also don’t have much time now.

          The thing is this: UKIP have been resurgent in recent years because the “main” parties have done nothing but wade us further into the EU mire.

          I hate to say it but whatever campaigning you and others have done, it has little observable, practical effect.

          The people are tired of politicians playing their political games with OUR country and are now taking action.

          It is indeed unfortunate that this could well lead to a splitting of the votes and the worst case scenario coming to pass that Labour wins almost by default but what other choice do we, the people, have?

          We didn’t go into Europe last week – as you rightly point out, this has been twenty years – the Conservatives have done NOTHING in that time to make the people believe that they want anything other than to keep us in the EU.

          I try to put myself in your shoes. How would I feel if I had dedicated the best of my life to a party that now seems to be poles apart from my own position.

          You are in the right here. Your party is wrong. Yesterday’s results might mean little in the great scheme of things but it was a bright, flashing neon sign being waved at the Tories saying “You are wrong!!!”

          If I had spent 20 years campaigning for something to little or no avail then I would be extremely “prickly” after yesterday’s events.

          Being able to say “I told you so” is scant reward when the party and the country has been led to a situation where the solution has actually now become part of the problem BECAUSE of inaction on the part of the Conservatives for those twenty years.

  21. matthu
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 9:56 am | Permalink

    It is worth reading this account from Alexis McEvoy who used to be the Conservative councillor for the South Waterside ward of Hampshire County Council until yesterday:

    I am very well known in my area, I worked hard as a county councillor. I was part of a council that has done all the right things – kept tax low, cut costs, improved services. My Ukip opponent, charming man though he is, doesn’t even live in the area. They’ve never been here before, but they took ten seats last night.

    So we have to ask ourselves, how on earth has this happened? For Ukip to come from nowhere like this, you have to ask, what is going on?

    There is a problem with the people at the top of our political parties. They just don’t listen. They don’t listen to ordinary people or our concerns.

    The European Union referendum is a good example. They all promise a referendum, but come the time, they change their minds and say ‘You don’t need a referendum”.

    David Cameron says he’ll have a referendum, but no-one believes a word he says. I don’t believe a word he says, and I’m a lifelong Conservative.

    Then there’s immigration. Whenever anyone brings up immigration, they are fearful they are called racist, they are called names, and no one likes being called names. People tend not to voice their views, they are afraid to speak.

    There are a lot of concerns about the right to free movement that comes with the EU. It doesn’t seem right that we can’t do anything about it. To be told that as a free sovereign state, we can’t make that decision ourselves, that is a worry.

    The Ukip messages chime with everybody, but they have done the Conservatives most harm, and I think that’s our own fault in a way.

    For some unknown reason, David Cameron and his advisers seem to think that a lot of Conservative voters’ values are out-of-date and need to be modernised and thrown out.

    These are values that we have held true to for years, and now they are being ditched.

    We stood up for things in the past. We don’t stand up for anything any more.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/local-elections/10035060/Tory-councillor-dishonest-Cameron-has-ditched-our-values.-No-wonder-people-are-voting-Ukip.html

    • Dan
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:23 pm | Permalink

      Seems McEvoy hadn’t the courage to stand with a party which did represent her views…..a typical trait of Conservative eurosceptics!

  22. Glenn Vaughan
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 10:08 am | Permalink

    Congratulations to UKIP!

    I hope the remaining results to come sustain their improved electoral performance.

  23. waramess
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 10:09 am | Permalink

    …”Labour, the very party that gave away many of our rights to self government in the federalist Treaties of Nice, Amsterdam and Lisbon. ”

    This really is stretching the truth in order to make a very feeble point. The Conservatives have been equally culpable and the electorate know it.

    As a body corporate the Conservative Party are just as Europhile as Labour (if a little less honest) and therein lies one of the problems.

    Who do you vote for if you oppose EU, money printing currency devaluation, windmills, high energy bills, big government? Well just look out because the electors have just found out there is an option

  24. D K McGregor
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    UKIP can have their referendum at the next General election by only putting up camdidates to oppose Tory euro supporting candidates , it might get a few more Tory MPs off the fence and get British politics back to a proper contest beteen left and right instead of the balloon on a stick posturing we suffer now in the name of winning the centre .

  25. Edward2
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 11:22 am | Permalink

    Another set of elections where the large number of postal votes has had its effect on the outcomes.
    Will there ever be a proper examination and then elimination of, the ease how fraud can happen in the current system of postal voting?

    • uanime5
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:39 pm | Permalink

      Do you have any evidence that the result of any local election would have been different if postal votes weren’t considered? If so please provide evidence of this.

      • Edward2
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 7:21 pm | Permalink

        On Sky news today it was said that over half the votes cast in the by election were postal votes which is very unusual.
        In Birmingham in the last election judge called the level of controls of the arrangements and scrutiny of postal votes as being akin to a banana republic.
        Look it up yourself Uni,

  26. behindthefrogs
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    You seem to have completely missed the point. Apart from South Sheilds these are local elections. They have almost nothing to do with the EU. Many but unfortunately not all electors have been voting on the future direction of their local council.

    UKIP has some policies like preservation of the green belt which are very much local issues. The leaflets of many conservative libdem and labour candidates seem to have confused this election with a general election and completely ignored most local issues. No wonder there was a protest vote. When the main parties open their eyes and start canvassing on local issues for local elections some of us will return to voting for their candidates. Meanwhile our votes will go elsewhere.

    Reply Some of the UKIP leaflets I saw were all about national and EU issues.

    • behindthefrogs
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 10:53 pm | Permalink

      I agree that the protest vote was probably misplaced but it doesn’t excuse the main parties from wrongly concentrating on national issues rather than the local ones that they should have been worrying bout.

      The good news is that the Isle of Wight seems to have got the message and elected a council made up mainly of independents. Perhaps next year other parts of the country will get the message and follow them.

  27. Denis Cooper
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

    “A majority of those voting in South Shields voted Labour, the very party that gave away many of our rights to self government in the federalist Treaties of Nice, Amsterdam and Lisbon.”

    Now, now, you know that the process started with accession to the EEC under Heath, which was a brazen breach of the Tory manifesto promise for the 1970 general election –

    “Our sole commitment is to negotiate; no more, no less”

    – and which most of the Labour party then opposed while most of the Tory party supported it, and which he got pushed through the Commons with the help of rebel Labour MPs led by Roy Jenkins to counteract the small number of rebel Tory MPs, but which he got through the Tory dominated Lords without the slightest difficulty, it barely touched the sides.

    And you know that having campaigned for a “Yes” vote in the 1975 retrospective referendum Thatcher then destroyed the basis for that public consent, the government pamphlet having given the electorate the reassurance that Parliament would not lose its power because –

    “The Minister representing Britain can veto any proposal for a new law or a new tax if he considers it to be against British interests.”

    – by pushing for the abolition of national vetoes, and it was while Thatcher was Prime Minister that the Tory party, uniquely among the three main parties, dared to display the EC flag on the backdrop to the platform at its national conference, and moreover giving it the position of honour as superior to the British flag.

    And you know that Major adamantly refused to hold a referendum on the Maastricht Treaty –

    “game set and match for Britain”

    he claimed, the lying *******; and he would have had us in the euro if he hadn’t been stopped by some other ********; and he resorted to a confidence vote to get it through the Commons, too many self-seeking Tory MPs being far more concerned about losing their seats and their political careers if there was a general election, than about the Parliament of which they were members losing even more power through that treaty.

    And you know that the Tory party pushed hard for EU enlargement knowing very well that it could lead to a flood of economic migrants from those much poorer countries, which would have been true even after the maximum transitional period of seven years – see where Romania and Bulgaria now compare with the UK in terms of per capita GDP.

    “It is also the party that gave away our right to control our own borders, and invited in so many new migrants from the rest of the EU after years of a more restrained migration policy.”

    I think you will find that this can be traced back to Article 3 of the 1957 Treaty of Rome that Heath imposed upon us with the support of most of the Tory party.

    Reply You n ormally stick to facts, but this time you twist them. As you well know Conservatives kept an opt out on borders/migration/social chapter which Labour needlessly gave away along with a chunk of our rebate.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

      I am sticking to the facts.

      We got an “opt-out” from Schengen, which is still in place under protocols to the EU treaties, but Heath first committed us to the principle of the free movement of persons by accepting Article 3(c) of the 1957 Treaty of Rome:

      http://www.eurotreaties.com/rometreaty.pdf

      “ARTICLE 3

      For the purposes set out in Article 2, the activities of the Community shall include, as provided in this Treaty and in accordance with the timetable set out therein

      (a) the elimination, as between Member States, of customs duties and of quantitative restrictions on the import and export of goods, and of all other measures having equivalent effect;

      (b) the establishment of a common customs tariff and of a common commercial
      policy towards third countries;

      (c) the abolition, as between Member States, of obstacles to freedom of movement for persons, services and capital; … “

  28. Bernard Juby
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    Enoch Powell’s (speech-ed) quoted out of context in the 50’s on uncontrolled immigration could well erupt EU-wide as a result of Brussels’ policies from un-elected bureaucrats.
    Perhaps UKIP’s 25% of the vote could shake Cameroon’s faith in listening to the Tory Grandees and listen to the electorate for a change.
    It’s time he went. A cast-iron promise is a cast-iron promise which he reneged on once his snout was in number 10. The electorate have long memories! He has had his wake-up call.

  29. forthurst
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

    “Ukip voters, [Grant Shapps] says, are simply “impatient for change” and their demands – curbing immigration and welfare spending, restoring the economy and repatriating powers from Europe – are the same as the Tories.”

    RBS has announced it will be ready to return to the private sector next year, after the taxpayer will have taken a large hit on his ‘investment’, presumably. RBS, however, is an unnatural entity, much like the now subsumed BoS, an example of how much money can be lost in taking over far better run but ill-fitting English financial institutions and profligate lending to extend the ‘asset’ base. Presumably, should the Scots decide to become independent, RBS will be their dowry from the English taxpayer, and a significant part of the UK will depend on it for banking services.

    RBS and Lloyds must be returned to their previously functional components otherwise the UK economy will not recover. Will this happen? Not when we have a Tory Party, run exclusively by and for slippery customers like Cameron and Shapps whose overriding interests are in promoting neocon wars of aggression in Asia and North Africa, shedding crocodile tears when inevitably our servicemen our lost or grievously injured fighting their unnecessary wars, pretending to control immigration whilst encouraging immigration from India, and continuing to subsume us into a European melting pot which is actually simmering with fractious rage rather than singing ‘Ode to Joy’ in harmony as the gay wedding bells are ringing.

  30. Bert Young
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

    Before you get a cold or any sort of an illness , there are always a number of warning signs . If you are prudent and wish to stay in good health , you take heed of what is happening , seek help if necessary including taking the odd medicine or two . The results yesterday are warning signs – particularly to the Conservative Party ; looking at the evidence I would say its state of health was bordering on the catastrophic and the cure was beyond the odd medicine or two ; an amputation is necessary in the leadership . No amount of outside help or advice can change the course of action required ; the head of the patient should resign himself as the speediest and most effective approach back to health .

  31. John B
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

    Mr Redwood: judging by opinion polls and the results in the local elections, your analysis certainly is shared by the majority of the electorate.

    It also stands up to objective assessment.

    What people cannot understand is why David Cameron, and for that matter the other two ‘leaders’, cannot or will not see it.

    Why in the face of all evidence to the contrary about the EU (and the global warming scam) does David Cameron insist on driving the bus, pell mell, towards the cliff and persist in carrying on with what is surely going to destroy the UK when the remedy is easily within his control?

    1. Is he really so stupid he simply cannot understand?
    2. He does understand but he is so stuffed with his own conceit he will not back down?
    3. He is in the pay/under the power of some agency wanting to destroy the UK?
    4. He does understand but has not the mental equipment to reolve the situation?

    What ever the answer, time for him to go surely.

  32. Electro-Kevin
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

    I have spoken to the many who voted UKIP in my circle. It needs to be noted that our vote for UKIP was no bluff and will be carried out at the general election.

    Lifelogic’s earlier comment is worth repeating in response to this post: “Those pesky Tories splitting the Eurosceptic vote.”

    In 1997 I abstained. I recall John Major losing control of our borders then and that’s why.

    There is no rejoicing here. We are very worried in fact.

    Abu Qatada has done the country a great service in exposing the Tories.

    • Bazman
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

      Abstained couldn’t decide or couldn’t be arsed? Or in the case of MP’s sitting on the fence and need to be sacked for not working.

      • Electro-Kevin
        Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:18 pm | Permalink

        Bazman – I abstained because I had no-one who represented my views to vote for.

        Clearly disenfranchisement is a frustration that you’ve never experienced. Lucky you. No wonder you can afford to be so sanguine about things.

        I have not been alone in that feeling, obviously: David Cameron was unable to win an election against a deeply unpopular PM in the midst of an economic crash and look at today’s UKIP gains. It says it all really.

        Bulgarians and Romanians are yet to qualify for UK citizenship. It’s all very well Mr Cameron assuring us that their diplomats predict no major influx but the question has to be what can Mr Cameron do about it anyway ?

        Nothing.

        He is helpless. This will finish the Tories for sure, least of all because the press owe the PM no favours.

        It is my belief that the Tory party will never form a majority government again. It is also my belief that they will be wiped out at the next general election.

        You must know this too. Why do you come here ? To gloat ?

        • Bazman
          Posted May 4, 2013 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

          To make sure. They are just sleeping..

  33. Barbara
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    They are all at it, saying UKIP won’t sustain these results in a general election, how do they know? To hear them talk UKIP wouldn’t make gains this time, but they’ve done so well its shook them to the roots. Its all down to the EU, Immigration, foreign aid budget, and wars, we don’t want, and no growth. Unemployment amongst the young at record high levels. Most of all its being ignored by the elite on a referendum, who assume they have the right to decide, they don’t. If we are living in a democracy its the will of the people who decide not politicians.
    Now perhaps they will truly listen to us and make changes to accommodate our beliefs and wishes. The time has come for change, and its hitting all parties not just the Conservatives, and that should be a wide shot across all their beams. Well done UKIP, I hope now the Conservatives will negotiate with UKIP to stop Labour getting the next government by default.

  34. nTropywins
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

    John

    Hi. Hope you are ok.

    There is no doubt that the times they are a changing. It is understandable that in public you put a brave face on it and try to downplay the importance of the surge of support for UKIP.

    Given that your party is wedded to, and the economy is effectively hobbled by, the LibDem eco nut jobs, the support for UKIP can only get stronger as we run up to the next general election, with a bit of oomph imparted by the EU elections in the interim.

    Being an educated man you will know that xenophobia is hardwired into the human brain by hundreds of thousands of years of evolution. That hardwiring cannot be reprogrammed by Acts of Parliament. A friend of mine tells me of a man he has known for 40 years or more, a member of the Workers Socialist Party all his life. This man announces recently that he has switched to UKIP. Why on earth asks my friend (himself an active LibDem supporter). Aahh says our man, where I live, we are inundated with immigrants. It may not be politically correct, John, but that is a view supported by a lot of ordinary folks.

    And let us not forget the ace in the deck. UKIP have not yet highlighted the fact that they are the only major political party that has an energy policy that was not designed in kindergarten.

    As I say, John, the writing is on the wall. The Tories will rue the day they got into bed with the LibDem losers. Whatever influence you currently have has a very short lease of life. Make the most of it.

    As always, I wish you well.

    Reply I do not downplay nor overplay the importance of UKIP votes. I seek to provide sensible analysis of the reality. Winning 147 Council seats on County Councils is interesting, but not in itself world changing.

    • nTropywins
      Posted May 4, 2013 at 8:16 am | Permalink

      One of the other things that evolution has given the human brain is the power of thought. Whilst it appears to the casual observer that most of those that live in the Westminster bubble have put that rather important faculty on permanent hold, those that live in the real world have to exercise their grey cells nearly once a month just to stay alive.

      Some years ago I entered into non-productive communication with Nick Clegg about climate change and the futility of policies based on renewables. Like all good bubblists, Nick ensures that his cognitive processes are at all times suppressed by his belief in the Green God. Accordingly he was (and it seems still is) unable to see that his stupidity will ultimately be tested in the real world where evil capitalist investors decide where real money is spent. And this chapter of the story is just now being writ large. I would recommend an excellent analysis by Peter Atherton of Liberum Capital if you have the time. Pretty much what I told Clegg in 2009 but I had to keep it simple obviously. No words with more than 2 syllables.

      Stay safe John. The country needs every good man it can muster.

  35. Ken Adams
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:25 pm | Permalink

    Still stuck in the Conservative Labour mindset what does it matter which of these parties gave away what to the EU they are both equally responsible for the state this country is now in.

    The vote if you are really listening should tell you we want something done about it, we do not want promises for a referendum some time never when the government will be using our money to campaign for staying in the PM has already told us that is what he intends to do, he has already said he will ignore a vote to leave.

    We know you cannot renegotiate anything important, it follows that we know anyone suggesting such intends for this country to stay in the EU.

  36. ian wragg
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:59 pm | Permalink

    I note Unimeg is very quiet today!!!!!

  37. Anne
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 3:59 pm | Permalink

    In the short time left before the General Election in 2015 there is not enough time at all to renegotiate, even if you propose or an”IN” or “OUT” Referendum before the 2015 Election we remember that “No Parliament can bind another” and it is hardly likely the Conservatives that I used to vote for, will get into power again. Sadly I no longer trust a referendum any longer anyway. However in 2015 “There’ll be a referendum coming, only we’ll be calling it a General Election.” In other Words we will have to use the General Election as the REFERENDUM the people have been denied all these years and make sure that they only vote for those Political Parties that want to come out of the EU.

    Time is getting too short before the EU will have EVERYTHING THEY WANT FOR THEIR ONE STATE OF EUROPEAN UNION. It saddens me that lost of what this Government has done since it has been in power is implement EU Legislation. There is very little left to hold on to, to drag back that which has been given away already-sorry that should be “PAID” heavily to give away. The deliberate changing of our long standing Common Law Constitution in NINE parts of our Constitution this Country has gone to WAR TWICE to protect, yet those presently in our Parliament are willing and paying to CHANGE our Constitution for the EU’s EQUALITY ACT. There is absolutely no point in having ANYONE in those two Houses of Parliament if they cannot Govern us according to our Constitution. The Constitution we fought to keep in that last war and which I remember very well every bomb that rained down an us and bombed our Houses.

  38. uanime5
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

    A majority of those voting in South Shields voted Labour, the very party that gave away many of our rights to self government in the federalist Treaties of Nice, Amsterdam and Lisbon.

    Maybe they voted Labour because they agreed with the policies of the Local Council.

    So far the Conservatives have retained control of 5 Councils, and 2 have passed to no overall control – probably to bureaucrat controlled.

    This is probably due to the unpopularity of the Conservatives’ policies, rather than the EU. Giving the poor benefit cuts while giving the wealthy tax cuts was always going to result in the Conservatives losing votes.

    It is deeply resented and opposed by many, especially in the Euro zone where it is at its most powerful and most damaging.

    Given that political parties that oppose the euro and EU do not get the majority of the votes it’s clear that only a minority of the people in the eurozone oppose the euro and EU.

    a split Eurosceptic majority that still does not have a majority where it counts.

    UKIP has gotten 144 Councillors, while the Conservatives have lost 320 Councillors and control of 10 Councils. So the loss of Conservative seats is more likely to do with the Conservatives’ policies being unpopular, rather than the vote being split. There’s also nothing to prevent Conservative and UKIP councillors forming a eurosceptic coalition in a council.

    A possible solution is to introduce a more proportional system to prevent the vote being split between two parties. Perhaps a system where you can give your vote to an alternate party if the first party you voted for doesn’t get enough votes. So a system like the one used to elect Police Commissioners and the Mayor of London.

    Also here is a map of the election results:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21240025

    Greece and Spain end up with more than half their young people unemployed, and with 1 in 8 who want work not finding jobs through the Eurozone as a whole.

    Both of which were caused by the 2008 financial crisis, not the EU or euro.

    • Edward2
      Posted May 4, 2013 at 8:20 am | Permalink

      Uni,
      I read this post quietly thinking the arguments were logical and had some merit, until the very last sentence.
      You have moved from your usual uncharitable view that it was all their own fault, to saying its al the fault of the 2008 crash, which is an improvement, but to say being in the EU and being locked into the Euro has had no negative effect on them is plainly incorrect.

  39. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

    Maastricht was the first of the federalist Treaties because it legitimised creation of the Euro. When it was negotiated, Mrs Thatcher saw the opt outs that had been won and was pleased. Then she read the Treaty and found out what it was we had opted out from; she was appalled.

  40. Martyn G
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:00 pm | Permalink

    Does anyone know what it is that the Conservative Party wishes to conserve? I don’t and there seems little evidence that it does, either. Unless you call sound-bites and spin conservation measures?

  41. Alan Wheatley
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

    It was interesting to hear Alan Johnson last night speaking about immigration on BBC1 This Week. His view was that the large rate of immigration seen under the last Labour government was the way of the modern World and there was no going back.

    Well I hope all those who had previously voted Labour will not be going back if Johnson’s views are those of his party.

  42. Credible
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

    John

    Do you really think the people of South Shields who voted Labour were bothered about the EU?
    They voted Labour because they know the Conservative party doesn’t care about poorer urban areas in the north. They voted the way they perceived was best for their own well-being.

    • Ross G
      Posted May 3, 2013 at 8:04 pm | Permalink

      The people of South Shields voted tribally. In South Shields you could field a chimpanzee in a red rosette and it would win,(etc etc)

  43. Anne
    Posted May 3, 2013 at 10:16 pm | Permalink

    There is not enough time at all to renegotiate an “IN” or “OUT” Referendum before the 2015 Election and we remember that, “No Parliament can bind another” and it is hardly likely the Conservatives that I used to vote for, will get into power again.
    Sadly I no longer trust a referendum on this particular subject anyway.

    However in 2015 “There’ll be a referendum coming, only we’ll be calling it a General Election.” In other Words we will have to use the General Election as the REFERENDUM the people have been denied all these years and make sure that they only vote for those Political Parties that want to come out of the EU.

    Time is getting too short before the EU will have EVERYTHING THEY WANT FOR THEIR ONE STATE OF EUROPEAN UNION. It saddens me that most of what this Government has put through re Legislation since it has been in power is EU Legislation. There is very little left to hold on to, to drag back that which has been given away already-sorry that should read, “PAID” heavily to give away.

    The deliberate changing of our long standing Common Law Constitution in NINE parts of our Constitution this Country has gone to WAR TWICE to protect yet those presently in our Parliament are willing and paying to CHANGE our Constitution for the EU’s EQUALITY ACT. There is absolutely no point in having ANYONE in those two Houses of Parliament if they cannot Govern us according to our Constitution. The Constitution we
    fought to keep in that last war which I remember very well every bomb that rained down an us and bombed our Houses.

    • Jerry
      Posted May 4, 2013 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

      @Anne: “However in 2015 “There’ll be a referendum coming, only we’ll be calling it a General Election.” In other Words we will have to use the General Election as the REFERENDUM the people have been denied all these years and make sure that they only vote for those Political Parties that want to come out of the EU.

      But by that score every GE since Lord Goldsmith and his ‘Save the Pound Party’ has been a referendum on EU membership surely, certainly since 1997 the elections have had UKIP standing in (what they considered) ‘winnable’ constituencies and thus EU/Euro issues have been very much to the fore. That said Anne, what do you think will be different in 2015 that will make people use that GE as a referendum any more than they have been using previous elections, yes I know that some people have become more sceptical of the EU since the banking/Euro crisis but that was also true in 2010 – oh hang-on, I do see your point, people did use 2010 in such a way, that is why the Tories failed to gain a working majority, ho-hum.

      Sorry to say, as much as I support the UKIP ideal, what we actually need is for the UKIP and the Tory parties to bury the hatchets, seek an understanding and then stand on a common ticket that will not split the vote. I suspect Mr Farage (and perhaps ever Mr Cameron) understands this, hence why Farage has, in the last couple of days, been very complimentary of the SDP and the way they changed UK politics even though they lost much of their original identity – together we raise, divided we (both) fail…

  44. David Langley
    Posted May 4, 2013 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    John you have said it yourself, your party is not listening, however they may have a greater appetite for it now UKIP has stopped being an irrelevance. Please do not rubbish UKIP by saying that it is a party with no real significance. Certainly we have not reached that tipping point that gives us power to do what is right for our country and a better job than current main parties who are timid and have lost their way in a welter of personal self promotions.
    Realisation is coming and it is not just something new. What you have to realise is that what UKIP wants is not new but a return to sanity and real politics. We need to start looking after the people of Britain first and our own self interest. I have dedicated my youth to helping other countries achieve some form of democracy and self respect while all the while we were losing ours at home. Its time to get our country back, be a realist and admit the Conservative party is losing. Can you stop the rot by adopting UKIP policies, not really, the electorate dont trust you.

    Reply I do n ot rubbish UKIP though UKIP supporters regularly try to rubbish me.

  45. David Langley
    Posted May 4, 2013 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

    John I respect what you say and do especially when you vote for the right policies as espoused by most of your contributors. I just sense despair in your replies a lot when pushed into stating your position.
    I repeat some questions I have asked”
    Has the Foreign Secretary any ideas yet on what EU competencies he is going to submit to parliament before the next election?
    Have the present coalition government made any “ball park” costed plans to cope with an “out “decision referendum?
    Has the present government any idea at all how long a withdrawal from the EU treaties would take?
    What form of cooperation would then be put in place, and anticipated structures eg Europol cooperation etc.

    If Cameron is serious about a referendum then we need to see evidence of an act being passed to allow a referendum where the qualification conditions are the failure to agree certain serious options for withdrawal at the least. As I understand it the attempt to do this has been quashed already.
    In 2015 the British public will more informed about the serious effect our membership is having, as UKIP increases its educative effects.
    How ridiculous is it by the way to moan about the financial mess we are in then immediately throw money away on aid, EU subscriptions and loads of vanity projects. Start looking at the financial targets and focus on the bulls eye, ditch the nice to haves we cant afford them.

  46. Anne
    Posted May 4, 2013 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

    Jerry. The EU is so close now to its State of European Union. (By the way Jerry, I am not in any Political Party or Organisation, never have been and never will be) that if we do not get out of the EU soon, it will become the one State of European Union. Will it go on to become part of the once proposed “World Federation”, that was debated in the UK House of Lords 7th May 1953? I do not know, for since the EU embraced the 16 Mediterranean partner countries from North Africa unto its bosom, there seems to have been nothing but leadership change, war and many ordinary people killed, and still ongoing at present.

    However, the one GREAT change, at long last the people here in the UK have realised that ALL THREE MAJOR POLITICAL PARTIES here in the UK WANT TO REMAIN IN THE EU -FOREVER. The people that want freedom however, need to place their cross along side an Organisation that want freedom from foreign rule. PLUS, and it is a BIG plus, the people cannot afford to keep paying for two Governments and three Parliaments, especially as some are losing their jobs here in the UK. Perhaps i should add, now that Mr Cameron divided ENGLAND into nine EU REGIONS.

    John Redwood does not want to see in the UK what is happening in the Euro Countries at present-the riots, the starvation, the people wanting to earn money for their famies yet can’t. The EU is outdated. It was also an idea that was never going to work, for we can’t understand one another. To make it work every school child should have had Foreign Languages as a priority at school especially here in the UK and from 1953. Too late now of course. Goodbye in eleven of them here for you Jerry.

    Goodbye, Arrivederci, Gia sas, Hasta Luego, Adjö, Näkemiin,
    Farvel, Dag, Au revior, Até logo, and Auf Wiedersehen,
    N’est pas vraiment, C’est un horreur,
    Arrividerci———————until tomorreur!!!!

    • Jerry
      Posted May 5, 2013 at 9:04 am | Permalink

      @Anne: “The EU is so close now to its State of European Union. (By the way Jerry, I am not in any Political Party or Organisation, never have been and never will be) that if we do not get out of the EU soon, it will become the one State of European Union.

      Indeed, many if not all agree (even the europhiles), but why then -as a europhobe- do you suggest that the 2015 GE should be used as a referendum when doing so will surely hurt the right far more than the more europhile centre and centre-left, thus allowing either a straight working majority or a coalition of those two groups?!

      Also, if the majority of people voting in a GE vote for eurosceptic or europhile parties and not a europhobic parties what does that tell us about the UK’s relationship with the EU, that the majority are happy or that democracy doesn’t work and thus we need to change?…

      Oh and even though UKIP supported PR at the referendum, before signing such praises, do remember that just as many europhile parties would gain from PR as would europhobic parties.

One Trackback

  • 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