Peter Oborne, in that which will probably be the 'op-ed' piece for tomorrow's Daily Telegraph has what, for him, is a reasonable bit of prose and one which makes a fair number of good points - although he who is probably my favourite blogger will probably disagree! As a member of Ukip, the comments I am about to make - ones well known to those in the upper echelons - will no doubt bring forth criticism.
Oborne is no doubt correct when he maintains that Ukip is the Conservative Party in exile (or what used to be the Conservative Party before the 'Cameron rebranding' changed it beyond all recognition). One only has to read Ukip's manifesto to realise that the policies on which Ukip campaigns is that on which the original Conservative Party campaigned. Ukip suffers, without doubt, from the label of being a 'one-trick-pony', namely exiting membership of the European Union, one which unfortunately for them is firmly fixed in the mindset of the electorate
That this is due to a lack of good presentation of their policies, an abysmal website and bad administration is, I believe, matters that are undeniably true. That Farage is an extremely good speaker, one who uses language with which the man in the street can resonate is, again, undeniable and as an example of that it is only necessary to see the reaction he received from the audience of Question Time last week where that audience made their views plain. However it would seem from appearances that Farage has committed the error, one practised by all party leaders, of having surrounded himself with sycophants; otherwise I maintain the party would be polling far better than it has of late - and that is not to decry the recent improvement the party has made, albeit one that can be laid at the door of the heightened present coverage of the EU in the media.
The other criticism I have - and it is purely a personal one - is that Ukip appear to wish for the continuance of the existing system of representative democratised dictatorship, albeit with more use of referenda, rather than a participatory system of democracy. The latter would 'sit' well within their stated view that the people should have more choice in 'government' on both a national and local level. That a participatory form of democracy is one that would gain a following, once it is understood, is, again I believe, unarguable and Ukip have the 'voice' and 'means' of promoting it. Consider: if, as Ukip maintain on the question of sovereignty, the people's voice must be heard; once they have regained their sovereignty, should they not have a voice in the continuation of their country's independence and what laws are proposed?
9 comments:
In my opinion:
Firstly, the party name sounds ugly, and it really should be rebranded. I don't like the colours either. These may seem small matters, but I think they are important.
Secondly, what the party needs, to escape the tory party in exile thing, is a libertarian wing to offset the conservatives.
My wife belongs to UKIP, but finds that many of the members are very anti-conservative, basically due to Ted Heath and his lies. They are opposed to any electoral pact with even those Tories who have shown themselves to be anti-EU on the grounds that they can't be trusted. This view, of course has been reinforced by Cameron and his "Cast-Iron" assurances. This hostility puts off many Tories from considering UKIP, certainly our local branch has strong Labour leanings as far as other issues are concerned.
Oborne is correct in that UKIP could have a great influence on the outcome of the next election. I suspect that given sufficient publicity, that old bete noir again, and some more inspirational candidates they could even win some seats at the next election, given that the likely collapsed LibDem vote has to go somewhere.
That said I still don't see any big MSM support coming forward, I get the feeling Farage really likes it that he is just about the only public UKIP voice, UKIP will always be a more palatable protest vote than monster raving loony, but still a protest vote, while they keep the name and the UK out persona. Also it is a long time to the next election and public memory can be very short, it is possible for the LibDems to regain support if the government runs its full term.
All of that predicts their affect will be similar to the last election, but probably enhanced, in other words, they will sap sufficient conservative support to ensure an outright Labour victory. That at least should ensure Cameron is dumped, but it is not a certainty that a more conservative Tory party would result. The wets, the social democratic conservatives, are still in charge and will claim it is essential to move even further in a social democratic direction in order to win power again. Tory realists are likely to completely reject that and the Tory split will simply widen, potentially to breaking point.
All that is really moot, of course. It is Eurogeddon and the global economy that will determine events in the not too distant future and that is what will shape events unless can kicking can be extended indefinitely and I simple don't see how it can be.
It is politically impossible to get UKIP'S message out, unless the BBC give it the same publicity as the other parties. They will not do this because they support only the chosen two, and tolerate the other one.
As an ex-Tory member and now a UKIP member, I do agree with you. I have brought up with local committee that ask any member of the only interested in politics at election time clan and they will not be able to name one single UKIP person other than Farage. They will not know (or care?) that Lord Hesketh has recently joined UKIP from the Tories. My concern in my local area is that I am the youngest member....and I am in my early 50s!!! We do not have enough candidates to stand in local elections in every ward in our town and of course we do not have to money to spend. That leads onto the BBC (and other media). I believe that to guarantee a few minutes airtime you have to have xxx number of candidates. UKIP just wont have enough at local election time. On the plus side, we are out and about talking to people and delivering leaflets. We have had a positive response. But will this turn into votes?
Oborne is no doubt correct when he maintains that Ukip is the Conservative Party in exile.
I think that's a mistake. The Conservative Party today is basically the party of Macmillan and before. The Thatcher/Major years were an aberration to that, and Thatcher was more of a classic liberal than a Conservative.
UKIP is more in line with the Thatcherite classic liberal position.
The hard thing for UKIP is facing up to Duverger's Law that means that people are less inclined to switch to smaller parties under the FPTP system. They'll vote for the least worst of 2 options. The only way they won't is when the 2 options become so terrible.
I think UKIP in a similar situation to where Churchill was in the 30s, pointing out that Hitler was a dangerous madman (which was all written down in Mein Kampf but no-one wanted to hear it). Eventually, reality caught up with analysis, and Churchill became the national hero.
Nigel Farage was the only party leader that I heard questioning spiralling house prices and questioning government spending running up to the election. He's a realist, while the rest are carrying on with higher spending (albeit to different degrees).
There's no hope for the Conservatives. The local parties can't deliver the sort of candidates that they like now. It's all controlled by Central Office, which means more Cameroon types.
BTW The best thing for UKIP to do is to concentrate on Conservative marginals and attempt to unseat MPs. That will quickly bring the Conservatives to the table.
Sorry but to my mind UKIP is as much a part of the alien problem as the Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrat parties along with 'smaller parties'.
It's the party system that is the root problem because it strangles true democracy and promotes autocratic rule by the civil service. (Londons Fire Chief taking the piss to the tune of £700K reported today in some rag I glimpsed)
Until there is catastrophic change instigated from outside of the party system things will carry on much the same as today.
TT: You may be right. Personally I would keep the name and colours - just lose the bloody £ sign! Maybe replace it with Britannia? (Can never recall whether it one 't' and two 'n's or viky-verky.....
EP: And that is quite 'rife', believe me........
PC: And once again I can but agree, unfortunately.........
GY: And have to agree with you....
tso: Thanks. To be fair Ukip are recruiting some youngsters, but yes, Ukip does suffer from the 'old fogey' immage........
JT: Hello again - and this may surprise you, but I am in total agreement with you!
You may be also correct with your second comment, although I believe it has an element of removing choice from other constituencies?
Bill: Agreed because it does not believe in participatory democracy, rather it wishes to retain the status quo of democratised dictatorship.
Post a Comment