May 17, 2013 · 10:56 am

Farage’s Fatuous Failure

Cuuuuurious. The moment Nigel Farage takes an iota of flak on the campaign trail he turns into a hyperbolic, reactive angryman. Touring the Royal Mile in Edinburgh yesterday he was slightly beset by the jeers and cheers of a group of Scots particularly intent on letting the UKIP leader know that he was Scum! Scum! Scum! Scum! Scum! Poor old Farage. UKIP is so oppressed and these sneering members of the public are just such bastards. “Yobo, fascist scum,” Farage eloquently hit back against his assailants during an interview on Good Morning Scotland today.

My prior characterisation of this grinning buffoon, as an honest but misguided soul with an irrational fear for the continent, was one that sort of deserved pity. Farage did seem to encapsulate that genuine frustration about the arguably technocratic advancement of the European project. But the wheel has now turned and we are given a fuller picture of an unintelligent man, lacking in nuance and restraint, and full of a rather nasty brand of vitriol when it comes to disagreement. Lashing out at the protesters was by no means the story of this incident.

Just to be clear, the tone of the protest as Farage left a pub, his favourite campaign venue, was boisterous, jovial, perhaps a little cheeky. Farage moved smoothly through a small crowd of grinning antagonists and straight into a minivan without so much as a physical feather ruffled. To hear him lament his woes later you would think some burly Scotsman had pinned him down and ruthlessly, repeatedly stolen his virtue. “I’ve never seen anything like it… it was deeply racist, with a total hatred for the English.”

“If this is the face of Scottish Nationalism, it’s a pretty ugly picture,” he continues, “the anger, the hatred, the snarling, the shouting, the swearing, was all linked to a desire for the Union Jack to be burned, and extinguished from Scotland forever. There’s absolutely no doubt who these people were, or what they stood for.” David Miller, conducting the interview, at this point had to interject again with the suggestion that Farage was conflating anti-English with anti-UKIP sentiments, although I suspect the word ‘hypocrite’ was struggling to leap off his tongue.

It is the most indisputable and pure of ironies that a man like Nigel Farage feels beset by the evils of nationalism. His suggestion that these people had no interest in debate was brilliantly juxtaposed with his refusal to engage with Miller on the more considered angles of this story. When Miller referenced a recent Ipsos Mori poll as indicating that UKIP support in Scotland is roughly to the tune of two per thousand voters, Farage bullishly rejects the poll. And when Miller suggests that UKIP are therefore an “irrelevance” in Scotland, Farage starts to get mad.

Sensing the opportunity to strike deeper, Miller puts Farage’s own words to him, words quoted from the Times, “Telling everyone how much I love Scotland, and what a big part of my life it’s been, how sincere I am, it would all have been a lot of rubbish.” Legitimate grounds, you might think, to accuse Farage of a fundamental disconnect with Scotland, its people and its politics, as Miller indeed does. “I’m sensing similar hatred from this line of questioning that I got on the streets yesterday in Edinburgh,” is Farage’s interpretation of this.

Things conclude bizarrely. Trying to trump up UKIP’s representation in more constituencies than any other party, including members for Northern Ireland and across Scotland, Farage attempts to salvage the pan-UK appeal of his party. The irrelevance of this fact to electoral efficacy and voter support is pointed out by Miller. “And remind me, how many elected representatives you have in Scotland?” “Absolutely none,” Farage retorts, choking up a bit, “but rather more than the BBC do,” he strangely adds.

Bumbling over some point about how if the interview had been conducted in England he wouldn’t have faced this kind of hatred, he whines, “And frankly I’ve had enough of this interview, goodbye.” And he hangs up. Remarkable, pathetic, petulant stuff. The first strident bullet of reality in the heart of this overblown UKIP surge. Even in Farage, the supposed master of his party’s mainstream aspirations, do we see something deeply unpleasant and unwanted in our politics. But there is no need to fixate on this one incident. Plenty of further proof is inevitably yet to come, if Farage and his party truly feels so misunderstood and hard done by the media.

UKIP, like the BNP, are a nominally pro-union fringe movement but actually represent a sort of anachronistic ‘Little England’ mentality that is dismissive of the other nations that form this union. Pro-Britain is a more marketable brand than pro-England however, whatever the ratio of anti-EU sentiment it is cut with, and we can only be thankful that they are so painfully transparent in their cynicism. I credit most of those who voted for UKIP in the locals with a respectable desire to protest against the established political class. I also credit them enough not to do it again when it counts.

1 Comment

Filed under Current Affairs, News Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , ,

May 16, 2013 · 2:12 pm

The Good Ship Eurofeud Embarks Again

Well well… it turns out our Prime Minister has a little fight in him after all. Quick to chide cabinet ministers Gove and Hammond over their indiscretion concerning the European question, and holding the course on the 2017 date for the referendum, it seems he’s not ready to bend over to the Eurosceptics quite yet. Although doubling down on holding the referendum if renegotiation is rejected by Europe will hush the right a bit, two and half years after the general election is certainly less politically expedient than it could be. A smattering of confidence in the party’s 2015 intentions, and in his own renegotiation policy.

A cheeky little endorsement from Obama on his support for a “fix” is nice, but isn’t certain to shake more than a few MPs out of their intoxication, drunk as they are on pandering to this transient UKIP bounce. The American president isn’t exactly every conservative’s cup of tea. This week, from the comfort of a New York armchair, Cameron gave his fellow party leaders Clegg and Miliband a minor savaging on their own undetermined positions regarding the UK’s relationship with the continent. “Heads in the sand,” as the PM phrased it, omitting entirely his own firmly lodged disposition up until the last few days.

While a very large question mark remains over the issue of what this renegotiated position would look like, the suggestion is that it would come heavily down to Cameron’s individual abilities as a statesman. In the face of Hadal level confidence and even whispers amongst conservatives that here is a latter-day John Major, the embattled leader’s resurgence, of sorts, is vital to his prospects. And judging by the debate in the Commons yesterday over the Queen’s Speech and this theatre about the absence of the EU question, Cameron does appear to have turned some of the guns away from himself. Rigorous criticism was circulating around the entire House, notably in Clegg’s direction.

The amendment was easily defeated 277 to 130, but the 114 Tory MP’s who voted in favour are still a long term issue for Cameron. And with 29 year old Eurosceptic MP James Wharton winning the private member’s ballot for the first attempt at a referendum bill today, we can anticipate early problems in the process. Wharton is a staunch in/out referendum supporter and will certainly be trying to lock down the House on the 2017 date. It was by no means an overwhelming rebellion on Europe, but with backbench support up from 81 in favour of a referendum in a late 2011 vote, the already blatant swoon rightwards by some MPs is further indicated.

Now it remains to be seen how many in the Commons will actually get behind Wharton’s bill, and while it is currently likely to be shot down, the Tory’s did announce this morning that the three line-whip was coming down in favour of it. Cross-party backing is in short supply right now, although 11 Labour votes in favour of the Queen’s Speech amendment shows some desire in the opposition for Miliband to take a stronger stance on Europe, and as Tory Eurosceptic John Baron was suggesting earlier, there will be hopes a few Lib Dems could be rolled over in favour too. This issue remains something of an anathema to me though.

At the time of the Lisbon Treaty, Clegg was a bold little mouthpiece when it came to Europe, calling for a referendum then, and carrying this message through to 2008 and beyond. Despite criticising Cameron on the radio today for the renegotiation policy being “clear as mud”, where he stands and wants his party to stand on the matter is now one of Westminster’s total mysteries. To “lead the reform and then give people a say in a referendum when that leads to a change in the rules”, is ostensibly a position loyal to the coalition agreement, which stipulated that changes in the EU relationship would trigger an automatic referendum.

Sadly, the agreement also states that he and the Lib Dems have to be integral to such a reform process, and in light of Clegg’s hateful fecklessness, born from a confusing amalgam of power hunger clashing with a party political need to remain distinct from his coalition partner, I predict he will be true to his spanner-like identity. Thrust himself firmly into the works he will, the unmitigated pillock and architect of Liberal Democrat ruination. He’ll be the linchpin of political deadlock for the next two years while his party begin trying to carve themselves a more distinct and electable identity for 2015.

Rant over. They just annoy me, the Liberal Democrats. Not being a Eurosceptic myself but recognising the problematic relationship between the UK and an increasingly integrating continent, at least politically, it seems clear that public sentiment is generally in favour of strong and determined action to achieve the relationship the public is comfortable with. I believe in renegotiation, albeit ideally helmed by someone less precarious and subject to the sceptics gaze than Cameron, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong in questioning the very one track European trajectory that has been.

As disturbing as it is to say this, as long as Cameron can hold his nerve he remains the best prospect for moderate change. Labour haven’t shown signs of offering the British people what they want and I doubt the Lib Dems under Clegg will ever have the guts to follow through with their supposed position. UKIP simply want the UK to slip into obstinate and isolated ignominy with their extreme position, more to the tragic irony of their general “Rule Britannia” understanding of the world. So… yeah. If Europe is the central issue in your mind, then the man even I had virtually written off last week is indeed your flickering, faint supermarket-bought pocket torch of a thing once known as hop… shop? Hope! Hope.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Current Affairs, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

May 12, 2013 · 8:50 pm

Spring of the Long Knives

Nigel Farage must be laughing himself silly. Not to be hyperbolic, but chaos has beset the main three parties, as the last few weeks show the knives being drawn from clunky sheaths by not the subtlest of hands. Just today, Conservative cabinet ministers Hammond and Gove turned up the temperature on Cameron by announcing that a referendum on Europe tomorrow would see them voting “out”. The pain isn’t limited solely to the Tory leadership however, as signs indicate Labour and Liberal Democrat factions are steadily beginning to murmur insubordination.

It doesn’t come as the greatest of surprises that Peter Mandelson is dipping his beak back into the news cycle at this point, with words that poor old Ed Miliband won’t be delighted to read. Attacking the vagueness of the rather insipid “One Nation” theme that the opposition launched at last year’s party conference, the more cutting edge of his criticism was about Labour’s broader trajectory and focus. “You have to be more than a slogan and more than a label to get people to vote for you. So much is obvious,” he says.

Clearly not obvious enough to his party’s Commons front bench, who have proved guilty of being little more than a hollow protest bloc under Miliband’s leadership. The odd whispers of exciting, intellectual social democratic ideas that he is reported to be a font of haven’t translated into notable policy or a cohesive party mission. And more importantly, they haven’t translated into an energising force in terms of the electorate. Miliband, and Ed Balls for that matter, have consistently polled worse than their opposites in government.

This will be a strange one for Miliband to compute, given that “One Nation”, a concept pinched off conservative Disraeli, was his attempt to plant the Labour flag much closer to the Mandelson-favoured centre-left. A mild twist, given that Miliband came up through the party in the Brown faction that never quite got behind the “Third Way”, and was propelled to the top by the unions. Without the support of the dark lord of the New Labour movement and having been recently thoroughly spanked by Unite leader Len McCluskey for not being a union lapdog, it seems that Cameron is not alone in his hapless scramble in the dark for an ideological foothold.

Perhaps the most speculative of the treacherous whispers is regarding Nick Clegg, although how his fate isn’t considered inevitably sealed by his party’s current flirtation with ruin is an enigma. Whether or not Gove’s suggestion that Clegg’s opposition to childcare reforms is an attempt to shore up his strength in the party is almost irrelevant. Supposing that the slyly propagated rumour was true, and even if Lord Oakeshott were to put Vince Cable on the throne, the party are doomed to face only more electoral pain for the coming years. The initiative is gone for the Liberal Democrats, and they won’t see another bump in the polls like 2010 for some time, if ever again.

Of greatest import currently is that we’re on the eve of dramatic activity within the Conservative party, with events since the local council elections telling us that Cameron is likely to surrender to most of his right wing’s demands on Europe and immigration. Unless he has suicidal tendencies. Even the “compassionate” sympathisers seem to be getting dragged by fear into the traditional fold as is particularly indicated by Gove, who has been a major supporter of Cameron up to this point and for a long time. The education secretary undercutting his leader so bluntly is no small thing.

Until the 25th hour Cameron was desperately trying to inject enough confidence in his EU “renegotiation” strategy with Merkel to avoid this sort of mess, but UKIP struck too soon and he simply failed in that respect. With prominent ministers speaking their rather expedient piece, adding to the anti-EU chorus of old Tory notables like Nigel Lawson, this bizarre vote on the Queen’s Speech amendment on Tuesday is about as clear a message to the PM that it’s time for obedience on Europe. That, or protracted in-fighting, which could consign the lot of them straight back to opposition.

Tense times, where centre-ground politics are at stake. The country is generally not at all lurching to the right, as the Daily Mail might idiotically suggest in an attempt to deny Labour some comfort out of a very soft performance in the polls, but the race to target the middle that New Labour initiated has presently lost its vigour. I don’t think it’s impossible that we see a set of manifestos come 2015 that much more resemble types from the pre-Blair years. It’s looking that way for the Tories and we still have to see for Labour, but the amount of time they take to start galvanising their bases is directly proportional UKIP’s consummately unwanted longevity.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Current Affairs, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

May 10, 2013 · 11:00 am

Class and Britain

Yikes… heavily neglected the boys in the last couple of months. No, you puerile infant, I meant the journalists three, Jenkins, Freedland and Mardell, my dark horsemen of the news print apocalypse, though adversely fighting the end with robust and admirable works. It was possibly a flawed concept to try and take on the same issues as they did, article for article, as more often than not I found myself with less to say in order not to repeat them.

I like to find a novel angle but all too often enough they were just covering the bases, and so this blog finds the adequate impetus to evolve again. Delighted as I am to continue selectively challenging their works I will also apply this focus to any writer encountered and… oh, look at that. Ellie Mae O’Hagan for the Guardian on class in Britain. A contentious subject if ever there was, no less from a young lady who works for Unite, the UK’s largest union, and is active with UK Uncut.

And she also writes for the New Statesman, Union News (trade union publication), New Left Project (socialist politics publication), False Economy (anti-austerity publication) and the Red Pepper (god knows, somehow feminist, green and libertarian publication). I’m not one for quickly labelling people but the picture building here is pretty clear, she is no lightweight, and it won’t surprise anyone to know that in this article O’Hagan is calling for a reaffirmation of working class solidarity and action.

That’s the long and short of it. Earlier, David Boyle earned her pinko gaze for suggesting that the middle-class is a necessary buffer in the protection of the working classes from ruling and financial elites. I agree and disagree with Boyle. The middle-class are certainly not conscious saviours but there are transmittable values between the two and the middle-class are politically a more potent force. It can be argued they potentially, indirectly preserve the working class to a degree.

But while I therefore also don’t disagree with O’Hagan’s critique, that the working class don’t need the middle to serve in this function and that working class interests are best served by the working class, her article is tremendously problematic for me. Not the least because it highlights the value of strike action in the 1880/90′s when unionised matchbox girls and dock workers laid the ground work for 8 hour days, holiday pay and the minimum wage, assuredly amongst other perks.

How the value of modern Western union actions stack up against the truly worthy battles of that day is something I think about quite a lot. I usually conclude that it does not stack up well at all, which is a shame. I appreciate the need to have a thriving, living defence of an historically vulnerable section of society but that defence needs to be considered and tempered like all things. Apologies for being selective and anecdotal, but Tube drivers on C£45k p/a don’t need to strike. Yet they do.

O’Hagan’s implication that the middle-class can be equally oppressive of the working class in working environments is also so profoundly anecdotal however, that I’ll forgive myself. Just to remonstrate briefly – I have had some superb middle-class employers who paid and treated me well, but the time I worked at a call-centre was misery under the boot heel of an angst ridden working man. That may mean something to me, but taken on its own it has no value as evidence.

She moves on to rightly indicate that working class cultures and values are being eradicated in an overemphasis on their middle class alternatives. And though O’Hagan is partly right in indicating Thatcher as an early cause for this, we can find inherent bias in the omission of Blair’s tenure and his middle class building efforts. These were in the vein of university attendance hikes and the killing blows to manufacturing and industry. Thatcher didn’t actually finish the job.

None of this is why I’m ultimately pursuing her article though. You see, it all begins with a notion that I’m quite uncomfortable with, as she quotes the lugubrious Owen Jones of “Chavs” fame in her opening paragraph, “To say that class doesn’t matter in Britain is like saying wine doesn’t matter in France.” It’s not just that this statement is so absurdly unscientific in its analysis that it is preposterously worthless, but more that I personally don’t believe in the sentiment.

Or I don’t want to. It’s said we live in the post-ideological age, which is bad news for O’Hagan and comrades, but that isn’t enough for me. I want to live in the post-everything age. Post-ideology, post-class, post-patriarchy, post-feminism… they are all in their “pre” or “present” iterations nothing more than implacable dividing lines and it doesn’t matter what side of that line you are on. Socialists often believe they hold the common, egalitarian ground but they don’t serve everyone, not by a distance.

In fact Marxism, the theory so laden with intrinsic class antagonisms and the need to remove them through struggle and arch-socialist measures, is so circular in its logic that I’m always surprised when intelligent people use it in constructive thought processes. The central theme of workers being the subjects of history is subjective and ignores the clear exchanges of influence between workers and power structures throughout history.

I’ll be the first to admit that my desire to particularly reject class notions is because they make me feel distinctly icky. I don’t want to live in that country or call its principles mine and perhaps it’s easier to deny these things than confront and fix them. No wait, it definitely is. I know this because the piece I’ve been working on for counterpart blog TranquilSigh has been such a f*@king pain in the arse to write that I’m currently procrastinating with this article.

Aware as I am of the slight contradiction in a post-ideology ideology, I’ve been exploring ideas of individualism and self-interest that can be functionally tied into a model with a strong societal emphasis. I’m pretty sure the outcome will differ from traditional models of ethical and regulated capitalism, which I feel in its proper incarnation achieves the right balance between the individual and society. But fewer seem capable of distinguishing between the C word and neo-liberalism these days, so on to the next phase.

Seriously… Coming soon to TranquilSigh. I promise. Unless I’m intellectually or logically defeated by the challenge, which is not beyond the realm of possibility.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Current Affairs, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

May 8, 2013 · 3:15 pm

UKIP in a Nutshell

Why UKIP really are a joke. A quick guide, translated into English, of the party’s online policy forum found on http://www.UKIP.org (website frequently non-functional). As of May 8th 2013. Subject to spontaneous, disorganised change.

First, Google text reads,“Libertarian, non-racist party seeking Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union.”

What we stand for?

Fear. Using absurdly dark and foreboding language, clearly designed to encourage negative emotional responses, we want you to be in fear for the very fabric of society. Salvation is exclusively linked to EU withdrawal.

  1. Restore Self Government & Democracy – anti-EU statistics and information of dubious provenance. Bring all powers back to the UK.

  2. Rebuild Prosperity – anti-EU cost reductions, truisms about the state of the economy, climate change denial, reduce government, cut taxes.

  3. Protect Our Borders & Defend Our Country – anti-EU, anti-immigration, 5 year freeze, more ridiculous fear language, dubious statistics, pro-nukes.

  4. Safeguards against crime – tough on crime, more prisons, racial profiling is fine, scrap HRA, lots of money for the police, terrifying police state sort of stuff.

  5. Care and Support for All – magically fix the NHS, simplify pensions, no benefits for non-permanent residents, revert higher education to Edwardian state, deregulate education.

  6. Our Way of Life – nationalism, pro-hunting, pro-empire, pro-smoking, anti-foreigners.

About Policy Proposals

We will change our views as and when we choose because we have no political accountability yet.

Defence

The largest section on the website. Open quote, Margaret Thatcher. Reducible to – restore the military machine of the UK to roughly “height of the empire” levels. Throw money at it until we can rule the world. Security is the foundation of society.

Energy and Fishing

Actually two individual sections, but very small. Oh my… Energy is actually a link to a policy paper… taking a very long time to load… very long time indeed….

The fishing section ‘details’ taking fishing grounds back off the EU for exclusive UK use, scrapping EU quotas, not a lot really. But we have to leave the EU!

And I can’t view the policy paper because the link doesn’t work. Desperately upset to be cheated of whiff of detailed policy. But I imagine it will be a further dose of climate change denial, cut with some grade A anti-green energy policy, pro-nuclear, pro-our “green and pleasant land” patriotic nonsense. UKIP deem the aesthetics of the nuclear cooling tower better than wind turbines. Subjective says I.

Healthcare

Emphasis on reducing NHS bureaucracy by ironically hiring a quango to hack and slash, god knows UKIP don’t have the expertise, and establishing County Health Boards to localise healthcare management, more nursing, free dentists and opticians. Almost a reasonable section.

Immigration

Do I even have to do this section?

Fine, massively reduce and regulate immigration, UK is full to bursting and they say we can’t afford all these immigrants and their welfare needs, ill-defined points system for working migrants only of value to the UK, permanent residence status only available to EU folk seven years in-country, withdraw from ECHR and ECR so we can deport all the immigrants we like. All of which requires leaving the EU. But honestly… UKIP are not xenophobes.

Same-Sex Marriage

Anti-same-sex marriage. Apparently because they’re worried about encroaching upon religious sensitivities in a nation that is in inexorable religious decline and socially progressive advancement. Separation of church and state and all that. But the gays can still have civil partnerships so UKIP are not homophobes. Rather curious issue to include as a banner policy then.

Tax

Our economic outlook is worse than even the leading credit agencies like Moody’s are saying. We need to grow so we must hugely reduce taxes for the wealthy with a flat tax (currently 25%, down from 30% two weeks ago) that imposes a massively disproportionate weight of contribution on lower to medium earners. Writes off higher taxes on the wealthy as low revenue “political taxes”, no corporate tax, lower VAT, £13k tax allowance, income tax is an anti-freedom evil, so is NI and actually all taxes for that matter. Deregulate business and markets.

Generally fairly condescending stuff about how even a drunk monkey could see how much trouble we’re in. Their solution is an impossible to fund daydream. Actually references Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations” as a classical source. The only one besides David Ricardo’s “The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation”. Which sort of makes sense.

—————————–

There you have it folks. No more sections. UKIP in under 700 words. Excuse me while I go and wash myself amidst these fits of laughter. It’s a shame that the genuine sentiments and discontents of so many people have only these ill-prepared sorts to express a measure of democratic protest. A litany of the worst of conservatism.

5 Comments

Filed under Current Affairs, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

· 11:32 am

David Cameron’s Pickle

This isn’t an article about the Prime Minister’s penis, or any part of his genitalia for that matter, although were he to find his testicles any time soon it would a tremendously good thing for the country. Cameron’s reaction to the UKIP plague has been a consummate disappointment in the immediate aftermath of last week’s council elections. Where William Hague calmly assured of no lurch to the right, we see in the Queen’s Speech the new centre-piece of coalition politics – immigration reform.

This has been in the deck for a while now but one suspects the PM was holding it in his pocket for the day when he needed more than his Etonian credentials to sate his right wing’s fears over anything moderate. That day has come but it is a tragedy the card has to be played due to external forces. An intra-Tory xenophobia war could have been managed and largely squashed but with UKIP putting serious pressure on the party, there is every likelihood we will see some startling changes in the months to come.

I described the PM in my last article as a curiously wet non-entity and that assessment remains. Where my excitement has gone over his centrist appeal and apparent dynamism with regards to taking the Conservative Party in a new, compatible and modern direction, I’m not sure. Probably flushed down the toilet with half a dozen cabinet fails, a couple of party rebellions around Europe and gay rights and an ever sluggish economy. All taken together it smacks resoundingly of a dearth in leadership.

The traditional Tories were never going to just fade away or become naturally subducted into Cameron’s compassionate model, that is, beyond initial electoral logic. He clearly failed to realise that this was his job, to carry the party with him. Instead he ploughed forward with his loyal clique in tow and has up to this point been dangerously dismissive of those within the party who opposed his more progressive tendencies. Not that I’m defending the reprehensible Nadine Dorries, but the leadership’s treatment of her is indicative of this.

If immigration needs reforming then fine, do it. I’m hugely wary of the wide and competing range of arguments in this area and frankly cannot be bothered to wade into that now. All I know is that the timing of this new initiative is cynical and transparent to the point that I’m tempted to add Cameron to my Bonfire of the Ministers. The right wing is indisputably wagging the Cameron, if you’ll pardon my phrase-butchery.

Compassionate conservatism is now a dead brand thanks to wildly controversial NHS overhauls and welfare reform, coupled with slashed corporate and 50p tax rates, against a backdrop of decreasing living standards. The electorate won’t buy that line again for some time indeed. So while the rightwards lunge is hugely undesirable, the centre is no longer fertile ground for the Tories and they are left in an ideological crisis. At the moment, Labour can reasonably look forward to a leading share in the vote come 2015, as completely undeserved as that is and would be.

I tentatively whispered some months ago that perhaps Hague deserves a second shot at the top job, especially if he could do so during a period that wasn’t politically untenable for the Conservative Party. I wouldn’t exactly describe the current climate as tenable but the Tories are still in power with a good stretch ahead of them. While I’m usually highly skeptical of the often nominal cabinet reshuffle, proactivity should probably come in the form of radical personnel changes. I’d prefer that to an immigration policy that satisfied those with the worst perspective on the issue.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Current Affairs, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

May 3, 2013 · 4:02 pm

The Rise and Projected Fall of UKIP

The results are… sort of in! As things stand, with 32 of 35 voting councils declared, the picture is pretty much what was expected, minus that dash of sensationalism over UKIP’s potential fortunes. A projected general election vote share puts them on about 23%, behind Labour and the Tories on approximately 29% and 25% respectively. The Liberal Democrats are consigned to a delicious 14%, adding further ridicule to their leaderships‘ recent, absurdly denialist statements of vitality.

To the figures! Labour’s current addition of 260 seats is barely a performance after their 2006-9 catastrophes. Two councils, South Shields and the two mayors gained will be considered a hazardous minimum. The Tories might be slightly relieved not to have suffered far worse than ten councils (all but two to No Overall Control) and 320 councillors lost, considering they retain an overall majority in councils. Still, it’s a sorry metric for success and more a stern indictment.

Liberal Democrats have typically relied more on “grass roots” council level elections to maintain national influence and the loss of at least 106 councillors and a massive reduction of the vote share could push them into crisis mode, long overdue as that is. Otherwise, the Green Party gaining but one seat and the BNP losing their remaining three is an afterthought. UKIP, adding upwards of 136 councillors to the original eight, is clearly the new “further to the” right wing player.

Farage has reacted, perhaps for the first time with an inkling of legitimacy, in typical fashion to any and all gains or even lateral movements for the party in the last five years. To paraphrase, “UKIP are now on the scene as a major party and will shape the face of this nation’s politics in a substantial way.” He’s a goofy little optimist in that sense and probably an honest one, despite the other half of his world view being consumed by fear of anything beginning with Euro.

But it turns out that the answer to the crucial question of whether or not the England and Wales council elections carried any true significance is, no. Not really. This general election projection is a curiosity at best, and distorts these results. They should be regarded as checking the pulse of the nation, and presently that pulse reads dangerously for the three established parties. But between the present and the spring of 2015 is a meaty chunk of what we humans call…. “time”.

Time, granted, in which the Tories, Labour and the Liberal Democrats could prove incapable of recalibrating their collective sense of basic competency and political focus. In that regard it wouldn’t displease me to see the heads of messirs Clegg, Farron, Balls, Miliband and Osborne upon ye olde Westminster spikes. Cameron remains an oddly wet non-entity at present, avoiding the implicit chop that nonetheless is being steadily prepared by his blonde nemesis.

However I also wouldn’t be surprised to see the whole lot still shackling their parties down with so much toxic association come the general election. Solutions will likely be sought elsewhere although I don’t imagine the main three will have to be too creative. UKIP gave us just a little glimpse in the run-up to these elections of what lies in store for them, and toxic associations in the form of BNP and EDF dabblers aren’t the least of their concerns. They are not prepared.

Part of this is down to Farage’s curious insistence that his members not be whipped into unity in terms of policy. Without anything resembling a comprehensive central party policy all this has achieved is confusion when trying to relate UKIP’s cohesive mission statement to the public. They have somehow achieved a pitfall most commonly associated with liberal politics, despite the supposed anti-EU glue of the UKIP world.

Scratch beneath the surface of the perfunctory stump speech in this area and there is disarray. Email exchanges between the party’s leadership show this as much as any challenge to any of their number on something as essential as tax policy. This pathetic excuse of not having a respectably complete platform for want of a looming general election, is something any party vying for the responsibilities of government should be eviscerated for.

And UKIP have been around for a while now. Discussions of purchasing a platform from right-wing think tanks, at this point, is so laughable you can fairly argue that this party’s ability to only achieve the anticipated degree of success in these elections, in what is an abysmal political environment for the main three parties, shows that scepticism for the protest vote is already in healthy supply. I anticipate they won’t gain a single parliamentary seat in 2015.

Labour’s overall rise in the vote share clearly demonstrates that social democratic values aren’t particularly threatened by UKIP, with most of the actual right-wingers’ share being taken from the Tories and Lib Dems. And most importantly, UKIP failed to take control of a single council, highlighting the common feature of a fringe-turned-protest cum embryonic/ephemeral beta main party – a dispersed and ineffective voting base.

I’m only concerned in-so-far as the moderate political establishment does indeed have a pressing priority in getting their ships in proper order and pulling back the votes, as failure to do so leaves the door open for the sideshow that UKIP intrinsically and unavoidably are. They have two years to achieve this and I have a fleeting optimism that if there is any force that can adequately corral these buffoons, it’s a tangible threat to their political careers.

Well… at least the fleeting optimism will be back to its full anaemic state after my gag reflex settles. I’m turning off the news before I see another adult politician fawn over UKIP and their triumph of the day. Have some goddamned self-respect.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Current Affairs, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,