In an exclusive for the Times Lord Pearson, the newly elected leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), said that UKIP had approached the Conservative Party with an offer. This was that, if the Tories pledged to hold a referendum and give its politicians a free vote on whether to accept the Lisbon Treaty or not, UKIP would disband and its members stand down. After their successes at the European Elections Lord Pearson said he approached the Conservative leader in the Lords, Lord Strathclyde, on behalf of Nigel Farage with the offer. Both Mr Farage and Lord Strathclyde have confirmed this.They did not though receive an answer. This off-hand and dismissive treatment has angered UKIP, which now plans to wrest 50 seats from the Tories and therefore force a hung parliament and try to realign British politics.
Nigel Farage, the grudgingly admired and flamboyant recent leader of UKIP, has relinquished the leadership so he can concentrate solely on his campaign to be elected to Westminster at the next general election. He is contesting the seat presently held by the Speaker, John Bercow. There are also moves to put a heavyweight figure up to oppose the BNP leader Nick Griffin in his seat At present UKIP has 13 MEPs but no MPs.
UKIP has a lot of lessons to learn. Last night on Channel 4 News Lord Pearson was quizzed about his comments whilst in the US that Muslims were ‘breeding like rabbits’. He said that what he said was wrong and that he had been jet-lagged. He also stated that he was not an effective politician further clarifying this as meaning that he was not a career politico and wanted to bring real people back into politics.
This may sound nice and homey, but the reality is that whenever a political foe feels under pressure from UKIP this will be trotted out as ‘you have been stated on record as …. ‘
Lord Pearson was also embroiled in controversy when he invited the far-right Dutch politician Geert Wilders into the House of Lords to show his film about Islam called ‘Fitna’. Wilders was on this occasion prevented from entering the country so the showing did not take place.
As the election approaches UKIP may find they have a few successes, but many people may think a vote for them is a wasted vote. There is also the dawning realisation that we will need a very strong government to take us out of this recession and address the burgeoning public debt. People may also come to realise that a hung parliament would not be able to deliver the harsh medicine required.
Another Eurosceptic group, the small and fledgling UK Libertarian Party are meeting today in Bristol to elect their new leader. The current leader, Ian Parker-Joseph, is standing down. This party are part of the Albion Alliance that has extended an olive branch to UKIP and disaffected Tories to try and force a vote on the depth of UK involvement in the EU.
The lpuk met in Bristol, we are not part of Albion Alliance, and we are not forming alliances or pacts with anybody, but apart from that you are right about we are Eurosceptic on an institution that has never been mandated by the British People and has not passed audit in over a decade.
Andrew Withers
Deputy Leader LPUK
Thank you for that clarification Andrew. My mistake with the venue, has been corrected.
However, my reference to the Albion Alliance was made on the basis of your very recent leader's piece on the Albion Alliance's website:
http://albionalliance.org.uk/?page_id=97
Hi James, thanks for the further information. I think that Ian Parker-Joseph and David Phipps should have made it very clear that they were writing as individuals and not as party officials in the articles on the Albion Alliance site.
Both quoted their party credentials and then said 'we' in the alliance. That I found was misleading.
The Conservative Party has always been a broad church which accommodates a range of different views. Some in this right of centre party are thought of as “right wingers†others used to be termed “wet†which tended to refer to the more liberal left of the party. The centre of the party I have always found more difficult to identify as members could be right wing on some issues and wet on others. One of the few issues which has been difficult to fudge is Europe.
The Conservatives took us into the Common Market which was officially known as the European Economic Community at that time and at the subsequent referendum Margaret Thatcher campaigned to stay in. She changed her tune some years later however and became something of a Eurosceptic. In general, the Eurosceptics were happy to be in the Common Market but didn’t want to see an expansion of the European project to where it has been led, ie, a large political and social framework having influence in all our daily lives and precedence over British law. What was the EEC became the European Community and now the European Union.
Over time, a number of treaties have taken us to where we are now, Rome, The Single European Act, Maastricht and Lisbon probably being the most significant. Early on, terms like “ever closer union†were seen as harmless and friendly but others realised that the ultimate goal of the political axis between France and Germany was to see Europe as a single Country (Like the United States of America) but with a less centralised political power also referred to as more Federal; a federation of autonomous nations within a bigger framework but with a united outward facing policy backed by collective institutions.
The Conservative Party has generally maintained a Europhobic position although there are some pro-Europeans within the party who would always stay in and fight for their own vision of the collective European future. John Major played a role with the Maastricht Treaty and proposed expansion to the East to allow former Communist Warsaw Pact countries to join. Perhaps his aim was to dilute the Franco-German axis? In practice, expansion led the organisation to be less governable, requiring a new constitution which was watered down a bit to form the Lisbon Treaty. Nice try John! He also proposed the “hard ECU†which eventually became the Euro but ensured that Britain had the chance to opt out of joining; a wait-and-see position. Maastricht also paved the way for the social chapter and working time directives.
Some would say that Maastricht was a treaty too far, and since it was passed in Britain the Conservatives have failed to win a General Election. Perhaps things had just run their course after four consecutive terms under two leaders and it was time for a change. Perhaps the death of John Smith which allowed Blair, Brown and Mandleson to usher in New Labour also had a big impact at filling the void that an ever weaker Major government left. Perhaps the Tory membership which gave us a too young William Hague, a nobody, quiet man, Iain Duncan-Smith and the never popular Michael Howard should also share some of the blame. Perhaps also, those who had previously voted Conservative but have refused to do so ever since because of policies on Europe continue to make life difficult for the Conservative leadership. Personally, I have voted UKIP since 1997.
David Cameron had a good fudge position policy in place with regards to the Lisbon Treaty. He gave a cast iron promise that if it had not been ratified across Europe by the time he became Prime Minister he would give the British people a referendum on it and would campaign for a “no†vote. However, now that it has been ratified he has had to nail his colours to the mast. He is not a proper Eurosceptic. He doesn’t like the increasing encroachment of the EU on Britain and he’s happy to bring in a law requiring a referendum in the future but the only referendum he could hold now in on the basic question of whether Britain should stay in or leave the EU. He refuses to offer that referendum because he believes that Britain’s future is better served being a member of the club and we should fight from the inside to shape it in a way that suits us better. Fat chance of that!
I think the UKIP offer was potentially great politics. It was a win-win offer from UKIP. Had Cameron said yes he could have banked a whole tranche of votes from people like me who just want the chance to have a say because UKIP would stand aside. I must have been about six years old at the original referendum. He could have said yes without any commitment on his part (or any Conservative) to back the “out†vote and since it would be a free vote and he and others would vote to stay in, it needn’t have a detrimental effect on the Conservative Party. In declining the offer he leaves a clear divide in policy between the Conservative Party and the likes of me. He has little chance of many seats in Scotland (unless the SNP implodes), they don’t stand in Northern Ireland and Wales isn’t normally a happy hunting ground either so he needs to win a big majority in England with one hand tied behind his back if he is to form the next government. Increasing competition from UKIP, The Green Party and The BNP to name just three suggests to me that any party gaining an overall majority is not a foregone conclusion.
In view of the economic circumstances a hung parliament is the last thing Britain needs right now.
I think it was a tactical error Dave.
As Brian English said
By the way Brian………..that is more than a comment and wasted as a comment…..that should be an article! if you want to have that put up as an article then contact us and we will put it up as a separate article as Brian English.
I believe Birth rate will determine the future of western society. When the minority become majority, majority can call for referendum to change the country constitution.