National strategy is overseen by the party's new leader, Lord Pearson, and the campaign director, James Pryor, who formerly advised Margaret Thatcher and John Major. No doubt it is Mr Pryor's involvement that has led Ukip to focus on Tory heartland issues such as grammar schools and clamping down on crime, as well as on its popular anti-EU message. However, the profile that Mr Farage has built for himself, through the odd outburst in Brussels and his aggressive performances on Question Time, means that he is largely left to run his own show in his quest to win the Buckingham seat. The party reckons it is his strong performance at hustings that will win him crucial Tory votes, so the strategy is simple – long days on the campaign trail.A fair wind behind UKIP?
Recent successes have buoyed party officials. They believe Ukip's strong performance in the Norwich North by-election last year went largely unreported. All the attention was on how the Greens would perform, but it was Ukip that made the biggest leap, with a swing in their favour of nine per cent. The party secured more than 4,000 votes – only 800 behind the Liberal Democrats, and enough for them to beat the Greens to fourth place. Resources have already been found to fight a high-profile campaign in Buckingham, with Stuart Wheeler, the spread-betting millionaire who has previously donated to the Tories, handing around £100,000 to Mr Farage's campaign.
Tuesday, 6 April 2010
The Indy reluctantly acknowledges UKIP's achievements
The Independent today has an article about the three main fringe parties and speculates on how well they might do on May 6. Naturally, its preference is with the Greens, who, according to Michael Savage, author of the article, have tripled their support in the last decade. There is no mention of the recent problems the warmists have had and the growing disenchantment in their ideology. But Mr Savage does note that it is, in fact, UKIP that has made a huge break-through recently in electoral terms.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I would urge all Conservative voters to examine their consciences before voting in the next General Election. The EU is the greatest threat to Britain to govern ourselves since Adolf Hitler. Ask yourself this question. What would Churchill have done? I most sincerely urge you all to follow your consciences and vote UKIP at the next general election, particularly in Conservative/Labour marginal seats.
ReplyDeletePlease, please get some forums up, they're more effective than door-knocking!
ReplyDelete>>Please, please get some forums up, they're more effective than door-knocking!
ReplyDeleteNo they're not. Nothing is more effective than face to face encounters. Online forums have their place but it's a serious mistake to put that much faith in them - unless of course ones intention is to deliberately distract the party.
UKIP's greatest achievement online has been its own website featuring easily accessible details of its many policies. That alone has silenced many critics who can no longer claim the party is a single issue one when a simple mouse click will show otherwise.
"No they're not. Nothing is more effective than face to face encounters. Online forums have their place but it's a serious mistake to put that much faith in them "
ReplyDeleteThe Swedish rejected the euro and the French and Dutch rejected the Lisbon Treaty all in the face of a united political front and a media blitz.
Was this achieved by door-knocking or the internet??
You'd better let me have the last word or this will begin to look like a forum thread ;)
>>Pearson has a plan. He advocates cutting the number of MPs in the House of Commons from 646 to just 250 part-timers, paid a maximum of £30,000 a year.
ReplyDeleteFrom Jonathan Ford's profile of Lord Pearson in the 19 March edition of the FT. I'm surprised this hasn't gotten more traction. Cameron allegedly has a plan to reduce the number by 10% - the so-called '585 project' - but Lord Pearson's plan is dynamite stuff & would, I think, play like gangbusters with the general public. Perhaps we could hear a bit more about this from Lord Pearson on this site or could it be flagged up on UKIP's site?
I know a number of people who would feel like a boil had been lanced were they aware of a political party advocating this kind of measure to clean up its own house. Can someone point me to where this can be found in UKIP's policy documents? Thanks.
Surely this cannot be a credible plan. To expect someone to be an MP, doing a totally thankless job, with, presently, little or no perks, for £30k per annum. What type of person do you think we will get running the Country? You cannot be serious!
ReplyDeleteIf UKIP wish to become a Party to be taken seriously, they need to carefully consider the type of resolutions that carry their backing.
Maybe a better one would be to pay all MPs a flat £100k per annum, this would at least entice people from the private sector, who probably have had a modicum of success in business life and therefore have some knowledge and experience to offer!
I don't feel UKIP should fall into the "we can please everyone" Cameron type thinking. If so, I may just as well stick with the Tories!
"Surely this cannot be a credible plan. To expect someone to be an MP, doing a totally thankless job, with, presently, little or no perks, for £30k per annum. What type of person do you think we will get running the Country? You cannot be serious!"
ReplyDeleteWhat planet are you on, Ken? Assuming you ever visit planet Earth try asking one of the residents what kind of people we have running the country now? You may find the answer enlightening.
There is an overwhelming case for reform. The question is not how many hours MP's work but what they actually achieve. On the legislative side MP's are sheep, fodder for a party machine that whips them into voting for whatever has been decided in advance. There are a few honourable exceptions - MP's prepared to follow their consciences in defiance of their party whip - but most of the 656 MP's don't even bother to think about the legislation passing in front of them. They simply vote as they're expected to. The situation is a farce & a dangerous one for our democracy.
On the constituency side, although the old image is of a local MP getting things done, the truth is that local power resides with housing, council & health authorities. So even there an MP has very little power. What then are we paying these puffed up drones hundreds of thousands of pounds a year for?
As Lord Pearson's suggestion indicates, there is no reason in the world why MP's could not achieve on a part-time basis what they currently manage on a full-time basis for a wholly undeserved salary & a slew of perks that has outraged the country & which most private sector employers/ees can only dream about.
But then behind Lord Pearson's suggestion is the assumption - widely shared by the public - that representative democracy has failed & so it is a matter of urgency that the business of political decision-making be devolved to the public on the Swiss model of Direct Democracy. Much less will we be forced to rely on the pre-election promises of politicians who proceed to act in their own best interests once elected. Throw the bums out. We don't need them (or at least not 656 of 'em).
Aside from anything else the sheer number of MP's is quite absurd. America - a country vastly larger than Britain - has far fewer politicians than we do!
Oh, & Ken, if you want to pay MP's £100,000k a year for their underachieving efforts then you can slash their number from 656 to 400+ & that way you'll be able to pay them the extra you think is essential for attracting 'private sector types' without having to take anything more away from the poor taxpayer.