UKIP continue to enjoy the oxygen of publicity

UKIP are sending some sort of tank up to Manchester today to park on the 'Tory lawn'.  The media stunt is meant to underline the right-wing party's bid to colonise Tory turf on such traditional issues as public service reform and tax.  UKIP are rebranding themselves as 'Independence' with policies on greater independence for schools, hospitals and councils.

Confirming the oxygen of publicity that David Cameron's 'fruitcake attack' has given UKIP, Nigel Farage MEP was on this morning's Today programme underlining this attempt to steal Tory votes.  After New Labour voters won't want "blue Labour", Farage insisted.  UKIP will give voters a real alternative, he promised.

A little more oxygen was given to UKIP yesterday by Francis Maude.  The Tory chairman told the Today programme that UKIP "is a bit of a party that just wants to turn the clock back, that doesn’t like the fact that Britain is a multiracial country, a multifaith country, would like to return to a world where Britain is all-white and Europe didn’t exist — well, that’s not the real world.”

UKIP have reacted petulantly by promising to target Tory seats at the next General Election.  They will not be able to take legal action "because it would have to prove damages while, on the contrary, the party had benefited from the Conservative leader’s outburst," a party spokesman told The Times.

Related link: Donal Blaney's latest Law of the Public Policy Process - You cannot make friends of your enemies by making enemies of your friends.

Comments

[Chris Palmer]

One clever thing about UKIP rebranding as "Independence" is when it comes to the ballot paper and voting. Independence is very close to "Independent" which means that all those who go along to the polls and vote Independent, trying to be non-party political, may infact vote Independence because the two would look very similar.

[TT]

It's also clever because 'independence' is at the core of Conservatism! I know a fair few Tories who would be happy with independence for schools, independence for the NHS, independence of the individual from the state, not to mention independence from the EU.

Re-examining UKIP's last manifesto, it is largely an appeal to core Conservative voters. And watching C4 news last night, when some stupid woman from Denton & Reddiish Conservative Association said ON NATIONAL TELEVISION that her association would not want an ethnic minority candidate, it is clear that 'closet racists' is an accusation that UKIP could credibly throw back at Cameron.

[Chad]

One clever thing about UKIP rebranding as "Independence" is when it comes to the ballot paper and voting. Independence is very close to "Independent" which means that all those who go along to the polls and vote Independent, trying to be non-party political, may infact vote Independence because the two would look very similar.

UKIP haven't changed their ballot logos as yet, with just the single current one of the UKIP within the pound. You can keep up to date with the logos they can use on the electoral commission site to see if they do actually rebrand as 'independence'.

I'm just redesigning mine, and want one to simply say: "No charge: Cross here for free votes"
to reflect that there is at least one place the voters can place their cross without being charged thanks to the state funding plans.

This will really emphasise how the other parties will be charging voters.

Who needs millions of pounds of advertising when you can connect directly with the electorate and make your message clear on the only form that really counts.

[Chris Palmer]

My point was Chad, that the words are similar. People don't necessarily look at the logos.

Also, do you know what you're doing with this own party thing..? Are you really sure it's worth going ahead with?

[Chad]

Hi Chris,
If state funding of political parties is introduced, then yes, it is vital to give the electorate the option to not be charged for their vote.

We can't have an electoral system where people are charged to vote and by rejecting any entitlement, I can at least give people the chance to reject state funding and vote without their pocket being picked at the same time.

I don't need any real budget to achieve this, so it will be a powerful protest, where once in the voting booth, there is at least one option to vote for free.

It will only take a few grand to stand in many seats and if I raise enough, then we can stand in every seat to give every Briton the chance to vote without charge.

If the Tories come out and oppose all forms of street funding, then clearly there will be no need for such a course of action, but the current collusion between Blair and Cameron to fill their own pockets, does not make this seem very likely.

On the UKIP logo, they have not actually changed their party name in any form, so the only place they could use 'independence' would be in the logo.

[chad]

street funding s/b state funding!

Adding such a free vote protest option to ballot papers could really help bring out more people to vote. I'm sure the response will surprise the big parties, as the electorate will really be able to show what they think of the way the big parties are behaving.

[UKIP Fiend]

So how are UKIP going to park their tanks on the other parties lawns when they don't even know how many candidates they have in the local elections! - Its 300 or 250 or 450 - less that 10% of seats up for grabs!

Does anybody think that Cameron is having his 'Militant Tendancy' moment and publically severing any links between UKIP and the Tories?

He can claim that UKIP are the banner waving, tank driving swivel eyed loons - while he gradually repositions the Conservatives to the centre ground where 2 or 3 million non voting conservatives reside?

UKIP are boxing themselves into to the far right fringe - just before you get to the BNP?

[Sean Fear]

UKIP are not remotely like Militant Tendency. The views they espouse are not regarded as threatening by the average voter.

[William]

The answer to UKIP is not to talk about their faults - although the party is tightly controlled by a cabal that never shifts from decade to decade. That cabal mostly came from New Britain - an openly racist lot who stood at elections with pathetic results.

The only reason UKIP are getting any joy at all right now, is that Cameron is a europhile pretending to be a eurosceptic.

This game worked well in the past for Conservative leaders - notably John Major. But Conservatives are getting a lot closer to being able to tell when they are being conned by their own leaders now, and they can see that Cameron product is not exactly what was promised on the packaging.

This leaves a large question mark in most Conservatives' minds.

Nigel Farage unlike many well-known Conservative eurosceptics who fell for Cameron's 'little chats' at the Party conference, has known that Cameron is a false eurosceptic all along.

Farage has just been waiting for a way to open up on him...and now a way has been generously provided by Cameron and Maude, who've blundered and are now having to chirp to UKIP's tune.

The tank 'attack' is a typically loony UKIP stunt, but the 'Blue Labour' phrase will stick to Cameron and Maude like glue. Because that is exactly what they are. The answer to UKIP is to become the Conservative Party once more - eurosceptic, economy-growing, job-creating, globe-reaching, innovative, problem-solving and successful...not a bunch of losers mired in mutual recriminations with a troop of middle-aged tank-driving racists.

[Elaib]

"eurosceptic, economy-growing, job-creating, globe-reaching, innovative, problem-solving and successful...not a bunch of losers mired in mutual recriminations".

So what is it that the UK Independence Party espouse. Well I hope you would give us Eurosceptic without much argument. Then, “economy-growing”. Well if you mean by that deregulating and providing a more sensible taxation formula, well that is UKIP too. (If you look at our upcoming flat tax policy, both for personal and corporate taxes I am sure you will like it. Then, “Globe-reaching”, In what way, in the sort of let the EU run our trade policy way which was what Dave said at the Foreign Press Centre only a couple of weeks ago, or maybe you would prefer to take Trade policy back off the EU allowing the UK to run a far freer and fairer trade policy, first with the Anglosphere, moving to full free trade with the developing world to give those countries a far better deal, in order ideally to moving in the fullness of time towards unilateral free trade - yup step forward UKIP.
"Innovative" - well I reckon those above should take at least some prizes for innovation in the claggy world of centre ground politics, but shall we go further. An utter rejection of the 50% target for further education with the acceptance that this will mean that many of the pointless further education establishments will go to the wall, thus reducing the cost to the taxpayer and accepting that in her education the concept of elite should not be a dirty word but an ambition. A rejection of the centrally planned National Curriculum, a rejection of Whitehall devised targets in health care. A drive towards local democracy, with locally based police forces there to serve the local population rather than monitor them. Hopefully with the creation of locally elected police chiefs. An utter rejection of regionalisation and all its myriad works. A radical suggestion for the West Lothian question.
Problem solving, see above, but there is more.
Successful, ah now there's the rub, but I was pleased to note the local council vote in Lincolnshire a couple of days ago which put UKIP second behind the Tories - with a 7.5% swing Con-UKIP, so we are getting there.
Now as to the slur, go and wash your mouth out with soap and grow up.

[william]

tank-driving? correct.

middle-aged? flattering to the cabal - Nattrass, Titford and Knapman. they're actually quite old men.

losers? New Britain racial policies were hardly a rip-roaring success.

As for UKIP's current policy profile, they used to play left-wing. Now they're playing right. UKIP just try to plug gaps Lib Dem style, playing the market. As to what they really think......your guess is as good as mine.

But yes UKIP are eurosceptic. And Cameron is not. That is the tragedy for the Conservative Party, and for Britain.

[Rick]

tank driving swivel eyed loons

So why are soldiers of the Royal Tank Regiment swivel eyed loons ?

The British Army is now to be insulted and derided by Conservatives too ?

[John Hustings]

It is to be remembered that Euroscepticism hasn't always been a "right-wing" position, and there is no intrinsic reason why it should be. Anyone interested in democratic accountability should be a eurosceptic IMHO.

It's depressing that the way to dismiss a eurosceptic position now is simply to insult all adherents as "far right" or "racist/xenophobic/little-englanders".

David Cameron is insulting UKIP partly because he doesn't want to argue with them. As with previous Tory leaders, he is terrified of the Europe issue and the potential divisions that could arise from it.

[Esbonio]

Well said John Hustings. Cameron is a busted flush.

[Richard]

We should try and forget the UKIP outburst and move on. I thought it was a very stupid thing to say but hopefully Cameron will learn from his mistakes. I'm sure he realises that antagonsing the party's Right isn't the way to go about motivating activists. The Right have generally tolerant of Cameron up until now, accepting that he has a point about the need to change. That goodwill should not be thrown away.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

"UKIP are not remotely like Militant Tendency. The views they espouse are not regarded as threatening by the average voter."

Are you on drugs? Can I have some? Anyone which can make UKIP not appear Enoch Powell scary must be pretty powerful stuff.

This "Blue Labour" nonsense only shows how certain members of the Conservative party have lost touch with reality. Anyone who advocates policies which most voters can agree with, policies which will up that poll rating and win us the next election, must of course be a socialist? Can I have some of what you're taking too?

I want someone, anyone, who thinks UKIP should be apologised to to answer me two questions : Do you seriously think we will we win next time by cutting and pasting the UKIP manifesto onto ours?

When you vote you don't vote for a manifesto. You vote someone into power on the strength of nothing more than a promise. I'd rather not vote former "New Britain" members into power. Their manifesto might sound great, but I don't trust them as far as I could throw them.

UKIP are a bunch of fantasists. Like I said before, Cameron didn't insult them, he dismissed them as what they are. In a way UKIP are very useful, they're the poster-children for the unelectability of the far right.

[Richard]

Are you on drugs? Can I have some? Anyone which can make UKIP not appear Enoch Powell scary must be pretty powerful stuff.

Militant were on the Far Left. They wanted to nationalise vast swathes of industry, redistribute wealth on a massive scale and generally pull us towards full on communism. They later became the Socialist Party and have pictures of Marx and Engles of their website.

UKIP may be right wring but they are not as far to the Right as Militant were to the Left. I do not see pictures of fascists like Hitler or even Ultraconservatives like Franco on their website. They have not called for the repression of our civil liberties, the establishment of an all-white Britain or a Corporate State.

If you want to define libertarian as far-right, they haven't called for the demolition of the entire welfare state, the legalisation of drugs or the abolition of anti-discrimination law.

So while it is true that UKIP may be out of touch, they are noway near as extreme as Militant were.

[Voice from the South West]

This has proved everything that I said it would in that UKIP has received a lot of unnecessary publicity. However I was there at the Spring Forum and one thing I will say is that IMO the UKIP protest was totally ineffective. As someone said to me in my group - where was their token black person? Also Nigel Farage was there at the ‘protest’ and looked totally ridiculous wearing his cow-boy hat.

[Richard]

"Do you seriously think we will we win next time by cutting and pasting the UKIP manifesto onto ours?"

"Their manifesto might sound great, but I don't trust them as far as I could throw them."

Unless I am mistaken you seem to contradict yourself here.

I don't know if copying and pasting their manifesto would win us the election alone. I don't think it would lose us many votes. It would depend on the campaign and the emphasis given to certain issues. Going on about the EU won't win us an election.

I also happen to agree that UKIP don't have the greatest of images but I think their manifesto is quite sound.

[UKIP Fiend]

UKIP have promised to cut Coucil Tax by 50%.

Exactly how are they going to make up the 50% shortfall in Local Government finance?

They can't claim they will use the money the UK gives to the EU budget as this has already been promised to give the pensioners an extra £25.

So what taxes will go up and what services will be cut to plug UKIPs multi billion local government black hole?

UKIPs local government manifesto is an uncosted collection os sounbites and with 200 to 300 councillors standing they have a snowballs chance in hell of getting in inacted!

How many candidates are UKIP standing - they dont know! figures range from 150 to 400!

[Matthew Oxley]

UKIP are promising to fight our marginals in future elections, and the notion of a war will no doubt afford them extra publicity, has Francis Maude just lost us the next election?

[chad]

John Hustings wrote:
It is to be remembered that Euroscepticism hasn't always been a "right-wing" position, and there is no intrinsic reason why it should be.

100% agreed John. I approach my eu-scepticsm from an internationalist, arguably moderately centre-left approach, and can see that the eu is a regional old-boys' private members club that is a distraction to international cooperation and advancement.

Many of those who claim to be super pro-Europe are in reality xenophobic, as they really want to build a new superpower to fight what they really hate; the USA.

We don't need a new superpower to antagonise the Americans, we need all countries working together. The EU-vision is too narrow and too protectionist. The biggest challenges we face are international ones, and we should ensure we address them 100% internationally.

For me, in practice, this means wholesale reform of our international bodies, then when they are ready, we, along with our european neighbours, should withdraw from the regional EU and work together within the reformed global bodies.

Perhaps the EU has shown how countries can cooperate, but now it has become another self-serving, bloated organisation for the politicians to squander even more taxpayers funds.

In language Cameron likes, the internationalist approach is 21st century and digital, the EU is so 20th century and analogue.

In short, eu-scepticsm is as much a centre-left as a centre-right issue. The approach and core focus may be different, but the overlap in beliefs is that the EU itself is not the best solution for the UK, for Europe or the world.

On this issue, with new and blue labour it seems aligned, no wonder people are looking for eu-sceptic representation. Hopefully I will be able to build a voice for those eu-sceptics on the c-l, the internationalists who would probably not want to vote ukip and instead begrudingly vote tory or libdem or sit on their hands and stay at home.

Cameron's blue labour is letting down the country by not seeking to show that the eu is not the way forward for international cooperation in the 21st century.

Cameron keeps repeating the word "change" and with he self-proclaimed title of "heir to blair" it should come as no surprise that he is seeking to turn the Tory party in the Labour party.

The fact that Cameron wants to install a windmill on his roof should tell you all you need to know; more spin! ;-)

[Selsdon Man]

Many of the UKIP candidates who fight marginal seats will be former members of the Conservative Candidates List who were purged last year. Many of them are experienced and capable. They could cost Mr Cameron the election. Act in haste (or prejudice) and repent at leisure!

[Henry Whitmarsh]

If they want to wake up with Labour, thats up to them. (Obviously being a closet socialist and EU federalist, I won't be as bothered as they will.) Scared of UKIP? Only if the Socialist Workers aren't fielding a candidate.

[Matthew Oxley]

They will probably be those rejected from the A-list, too, Selsdon.

[UKIP Fiend]

Didnt the LibDems try a 'decapitation' strategy at tthe last General Election to wipe out the Tory shadow cabinet - only for the Conservative support rally and the targetted MPs have their votes increase?

[Christina]

Chad,

You seem to be saying that the EU cannot be reformed to be more Internationalist, so you are proposing that the whole world be Internationalist.

This seems unrealistic to me.

If Europe cannot do it in the EU, as a stepping stone to Internationalism, then there is less likelihood of the whole world doing it.

There is already an Internationalist lobby in the EU. Many Federalists want the EU to become a Federal Europe en route for the whole planet becoming a One World Government. A world without countries.

I would like to see an Internationalist approach that can actually work. The co-operation of like-minded Nations, ie Liberal Democracies working together. I would like to see such co-operation in the Space Race, which will lead to new technologies that will help the whole world too.

[Chad]

Hi Christina,

You seem to be saying that the EU cannot be reformed to be more Internationalist, so you are proposing that the whole world be Internationalist.

You can't be half-internationalist.

Either your organisation is open to an international membership or it is not. We know the eu is a regional grouping based on and limited to geographical considerations.

Even pro-EU internationalist libdems (peter_b for example) accept that the eu is actually hindering internationalism.

However, all I am actually asking for is for our political leaders to treat us like adults and debate these issues fully and objectively instead of stifling debate by just insulting those with an opposing view.

Cameron has shown no appetite to discuss this subject in any form.

[UKIP Fiend]

UKIP have their own Super hero called UKIP MAN - he has his own website - which he has closed down during the local elections!

Here is his picture:-

http://www.lechladegroup.org.uk/

He can be found prancing around Romford, Hornchurch and Havering area dressed as UKIP MAN.

Be scared you Tories in marginals for a super hero is on his way!

He also has a van - and was most upset not to be invited to the demonstration in Manchester - I wonder why UKIP leadership kept him away?

[Christina]

I don't see the EU as just a regional group, Chad, but a group of like-minded democracies.

I think the acceptance of liberal democracy is needed for full International co-operation.

I oppose the idea of an Internationalist approach which accepts dictatorships, for example. It's not a regional thing alone, but a cultural and political one.

Nations need to have things in common.

What has Israel in common with an Iran which wants to wipe it off the map?

You can be half-Internationalist, IMO. You can set up co-operation on an International basis, with an invitation to join to those Nations who do not share our values (human rights, for example) should they wish to make changes in those directions. ie the spread of liberal democracy.

Regions can learn to co-operate, and be a model for the rest of the world. I don't see how destroying the EU would help make the world more Internationalist, it would do the opposite, IMO.

The EU has grown to 25 Nations, it could grow again and include non-European countries, in time (and effort)

I could understand an Internationalist approach which is pro-EU but calling for reform, but not an anti-EU stance.

I should think the idea of "imagine no countries" to be anathema to the majority of EU-Skeptics, as we tend to be very much for the Nation State, not for some One World Government idea, whether Federalist or anything else.

Cameron does stand for the Nation State. I wouldn't support him if he did not.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

Great, UKIP candidates = A list rejects. Wonderful. Please do keep those little golden nuggets coming UKippers!!!

If conservative voters know that UKIP are only targeting a marginal seat to punish the Conservative party and hand over the seat then this will only motivate them to vote Tory and look very harshly on UKIP.

[Chad]

I don't see the EU as just a regional group, Chad, but a group of like-minded democracies.

The EU has grown to 25 Nations, it could grow again and include non-European countries, in time (and effort)

Christina, you must stick to the facts. You do tend to drift off into subjectivity on this issue.

The EU is not an international but regional body that is only open to European countries.

If you doubt then, then search on the EU's official site for the reason they refused entry to Morocco in 1987. The reason given was simply because it was not a European country.

It's called the EU because it is only open to European countries, as they have shown.

You can't have it both ways. It is either an international body or it is a regional body restricted on geographic bodies. Many federalists have tried to argue that the EU is a fully international body to me until I mentioned the Morocco rejection.

EU Federalists fear the internationalist approach because it opens them to the same charge of xenophobia as they throw at the eu-withdrawal supporters.

The EU has clearly defined itself as the latter by rejecting countries for no reason other than being "non-European".

To avoid any confusion, the internationalist seeks international cooperation between nation states. After reform, this would include cooperation on security, terrorism, trade etc and of course, as we do now, by abiding by the rules we give up some sovereignty, however we do so on a voluntary basis whilst ensuring the organisations 100% respect our national sovereignty.

This is no different from now except for its commitment to international reform and withdrawal from the federalist EU project.

I can't imagine eu-sceptics opposing that!

You can be half-Internationalist, IMO. You can set up co-operation on an International basis, with an invitation to join to those Nations who do not share our values (human rights, for example) should they wish to make changes in those directions. ie the spread of liberal democracy.

I agree, that isn't half-internationalist. You don't need 100% participation for like-minded countries to work together internationally in the same way as the EU does not include all European countries.

All I am saying is that there is no logic in these like-minded countries grouping together on a regional basis when they can focus the same effort internationally.

The EU is a federalist project that is damaging international efforts.

Christina, may I ask you one simple and direct question, to avoid any ambiguity? Do you still support EU withdrawal?

[Christina]

Chad,

As I have stated many times before, I have difficulty believing that the EU can be reformed in a "in Europe, not run by Europe" direction.

That's what we should try though - reform of the EU.

If reform does not work, then a crisis would result, and that would be when we call for withdrawal. If it does work, there is no need to withdraw.

[Chad]

Thanks for the clarification Christina.

That is a significant change from your previous firm position on withdrawal, but it does explain your other comments.

I can now see why you were unhappy with progcon's and ukip's unequivocal goal of withdrawal.

Do you now support a federal Europe? What reform are you lokking for?

[Christina]

I haven't changed my position, Chad, for some time. I want the EU to reform in an EFTA type direction, the opposite of federalism.

The progcon and ukip way would leave the rest of the EU more prone to federalism, because if we withdrew, there would be less opposition to federalism.

We cannot stop the EU becoming federal from the outside of the EU.

If one wishes to prevent a federal Europe, the CP is the place to be.

If one isn't bothered about Europe becoming federal, but wants Britain out, then UKIP is the place.

If Europe decides to be federal, then we should withdraw and go back to Churchill's vision. Britain outside the EU in this scenario, would help with tensions and other considerations as a new superpower arose.

[Chad]

Thanks Christina, that answers my suspicions from before that you must have changed you mind whilst a member of a party(ies) that was 100% committed to EU withdrawal.

But we'll leave this discussion here and pick it up on the ukip forum to stop this thread going off on a tangent.

[Christina]

The problem wasn't withdrawal Chad, it was the overall progcon EA plan which I believed would not work.

As for changes, you have moved from a centre-right progcon to a centre-left imagine.

People who want withdrawal, want Britain to be her own country, you want no countries. I don't think your new position would appeal to EU-skeptics. Your new position of 'imagine no countries' is akin to communism and federalist visions of a One World Government, it seems to me.

[Christina]

PS Chad.

When in ProgCon, I argued that withdrawal could only happen if the Conservatives tried to reform the EU, and it they couldn't. Withdrawal would come from a crisis, if at all. Davis said there would be a crisis if his reforms were rejected by the EU (to Dimbleby).

I argued with UKIP members that opposing the Conservatives was counter-productive, we needed a Conservative Government who would try to reform our role in the EU.

The only change I've made is to believe that under Cameron, reform is more likely, though I am 80% skeptical, instead of 99.9%.

[Chad]

People who want withdrawal, want Britain to be her own country, you want no countries

No I don't, you have completely misunderstood.

I simply want nation-state cooperation based on the world as a whole, not regionalised into little power-bases that creates friction (eg between the USA and the EU).

The "no countries" simply refers to treating all countries equally (ie not creating clubs that are only open to, and thus benefit a few) not merging into them!

[Christina]

It's not surprising I've misunderstood though, is it. We all know John Lennon's Imagine, and you are claiming his vision, but your vision is actually different. He also sang 'imagine no possessions'.

Why aren't you complaining about NATO?

Surely if there in one org that doesn't allow every country, it is NATO.

[Chad]

All you have to do is read the site! It's clear and I have explained it here many times.

Why aren't you complaining about NATO?
Surely if there in one org that doesn't allow every country, it is NATO.

Indeed, I have complained about the international bodies here and called for reform. Tim said it would be a theme for discussion soon.

As I wrote in my comment at 14:47
This is no different from now except for its commitment to international reform and withdrawal from the federalist EU project.

We need international reform first, then we can safely withdraw from the EU and step up to act internationally. I haven't proposed any rash actions but a sensible shift from regionally-bias to international bodies that reflect the world in the 21st century, not the current snapshot of the world in 1945.

The internationalist approach can bring the end to the federalist eu, because the real way forward is nation-state international cooperation.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Chad, Christina:

This site is ConservativeHome.com, not ImagineHome.com. Could you two not conduct this personal conversation somewhere else?

[Chad]

DVA,

The discussion is about the EU in a thread in which UKIP is in the title.

Christina is a Tory party member, and it would be nice for once if we could have an open discussion about Europe.

We're talking values and EU aims, not parties.

[chad]

Is UKIP withdrawal aim, a federal EU aim, an internationalist nation-state aim the right way forward etc?

This seems particularly relevant to what is happening in the Tory Party right now where the EU is once again causes concerns as fears grow that Cameron may well be a europhile who has made an eu-sceptic promise he does not intend to keep.

Why must discussions on the EU be suppressed? A thread on UKIP seems a very relevant place for such discussion to take place.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"Why must discussions on the EU be suppressed? A thread on UKIP seems a very relevant place for such discussion to take place."

Chad, I'm not calling for discussion on the EU to be suppressed, but it does seem to me that the personal issue you and Christina have with each other has caused this (and other threads) to descend into a round of circular sniping between the pair of you.

Some examples:

I should think the idea of "imagine no countries" to be anathema to the majority of EU-Skeptics

Christina, you must stick to the facts. You do tend to drift off into subjectivity on this issue.

Christina, may I ask you one simple and direct question, to avoid any ambiguity? Do you still support EU withdrawal?

That is a significant change from your previous firm position on withdrawal, but it does explain your other comments.

I can now see why you were unhappy with progcon's and ukip's unequivocal goal of withdrawal.

Thanks Christina, that answers my suspicions from before that you must have changed you mind whilst a member of a party(ies) that was 100% committed to EU withdrawal.

But we'll leave this discussion here and pick it up on the ukip forum to stop this thread going off on a tangent.

The problem wasn't withdrawal Chad, it was the overall progcon EA plan which I believed would not work.

As for changes, you have moved from a centre-right progcon to a centre-left imagine.

It's not surprising I've misunderstood though, is it. We all know John Lennon's Imagine, and you are claiming his vision, but your vision is actually different. He also sang 'imagine no possessions'.

Those were just a few snippets I picked out from a quick glance back at the last ten or so posts on the thread.

[Chad]

No DVA, we have heated debates, but on issues. That is healthy. Now your intervention has simply taken the thread of course.

I'm sure we'll have many in the future, and some have become very heated, but we are debating themes related to the thread.

Why don't you take the time to read the thread subject and contribute to the theme rather than adopt a self-impose policing role?

When I look back, I see the core matter being discussed the different approach to the EU, well until you waded in anyway.

So why don't you help to bring the subject back on track and contribute a comment linked to the theme?

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

I voted UKIP in the 2004 European Parliament elections, partly because I wasn't particularly inspired by the platform of Michael Howard's Conservative, partly because I was disillusioned with the Conservatives after the shocking treatment of Iain Duncan Smith and partly because in my heart, I have some sympathy with the view that the UK should withdraw from the European Union.

I don't intend to vote UKIP ever again and consider my earlier vote for them to be an aberration that I attribute to the misplaced idealism of studenthood.

With regards the EU, I consider it to a be sclerotic monster of a political organisation, forever on the brink of crisis and forever locked about two decades behind the contemporary political agenda, offering yesterday's answers to the day before yesterday's problems and in desperate need of reform.

The UK certainly needs to reconsider its relationship with the EU, and in the past I've suggested a fully-independent, high-profile review of the UK-EU relationship and whether British interests would be served better by withdrawal from the EU, followed by a referendum on membership.

Happy now?

[Chad]

:-) Thanks.

William Rees-Mogg wrote about the fear of discussing the Europe issue this morning.

It was a good article showing how Cameron's team are avoiding Europe entirely and presenting it as a "non-mainline" issue.

[Christina]

Dan,

As far as I'm concerned, Chad hasn't been sniping at me, nor me at him. We're just exploring differing views on Europe and the whole world. A challenge isn't a snipe.

[William]

How will UKIP halve Council Tax? was asked.

Outside the EU, we do have more tax options than we do inside it.

For example, VAT could be got rid of in its entirety. A local sales tax (not an income tax) could be brought in to fund local government, ending all grants and control from Central government,

We could remove the 50% tarrif barrier on all electronic goods which forces us to pay 50% more for computers etc than the rest of the word, some 70% tarrif barriers on food and free up the City.

Minford estimates our economy's GNP would grow by 20%, boosting tax revenues by a similar amount.

We could join the world economy, achieve 4-5% growth as do USA, Australia, Canada etc instead of being locked in to EUsclerotic 2% and less.

Cameron's failure is his pecking at things -jumping around to the media's tune when he should be telling us where we are now, where we should be going and then getting us there.

The EU can either open itself up to the world (not a chance), or let us back out. We cannot allow it to smother our potential any longer. 30 years is too long. Are we to be stuck in the world's slow lane for another generation?

Cameron, spooned into position by the media, shows no leadership quality that I can recognise. He backs Blair's moves to end the indpendence of political parties - which is an EU programme, as is the centralisation of all information governments hold on their citizens. ID cards are only the visible part of the spread of government's tentacles into all aspects of our lives. Cameron is asking for 10% of all MP's to be eliminated - music to Brussels' ears.

IDS was getting us there, but MP's allowed the media to ditch him, when we were 40% in the polls, and Labour 35%. Howard and Cameron have never got close to the support IDS enjoyed across all sections of the community. He was 'real' - not the output of a media image factory, or focus group.

UKIP is a farce. It blew its best chance when its controlling cabal blanked Kilroy Silk. Even though a hot head, he would have lifted UKIP from 2% to 5% at general elections and forced the Conservatives to compete.

Now we're stuck with Cameron the media creation with no sense of direction. He's happy to sell us out to the EU, and Britain is lost.

If only the eurosceptics had backed Liam Fox...but they let the media decide the leadership issue for the second time. The Conservatives can only win by dumping the media, and choosing their own leadership.

If Primaries become the method of selecting candidates nationally for all posts, then we might have a chance of revival. But trying to get a movement going out of the media that everyone knows is rotten to the core, is a waste of everyone's time. Just look at Cameron.

Major started the rot, selling out in the Mastricht Treaty, feigning euroscepticism, and living in the media. Blair perfected the art - using mandelson, campbell and the creation of the lying machine.

We should not be trying to emulate or compete with the worst era British politics has ever experienced. We should be creating the future...out of own beliefs and values. Until we start from those, we're flotsam.

Lists are not strategies. They're the work of muddled minds. Strategies can be expressed in one thought, one sentence and are instantly expressed into action.

[Jack Stone]

UKIP can promise to cut council tax by 50% because they simply have no chance of getting more than a couple of councillors elected let alone take control of a council.
UKIP are a small bunch of obsessive fruitcakes who are against everything but for very little.
They want a Britain where Churchill is still Prime Minister, India is still British, everyone is white skinned and homosexuals are locked up in prison.
They are the party of the past. They have nothing to offer todays Britain.
We should ignore them and let them play at politics while we in the Conservative party work to save Britain.