Helmer accuses Cameron of 'betrayal' on EPP

Team Cameron's media management of the 'EPP deal' was very impressive - as ConservativeHome noted at the time.  MPs David Heathcoat Amory and Philip Davies made their anger clear but the Cornerstone Group and other Eurosceptics were notably quiet.  Roger Helmer MEP pulls no punches today, however, in an article for the latest edition of the Freedom Association's magazine.

Mr Cameron, he writes, has not fulfilled his promise to leave the EPP - he has "betrayed" it.  Mr Helmer says that David Cameron broke clear promises to take Tory MEPs out of the EPP "during his honeymoon period" - "it would be a first week task".

Mr Helmer's account of Mr Cameron's promise will be dismissed by some as he has had the Tory whip withdrawn from him (the reasons for this are disputed but he mounted attacks on alleged corruption in the European Parliament using procedural devices that the EPP disapprove of).  Nevertheless, two other prominent Eurosceptic MEPs have corroborated Mr Helmer's account in private briefings to ConservativeHome.  They remember  Mr Cameron promising to take Tory MEPs out of the EPP at the same time as he announced the A-list.

Helmer fears that Mr Cameron's "indefensible, humiliating and wrong" decision will cause some defections to UKIP.  It is understood that UKIP, which is in the middle of its own leadership contest, have offered Mr Helmer leadership of its grouping of MEPs but he has declined.

Download a pdf of Mr Helmer's article and visit the campaign to restore him to the full membership of the Tory group of MEPs here.

Comments

[Chad]

Well done Roger. A UKIP MEP of the future if ever there was one!

Nigel Farage has made the clearest possible pledge to the fledgling eurorealist BetterOffOut campaign by not only confirming that as UKIP leader, he would not stand against better placed BOO's in other parties, but would not be part of a party that did.

Well done Nigel. This fledgling cross-party eu withdrawal campaign will become a significant force in pushing for EU withdrawal, and to actively work together rather than vote splitting confirms Nigel's determination to deliver EU withdrawal.

[Jack W]

Chad ".... confirms Nigel's determination to deliver EU withdrawl."

As Farage was unable to deliver diddly squat in Bromley I fear withdrawl from the EU may be somewhat outwith his powers.

..............................

I'm somewhat unsure as to whether Mr. Helmer has endeared himself to his nominal leader with this latest edict .... Conservative Whip and Mr Helmer appear as parted as ever.

[william]

Cameron delegated the EPP decision to Hague. Hague flunked it. Cameron must override Hague's EPP mess, or Conservatives in the Euro Parliament will become a dying breed.

There are only 8 or so eurosceptic MEP's willing to speak out against EU corruption. Hague has now threatened these with deselection if they speak openly as Roger Helmer did. Two are already looking for Westminster seats and leaving. Helmer is unlikely to be there beyond the next Euro MEP elections, if the deslection threat is carried out.

How will any eurosceptic MEP wish to follow in the footsteps of Hannan, Helmer and Heaton Harris, and be betrayed and silenced by hague in similar fashion?

If the whole Euro Parlaiment Conservative delelegation becomes hardline europhile, few Conservatives will want to vote for them.

The next EU elections could become a Conservative bloodbath, unless Cameron takes hold of this situation.

The BNP are targeting these elections, and UKIP, currently a spent force with little fight being shown by their leadership, might come back to life.

Hague's EPP mess will not go away. Cameron must show the strength of a leader and sort this out, or it will come back to haunt him over and over again. There has been a wrong calculation made as to how to play this. Hague is responsible. He must resign - or be sacked.

Helmer must not be silenced by threats of deselection. If nothing else we now see what a farce the Euro Parliament is. Freedom of Speech is simply not tolerated.

This EPP fiasco demonstrates beyond any doubt that Conservatives must campaign to leave the EU. There is no democracy. Freedom of Speech is not tolerated. Centralisation of power is total.

[Richard Hyslop]

Here Roger has shown yet again what a decent and principled politician he is.

[Derek]

Roger is in a very difficult position. He can remain loyal to his party leadership, and it looks as though he will get kicked out as a reward, or he can join UKIP and almost certainly remain an MEP. If I was Roger I would wait a little longer to see if any compromise was possible - but not too long!

[Chad]

"As Farage was unable to deliver diddly squat in Bromley I fear withdrawl from the EU may be somewhat outwith his powers."

That was UKIP's failure not Nigel's he even got Simon Heffer to endorse his campaign. No-one else in UKIP could come close to achieving that kind of media support or attention.

UKIP in Bromley had all the boxes ticked, but it's narrow overall message let it down.

UKIP and BOO have a very, very, long way to go, but at last, the seed has been planted, and eurorealists are pointing in the same direction and that is the key to success.

[strapworld]

Nigel Farage is a legend in his own mind! If ukip are stupid enough to elect him as their leader then he will prove as disastrous a 'leader' as Knapman.Knapman was, apparantly one of the Meastricht rebels! or so his supporters told everyone...one of Major's bastards too! Ukip's top brass are failed politicians with self interest being their only major policy! Forget about coming out of the EU they are getting too much money and cannot afford to come out! BUT they will lose the seats in the west country to the Lib Dems...mark my words.

Roger Helmer is a brave fellow but, sadly, he will be forgotten after the next EU election. The Tories are wed to the EU.

[Jack W]

Chad @ 9.49.

I hadn't realized that Farage had taken his bucket and spade and decamped to Blackpool for the duration of the Bromley campaign !

For one of the "heavyweights" of UKIP to campaign so extensively and post 8% in friendly territory was a woefully inadequate result and no amount of UKIP spin will prove otherwise.

You say that UKIP "ticked all the boxes" in Bromley, forgetting that the most important box is the one the voters tick and for UKIP the box the voters have in mind is one placed six feet under in the political landscape.

And .. oh dear the Heffer endorsement .... a man so puffed up with his own own self importance and "guru" of conservative values, that he fails to see that he's become a figure of ridicule and fun in mainstream Conservative circles. A free transfer to UKIP beckons ... indeed I expect many Tories would pay good money to off-load Heffer to the outer reaches of political loony tunes ..... but UKIP should snap Heffer up quick or Veritas or the English Democrats may gazump you !! ...... spare shilling for the fund anyone ??

[Chad]

Hi Jack,
UKIP is an awful mess I completely agree.
The significance of the party failure cannot be underestimated.

Even in the best possible environment, with the best candidate, decent spend etc etc, they can only poll 8%. Rubbish. I agree.

I totally agree, and wrote before how the result would be a stark wake-up call.

The failure in B&C was not Nigel's, or the activists, or the campaign, it was solely UKIP's as a party.

The complete lack of an excuse is the best thing that could have happened to the party imho as we enter the leadership election; the party must grow as a rounded small government eurorealist party, and for me, the failure in Bromley is the very catalyst for change.

So, yes, UKIP is an organisational and electoral shambles, but despite this it still has 18,000 members and 10 MEP's. That is a useful foundation to build on. Change is coming, and it is long overdue.

[Gareth]

Meanwhile, down at Salem ...

Judge Euro-scep has uncovered yet more of the devil's workings after Roger 'Abigail Williams' Helmer was seized by a vision at the village meeting and declared:

"Davey Cameron is a witch I tell ye!"

There's gonna be a hangin' folks ...

[Jack Stone]

Is this a site for Conservative Party members and supporters or a fan club for UKIP a party that hardly any ordinary people support. I sometimes wonder!

[Chad]

Modern politics Jack, modern politics!

Eurorealists and eurosceptics are all one big happy group no matter what party we belong to.

No more back-biting, vote-splitting etc, just working together where we agree. Some might even describe it as the end of punch'n'judy? :-)

[Jack W]

Chad @ 1039.

Whether your vision for UKIP comes to fruition time will tell, however I'm sceptical in the finest tradition of yuor party !!

But your rewriting of Bromley as a UKIP "failure" is risible !!! In Bromley UKIP was Farage, the activists and their campaign and the responsibility is squarely theirs. You might contend that Farage was the best UKIP candidate available and that an unknown would has performed even worse, but that's another matter.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Oh wonderful. Yet another opportunity to conjure up a 'TORY SPLITS OVER EUROPE' story out of a trivial issue. Terrific.

[christina speight]

The issue of the EU is live and festering. the Better Off Out campaign backed by the Freedom Associotion, the CIB, the Democracy Movement and even the now irrelevant UKIP is getting its message across. As William says if the spineless Cameron doesn't grasp this nettle, make good his broken promise and join the party's majolrity view the Tory MEPs will be a dying breed at the next euro-elections.

BNP will probably gain massively.

[James Hellyer]

Oh wonderful. Yet another opportunity to conjure up a 'TORY SPLITS OVER EUROPE' story out of a trivial issue. Terrific.

It may actually be a sensible policy of containment.

Containing the UKIP posters in one thread, that is.

[william]

DVA. I don't think you are right. If the eurosceptic wing of the Conservative Delegation to the Euro Parliament continues to implode, it is not a trivial event.

The europhiles have always talked a good eurosceptic talk to get elected, but never walked the walk. Until the EPP issue became the turning point in the leadership contest, few were aware of any of this. Two years ago, no one was bothered.

We now have the situation right out in the open with millions of people seeing the threat of deselection by Hague enforcing the silence of the eurosceptic Conservative MEP's.

If the Euro Parliament cannot tolerate freedom of speech, maybe even you can see that this is a significant event in our Party's history. In simple terms, the truth is coming out.

Cameron cannot carry on with the old ways of ignoring the issue and sweeping it under the carpet. By trying to do that, he's been made to look weak and unprincipled. If he doesn't get the situation under control, it will not only be Euro votes that slip away.

This is Cameron's opportunity - to show that in fact he does have the strength to stand up for what's right, and redefine the future. Otherwise all the talk of localism, social justice and environment becomes just talk.

Do we have a leader? That's the real question that the EPP situation is asking. Millions of people are watching and need to know the answer to that question. Roger Helmer can shuffle off and retire into obscurity if you want. Cameron cannot. He is becoming the issue.

[Chad]

"Containing the UKIP posters in one thread, that is. "

LoL. You can't contain us - I've tunnelled my way through to the James Cleverly Mayoral thread!

[william]

If this is a UKIP thread, then it is worth a mention that they are in the midst of a leadership contest, which will end in September.

Suchorzewski could win and put UKIP back on track. If they get professional leadership, the time will be ripe for them.

I don't see how Conservatives are going to vote to support a hardline europhile delegation in the Euro Parliament.

Roger Helmer is right to be alerting Cameron to the dangers of the situation. Will he act in time?

[Adam]

I wonder if Roger Helmer knows what happened to all those free market Atlanticist parties from the new member states that were supposed to be crying out for a new grouping?

Instead of carping, maybe he could find out.

[Derek Buxton]

There seems to be some confusion here, Cameron elected leader on the basis of one promise, not kept, and toadying up to Blair on education and "let's not be nasty in Parliament". Now he doesn't like freedom of speech. This man is not a leader, he is a freeloader, "I'm alright Jack", sod the rest of you, where is the next cheque please?"

[william]

As Roger says in his article Adam -

you obviously didn't read it.

[CJC]

This is the most fascinating era in modern politics. First we have a Labour leader who openly despises what most of his own party believes, now we have a Conservative leader who appears to do the same.
And so disillusion and turnouts continue, respectively, to grow and shrink...

[Chad]

"Suchorzewski could win and put UKIP back on track"

LoL. It'll be Nigel or DCB and either way they'll work together and reform the party.

Does anyone remember Richard from when he was picked as the Tory candidate for Swansea East 1992? Email me if do please.

[Adam]

William,

Roger doesn't detail any potential allies.

What he writes is:
"Four times since 1997 we have gone to other MEPs and said 'If we leave the EPP, might you join us?'. We can't cry wolf again. They want to see the colour of our money. Once we leave the EPP there will be many MEPs, some we perhaps haven't even though of, who will flock to our banner"

So, according to Roger, we just have to trust him that there are loads of MEPs dying to form a new group. He has no idea who they are. He doesn't think anyone else has any idea who they are. He just has some sort of faith that it will all be alright in the end.

It's pathetic.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"It is understood that UKIP, which is in the middle of its own leadership contest, have offered Mr Helmer leadership of its grouping of MEPs but he has declined."

This is either arrogant complacence on the part of Nigel Farage (their current leader in Europe) in thinking that he will win their leadership contest and therefore be in a position to offer Roger Helmer the European leadership position OR Farage is being stitched up by party colleagues.

Whilst I would be delighted if the latter situation was the case, my perception of Farage leads me to the former conclusion.

[Chad]

Daniel, all the candidates, not just Nigel, have detailed who they would like to have on their teams if they win so we can look beyond just the leader.

[A H Matlock]

Well, I think this puts paid to the Reinstate Roger campaign....

[Michael McGowan]

"UKIP's top brass are failed politicians with self-interest being their only major policy". Unlike the leadership of the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties you mean??

[Denis Cooper]

This has got nothing to do with UKIP.

Cameron made a promise, and he's broken it. He said it was wrong for the Tory MEPs to be in the EPP, so if he became leader they would leave within months not years, and that would happen whether or not it was possible to form another officially recognised group beforehand.

Not only has he broken that unambiguous pledge, he's allowed Hague to threaten Tory MEPs with de-selection if their consciences will not permit them to remain in the EPP, and he's ensured that one of the most decent and honourable people elected as a Tory MEP won't be re-instated and so won't be a candidate in 2009.

We now know that any promise made by Cameron, on any subject, is worthless, and we now know that he's totally in thrall to the EU, and neither of those things will be forgotten over the coming years.

[william]

Well, I think this puts paid to the Reinstate Roger campaign....(Matlock)

Why?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

UKIP are trying to exploit Cameron's weakness and the rift that has been created within the Party. The sooner it is sorted out, and we close ranks the better. Unless you think we look good as we are, for some reason.

Roger has remained loyal at all times. Even here he is speaking openly about the obvious dangers of the situation that has been created. Do we want our delegation to the Euro Parliament to become hardline europhile?

The selections in 2007 will be crucial as Roger says. Reinstating Roger and removing the threat of deselection from him would be a very sensible first step I would think, in drawing the poison out of the current situation. Unless Cameron wants more and more trouble out of this.

It reminds one of the days of 'victimisation' when Trade Unions used that as their battle cry. I never thought we would see the Conservative Party selecting of a few 'victims' for deselection becasue they have dared to speak openly about corruption.

I would advise Cameron to call Helmer in for a friendly chat, unwind the situation and look at ways to heal over this situation. It has the potential to derail Cameron's leadership if the situation continues to deteriorate.

'Bring Helmer in from the cold, or freeze yourselves' is the advice I would give to Cameron and Hague.

[deborah]

"So, according to Roger, we just have to trust him that there are loads of MEPs dying to form a new group."

Perhaps, but Roger does have a reputation for honesty and integrity which other members of the Party are lacking at the moment.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"DVA. I don't think you are right. If the eurosceptic wing of the Conservative Delegation to the Euro Parliament continues to implode, it is not a trivial event."

Spare me the melodrama please, 'William'. The EPP-ED withdrawal delay was disappointing, but the way a lot of the contributors on this site carry on, you'd think armageddon was nigh.

Well it isn't, and the truth is that this issue is a matter of concern for nobody but foaming-mouthed Euro-obsessives and those with a keen interest in stirring up hackneyed 'TORY SPLITS OVER EUROPE' stories.

"Until the EPP issue became the turning point in the leadership contest, few were aware of any of this."

Hogwash. The turning point in the leadership contest was the week-and-a-half covering the leaderhip bid launches of David Cameron and David Davis, the party conference in Blackpool and Frank Luntz's personal political broadcast on behalf of David Cameron on Newsnight. The EPP-ED pledge was a side issue.

"We now have the situation right out in the open with millions of people seeing the threat of deselection by Hague enforcing the silence of the eurosceptic Conservative MEP's."

More wild exaggeration I see. The general public couldn't give a fig about who the Conservatives sit with in the glorified talking shop, and the only reason it could possibly reach the outskirts of their attention is that people like yourself keep making such a fuss about it.

[Denis Cooper]

But they do give a fig about whether they can trust the word of a political leader.

[Jon Gale]

"Cameron made a promise, and he's broken it....We now know that any promise made by Cameron, on any subject, is worthless, and we now know that he's totally in thrall to the EU, and neither of those things will be forgotten over the coming years."

Hmmm, not too over the top!

Cameron made a clear pledge, yes, and repeated it often, and shadow cabinet ministers told the Editor of ths site it was going ahead, etc. But when the deals with the Poles and Czechs fell apart Cameron didn't dare have Tory MEPs sit on their own, so he fudged it (And I think (very strongly)that was the wrong decision).

But some apear to think it more plausible that DC would make such a clear promise, with no wriggle room and repeat it, INTENDING from the start "I'll just break this pledge when I'm leader, no one will notice!" and then also assume that this will apply to all future promises! I have a hatred of conspiracy theories, so this seems to me like utter madness.

It is also deeply ironic that David Davis, who wouldn't even contemplate leaving the EPP, has come out of this a hero to the right! If anyone is "in thrall to the EU" it is him.

[Andrew Woodman]

If people couldn't give a fig where we sit, why don't we stick to our principles and sit as independents.

[Yet Another Anon]

BNP will probably gain massively.
So far the BNP haven't even managed to win anything at County Level let alone in European , Devolved Assembly\Parliament or National or European Elections - a lot of the news reports in the 2006 Local Elections focused on their wins whereas actually they lost a lot as well and if it wasn't for Barking & Dagenham would have actually seen very little in the way of gains at all, they have only District Council Seats and they have fewer of those than the Liberal Democrats have MP's and even between elections they don't seem to be able to hold onto them, consider all the people who a matter of a few months after their election resign their seats saying they don't understand what is going on or that they were a fool to ever be conned into standing for the BNP and others who have then switched to be Independents or who have joined other parties.

[Jack W]

DVA @ 1325.

You are correct. For most of the electorate the internal squabbles over the EPP and related issues are of so little interest as to barely register in their day to day lives.

..................................

One can only wonder at the motives of some Conservatives. For the first time in almost 15 years the Tories enjoy a small but sustained lead in the polls with a leader that potentially will deny Labour a majority at the next election.

Yet there are those who for all the world appear like Militant in Labours ranks in the 80's, Tories who consider idealogical purity and Europe as a totem to the exclusion of all other issues. They should remember the Conservative party is a broad church and is at its best when it accepts the best of the talents of that broad church. They should remember well that Maggie knew that lesson well and acted on it.

[malcolm]

Is there really anything left to say on this subject?Many of us were bitterly disappointed by Camerons' decision and made our feelings very clear at the time.But the decision has been made and won't be unmade without damaging the Conservative party.Isn't it time we focussed our attention on subjects we can still influence?

[Denis Cooper]

Jon,

I don't know whether Cameron made his pledge with all sincerity, or whether he always intended to break it. The facts are 1. he made the pledge 2. he's broken it 3. he's pretending that he hasn't broken it, and 4. he's allowed Hague to issue threats against any Tory MEP who actually does what he (Cameron) previously said they should all do.

So what will happen about the next promise he gives?

[Michael McGowan]

Please spare us all the platitudes about the Conservative Party being a broad church, blah, blah, blah.....and Mrs Thatcher doing or not doing x, y or z in 1066. The issue is much more basic: a lot of people who do not particularly see themselves as ideological or aligned with UKIP are deeply agnostic about a Conservative Party which seems to be a spitting image of New Labour i.e. run by two-faced slippery careerists who have no intention of undoing the damage of a decade of incompetent, authoritarian left-wing government. You may tell me that most Conservative governments have been like that.....and you wouldn't be far wrong. They, however, could count on the deference vote, which is steadily evaporating.

[Andrew Woodman]

There are still things to be resolved from the decision though Malcolm. We have one of the nominees for Outstanding Parliamentrian being right royally shafted by the MEP leadership and hung out to dry by the British leadership for daring to stand up to EU corruption. Now their is the added threat of deselection. David Cameron is leader, why doesn't he do a bit of leading and sort this travasty out!

[malcolm]

Good question Andrew.Not sure if Roger has done himself any favours by writing this article now but I hope he is readmitted to our MEP grouping now.

[Yet Another Anon]

Tories who consider idealogical purity and Europe as a totem to the exclusion of all The EU does have a lot of control over what the member states do, it's like a sort of regulator, everything the UK Parliament does has to be checked to make sure it complies with EU regulations, they are starting to get into everything saying what has to be done and what musn't be done - in that case it does come down to what people expect of the future of the EU, for people who think that it is likely that the EU could merely reflect UK policy on a larger scale or indeed that policywise it might be closer to what they want than is likely to be achieved by the UK than they are likely to favour it because of the advantages of scale, if on the other hand it is likely to add to difficulties in carrying out certain changes that someone considers of fundamental importance within the UK and indeed rather to actually worsten the situation then they are likely to be fundamentally opposed, it's the most important Constitutional matter by far and how the Constitution is has a huge impact on how policy and it's implimentation ends up.

[Andrew Woodman]

Maybe not Malcolm, but he has to do something. The leadership are not taking any action to sort the situation out and he's been suspended for well over a year now.

[RodS]

What a mess !!

Rogers problem is that he is a man of principle who talks straight and keeps his snout well out of the trough.

There is clearly now no place for man like that at either Brussels or Westminster.

[michael mcgough]

The young and inexperienced Cameron has surely learnt that pledges are BETTER OFF KEPT and that you should choose those that advise you with more care.Those who gave bad advice last century are unlikely to be wise now.

EPP today-----------gone tomorrow.

[Chad]

"Rogers problem is that he is a man of principle who talks straight and keeps his snout well out of the trough."

Not surprisingly, that is a common theme amonst the Tory BOO's too as we have seen here with Philip Hollobone's reluctance to unnecessarily claim expenses.

Of course the piggies with their snouts firmly in the trough will continue to attack Roger, or the Tory BOO's that could bring an end to their taxpayer-funded good times.

[David Banks]

Things certainly get heated inside the political bubble don't they. The doings of the EPP and Mr Helmer seem to be certainly dwarfing, on this site as a whole, perhaps rather more weighty issues. However for the sake of comment , i must say that obviously its a good thing if politicians keeps their word.
But lets not forget that 99% of principles are expendable.
Its also probably a good thing if people don't run round branding others 'Fascists ' and 'homophobes' at the drop of a hat. Tolerance , in the words of the cliche , is a two way street.
On a personal note , hello Chad , hows UKIPhome going?
Have you had many takers?
I would have thought you would have been rather too busy keep the whole site thundering along to grace our discussion too but its lovely to hear from you.

[Tam Large]

Well done Roger. Wonderful to see the truth stated plainly.

As for the EU being a Tory obsession.... over 60% of our laws now originate in Brussels. That means it is Westminster which is irrelevant, and the make-up of the EU which matters. That's a take-over, not an irrelevant backwater. The reason the public are less interested in the EU is that the 3 main parties are not telling them the truth about who runs this country.

[David Banks]

The multinationals run the country, oh and the media of course. They both make Westminster and Brussels look like the effete talking shops they really are.
Still , Vote Cameron.

[Denis Cooper]

Correct, the truth is constantly concealed. Take the first subject of the letters in the Telegraph today - Royal Mail changing the way postage is charged. Good idea or bad idea, that's as may be, but nowhere is it being mentioned that it's come from the EU. If it seems like a bad idea, let Royal Mail take the blame. There are lots of things like that, day after day, which are deftly covered up.

[Chad]

"On a personal note , hello Chad , hows UKIPhome going?"

Aah the personal attacks from Mr Banks! I always look forward to them.

It's gone much better than I had hoped, and I haven't read a copy yet, but I believe the edition of 'Freedom Today' we are discussing might even have a small plug for ukiphome, several Tory MP's have been circulating one particular article and the chairman of UKIP wants to get involved more.

Not bad in its first month and there is a lot more to come!

[David Banks]

Me chad , attack you? Surely not. Polite disagreement - yes. Glad to hear its so succesful.

[Chad]

:-) It's all knockabout fun David!

Well of course it is all thanks to Tim for getting the ball rolling. It would be hard for any serious political party not to have an independent but pro 'home' voice to sit between the party and the membership.

I'm just really pleased that the UKIP top brass have embraced it too.

[Jack Stone]

People vote BNP because they hate blacks and Asians not for any other reason. To suggest they vote for them because they are anti-Europe is nonsense.

[William Norton]

Jack Stone: People vote BNP because they hate blacks and Asians not for any other reason. To suggest they vote for them because they are anti-Europe is nonsense.

I'm afraid, Jack, that approach is the sort of wilful ignorance that allows the BNP to become established in places. There are a variety of reasons why people vote BNP. Racism is only one of them and the weight between each motive relative to their total vote at any given place will depend upon the locality (sometimes its pretty much 100%, others much less so - especially when they get a high vote).

Anti-Europeanism is a factor, as one of the many factors feeding a general disengagement from parliamentary politics. It probably isn't a major factor except in areas where there isn't a UKIP branch. Until very recently (this is a crude generalisation) there was a remarkable lack of overlap between active BNP and UKIP cells.

[David Banks]

i thought people voted BNP cos they were a trifle short of a picnic. Answers to such questions as 'Why do people vote BNP', 'where the hell is Kilroy?' and' Can we have a discussion on the CH site without mentioning Gay sex or Europe?' to BNPhome c/o Adolfs Duff Ideas, Mel Gibsonland,the Bunker , Berlin.

[Chad]

"there was a remarkable lack of overlap between active BNP and UKIP cells.
"

It's more helpful to look at the political grid with both social and economic axes.

It's no wonder the BNP successfully picks up disaffected Labour voters.

[Jon White]

After our disagreements yesterday on a different thread, I find myself totally in support of Denis Cooper here. Cameron made a promise, he made it to ensure he got the support of the right wing of the party in the election against David Davis. Once he had won the election, he broke his promise. It's no use blaming Hague - the buck stops at the top. If I as a Tory voter have had my faith in Cameron's ability to follow through on a pledge, or indeed keep a promise, shaken (if not destroyed), imagine how it must be for the 'floaters' who are lokking for a leader that they can trust after almost 10 years of Blair's lies.

[christina speight]

David Banks writes "The doings of the EPP and Mr Helmer seem to be certainly dwarfing, on this site as a whole, perhaps rather more weighty issues"

Tell that to the limp-wristed spineless Cameron. Not a peep out of him on anything of substance at all.
===========

And Jack Stone "People vote BNP because they hate blacks and Asians not for any other reason. To suggest they vote for them because they are anti-Europe is nonsense."

What rubbish! They vote for BNP because they are at the bottom of the heap when it comes to housing, to health and education. They are being ignored. The fact that BNP is also anti-EU is a bonus.

[Jon White]

Christina Speight: Of course people vote BNP for different reasons, but Jack Stone is right - the primary reason for voting for them is racism. Sadly, racism always manifests itself most strongly in those who are socially disadvantaged, and are looking for a scapegoat to blame their situation upon. I would image that the BNP will soon be not just anti-black and anti-Asian, but anti-Pole, anti- Lithuanian etc. From what I can gather, sadly such policies would probably gain them votes.

[william]

Not sure if Roger has done himself any favours by writing this article now (malcolm)

When should he write it? 2009.

By then most eurosceptic MEP's will be leaving the Conservative delegation, as Hannan and Heaton Harris are now. We will be represented purely by Hardline Europhiles like Jackson with snouts in the trough, and will be unlikely to attract many votes - especially if they rig the selections by changing the rules, which is being proposed.

Roger is trying to wake people up to the consequences of Hague's decisions, which I don't think anyone has yet given much thought to.

I'm sure he is interested in his own position to some extent, but this article is not written about his own position. It's a warning of what could happen next to the Party.

OK DVA doesn't mind if we are wiped out in the Euro elections in 2009. I find the opinion that hardly any of the 8.5 million people who voted Conservative in 2005 are even interested, curious. I thought people voted for political parties because they wanted them to prosper and win power, not to throw power away.

Is there a new category of voter running around that doesn't mind if the party he/she supports is to be decimated by opponents? Please tell me where I can meet some.

The effect of Roger's article is that unless the eurosceptic wing is reestbalished strongly in the selections which will take place in 2007, there is great potential electoral damage here.

OK it doesn't matter. No one's interested etc etc. But prepare for the headlines 'CONSERVATIVES DECIMATED IN EU ELECTION BLOODBATH'. That'll be fine. No problem. What's for tea today? Who's interested in the EPP anyway?

[deborah]

Jon White,
You're confusing cause and effect.
Christina is right. The BNP vote isn't growing because a whole load of people have suddenly discovered that they don't like foreigners.
The BNP vote is growing because those at the bottom of the list for housing, health etc - are seriously worried and angry that they are now having to share these scarce resources with a massive influx of newcomers.

[Jon White]

deborah, I don't think we disagree. As I said, those who are most socially disadvantaged always look for scapegoats. One can't blame them, probably just human nature. Perjorative words like 'massive influx' merely feed those insecurities sadly.

Where you are right is that there is reality, and perceived reality. The most important of these is the latter. As socially disadvantaged people PERCEIVE that the 'massive influx' of immigrants will mean that they will get less, then they will be driven into the arms of distateful parties like the BNP. The fact that they are spouting factual rubbish is immaterial, it is the perception that matters. This is why I am sure that the BNP will latch onto the current anti-Eastern European trend, and exploit it for their own electoral benefit.

[Yet Another Anon]

People vote BNP because they hate blacks and Asians not for any other reason. To suggest they vote for them because they are anti-Europe is nonsense.
The BNP in fact have been trying to win votes of Afro-Caribbeans, Sikhs and Hindu's and Jews. They have switched to trying to gain the Sikh and Hindu vote by campaigning more heavily against Muslims, it has to be said though that this has not paid off for them so far and is alienating much of their core support, they could end up losing support to the National Front from people who feel that they are selling out, there is a divide between the parties membership and it's current leadership and having apparently failed to get agreement for changes from his party's membership for rule changes such as removal of the restriction of members and candidates being ethnically North Western European as defined by the BNP, it appears that the leadership has been turning a blind eye to the rules and so they actually have councillors who technically would be barred by the party's own constitution - I would have thought a challenge to the leadership is quite possible and it could end up with the BNP being back to where they started with not even any council seats.

So far as the EU goes, UKIP has far more prospects of actually getting into parliament so I don't think that's it, reintroducing Capital Punishment is a major issue - if UKIP and the Conservative Party and other parties were to adopt the introduction of Capital Punishment as Official Party policy a lot of the support for the BNP would fall off, certainly it is better to lose than adopt the sort of racist scapegoating that the BNP go in for, but the fact is that they get less than 1% of the vote and struggle to hold most of their deposits - I would hope that none of the major parties or UKIP actually try to copy the BNP.

[Yet Another Anon]

As I said, those who are most socially disadvantaged always look for scapegoats. One can't blame them, probably just human nature.
It's not always the most socially disadvantaged who have taken to Neo-Nazi tendencies - in the 1930's support for the Nazis was quite common among elements of the aristocracy; people such as Oswald Moseley, The Chestertons, John Tyndall, Nick Griffin, and in France Jean Marie Le Pen and Rene Maigret, Briggite Bardot - all these people came from well off families, Nick Griffin's father apparently introduced him to the National Front taking him to a National Front rally when he was 15. The KKK had many members who were from very rich families.

People such as Ross Perot, David Davis, John Redwood, Lloyd George and many others certainly were all from modest backgrounds and none of them looked for scapegoats in their careers.

[Jon White]

Yet Another Anon - you point is accepted. However, in fairness to myself I didn't say that support for extremism ONLY comes from the socially disadvantaged, I said that this group are more likely to embrace a cause that has a convenient scapegoat.

It is true that many great leaders from moderate backgrounds never needed scapegoats. A certain daughter of a Grantham grocer springs to mind. Likewise, the reactionary right (and left - look at the Redgrave or Foot families) have picked leaders from the well-off.

However, my point was that the racilly motivated BNP specifically target the less well off by presenting them with a convenient scapegoat for their plight.

Sadly, recently it seems to be working.

[Denis Cooper]

Jon,

Of course it's a 'massive influx', there's no need for the inverted commas. It's the largest tide of immigration into this island in recorded history, in both relative and absolute terms. Even Jackie Ashley in the Guardian yesterday wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1833797,00.html

"Hysteria aside, Labour must lead the immigration debate"

"Yet, putting hyperbole to one side, the scale of the movement of people is awesome. Complete statistics are not available, but government figures show just under 400,000 eastern Europeans have arrived here and signed up for the worker registration scheme since the 10 new EU countries joined. That number, of course, takes no account of those working in the black economy. Whatever the true figure, it is certainly much, much bigger than the official prediction of about 26,000 for the same period.

To understand the scale of this, historical comparisons are useful, as long as we steer clear of silly ones - so far as we know, Poles and Hungarians are not being whizzed over here to boost New Labour at the polls, nor are Tony Blair's apparatchiks forcing millions of cowering dissenters into a life of grinding poverty and exile in, say, Orkney.

But there are useful parallels. There was massive migration to Britain after the second world war from across Europe, as hungry people came for work, as it happens from Poland, but also from France, Italy, Belgium and Germany. It happened in the immediate aftermath of shattering war and brought in about 300,000 people over five years. The black and Asian community established in Britain by the early 60s was about 300,000, and the combined Ugandan and Kenyan Asian inflow, which caused panic legislation and national hysteria in the 70s, was fewer than 50,000 people.

This latest wave will change Britain in all sorts of ways. The current Jewish population in Britain is about 260,000, some settled since Cromwell's time and some the refugees of pogroms and nazism. Modern Britain is unthinkable without the contribution of Jewish migrants. The same is true of Caribbean people, who have settled here over a far longer period than the east Europeans."

But this is really well away from the topic of Roger Helmer and the EPP.

[Jon White]

I completely agree with your last line Denis. We won't agree on the immigration thing, but I think that we do agree on DC's breaking of his word and the courage of Roger Helmer to say so.

[Richard Willis]

A H Matlock - I entirely agree with you. This is a very ill-judged article by Roger. I have as a result requested that my name be removed from the "Reinstate Roger" website. I hope others on there will do the same and I will certainly suggest to friends who are listed that they should also withdraw their support.

[william]

First Roger is de-whipped for speaking up about corruption.

Now a couple of posts want Roger deselected because he wants to put up an electoral fight against other parties, which will benefit, if these issues are not addressed. Surely Roger is entitled to speak!!

Some heads need to come out of the sand.

Richard Willis, I'm surprised you have any friends. If you do, I hope they tell you you're wrong! Freedom of Speech must be defended - in the Euro parliament, in the Conservative Party, on this website and everywhere else that it come under threat.

For every day that Roger Helmer remains cast out, the Conservative Party is unnecessarily injuring itself. Hague and Cameron are in a position to do something about the situation. I suggest that they do...or this (originally) relatively trivial affair will become the rock on which Cameron's progress is checked.

[Richard Willis]

William petty personal attacks do not enhance your argument!

Elected politicians have a collective responsibility to their party. If Helmer wants the whip restored he is going about it in a very strange way. He should show a little restraint!

[william]

No. But they're fun, and I was hoping you might have a sense of humour. These threads can get a bit dry if we're not careful.

Since Hague's decision about the EPP, there has been a uniform silence from MEP's who fear for their careers. Many of them are young and married with families and feel they cannot put up the fight that the situation deserves.

Hannan is going. Heaton-Harris too. We don't yet know about the rest of the eurosceptics, but clearly skilful exploitation of this by opponents could prove expensive for us electorally. This is what Roger is saying.

Roger has always made it clear that he wishes to represent his constituents and that he is loyal to the Party and to David Cameron. I see his statement as consistent with these aims.

Roger is not a shrinking violet. I don't think that going silent in fear for himself is likely to be his approach. Things are going badly wrong in our delegation to the EU Parliament. Roger senses trouble ahead if no action is taken.

He is right to speak out. I admire him for doing so. In fact he is the only representative our party has who has dared to speak openly about corruption in the EU parliament. If we deal with that by getting rid of him, we will have to face the consequences. It's a gift to our opponents. As Roger says, it is 'indefensible, humiliating and wrong.'

[malcolm]

I agree with you Richard,Roger should show restraint.But equally I'm sure you would agree with me that the behaviour of Tim Kirkhope and his friends has been disgraceful and David Camerons reluctance to do anything shows a distinct lack of courage to say the least.Can we agree on that?

[Richard Willis]

Malcolm - yes there is much about Kirkhope and the Euro-fanatic's behaviour that I find appalling but attacks on a new leader who is making good progress, over a sensible compromise he had to make, is irresponsible in my view.

[A H Matlock]

Richard Willis is spot on. Nobody denies that Timothy Kirkhope's treatment of Roger Helmer is unjust - it is and I deprecate it in the strongest possible terms and have been signed up to the campaign to reinstate him for some time now. Kirkhope's bad behaviour does not, however, excuse Helmer's in this case and he has harmed his cause by penning such a harshly-worded, stridently-toned missive for mass publication.

The hard reality is that the compromise that Cameron made on the EPP was necessary - does anybody really think that he wouldn't have much preferred to have been able to announce our departure from the grouping on 13th July? That is fanciful nonsense. Politics is the art of compromise - nobody ever gets everything they want and we all have to put a little water in our wine on occasion in pursuit of a larger goal, in this case our return to power at Westminster as early as possible.

The last thing we need at this time, after all the progress of the last 8 months, is to be derailed by yet another round of bloody infighting on Europe, particularly over something as obscure as seating arrangements in the European Parliament. A firm schedule is in place to deal with this anomaly in 2009 - we will be out at that time, at the head of a new group of like-minded but constructive Sceptics. Let's get on with the real job at hand and not get into a lot of self-serving navel gazing on the EU.

[Chris Ryder]

nobody ever gets everything they want and we all have to put a little water in our wine on occasion in pursuit of a larger goal, in this case our return to power at Westminster as early as possible. -A H Matlock

I don't know what wine you drink but it certainly isn't mine!, but I do know one thing politics has been 'watered' down in this country to such utter drivel that it is today were navel gazzing seems to be the more attractive option for us voters!, if a few slight opinion poll figures gives the Tories there self belief that Davey boy is doing well that is utter nonsense, as my dear beloved cat here could romp home with a higher opinion poll rating success right now against the back drop of these incompetent bunch of morons that presently in power governing us! ..so this is were the real 'navel gazing' is, the shortsightedness on your part not to see the reality of it!..still never mind it does make for a good laugh if nothing else, but as for EU issue it is the one thing that will always blow the old Tory bandwagon off course whether it be now or later as that unhealed Tory scar is still there bleeding away.

[Richard]

This is a typical illustration of what happens when politicians with very strong principles clash with a political system that requires compromise. Even if one expresses a view that is electorally popular it may be opposed in the interests of consensus, especially if it is controversial amongst the political classes.

[william]

Politics is the art of compromise......

...and maybe the little matter of winning elections.

If we want to win seats in the EU Parliament, we will need to explain to voters why they should vote for us to represent them there.

Read Roger Helmer's letter. It explains the risks. Losing elections is not navel gazing. It's failure. If it was 'necessary' to stay in the EPP (why?) - it was certainly not necessary to threaten Helmer with deselection.

It's not simply the getting rid of Helmer which is unjust. It's a stategic error to push the eurosceptics out of the delegation. Because people will not vote for a delegation of wall to wall hardline europhiles.

If Cameron does not want to win seats in the Euro Parliament, that may be part of his strategy. But it will give renewed oxygen to opponents, who could then damage our electoral prospects at Westminster and elsewhere.

They talk of joined up government. What about joined up opposition?

[Jack Stone]

People vote BNP because they blame there bad housing etc on blacks and Asians. Its exactly the same reason the German people turned to Hitler in the thirties because they blamed Jews for the fact that they were suffering poverty, bad housing etc.
Those who try to make out that the BNP and there supporters are nothing more than a racist bunch of bigots have agenda`s of there own and those agenda`s are those that no decent person should have anything to do with.

[malcolm]

Give it a rest Jack, you have made the same point again and again.Nobody on this blog has advocated voting BNP.Are you really so stupid that you can't understand that? Those comments are designed to show why the BNP may increase its electoral support.Personally I don't agree with them.There is a huge difference between that and actively encouraging people to support the BNP.

[James Hellyer]

People vote BNP because they blame there bad housing etc on blacks and Asians. Its exactly the same reason the German people turned to Hitler in the thirties because they blamed Jews for the fact that they were suffering poverty, bad housing etc.

Thank you for your insights into the minds of the electorate, Jack. I have to disagree however. When polls showed that a third of the electorate would consider voting BNP, I don't think it was because blamed balck people for their woes or because they wanted a BNP run government, or even a BNP councillor. It was a simple protest against the other parties.

[Denis Cooper]

I'm sure that many of the people who voted BNP did so because they didn't see any other party which could be bothered to look after their interests. Whether that's their interests in contradistinction to those of earlier immigrant groups, or those of more recent arrivals, or those of people in foreign countries, or those of criminals, or those of layabouts living off the taxpayer, or those of the numerous superfluous state employees who cost them money and give them hassle, or those of the wealthy, or those of business, or those of politicians including local councillors. Walk round what used to be a council estate, which usually now is part private and part housing association, and you'll find the salt of the earth and the scum of the earth living side by side. It's the first who've had enough and have now started to vote BNP, possibly holding their noses while doing so.

However this has nothing to do with Roger Helmer, who basically is following in the footsteps of everybody else who has ever tried to fight corruption in the EU.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"OK DVA doesn't mind if we are wiped out in the Euro elections in 2009."

Poppycock. I find your implied suggestion that the Conservatives face wipe out because of the delayed withdrawal from the EPP-ED laughable, to say the least.

And as for your ridiculous assertion that I don't mind if the Conservatives are wiped out, I'll tell you now that I mind very much, which is why I want people to stop making such a fuss about this non-issue and creating the impression that, as a party, we have been torn asunder by the European issue yet again.

"I find the opinion that hardly any of the 8.5 million people who voted Conservative in 2005 are even interested, curious."

I'm sorry, 'William', you're right. When I was at the doctor's yesterday, all people could talk about was parliamentary groupings within the European Parliament. The ticket inspector on the train I was on at the weekend couldn't pass by without expressing his strong opinion that David Cameron had blown it by not withdrawing from the EPP-ED now.

Get a grip - the people who voted Conservative in 2005 (not including all those stolen postal votes, eh Will?) did so for a variety of reasons, but I imagine hardly any (if at all) did so on the basis of who we sit next to in the European Parliament.

Face up to it 'William', the people in the street don't give a toss about obscure European parliamentary groupings - they care about the state of our schools and hospitals, they care about crime and immigration, they care about taxes, they care about their jobs, they care about the environment, they care about national security and they care about British foreign policy. If we ignore these issues in order to indulge in this obsessive navel-gazing that you seem to prefer, then we really will face being wiped out.

"I thought people voted for political parties because they wanted them to prosper and win power, not to throw power away."

That's the point I'm making, 'William' - the way to win power is to show people that you will address their concerns and serve the needs of the country as a whole. We won't achieve that by spending three years sulking about the delayed withdrawal from the EPP-ED. We will achieve it by developing policies to deal with the bread-and-butter issues that matter to the public.

"Is there a new category of voter running around that doesn't mind if the party he/she supports is to be decimated by opponents? Please tell me where I can meet some."

Try the Liberal Democrats - they voted for Ming Campbell as leader.

[william]

lively stuff DVA, but does it convince? You seem certain that voters have no interest in Europe.

Look at 2004. UKIP who are usually believed to be Conservative voters unhappy with our European policy polled 2.7 million. The lib Dems only polled 2.5 million.

Another party which is on the up, frequently mentioned in this thread, the BNP, polled 800,000. Their local election results in 2006 show an increase in their support of around 2.5 times their 2004 levels. That might give the BNP around 2 million if the EU elections happened today.

In 2004 the Conservative vote was bolstered by a strong euroscptic wing in the EU Parliament - Hannan, Heaton-Harris and Helmer plus about 5 others. These three will possibly be gone by 2009. If Hague has his way and the system of selecting is changed, their replacements will be hardline europhiles.

By 2009 the BNP vote will probably have grown further, and UKIP might soon elect a leader with some professionalism. With Conservatives seen as 100% europhile, we could be decimated in the 2009 EU elections.

I like your rhetoric, DVA. But open your eyes to the statistical information. We are very vulnerable. Many believe that Bromley was a result of having selected a europhile.

Your proposed strategy of 'don't mention Europe' and 'don't navel gaze' might have worked in the 1990's. But electors are better informed and aware of the significance of the EU now. Conservatives who think they can still hide their closet europhila under the carpet, could be due for mass instinction.

Personally I would prefer not to become a dinosaur, but to see David Cameron's era become a new Conservative hay day. There is so much good in his ideas and in his approach, that it would be tragic to see him (like you) fail by underestimating a key threat.

You are making the mistake of believing your own rhetoric. The evidence is that voters do care about Europe. We must move our position or fail.

[Yet Another Anon]

That might give the BNP around 2 million if the EU elections happened today.
I rather imagine that actually the extra numbers voting for them had more to do with the fact that they had far more candidates in the recent Local Elections than in earlier ones and in the case of the European Elections the Regional List system makes it easier for them because of the area it covers - in the European Elections they had 100% coverage and with a proportional system really their vote should have been about at it's maximum, it still slipped back substantially in the 2005 General Election when it was only marginally higher in absolute numbers and in terms of those turning out to vote (actually less in terms of those eligible to vote) than the National Front got in the 1979 General Election, as with the Alliance and Liberal Democrats and Liberals the NF and BNP have had their ups and downs (mostly downs) but their ups have actually not been very much up really.

[william]

If you compare the same wards in the local election results, the BNP's support is uniformly around 2.5 times bigger in 2006 than where it was in 2004.

[David Banks]

Hardly teetering on the brink of power are they though!
To reiterate DVA's point , the doings of the EPP are a non issue that don't really impact on the ordinary voter. This kind of pointless backbiting is a gift to our electoral rivals. And for goodness sake , the BNP are not a threat. The less oxygen of publicity they get the better. Lets not just reconnect to the voter , lets try and reconnect with reality outside the , albeit gripping, political bubble.how about focusing more on Pensions , Transport, Prison reform etc.

[william]

The BNP allege substantial rigging of polls against them - inluding number of votes being different to numbers of voters counted entering polling stations, postal vote fraud and tampering with ballot boxes.

From BBC on 2005 General Election, the report on the BNP states -

The BNP's share of the UK vote was about 0.74% - below exit poll expectations of about 3%.

They 'won' a council seat in Birmingham in 2006 but despite that, the seat was declared for Labour. They brought a case to challenge the result, but the Judge refused to hear the evidence from the Police investigation into whether any rigging had taken place, and declared Labour the victors. Very odd.

If polls are being rigged against the BNP, and there is a lot of evidence that they are, it will end up being counterproductive as the BNP can claim to be martyrs to the system.

http://rightlinks.co.uk/linked/modules/wiwimod/index.php?page=Postal+Voting

It is equally probable that they will not be eligible for State Funding, and they might even be banned. The more the State uses non-democratic means against the BNP, the more they will be able to persuade people that the system is rigged against them.

It would be far more sensible to fight the BNP democratically on their merits.

[Yet Another Anon]

below exit poll expectations
So was Labour's vote in the 1992 General Election but no one suggested that the vote had been rigged against them, the BNP in this country and Front National in France are always claiming when they lose that it is because of vote fraud, if the courts were simply to hand them the seats every time they complained it really would be making things easier for them.

[Sean Fear]

I doubt if there is vote fraud agains the BNP. They would very likely have won 3% of the vote in 2005 had they stood in every seat, but in fact they stood in 120.

Birmingham was cock up rather than conspiracy. In Barking and Dagenham, the Court is likely to award them an extra seat, in Eastbury, due to a similar cock up.

Their support is steadily increasing though. In the local elections of 2000, they won 3000 votes. In May, they won 238,000.

[william]

OK - allow Hague to demoralise the eurosceptics in our delegation to the Euro Parliament, to deselect Roger Helmer, to change the method of selection of MEP's so that europhiles can slide in. Let's not mention it again, and hope that no one notices.

Anyone who mentions Europe is a Conservative traitor.

Somehow I don't think it will work.

Roger Helmer has tried to warn everyone. He's done his best. That's all anyone can do.

If people don't want to listen, then at least he gave them the chance.

What you make of it all in the end is up to you.

I'm checking out.

[malcolm]

Goodbye Henry (William) I will miss your conspiracy theories and uncanny ability to turn every single thread onto the EU and or Roger Helmer and the EPP.

[Richard]

"Its exactly the same reason the German people turned to Hitler in the thirties because they blamed Jews for the fact that they were suffering poverty, bad housing etc."

Of course the Great Depression had nothing to do with it. Nor the Versailles Treaty.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

'William', you still appear to be confused about what I am trying to say.

I'm not saying the electorate aren't interested in Europe; what I'm saying is that the vast majority of the public aren't interested in when or whether we leave the EPP-ED group and that continued griping about the decision to delay withdrawal only serves to perpetuate the illusion that the party is tearing itself to shreds over the European issue again.

I am a Eurosceptic myself, and will openly admit that, in a regrettable mistake I attribute to the impetuosity of studenthood and disgust at the way the party treated Iain Duncan Smith, I voted for UKIP in the 2004 European elections.

2009 will be different, and seeing as crystal-balling seems to be today's game, I'll make a few wild predictions of my own (all based on the assumption that the European election will not coincide with the British general election):
* the Conservatives will gain seats, at the expense of Labour, UKIP and Robert Kilroy-Silk;
* the Liberal Democrats will gain seats, at the expense of Labour and UKIP, but prophecies of Liberal Democrat revival for the general election will prove to be a false dawn;
* the number of UKIP seats (if any) will be in single figures, probably lower than 5;
* Respect and the BNP will both do relatively well, with one or both picking up a seat;
* the Greens will be squeezed by the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats and Respect, but will still hold 2 seats;
* Labour will do very badly outside their heartlands, possibly provoking a panicked regicide of Gordon Brown in order to attempt to prevent meltdown at the general election.

All the above will happen in spite of the heart-stoppingly reckless (ok, maybe I'm taking the sarcasm a bit too far now) decision of the Conservative leadership to delay withdrawal from the EPP-ED until 2009.

Why? Because the public knows that the Conservatives are the most Eurosceptic of the main parties (and the Liberal Democrats) and doesn't care about seating arrangements in the European Parliament.

[Yet Another Anon]

They would very likely have won 3% of the vote in 2005 had they stood in every seat, but in fact they stood in 120.
The seats they put candidates up in naturally were their best hopes, they had varying results in these - I doubt that if they had stood in all 646 seats that this would even have raised their vote to 1%, there are seats where except for the odd nutcase there is very little support for the BNP.

[Yet Another Anon]

I think that the Euro Election will be held in 2009 on the same day as the General Election, this will increase total numbers voting and Labour is unlikely to get as low as the 22% they got in the last Euro Elections even though it will certainly be lower than the General Election or even Local Election votes, with higher turnout especially for Labour and Conservative it's going to be a struggle for UKIP and others to maintain their percentage vote, I think though UKIP might pick up a seat in the General Election as well as having some MEP's and I think Salma Yaqoob might end up an Respect MP, I suppose that on the European Ticket George Galloway will be top of the list in the best prospect - I don't think Respect have broad enough support to get a seat in an area as large as the Regions in the EU elections cover, I think the BNP will miss out as well, the Greens probably will lose what they have and the Liberal Democrats may even slip back.

[Andrew Woodman]

'Why? Because the public knows that the Conservatives are the most Eurosceptic of the main parties (and the Liberal Democrats) and doesn't care about seating arrangements in the European Parliament.'

That sounds a bit complacent to me Daniel. The majority of people might think we are but I still hear strange comments on the doorstep such as 'I voted Lib Dem as there wasn't a UKIP candidate'. We're losing must of the Eurosceptic MEP's. If we put forward a bunch of Europhiles, a well co-ordinated UKIP will most certainly not be going down to 5 seats at all.

[william]

Don't worry Malcolm. I'll be back. You are ultimate EU denier. Even the EU is nothing to do with the EU!!!