Ken Clarke explains how he will deal with collective responsibility on Europe

Probably the biggest concern of those of us who were sceptical about Ken Clarke returning to the Shadow Cabinet was how he would deal with collective responsibility on the European question - especially with the impending campaign for the elections to the European Parliament.

Today he has answered those questions directly in a Q&A with readers of The Independent.

Asked if he will be campaigning for the Conservative party in the European elections, he replies:

"I will consider invitations to campaign, but some of our European election candidates may feel as I do that I would not be the most persuasive of advocates on some of their campaigning issues."

And on the wider question of Tory European policy he tells another reader:

"Conservative policy on Europe has been settled by David Cameron, and I have no intention of seeking to change or challenge it. The policy is reasonably moderate and the policy does not provide any justification for me declining to join the Shadow Cabinet at a time of economic crisis or accept collective discipline, as British politicians always do in our system of parliamentary government."

Since his appointment to the Shadow Cabinet I have been generally impressed with his performances at the Despatch Box and in the media. He is a star turn with box office appeal and as long as he sticks to his pledge not to rock the boat on Europe as outlined above, his return makes the party stronger as it takes the fight to Labour.

Incidentally, it's worth reading the Independent Q&A in full as Mr Clarke also addresses, among other things, his acceptance of party policy on recognising marriage in the tax system - "I am now directly exposed to the collective wisdom of my colleagues", his relationship with George Osborne - "he is cut out to be the next chancellor", and his previous involvement in the tobacco industry - "I am a strong believer in personal responsibility and freedom of choice".

Jonathan Isaby

Comments

[Old Hack]

One other benefit of Ken's rehabilitation is that his status of UKIP bogeyman is being blown out of the water. Doubtless the conspiracy theorist nutters of UKIP will still spew their bile, but the Tory division on Europe is effectively over. We now have broad consensus and the debates of the nineties are over.

If we can bury UKIP at the next European elections then there is one less obstacle between ourselves and Government. It was UKIP vote splitting in 2005 that cost us seats. Game on!

[Sally Roberts]

Game on indeed, Old Hack! I agree 100% with what you say.

[Edward Huxley]

Comments such as " conspiracy theorist nutters of UKIP will still spew their bile" only show the ignorant bad manners of people like Old Hack. It doesn`t do their cause any good.

As far as Mr. Clarke is concerned it is clear that he has obviously had to promise not to rock the boat over this, otherwise he would be booted off the front bench. He is a has been and it doesn`t much matter what he says.

[Malcolm Dunn]

You've got to admit Edward that many of your UKIP colleagues are just as rude about us as we are about them so please don't be too holier than thou about it.
As regards Ken Clarke, I'm glad he 's said this. He knows he's a very lonely Europhile voice in the Shadow Cabinet and parliamentary party. No one is indespensible and if he doesn't toe the line he's gone. But I think he's far from being a 'has been' and look forward to him playing a full part in the UK's economic rehabilitation.

[John Broughton]

Old Hack

"One other benefit of Ken's rehabilitation is that his status of UKIP bogeyman is being blown out of the water. Doubtless the conspiracy theorist nutters of UKIP will still spew their bile"

I simply cannot see why you are so rude about UKIP; there are many very committed decent people within the party. Currently the party leadership and the rank and file do not see eye to eye and that is the most likely reason they will not do well in the euros. Why not address your arguments in polite terms?

I fear that Ken retains the potential to cause us problems and splits. I hate being a bore on the topic of a referendum on the constitution/treaty but if we do not have one and win it, whether or not ratified by the rest of the member countries, then control of this country is lost to Brussels. I think Ken would find it difficult to contain himself throughout a referendum.

[The Bishop's Wife]

Has been? senior Job, they do not go together. Ken isn't finished and despite his once uttered views on Europe is still a very big hitter. Otherwise I agree with what you three are saying. There will be no tactical voting this time around for me. UKIP ME P's would be wise to look for other positions or work out how to live on JSA.

[The Bishop Swine]

" simply cannot see why you are so rude about UKIP; there are many very committed decent people within the party"

UKIP is a place disaffected ex-Tory's go to waste away. It may well contain decent types, but its bad for conservative politics. After this next bunch of European Elections it will be finished. In the meantime the "better off out" group have effectively stolen its thunder. If you want to make a difference rejoin the Conservative Party, its as simple as that.

[RichardJ]

"I simply cannot see why you are so rude about UKIP; there are many very committed decent people within the party."

Very true. Unfortunately some of them that post here seem to be constantly angry and spend half the time ranting.

[haddock]

"If we can bury UKIP at the next European elections then there is one less obstacle between ourselves and Government."

Old Hack, you will find it incredibly difficult as a party to bury anyone.... if you are in a hole over an issue, and don't stop digging, it is you who will be buried.

An Old Hack should know two things.... one fewer, not less..... and if Sally agrees with you you are on a hiding to nothing.

[Edward Huxley]

I deplore rudeness Malcolm, wherever it comes from and your party has more than its share of this, as regular postings show.

Can I dispose of the false claim that UKIP "intervention" cost the Tories seats? Here in Runnymede and in neighbouring Spelthorne, at the last general election where UKIP candidates stood the sitting Conservatives were returned with increased majorities. Could be that they helped by taking votes from Labour and the Libdems. Once again, I say I`m still a Conservative but cannot vote for the present lot. With a few honourable exceptions, all their MPs voted for the Climate Change bill and Mr. Cameron refuses to consider the possibility of our ever leaving the EU and won`t have a BOO man on his front bench. So Tory, Labour, or LibDem, makes little difference.

[former Tory]

So Cameron is pro our membership and subservience to the European Union. There is bitter acrimony in the party but the leader and his liberal friends simply suppress it. Damn the Tory Party. I would not want to support UKIP however as that party is full of spivs and mad people. But Cameron is a child when a man is needed to do a terribly difficult job.

[Graeme Pirie]

I can't see the big deal about having different views in the cabinet.

Surely we want a range of opinions & not 20 clones??

I'd much prefer to hear that there were dissenters but that the majority view was....

[AlanofEngland]

How sad to see comments such as Old Hack makes. He may not remember the lies I, as a fervent Tory, was told by Heath, Rippon and Clarke. Now I will simply not vote Tory again but will take my democratic right to vote for a party that offers me a chance to get out of the EU organisation that is not only corrupt but grossly inefficient too. And as for the Bishop Swine, I'm not wasting away, I'm paying back!

[David Roberts]

"It was UKIP vote splitting in 2005 that cost us seats. Game on!" says Old Hack.

They didn't get an axe and magically split the vote down the middle. They put forward opinions and policies with which the large numbers of previous tory voters agreed. And, Old Hack, you would do well to remember that.

There is not a lot of evidence to prove that those ex-tories think any differently on the European question.

"Game on" inded! What nonesense.

[Adam Hume]

"I would not want to support UKIP however as that party is full of spivs and mad people."

Please give examples if you have even been to a UKIP meeting. A lot of the idiots have been expelled or have left. Do you consider Lord Pearson of Rannoch, Lord Willoughby de Broke or Roger Knapman MEP (a former Tory Whip) as spivs or mad?

There are a few spivs and mad people in all parties. That is the nature of political parties, including the Conservatives
Do you not consider Derek Conway MP or Den Dover MEP (Con) to be a spivs? There are a lot of Conservative MPs who have exploited the Commons expenses system - e.g. Nannygate.

People in glass houses should not throw stones.

[michael mcgough]

Why should Clarke worry about Dave's position on the EU --he'll never have to deliver on his anti EU promises.
Either the Irish vote NO again to Lisbon and the treaty will be abandoned OR they vote yes and it will be ratified acroos the board.Cameron will never have to give us a referendum.As for the EPP,I am sure Ken and Michael will help Dave explain the practical difficulties which will only become truly apparent come June with a new mix in the euro parliament.
EPP Today,EPP in 2010

[Adam Hume]

"I simply cannot see why you are so rude about UKIP; there are many very committed decent people within the party. Currently the party leadership and the rank and file do not see eye to eye and that is the most likely reason they will not do well in the euros.

Posted by: John Broughton | February 09, 2009 at 09:24"

The rank and file do see eye to eye with the UKIP leadership. There are a few vocal troublemakers around - BNP and Tory plants, Libertas stooges, sacked employees and aspiring MEP candidates who failed to be selected in the members' ballot.

[London Tory and Clarke fan]

Boring navel gazing.

The public 'like' Clarke in a way that they don't 'like' others in our Party. Therefore, Clarke's return boosts the chances of what we all want to see, a Conservative Government.

One only had to see the loopy Farage on BBC Question Time last week to see the limit in that type of 'appeal'.

[Witerings From Witney]

Firstly, it is interesting that for 'a bunch of nutters' and 'mad people', ie UKIP, the Conservative Party and its members seem to get very emotive about them!

Secondly, I would say that the only way the Conservative Party would negate UKIP would be were they to definitely state, without equivocation, their total opposition to the EU and everything that body stands for. Coupled with this would be a similar statement to adopt policies as outlined in The Plan by Hannan and Carswell.

Thirdly, if David Cameron and his shadow cabinet believe that membership of the EU is good for the country, it might help were they to publicly discuss those reasons with the electorate, rather than just keep quiet and state 'Our views on Europe are well known' - how can they be well known when no-one talks about them. The problem for the Conservative Party is that in the next few months they ARE going to have to talk about them.

At the moment, with regard to this country's membership of the EU, in respect of a choice between the three main parties the electorate is faced with a choice of 're-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic' syndrome.

The Conservative Party's 'popularity' in the polls at the moment is down to one element and one only - the country's total aversion to this government and everything it stands for. It is not necessarily that the Conservative Party is thought any better, rather that it is the less evil of the options available.

It could be argued that, like every party, the Conservative is deeply split on the question of the EU, but that this is well 'hidden'. The 'dust sheet' covering this division will definitely get blown away shortly by the electorate.

[Evan Price]

The Party's policy on the Lisbon Treaty is clear. In the Treaty's current state - not in force - the Party if it is in Government will hold a referendum and will remove ratification from the Treaty if that referendum result is negative. See here -
http://www.conservatives.com/Policy/Where_we_stand/Foreign_Affairs_and_Europe.aspx

There are real practical and legal problems if the Treaty has been both ratified and is in force - and for that reason, the policy is that things will not be allowed to rest there. That may appear vague, but I am sorry to say that a simple referendum on the Lisbon Treaty at that stage may be a waste of money - and could also encounter real legal as well as political difficulty. As a result, the Party's policy is to seek real reforms to the structure of the EU - and these will be sought whether or not Lisbon is in force at the time.

[David_at_Home]

The problem for both the Tories and the Labour Party is the freedom to come and work here given to more than 400 million people from continental Europe with a further 100 million plus to come from Turkey, the Ukraine and the former Yugoslavia. Many of these people come from countries where the standard of living, and hence the rates of pay, are much lower than in the UK; furthermore, the UK tax and benefits system is much more welcoming to these people than is the case in other Western European counties. The inevitable result has been and will continue to be a lowering of the rates of pay and a reduction in the employment prospects for native Working Class Brits.

This problem will come more and more to the fore between now and June.

Then there is the little unresolved problem of the Lisbon treaty and what the Tories will do about this is it comes into force before the next General Election.

It has always been fashionable amongst the political class to write UKIP off but, since its formation, UKIP’s share of the vote has increased in every EU Parliament election and so also has its (much smaller) share of the vote in successive General Elections. Part of this is indeed a protest vote against the established parties which continue to become ever more unpopular

So I will be very rash and make a prediction that, for the EU Parliament elections in June, UKIP’s vote will be significantly greater than the 16% achieved in 2004, possibly as high as 25% which would match or exceed that of the Conservative Party.

Of course, the Conservative Party could kill UKIP stone dead if it wished to. All that is required would be a believable commitment to leave the political EU and to revoke the current open borders policy with the EU and elsewhere.

[Iain]

"There are real practical and legal problems if the Treaty has been both ratified and is in force "

Why? ‘No’ doesn't stop the federalists, so why should we be obliged to adhere Lisbon when its been brought in by corrupt and anti democratic means?

[The Bishop Swine]

AlanofEngland

" Now I will simply not vote Tory again but will take my democratic right to vote for a party that offers me a chance to get out of the EU organisation that is not only corrupt but grossly inefficient too. And as for the Bishop Swine, I'm not wasting away, I'm paying back!"

I would be more inclined to take your views seriously if your MEP's, were prepared to publish their expenses. I had believed that they would not take up their seats let alone take a salary from the E.U. That was what I was told on the doorstep by the nice man from UKIP long ago, the only time one ever visited. By now you might have realised that you cannot trust anyone on this issue, let alone your own leaders. I will continue to work with the skeptics and the better off out group, but I have little hope we will win in the long run, as much becuse of UKIP as any other factor. The fewer people who are willing to stand against Europe inside this party the less chance there is of us getting anywhere. Even you must realise that splitting the vote is not an effective way of dealing with this issue, anymore than simply ranting and raving. Wasting away and wasting your vote, may be the only outcome of your pay back.I voted UKIP for the European elections.I regret these lapses in Loyalty now, even though our leadership was uninspiring at the time. Well you might ask what has changed, such that I am now behind the leadership. Ken Clark's come back may well be the single most important factor. Not because I have gone soft on Europe, but because I know that we need to win if we hope to retain even a little portion of our National sovereignty. Putting the Party and Nation first, is sending the right message. Having a Conservative government is more important than any single issue. Only by getting Labour out, can we hope to retain any of our national character and only by ridding ourselves of Labour will the Euro-skeptic voice have a chance of being listened too. It's a simple as that, UKIP will never form a National government and has not succeeded in slowing down the E.U. project at all. A vote for UKIP will continue to be a wasted vote.

[Alex G Briggs]

At the current time who with an reasonable sense would wish to raise the EEC situation again.Clarkes experience etc is an urgent requirement for the Tory team and the UK. The French as an example HAVE NOW highlighted our biggest concern.BROWN & the banks.
Brown started us off into this decade of decay.So if the bank bosses need sorting surely so does Brown he was the UK leader from the start.
If he is as honourable as he claims and really has concerns for the UK ,he should resign NOW /call an election ASAP.Let the electorate decide democratically who runs the UK.
He still has to win a leaders election.Never elected by his Party or his country.

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Oh gawd - another day, another Euro thread, another day for BNP/UKIP nutters to have their say...

[London Tory]

To UKIP'ers

Have you noticed that many of your most prominent members are the ex Tory MPs who lost most heavily in 2007, Legg and Knapman being obvious examples ? Clearly the voters of the Isle of Wight and Stroud did not share their obsession.

Spink will be next at Castle Point.

[Evan Price]

The legal problems relate to the principle of international law that treaties once in force cannot have their ratification removed ... a different process is involved and it requires either derogation or repudiation.

These legal problems then go further - if the Lisbon Treaty is in force, then there will be institutional, famework and other legal changes to the bodies that run the new EU. These are some of the reasons that I oppose the Lisbon Treaty in the first place. But the problem is that it won't be possible to simply 'turn the clock back.

I am one of those many Conservatives and others who want a referendum and want to vote 'no' and capaign for a 'no' vote. That there will be practical and legal constraints on the effect of a referendum if the treaty is already in force is not some political statement - it is recognition that international treaties have legal and practical effects when they come into force.

If it is in force, we will need to find a way through that maze - and it won't be easy because, apart from anything else, it will involve negotiation and discussion with others who disagree with us. Setting out the detail of that process would be to hamper your ability to manoevre in those negotiations and discussions.

And yes, I am a lawyer; in fact I was one of those who appeared for Stuart Wheeler in the Court of Appeal last year. Oh, BTW, I am also a candidate for the European Parliament in June.

[Scott Carlton]

A very good article Jonathan, and I too have been impressed with Ken at the dispatch box, I dont envy Pat Mcfadden at all, standing in for Mandelson. I said from the offset that Ken would put economic matters first and that he would accept the Party's line on Europe, and I think it reaffirms the balance of ideas that you must have in any cabinet in order to reach out to as much of the electorate as you can.

I personally would like to see Clarke and Mandelson on Question Time or Newsnight, so we can get some live debating between the two.

[A long time Tory]

Ken has clearly laid the E word issue to rest. Like any genuine Conservative, I see the 1990's debates as dead and buried.

As far as the comments on rude UKIP, yep they are. This is Conservative Home, not UKIP Home, yet they come here to our "home" lonely and looking for an arguement, if that's not rude, what is?

;-)

[former Tory]

Dear Adam Hume. You ask if I have ever been to a UKIP meeting. Yes as Chairman of one of the most successful branches in England I was there. I also went to the 2004 wrap up meeting which should have seen UKIP force the Conservatives to split and choose whether they want the UK to be ruled from Brussels (Clarke Maude Cameron etc) or be a self governing nation.
Roger Knapman is nice but weak, Farage is a crook and has stitched up the NEC to the point where UKIP is his own private fiefdom. It is an absolutely rotten party and has stolen money time and hope from good decent generous individuals. The party was a danger to the Tories in 2004 so through a combination of greed incompetence and spite it was deconstructed internally. If you want chapter and verse I suggest you visit these:

http://CaterpillarsAndButterflies.BLOGspot.com

http://GL-W.BLOGspot.com

[Edward Huxley]

Justin Hinchcliffe, it`s true that subjects aired here often end up with the EU. Reason is of course, that Brussels has a hand in practically everything. Anyway, this time it`s about Mr. Clarke and the EU. No doubt he will be able to fend off any awkward questions (have you changed your mind about the EU Mr. Clarke?)with the usual politican`s skill at evading them.

[Jack Stone]

It always makes me smile when people say that four hundred million people have been given the right to live here as if everyone is going to come and live here.
You can turn it on its head and say the eighty odd million of this island have also been given the right to live on the continent if we choose.
These things work both ways and both this country and the rest of the EU benefit by the free movement of people.

[Marian]

"As far as the comments on rude UKIP, yep they are. This is Conservative Home, not UKIP Home, yet they come here to our "home" lonely and looking for an argument, if that's not rude, what is?"

It's rather sad isn't it. I feel for them having left the party in a petulant fit, they have nobody to talk to. They could set up a UKIP-HOME, why havn't they?

[Derek W. Buxton]

Oh dear, the same old non arguments, the only way the "tories" are agreed on the EU is to stay in and accept it. Who would believe Clarke anyway, he is a loose cannon and believes in the EU above all else
I notice that someone above refered to "reforming the EU and retaining some of our National independance", I wish. Neither can or will happen, to even think it shows that you do not understand the beast, the EU that is, Clarke is just a red conservative,...possibly.

[Adam Hume]

"If you want chapter and verse I suggest you visit these:
http://CaterpillarsAndButterflies.BLOGspot.com
http://GL-W.BLOGspot.com
Posted by: former Tory | February 09, 2009 at 11:20 "

Those sites are run by a trouble maker who has never been a member of UKIP. He posted a nasty anti-semitic (IMO) comments recently that make me believe that he is working for the BNP.

London Tory should note that Barry Legg has never been a member of UKIP. It would help if anti-UKIP posters got their facts right.

[Edward Huxley]

To A Long time Tory and others who object to Ukippers (and any others who do not support the present Conservative party) joining in on this site I say if the Editor objects to my comments at any time I shall cease to take part. Seems some want to keep it just for 100% party members who try to outdo one another with gushing praise of the leadership. Won`t worry me. What about it Editor?

[Adam Hume]

"It's rather sad isn't it. I feel for them having left the party in a petulant fit, they have nobody to talk to. They could set up a UKIP-HOME, why havn't they?

Posted by: Marian | February 09, 2009 at 11:31"

Chad Noble started UKIP Home but he did not make the most of the opportunity. There is a UKIP forum but it is for members only to keep out the BNP and Tory trolls. You need to register with your membership number.

[George Earle]

Previewing your Comment
David at home said at 1040 "So I will be very rash and make a prediction that, for the EU Parliament elections in June, UKIP’s vote will be significantly greater than the 16% achieved in 2004, possibly as high as 25% which would match or exceed that of the Conservative Party."
I think that is fair comment. Whether you like it or not, June 4th could well become a referendum on our membership of the EU. As things stand only UKIP and the BNP stand for leaving the EU versus the Lib/Lab/Con wholly for staying in. Simple choice.If UKIP match David at home's forecast i.e. top Party, what then?

Posted by: | February 09, 2009 at 11:47

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

That's why Tim should introduce registration...

[David_at_Home]

Editor,

You may wish to consider whether the message left by “ Former Tory” @ 11.20 might be libellous.

My own personal position is that we (the public, that is) are entitled to be as rude as we wish about our politicians (though, in my experience, rudeness is generally counter-productive) but accusations of criminal behaviour should not be made without hard evidence.

[former Tory]

Adam Hume
Greg Lance Watkins utterly refutes the racism of the BNP.
He has been accused of being an agent for MI5 MI6 the BNP etc etc as none of his accusations against UKIP have ever been repudiated and despite myriad threats he has NEVER been sued I suggest his exposure of UKIP is accurate. You can always call him as his address and phone number are available in the public domain.

[Sally Roberts]

"An Old Hack should know two things.... one fewer, not less..... and if Sally agrees with you you are on a hiding to nothing."

Thank you My Fishy Friend - I knew I could rely on your support ;-)

As to those who are calling "Former Tory"'s remarks "libellous, well that may or may not be over-reacting but I do think people should be careful what they say and this is not the first area of Conservative Home where what one might call legally-irresponsible remarks have been made. I have no time for UKIP (as you all know) but I think referring to anyone as a "crook" is playing with fire.

[David_at_Home]

Justin Hinchcliffe,

I am a conservative but I long ago ceased to be a Conservative. The Heath/Barber “Dash for Growth” and the consequent inflation seriously damaged my late Parents’ fixed income pensions and investments, blighting their later years and turned me against your party leadership. After a (notional!) flirtation with Maggie, I was finally driven from supporting your party by John Major’s general ineptitude, his idiotic “Dash for Gas” and the Maastricht Treaty.

Nevertheless, I would be only too pleased to return to the Tories if they, once again, became the Party of the Nation, as they were with Pitt, Disraeli and Churchill. I believe there are many like me and most are not UKIP members

If Tim requests that I leave this forum then I will certainly do so but would you really enjoy a blog where Conservative party members Tories converse only with other party members?

[Witterings From Witney]

A number of points:

Marian: Conservative Home is an open public site that anyone can visit and post comments, or you saying that only Conservative Party members or supporters should be the ones to have access? You appear to follow the same mistake of your leaders and do not wish to debate the issue of our membership of the EU. What is it that you and your party are afraid of? Is it that you cannot justify your views? Unfortunately for you, sarcasm is not debate!

The Bishop Swine: If you are willing to work with Better Off Out and 'skeptics' then surely you must support the policy of the only party offering a choice at an election? There is no choice between the three main parties - they all believe in our membership!

Alex G. Briggs: Calling an election to decide, democratically, who governs Britain? You miss the point as the only ones who govern this country are the people and we have never been asked if we agree to be governed by a body that we have not elected and that are not accountable to us.

Whether those posting in opposition to your party's views are BNP, UKIP, Labour or from whatever party is beside the point. Debate with us, calmly, without sarcasm or rudeness - otherwise you do yourselves and your party a disservice.

[former Tory]

David at Home - Well if anything is libelous in my post
I assume you refer to the word "crook" - when you are asked to support a political party which promises to seek the UK withdrawal from the EU and then sees tens of thousands of people expend energy time and money only to see their efforts come to nought due to internal party feuding and a clear lack of financial transparency which leaves hundreds of thousands of pounds unaccounted for, I believe the word crooks applies. If UKIP had the money and will to sue then as they say "bring it on baby!" because then instead of a mere 16000 hits the web site on which Mr Watkins exposes UKIP's uselessness and duplicity, the truth will be available to the GBP will the clear reasons why UKIP is now part of the problem and not the solution, rather like the Tories under David Cameron.. By all means spoil the ballot papers in MAY and write in LEAVE THE EU but a vote for UKIP is as wasted a vote as all British votes are because of QMV. The only beneficiaries of the UK having MEPs are the MEPs themselves.

[Sally Roberts]

David_at_Home I certainly don't want you to leave this Forum! You have been mainly considered, good natured and gentlemanly even when we have had strong and fundamental disagreements on various issues. Would everyone outside the Conservatives were like you!

[David Sergeant]

Here we go again. Europe, Europe, Europe. And the voters arn't really interested - one reason we have a pro EU Labour government.

Just to accept UKIP at their face value, they have claimed several times on this site that they cost the Tories 20+ seats at the last GE, if that were true it is possible that with Labour defections Brown couldn't have got the Lisbon treaty approved. As has been said several times, if UKIP didn't exist Brussels would have invented it. Vote UKIP, vote EU. Whatever you think that is the acuality.

[former Tory]

Oh yes, I meant to add, there also used to be something called freedom of speech in this country. That seems to no longer apply if one wishes to point the spotlight on people who are damaging the nation. What a perverse nation we have become when the BBC becomes the adjudicator of free expression. By their standards some pigs are more equal than others. Surely Con Home is not subject to the thought police also?

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

David_at_home - you seem to assume we're interested in you. Well, we are not! We're not interested in what happened over thirty years ago, why you joined UKIP or, anything from you for that matter.

[Steve Crowther]

I nearly said "with apologies for intruding", but hey - I'm a conservative, so I have a perfect right to join your (open and, as yet, uncensored) discussion.

As a conservative, I cannot understand why the Conservative Party should have taken the decision to hand over our nationhood, self-government and democratic rights to another state. Or forced the Queen to abdicate her constitutional position.

I know many other people like me, who are not nutters, spivs, crooks, fascists, gadflies, cranks, mad people, rude people or splitters (have you seen Life of Brian?). We just can't bear to see our amazing country dismantled and sold, with the complicity of the party we have always philosophically supported.

Can we please be accorded some degree of respect for that? "UKIP will never form a National government and has not succeeded in slowing down the E.U. project at all." Well who's done better? If UKIP hadn't been slogging away for years on this, who would have been? The highly successful Bruges Group? The high profile BOO group (always on the telly)? The majority of Conservative party members who feel equally uneasy but keep quiet about it because they've been told not to "rock the boat"?

As I said to a Conservative councillor who berated me about this 'vote splitting' thing recently, "If the Tories got a backbone on Europe, we wouldn't be standing here in the rain." His spirited riposte? Absolute silence. Nothing to say.

If you want your country run by someone other than its own people, you're not a conservative, you're something quite else. It's as simple as that. Why not be honest about it, and stop abusing those of us who are standing up for our (and, ostensibly, your) political principles?

[David_at_Home]

Sally Roberts,

Many thanks. I, for my part, am very much aware that many Tories wish to do the best for our country and are well motivated.

I salute you and all those Tories who are like you.

[swivel eyed camerloon]

Former Tory ,is it Niall?;Nobody has ever sued GLW because it would be fruitless to sue an anti-semitic ,homophobic ,failed second hand bookseller without assets.Similarly having had past but spent convictions for firearms offences,and having declared himself as a supporter of political assasination he is given the wide berth that care in the community demands.

[Raj]

It always makes me smile when people say that four hundred million people have been given the right to live here as if everyone is going to come and live here.

You can turn it on its head and say the eighty odd million of this island have also been given the right to live on the continent if we choose. These things work both ways and both this country and the rest of the EU benefit by the free movement of people.

Yes, when people complain about other Europeans being able to move here as far as I can see they're saying:

a) I'm stupid and don't know I can go live in another European country; or

b) I'm a useless idiot who has no knowledge of or interest in learning foreign language and no transferable job skills.

If it is the case that the UK doesn't benefit as much from freedom of movement as other countries do it's because too many people in this country are lazy and blinkered. That says something about our society. We should be giving real language skills to children rather than saying "you speak English - all you need is useless tourist drivel" and telling them that there's more to life than the UK.

If people from other parts of Europe have the determination to move here and are willing to graft in a foreign country then they should be congratulated. People like that are what we need to get our country out of recession.

[Witterings From Witney]

I would second the last paragraph of the post by Steve Crowther. It is of no consequence what the political 'leanings' are of those who wish to debate democracy, but at least debate the question with us and desist from name-calling.

Steve Crowther is correct on another point - the Conservative Party has been 'told' not to 'rock the boat' on the EU issue or why else would they be so reticent? No true? Then debate with us folks!

[London Tory and Eurosceptic Clarke fan]

This thread provides an illuminating illustration of just why we were unelectable from 1992 to 2005. Mrs Thatcher was the original, ultimate Eurosceptic, but she would never have resorted to some of the UKIP trash on here.

UKIP'ers- look at how you are perceived by the 99.9% of the population for whom mortgages, jobs and finances are more important than events in Strasbourg. You come across as very politically unattractive, and frankly as just odd.

Please go away, this is a site for Conservatives, not putative Basil Fawltys.

[Marian]

"Marian: Conservative Home is an open public site that anyone can visit and post comments, or you saying that only Conservative Party members or supporters should be the ones to have access?"

No I said that UKIP members are sad, and lonely. It must be very hard being outside of the only real Conservative party. As for this site becoming members only that would spoil a lot of the fun. I am a democrat. The sceptics and the “better of out group” are inside the party not outside splitting the vote. “Debate with us, calmly, without sarcasm or rudeness” Oh please you are asking for the moon, why should we be nice to schismatics?

[Witterings From Witney]

Marian: “Debate with us, calmly, without sarcasm or rudeness” Oh please you are asking for the moon, why should we be nice to schismatics?

The above demonstrates the paucity of your argument and stance. As a believer in democracy, as you purport to be, I respect your right to put forward your views and only ask for the same courtesy in return.

It is however obvious that you only have the ability to indulge in vituperation and in which, it seems, you are not alone.

[Ross warren]

Nobody has told us not to 'rock the boat’ but we know that only a unified party has any hope of being elected. The fighting within the Party is over. It seems to me that UKIP would like to open up the old wounds over again, because they are a one issue pressure group masquerading as a political party. What is there left to discuss with UKIP, nothing really.

Witterings From Witney:

Since when has calling somebody sad and lonely, amounted to vituperation, don't let them get under your skin Marian, they are Vituperable and thats the fact.

[Geoff Middleton]

The policy is reasonably moderate

And that says it all.
Ken Clarke applauds Dave Cameron's policy on the EU.

[Tim Worstall]

Ken Clarke tells us in an interview that: "...some of our European election candidates may feel as I do that I would not be the most persuasive of advocates on some of their campaigning issues." and that thus he will have a low profile during the euro-elections campaign or even not campaign at all.

The truth is of course that Ken's views are plumb in line with the actual candidates to become MEPs for the Tory Party. Most of such are not just europhiles but fully blown federasts (honourable exceptions including such as Hannan which is why they won't let him rejoin their gang).

It's not the candidates that Ken disagrees with. It's both the candidates and Ken who disagree with the majority of Tory voters on the subject of Europe. That's why he's being kept quiet, to make sure he doesn't scare the populace.

And yes, as many know, I work for UKIP.

[haddock]

A great many people will vote UKIP in the Euro elections ( on the theory that it matters not one jot who is elected... the EU will steamroller its way on regardless ) but they will not vote for the party in a general election. I will not vote UKIP if it gives Labour or their mates the Libdems a chance of success.
I would like to vote Conservative, all I need really is a conservative Conservative party to vote for, preferably one led by a Conservative.

[John Leonard]

Is Ken Clarke to the Conservative Party what Mickey Rourke is to the cinema?

[Willaim Ferguson]

Anyone who is anti EU or Lisbon Treaty shouldn't bother to vote to put any wannabe at the Euro trough, unless of course it is just to see your colour of rosette win a seat somewhere. Voting for a candidate is confirming that you actually agree with the European super dream and want someone there to represent you no matter now twisted or convoluted the so called democracy within it is.
If you are anti EU or anti Lisbon spoil your vote, you aren't counted amongst the majority non attenders as apathetic and you have exercised your democratic right and put your opinion across in the only way that doesn't involve marching on Westminster.
Sure, someone will get in should it only be the candidate with the largest family to employ once there, but any Government or future (fingers crossed) government would be well able to read the spoiled votes for what they are, a vote against Europe, and force the British statelet parties to focus on a real vote winner at the next General Election, a referendum. Use the only means open to you in Europe to actually get your say on it, because once any candidate gets there British aspirations are quickly forced on the back burner, for the sake of European integration and dominance.

[AlanofEngland]

Ah, Bishop Swine, please take me seriously? Do you remember this speech? "Saturday, 20th September 2008 was the twentieth anniversary of Margaret Thatcher's seminal Bruges Speech in which she outlined an alternative vision for Britain and Europe.

Margaret Thatcher’s speech is as true today as it was twenty years ago. The Bruges Group says that those statements should have been taken more seriously then and acted on, but it is not too late. The reality of the European Union is that it is a centralising project that does not believe in accountability or democracy. It is the antithesis of British and European history and its developments remain dangerous. Margaret Thatcher warned about the path the European Community was taking towards becoming a centralised political structure that was clearly intending to suppress national identity and national independence. This was a dangerous path.
“To try to suppress nationhood and concentrate power at the centre of a European conglomerate would be highly damaging... Europe will be stronger precisely because it has France as France, Spain as Spain, Britain as Britain, each with its own customs, traditions and identity. It would be folly to try to fit them into some sort of identikit European personality.” Power, she said, should not be concentrated in Brussels; Europe should become a willing coalition of states that collaborated as they saw fit. Nor should Europe aim towards greater centralised state control but learn to encourage freedom in every sphere and economic enterprise.

Twenty years on we can see how prescient the Prime Minister’s statements were. Since then more power has been ceded to Brussels; the EU and its member states have become less competitive and more tied down by bureaucratic regulations; freedom and democracy are being undermined as we can see in the way that the EU is still trying to impose the Lisbon Treaty (the revived Constitutional Treaty) on the peoples of Europe.

As Steve Crowther says "If you want your country run by someone other than its own people, you're not a conservative, you're something quite else. It's as simple as that." Well, I want MY country NOT to be suppressed but run by my own people, always have, always will.

[Pat Seward]

I would recommend everyone to read the Plan by Carswell and Hannan.
It is the way to go in the future and I hope Cameron takes on board what is written.

[AlanofEngland]

Talking of Carswell....Question:
There is a book by Professor Patrick Minford, where he analysed the balance sheet of our membership of the European Union. He says the negative effect on the Gross National Product is five percent of GDP. How has this been covered up? Why isn’t it on sale at the conference and other bookstores?

Answer Douglas Carswell:
I don’t think there is. The conventional wisdom that has been put about by politicians and the BBC, the idea that there is an economic rationale, that it is the common market, and that it’s worth playing a political price – I think it’s fictional. If you look at the balance sheet you have to take into account the fact that before we went into the common market we had an economic surplus with the member states. We’ve had a deficit every year since. There are two continents on earth with which we have a trade deficit, Antarctica and Europe. We have to have a massive trade surplus to make up for it. It’s not actually any good for our economy. Look at the regulatory impact of the over-regulation. I think these arguments do need to be made, but they have to be made sensibly. The federalists would love us to talk in a way that makes people concerned about their economic wellbeing. So I think we have to make the argument sensibly, rationally and progressively. One often hears people say that we couldn’t possibly survive outside the common market. Switzerland can do it, but they’ve got banking. Iceland can do it because they’ve got fish. Norway can do it because they’ve got oil. Well, what is the city of London? What is that stuff that we have coming out of those pipes in the sea? Oil. What are those things that we used to have swimming in our waters? Fish. We are the fifth largest economy on the world, we have three times as many people as they have in Australia. I think economically we can survive very well outside the EU. I do think we need to make the argument in sensible terms which means that the core vote that we need to appeal to is attracted by our argument, not repelled by it.

[Sally Roberts]

"Most of such are not just europhiles but fully blown federasts"

This really is an objectionable word and I am pleased to see that we have managed to go for a long time without anyone using it.

To equate (even by implication) a pro-European with a child abuser is completely unacceptable and rather offensive.

[The Bishop Swine]

"Ah, Bishop Swine, please take me seriously? Do you remember this speech? "Saturday, 20th September 2008 was the twentieth anniversary of Margaret Thatcher's seminal Bruges Speech in which she outlined an alternative vision for Britain and Europe."

Yes I belive that I do recall the speech.

"The reality of the European Union is that it is a centralising project that does not believe in accountability or democracy. It is the antithesis of British and European history and its developments remain dangerous."

I agree with you 100%. It may have been sold to us as a common Market, but its plain that it's an attempt at forming an empire without to much bloodshed. I am absolutely not with those who believe that we can do anything about it with out winning the next election. All I can say honestly is that whilst I have never spent any time with D.C. I have spent enough time with a senior Tory MP and shadow minister, to know that this is the most right wing Tory Shed cabinet we have had since Mrs T. It could be that after the next election we will be sold out, even so it is better for Britain for it to be run by the Conservative party than Labour. Is this what they call a Hobson’s choice ?
For now the important thing is to keep the party united and win the election. What other rational choice is there? We know that another Five Years of Labour will only make the matter far worse. For now Please excuse this brief reply but I have to dash to a meeting right now.

[James Maskell]

Clarke's return has done well. He knows full well that a condition of his return is not to cause trouble over Europe. Hes got more than enough to do without needing to talk about the EU voluntarily.

Pity that another thread mentioning Clarke goes off the rails to have yet another discussion about UKIP...

[Ric]

About 70% of the electorate are Eurosceptic. If the Conservative Party just promised a referendum on E.U. membership, they would win the next election comfortably. So why wont they make this simple pledge? All Eurosceptic Conservatives should ask their M.P.'s and candidates 'Will you give us a referendum on our membership of the E.U.' ? If the answer is no then you know what you must do. Leave the party.

[Ian]

I don't buy all this stuff that Clarke is a star performer, he looks and sounds like an ill prepared waffler, an elephantine and somewhat duplicitous buffoon.

Why doesn't he push off to the Liberal Democrats where his sort of jazz playing Euro loving ‘George Melly type’ belongs.

He didn't impress me when he caused trouble in the Major government and he doesn't impress me now, but I guess he fits in with 'Call me Dave’s’ philosophy of being all things to all men, a regular sort of ‘bloke in the pub’.

But mark my words, there’ll be trouble afore bedtime.

[Tim Worstall]

"This really is an objectionable word and I am pleased to see that we have managed to go for a long time without anyone using it.

To equate (even by implication) a pro-European with a child abuser is completely unacceptable and rather offensive. "

It's meant to be offensive. Glad to see that it is.

[Old Hack]

Let me go back to the original point about this post.

As a confirmed Euro-sceptic and passionate believer in limited government I welcomed the return of Ken and still believe it works on more levels than anyone gave Mr Cameron credit for.

Ken Clarke's stewardship of the British economy was infinitely superior to what Labour has managed since. The media know this, the public believe it and wanted him back, the Party is more united by his inclusion than by his exclusion.

Ken is still a maverick and he will make mistakes of course. But so does Boris Johnson and he has been forgiven much more.

We need good policies to win, but we also need unity and confidence in our leadership. By bringing back Ken, David Cameron demonstrated sound leadership and paradoxically boosted unity through a move many thought might be divisive.

Now if UKIP had a decent leader and could stop fighting incessantly they may have had a shout in 2005. They have wasted their chances, but that's another discussion. In 2009 Ken Clarke's return is far from the good news for them that UKIP hoped it would be.

[David Lindsay]

What’s to deal with?

The Tories are the party of the Treaty of Rome, the Single European Act, the Maastricht Treaty, eighteen consecutive annual votes to approve the Common Agricultural Policy (with only the tiniest handful of rebels, towards the very hand), eighteen consecutive annual votes to approve the Common Fisheries Policy (likewise), the withdrawal of the whip from an infinitesimal number of MPs who had merely abstained on increased British funding of the EU, the deselection of a Maastricht rebel and of no other MP ever on the European issue, the fake call for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty rather than for its simple rejection by Parliament, and the refusal to promise to campaign for a No vote in the extremely unlikely event of any such referendum.

Even the vague promise to revisit the CFP, an old Major hand like Michael Howard’s nod to Euroscepticism, has been ditched by Cameron, Michael Heseltine’s mini-me. The Tories have not left the European People’s Party, and they never will.

[Malcolm Dunn]

Hi Edward Huxley,

Delighted to hear that you deplore rudeness from anyone. I must have missed your posts deploring your colleagues Henry Mayhew, Chad Noble and UKIP Defector who can be as rude as you like about Conservatives and the Conservative Party.
Personally I know and like several members of UKIP and agree with some of what they have to say. For example I found myself in agreement with most of what Nigel Farage had to say on QT last week and thought he was far better than Theresa May.
However I sincerely believe that UKIP is an electoral joke who do themselves and the country no favours by fielding candidates at a general election. The only beneficiaries are Europhile MPs largely from the Liberal and Labour party.
It also angers me that UKIP members seem to spend an inordinate amount of time attacking the Conservative Party and are far less willing to debate with the real EUphiles in this country. I remember one of your members Michael Mcgough telling me he was proud to have taken votes Iain Duncan Smith which left me dumfounded. Had IDS lost Chingford we would have had another EUphile Labour MP. What could possibly be the benefit of that?

[David_at_Home]

Malcolm Dunn,

Your viewpoint about the wrongness of UKIP taking votes from the Tories may be logical from the viewpoint of someone who believes that a Conservative Government would be preferable to a Labour government. Sadly, with the current Tory Leadership, many who vote UKIP consider the policies of both the main parties to be virtually identical.

You assume also that UKIP takes more votes from the Tories than for Labour. This might have been the case once, in some areas but in the light of the current furore about migrant labour it may not be so now and in the future.

[Charlie]

Charlie
Noted with interest the editorial abuseing
of Ukip, my guess is, if at the next election labour supporters defect their
party, they will, unless they abstain from
voting, will need to give their vote to
another party, this is unlikely to be the
conservatives, so Ukip come into the picture
and as l am a staunch conservative, l think
the battle will be for them, the LibDems or
Ukip, which gives those two parties a split
vote, what could be better for the conservatives, assuming Brown continues his
demolition of the country, the humiliation to Labour will be immense.

[Super Blue]

Quite right, Malcolm - they are a Labour front.

[Ross Warren]

"However I sincerely believe that UKIP is an electoral joke who do themselves and the country no favours by fielding candidates at a general election. The only beneficiaries are Europhile MPs largely from the Liberal and Labour party."

I agree, with some reservations. I feel that the rank of file of UKIP contains a lot of very decent types. The leadership on the other hand, very like the Old gang of four SDP are political opportunists. They have managed to maintain a good quality lifestyle at the expense of the general public. The UKIP activist who told me that they would never take up their seats, let alone take a salary from Europe was sincere but gullible.

What is their left to debate with them?

[Philip]

It is good that since returning to the front bench Ken Clarke is behaving himself!! That he accepts the line on Europe (although it seems our EU policy had to be sufficiently timid for him to return!) and supporting marriage in the tax system is good news, and if he can keep it up, him being in the Shadow Cabinet will be a real help to us.

[Julian Melford]

To Evan (9th Feb, 10:40) - about 'seeking reform' to the structure of the EU. By which I suspect you mean whether powers are exercised at national or EU level.

Can you explain how a future Tory government would actually be able to *effect* reforms, please?

It is increasingly common knowledge that once power has been transferred to EU level, it stays there. This 'acquis communautaire' is European Case Law, and binding as a condition of membership.

Not only are we banned from doing anything that goes against our EU obligations, but we also find that the European Court of Justice ruled that where there is an EU policy, it constrains our foreign policy too.

I feel that our reluctance to discuss Europe has merely postponed the day of reckoning and things will get quite choppy in May when voters awake to the European elections.

I'm not in UKIP and won't predict how many MEPs they might or might not get. However in 2004, a report for Andrew Duff MEP predicted that they would drop from 3 seats to 0.

Nobody could have foreseen the Kilroy factor that pushed them up to 12. Normal politics goes out of the window at this type of election.

[Edward Huxley]

Malcolm Dunn, we could go on arguing about this, but are not likely to change our minds. I just wanted to point out that in some cases UKIP actually helped the Conservative candidate.

Instead of complaining about UKIP " intervention" the people who failed to get elected should have asked themselves why so many voters deserted them.

On the subject of insults I`m not likely to forget Mr. Cameron`s ill-judged "fruitcakes and closet racists" remark. Compounded by his not very bright sister in law, who had a job in his office at the time, using a comment from Operation Black Vote as "evidence".

My Conservative friends tried to get me to vote Tory "to keep Labour out", but I had to tell them that I will do so when the party changes its policy on the EU. If and when that happens, I shall be delighted to rejoin - I was an active member and fund raiser for many years.

I live in hope.