Immigration could be top issue at European Elections

Last Friday's Telegraph reported that immigration was becoming voters' top issue.  This morning's Times warns of "hordes of unemployed workers heading west" unless radical action is taken to bail out recession-struck Eastern European nations.  But although the "rich" EU nations will struggle to afford any bailout this week's Economist uses its cover feature to warn that "western Europe cannot afford not to pay it."  It warns of catastrophic implications for EU banks and the wider economy if the East is allowed to fail.

The same issue of The Economist carries an article examing the pressures facing Germany as it moves towards a reluctant acceptance that "the collective" will have to help.  The article is illustrated with a photograph of Angela Merkel digging into her handbag.

Both UKIP and the BNP will undoubtedly seize on these issues as June's European Elections approach.

UKIP's political credibility was damaged last night, however, after Robin Page accused his former party's leadership of falling in love with "the high life of gravy and status".  Writing for The Telegraph Mr Page said: "The party created to fight centralised government, sleaze and corruption has become a parody of itself, a mirror image of the body it professes to loathe."  UKIP is dismissing the attack as sour grapes after the former presenter of BBCtv's One Man And His Dog was prevented from standing as a UKIP candidate in East Anglia.

Tim Montgomerie

Comments

[UKIP campaigner]

The election results from 2008 District Council elections show that Robin Page is a has been. He stood in his home ward and got beaten by the local Liberal Democrat. Page has been ranting about UKIP for weeks on his pathetic Daily Mail blog.

The fact is that Robin Page had plenty of time to submit his nomination papers on time. He failed to do so and was disqualified. Who wants a incompetent MEP candidate who describes himself a peasant?

The Telegraph owners should ask its staff why they are allowing them selves to be used as a personal rant site from an individual who cant even muster enough support in his home village to get on the local council or get his nomination papers in on time.

[HF]

What is "UKIP campaigner" doing on here carrying on Farage's party purges?

[GB£.com]

There's no need for a slew of anti UKIP stories. You've got nothing to worry about, who can compete with such a clear policy platform of "if the Lisbon Treaty is ratfied by the time we get in, we won't give you the vital say we have been banging on about as essential for so long, but won't leave it there".?

It's in the bag! ;-)

[Harry]

I wouldn't listen to what Robin Page says. Nobody else does! He has long been in the very loony camp UKIP has tried to ditch. The fact he was not able to stick to the same rules as every other candidate, so missing the chance to be nominated, and has now left in a huff is typical.

[Phyllis Crash]

We need to focus on the immigration angle to this post. UKIP's internal dynamics are a distraction.

[Iain]

So our brilliant minds in Westminster have achieved the near impossible of making us losers what ever we do, we either spend a fortune balling out EE countries, or we will get swamped with their unemployed and have to pay for them here.

Well done chaps! you never disappoint us of our low expectations we have of you and what you will achieve.

Of course you could always get control of our borders, but of course your EU project is more important to you than our jobs and our tax money.

[UKIP campaigner]

COMMENT OVERWRITTEN.

[Letters From A Tory]

Oh dear, the idea that all EU states both rich and poor can work together as one seamless whole begins to break down. No doubt the EU taxpayer is going to take on a huge burden at some point.

The question is now are the Conservatives daring enough to discuss 'the E word' before June 2009?

[David_at_Home]

Read Robin Page’s own words:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/4903755/Why-Ukip-has-just-lost-another-member.html

“I had a special dispensation to submit my papers a few days late. Or at least I thought I had.”

If an exception had been made for him (and I understand that he also did not have the required numbers of signatures to support his application) then it would have had to be made for anyone else who, retrospectively and without the required support, might have decided to stand as a candidate.

Mr Page is inconsistent in what he writes. If he believed that UKIP should not be sending MEPs to Brussels then why was he so keen to stand?

It is sad that Robin Page has allowed himself to become a tool of the Tory Party supporting Telegraph. UKIP attracts people who feel strongly about the need to preserve our country’s independence and many feel so intensely about this that they feel that they have a unique way of communicating this to the British public. But the problem that UKIP faces is fulfilling its mission is immense and will not be solved without a great deal of hard work and, to succeed to withdrawing our country from the political EU, it will first be necessary to turn around the received wisdom on this issue amongst the leadership of the Conservative Party or thee Labour Party or both. Standing in elections with moderate sensible policies is one way of applying this pressure.

Tim is correct that mass immigration will be the issue that dominates the EU Parliament elections and those who wish to stand up and be counted will have to chose between the extremist nationalist socialist BNP and the moderate centrist UKIP.

[Malcolm Dunn]

Immigration will be a top issue at this election. That became obvious when the recession started to bite.How we face this will be a key indicator as to fare in this election and beyond.
Not really interested in the interminable wranglings of UKIP. In the great scheme of things it's not really very important is it?

[Edward Huxley]

I am, or rather was, a Robin Page fan. He has written some good robust stuff on subjects like global warming, but he seems to have lost the plot here. Why didn`t he send in his application to become a candidate in time? If the rules had been bent for him there would have been uproar in the party.

He scorns the MEP gravy train, but would have been quite happy to get a seat on it! Sounds like sour grapes to me.

From his past utterings about the Conservative party I don`t think he will be transferring his vote to them. Perhaps he fancies the BNP.

UKIP will have to manage without him.

[michael mcgough]

I must agree with GB£.COM It's in the bag.
'we would not let matters rest there' is such a strong statement of intent.
That old EU timebomb is no longer ticking ,the EU is not a problem.William Hague's support for EU workers taking UK jobs will ensure the union vote switches from Labour as will the commitment to Turkey's EU accession.If there are street riots pre June that should clinch it.

[R.Baker.]

In the meantime the country should keep on voting Tory if they want to improve the flow of EU immigrants into this country,not to mention the outflowing of democracy from the broken down dis-United Kingdom.

[Henry Mayhew - Ukipper]

I enjoy being the bullied underdog so am running out of things to say now that all my, David's and GB£'s dire admonitions are coming to pass.

Will drop out for a bit until it looks like we are starting to lose the argument with the Roons.

[David_at_Home]

"It's in the bag"

I agree if by this you mean that UKIP will greatly increase the 16% share of the vote it achieved in 2004 but getting our country out of the political EU and stemming the flow of mass immigration is far from “in the bag”.

[Iain]

I noted Rifkind’s comments on the radio this morning where he sneered at Brown's comment of British jobs for British people, what Rifkind fails to understand is that the problem with Brown's comments is that the British political establishment are no longer able to deliver, not that the statement was wrong.

[A long time Tory]

That UKIP and BNP take the same position is no surprise, I've always taken the view that UKIP is to the BNP, what Sinn Fein is to the IRA.

What is clear though that we need a proper balanced approach to immigration , which only the Conservatives offer and are realistically the only political party who is going to be in a position to deliver it.

All the extreme right (who will be looking to undermine Conservative support to validate their own ends) will do, is make that harder to achieve. Funny old world really....

[Patsy Sergeant]

Does UKIP have its own website? I imagine not, since so many Ukippers spend their time posturing on this site. On this thread so far, they seem to have taken over!

I do happen to agree that Immigration is going to be of increasing importance in elections, as more and more UK nationals lose their jobs - AND don't find new ones!

I am also becoming more disllusioned with the EU by the month. Over time I have discovered that as far as general opinions go, I seem to be Mrs. Average, I may be somewhat 'ahead' of the average Mrs. Average, courtesy of this website, and others, but I believe that the public in general, is becoming increasingly aware of the dictatorial nature of the EU.

Having Laboured nearly 12 years under that type of government themselves, the will not tolerate much more. The business of the Italian workers will have lit a fuse (regardless of the actual circumstances), how long that fuse is?????

[Nicholas Keen]

".... the problem with Brown's comments is that the British political establishment are no longer able to deliver, not that the statement was wrong."

I agree. Both major parties can only dance around the issue: Labour cannot back up its slogans with action; the Conservative response puts impersonal free market dogma over people's jobs. The result: the thugs in the BNP benefit. Historically, the Conservatives have been able to draw the sting from this tendency by advocating sensible policies that reflected the national will; hence the historically poor showing of the far right in British politics.

[ukipwebmaster]

One man and his ego looking for some sheep to follow him into Kilroy land.
Some of the real Conservatives here might like to hear William, Earl of Dartmouth:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tPTqeZi3FQ

[Edward Huxley]

I`d just like to point out to Patsy Sergeant that UKIP was part of Tim`s statement, so I don`t think the "posturing" as she puts it is justified. Not all my postings on this interesting site have been about Europe, but if the editor would like me to stop contributing I will comply immediately.

Unlike some here (and I include Conservatives), I always try to be polite, and do not hide behind a nom de plume. Anyway Patsy, there`s hope for you yet - you say you are becoming more disillusioned about the EU. Come and join us!

[Mark Hudson]

What happens in UKIP matters in the sense that to long-term, diehard Conservatives like myself, Cameron's Party continues to to be very far from something that we can support. If the UKIP internal wranglings are true, this is sad, but no different from what I witnessed first hand in the Conservative Party.

Immigration will play a major part in the European and General Elections. If the major parties aren't too damned careful, then the BNP is likely to perform beyond their wildest nightmares.

Why can't all Conservative MEPs be like Dan Hannan and we have single members constituencies? it would make June's vote so much easier for some of us in Kent.

[Iain]

" puts impersonal free market dogma over people's jobs. "

I would go further than that, they have put 'the market' before the nation, and confuse what is in multinationals/business interests as being the same as the nations interest, its not. The Conservative party of old used to be called the party of the nation, that can't be said of the current lot and their confused thinking in regards to the EU.

[haddock]

A long time Tory might perhaps explain to us how He/the Conservatives would best ask Brussels if we can have control of our borders back ?
will he have to really beg and say 'pretty please'?
That should do it,
Funny old world....as you say... here we are a few months away from an election where THE issue will be immigration and border control and the conservatives can only make reassuring noises; they know they can promise nothing .... not that Cameron's promises relating to the EU amount to much.

[Edward Huxley]

To Mark Hudson`s comment about the excellent Tory MEP Hannan I would add Roger Helmer. I wonder how long their views, which are very similar to UKIP`s will be tolerated at Tory HQ. These brave chaps with their support for Better Off Out have the support of many UKIPpers, but they would never be tolerated on Mr. Cameron`s front bench.

Sooner or later,and well before the Euro elections, the public will want something better than "we will not leave it there" and I think many party members will agree.

We live in hope.

[UKIP campaigner]

@Patsy Sergeant

UKIP does have its own site - UKIP.org. There is also a lively members' forum where our activists discuss campaigning and debate policy in private.

The reason why UKIP members post here is to debate issues in public on this very well run forum. We also need to rebut the smears of our opponents and enemies.

It was the editor who drew attention to Robin Page's article. The UKIP members and supporters who posted comments here are merely exposing Mr Page's incompetence and hypocrisy.

You can expect to read a full rebuttal by Nigel Farage in tomorrow's Telegraph. UKIP is better off without Robin Page who appears to be doing the Conservatives' dirty work on his Mail blog and the Torygraph.

[Richard Calhoun]

UKIP have not lived up to their initial success, they hardly featured during the row over the Lisbon Treaty.

They are a busted flush, however the BNP are not and must be taken seriously.

That is simple if one recognises that Labour's immigration policy is / was a shambles. A policy is what is needed with no prevarications, and the Tories will reap the benefit at the expense of Labour and the BNP.

[A long time Tory]

Haddock @ 12:51 asks what we can do?

Well we could throw the baby out with the bathwater al la UKIP (not happening) or do what we have done all the way, especially exemplified by Mrs T, and negotiate on what we don't like and push what we do.

As the interests of the countries which fund the EU will be aligned, it won't be that difficult. Despite kipper protestations, there is no such thing as irrevocable when it comes to politics & treaties if you push hard enough.

I have always thought that Ukippers were fundamentally defeatist, in that they don't think we can win the argument in Europe, and that we will lose to the "enemy". so off they want to go, home with their bat and ball...

Interesting that I am not seeing much (any?) comment on the UKIP/Sinn Fein comparison, or the point that UKIP is effectively working to get Labour and the Lib Dems re-elected.

[Steve Tierney]

I get pretty bored with Conservative attacks on UKIP. I'm a faithful Tory and I have no intention of voting UKIP, but I have every sympathy with their message and I value their input here.

The person who said that they are to the BNP what Sinn Fein was to the IRA is either just deliberately trolling or is an idiot. Or both.

UKIP and large parts of the Conservative Party share an ideology. They are our political cousins, in my opinion. We may not agree with them on everything, but we have more in common with them than not.

[Gawain]

You want serious? Here is serious.
http://englandexpects.blogspot.com/2009/03/blackmail.html

What is happening over here in Brussels makes the internal machinations of UKIP pretty small beer. The probblem for the Tories is as they support the free movement of people they can do nothing about this.

Essentially, Eastern Europe - in particular Hungary - are blackmailing the Western part, UK included. Give us 160 billion Euros or we will send you our unemployed.

And with Tory support there is nothing in EU law that can be done about it.

Come on Mr Hague, what is your answer to Mr Gyurcsany's letter. What can you do about it?

[dcj]

I think it's time to simplify matters.

I loathe - and fear - the "European Union". I voted against (unlike many who are now in UKIP) the one time we had a chance. I loathe the Lisbon "Treaty" and am appalled at the iilliberal, dictatorial European movement. I want out of Europe at the first conceivable opportunity.

I loathe Zac Goldsmith and the rest of the Watermelon Bunch. I really do not like Mr Cameron's trendy leftish appearance nor his twitches towards greenery nor his odd ideas like directly elected Mayors.

So why am I not supporting UKIP? Simples, as the meerkat advert says. There are only three possible outcomes of the next election: Labour win, hung Parliament, Con win. And if it's a hung Parliament, the LibDems either back McBroon (probably) or back Mr Cameron but at such a high price (PR and permanent left-wing Govt)that I don;t want to see it paid.

Mr Cameron has had a difficult hand to play. There are those in the COnservative Party who do not share my views on Europe (and they're entitled not to do so) and there are a lot of centre-rightish voters who at the moment don't care about Europe.

Before we can do anything at all about Europe we have to win power. And we won't if we're perceived to be split. And if we head off down the UKIP road, all the one-time Con voters who got scared off in 1995-1997 and who are just starting to come back to us will be off back down the Cleggybrick road.

So let's ask all the happy former Tory UKIPpers here. Do you really think Britain will be better off with 5 more years of ZanuLab? Or living under a PR system that means you'll NEVER get a Government which can do all the other things (apart from Europe) that you and I want to see? You might just think that it's worth giving Mr Cameron a chance to prove what he can actually do with regard to Europe when he has the power to do something, rather than just damning him straight away. If he fails, then is the time to think about splitting.

Just a thought. In the last election (1997) where there was last a very active and vocal anti-Europe campaign (for the Referendum Party), the effect of that intervention was some fifty seats in which the non-Tory majority was less than the Referendum PArty vote.

So in 2010, what is the only possible effect UKIP can have? Yes - that's right - deliver us back into Gordon Brown's tender care for another 5 years or ever whichever is the longer.

I was a History teacher once, and there was a line I liked - he who does not learn from History is condemned to repeat it. I don't want to see a smiling McBroon in Downing Street on May 8th next year, with or without Nick Clegg on his left hand, so I won't be backing UKIP. And I'd ask anyone else who thinks they're on the right of politics to think very carefully before they give help and comfort to McBroon by doing so.

[A long time Tory]

UKIP campaigner @ 13:12

If Kippers have a busy forum (big if), they must have a lot of spare time to be able to contribute to both.

Interesting that you say they have to come here to air things in public. Surely the UKIP site is public or could be?

As for smears, UKIP & ex-ukip don't need help, they can manage without us. DC had them bang to rights; and while I would not like to hurt ukippers feelings, they really don't feature in conservative conversation, except perhaps when hearing of the farces featuring such illustrious alumni as Kilroy-Silk et al.

[A long time Tory]

dcj @ 13:42

Well and elequently said.

Though I am not as sceptical as you on Europe (though I am with you a 100% on elected mayors) I am still glad to have you in the party fighting for what you believe in. The party needs to be a broad church to win government and you are in the right place.

[Peter Watson]

You want to see the future then read history. The fall of Weimar and the rise of Hitler. The BNP should do well if they are really the BNP and not just another heat sink as UKIP was. If the BNP stand candidates for the EP elections they will probably remove UKIP in toto and form a real nationalist opposition.
And if you want to know the real truth about what will happen if the politicians do NOT solve the immigration problem then geddaloadathis.
http://www.iamanenglishman.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=0f9633f5ee353e3c0d1fca0cf1d204ca

[Malcolm Dunn]

Good post dcj. My thoughts entirely.

[A. D. Osborne]

In themselves the EU elections do not matter as MEPs do not have any power. To be explicit, MEPs are not going to stem the flood of anything across our borders.

However, if the BNP could get a few MEPs just think of the publicity value and the boost to BNP funds which the EU gravy train would give.

[Iain]

"I don't want to see a smiling McBroon in Downing Street"

But the EU elections will have no baring on that, so vote UKIP in the EU's to keep a Cameron Government honest about the EU and its promises, all be it fairly feeble and imprecise promises, in Westminster.

The issue is trust, and Cameron has to give us a good reason why we should trust him on the EU with our vote.

[Mr Angry]

Immigration is the number one concern of the voters. However it won't be the number one issue at the Euro elections because the three main parties contesting those elections in the UK are too scared to talk about it. They will therefore, totally disgracefully, leave it to the BNP to do so and thereby help to maximise the vile fascist's vote.

Well done chaps, more EU gravy (train) with your pork?

[Peter_M]

Let me say something about the bailout mentioned above. I come from Slovakia which is one of those "poor" EU countries. BUT not every "poor" EU country in Eastern (or to be precise, in Central) Europe is struck by the current crisis so much, it would need a bailout. Slovak economy is in a good state after deep reforms introduced by the last centre-right Cabinet. Yes, there are struggling companies and even bankrupts, but we got low (flat) taxes, our state budget is in a good condition and we have just adopted Euro (which is in fact a catastrophe for our soverignty). Slovenia and Czech republic are in a similiar good condition, so you don't have to be worried about these three countries. The situation is much much different with Hungary and Baltic states (especially Latvia), but as a economic liberal I believe in "an invisible hand of the free market" though it may seem old-fashioned. As Pres. Klaus has recently said, this and any economic crisis is like a flu: when you don't treat it, it lasts one week, when you do, seven days. So please, no bailout!!!

[dcj]

With respect, the Euro-elections - any elections - have a bearing on the outcome of the General Election. Reduction in the Tory vote means help and comfort to McBroon: think how Labour will spin anything but a crushing Tory win.

As for Mr Watson's post, what a good argument for voting Tory to keep BNP a long way away from power. The result of a nationalist Government coming to power, legally, in Germany in January 1933 was the opening of Dachau in March. Don't forget, Mr Watson - many of those who worked to see Dachau established wound up getting a very good look - from the inside.

[David_at_Home]

Here is Nigel Farage's response to Robin Page's article in today's telegraph:

http://www.ukip.org/content/latest-news/925-farage-hits-back-at-slurs-on-ukip

[The Bishop Swine]

"Many of those who worked to see Dachau established wound up getting a very good look - from the inside."

Of course they did both as Guards and Aryan prisoners. the ruthless nature of the criminals who use a national socialist revolution as an excuse for a power grab is well known.

"what a good argument for voting Tory to keep BNP a long way away from power."

The Hatred of such brutes for the sighted minority is well known. They are particularly likely to turn on libertarians and anarchists, those who can read them like a book, better decide quickly which side of the fence to sit on.

This brings me back to the divide between the poor east and the relatively rich west.
Poland is alive with National Socialists they represent a large minority. Russia is also home to many thousands of Nazi skinheads. Many of these people have held such beliefs for many years, it is deeply entrenched in the east. We should either be very concerned or prepared, there is little point being scared witless. We should be praying that Obama can revive America, because the downturn is a golden opportunity for extremists of every possible hue to exploit.
I think we should be very concerned about BNP and do our level best to understand them.

[UKIP campaiger]

@ A Life Long Tory at 13.42.

The UKIP members forum is for party members only. UKIP members would not be allowed to post on the official Conservative blog on conservatives.com.

Instead of moaning at UKIP, Conservative members should ask why there is no private forum for activists to discuss campaigning and policy with CCHQ officials. They should be asking Rishi Saha why the official party blog, moderated by him or his staff, has so few comments. What are they afraid of? Discussing the EU's imposition of 75% of our laws and control of our borders?

This site is not an official Conservative Party forum. There are plenty of UKIP blogs that Conservatives can post comments on, e.g. bloggers4ukip. It seems that Tories are too lazy to find or post in them. That's their problem, not UKIP's.

[Malcolm Dunn]

It's not anyone's 'problem ', UKIP Campaigner. No one is really that interested.

[Iain]

"With respect, the Euro-elections - any elections - have a bearing on the outcome of the General Election. Reduction in the Tory vote means help and comfort to McBroon:"

Well then Cameron should give us good reason why we should vote Tory at the Eu's, not expect us to vote Tory because they aren't Labour. So far on his EU political account, his promise on the EPP has yet to be fulfilled, his undertaking on Lisbon would be called an over statement to describe it woolly, but he has come through for the EUphiles by handing the MEP selection to them. From an EUsceptic's point of view I recon that makes his EU political account over drawn. In addition in light of all the Neville Chamberlain claims over EU treaties from the main political parties over the years, where the outcome has been the opposite of the claim, then I want to see some clear, precise, bankable undertakings from Cameron before he gets my vote, for the British political establishments word is pretty much worthless where the EU is concerned , and Cameron , in his tardiness to fulfil the EPP promise hasn’t exactly don’t much to change that perception.

[Patsy Sergeant]

Thank you Edward Huxley for your kind invitation @ 12.33, I am afraid I have to decline it - for the time being.

Although I am more inclined to agree with the UKIP attitude to the EU, rather than the Tory Party, I very strongly agree with dcj @ 13.42, that the most urgent action that needs to followed is to get this ....... government out of Downing Street. I believe that dcj, was talking about the General Election and not the election of MEP's.

As far as the GE is concerned, it seems to me that neither the Lib Dems nor UKIP can REALLY care much about the UK, if they put themselves before ensuring that this bunch of dishonest shysters, is booted out. Both Lib Dem and UKIP know perfectly well that they haven't got a hope in hell of obtaining a large enough number of seats to form a government - thats not crowing, its a logistical fact.

[Jack stone]

The fact that about thirty per cent will turn out for the European elections means they will not be judged to be significant by anyone.
People will probably use them as some sort of protest vote and I suspect that The Nazi Party will probably do better than UKIP.
Hopefully if this does happen which I hope it will not people will confront these bunch of nazi`s and start standing up against racism. Something the Conservative Party have not done so far.

[David_at_Home]

I don't think that you understand, Patsy Sergeant, that we Ukippers disagree roughly equally with the (virtually indistinguishable) policies of both the Labour and Tory Parties. Our quarrel is not with the ordinary members or voters of either party; in fact, we probably agree with many on most issues.

If the Tory Party was led by a Disraeli or a Churchill or the Labour Party was led by an Attlee or a Gaitskell then there would be no need for UKIP but, unfortunately, this is not true for either of the main parties so we will fight on until one or both kick the current leaderships and revise their policies

[Jack Stone]

You fools in UKIP just don`t get it. Get a Conservative government and you get some of what you want. Keep Labour in power and you will eventually get all that you don`t want.
The reason why people are in UKIP is because they want it all. That`s not possible in politics. You have to decide how best you can get most of what you believe in and its clear that is by voting Conservative.
If you can`t see that you need your heads examined!!!

[Steve Tierney]

Surely that can't be the real Jack Stone's comment?

[Patsy Sergeant]

Jack Stone @ 20.04 - whichever JS you are - what has got into you? Definitely a different message than usual!

[David Parker]

[email protected] like many other posters I found much to agree with in your first post, particularly as I was myself a Referendum Party candidate at the '97 GE.
As a matter of historical interest, before that election James Goldmith made an offer to John Major to withdraw all his candidates if only Major would promise that, if re-elected, he would hold a referendum over Britain's membership of the EU, to which Major replied "I do not believe in referendums, that is not the British way of doing things".

Obviously, none of us vote for minority parties with any expectation of those parties forming a Government or even, in most cases with the hope of achieving an MP, as a lone voice crying in the wilderness.

More often than not such votes are the only remaining means of protest against a Government or Opposition party which simply refuses to acknowledge or address the very deeply held concerns of many of those who would otherwise support it. The alternative, of course, is to abstain from voting, however, this is even worse for democracy, since it places politics even more in the hands of the party activists and allows Governments elected on an absurdly small turnout to claim that they represent the will of the majority of the people.

Far better that a Government should be elected with a smaller majority and an effective opposition to hold them to account.
To take a realistic view of the next G.E. it is probable that a substantial vote for minority parties might cost the Conservatives a few seats, but probably not as many as Labour, possibly to the benefit of the Lib-Dems, but it would be unlikely to cost Cameron the election, though it might send him a warning that, unless he addressed certain issues, he could not rely upon a second term.

I think that it would be a tactical mistake for the Tories to adopt scaremongering slogans such as a vote for xxx minority party is a vote for Brown since this merely suggests their own insecurity and lack of confidence. Far better would be for them to analyse why many long term supporters are unhappy with them and to try to address these problems, however, that does, of course, presume that we have an opposition which genuinely believes in Conservative values.

[dcj]

A very thoughtful post from Mr Parker, and I accept much of what he says. However, I really think we are at a very crucial moment. It is not a racing certainty we will win the next election. I think (and there are comments about seeing through a glass, darkly) that the best we can *realistically* hope for is a majority of 20 - 30.

Given the way in which Labour is over-represented in the north, West Midlands, Wales and Scotland it would not take much in the way of defections to UKIP (or BNP, tho' it is likely that these would come mainly from Labour) to make the difference between a majority of 20 and being the second largest party in a hung Parliament. Playing around with figures on the UK Polling Report website will illustrate what I mean.

I really do appreciate the sincerity with which many UKIP members hold their views and I deeply sympathise with the way in which they feel let down by the present Conservative leadership (and let's not forget Mr Major)

If we win, and Mr Cameron doesn't fight for our interests in Europe, then there is a strong case made for UKIP. But if McBroon wins ... I won't say there won't be another election, but just look at the way local Councils are being emasculated in favour of highly undemocratic and unrepresentative "Community Partnerships."

Now I know some UKIPper is going to say that's exactly what's happening vis-a-vis Brussels and Westminster - we can do anything we wish provided it's what Brussels wants - but look at it this way. A COnservative Government under Mr Cameron *might* try and do something about it: a Labour or LibLab (or, horror of horrors, LAB/BNP!!! - think about it) Govt certainly won't.

And if Mr Cameron doesn't live up to your wishes, you have the next election to judge him in. Are you prepared to gamble that you'll get another chance with McBroon?

[Patsy Sergeant]

Once again I think that dcj in his comment @ 22.35 above has 'hit the nail on the head', especially in his last paragraph.

I presume that David Parker @ 21.48 is referring to Tory MP's when he talks about 'scaremongering slogans', rather than 'Tory' rank and file?

Because I think it is much more likely that Tory rank and file, rather than being 'insecure and lacking in confidence', are experiencing first hand the inhibiting, heavy-handed, results of this governments tinkering with this country's laws, and very fabric of life. It is quite likely that they realise the only direction that such statist control leads to! And that they have therefore decided how important it is to end this developing autocracy.

[Mr Angry]

I don't give the vast amount of time, effort and money that I do to the Conservative party to see them be simply the least worst option from an unpalatable range of choices.

A vote for UKIP at the Euros elections may well be the only way left to register my total opposition to the Cameron stance and actions on Europe without allowing Labour another term in Government in the UK.

[Jo]

The current revival of European cultures is often attributed to fascism, but that is not the real cause. It is simply an age-old phenomenon: people discovering their cultural roots. Just as the Latin and African countries fought for their independence from being split apart by various other countries like a piece of pie, they did so out of the affirmation that they had the right to run the land they lived on with their own culture, rather than the culture of another, imperial power. So too, today, are countries like France and Britain and Sweden reassessing their cultural identity. When immigrants come in from diverse regions, they are often coming with intentions of forming networks and coming to dominate the power structure of certain industries, or even political ascendance in the country they come into. The effect is the splitting of England into pie parts of India versus Pakistan versus Somalia, etc. or the splitting of France into Morocco versus Algeria versus Nigeria. The newcomers are full-grown adults and individuals well aware of their ties to their homes countries and the power relations between various nations. To reduce the mindset of immigrants to that of infants, claiming that they come with the simple goal of getting food and shelter, and willing to listen to the political regulations of the native government, is to claim that they are mentally incapable of planning for themselves. They can’t be blamed for wanting the best. We all do. But the countries that are affected by such immigration can’t be blamed either for regulating such behavior, and planning in the self-interest of, first and foremost, its own citizens who have been part of the government for generations. Take the simple example of Chad or Senegal. The countries were infiltrated by French and British nationals trying to gain power struggles and resources and what was the end result? Rebellion, millions of people sick their culture, their land being changed. Furthermore, they were sick of seeing their land and government being infiltrated and divided into pieces by foreign countries. The Scramble for Africa lead to great civil unrest and in the end, each African nation affirmed to the world that they had the right to be the cultural and economic deciders for their countries, that European settlers would have to be kicked out of the country. And the world helped them. Today, we completely recognize the legitimacy of any non-European country to maintain its culture. We applaud and praise the efforts of valiant heroes like those in the Haitian revolution, so on. It is only fair to extend the same courtesy to European nations. Each should not be allowed to colonize and force their ideals on other countries, but neither should other countries be allowed to split and divide France, Britain, Italy, etc. What we are seeing today is the Scramble for Europe through softer means but the end goals are the same: wealth, power, resources, and land. To claim, because they are developed nations, that they have no culture is ludicrous. Where did the great works of Da Vinci come from? What about the literary treasures of Jane Austen? What about the long history of salons and artistes? If we eliminate the use of race in assessing the modern immigration issue, we find that such nations are justified in restricting immigrants and enforcing new laws. Pretend for a second that everyone in each of these countries is blue, each with a long history of its own culture. So countries A, B, C, and D all have blue people. Recently, many people from A and C have been moving to B, and soon as they set up localized neighborhoods within B harboring their own businesses and networks, they begin to request that B hold special townhall meetings by the rules of A and C countries. They ask that B not allow the citizens of B to do things that would offend how A and C usually view social customs. In response, B limits immigration from A and C, and begins to plan methods for existing A and C members to better adapt to the B lifestyle, so there is less tension and long-term peace. Is this too much? Is this racist or unfair or extremist? I would say no. Each country has the right to give the best life to first and foremost, its own citizens. Then, it can help take care of other countries by contributing in development aid, allowing small amounts of immigration, and working together to promote peace and trade.