Tuesday 30 June 2009

German Constitutional Court to rule on Lisbon Treaty

Germany's Constitutional Court is due to rule today on whether the Lisbon Treaty is unconstitutional under German law.

There is very little chance of the Constitutional Court ruling that the EU not-a-constitution is unconstitutional but they may take the opportunity to have a dig at not-a-communist Merkel handing over more German sovereignty to the European Empire.

The EU and 'City' Regulation

Despite the recent 'down-turn', Britain has by far the largest financial services sector in Europe. However, as a result of the latest EU agreements outlining financial services regulation, Britain will only have a small and ineffectual voice (as one of 27 members) in determining what precisely the new rules will be and how their supervision will take place.

The City of London has been pre-eminent as a financial and trading centre for more than 300 years, but as such it is dependent on the versatility of its fiscal and regulatory enviornment. As a result of this intrusive EU legislation, as well as the pending increase in the UK marginal tax rate to 51.5%, a significant number of firms are already murmuring and considering relocation to Switzerland or elsewhere.

The following article from 'The Times' confirms this handover of British financial regulation to the EU executive committee :


Monday 29 June 2009

EU President Fires Warning Shot at Cameron

A Slithering snake in the EU Presidency pit has been disturbed from its lair by the Conservative leader David Cameron, who started making noises about a referendum for the British people shortly after seeing UKIP's popularity rise to astounding proportions during the European election. The new EU President says that "Cameron will struggle to implement his plans as prime minister on a range of issues, including climate change, unless he changes his Eurosceptic attitude and learns to work with European leaders".

The not so veiled threat comes hot on the heels of Cameron's breakaway Eurosceptic party. The Swedish prime minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt said that Cameron will "need" mainstream leaders. Loosely translated that means toe the line or you'll regret it.

It will be interesting to see if this will strengthen Cameron's resolve to put his money where his mouth is and forge ahead with the moderate Eurosceptic plan he conveniently stole from UKIP at the height of our Euro election popularity recently, or if he will do what some of us suspect he will do, and that is to use it as a vehicle to hoodwink the British people in the next general election, and then do as he's told once we're part of Europe.

Despite Cameron's rhetoric on Eurosceptism we must never forget that the Conservatives have been as much to blame for the position we are in now with the EU who are poised to take away our national identity, our freedoms, our culture, our right to self govern and our civil liberties, and that Conservative collusion goes right back to the days of Edward Heath.

I was somewhat concerned last night when I saw the headline “EU unites to warn Tehran over arrest of British embassy staff”, because it might increase support for the EU and it was my fear that the argument could be levelled that we need EU protection, in this ever more dangerous world, and I couldn’t think of anything at the time to argue against it, being as I am new to politics and still learning.

I turned to the UKIP Press office for guidance, and for the benefit of anyone else who has been troubled by this issue, I publish unedited their response.

Thank you for writing to Nigel about the EU's posing as the defender of Britain and as "Europe's only hope of survival in a dangerous world".

The Iran-crisis (like the dishonest, and criminal interventions, in Iraq and Afghanistan) is derived from interference, in a sovereign nation's affairs, by the so-called "international community", which is actually the USA, the EU and a detachable rag-tag of fellow travellers.

The intelligence services of this "international community" - often posing as aid-workers, journalists, musicians et al - have been highly successful in engineering coups in countries (Georgia, Ukraine, Serbia etc) which opposed the "international community" and its plan for regional trade-blocs (like the EU) linked up to form an (inevitably totalitarian) one-world government.

There is undoubtedly a natural opposition-movement in Iran, but this has been magnified by foreign support, both on the ground and in the media. Consequently, the problems we are facing result from our slavish concurrence with the aggressive policies of the USA and the EU, and not from any reluctance, on the part of our EU-government (for that's what it is) to take part in them.

The EU's control of its member-governments' trade-policies does give it considerable clout in international affairs, but, even if that clout were being exercised in a desirable manner - which it certainly is not - this control of trade-policies would still be highly detrimental to the EU's subject states, which have all lost their voices at the WTO and can no longer conclude international agreements to their own advantage.

If the EU managed to get control of its member-governments' armed forces as well, this situation would become very much worse. Indeed, we would then enter the age of "continuous war", between collusive trade-blocs, which was predicted by George Orwell, as the only way to perpetuate a global dictatorship.

Naturally, our (EU-) government is attempting to cast the EU as a knight-in-shining-armour, in the current (and every possible) scenario, but this could backfire, because it demonstrates just how far Britain's autonomy, and therefore the sovereignty of its electorate, have been eroded by the EU, and how far our ability to "speak peace" to other nations is being destroyed by EU/US global aggression.


Why the Queen can do nothing to stop the EU from destroying our nation.

When people say that the Queen should stand up against politicians who have given away our sovereignty, (the mechanism to govern ourselves), and suggestions are made that what is happening is an act of treason, as have recently been made, may I remind them that it was Gordon Brown back in 2008 who placed the Queen is such a position that she had no choice but to sign away our sovereignty to the EU.

The Royal Family can do nothing to stop it now. It's worth going back to that story in order to understand why we are powerless to stop the destruction of the British Constitution, and why we are powerless to do anything about the horrendous pitfalls to come once we are converted into Europeans after the Irish say yes to the Lisbon Treaty, which it is widely believed they will.

Gordon Brown is the betrayor who signed away Great Britian as a nation in its own right. He signed away our culture, our liberties and forced the Queen into a position where she could not refuse. Never forget that, and I quote:

"Under a cloak of secrecy, the Government finally ratified the Lisbon Treaty earlier this week and committed the country to a new deluge of European meddling. In a sign of the Prime Minister’s personal embarrassment over the betrayal, the historic step was only made public yesterday – 24 hours after the covert ceremony had taken place"

"The instrument of ratification was signed by the Queen, who had no choice. Because Mr Brown had signed the treaty, she was constitutionally forced to follow suit".

This is the same Gordon Brown that said "It is not as though this is being imposed on our country. People will have the chance to put their views".


Help Wanted in Norwich North !

UKIP's by-election campaign in Norwich North is in full swing. Today UKIPs substantial billboard and telephone kiosk advertising went up all around Norwich. All help is now required to fight a strong campaign which is going to be hotly contested by lots of candidates.

We have a great LOCAL candidate Glenn Tingle, who has a strong local and business profile in the area. He is a former Army medic and highly regarded international marathon runner.

Our campaign office is at... 166 Wroxham Rd , Norwich , Norfolk , NR 8DE

If yould like to help out or donate please contact the office at the address above or contact Pete Reeve, the Regional Organiser, on 07792290434.


The campaign in Norwich North continues to hot-up with UKIP’s Leader Nigel Farage MEP and Norwich North by-election prospective candidate Glenn Tingle, signing up former Liberal Democrat county council candidate Corinne Russen. Corinne stood for the Sprowston Division in the election on 4th June 2009.

She has now joined the UK Independence Party having been impressed with the policies of the Party at the European Election. Corinne said: “I was surprised to discover that UKIP, with its agenda of fighting for British democracy and its genuine concern for the freedom of the individual is much more in tune with my views than the Liberal Democrats.”

Glenn Tingle, UKIP’s prospective parliamentary candidate for Norwich North said: “I am delighted that Corinne has joined us. I am sure she is going to be a major asset to the Party and, in particular, to my ‘Clean Start for Norwich North’ campaign. With our combined experience in local politics here in Norwich , we are going to be a formidable team. All we need now is for Gordon Brown to pull his finger out and set a date for the by-election.”

Quote - Unquote

Mikhail Gorbachev 1987

“We are moving toward a new world order, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road.”


David Rockefeller

“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”


President Sarkozy of France

"The project of our founding fathers is complete: the economic union is becomming a political union".


Guiliano Amato, the former Italian Prime Minister.

"The good thing about not calling [the Lisbon Treaty] a 'constitution' is that no-one can ask for a referendum on it".


Valerie Giscard D'Estaing (the author of the rejected EU constitution) speaking of the Lisbon Treaty (widely regarded as the new version of the old EU constitution).

"Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly. All the earlier proposals will be in the new text but will be hidden and disguised".


Trevor Colman MEP -2009

"Each pound that we receive from the European Union costs us three pounds".


Daniel Hannan - Conservative MEP - 21 June 09 - In The Telegraph.co.uk

"The proof is before our eyes. Our system needs, and our electorate demands, an early election. Yet we must be denied one for the sake of a treaty [The Lisbon Treaty] that three other countries have already rejected in referendums. How cheap our Parliament has become. How diminished our nation".


UKIP Press Office - 2009

"Opinion-formers" have been actively identified, stalked and bought, for decades, and, although such people are a tiny minority in society, they are so placed, strategically, that the pro-EU élite is able to control society through them."


Gerard Battem MEP - European Arrest Warrants (EAW) - October 2008

"...statements made on the Internet could result in the issuing of an EAW in a member state where it is a crime, and the arrest and extradition of a citizen from another state where the statements were made and where it is not a crime. If this involves information published on the Internet then it strikes at the fundamentals of free speech within nation states".


Google Hosted News - 20 June 09

"The European Commission is responsible for drawing up legislation that impacts daily on the lives of almost half a billion Europeans, as well as enforcing the measures already in place. Its president -- who like the commissioners is appointed rather than elected -- has significant leverage to influence legislative priorities".


British Prime Minister Gordon Brown - Whilst denying the British a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty he contradictorily said:

"It is not as though this is being imposed on our country. People will have the chance to put their views".


UKIP Press Office - 2009

"The degree to which the existing pro-EU political élite has succeeded in penetrating society's influential communication-nodes - including professional associations, churches, the trade-unions, big-business, the universities, local government and, of course, the media, using taxpayers' money and privileged partnerships to further those it favours, and eclipsing those it dislikes, by witholding such advantages from them - is quite staggering".


Nigel Farage - Lisbon, the Myth of National Powers - 2008

"IT IS repeatedly claimed that the Lisbon Treaty will give national parliaments an increased and enhanced role in legislation. The truth is that it gives them only one power, and that is the power to complain about something they do not like. This has been called the "yellow card" principle – but all it does is allow an objection to be raised with the Commission when the complaint is supported by one third of national parliaments. And even then, the Commission does not have to listen".



Trevor Colman MEP - Liberty and Governance - 2009

"We have had taken away from us, the ability to govern ourselves, without any hinderance. The ability to vote for the people who make our laws and the ability to get rid of them. All that has been lost because our politicians have given away what was not theirs to give away"


UKIP Press Office - JUNE 2009

"UKIP's press-officers are keenly aware of concerted resistance, from the media, to any story, which might injure the EU and its supporters, or (above all) promote UKIP. Sometimes, the media even take our stories (if they are not too EU-toxic) and use them to promote the Conservative Party, by changing their attribution and even putting our quotations into the mouths of Tory-representatives!"


George Orwell

“If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.”

Sunday 28 June 2009

EU Calls For Open, Independent and Accountable Governance of the Internet!

That's a bit rich, coming as it does from an unaccountable, unelected and self appointed regime like the EU Commission! How do they have the gaul? The EU is trying to get the ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) organisation away from American government apron strings, and the Director of ICANN argues that there is already an International framework that works just fine.

However one might view this (myself I don't trust American governments as much as I distrust the EU Commision) I find it a bit of a nerve that the EU Commission uses words like 'open' when they themselves meet in secret, 'independent' when it is the EU that is hell bent upon taking away Great Britain’s independence and 'accountable' which is the biggest affront of all when one considers that the accounts of the EU have not been signed off in 14 years because of irregularities!

Saturday 27 June 2009

Devolving Power

Janet Daley, writing in the Telegraph, has an interesting article regarding 'power to the people', which can be viewed here.

Commenting on the inefficiency and impracticality of allowing politicians and bureaucrats to spend other peoples money - highlighting MP's expenses and the BBC in particular - Daley ponders whether this may be the catalyst to harnessing the public's anger, as Thatcher did against trades unions and 'Loony Left' local authorities.

She makes a telling point, encapsulating a hidden 'dig' against the Conservative Party, when she states:

"For public outrage must present an opportunity – if not an obligation – to an Opposition. If popular anger can't be channelled through mainstream politics, then democracy is useless."

If politicians are truly wishing to devolve power to the people, instead of mouthing platitudes, then it can only be enacted by a belief in what Hannan & Carswell call 'true localism'.

Under the present system local government is but a sham and it is for this reason that turnout at local elections is so low as people now seem to be aware that their vote counts for nought.

The allocation of monies to local authorities by the Treasury is made purely on assessing spending needs against the level of local services. Therefore a good local authority, able to produce a high standard of local services does not qualify for as large a Treasury 'handout' as one that is inefficient. Consequently voters are unable to reward, or punish, the behaviour of their local council as it is far from clear who is actually responsible, on top of which a local council has only limited control over its budget. Couple this with the situation that where councils employ the 'Cabinet System' of local authority government to implement central government dictats, a council of say 50 councillors incorporating a Cabinet of say 7, means that the remaining 43 councillors are, in effect, disenfranchised.

Without, in turn, sounding patronising one does wonder how many of the electorate fully appreciate the source of funding for local authorities and whether it is believed that Council Tax is the sole provider of that funding.

For 'true localism' - and local government - to work for the benefit of local people, the following needs to happen:

* Abolish regional development agencies, regional government offices, MAAs (Multi-Area Agreements) and transfer all their powers to local authorities.

* Abolish the Department of Communities & Local Government and pass their powers to local authorities also.

* Grant to all local authorities responsibility for all areas of policy which have been devolved to the Scottish Parliament, under the 1998 Scotland Act.

* Replace VAT with a Local Sales Tax or, to keep young Wadsworth happy, a land value tax.

* Make all local authorities self-financing.

Without central government grants and making local authorities self-financing, local councillors would have to stand on their record, thus allowing voters to judge them accordingly. As one of the aids to making local authorities self-financing, let us consider a local sales tax, which would be a charged just once at the point of retail. Local councils would be free to vary the rate levied, dependent on their spending needs. To take a local example, were Wiltshire to set a lower rate than West Oxfordshire, then West Oxfordshire may well find shoppers crossing county lines to spend their money, to the gain of Wiltshire and the loss to West Oxfordshire. It would, as a result, introduce something to this country that we have never previously experienced, namely tax competition which, in turn, must lead to a downward pressure on taxes. Tax competition would also force local authorities to accept what is known as the 'Laffer Curve'; that is, that setting lower tax rates might well net them greater revenue with the added advantage that business and trade may well be attracted to low-tax areas, thus broadening the tax base.

By the abolition of the Department of Communities & Local Government one immediately returns to local people control over what may be described as quality-of-life issues such as siting of mobile phone masts, siting of incinerators and local planning.

But why stop there?

All three main political parties, when discussing the NHS, treat this subject as if it were a 'sacred cow' - it is not. The NHS is a service provider and as such should be subjected to a review of, and the implementation of, an acceptable level of service and efficiency. Why not, for example:

* Allow patients to opt out of the NHS and instead pay their contributions into individual private health accounts, a proportion to be allocated to everyday healthcare and the remainder set aside for insurance against serious illness.

* Allow those who choose to remain in the system, or cannot afford to contribute to a private healthcare system, to remain within the NHS.

* Incentivisation for prevention of illness, rather than cure.

The last point may well introduce an effort by people to avoid developing habits and conditions that require expensive remedies.

How about social security?

For far too long governments have seen their social security budgets balloon with little effect on relative or absolute poverty. Millions of people have become trapped in a world of relative squalor and low expectation. In their publication, The Plan, Hannan and Carswell state: "....as long as you pay people to be poor, you will never run out of poor people."

Why not:

* Return responsibility for the relief of poverty to local authorities.

* Allow local authorities to determine eligibility for benefits

* Provide local authorities a bloc grant for social security and give local authorities discretion over the allocation of those funds

Consider: Person A may be a widow or pensioner who has fallen on hard times whilst person B may be a local 'layabout'. Would not a 'local' caseworker be more able to discern the difference than a government controlled 'service'?

Local authorities would be free to innovate and devise ideas and pilot schemes - those that work will soon be copied by other local authorities, thus benefiting the country as a whole. Many benefit cheats see their activities as 'cheating the system' rather than 'cheating their neighbours' - introduce localism and local accountability and benefit cheats really will soon seen to be 'cheating their neighbours'.

What about education? It is generally accepted that schools and the education system is failing and the reason is simple - too much government!


Government decides how many schools there are in any area.
Government decides the rules which dictate where your children go to school.
Government decides what they learn and how they are taught.
Government decides who can teach and how teachers are trained.
Government decides the hours your children spend in school, how many hours are spent on different subjects, what they eat and how they behave.

So the Government has created a monopoly, as in the health service, thus giving parents little choice. A state monopoly means uniformity and that, in turn, creates mediocrity, hence the lowering of standards - and the government is surprised when parents opt for home education. Even then parents are not 'left alone', but subjected to 'innuendo', in the argument against parents providing home education; this being done by hints of the opportunity for 'child abuse'.

So why not introduce 'true localism' by providing parents with a form of 'credit account' - ie the amount of money that the education of their child, or children, would cost and allow the parents to spend that sum at whatever school they chose, being one that provided the type and level of education that the parents wanted?

Why not consider the question of law & order?

Contained within our Council Tax demands is a 'precept', which is passed to the local police authority. This is another example of public money being spent by unaccountable and unelected individuals who then decide, under Home Office 'guidance', their policing priorities. As this is 'your' money, should you not have a voice in how it is spent? Should not those spending it be accountable to those providing said funding.

Now were Chief Constables forced to stand for election by their local community - and this is another argument for each local authority having their own police force - then, each candidate could present their 'manifesto' for law enforcement. For example, should the voters in a local authority vote for a candidate that promises zero tolerance to crime, then that is what they will be given and if the elected Chief Constable fails to deliver what the voters require - they elected him and so can 'un-elect him' - would result in true local democracy in action!

It is worth reminding readers that all 'local' services are provided with your money, whether this is by payment of Council Tax or taxation in general and consequently you have a 'right' to decide how it is spent.

On the question of 'rights', whether this is in regard to 'local' democracy or democracy 'per se', bearing in mind the three main political parties wish to devolve power - power which they have 'assumed' in most cases - it is worth recalling the words of Aldous Huxley;

"Liberties are not given, they are taken."

Friday 26 June 2009


Walsall's historic market.

Walsall Council has been forced to do an embarrassing U turn over controversial plans to part privatise the town’s historic outdoor market.

Members of Walsall Council’s cabinet confirmed last night (Wednesday, June 23) that its joint venture market management model with Norton & Proffitt is no longer on the table.

The significant move follows a long running campaign by market traders and UKIP MEP Mike Nattrass who were completely opposed to the partial sell-off of Walsall’s outdoor market.

In May, Mr Nattrass joined market traders to stage a protest against Walsall Council’s bid to part privatise the market.

Now Walsall Council has halted the move and will now undertake a borough-wide markets review to look at ‘all options’ for their development and management.

Members of the cabinet also approved plans to instruct the submission of a planning application to facilitate the temporary move of Walsall Market to a prime site on The Bridge.

Mr Nattrass said: “I very much welcome the council’s decision – members of the council have at long last seen sense and listened to the market traders.

“It is our campaign that has forced Walsall Council to go back to the drawing board.

“The market is an important part of Walsall’s rich heritage. It is a tradition which stretches back to 1220 and it should be run by the people of the borough.

“The council should never have tried to push this part privatisation of the market forward. The whole sorry saga has been deeply distressing for the market traders who are a credit to the town.

“I now urge the council to urgently carry out its borough-wide markets review and I welcome the temporary move of the market to The Bridge.”

Karen Sands, from Walsall Market Traders Association, said: “I would like to thank Mike Nattrass for his support during what has been a very difficult time for the market traders.

“The move to The Bridge will be fantastic and will boost trade in the area. We did not want the sell-off and hopefully, following the markets review, it will never be considered again.

“Our campaign led to this U-turn – it is a victory for customer power and a victory for the town.”

Thursday 25 June 2009

UKIP Peer Clashes With Government over EU Summit Statement

In a debate in the House of Lords on 23rd June, the UKIP Peer, Lord Pearson of Rannoch, supported by independent Labour Peer, Lord Stoddart of Swindon, clashed with the Government over its statement on the recent EU summit. Lord Pearson chided Baroness Royall of Blaisdon, (for the Government) for suggesting that the European Parliament has any democratic legitimacy. Lord Pearson said: "After all, the majority of law which is now imposed on this country is proposed in secret by the European Commission and passed in secret by the Council, and this Parliament can do nothing about it".

Lord Pearson also challenged the Government on the issue of whether the new institutions being created by the EU to control financial services would have supremacy over the UK's Financial Services Authority. Baroness Royall did not answer the latter question and attempted to suggest that Britain's representation in the European Council and Parliament give European laws democratic legitimacy.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon exposed the serious weakness in her argument by pointing out that: "...even if the British Members (in the European Parliament) voted as a group, they could always be outvoted by over seven to one. Decisions that might be inimical to this country’s best interests could be passed, irrespective of the views of the British Government or the British people".

He went on to raise with the Baroness the very serious concerns expressed by Stuart Fraser, the chairman of the City of London Corporation’s policy and resources committee, in the Daily Telegraph (23.6.09), about the ceding of control over financial regulation to EU institutions.

Baroness Royall accepted Lord Stoddart's depiction of the way the European Parliament voting can work against British interests by saying: "that is what the European Union is all about. I do not deny that." She avoided answering Lord Stoddart's second point about control over regulation by saying that she had not read the relevant article.

For the full statement and debate click here


Lord Pearson of Rannoch: My Lords, I trust the noble Baroness will not mind if I suggest that she was perhaps a little disingenuous when she suggested that the European Parliament carries any form of democratic legitimacy. After all, the majority of law which is now imposed on this country is proposed in secret by the European Commission and passed in secret by the Council, and this Parliament can do nothing about it.

As to the Statement itself, perhaps I may put two questions to the noble Baroness. First, on the new European supervisory powers over our financial services, will the Financial Services Authority be supreme in those areas or will the new EU bodies be supreme? It really does not help to be told in the Statement that there will be no fiscal change, because if these new European regulations drive our leading City practitioners overseas, surely that will have a devastating effect on our financial and therefore fiscal position. Therefore, can she confirm who will be the boss in future—the British Government and the City of London or this new financial supervisory set-up?

Finally, perhaps I may remind the noble Baroness of the words of Mr Jens-Peter Bonde, the leading Danish politician, who has said that all the guarantees given to Denmark when Denmark was forced to vote again on the Maastricht treaty have been broken. All those guarantees have been broken. So, really, it comes down to the question of what is the status of this protocol. Let us suppose that there is not a treaty of accession for Croatia . Where will Ireland be left then? Surely the most monstrous deception is being practised on the Irish people and I very much regret that the British Government have gone along with It.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, on democratic deficits, I respectfully point out that 80 per cent of European legislation, I think, is now made by co-decision. As the noble Lord well knows, co-decision means that it is agreed not only by the European Parliament, in which we have democratically elected representatives, but by the European Council, which is made up of members of this Government. So there is a very strong democratic element in the way in which European laws are made. The European Commission only proposes.

As for the views of Jens-Peter Bonde, I have long known Mr Bonde and his anti-European views. However, he has always sent his children to a European school in Brussels . I think that that is an interesting point, since there seems to be something to do with the European Union that he likes. I note his views on Denmark but I have more trust in Europe and the institutions of the European Union than he does.

I do not think that there has been any kind of monstrous—I cannot recall the word that the noble Lord used.

A noble Lord: Conspiracy.


Lord Stoddart of Swindon : My Lords, first, the noble Baroness the Leader of the House, in her reply to the noble Lord, Lord Pearson, pointed out that 80 per cent of decisions were made by co-decision with the European Parliament. I would point out that even if the British Members voted as a group, they could always be outvoted by over seven to one. Decisions that might be inimical to this country’s best interests could be passed, irrespective of the views of the British Government or the British people.

Secondly, I noted the reply of the noble Baroness to the noble Lord, Lord Woolmer. Has she seen that in this morning’s Daily Telegraph, Stuart Fraser, the chairman of the City of London Corporation’s policy and resources committee, said:

“We have lost the broader argument about ceding control of UK rules to the EU, though we are happy that some concessions have been made”.

He went on:

“We now still have a situation where binding arbitration dictated by Brussels could overrule the UK ’s Financial Services Authority”.

That is in direct opposition to what the noble Baroness and the Government believe. I would like to know whether the corporation has been consulting and whether the Government will listen to any representations that it might make.

I have one more question. The Commission believes that these changes can be brought in under Article 95 of the EC treaty on the approximation of laws to operate the single market. Is that so, or will Parliament have to ratify—and first discuss—the proposals, and then ratify any treaty that may be needed to bring these proposals into effect?

UKIP on 8% for general election

A Harris Interactive poll conducted for the Metro newspaper predicts UKIP to pick up 8% of the vote in a general election.

The poll shows the extent to which Liebour's support has been decimated with a 31% swing from Liebour to other parties.  According to the poll, 8% of people who said they would vote UKIP in a general election voted for Liebour in 2005, another 8% voted for the Lib Dims and 5% voted Tory.

With just under a year with which to campaign and expose the fundamental dishonesty of David Camoron's Conswervative & (European) Unionist Party, UKIP is already in a strong position.  The second Irish vote on the EU not-a-constitution in October will make the European Empire even more important an issue and the back-peddling that Camoron will have to do if the EU not-a-constitution comes into force before the election will be an enjoyable display of electoral suicide.

With the way Liebour has rigged the electoral system to enable them to gain maximum seats from a minimum of votes, we could see a hung parliament with UKIP holding the balance of power.  Watching Camoron sharing the front bench with "swivel-eyed loons" would be most amusing.

Tuesday 23 June 2009


UKIP West Midlands MEP Mike Nattrass says Britain should not be saddled by new unnecessary EU rules banning horse owners from eating their nags.

The MEP said the ludicrous legislation is just the latest in a mounting number of barmy rules to be imposed on Britain by the European Union which is galloping away with the UK's sovereignty, keeping MEPs round the trough and treating voters like donkeys unable to Say Nay.

Aimed at continental Europe the Horse Identification Regulations, which come into force next month, mean that horse owners will have to sign a pledge not to eat their own animals or they will be dropped into the manure with up to two years in prison.

Mr Nattrass, who is a keen defender of animal rights, said "It is time to rein in the power of the EU and harness our right to stable government, by sending the EU to the knackers yard ”

“The EU should keep its nose bag out of our affairs, it is blinkered, knows nothing of our traditions and trots out endless ridiculous rules.

“You could make yourself hoarse opposing all this, show jumpers with certainly take a fence. Hay we should have a straw poll of horse owners.” he added.

Nigel Farage UKIP Leader said on TV "I would like to be a fly on the wall when they ask The Queen and Princess Anne to sign."

Mike finally added "We will get out of this daft and expensive EU but I dare not say 'Otherwise I'll eat my hat' otherwise they'll bring in a regulation stopping that!"

You can't make this stuff up ...

Forget about the recession, the swine flu pandemic, rising unemployment, banks collapsing, people trafficking and all those other minor issues, the European Empire certainly has its priorities right:

While on the subject of ridiculous suggestions from the EU, The Sun also highlighted a plan to protect the UK's zebra population...

The article read:

ZEBRAS will get a BARCODE to keep them safe from thieves as part of the latest EU crackdown, it was revealed yesterday.

The African wild animals are already born with unique black-and-white stripes. But under the new rule, every foal will be implanted with a microchip.

Using supermarket-type scanners, its barcode can then be matched to a "passport" number to see if the creature has been stolen.

UKIP leader Nigel Farage said: "I wasn't even aware we had a problem with stolen African wild zebras roaming the streets of our cities."

Defra was yesterday unable to say whether any zebras had recently been nicked but insisted the scheme would "reduce fraud and control diseases".

(Hat-tip: UKIP)

mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web

Sunday 21 June 2009

Tim Worstall Talks about his Life on the Fringe

British elections are known, just like American ones, for the boring consistency with which the two main parties dominate the results. Sure, there’s the occasional socialist from Vermont, perhaps a Liberal Democrat wins a seat in some strange part of England. But we know in our heart of hearts that it’s always going to be either the Republicans (on my side of the pond, Conservatives) or the Democrats (Labour) that’s actually going to gain the power.

Even when this doesn’t hold, like when Ross Perot nearly broke through, we know that next election it’ll all return to the status quo ante. There just doesn’t seem to be any way for a political organisation to stay viable long enough, to keep the activists engaged between elections, so that a partial breakthrough or a partial success can be built upon two or four years later (with the exception of the Celtic parties in Wales and Scotland, something of a special case).

Until this election just gone past in the UK, that is. I’m a member of a smaller party called UKIP (the United Kingdom Independence Party). Our defining policy is that we simply don’t want to be part of this federal European superstate that is being built, what you would probably know as the European Union. It’s not that we’re “Little Englanders” as the pejoratives have it, rather that we’re Great Britons. We have the fifth (or depending upon how you measure it, sixth) largest economy in the world, we’ve a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, we’ve connections and contacts all over the world. We’ve cousins and relatives all around, our head of state, Queen Elizabeth II is also the head of state of some 18 or so other nations, ranging from tiny Grenada to Australia, New Zealand and Canada. We just don’t need to shelter under some umbrella of European countries, most of which would impose social democracy upon us in a heartbeat.

We’re all in favour of trading with our neighbours, of course, but also of trading freely with the rest of the big wide world. We’ll co-operate with anyone, anywhere, when we both desire to and think that it’ll be in our interest. We just don’t think that full blown political union with 26 other European countries is needed to enable this. I should also add that we’re not anti-Europe (I myself live in Portugal which would be a strange thing for someone uncomfortable with foreign climes to do) nor are we xenophobic. We just don’t like the extant and proposed political structure.

Having given the party advertisement (and don’t worry about my hitting you up for contributions, as in the U.S., non-citizens cannot donate to campaigns) now for the boasting. UKIP was set up in 1993 and was very definitely seen as a minority affair. In 1999 we won three seats in the European Parliament. There are two reason as to why the EU Parliament, rather than the Westminster one. Firstly, we’re seen as a single issue party (rightly or wrongly) and it tends to be the European elections when our issue gets aired. The second is that the electoral system is different. Westminster elects as you do to Congress, one congresscritter per district. In the European ones, the country is divided into regions and then each party runs a list of candidates for the region. For example, in the SE region of England there are 10 seats and 15 parties put up candidates for them. The more votes each party had the more of their list of 10 candidates got elected. You can see how this worked out here. The net effect is to make it a great deal easier for the so called “minor” parties to win seats.

However, it’s not quite right to think of UKIP as a minor party any more. In 1999 we won those three seats, in 2004 (elections are every 5 years) we won 12. That was our breakthrough, our Ross Perot moment. Back in January this year we were entirely written off. The Times (the London one) said that we had “imploded” and the feeling was pretty general. We were on 7% in the polls, as against the 16% and a bit we had had in 2004. The only people who didn’t feel this way were us, those inside the party. We know that for most of the time we fight like cats in a sack but come election time we’re a great deal more disciplined. We started our campaign with the belief that we could maintain our position as the third party, ahead of the Liberal Democrats, the position we had gained in 2004.

There was one little wrinkle of the way the UK works that bolstered this. In an election campaign the BBC promises to give equal time to the three parties that came top the last time the same election was held. So we were going to be there at the top table with Labour and the Conservatives. And this indeed did have an effect.

The end result was that we not just came third, we came second, beating the ruling Labour Party into third place. Not bad for a so called “fringe party,” eh?

It wasn’t just the BBC effect, of course. Some say it was the way in which the troughing of Westminster politicians was revealed, we benefitted from a “none of the above” feeling. But our own suspicion, the reactions we were getting while actively campaigning, was that most share our desire to leave, or at least radically change our relationship with, the European Union. So much so that we think our vote would have been higher if there hadn’t been the “expenses scandal” that so dominated the campaign.

My own role was working in the press office, preparing releases and so on. The usual sort of humdrum stuff that is the meat and drink of any political campaign. The interesting part was when I was ghosting newspaper articles: I’ve been a 42-year-old party leader with a passion for sea angling, a 62-year-old ex-telecomms salesman, and even an Argentine/Spanish female accountant. PJ O’Rourke was right when he said that trying to copy the writing style of others teaches you more about your own style than anything else can. As a purely personal point, I think the 1,000 word piece I did on politics as our female accountant for the Daily Sport was the high point. A Thousand words is rather more than they usually have in the entire paper! (think the sadly departed Weekly World News without the intellectual content, combined with the Sport‘s advertising slogan “More nipples than any other daily paper!”) Happy days, happy memories!

Of course we’re proud of what we achieved, we raised our vote, won an extra seat and kept the flag of euroscepticism flying. But what has been rather overlooked so far is what we managed in the larger scheme of things. As I say above, there have been insurgent campaigns in both American and British national politics, but they’ve never lasted to the next electoral cycle. That’s what we’ve managed, we’ve been able to keep the party alive and together over three electoral cycles. We’re now an inescapable part of the electoral landscape, and it’s the first time anyone has done that in either country since the emergence of the Labour Party in Britain in the early 20th century.

I can’t claim all the credit for this, of course, in fact am too English to be comfortable claiming any. But I’m damned proud to have taken part, both chuffed and puffed that we managed to do what has been so often threatened but not achieved for over a century, we broke the mold of politics.

Saturday 20 June 2009

One size fits all (except Ireland)

EU agrees Irish treaty compromise

EU leaders have agreed a deal they hope will secure the Lisbon Treaty a "Yes" vote in a second Irish referendum.

Ireland won legally-binding assurances that Lisbon would not affect Irish policies on military neutrality, taxes and abortion, diplomats said.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said leaders had agreed to Irish demands that the guarantees would be given the status of a treaty "protocol".

But he stressed it would not affect the other 26 member countries.
You see, the EU can't even manage a one-size-fits-all treaty to make a one-size-fits-all European Empire.

The new Lisbon Treaty isn't the same Lisbon Treaty the British government (or any of the other EU governments) ratified. It should, by rights, go back to Parliament to be ratified again but of course hell will freeze over before that is allowed to happen. After the drubbing they received on June the 4th, too many Liebour MPs will be too worried about losing their jobs in the general election next year to guarantee that the European Empire will get the "right" answer again.

Friday 19 June 2009

Mid Sussex Times: Tory 'smokescreen' letter

Tory 'smokescreen' letter

THE letter from Conservative councillors Acraman & Worth (A&W), was unbelievably misinformed, prejudiced and highly offensive to me as the UKIP candidate and to the residents of Burgess Hill who voted for me.
A textbook example of the Tory Party trying to use a smokescreen to hide its true (Pro-EU) colours.

Throughout the letter, A&W try to equate UKIP with the BNP. Completely untrue! UKIP is a mainstream political party, which came second in the EU elections. UKIP is quite distinct from the BNP. A&W also claim the consequences of voting UKIP were the election of Lib-Dems.

I would say the election of the Lib-Dems is down to the many Eurosceptic Tories that mistakenly continue to support the Pro-EU Tory party rather than the genuinely Eurosceptic UKIP.

With the subtlety of a charging, rhino A&W also attempt to put UKIP and BNP in the same political category when summarising the total votes cast in Mid Sussex. A&W list all the other political parties' votes separately and then pathetically lump UKIP & BNP together.

The most outrageous comment, however, came when A&W wrote: 'in Burgess Hill West, 476 loyal BNP folk allowed the election by just 50 of another Lib-Dem'. How incredibly offensive and prejudiced of A&W to assume that the 476 UKIP voters in Burgess Hill are 'loyal BNP folk'.

On behalf of those 476 good people of Burgess Hill and myself, I demand an immediate apology from A&W for such a comment.

Chris French
UKIP County council candidate
Burgess Hill Town
Firtoft Close, Burgess Hill

Thursday 18 June 2009


UKIP MEP Mike Nattrass has today expressed his concern at an EU ban on people being allowed their final wish, to be cremated in a football shirt.

An EU directive preventing people from being cremated in normal clothes has been attacked by the MEP who believes the move removes the rights of the dying, the dead and those that are grieving.

The directive means the deceased may have to be cremated in natural fibre shrouds if local authorities follow Kirklees Council, in Huddersfield, and introduce the ban to reduce crematorium emissions.

Deceased children may no longer be allowed to be cremated with their favourite toys as a result of this directive which could cause further distress to mourning families.

Mr Nattrass said: “The EU doesn’t seem happy with just taking away freedom and choice from the living – it seems it also wants to dictate to the dead.

“I believe this EU directive is contemptible and shows no regard for people’s final wishes.

“The EU introduces 75 per cent of our laws in Britain and we pay £40 million a day to be told how we should live. Now it appears the EU is even trying to control us when we have suffered a bereavement and also when we have passed away ourselves.

“We should say NO to the EU and make our own laws in Westminster,” he added.

Telegraph: UK 'powerless' to stop EU regulation

UK 'powerless' to stop EU regulation

A senior French official has confirmed Gordon Brown is almost powerless to stop the creation of a European regulatory machinery at today's EU summit, opening the way for a transfer of control over the City from London to Brussels.

"There will be a pincer movement on Britain," said a key aide to President Nicolas Sarkozy, speaking at a pre-summit briefing.

Paris believes the push for tighter regulation by the Obama administration leaves Britain in a weak position as it tries to fight off the assault on the City.

"If the Americans make strong commitments towards regulation and on derivatives and other sophisticated products, I believe they are going further than the Europeans. That will provide a boost to the most determined among the Europeans," said the official.

"It will be a reminder to the British that they cannot be quite isolated within Europe and at the same time refuse to accept for the City the kind of rules being imposed on Wall Street. "

Europe's key proposal is for three new bodies to oversee banking, insurance and securities. Each would rank as EU "authorities" and have binding powers to dictate decisions over sweeping areas of regulation.

Britain cannot veto the proposals because EU single market laws are passed by qualified majority voting (QMV). While a few countries have reservations – Germany views the plan as "too ambitious" – London will struggle to put together a blocking minority.

It would be a serious political matter if the EU proceeded against vehement objections from the British Government. Any outcome depends on whether Mr Brown is willing to risk a showdown with Europe.

Chancellor Alistair Darling said Britain will not agree to any measures that erode "fiscal sovereignty", an area that is still covered by the national veto.

What are the odds of that?

Ladbrokes are offering odds of 100/1 on most seats for a UKIP win at the general election.

At those odds it's worth putting a pound on a couple of seats, especially in the Stafford and Stoke area where UKIP has been doing particularly well in local elections.

But simply putting UKIP down as 100/1 (the same as the BNP, incidentally) looks a bit too much like a finger in the air job for Ladbrokes when they have UKIP at odds of 1/10 to win a seat at the general election.

Tuesday 16 June 2009

Constitutional Reform Bill 2009

UKIP's Lord Willoughby de Broke has introduced the Constitutional Reform Bill 2009 into the House of Lords which, if hell freezes over and the LibLabCon pass it, would:

  • Repeal the European Communities Act 1972
  • Repeal the Human Rights Act 1998
  • Introduce binding referenda
  • Require the British Parliament to approve international treaties and declare war
  • Hand powers down from the British Parliament to local authorities
  • Fix the salary and expenses of a British MP and what expenses can be claimed for

The practical effect of the Bill would be to withdraw the UK from the European Empire and make the protection of fundamental human rights the job of our own constitutional statutes - the Bill of Rights, Magna Carta, Habeas Corpus, etc..

All in all the Bill is concise and well written, although it fails to address devolution properly so the Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies would remain but power would be devolved to local authorities in England which could never hope to compete with one of the national assemblies.

I Lord Willoughby de Broke the best of luck with his Constitutional Reform Bill but I won't my breath on it getting past the first reading.

Sunday 14 June 2009

Ken Clarke lets the cat out of the bag

Oh dear, Ken Clarke has let the cat out of the bag. Dave won't be happy.

Like UKIP has been saying all along, the Tories cannot and will not do anything about the EU not-a-constitution.

Booker lays into Camoron again

Christopher Booker has got the measure of Camoron.

Vote for us or the puppy gets it
He has written an article in the Torygraph referring to Camoron's "cowardly caveat on a Euro referendum" criticising him for being vague on the European Empire and covering up the true extent of the power they have over us.

Of course, the reason he puts a "cowardly caveat" on a referendum on the EU not-a-constitution is because it would be illegal under EU law to rescind the Lisbon Treaty once it has been ratified by all member states and enters into force.  To rescind the Lisbon Treaty once it has entered into force would require the agreement of all EU member states or to leave the EU and to leave the EU once the Lisbon Treaty is in force will require the agreement of all EU member states.  But that is an irrelevance anyway because Camoron has already said that the UK will never leave the EU under a Tory government even though that's what the majority of the electorate wants.

Saturday 13 June 2009

Mandelson says UK will join Euro

Peter Mandelson (I won't call him Lord Mandelson, a man without honour doesn't deserve an honourary title) says that the UK will join the Euro.
Does it remain an important objective for Britain to find itself in the same currency as that single market in which it interacts? Obviously yes.
Important objective for who Mandy? Not for me and not for the vast majority of the electorate who would rather return to bartering with livestock than replace the pound with the Euro.

Nobody in their right mind would willingly abandon the pound and adopt a currency that's run by and for France and Germany. But then Mandy isn't in his right mind, not by a long shot. The man's an utter fruitcake - like most eurofederalists his mind doesn't inhabit the same planet his body does.

Of course, Mandy's suggestion that we should adopt the Euro might have something to do with the fact that he risks losing his very generous taxpayer-funded EU pension if he fails to promote the European Empire.
No one can serve two masters, because either he will hate one and love the other, or be loyal to one and despise the other.

Matthew 6:24
Mandelson serves two masters - the British government and the European Empire. So where does his loyalty lie and who does he love and hate? I think we all know the answer to that question.

Tuesday 9 June 2009

Rattling cages

I think UKIP (and especially Marta Andreassen getting elected) may have got a few people worried...

Monday 8 June 2009

European Election - Voting Figures

Accessing the Electoral Commission - as the 'authoritative' source for the final voting figures - one is directed by link to the BBC - our 'independent' broadcasting organisation, which now seems to operate as a 'mouthpiece' governmental quango, but I digress......

Bearing in mind that the governing party polled 2,381,760 votes, just 15.7% of the total votes cast; then factor in the 'anti-EU' votes which comprise UKIP, BNP, English Democrats, Socialist Labour Party, NO2EU and UK First, which together polled 4,121,983 votes, 27.2%, the Labour Party can hardly be said to have a mandate when deciding a major aspect of this country's policy on membership of the European Union.

More importantly, the Conservative Party - which has the stated aim of maintaining said membership - which polled 4,198,394 votes, 27.7% of the total votes cast, may well state that they polled the majority of votes but then can hardly consider that as a mandate, being just 0.5% greater. This is, it is believed, justifiably a 'false' majority when it must be accepted that not all those who would have voted in a referendum, on an in/out question, had voted. This point, when factored into the equation, leaves the Conservative Party in the same position as the Labour Party - ie, without a mandate.

Just another thought..........

Come join the winners! UKIP welcomes all

As supporters celebrate a fantastic performance in the Euro elections, Party Leader Nigel Farage has urged people across Britain to join the UK Independence Party.

"This strong result, an improvement on 2004, confirms that we are a serious force on the UK political scene," Mr Farage said. "To beat the UK's governing party into third place in these Euro elections is not only humiliating to Gordon Brown, it is confirmation of what UKIP has been saying all along: The British people are unhappy with their relationship with Europe.

"UKIP hopes to build even further on the 17% of the national vote that we received and encourages everyone, from all backgrounds and walks of life to become supporters of our party."

To join UKIP, click here.

The blame game

Harriet Harperson told the BBC this morning that the BNP getting two MEPs elected was not the fault of the Liebour Party.

The Liebour Party needs to accept the blame for the far-left BNP getting two MEPs elected. Liebour has presided over the economy from boom to bust and then blamed the bust entirely on the global economy. Liebour has allowed virtually unfettered immigration into the country. Liebour have kept us in the EU when most of us want out. These are the issues the BNP campaigned on. The BNP benefited from constant free publicity from desperate Liebour Party officials telling people to vote Liebour, not because of their policies, but to make sure the BNP didn't get in.

The blame lies squarely on the shoulders of the Liebour Party.

You're nothing better than fascists and dictators

Nikki Sinclair, UKIP's number 2 MEP in the West Midlands, was booed and jeered by LibLabCon supporters during her victory speech.

During her speech she criticised "the LibLabCon" for not allowing us a vote on the EU and told them there were "nothing better than fascists and dictators".

She is one scary woman!

Election results for England & Wales

All the results are in for the EU imperial elections except for Scotland and Northern Ireland. The counters in the Western Isles and the whole of Northern Ireland wouldn't do the count on the Sabbath so they will be doing so this morning.

However, the results from Scotland and Northern Ireland won't change the picture dramatically and the final standings for all parties and independents in England and Wales are as follows:

4,012,600 votes
28.6% (+1.2%)
24 MEPs (+1)

2,440,438 votes
17.4% (+0.5%)
13 MEPs (+1)

2,151,907 votes
15.3% (-7.0%)
11 MEPs (-5)

Liberal Democrats
1,953,575 votes
13.9% (-1.1%)
10 MEPs (+1)

Green Party
1,223,303 votes
8.7% (+2.5%)
2 MEPs (+0)

British National Party
916,424 votes
6.5% (+1.4%)
2 MEPs (+2)

Plaid Cymru
126,702 votes
0.9% (-0.1%)
1 MEP (+0)

English Democrats
279,801 votes
2.0% (+1.1%)
0 MEPs (+0)

Christian Party-Christian Peoples Alliance
232,755 votes
1.7% (+1.7%)
0 MEPs (+0)

Socialist Labour Party
150,980 votes
1.1 % (+1.1%)
0 MEPs (+0)

143,543 votes
1.0% (+1.0%)
0 MEPs (+0)

United Kingdom First
74,007 votes
0.5% (+0.5%)
0 MEPs (+0)

73,544 votes
0.5% (+0.5%)
0 MEPs (+0)

Jury Team
72,312 votes
0.5% (+0.5%)
0 MEPs (+0)

Independent - Jan Jananayagam
50,014 votes
0.4% (+0.4%)

Pensioners Party
37,785 votes
0.3% (+0.1%)
0 MEPs (+0)

Mebyon Kernow
14,922 votes
0.1% (+0.1%)
0 MEPs (+0)

Animals Count
13,201 votes
0.1% (+0.1%)
0 MEPs (+0)

Independent - Peter Rigby
9,916 votes
0.1% (+0.1%)
0 MEPs (+0)

The Peace Party
9,534 votes
0.1% (+0.0%)
0 MEPs (+0)

Independent - Katie Hopkins
8,971 votes
0.1% (+0.1%)

Fair Play Fair Trade Party
7,151 votes
0.1% (+0.1%)
0 MEPs (+0)

The Roman Party
5,450 votes
0.0% (+0.0%)
0 MEPs (+0)

Independent - Steven Cheung
4,918 votes
0.0% (+0.0%)

Socialist Party of Great Britain
4,050 votes
0.0% (+0.0%)
0 MEPs (+0)

Independent - Francis Apaloo
3,621 votes
0.0 % (+0.0%)

Yes 2 Europe
3,384 votes
0.0% (+0.0%)
0 MEPs (+0)

Independent - Sohale Rahman
3,248 votes
0.0% (+0.0%)

Independent - Gene Alcantara
1,972 votes
0.0% (+0.0%)

Independent - Haroon Saad
1,603 votes
0.0% (+0.0%)

Wai D
789 votes
0.0% (+0.0%)

UKIP Double seats in West Midlands !

Mike Nattrass and Nikki Sinclaire are set to go to Brussels !

Conservative 396,847 28.1 (+0.7) 2 0

UK Independence Party 300,471 21.3 (+3.8) 2 +1

Labour 240,201 17. (-6.4) 1 -1

Liberal Democrats 170,246 12. (-1.7) 1

Labour Wipe out in the South West

UKIP have held two seats in the South-West (of England) EU Constituency it was announced in Poole at 1.16 am. Trevor Colman MEP and William, Earl of Dartmouth will take up the seats.

Conservative 468,742 30. (-1.3) = 4 seats

UK Independence Party 341,845 22.1 = 2 seats

Liberal Democrats 266,253 17.2 = 1 seat

Green Party 144,179 9.3 = 0 seat

Labour 118,716 7.7 = -1 seat

UKIP candidate Marta Andreasen is elected to EU 'Parliament'

UKIP member Mrs. Marta Andreasen is now a member of the EU 'Parliament'.

She joins UKIP leader Nigel Farage MEP who was re-elected for a third term. Both will represent the south-east of England in Brussels. The result of the South-East (of England) EU Constituency was declared in Southampton today at 1.21 am.

Conservative 812,288 34.8 % = 4 seats

UK Independence Party 440,002 18.8 % = 2 seats

Liberal Democrats 330,340 14.1 % = 2 seats

Green Party 271,506 11.6 % = 1 seat

Labour 192,592 % = 1 seat

Poor result in East Midlands

A poor result in the East Midlands, partly down to Robert Kilroy-Silk but mostly, I suspect, because of the immigration policy.

The Tories got 2 MEPs, Labour got 1, UKIP got 1 (from 2) and the Lib Dems got 1 at the expense of UKIP.

Here are the results:

Tory 30% (+4%)
Labour 17% (-3%)
UKIP 16% (-10%)
Lib Dem 12% (-1%)
Green 9% (+2%)

Live blogging of the results will have to stop now, check back tomorrow for an update.

Early result from West Midlands

Worcester News is reporting the West Midlands result early as follows:

Tory 2
Labour 1
Lib Dem 1

One result is still outstanding
but apparently won't change the result. This is excellent, a gain of one in the West Midlands.

No change in London

UKIP has retained its one seat in London, the Tories have retained their 3, Labour 2 and the Lib Dems 1.

Here are the results:

Tory 27% (+1%)
Labour 21% (-4%)
Lib Dem 14% (-2%)
Green 11% (+3%)
UKIP 11% (-2%)
BNP 4% (+1%)

BBC predicting UKIP 2nd place

The BBC's tame mathematician is predicting a UKIP 2nd place when all results are declared, Labour in 3rd.

Nigel Farage has a lot riding on this election, he has said he will resign if UKIP get less than 10 MEPs. Currently he's grinning like a Cheshire cat and understandably so. He's also making the very good point that in the last 4 weeks there's been no debate about the EU because of the expenses scandal. He also said that UKIP has 300 PPCs for Westminster elections and is aiming for 500. "It's about time we had a debate wabout where 75% of our laws come from" - right on!

Sunday 7 June 2009

UKIP gains a seat in Wales!

UKIP has gained a seat in Wales in an unbelievable result, taking a seat of Labour. The Tories have topped the poll in Wales - the first time Labour have lost a national vote in Wales since 1918. The Lib Dems have failed to win an MEP again.

The results are as follows:

Tory 21% (+2%)
Labour 29% (-12%)
Plaid Cymru 19% (+1%)
UKIP 13% (+2%)
Lib Dem 11% (+0%)

UKIP retains seat in Yorkshire & the Humber, BNP gain MEP

UKIP has retained its single MEP in Yorkshire & the Humber but the downside is the BNP gaining a seat from their fellow left wing extremists in the Labour Party.

The BNP gaining an MEP is the product of Labour's disastrous policy of hyping up the BNP threat trying to motivate Labour voters to support them and giving the BNP free advertising instead of depriving them of the oxygen of publicity.

My prediction before the election was that the BNP would win at most one seat ...

The results are as follows:

Tory 25% (+0%)
Labour 19% (-8%)
UKIP 17% (+3%)
Lib Dems 13% (+2%)
BNP 10% (+3%)
Green 9% (+3%)
EDP 3% (+1%)

UKIP keeps 2 MEPs in East of England

UKIP has kept its two MEPs in the East of England euroregion, the Tories have kept their three. The UKIP, Tory and Lib Dim vote share remained the same whilst Labour dropped 7%.

Results update

There are still no more results in for euroregions although local results are trickling in.

The vote share in Scotland is dismal as expected. To paraphrase a certain West Midlands MP, Scotland is horribly socialist.

Cornwall looks interesting - Labour have been pushed into 6th place behind Mebyn Kernow, the Cornish nationalist party.

Yorkshire & the Humber's result is due imminently and it looks like UKIP have come second but may not have done well enough to get the second MEP which may go to the BNP.

UKIP narrowly misses out on North East seat

UKIP has narrowly missed out on a seat in the North East of England euroregion.

The results were as follows:

Labour 25%
Tory 20%
Lib Dem 18%
UKIP 15%
BNP 9%

There are only 3 seats in the North East of England so the LibLabCon get one each.

An interesting prediction is the BBC saying the Tories will top the poll in Wales and that UKIP may get the fourth seat at the expense of Plaid Cymru.

UKIP is polling joint 1st with Labour in Hull.

EU election results on Bloggers4UKIP

You can follow @Bloggers4UKIP on Twitter for up-to-the-minute news on the EU imperial elections.

Updates will appear on the blog throughout the evening.

Camoron ignores 77% of members on EU

A poll by ConservativeHome shows that 77% of Tories think Tory MPs and PPCs should be able to sign up to the Better Off Out campaign.

David Camoron has banned Tories from publicly opposing the UK's membership of the European Empire via the Better Off Out campaign. Supporters of Better Off Out are not allowed to be PPCs, MPs that sign the Better Off Out pledge face losing the Tory whip and any MP who was already a signatory before the ban was introduced is banned from sitting on the front bench.

Camoron will not tolerate open euroscepticism in the Conswervative Party, all MPs must get behind his eurofederalist ideals.

If Camoron is prepared to ignore 77% of his own membership then why should we believe that he will listen to the electorate?

Saturday 6 June 2009

EU puts Dutch government in its place

Hat-tip to Tony Sharp and EU Referendum for pointing out that the European Empire has slapped down the Dutch government for releasing exit poll and partial count information on the imperial elections ahead of Sunday's official announcement in accordance with Dutch law.

Spokesman for the imperial commission, Amadeu Altafaj Tardio, reminded the Dutch government who makes the rules:
The events that took place in the Netherlands yesterday seem not to comply with the spirit of the European elections. They're supposed to go beyond the purely national aspects. If we want citizens to understand the European nature of these elections, we think it's absolutely essential that we release the results in all countries at the same time, also in order not to influence the vote in the countries which have not voted yet – and that at the moment is 25 out of the 27 member states.
Amadeu Altafaj is absolutely right, of course, the decision by the Dutch government to comply with Dutch law and publish details of the elections doesn't comply with the spirit of the European elections, the objective of which is to undermine national identity and sovereignty. If the Dutch government had any balls they'd tell this unelected Belgian civil servant that the Dutch government makes the rules in the Netherlands but of course that isn't the case any more, the Dutch government have accepted the primacy of European law over domestic law the same as the British government have.

Local election result best ever for UKIP

Thursday's election was undoubtedly UKIP's best result in a local election in the party's history.

Despite the fact UKIP gained only 8 seats, the result needs to be looked at in the right context. The Conswervatives were always going to win the election although I don't think anyone would have predicted The Tories gaining 217 councillors, Liebour losing 250 and "others" having the same total number of councillors as Liebour.

The fact is, the Tories were always going to win the local election and they were always going to win it convincingly. The Lib Dims, in their traditional role of the "none of the above" party, were always going to mop up the left wing votes that didn't go to the Tories and they'll be quite happy, I'm sure, to have only made a net loss 8 councillors.

With only a couple of exceptions, UKIP candidates came either first, second or third in seats they contested. Taken as an average over all seats contested by the party, UKIP came a very close third overall. There are too many results to go through to work out the position as an average of all seats, whether there was a UKIP candidate or not, but there's a good possibility that UKIP came above Liebour on vote share even though Liebour contested almost every seat.

I don't expect any of the papers will report on UKIP's historic performance, they'll all be too busy writing about the success of the Conswervatives, lamenting the decimation of Liebour or navel gazing about the BNP getting 2 councillors elected. I'll be sending letters to newspapers pointing out what a fantastic result this was for UKIP, hopefully a lot more UKIPpers will too.

Friday 5 June 2009

UKIP tally up to 7

UKIP has gained 7 councillors in total from the 30 councils that have declared results from yesterday's election.

Four of the six have been elected in Staffordshire, putting them on an equal footing with the Lib Dims and above Liebour who have gone from controlling the council with 32 councillors to losing it with 3. UKIP have also won in Nottinghamshire ,Norwich and Suffolk.

UKIP gain 5 councillors

UKIP has gained 5 councillors so far with 23 of 34 councils declared.
  • Dave Woolley has taken Woolstanton ward in Newcastle-Under-Lyme.
  • Rex Parkinson-Hare has taken the Nelson and Southtown ward in Great Yarmouth.
  • Steve Povey has taken the Leek South ward in Staffordshire Moorlands.
We're still waiting for details of the other two. If anyone knows who they are, please let us know.

Almost without exception, UKIP has come in the top 3 wherever a candidate has stood.

UKIP takes seat of Tories

UKIP has won a seat in Newcastle-under-Lyme from the Tories.

The Seabridge and Wolstanton wards of Newcastle Borough Council both became vacant after the incumbent Tory councillors had to resign after one of them attended only 10% of committee meetings and the other was investigated (and subsequently found guilty) by the standards committee for abusing his position after the council wrote off thousands of pounds of business rates he owed to them.

The Tories kept the Seabridge seat but lost the Wolstanton seat to the UKIP candidate, Dave Woolley. UKIP now has 5 seats on Newcastle Borough Council.

EU protest voting spreads to Netherlands

The exit polls indicate that yesterday was a good day for UKIP with an average or better than average turnout and a lot of people voting the only sensible way they could - for UKIP.

The Dutch also went to the polls yesterday and their exit polls are showing a surprisingly strong showing for Geert Wilders' Freedom Party which stood in the EU elections for the first time yesterday. The anti-Islam, anti-immigration, marginally eurosceptic (roughly akin to the vague euroscepticism of the Tories) Freedom Party looks to have come second on the Dutch EU election, not far behind the incumbent Christian Democrats headed up by Dutch PM, Jan Peter Balkenende (or Harry Potter as he is affectionately known).

It looks like the eurosceptic protest vote (yes, there are eurosceptics in the Netherlands, they're just very quiet) all across the European Empire will be a strong one.


Dave Nixon, the Chairman of the Newcastle Under Lyme UKIP branch has reported a UKIP win in the Metropolitan Council election in the Woolstanton Ward.

The results were:
UKIP 475, Conservative 345, Labour 393, Lib Dem 285. UKIP win.

In the same area in the Seabridge Ward UKIP came second. The results were:
Conservative 602, UKIP 352, Labour 310, Lib Dem 302.

At the verification for the Euro elections in Walsall town hall it was showing a higher than normal turnout for the European elections with most wards showing around, or over, 40% turnout. The St Martins church hall polling station in the Park Farm Pheasey Ward there was a 60% turnout.

Mike Nattrass has said the signs look good in Erdington and Nikki Sinclaire also reported a high turnout in Solihull. Although the ballot papers for the European elections have been counted face down for the verification of the votes before the main vote on Sunday, from those ballot papers that have been glimpsed the signs are looking good for UKIP.

Thursday 4 June 2009

UKIP preparing legal challenge to election result

UKIP has received hundreds of phone calls complaining that they can't vote UKIP because it isn't appearing on ballot papers.

UKIP is on all ballot papers but as parties are listed in alphabetical order, UKIP appears at the bottom. The problem is that election officials are folding the ballot papers into 3 or 4, voters are unfolding the papers only once not realising that there is more to the ballot paper and being presented with a shorter list of parties to vote for.

Because of the high number of complaints, UKIP is preparing a legal challenge to the result which may lead to the election having to be re-staged.

  • The Electoral Commission have already issued guidance to all returning officers that ballot papers should be handed to voters unfolded.
  • In some areas, just the UKIP box has been tightly folded so that the ballot paper appears not to have a UKIP option.
  • Anyone who has been issued a folded ballot paper should call UKIP on 08005876587 and leave their name, address and polling station details as evidence of unfair or fraudulent activity.

Why Cameron won't answer the referendum question

Lots of people are wondering why David Camoron keeps avoiding answering the question of whether he will hold a retrospective referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The reason is simple - he doesn't want to admit that he can't.

To repeal the Lisbon Treaty, or even to just repatriate powers from the EU like the Tories say they will in their manifesto, requires the unanimous agreement of all EU member states. The only way to repeal the Lisbon Treaty after it has been ratified by all member states and comes into force is to repeal the European Communities Act and leave the European Empire.

This is why David Camoron refuses to answer the question of whether he will hold a retrospective referendum. He knows that if he holds a retrospective referendum he can't honour the inevitable no vote unless he takes the UK out of the EU and he has already said that the UK will never leave the EU under a Tory government.

As I said the other day, David Camoron is a fundamentally dishonest person. Don't waste your vote on the Tories and their false promises, vote UKIP.

Wednesday 3 June 2009

Tomorrow is UK Independence Day

Tomorrow is June the 4th, UK Independence Day.

Here are your instructions for tomorrow:
  1. Take your voting card to your local polling station
  2. Exchange your voting card for a ballot paper
  3. Find the box with UK Independence Party written next to it
  4. Put a cross in the box

If you encounter any canvassers for the LibLabCon, the Greens, Libertas, Jury Team, the English Democrats, the BNP or any of the other eurofederalist and/or racist parties, adopt the Churchill victory pose as seen on the thousands of UKIP billboards and posters up and down the country, rotate your raised hand 180 degrees and optionally utter the first string of Anglo Saxon words that spring to mind.