UKIP enter coalition with Tories to take control of Plymouth City Council

UKIP's Plymouth councillors have agreed to form a coalition with the Conservative group to take the council off Labour.

After this month's elections the Conservatives and Labour were left with 27 councillors each with UKIP's three councillors holding the balance of power.

The UKIP group approached both the Labour and Conservative groups to negotiate a coalition with an agreement to abolish the cabinet system and reinstate the committee system so that all councillors are able to take part in the decision making process as a prerequisite. Labour refused to give up any power whilst the Conservatives grudgingly agreed to reinstate the committee system.

The outgoing Labour leader, Cllr Tudor Evans, is unimpressed at losing his £41,470 a year job and described the UKIP-Conservative coalition as "a grubby back room deal". He said that Labour won the popular vote even though more people voted for someone else than they did for Labour and that it is "not the will of the public that Labour should not continue to lead the council". He believes that the council being run by a coalition of 30 councillors is less representative than the council being run by Labour's 27 councillors on their own.

You can read the joint UKIP-Conservative manifesto for Plymouth here.

Farage rules out coalition with LibLabCon parties

Nigel Farage has ruled out entering into a coalition with Labour, the Lib Dems or the Conservatives in May.

For some time now Farage has been playing games with Labour and the Tories, hinting that he could do a deal with one or the other and sparking constant media speculation about possible coalition partners. A coalition was never on the cards. Nick Clegg might have the political nouse of a 12 year old but Farage isn't stupid. Why would the man who has invested so much personally and professionally to take UKIP from being a single issue Tory pressure group to be the third party in British politics with representation at all levels of government and in all four member states of the UK and going on to become the first party since 1906 to beat the Tories and the Labour Party in a national election throw it all away for a brief encounter with the illusion of power that is the British government within the EU?

The membership has made its views on coalition very clear. There is to be nothing more than a confidence and supply agreement which would see UKIP support the formation of a minority government if the Tories or Labour get the most MPs again but not support their legislative programme unless it's something UKIP MPs supported.

If the Tories or Labour have to fight for every victory then that's their problem.

Coalition with Labour? Not a chance!

There has been some disquiet amongst UKIP supporters today following Nigel Farage's comments in the press about the possibility of UKIP forming a coalition with Labour after the next election.

Farage didn't actually say that UKIP was open to forming a coalition with Labour or anybody following the election in 2015 but the papers ran with the story anyway.  What he said was that following the election, "UKIP may well be needed in a coalition" and said that there is no way he could work with David Cameron.

The views of the membership on a coalition have been made pretty clear over the past year or so as the prospect of UKIP gaining representation in the House of Commons has come tantalisingly close.  The Lib Dems have shown what happens when you abandon your principals for a sniff at power and there is no desire amongst the membership or the leadership of the party to do the same.  UKIP MPs may support a minority government in exchange for some key concessions but a coalition would be political suicide.

Peter Mandelson, who isn't allowed to criticise the EU otherwise he'll lose his very generous pension, said:

Beginning 2013 by placing this large and indefinite question mark over our membership of the EU, and all the trade and investment privileges it brings us, can only be described as economically insane

With people like the disgraced communist Peter Mandelson - and there are many, many disgraceful communists in the Labour Party - they are no more likely to hold an in/out referendum on membership of the EU than the Tories are and any mention of electoral deals in exchange for one is just Farage spreading dissent in their ranks.

Hague must now give us a referendum on Eurozone Lisbon Treaty changes.

We may not be in the Eurozone but it clearly governs our actions.

Officially the bailouts that have been happening within the EU/Eurozone are illegal under the relevant treaties. But as there seems to be no court to enforce these treaties, this fact has been ignored.

However, to now regularise these bailouts, the treaties/laws are to be amended to retrospectively legalise the bailouts.

Prior to the last election and subsequently, after the establishment of the coalition government, David Cameron and his Conservatives have promised the people of the UK that there will be referenda on any future changes to our relationship with the EU that may impact UK sovereignty.

Putting these two issues together, a significant treaty change and the promise of referenda one might have expected a referendum on the proposed changes to the Lisbon Treaty. However, if this is what you expected then you would be disappointed as William Hague has said that there will be no referendum on this matter.

The Conservative governments argument against holding the promised referendum is that the change only affects Eurozone countries, of which the UK is not one, so the change makes no difference to the UK.

However following the initial £7 billion bailout of the Euro/EU/Ireland  it is clear that Eurozone issues are essential to the UK's national interest. Especially as conservative/coalition chancellor George Osborne has refused to rule out possible future bailouts of other Eurozone countries - Portugal, Greece and Italy.

There can now be no argument against having UK referenda on any treaty changes within the EU - even if only Eurozone countries are being targeted. While we are in the EU, then regarding the Euro and Eurozone  'we are all in this together'.

We may not be in the Eurozone but it clearly governs our actions - so where is our referendum?

AV: A chance for small parties and independents to enter the fray

Conhome seems to think that an AV referendum is a waste of money.


What price democracy?

I can see why the 'main' parties would be against AV and making the case against a 'costly' referendum on it.

But AV was part of the coalition agreement and unless you want to see the coalition fall apart, this referendum is vital.

From a disaffected conservative's POV (mine), AV would be terrific.

I realise that we would have endless coalition wrangles into the future, but it would allow the sweet breath of fresh air of new entrants into Parliament.

One of the main reasons that UKIP got nowhere in the GE was because everyone was just too desperate to get Brown out.

Surely, that stands democracy on its head? How can it be right that your only viable course of action is to vote for a party in which you have no overall confidence?

Before people jump on my case, I am pleased with a number of coalition deeds since the GE. Very encouraging.

However, I am bitterly opposed to its EU policy and people like me (the majority) had absolutely no choice in this respect in the GE.

So yes - bring on a referendum for AV and bring on AV!


I realise that this post will meet with opposition, but hey, if you disagree, discuss!


Cross-posted