But I do find these election results fascinating. The fact that, with one by-election for a parliamentary seat excepted, the remainder were concerned with voting in sundry county councillors who are for the most part a complete waste of oxygen, makes the results, which have produced national reverberations, all the more interesting and several random thoughts occur, and to be honest, not all of them are mine, but then, who expects original thinking around here?!
My first thought, if such you can call it, was the joy in discovering that personality still counts in a political world in which almost all of the participants from all parties appear to have been manufactured in a factory somewhere in China! Nigel Farage, leader of UKIP, is undoubtedly a man we Brits would call 'a character'! Like all such 'characters' one meets in life, one is not sure whether, in the words of Sellers & Yateman, that is "A Good Thing" or "A Bad Thing". Only time will tell. Churchill was 'a character' and a thoroughly detested one up until he 'got lucky' and a world war came along which eventually ended with him placed firmly upon a plinth of national reverence. Of course, I don't put Mr. Farage in the same mold as Churchill but undoubtedly he has proved determined to stick to his own political course through good times and bad whilst making every effort to distinguish himself personally from the factory-produced muppets in the mainstream parties. These sorts of 'characters' arise from time to time and usually they are found out and sink back into the obscurity they deserve - one thinks of the likes of Arthur Scargill. However, there is no doubt that Mr. Farage is an exceedingly intelligent political operator which he combines with a remarkable skill in political eloquence - his speeches in the European parliament are small classics - and an equal expertise in public relations. A man to watch, not just for the politics but for the fun!
Another thought occurs and this one really is mine. I wonder if the British people, or at least, the English, have at last discovered a subversive way of exerting their pressure on the seemingly invincible political class who so resolutely ignore them? The Lib-Dems used to be a sort of "party of protest" but they were so much part of the establishment that they were ineffective, and now that they are part of government they are well and truly hog-tied to the two main parties. The Greens were, are and forever will be, a sort of religious sect which most voters would avoid like a dog-pile on a pavement. But the UKIP has, under Farage's leadership and also under the pressures emanating from Berlin-Brussels, developed from its beginnings as a single-issue party into something much wider and therefore much more interesting. It is no longer necessary to be possessed of swivelling eye-balls in order to vote UKIP - as I discovered last Thursday!
My thought that the English electorate has discovered a useful weapon with which to threaten the 'Westminsterites' is developed with much greater historical analysis by John Redwood, the title of whose blog post (worth reading!) says it all:
The Ancien regime of the EU is under pressure but not about to collapse
He points out the difficulties faced by anti-EU groups in their efforts to achieve a pan-European opposition to Brussells for the simple reason that there is still no European-wide, European government. Now there's an irony for you! Instead, opposition is limited to various national groups fighting within their own frontiers, just like UKIP. So Mr. Redwood does not expect a sudden revolution leading to the overthrow of 'Rumpey-Pumpey & Co' but what he does foresee is a sort of latter-day Reformation:
I do not think there will be a single trans EU revolution. The forces
against the EU are very split by geography, preoccupation, language and
political affiliation. One of the ironies of the situation is that because the
EU has not succeeded in making a single European demos, there is no single
political community to unite against it.
This does not mean, however, that the current EU is stable and
proof against opposition. I suspect rather the change will come as it did in the
Reformation in sixteenth century Europe. Peoples in different parts of the
Catholic empire had different reasons for disliking Catholic authority. They
adopted different means of getting out from the Catholic yoke, and did it at
different times. Although the Catholic powers at the beginning seemed to have
all the cards, they lost much of their empire in a devastating thirty years. The
Catholics started with the intellectuals, the lawcodes and the armies all on
their side. They ended by losing most of Germany, Scandinavia, the Netherlands,
and the UK . The fault lines from this can still be seen in modern EU
negotiations.
I wonder if the impact of UKIP is actually the beginings of another Reformation in British politics. As a shrewd commentator (whose name I have completely forgotten!) said on TV or radio, the tiny SDP who broke away from the Labour party in 1981 and then dissolved into the Liberal party seven years later had a huge impact on British politics. Remember, Labour then were dominated by extreme Leftists and the rupture hit them below the waterline allowing 'that woman' a more or less free run over three general elections. You could say that the SDP defection eventually brought Tony Blair to power with an electable, soft-Left, social democrat party instead of the sub-Trotskyite rabble it had been hitherto.
I am hoping that even more people will realise the effectiveness of using the UKIP to discipline the Tory party in general, and Dave and his Old Etonians in particular. This could lead next year to a huge win for UKIP in the European elections and an equally huge spanking for the Tories. It might even, with a bit of luck and a following wind, get rid of Cameron if enough of the Tory MPs see the direction the wind is blowing.
I can't for the life of me see any reason to vote Conservative in the Euro elections. Other elections, possibly, but not the Euros. Why vote for a party that's split on the only issue that matters for the Euro election?
Posted by: dearieme | Sunday, 05 May 2013 at 01:20
My hope is that UKIP will evolve into thr English Conservative Party. Committed to a new arrangement whereby we English are shot of the lot of them - Frogs, Scots, Irish and so on - oh yes - and no more American wars! Given my advanced years I'd like them to get on with it!
Sent from a nice clean German hotel in Heidelberg.
Posted by: Backofanenvelope | Sunday, 05 May 2013 at 07:41
Exactly right, DM.
I think you are becoming a tad too crotchety in your, er, mature years, BOE. Whilst I enjoy taking the odd swing at the Jocks, the Taffs and the Paddies, in reality I think we are marginally better off with each other than separate. Pretty place Heidelberg, I trust you remembered your lederhosen!
Posted by: David Duff | Sunday, 05 May 2013 at 08:12
Did you see the comments by David Davis to his party? Reasonably sensible advice, but more 'locking the stable door, after...' I suspect than they realise.
Another thing I found out, and liked, about UKIP was their lack of a party whip, so in effect you are getting someone who votes as an independent, relying completely on representing their local voters views (and their own of course), rather than the 'party first, me second, backers third and voters.. who gives a damn what they think' attitude of the 'big three'.
As for 'devolution' - I still wonder at times whether the Scots, in particular, will ever realise just how much they are being played? The campaigns waffle endlessly on about 'independence' but fail to mention the fact that those campaigning want nothing more than to sell that independence to the European state. Just more 'divide and conquer' to my mind.
Don't underestimate the feelings developing in England as a consequence either. Imagine listening to somebody 2 miles away across an imaginary border complaining about representation, costs and hardship when they have both more representation and receive subsidies (and preferential treatment) on every imaginable area of life - it's not received well here, let me tell you.
Posted by: Able | Sunday, 05 May 2013 at 09:42
Yes, I saw Davis's remarks and, as usual, he was spot on. What a pity, and what an example of 'the Stupid Party' at work, it was when they chose Cameron over him.
I am not so convinced by the political methodology (if such it can be called) of UKIP. A party needs discipline but their chances of actually forming a government being nil to minus nil the idea is wishful thinking.
Any 'federation' has inbuilt tensions. I hate to say it but I think Labour was probably right to give a certain amount of independence to the Jocks and Cameron was right to allow them a referendum. Failure to do this would have lead to mounting and possibly dangerous pressures. Now the Jocks have what (some of them) wanted and it will concentrate their minds wonderfully. If they vote to leave then I will be genuinely sorry but - so be it!
Posted by: David Duff | Sunday, 05 May 2013 at 11:57
We are going to have to endure two years of Scottish whinging.. This will seriously p**s off the English and many nasty things will be said. Better to say goodbye now.
As to UKIP having nil chance of being in government - I bet you said the same about Cleggies shower a few years ago!
Posted by: Backofanenvelope | Sunday, 05 May 2013 at 18:00
Well, BOE, when did they ever sound other than like an out-of-tune bagpipe. I can say that sort of thing because, of course, I'm half a 'bagpipe' myself! As for UKIP, what I said was that their chances of *forming* a government were minimal although there is a slight possibility, I suppose, that one day they might be part of a coalition.
Posted by: David Duff | Sunday, 05 May 2013 at 18:09
One aspect which forever seems overlooked by the independence movement is the substantial numbers of Scots resident in England. Do they have a say in any devolution? One Scots friend raised the legitimate question of, post any independence, would he have to apply for 'a right to remain' through the normal immigration channels?
All those children of unmarried parents would only get nationality from their mothers too (current policy). The mayhem would be hilarious, or would 'the English' be expected to take the same as happened with Ireland 'we're an independent sovereign nation, we hate you, but we're going to send all our drunks/drug addicts/work-shy and criminals to you to subsidise and house... oh and we want free health-care and education too).
The oft touted difficulties of withdrawing from Europe would be as nothing compared to separating Scotland - defence, oil, etc.
Wouldn't all that be fun to watch!
Posted by: Able | Sunday, 05 May 2013 at 20:47
As the child, born in London, of an unmarried, Scottish mother, I wonder how I would fare? What a hoot if some tribunal decreed that I was a proper Jock and must henceforth get me hence!
Posted by: David Duff | Sunday, 05 May 2013 at 21:36
Oh I'm sure, as a thespian, you'd be able to claim protection under The Hague Conventions (1954 probably).
If not, then certainly The Geneva - after all bagpipes are the epitome of 'cruel and unusual torture' are they not, not to mention wondering how your frail southern physique would cope with 'proper weather'.
Failing all that try claiming sanctuary with your ecclesiastical lawn-mower (do your best Richard III and show some appreciation of the local campanologists and you'll be a sure thing).
Posted by: Able | Monday, 06 May 2013 at 06:15
I'll hire you as my brief, Able!
Posted by: David Duff | Monday, 06 May 2013 at 09:32