Congratulations to the Ulster Conservatives and Unionists on winning the third European Parliament seat in the province. They came a close third after Sinn Fein and the DUP.
It’s great to see that Ulster is starting out on the road back into the mainstream of British politics. There are lots of Johnstons in Belfast and environs, quite a few of whom have complained in the past that they were unable to affect the government of their country by their votes. Now I hope they will be able to!
Philip Johnston (no relation, to my knowledge) in this morning’s Telegraph claims that the Euro election results were people saying ‘a plague on both your houses’ to the Tories and Labour. It might be worth pointing out to users of this tired Shakespearianism that the same electors at the same time, voted the Conservatives overwhelmingly into control of just about all of the shire counties. This is perhaps a better guide to the likely outcome of a General Election than the Euro-result which uses the List system.
Being a learned Telegraph man, I would have expected him to point out how electoral systems have effects on voter behaviour and how a national list system distorts the political system in favour of minor, fringe or extremist parties.
To fight the Euros, a party can establish itself as nationally significant by getting a mere 70-odd candidates from an electorate of 40 million plus. No big deal – especially when the List System means that it doesn’t matter if no-one has ever heard of any of them before. They get a free post so they can get their leaflets into every house or flat without having to go to the immense trouble of setting up and maintaining a large volunteer base to deliver them or establish a publicly visible candidate selection process. Their absence on the ground during the election locally was a good indication of their real level of support.
In some instances the press and TV give them loads of free publicity. Ukip is a case in point, very much so. The Telegraph and the broadcast media were strangely silent about the antics of many of the ‘Ukip 12′ of 2004 while saturating the papers and airwaves for three weeks non-stop – with the biggest headlines I have ever seen the Telegraph use – about (mainly) Labour and Tory MPs’ expenses. Mr. J is rather coy about that this morning too.
Well, I hope Mr. J and his friends are satisfied with the outcome. I have no doubt that his owners are. I write as a loyal Telegraph reader since 1961. Their expenses campaign, timed and drawn out as it was, has done a wonderful resurrection job on Ukip and paved the path to Brussels of Mr. Griffin and his chum in Yorkshire. As Nigel Farage asked last night,’who could have believed this could happen even five weeks ago?’ Who indeed!
This could have been called ‘Voice of despair MkII’. On the eve of poll the Lib Dems locally are trying to latch on to the Gurkhas story, claiming to have started a campaign ‘years ago’ while Nick Clegg first asked a question about it ‘last year’. Nothing at all to do with European elections but Baroness Ludford (whose title is kept very much under wraps, by the way!) is quoted as having agreed with Ed Davey about Europe’s environment laws.
This leaflet is one of the most cynical ploys I have seen from this source in quite a time. It asks readers to sign a petition for ‘a fair deal for Gurkhas’ (in large letters) – having just celebrated forcing the Government to give them one! What it really wants is the details of your name, address, email address, mobile number and landline number so that Lib Dem activists can pester you in future – it even says so in very small print, thus skirting round the Data Protection Act. None of this information is relevant to this bogus petition. My advice is not to sign it at all, but if you do, confine yourself to name and address only and state that you do not wish to be included on any database held by the Lib Dems for any purpose.
It also invites you to join the Lib Dms or make a donation. It is fair enough to invite people to join or donate to a political party. We do it all the time – but to do it under cover of helping a justly admired group of soldiers strikes me as beneath contempt.
There’s a long editorial this morning, advising readers that ‘a vote for Ukip is a wasted vote’. I think I’ve made it fairly clear that I agree with that sentiment and the Editor’s stated reasons for holding it. Some people might think it a bit odd, though, when it has often seemed throughout 23 days of ‘Expenses-gate’ (sic!! – ugh!!!), that this was precisely what the dear old Telegraph wanted people to do. Maybe there’s a fear that people might vote for the BNP instead, and the warning against that is given both by the Editor and by my favourite Anglican Bishop, Michael Nazir-Ali.
It is right that angry people shouldn’t take out their wrath on innocent people like local government and MEP candidates who are blameless – and Cameron prefaced his actions on expenses in Westminster with dealing pretty harshly with troughing Euro-Tories. And no I’m not up for re-election this year, so it’s not a plea to vote for me!
Simon Heffer, however, doesn’t seem to agree with his editor. He launches an intemperate attack on Cameron for starters. Then for main course he repeats his threat to stand against Sir Alan Haselhurst at the GE unless he apologises in terms sufficient to gratify SH’s righteous indignation. Sir A must be shivering in his boots at that one. I rather hope Heffer decides to have a go, finding his own deposit and paying for sufficient leaflets to tell the voters of Saffron Walden what they’ve been missing in not having him as MP all these years. The leaflet might, perhaps, include details of all Mr. Heffer’s earnings for the last five years and copies of the relevant expenses claims and tax returns. Having been a Telegraph purchaser throughout this period (and much more) I and countless others like me have, after all, contributed daily to his support.
For dessert SH tells us, regardless of the Editor’s sage advice, he is voting for Ukip since, for all it’s had a few problems* in the last 5 years (I’ll say! – master of understatement as ever!!) its problems pale into insignificance beside those of the main stream parties. And to think I used to regard him as quite bright, really. Ah well………
For some reason this logo has made my Firefox crash four times! However, here goes with the literature from the Labour Party.
The front cover of the glossy leaflet shows a hardworking, casually dressed, four person heterosexual family. The photo surmounts a blurb about ‘Labour’s massive cash injection onto the NHS’ and tells the family that no Londoner now has to wait more than 18 weeks for an operation (i.e. 4.5 months), which sounds much shorter than the stated Tory figure of 12 years ago of 6 months. Interesting but nothing about Europe here. Let’s just bash the Tories.
The second page starts well(ish) with a photo of the Labour Euro-candidates, but a visit to Specsavers is needed to read the names. Europe is stated as being necessary to help London get through this ‘downturn’ – nicer word than Recession and obviously an ‘Act of God’ since there’s no indication that Labour might have had a hand in causing it. This fleeting reference to Europe is followed by a resume of public spending proposals which will employ 400,000 people over the next 8 years and keep lots more of them at school. A smiling photo of G Brown follows, with his sound bite about growing (by which he means ’spending’) our way out of recession – which contrasts nicely with what he affected to believe 12 years ago.
Half the next page is given over to photos of the backs of two female police officers and the fronts of two men in hard hats looking at a drawing. Labour is stated as making the EU work for ‘all Londoners’ – protecting consumers, from expensive, shoddy goods, poor environmental standards and cross border crime. Since when did we need the EU to do that? We’ve had consumer protection since the Middle Ages, locally organised (market charters, Courts of Piepowder etc.) and we’ve had extradition and Interpol and the Customs and Excise long before the EU. They repeat the Lib Dem smear that Tory opposition to European arrest warrants etc. is effectively support for weapons trafficking. A diatribe headed ‘Fair Rules for All’ goes slightly biblical ‘Unlike the Tories we won’t walk by on the other side and do nothing.’ I find sanctimonious twaddle of this kind not so much offensive as contemptible.
Equally contemptible is the allegation that David Cameron wants ‘tax cuts for millionaires’. This is knee jerk Brown. Labour ought to know, but I now think that Brown probably doesn’t, that public spending can’t run on in the way he has let it since 2000 and let it again in the recent Budget or the country will be bankrupt very soon. The British Government will have to address this as a matter of urgency soon – preferably before next Thursday.
The leaflet rounds off by attacking the Lib Dems on crime as being ’soft’ on it. It takes one to know another!
Believe it or not I am disappointed. I’m one of those old-fashioned types who believes that there’s much more to life than party politics and who likes to be able to respect my political opponents for their sincerity, even if I think they’re just plain wrong at times. Labour can do much better than this – but not with its present leadership. A good long stretch in opposition ought to do the trick!
The Conservative literature arrived only yesterday, some five days after my postal ballot paper. This was disappointing and might have cost the party some votes as many postal voters will have returned their papers already, without having read much from the Tories. This is a shame because, as a presentation, it’s the best and most relevant I have seen so far. But then I would say that, wouldn’t I? Well, actually, no I wouldn’t!
There are two pieces of literature, a letter from David Cameron (DC) and a glossy leaflet also heavily featuring DC but also all 8 Conservative list members.
The letter from DC is a very meaty read, quite long and in small type. It deals with the expenses scandal and what DC is doing about it. This is not a European issue but the daily drip from the Telegraph, destined apparently to continue until polling day or just beyond interestingly enough, means that, in this election, it is likely to be actually THE issue. It does address European issues in far less frenetic terms than the other parties have done and without introducing extraneous or misleading statements about ‘two horse races’ or whatever. It repeats the pledge about a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and it calls for an immediate General Election for Westminster. This would be the text of a really good DC speech. My concern would be that people might not read it or have difficulty in doing so.
Both letter and leaflet are free of WW2 imagery. The front cover of the leaflet shows DC at a lectern with Union flag and ‘Vote for Change’ slogan behind him. Inside on the first page is a montage of anti-Labour headlines from the press and a poster showing Brown facing both ways on the Referendum issue.
The middle page entirely addresses European issues relating to the Budget, jobs, climate change, defence, the Courts, MEPs’ expenses (when is the Telegraph going to get around to that, I wonder, especially on UKIP? – but I digress). It compares votes on each issue by Conservative, Labour and Lib Dem MEPs, making the Tories the only party so far to do so.
The third inside page is devoted to London, showing pictures of candidates (unnamed) campaigning, probably in last year’s GLA and Mayoral elections. Below is a group photo of all the candidates, with names attached, with Boris Johnson. Numbers indicate their position on the list, headed by the two sitting MEPs, Charles Tannock and local resident Syed Kamall. No. 6 is Graham Postles, a man I have liked and respected since we were both candidates in the West Midlands in 1987. He’d make a very good MEP, but the list system and the antics of some MPs over expenses have made that highly unlikely – this time anyway.
There’s a further letter from DC and a page of candidates campaigning: Syed Kamall in Kingston market next to a piece about pounds and ounces; J P Floru with Zac Goldsmith talking to a shopkeeper alongside a piece about business; Dr. Ian Twigg with NHS staff (one presumes) and an ambulance next to a piece about the working time directive and the NHS; lastly Charles Tannock, Syed and Marina with DC and Boris, getting ‘the best deal for London’.
In all this is a serious piece of work which addresses the European election as an event in its own right and doesn’t try to present it as a referendum on membership (UKIP and the BNP) or a platform for the candidate for the next Westminster election (the Lib Dems). It names all the candidates (unlike the Lib Dems and UKIP who only name one each!) takes the voters seriously and deserves to be taken seriously by them in its turn.
Surbiton Hill Councillors News from the Daily Telegraph
