Opinion: Time to expose UKIP

The recent expose of UKIP’s Victoria Ayling, who wants to send all immigrants “back home” offers a glimpse at the nasty side of this party which Nigel Farage would rather keep hidden.

Talk of ‘repatriating’ of immigrants sends a cold shudder up my spine as I remember the 1970s rhetoric of when that phrase applied exclusively to those from the Commonwealth.

As a European candidate in the East Midlands, the same region Ayling is from, I want voters to be informed the true face of UKIP.

For a party which many commentators speculate will reap the most votes in next May’s European elections there has been far too little scrutiny of UKIP’s long history of consorting with the Far Right.

For UKIP questions remain as to which decade or century their views on diversity are located. Analysis of the positions of UKIP and the BNP show remarkable similarities, and UKIP spokesman Christopher Monckton is quoted as urging members of the far right British Freedom Party to “come home” to UKIP.

French Far Right leader Marine le Pen has boasted of her links with UKIP and former MEP Godfrey Bloom, who was kicked out after spontaneously combusting at this years’ annual conference, has a few questions to answer over his alleged links with the Europe of Freedom and Democracy group.

These undercurrents are exacerbated by UKIP’s policies and pronouncements. At the last election UKIP produced a ‘pocket guide to immigration’ which promised an “end support for multiculturalism and promote one, common British culture.” As far as dog-whistles go this couldn’t get much louder.

Their 2005 manifesto went further advocating that all incoming immigrants should be “subject to health checks” for “communicable diseases”.

Farage has a habit of making false statements including that more immigrants came to Britain in 2010 than the previous 1,000 years, and his claim that four million Bulgarians wanted to move to Britain.

The fact Ayling remains unrepentant and that Nigel Farage has leapt to her defence speaks volumes, as does his strong links with some of Europe’s more crackpot parties.

UKIP claim they are only referring to Eastern European migrants but their rhetoric, like Ms Ayling’s, is often ambiguous and has a detrimental impact on families who have lived here as British citizens for decades.

This blurring of the line between EU and non-EU migration inadvertently envelopes Black and Asian communities and contributes to a hostile atmosphere were prejudice thrives against anyone who is not stereotypically Anglo-Saxon.

Language can have a powerful negative effect on community relations and quickly undo years of positive work. Awareness of this drove many to complain about Theresa May’s “Go Home” immigration poster.

These myths all contribute to a negative climate on immigration which impacts on the whole of multicultural Britain regardless of how established they are.

UKIP is a party attempting to harvest large swathes of the mainstream vote, yet most are unaware of their noxious views or undesirable company.

We have seen many stories about the extreme views of individual UKIP candidates but so far the higher echelons of UKIP have remained relatively immune.

Farage’s defence of Ayling should be a signal that more scrutiny is needed especially for a party seeking to portray itself as credible and electable.

* Issan Ghazni is Chair of the Ethnic Minority Liberal Democrats and former National Diversity Adviser for the Liberal Democrats. Issan blogs here

Read more by or more about , , , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

51 Comments

  • I’m no fan of Victoria but this headline is simply a lie. For one thing she was a Tory candidate at the time of her remarks, some 5 years ago. In addition, she referred to illegals and criminals, not to existing immigrants. Our policy is for an Australian points based system for new migrants. There is nothing nasty about it. Of course that’s not possible whilst we remain in the EU.
    As a UKIP activist I’m happy to talk about policy and will be more so once all the 2015 manifestos are published but unless the establishment, of which Liberals are now part, stop adopting the playground bully tactic of spreading lies, there is little point.

  • Clegg has said that the EU is ‘good for our country’. OK, he is entitled to his view. But opposing the British people having their say is bonkers.

  • SmokedKipper 27th Dec '13 - 3:58pm

    “Victoria Ayling failed to refer to “illegals and criminals” and at no point in the video released by the Mail on Sunday did she make clear she was not referring to established immigrants”

    That’s because the Mail edited it out, dummy. The full video is on YouTube. Go and watch it, then hang your head in shame for having unquestioningly believed what a newspaper told you.

  • The European Union has had an unremittingly bad press and is not popular in many quarters, but there are still large numbers who do support the Union. Since the 2014 election is on a proportional basis, I think Lib Dems would do well to put forward the positive case for the EU and working members of the EU parliament. In so far as UKIP is concerned the main focus should be on the need for constructive representation and how useless, and wasteful in terms of public resources, the Ukippers are at their job.

  • Graham Martin-Royle 27th Dec '13 - 5:13pm

    Talk of ‘repatriating’ of immigrants sends a cold shudder up my spine as I remember the 1970s rhetoric of when that phrase applied exclusively to those from the Commonwealth.

    Actually Issan, I think that that was when the phrase “New Commonwealth” started to come into vogue to differentiate those from different parts of the commonwealth. I never really did understand it, what was new about it? It was basically more racist claptrap.

  • Stephen Donnelly 27th Dec '13 - 5:14pm

    UKIP are a political party making (some) points about immigration with which liberals disagree, but it does harm to the political process to try to demonise them. It is more important to engage with, and where necessary, refute their arguments about Immigration and Europe, than it is to target certain individuals.

    @Bloggers4UKIP. Whilst I agree with you regarding false claims about crackdowns (though Liberals do not make them). immigration from within the EU is different because freedom of movement works both ways. British people can live in Spain, and set up business in Bulgaria. That is to our advantage, and ending it could put up to half a million British citizens who live in Europe under threat, and damage the Economy. British border controls have been, and still are, ineffective. Nobody know how many ‘illegal’ immigrants there are in the UK, but the number 500,000 is mentioned from time to time. That figure may include people who were born in the UK, or who have children or other dependents in the UK. No western government is ever going to deport that number of people. Are you seriously suggesting that UKIP would ?

  • “That’s because the Mail edited it out, dummy. The full video is on YouTube. Go and watch it, then hang your head in shame for having unquestioningly believed what a newspaper told you.”

    Can you substantiate that by linking to the “full video” and explaining what exactly you say the Mail has edited out?

    When she says “I just want to send the lot back but I can’t say that”, it is very difficult to believe that she doesn’t mean she wants to repatriate all immigrants, legal and otherwise.

  • Eddie Sammon 27th Dec '13 - 5:21pm

    four points:

    1. Good article, UKIP need to be scrutinised further and their views made clear.
    2. However it is wrong to go too far into the exposing to the point where one seriously violates the privacy of others.
    3. We should not get personal with most of the criticism and respect the fact that many UKIP voters are simply working class conservatives or traditionalists, lovely people (I know some personally) and live lives a lot less privileged and insecure than the politicians who criticise them.
    4. The way to win the argument against UKIP is to take a similar approach to Vince Cable – respectful, reassuring, but also firm.

    I understand those who want to take a harder line against UKIP, I am just communicating my opinion.

  • Eddie Sammon 27th Dec '13 - 5:50pm

    A lot less privileged and secure, not insecure.

  • Jayne Mansfield 27th Dec '13 - 5:58pm

    I think that Blogger4UKIP is following party tradition and over-egging the pudding. Have the Lib Dems really been relegated to the history books of British politics? I thought that they were in government whereas Ukip does not have one MP.

    Just before the last election, the BNP was ‘talked up’.They too were winning too many local council seats and district council seats for comfort. How many do they have now?

    Ukip have MEP’s , so do the BNP, but voters don’t seem to give the importance to European elections that they give to General elections. In my experience, it seems that the European s elections are a good opportunity to give mainstream politicians a ‘good kicking’. This can be done by staying at home as people did at the last European elections, thus enabling minor parties like the aforementioned BNP to gain seats, or they make a protest vote as a shot across the bows to the political party they intend to support at the GE. A sort of ‘just what do we have to do to make you listen to us’ tactic.

    As far as I am concerned, Ukip is just an anti-immigration party. They are also a party that rewrites history. It wasn’t ‘ the left’ who closed down discussion on immigration and multiculturalism, it was the Right. Enoch Powell and the political Right made it almost impossible for some of us of a non- racist, centrist, liberal sort of persuasion to say anything that might appear to give comfort or support to such an individual or party. We took a self imposed vow of silence.

    I know that I and friends still have a lingering fear about entering into discussion about what we see as some of the negative aspects of multiculturalism. We have left the field clear for the dog whistlers. We have been struck dumb because some of our beliefs accord with those who have very cleverly switched their arguments from race to culture.

    My own experience leads me to believe that it won’t be terribly helpful to bang on about the woeful sort of people that Ukip attracts. I would much prefer to see the concerns of perfectly decent people who feel uneasy at what seems to be an increasingly fragmented society addressed. In my opinion, there must be a rational policy for future immigration that meets the approval of the majority of the British population. ( not the panicky, knee jerk policies that currently pass for a future rational immigration policy). There must be discussion on the level of diversity that enriches rather than fragments society. There must be a concerted effort to break down the barriers that have been allowed to develop, leading to a hardening of social attitudes because of a fear that there is no overarching sense of communal values. That’s my wish list anyway. That an a hope that Ukip is put back in its box.

  • Jayne Mansfield 27th Dec '13 - 6:18pm

    @ Stephen Donelly,
    I think that you will find that Ukip in their statement of principles , whilst admitting that the number if illegal immigrants is unknown, then go on to state that the number is ‘ probably at least one million and possibly much higher’.

    I presume that this is the message that they are bandying around on doorsteps.

  • Eddie Sammon 27th Dec '13 - 6:21pm

    By the way, the fabled wonderful immigration system of Australia has serious problems with it and damages the economy. Many skilled workers can’t get in whilst anyone with a degree can. These are the kinds of arguments that need to be had with UKIP.

  • Good post Jayne. I think we have to accept that at the moment UKIP is picking up support from people across the political spectrum, many of whom do not necessarily even agree with their policies, such as they know them to be. As we have seen in the past on the occasions that we have been the recipient of such support, it tends to be ephemeral. The difference between us and UKIP, though, is that we have a solid core of ideology that has evolved over the course of hundreds of years, whereas UKIP has a charismatic (to some people) and dictatorial leader, and two policies – withdrawal from Europe and stopping immigration – which resonate with a sizeable proportion of the population, but which do not amount to a coherent programme of governance at any level, and which in any case a significant proportion of the Conservative Party is desperate to filch for itself. When the leadership of UKIP implodes and the party disintegrates we need to be able to welcome back those voters who have supported us in the past, and that means understanding the reasons for their unease which led to them abandoning us in the first place. I’m not sure that trying to portray UKIP as a racist party (although I have no doubt that there are racists amongst them) is very helpful in achieving this.

  • The EU elections are hardly about immigration, why should we help UKIP to make immigration a pointless focus for the campaign? It is in the interests of UKIP to talk up the issue and scare people.

    The real EU immigration problems are on more distant shores, in Italy or Malta for example and much sadder. I doubt UKIP has anything to offer to this.

    I would like to see a focus on the record of all parties in the European Parliament including on the Liberal Democrats. Which parties are getting things done? Which parties are merely posturing?

  • Not sure if I agree with the idea of “exposing UKIP”. Doing so reinforces Nigel Farage’s view that that three main parties look down on them and how they’re being targeted, etc. All of which he can turn into further support and votes for them potentially.

  • R Uduwerage-Perera 28th Dec '13 - 11:10am

    This is an excellent article by Issan in my opinion, and one that I am pleased to see is begin read by many people.

    The Guardian today reports that David Cameron is guilty of “pandering to prejudice, uncertainty and anger” as he responds to the threat posed by the UK Independence party by championing a “negative and uninspiring” form of politics, Ryan Shorthouse, the head of the Bright Blue think tank has warned (Source: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/dec/27/cameron-stop-pander-ukip-immigration)

    Unfortunately it is not only David Cameron who has historically attempted to ‘out-bigot’ Ukip in order to appear “tough on…” and bring back the less tolerant to the Tory Party. As we are only too aware even some Labour members, and I am very sad to say Liberal Democrats have attempted this as well.

    One only has to look back into 20th Century history to realise that a victory for Ukip is potentially terrifying for the country and explicitly some of us. Personally I would like to see the mainstream political parties take Ukip and their cousins the BNP head on and engage them in debates about the issues that really matter to this country as this would expose these ‘one issue’ parties of intolerance for what they are.

  • I agree with the last two posters that we are in danger of letting UKIP set the terms of reference of the European election campaign, whether this is by discussing UK immigration or the UK’s membership fo the EU (neither of which are issues over which MEPs have any control). I very much agree with Martin that we should talk about what MEPs of different parties have done in the European Parliament.

  • Michael Parsons 28th Dec '13 - 11:36am

    UKIP doesn’t have a single MP, couldn’t run a Council etc etc. Yet its policies dominate “the Parties”” discussions. What better example could you give than this thread of the futility and irrelevance of our political party system? Increasingly people despise MP’s and the political process, don’t want to run things in the way they are being run, subscribe to other organisations; and turn away from the elected Great and Good – who are thus left representing the voters’ backsides, on the whole; while claiming to rule on the strength of a minority of the electorate, sometimes even a minority of the minority who vote. A distasteful oligarchy that complains its far sighted vision is misunderstood whenever they see through it.. I am sad to say that in a situation where whichever foot you step forward with first results in pain and disaster, perhaps UKIP is a chance to stand still or jump with both feet. And perhaps when we attack that, growing numbers have no reason to care!

  • Eddie Sammon 28th Dec '13 - 1:36pm

    Ruwan, I think making personal nasty criticisms against UKIP voters should be reserved until at least the three main parties in The Commons have got the growth of the UK’s population and therefore building on green belt land under control.

    If you want to target the people who are voting for UKIP because of race then target them personally, but it’s not fair to call all their voters nasty names. You might think this helps by making UKIP toxic, but I think it just loses you support. The approach to take is Vince Cable’s, who made a very powerful contribution without getting personally nasty.

  • R Uduwerage-Perera 28th Dec '13 - 2:57pm

    Eddie and Co, as a student of history, specifically the period known as the Holocaust I remain fearful of the support that Ukip and the Far Right are gaining, but you will note that I made no comments about their members. When mainstream parties chase and support the bigotry that Ukip and the BNP espouse in order to win favour themselves, then actually they are themselves giving these political ‘outsiders’ credibility not I.

    Not all members of Far Right groups whether they be contemporary ones or those from history (in the UK or elsewhere) necessarily support ALL of the policies, and many people merely acquiesce because it is easier to do nothing and go along with something than it is to stand up for what is right. As for saying in this thread that members of Ukip or for that matter the BNP are “nasty”, well I am not sure that it was me. I even have some strange thinking ‘in-laws’ (my brothers actually) who are funders of this intolerant party.

  • The reason for Ukip’s ascendancy, is vastly misunderstood. The first paradox to grasp if you can, is that many voters who are lining up to vote UKIP, actually mistrust (even despise!) UKIP. If you can get your head around that concept you are making progress. For those willing to do a brief exit from the LibDem ‘bubble world’, and look closer, they would see that a vast majority of the public feel abandoned, and off the radar screen, of the three main parties, and indeed are isolated from the whole self serving political system. (Indeed, so said Brand, in his own characteristic way.)

    Over Christmas I have spoken to many people, and in one instance I spoke to someone who has not voted for some 20 years. He tells me he has registered to vote, simply so he can vote UKIP. So I ask you ; What kind of anger, feelings of detachment, and sheer frustration with the present system and with the three ‘deaf’ parties, that serve only themselves, would make someone do that?
    To see this as a blip, and a mere protest, would be a gross error of judgement. To understand the public mood that has elevated Ukip, you have to see Ukip, as a kind of ‘pitchfork moment’, railing against a politics that serves no-one but those self satisfied dwellers of the ‘club’, which is Westminster. I suppose in a curious way, the process is quite logical, (even Pagan?). Sometimes you have to destroy something which is redundant or infected beyond repair, in order to salvage or create something which has more utility and more suited for your needs? And the only sledgehammer we have right now is Ukip.
    The time you spend lashing out and sneering, at genuinely frustrated and concerned people and their move to Ukip, would be better spent, looking to your own party and the reasons for your diminishing relevance to the lives of ordinary people.

  • Jayne Mansfield 28th Dec '13 - 4:58pm

    @ Dave Page
    You are doubtless correct. Good luck in getting your message across.

  • Eddie Sammon 28th Dec '13 - 5:00pm

    You’ve also got to remember that it was not UKIP, but the Conservatives and the Lib Dems who wanted to bomb Syria that weekend. There are many reasons why people are voting for UKIP and it is too simplistic to say it is because of intolerance.

    UKIP wouldn’t exist in the numbers that they do today if it wasn’t for others being too submissive to the EU. This is why I’m against this party of IN stuff.

  • Little Jackie Paper 28th Dec '13 - 7:54pm

    jedibeeftrix – ‘ I can see some useful parallels with our neighbours across the channel, but it bears no relation to anything I recognise in Britain.’

    Actually, I would suggest a much more recent parallel across the Atlantic. To me UKIP bears a lot of similarities to the Tea Party in the US. The Tea Party started out as an entirely reasonable reaction to bad trends – exactly the same trends that we are seeing in the UK. Stagnant wages, lack of job security, generationally loaded housing, debt-funded education, non-competitive markets and so on. Effectively the Tea Party was something that looked not too far removed from Cameron’s striving middle class who have found that striving doesn’t actually on its own put food on the table. Now what the Tea Party has become is quite another matter, but it started off as something that was identifiably liberal and non-corporatist in outlook (though it probably would never have used those terms). Certainly the Tea Party was entirely within the Whig traditions of US liberalism.

    The reason that UKIP are being effective in this anti-EU stance, to my mind owes rather more to a perception (stress, perception) that the EU is, ‘for,’ corporate interests and not the interests of the middle/coping classes than to anything else. It is difficult to strive for better when you have to compete with three-quarters of Europe for a job. Now none of this is to say that UKIP’s policy package as a whole would pass muster – I don’t think it would. Certainly my local UKIP candidate was not especially impressive. But what has captured the imagination is a sense of something other than the corporatist orthodoxies that have prevailed in Britain across both major parties – hence they have no problem attacking the Conservatives.

    There is no meaningful sense of the term, ‘racist,’ that covers UKIP . They are what they are – a reaction to trends in society and a promotion of interests of a section of society, no more no less. Immigration is a part of that picture and people can make what value judgment on it that they wish. Whether UKIP will become as corporatist as the rest time will tell. But it is the Tea Party that is the parallel here.

  • Jayne Mansfield 28th Dec '13 - 10:50pm

    I have never quite understood how a party that claims to be Libertarian can then oppose gay marriage.

  • Michael Parsons 29th Dec '13 - 10:55am

    Little Jackie Paper
    Yes UKIP seems to me to be rooted in widespread political disillusion symbolised by its anti-EU policies, like the Tea Party or Occupy Wall Street. Parliament, with its ruling Party typically collecting the votes of only 24% of the electorate, and its Cabinets chosen from a very narrow social base, and its tiny Parties dominated by the Financial lobby makes UK arguably unconvincing as a democracy. Combine this with extremely low social mobility and the apparent financial racketeering that resists reform and avoids criminal sanctions and it is no surprise that people turn away. If you doubt this last assertiion Google RBS GRG (for “global reconstructioin group”) and look at material there from Fraser, You Tube recodings of bullying etc, and evidence suggestinbg deliberate destruction of firms by the bank’s through asset-stripping – which destoys fortunes, jobs and prosperity; and bwhich apparently now extends to attacks on the IRS even!.
    So what are the electorate to do? They can turn to UKIP (or other effective groups if these were to show up). My pipe-dream of a Democratic and Liberal party committed to radical reform in the interest of the people and commanding more than 50% of the electorate’s support remains just a dream now. So UKIP may represent the most “democratic stand” move on the political chess board? I feel the old cosy days are gone.

  • R Uduwerage-Perera 29th Dec '13 - 1:05pm

    Well the Guardian only yesterday reported that 72% of people aged 35-44 support rights of east European workers to live and work in UK http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/dec/29/bulgaria-romania-migrants-uk-poll

    What a welcome turn up for the books and a poke in the eye for the Far Right.

    Let’s hope that this more enlightened viewpoint continues in society and that our own Party continues to support this stance with more vigour, for many of the BME communities that I work may like our policies in general, but they are put off by the stance put forward by some of our ‘Leaders’ who were associated with recent draconian procedures introduced by the Home Office and UK Border Agency.

  • R Uduwerage-Perera :
    This is a link to the report, that to be honest, you should have given?
    http://www.britishfuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/J1527_BRF_RomaniaBulgaria_16.12.13_2-1.pdf
    Can you point us to the page and more importantly, the question asked to get the result that you assert.?

  • R Uduwerage-Perera 29th Dec '13 - 9:05pm

    jedibeeftrix, I try and be positive and you burst my bubble of hope!

  • R Uduwerage-Perera
    Don’t worry, you’re in good company. There are thousands walking into foodbanks, who have lost hope under this coalition government.

  • Helen Dudden 30th Dec '13 - 9:37am

    I do feel, that there is a need for some fresh air in politics.

    The “food banks” and the “bedroom tax” that solves nothing only collects funds for the Treasury.

    Being non political on the comments I make,, we are at a crossroads, and if this Government has any thoughts for the future ,they would be thinking how can we change some of the things that have been so unpopular.

    I am not a supporter of UKIP, and not a supporter of anyone, who thinks that measures taken on the above were a good idea.

    I still believe the measures to be hard and cruel to those who can least afford them, hardly a political comment, more a thought that is compassionate and caring.

  • Jayne Mansfield 30th Dec '13 - 3:45pm

    @ R Uduwerage – Perera
    I wouldn’t enter 2014 feeling too hopeless if I were you.

    I think that the way to go is the one that Dave Page advocates. I feel really sad when I see people who feel powerless parroting ‘ Ukip all the way’, The party seems to be a political repository for all their hopes and dreams . I believe that it has become so because it offers , in their minds, a degree of control over their lives that they currently do not feel.

    Whether Ukip will fulfil the expectation of the working class/ middle class voters who currently intend to support them is a moot point. I really think that one needs to look closely at Ukip’s much vaunted libertarian credentials. They have shown themselves to be remarkably illiberal in some ways. ( Gay marriage, laws prohibiting what women may wear wear etc.)

    Who in Ukip world will be thought deserving of greater liberty? How will we pay for the public services etc that free the poorer more vulnerable members of society from the enslavement of poverty and poor health? What bargaining power and employment rights will an employee have if their powerful employer? is given more liberty to do as they please?

    The likes of Farage and Bloom were tories, and one suspects that if the conditions were right they would revert to being tories , in name as well as in philosophy. I’m no politician, but f you want to expose them, I would have thought that analysis of who a Ukip government would really benefit would be the way to go.

    I wouldn’t let Ukip undermine my hope for the future. It’s a long time since the tories won an election.

  • Michael Parsons 30th Dec '13 - 4:55pm

    The “hard and cruel thing” is to allow immigration to continue unchecked so as to serve the Parties’ financial masters, letting corporations abuse the hopes of migrants, in orderto use them as a tool to drive down wages, exhaust and privatise our social welfare state, despise everthing traditional, profane everything sacred in the search for private profit and measure a person’s success only as a convenient “hand”.
    We need a deeper anal;ysis here: why are conditions such that people are willing to tear up their roots and can find no decency where they live? Why are people who live in areas rich in resources denied control over those resources? Why so much poverty amidst globally-owned riches? Polluteds rivers in pristine forests? Smashed towns and villages up-country from greedy global-center London? Villages woth houses and land too dear for villagers to buy?

  • Frank Bowles 30th Dec '13 - 8:16pm

    What if the Guardian had asked this question:

    For 44 years after the Second World War, the countries of Eastern Europe , including Poland, Bulgaria and Romania, were satellites of the Soviet Union and they had to live under a despotic and totalitarian regime that also drove their economies into ruin while the countries of Western Europe lived in peace and democracy and built rich, successful and powerful economies. Do you agree that these people , who know that being overrun by a foreign power extends beyond the arrival a few successful plumbers and builders, deserve a bit of an opportunity now?

    As we approach the centenary of the First World War, we should reflect that Europe is at last at peace; the chasm of the Iron Curtain healing and for all its faults the EU has facilitated that new Europe.

    Petty and nasty nationalism is one of the most pernicious threats to that security and growth and those who practice it, be they Tories or UKIP, should be treated with nothing but utter contempt.

  • Helen Dudden 30th Dec '13 - 10:33pm

    But you are in power with the Conservatives.

  • Michael Parsons 31st Dec '13 - 1:34am

    I really think that this thread should rise far above silly remarks such as “a poke in the eye for the far right” and at least attempt some analysis of the nature of global capitalism in its curent anti-people phase; and its manipulation of labour markets, capital movements and credit-money “fiat” creatioin in its search for higher private profits at the expense of safety and national living standards.. How can we hit the mark if we don’t know what to aim at?

  • If I were being cynical I would think twice about rejoicing in any exposure of Ukip’s nasty underbelly. A successful Ukip might prove a dirty yet productive means to a desirable end: of, say, a Tory-led government…

  • Jayne Mansfield 31st Dec '13 - 10:03am

    @ Michael Parsons
    Do you believe that globalisation is anti the British people, or people throughout the word where global corporations operate?

    It seems to me that individual governments such as our own , have little leeway when it comes to decision making. Large corporations hold us over a barrel and people will take their money and run if we make any demands on them. They seem able to blackmail us.

    Are Ukip anti -corporation and anti- globalisation and how would this work?

  • R Uduwerage-Perera 31st Dec '13 - 11:44am

    The Ukip leader Monsieur Farage appears to have modified his position regarding accepting refugees from Syria by suggesting UK should now only offer shelter to Christians fleeing violence http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/dec/30/nigel-farage-asylum-syrian-refugees-christians

    Farage states “It’s bad enough for Sunni and Shia, at least there are neighbouring countries that will take them,” but “Where on earth are the Christians going to go? Christians are now a seriously persecuted minority … they are under assault from all sides.”

    It is good to see that Farage remains totally inconsistent when it comes to his humanitarian overtures.

    Only yesterday I met some Syrian Christians that happen to live and work here in the UK and the thing that they wished to assure me of was that they were first and foremost proud Syrians and that prior to the current conflict they and their families had co-existed with the Muslim majority peacefully and even now it is only the radical elements that they have concerns about. The people with whom I was speaking (and I am not saying for one minute that they represent others opinions) were adamant that ‘taking sides’ on religious grounds will be immensely damaging for the nation as a whole.

    Back to specifically Ukip, I am pleased to see in today’s Telegraph that some of our Party Leaders are now positively speaking out against Ukip rather than trying to chase down their vote by sounding even more intolerant. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/10543276/Nick-Clegg-and-Danny-Alexander-warn-that-voting-Ukip-will-derail-economic-recovery.html

    Our Leader has stated “In May you are going to choose who represents you in the European Union,” Mr Clegg says. “Two of the parties on offer could help lead Britain out of Europe, the surest way to throw our recovery away. And the other one won’t lift a finger to help us stay in.
    “Ukip want out. The Conservatives are flirting with exit. And Labour just don’t have the courage of their convictions on this. All three would put narrow political interests ahead of the national economic interest.”

    Danny Alexander warns that Britain’s recovery could be hampered if Ukip has a strong showing in May’s European elections.
    “Weak demand from the Eurozone is still a problem, but our place in Europe is one of the reasons Britain is seen as a great place to invest,” he says.
    “A surge in anti-European sentiment in the Euro elections would send a shiver of doubt into the boardrooms of global companies that see a Britain in the EU as a gateway to the single market.”

    Hopefully our Leadership is starting t realise that taking Ukip on regarding matters where the LibDems can demonstrate not only gravitas but knowledge and experience is far better than trying to out-bigot a one issue Party such as Ukip.

    I personally this response as another “a poke in the eye for the far right” who I feel must be checked at every opportunity.

  • Michael Parsons 1st Jan '14 - 11:48am

    @Jayne Mansfield
    Well, people: here and abroad.
    We are not powerless as individuals (Assange, Snowden et al) because we could withdraw our consent. Even less as Governments – the global tyranny is seen as fragile in all media comments I suggest, for or against it. So the 2% toil to finance and control Parties, to engineer “regime change” and to create and fish in troubled waters;to bluster and break laws as the Banks do,to inflate asset bubbles in land, property and shares; and bankrupt as they are to seize ever more of our real assets to sustain the faltering cash-flow of their global ponzi scheme: by austerity without end, false statistics etc. Try Rules.org for a shot at confronting this. Try working out what “fiat money” means now we have an infinite international credit-multiplier (=unbacked expansion of paper debt-money) and what great improvements would happen if retail banking was separated from speculative banking; and those who gamble with our deposits were subject to criminal sanctions (instead of grabbing cash as they did in Cyprus, and now can here under EU and BOE regs in the coming crisis.)

  • Jayne Mansfield 2nd Jan '14 - 10:17am

    @ Michael Parsons.
    Thank you. I have taken your advice. Fortunately I found an article Fiat money for Dummies on the internet.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarRichard Underhill 17th Jul - 11:36am
    "safely to the moon and back" is the key element of President Kennedy's objective. It follows that humans should not be sent to Mars unless...
  • User AvatarPhil B 17th Jul - 10:45am
    Sue - thanks for that, I have to admit I was wondering much the same. I can stretch to the idea that a Liberal party...
  • User Avatartheakes 17th Jul - 9:54am
    I failed to get a comment published about the Cardiff by election, simply saying being a Con/Lib Dem marginal it would be interesting. Was a...
  • User AvatarDavid Raw 17th Jul - 9:47am
    @ Michael 1 "It’s the truth that UC was not implemented (or virtually not at all) under the coalition and indeed most of those that...
  • User AvatarGordon Lishman 17th Jul - 9:09am
    Paul Barker: “I don’t want to sound defeatist but”. That statement sounds a but unlikely, considering the tone of your usual contributions.
  • User AvatarRichard Underhill 17th Jul - 9:05am
    It may be necessary to win Brecon and Radnorshire twice in quick succession. Please be very nice to the local people, even if they are...