Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Tuesday, 22 January 2019

UKIP spawns a fourth love child

I'm really not keeping count, but the launch yesterday of 'My Brexit Party' by someone of whom one has never heard could have been mistaken for a fashion or lifestyle piece in the papers rather than a news item. Perhaps, I thought, this is the new equivalent of 'My Charity', much beloved of ladies of a certain age and income. Or perhaps a winter fundraiser, in a marquee at a suburban golf club, with vol-au-vents and Prosecco. Was I out of the loop? Was England frantic with leave socials? Were diaries full of leave book club nights, leave wine tastings, leave clay shooting days, leave fishing trips?

But no. This was the launch of yet another political party offshoot from UKIP. To be frank, apart from Britain First I was unaware there were so many - the others are Veterans and Badgers against Brussels and the Purple Blazers, apparently. My Brexit Party was apparently founded by a lady who was a UKIP spokesperson for something or other, and has only one political objective - to reach Brexit. She claims to have Nigel's support, but I haven't seen anything from the man himself endorsing this.

Well, I'm in no position to criticise. The Conservative party has already split into two, and like one of those comedy joke cars in two halves continues to roll down the motorway out of control but with the Leader in the driving position holding the halves togther with her legs. The Labour Party has become a Matryoshka doll, with more factions than a Scots Presbyterian church, but with the same condition - that two or more must be gathered together to make a conference group.

So why aren't we seeing more change at the centre? They can't be staying together 'for the sake of the voters' because by and large they prefer to ignore us. Perhaps they're having mediation, or sorting out who gets the CDs, the Le Creuset, the Party HQ and the members.

The Chuggers have spent years softening up the nation to take out direct debits for Panda fertility clinics, palm oil re-planting in Niger and a score of causes about which we don't give a fig, but the lady with the clipboard and the cleavage and the smile somehow persuaded us. We're ripe for signing up to £2 a month for a party membership - and the Corbyn Momentum faction have done just that.

But few I suspect will do so for Lucinda from Daventry or whoever she is solely because she's registered a party with Brexit in the name. 


r_writes esq. said...

He does indeed support Catherine Blaiklock's endeavour, however, the hope is still that the referendum will be honoured and the idea will not need to be pursued beyond registration.

The idea is to provide somewhere for decent kippers and those stupid folk who voted "leave" but normally vote for the reds or blues, and are now regarded as no more than scum.

Anonymous said...

Most of the Daily Mail's hundreds of anti-EU commenters seem to be clamouring to join Farbage's new frolic.

Jack the dog said...

R-w - as a colleague used to say, Hope is not a plan.

Fact is the establishment in the form of Grieve Hammond Robbins, Soubrey and the whole unlovely company have set themselves squarely against Brexit and will stop at nothing to prevent it.

The Brexiteers to date have been on the defensive and have not responded with a similar amount of vim and determination, mainly because while the Remainers can agglomerate around one simple idea, rather like shit particles in a soak away sewer, the brexiteers have many different ideas of what brexit actually means. As the clock runs down I seems to me a clean break will become more and more a common target and we wil gain traction.

Anonymous said...

No Jack, they have set themselves against the devastation of the country, that all the most informed and connected agree would stem from No Deal.

That is quite different.

Most MPs accept leaving the EU, but in an evolutionary, not an abrupt and catastrophic manner.

Jack the dog said...

Gents a nice comment in the Grauniad of all places:

Anon - your spouting your usual ridiculous opinions again, the verbal equivalent of a 20in sewage pipe discharging unprocessed human waste into some godforsaken river in the 3rd world.

Anonymous said...

People with decent jobs in manufacturing tend to vote Labour.

The Tory right see an opportunity in No Deal, to destroy what remains of UK manufacturing, and to blame that on the voters.

It would be the completion of what Thatcher began with mining, steel, shipbuilding etc.

Yes, it would damage Labour, and that is the prize for them.

Dave_G said...

that all the most informed and connected would agree....

....that they no more idea than others of an opposite stance.

Except.... no deal puts us back to square one, where no country with an import/export quota would refuse to make one and, in the interim, continue with the system as currently in place until such time as it is amended.

No one, not even leavers, would expect different. What's so difficult about that?

Raedwald said...

There is nothing more damning than ignorance. The threat from Brexit to manufacturing jobs is utterly inconsequential when compared to the effects of AI

But then anon rejoices in their ignorance and will not have read research such as

Anonymous said...

First class whataboutery there Raed.

So all those families might as well just give up now eh?

We know already that e.g. cars are made by AI to a large degree, and, coupled with 3-D printing etc. that rĂ´le will be extended.

But there are the countless jobs beyond the mere physical production, supported by, and irreplaceable by AI.

Again, an evolutionary restructuring of economies is needed, not Thatcher's devastating approach, but for Tory-ukip, the more destruction the better. Strife-torn communities don't organise.

Anonymous said...

Dave, your what-passes-for logic is, that because no one could prove, that running blindfold across the M25 would be 100% certain to get you killed, everyone might as well try it for a laugh.

It is the common thread running though most brexiter comments.

Mark said...

Anon. Margaret Thatcher has been dead 5 years and hasn't been PM for nearly 30.

"Tory-UKIP" have you been paying any attention at all?

Smoking Scot said...

JRM would very much like Farage to join the Tory party as well as all reasonable UKIP people.

Farage was honoured at the gesture, but very politely declined!

(IMO he does us a greater service as a loose grenade).

Mark said...

Anon, why do you equate a so called "hard" brexit with running across the M25 blindfold? Again, sophistry of the highest order. Do you imagine there has been no preparation whatsoever?

If we equated staying in the EU as going to France by jumping out of a plane with no parachute I'm sure you'd accept that as killing your arguments (for want of a better word) stone dead.

Where is the EU actually going. Maybe you could try justifying your position by considering that? This is what we specifically didn't hear during the referendum. It doesn't seem to be too healthy and the reasons for this don't have anything to do with us.

Dave_G said...

Mark makes the point for me Anon - what makes your assumption that a no deal Brexit is 100% guaranteed to cause 'catastrophe'?

Is this the kind of catastrophe as implied by the warmists i.e. something that is unprovable? computer modelled? future-based therefore 'best avoided because we don't know'? and 30+ years down the line still no evidence to support it?

It's not as if the potential catastrophe of a no deal Brexit has a consensus..... some (arguably informed and expert) people state quite the opposite. So, opinions aside, it boils down to democracy and the majority that voted, voted to leave.

Speaking personally - but, I suspect, in common with many others - I'm prepared to take the risk. I'm prepared to pay more (taxes, cost of goods etc) to leave the corrupt and communist EU before it drags the whole edifice into war.

It's a price worth paying.

Anonymous said...

"what Thatcher began with mining"

More coal mines closed under the preceding Labour government than under the Thatcher government.

The basic problem was that imported coal was cheaper and the mines were running at a loss. Should they have been subsidised by the taxpayers ? If so, by how much ?

And none of this has anything to do with Brexit, which is not a Left-Right argument but cuts across both. It is more an Authoritarian-Libertarian argument (see Political Compass). I would class the late Tony Wedgwood Benn, for instance, as a left wing libertarian.

Don Cox

Anonymous said...

Rees Mogg's invitation? Haha! Farage would have to get elected first. Maybe 8th time lucky eh?

Then there's the small matter that lying to Parliament is a crime.

The clown'd be speechless.

But oh, most of all, he'd actually have to work, instead of making paper planes, and twiddling all four of his thumbs at the EUP for £100kpa.

Budgie said...

Smoking Scot, I consider myself to be a reasonable (in both senses of the word) UKIP person. But I am definitely not going to join the Conservative party, or even vote for them again, after they allowed Theresa May to destroy the opportunities of Leave.

Mrs May's draft Withdrawal Agreement: separates N.I. from the rest of the UK (the "backstop"); does not contain an exit clause, ie prohibits international law; installs us in the EU's single customs territory; aligns us with all the EU single market rules, including "agri-food", ie the CAP; ensures the UK is subject to the CJEU; confirms the EU owns UK EEZ fishing grounds, ie the CFP; keeps us paying large annual sums; locks in the £39bn bribe; gives the EU no incentive to agree a better final trade deal; locks the UK into military, security and diplomatic subservience to the EU.

Although her dWA uses different words, and eventually different treaties, it has just the same practical effect as Remain. The anon troll says that Leave means remain, and the Tory party says remain means leave. What's the difference?

Anonymous said...

My point Dave is, that running blindfold across the M25 is NOT 100% certain to get you killed.

However, only a brexit nut would be so pathetically weak-minded as to be persuaded actually to do it.

All EU policy is based on the Precautionary Principle.

That is, unless something is proven to be safe, it is assumed to be dangerous. The fixated Leavers operate on the inverse of that. Madness, in other words.

Mark said...

Anon. What ARE you drivelling on about!?

You're not even trolling anymore. You've retreated to some sort of mental bunker. I hope it's padded.

Smoking Scot said...

@ Anon.

Were he to have accepted the invite, I have no doubt the Tory party would find a safe seat for him to win. Let's face it they had to go outside the law to defeat him in his home constituency in 2015.

He did not accept, however I stand by my statement that he's a far greater threat outside established politics.

@ Budgie

I'm with you all the way Squire. Try as I might, it is awful difficult convey deep sarcasm in a comment.

When I first read about JRM/NF yesterday my first reaction was W.. T.. F..! However JRM does admire his political stance that allowed the referendum. Moreover JRM knows perfectly well that several Tory MP'S will be deselected before the next GE, so giving ample leeway to ensure NF election.

It might suit the Tory party, but sod all in it for NF.

Anonymous said...

On a recurring theme:

Facebook has removed threatening messages posted in reaction to a paid-for advert by a pro-Brexit group.

It said the advert itself, which attacked "Remoaner globalist scumbags" and accused pro-EU MPs of "treason", did not break its community guidelines.

But the social media giant took down posts threatening violence against anti-Brexit politicians.

Raedwald said...

As a Tory member who admires Nigel hugely, I think he would find our party a patrician-run prison at the moment. Hague killed constituency associations with his new constitution - it's now a party funded by globalists and run by their CCHQ patrician dags.

So why am I a member? I think a reformed party can do great good. I and those like me would like to return this hijacked party to its members. But it may take a while. So it's actually best for everyone for Nigel to retain his independence for now - that way, he can piss into our Tory tent.

r_writes esq. said...

anon at 11:54

"All EU policy is based on the Precautionary Principle.

That is, unless something is proven to be safe, it is assumed to be dangerous. The fixated Leavers operate on the inverse of that. Madness, in other words."

Nearly right...

But it is called the "dictatorship" principle rather than the precautionary. Its Latin name is Corpus Juris and it means that everything is illegal unless your betters and excellencies decree otherwise. Us fixated leavers would rather have it the other way round.

Anonymous said...

Yes, r-w.

When people are dancing around a totem pole, beating their chests, it matters not, whether what they are chanting makes a grain of sense.

All that counts is, that it is the same as the rest of the mesmerised gathering are mouthing.

Dave_G said...

Anon "that it is the same as the rest of the mesmerised (remoaner) gathering are mouthing. "

(my bold)

That's called being 'hoisted with your own petard'.

Wessexboy said...

Anon, it appears you are free to 'beat your chest' on this site. Very entertaining at times. Some of us not so mesmerised by the need to be told what is safe by their 'superiors'.

Mark said...

Anon, interesting choice of analogy.

The Pole you're dancing around is Tusk. You seem to be the only one here who doesn't have the wit to realise it.

Even your subconscious is against you!

Anonymous said...

One of you - I can't remember which - said that the moment anyone started to tell him what he could or couldn't do was the point at which he realised that that person was a lefty. I paraphrase, but closely.

So if that person told him that he could not make his wife wear a burkha then I can only assume that that would make them a lefty too. You might want to think about that eh?

It was though, Hollande's socialists who brought in such a rule in France, wasn't it? I'm not sure of the political complexion of Belgium and Denmark just now, nor of the relevant regions of Italy, however.

Tusk does no more than to convey the consensus of the European Council, incidentally.

DeeDee99 said...

If The Brexit Party, led by Mr Farage, puts forward a candidate in West Dorset, I'll be voting for him/her. I can't support Batten's UKIP, and hell will freeze over before I vote for the treacherous LibCon Oliver Letwin.