Archive for UKIP

Vote UKIP on Thursday

The EU elections are a little over a day away and they promise to be the biggest defeat of the establishment parties in a national election ever experienced in the UK.

Labour’s vote has held up remarkably well all things considered but it’s not going to be enough to win the election. The Conservative vote has nosedived and the Lib Dem vote has collapsed to the extent that they’re level pegging with the loony Greens and probably going to lose all their MEPs.

Despite the media campaign against UKIP and the trade union funded hate groups attacking (physically in some cases) the party and its candidates, UKIP is on course to win the EU election and become the largest UK party in the EU Parliament. There has been a conspiracy of silence in the media where the wrongdoings of LibLabCon councillors and candidates have been ignored whilst turning over front pages to stories like a UKIP MEP candidate giving the finger to fascist anti-democracy thugs screaming abuse at her. I won’t list the stories of thieving, cheating, lying, bail jumping criminal LibLabCon councillors and candidates in the last month that the national media have ignored but if you want to see what the media don’t want you to see then browse through the last few weeks’ worth of posts on Bloggers4UKIP for all the sordid details.

When it comes to voting it wouldn’t matter if UKIP won every seat in the UK and sent 73 MEPs to the EU Parliament because our national interest will always be overruled by the europhiles that make up the majority but it is still important to return the maximum number of UKIP MEPs for two very good reasons: every UKIP MEP elected means one less europhile MEP and the more UKIP MEPs we have, the more eurosceptic MEPs we will have on committees which is where most of the damage limitation happens.

Beware of cheap imitations on Thursday, look for the £ sign!

FCO: no EU Treaty was drafted at the European Council in December

FOIThree weeks ago we submitted a Freedom of Information Request for a copy of the EU treaty that David Cameron was supposed to have vetoed.

The Foreign & Commonwealth Office have responded today with the following:

Dear Mr Parr,

Thank-you for your email. I apologise for the short delay in getting back to you.

We are not treating your email as an FOI request as no EU Treaty was drafted at the European Council in December. So I have passed your email asking about the Prime Minister’s rejection of a new EU Treaty and a financial transaction tax to my colleagues in our Europe Directorate for a response. They will be in touch shortly.

No treaty?  That’s interesting because according to the Conservative Party website on the 9th of December …

Prime Minister David Cameron has today spoken of his decision to veto a new European treaty following a round of discussions with European leaders in Brussels.

The Conservatives misleading the public?  Surely not.If you read the FOI request that we submitted, the first question asks for a copy of the treaty that Cameron vetoed and “If no draft treaty exists, please provide a précis of the intended purpose and contents of the proposed treaty”.  So no thanks, a statement from the EU Directorate isn’t really good enough.

Dear Mr Leinster,

Thank you for your reply.  In the first question in my request I said “If no draft treaty exists, please provide a précis of the intended purpose and contents of the proposed treaty”.  As no treaty exists but the proposed contents of said treaty were “vetoed” this information must surely exist and as such I should be entitled to it under the FOIA, notwithstanding the usual restrictions around national security/interest.

Bloggers4UKIP: No, we do not need a British Bill of Rights

I don’t find myself disagreeing with Nigel Farage very often when it comes to the EU and constitutional affairs but on the subject of the EU Commission on a Bill of Rights I completely disagree with him.

UKIP’s has made a submission to this commission slating the EU Convention on Human rights which was turned into the Human Rights Act in the UK and calling for a British Bill of Rights. Throughout the submission there is a conflation of English and British which demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the constitutional laws in force in the UK which is common to all political parties and the media.

The submission is spot on in its criticism of the EU Human Rights Act which isn’t about human rights, it’s about imposing a liberal left wing ideology on the population. Human rights to any right thinking person are things like the right to life, the right to liberty, the right freedom of speech and assembly, the right not to have your possessions and money stolen on a whim and of course the most important right of all, the right to rebel. Getting married isn’t a human right, nor is the enforced religious indoctrination of children or middle aged women moving in their 18 year old Turkish husbands.

Magna Carta Memorial, Runnymede

Magna Carta Memorial, Runnymede

However, the answer is not to create a new British Bill of Rights. We have an English Bill of Rights which, in conjunction with Magna Carta, the Habeas Corpus Act, the Petition of Right and the (English) Common Law, provide us with all the basic human rights we need. The problem isn’t that we don’t have enough rights, it’s with the lack of enforcement of these rights by the judiciary and the attempted usurpation of our constitution by EU laws.

Take for instance the multi-billion pound industry around the issuing and enforcement of illegal fines, fixed penalties, penalty charges or whatever new name the crooks that issue them come up with. The Bill of Rights, which is still in force, says “any promise of fine or forfeiture before conviction is illegal and void”. Having the numberplate of your car snapped by a camera does not amount to a conviction, nor does a police officer handing you a piece of paper at the roadside. You can refuse to pay and opt for a court hearing but that comes with a further penalty in disqualifying you from the reduced fee you are offered for not challenging the illegal fine and of course the promise of a fine has already been made before your court hearing and inevitable conviction which is unconstitutional and therefore illegal.

It matters not that laws have been passed since the Bill of Rights attempting to legitimise the extortion by summary justice, Lord Justice Laws established in the 2002 case of Sunderland -v- Thoburn (aka “Metric Martyrs”) that constitutional laws could not be repealed by implication and no government has yet been stupid enough to try and repeal the English constitution. Yet here UKIP is suggesting just that!

It is worth pointing out at this point that what is incorrectly referred to as the British constitution is, in fact, the English constitution, “Free Born Britons” is a mis-quoting of the term “Free Born Englishmen” that originated from the Leveller movement and the Common Law is English, not British. The English constitution also applies to Wales because Welsh law was abolished by Henry VIII and replaced with English law. Magna Carta, the Habeas Corpus Act, the Petition of Right and the Bill of Rights are English laws and don’t apply to Scotland or Northern Ireland (with one exception).

The Criminal Procedure Act brought similar rights to Habeas Corpus and Magna Carta to Scotland in 1701 but neither of the English statutes were ever applied to Scotland or Ireland. The Petition of Right applies to Northern Ireland by virtue of its application in pre-1937 Ireland but not to Scotland and there is no equivalent in Scottish law. The Bill of Rights similarly doesn’t apply to Scotland where the Claim of Right, passed by the pre-union Scottish Parliament, provides roughly equivalent rights to those contained in the English Bill of Rights. Furthermore, in the case of Sunderland -v- Thoburn, Lord Justice Laws included the Scotland Act and the Government of Wales Act in the list of constitutional laws thus establishing the principle that Wales has a distinct constitution from England..

In order to establish an all-encompassing British Bill of Rights common to all four home nations, each of the four constitutions of the four home nations would have to be brought into line with each other or abolished and replaced with this British Bill of Rights. Since putting the Scotland Act into effect in English law or the Northern Ireland Constitution Act into effect in Scottish law would be a complete nonsense, the only alternative would be to replace the existing four constitutions with a new one. So, to establish a British Bill of Rights would require the full or partial repeal of the following:

  • Magna Carta
  • Bill of Rights
  • Habeas Corpus Act
  • Petition of Right
  • Claim of Right
  • Criminal Procedure Act
  • Scotland Act
  • Government of Wales Act
  • Northern Ireland Constitution Act
  • Northern Ireland Act

I find the prospect of British politicians who have introduced such legislative abominations as the abolition of trial by jury, the EU arrest warrant, internment and arbitrary house arrest amending and repealing our centuries-old constitutions and drafting a new Bill of Rights quite disturbing and I would hope that 99% of the population would be equally concerned at the prospect. Magna Carta and Habeas Corpus have stood the test of time so effectively that they are in force in England, Wales, Australia, New Zealand, the USA, South Africa, Singapore, Canada and other countries around the world. If a new British Bill of Rights would give us the same rights that we already have then why do we need it? If it would give us extra rights whilst protecting the rights we already have then pass a new law giving us the extra rights and leave our existing constitutions intact.

There is no need to replace our constitutions with a British Bill of Rights because we have all the rights we need. What we need is an end to the EU usurpation of our laws and for judges in the UK to be forced to uphold our existing constitutions. If it is deemed necessary to grant the Scots and Northern Irish the same constitutional rights the English and Welsh have then pass a new law giving them to them.

Assuming the foregoing was ignored and the British government ploughed on with a British Bill of Rights, there is the fundamental problem of repealing or amending any of our shared constitutional laws in that every nation using these statutes has to agree to the change. The Magna Carta on the statute books in the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc isn’t a copy of Magna Carta, it is the same Magna Carta as the one in force in England: there is only one Magna Carta. Would every country using Magna Carta be happy to carry out the same act of constitutional vandalism so the British government can create a British Bill of Rights?

There is a tendency amongst the political classes to believe that making major constitutional change is simply a matter of political will but it’s not. Contrary to popular belief, the British Parliament is not an all-powerful supreme law-making body. It can’t change constitutional laws that we share with other countries, nor can it ignore centuries of judgements and precedent made by judges. Creating a British of Rights would involve massive constitutional upheaval and the consent and co-operation of several other countries around the world and in all likelihood would end up depriving us of rights rather than protecting and extending what we already have, not to mention setting a dangerous precedent that our constitutions can be changed on a whim.

UKIP’s submission is wrong in both substance and concept and I hope it has been conceived out of innocent, rather than willful ignorance. It certainly shouldn’t make it into the next manifesto.

Letters in the Shropshire Star

Here are some letters I’ve had printed in the Shropshire Star recently (italics are bits they edited out before printing) …

English are not to blame for turbines

For the last few weeks there have been a couple of letters a week complaining about the proposed new wind turbines to be erected in Wales “for the English”. The suggestion is that windmills shouldn’t be built in Wales for the benefit of “the English” and that “the English” shouldn’t have any input in planning decisions concerning them.

Not long ago, we had public consultations on the proposed reconfiguring of services at the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital and Princess Royal Hospital. Of the seven consultations held, three were in Wales and the Shropshire Star letters page was full of letters from “the Welsh” complaining about how the proposed changes would be to their detriment.

Talk about double standards. I agree that wind turbines are a blight on the landscape and certainly wouldn’t want them in my back yard. It’s a shame so many of them blight the Welsh landscape as well but if “the Welsh” want someone to blame, it’s not “the English”, it’s their own government.

The Welsh Assembly is committed to onshore wind farms and it is the Welsh Assembly that makes strategic planning decisions in Wales. It’s not “the English” they should be complaining to, it’s “the Welsh”.

Wind turbines are the most inefficient and expensive form of renewable electricity, requiring vast amounts of taxpayers money to make them financially viable for the operators. Windmills are so expensive and ineffectual that operators can’t make back the cost of building and running them before they reach the end of their life.

We should all oppose the construction of windmills not for their unsightliness or because they’re being built to power another country but because they are a gross waste of taxpayers money and the justification for building them – global warming – is nothing more than a scam. Even NASA is predicting a period of global cooling because of a decline in sunspot activity (something the “scientists” who make millions from the global warming scam claim has no significant impact on the climate).

Councillor Stuart Parr

We must not deny the right to protest

I read with disbelief that Councillor Mike Ion is calling for the Home Secretary to ban a proposed march by the English Defence League in Wellington on the day of AFC Telford United’s first match of the season.

Here is a man who apparently cares so deeply about democracy that he went to the effort and expense of standing for election to the council but then starts a campaign to deny EDL members their right to peaceful protest – one of the cornerstones of modern democracy!

The 19th century author, Evelyn Hall, wrote “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”. We may not agree with the EDL but that is not an excuse to deny them their rights.

Mike Ion and the other Labour councillors that are supporting his fascist campaign should hang their heads in shame. I believe in free speech and democracy and that sometimes means having to hear and accept things that you don’t agree with. Banning people from expressing contrary views is something you associate with repressive regimes in places like China or Burma, not England.

The EDL should be allowed to hold a peaceful protest in Wellington and if Unite Against Fascism wish to hold a peaceful counter-protest then of course they should be free to do the same. Personally, I despise the UAF thugs that drag these protest marches into violence but I certainly wouldn’t want them to be banned from protesting.

If Councillor Ion is successful in banning the EDL from marching in Telford not because of a risk of serious public disorder but because he disagrees with them, this will set a dangerous precedent. Who would be next? Would I be banned from criticising the EU because my views are contrary to those of the LibLabCon?

I would urge anyone who opposes the EDL to simply ignore them on the day rather than support an undemocratic, unconstitutional ban on their right to peaceful protest.

Councillor Stuart Parr

Dismayed by figures on child poverty

Like Councillor Davies (21/06), I am dismayed by the child poverty figures produced by the “End Child Poverty” campaign.

In my ward (Brookside) the figures show that 38% of children are living in poverty.

I disagree to some extent with the methodology the group uses. Poverty is defined by the group as a household income of 60% less than UK middle income of almost £26,000 but an average middle income in Telford is around £19,000.  Rent/mortgage payments are taken off household income even though most households with an income of just £10,000 would receive housing benefit.  The figures are also “adjusted” in an unspecified way as the only available data is 3 years old.

That doesn’t mean the figures don’t have any value – they may not be an accurate measure of poverty in Telford & Wrekin but they are a useful indicator of relative poverty in the borough and the fact that Brookside is in the top 5 most deprived wards in Telford & Wrekin only makes the borough council’s refusal to press ahead with much-needed generation on our estate all the more indefinsible.

The best way to tackle poverty is not with handouts but with jobs and support.  Brookside desperately needs some serious investment to create jobs and provide support to people who want to get off benefits and start working.

With the latest announcement of funding from the borough council, Woodside will have had £70m spent on regeneration whilst Brookside has had nothing – in fact, £2m of the £4m set aside for regeneration for Brookside was pillaged by the previous administration to pay for regeneration in Sutton Hill!

The owners of the businesses in the Brookside local centre have done their best to make the precinct more appealing to residents but with an open-ended promise of regeneration they aren’t going to make any serious investment when the whole thing could be knocked down within a couple of years.  We need a commitment to regeneration from the borough council with timelines so the residents of Brookside can hold the council to account if it doesn’t happen and so that those people that want to invest in Brookside can make plans for the future.

Cllr Stuart Parr (UKIP)

Electorate following habits of parents

David Burton is incorrect in his response to Simon Rogers’ letter claiming last year’s general election was a referendum on our membership of the EU.

The general election was no more a referendum on the EU or UKIP than it was on foreign policy, the environment, devolution or any other subject that motivates the electorate at any other time.

Generations of voters have put their cross next to one of the europhile parties for no other reason than their parents voted for Labour, the Lib Dems or the Conservatives and last year they did exactly the same thing.

The vast majority of people want to free our country from the tyranny of the European Empire but the British government won’t listen.

The electorate are lied to, conned and stolen from by politicians from the LibLabcon but most people still vote for them.

Why would they listen if they know they can rely on the votes of people they cheat and deceive?  Kick them in the ballot box and they might start listening.

And while I’m on the subject of elections, can I remind the Shropshire Star that the Lib Dem, Liz Lynne, is not “the MEP for Shropshire” as she is routinely described?

She is just one of six MEPs – three Conservative, two UKIP and one Lib Dem – elected in the West Midlands euroregion in 2009.  None of the West Midlands MEPs (including Liz Lynee who is based in Stratford-upon-Avon) is based in the county which shows what a farce the EU’s regionalisation of England is.

Councillor Stuart Parr

Election Day

It’s today!  I am standing for election today as a UKIP candidate for the Brookside ward of Telford & Wrekin Borough Council, having been elected unopposed onto the parish council as only 8 people contested the 8 vacancies.

It should be an interesting one this.  There are two seats on the borough council up for grabs and five candidates – me, two Labour and two Tories.

The two Labour candidates are the chair of the parish council and a former borough councillor who found himself co-opted onto the parish council when he lost his seat.  They’re actually nice people considering they’re Labour!

The two Tories are one of the current borough councillors and an failed former Tory candidate from 8 years ago.  The sitting borough councillor has been invisible for the last 4 years and hasn’t been seen at the parish council offices once since being elected 4 years ago.  They put out a leaflet at the last minute full of lies, claiming credit for the work of the local residents’ group – ironically delivering these leaflets claiming one of the candidates to be “a very active member” (came to 2 meetings and then disappeared off the face of the earth again) while myself and the rest of the residents’ group were clearing up rubbish on our monthly litter pick!

The Tories are fighting a losing battle to keep control of the borough council after unseating Labour who have controlled it since the day it was created but haven’t been putting in all that much effort.  Labour are pulling out all the stops and will probably win control of the council back again which is worrying.  Locally, I don’t want to try and call it.  The feedback I’ve had has all been positive so I’m expecting at least double figures on my own merit!  I’m hoping the protest vote comes to me as well – disaffected Tories won’t cast a protest vote for Labour and vice versa so I’m the only alternative.  It really is too close to call here so I won’t try!

It’s a good day to be a UKIPper

Labour 14,724 60.8%
UKIP 2,953 12.2%
Conservative 1,999 8.3%
BNP 1,463 6.0%%
Independent (Tony Devoy) 1,266 5.2%
Lib Dem 1,012 4.2%
Eng Dem 544 2.2%
Monster Raving Loony Party 198 0.8%
Independent (Michael Val Davies) 60 0.2%

Thank you Barnsley for making my day.

Election Prediction

The election is almost upon us and it’s time for a prediction I think: Nick Clegg will be Prime Minister.

Now, don’t get any silly ideas about the Lib Dems winning the election because they won’t.  The Tories will win the election with most seats but they won’t have a working majority and Cameron would rather go without than share power.  The newspaper ads and constant talk about how terrible a hung parliament would be confirm that Cameron is out for absolute power and nothing less.

There will be no shortage of offers to form a coalition with Cast Iron Dave but they will be rebuffed.  The party faithful will be told that it’s better to let a LibLab coalition limp along for a few months before collapsing and then the Tories can romp home to victory in a snap election.  Most of them will fall for it of course and those that don’t will accept it for the greater good.

So that just leaves the Lib Dems and Labour.  The Lib Dems will come second on Thursday, relegating Labour to third place.  Clegg will want a coalition of the left which rules out the Tories and whilst the SNP and Plaid will make gains at the election (the former more so than the latter) they won’t have enough lobby fodder for Clegg to see off the Tories so it will be a LibLab coalition with Clegg as Prime Minister.

Whether El Gordo will manage to cling on as leader after the election remains to be seen.  Mandelson is already leader in all but name and I expect him to take over the reins from El Gordo at some point after the election.  Clegg says he won’t work with Brown but once he smells victory he’ll soon change his tune.

And what about the non-LibLabCon/celtic nationalists?  Well, UKIP will come out with a handful of MPs – I think between three and five.  The BNP will retain some deposits but they won’t win and seats.  The English Democrats will spring a few surprises but won’t win any seats.  The Greens will come worryingly close to winning a seat but won’t quite make it.

Vote for change

Dave “the Ego” Camoron has got his mug plastered on billboards all over England inviting people to vote for change … by voting for the other of the two parties that share power between them.  Some change.

No thanks Dave, I think I’ll vote for real change, not more of the same.  New Labour or Blue Labour, what’s the difference?

Vote for change - don't vote New Labour or Blue Labour, vote UKIP!


UKIP has launched a petition calling for a referendum on our continued membership of the European Empire.

Ignoring the fact that the petition says Great Britain when it should say United Kingdom (another of my pet hates!) it’s one worth signing. This petition is going to be a big one, a lot of resources are being put into it.

The mild irritation caused by the British government and the European Empire calling the EU “Europe” finally reached tipping point the other day.

Europe Minister? No, EU Minister. European Commission? No, EU Commission. European Parliament? No, EU Parliament. European president? No, EU president.

The Europe Minister isn’t responsible for British government policy for the whole of Europe, just for the EU. The European Parliament isn’t a parliament for the whole of Europe, just the EU.

This irritating conflation of “Europe” and “EU” has prompted the first Bloggers4UKIP Number 10 petition: stop referring to the EU as “Europe”.

Other petitions that may be of interest …

Stop the BNP: Vote UKIP

Oh dear, oh dear, another leaked BNP membership list.  Things aren’t looking up for the BNP are they?

Last week Nick Griffin was forced to accept that the BNP cannot lawfully refuse membership to non-white or non-“British” people.  A court ruled – using a bill that isn’t a law yet, it seems – that the BNP isn’t allowed to refuse membership to non-whites even if it means allowing members that don’t subscribe to the party’s aims and objectives.  Expect a concerted effort to flood the BNP with muslims some time soon.

A new anti-BNP group has been formed by the Tories who are presumably jealous of Liebour’s anti-BNP far left extremist groups, Unite Against Fascism and Searchlight.  This new campaign group has done a sterling job of keeping the BNP in the news by publishing a letter written by former military commanders calling on the BNP to stop using wartime imagary because it gives the military a bad name.

And now a new version of the BNP’s membership list has been leaked on the Wikileaks website, prompting yet another investigation by the Information Commissioner.  A number of people on the list contacted by the Telegraph were at great pains to make it known they were no longer members of the BNP and most seem to have said they were only members for a short time.

It’s commonly accepted that the security services have moles in the BNP – they wouldn’t be doing their job if they didn’t.  The Liebour Party will undoubtedly have its own moles in the BNP (where they would be more easily camouflaged as fellow left wing extremists).  The British government knows that it doesn’t have any legal grounds to ban the BNP so it is instead using both legal and illegal means to try and put them out of business.  The same is true of UKIP, where the British government is trying to bankrupt the party using the corrupt Electoral Commission as a sockpuppet.  The trigger in both cases is electoral success that threatens to relegate Liebour to electoral irrelevance and challenges the established LibLabCon doctrine of unfettered immigration, eurofederalism and national shame.

The thing with the BNP is that most of their members have joined either because they’re racists or making a protest at the LibLabCon.  Most of them couldn’t name a BNP policy other than “immigration” and “sending th darkings back home” and most of them couldn’t argue their way out of a wet paper bag.  Let them have as much publicity as they crave because if you give them enough rope they hang themselves and the more rope they have, the more hangings there will be.  The “no platform” policy hasn’t worked, nor has denouncing them as bunny killing right wing nazi’s (socialism is left wing, not right).

The only way to undermine the BNP is to take away the reasons why people support them in the first place – restrict immigration and leave the EU.  This is what most people want and this is why people are voting for the BNP.  Unfortunately, the LibLabCon aren’t going to listen so the only way to stop the BNP is by voting UKIP who will restrict immigration and take us out of the European Empire but don’t have policies of forced repatriation of non-indigenous people, restricting freedom of the press and forcing anyone wanting to take part in English politics to have a DNA test to prove their anglo-saxon descent.

Bloggers4UKIP: Court of Appeal rules in favour of Electoral Commission

As reported in the media today, the Court of Appeal has ruled in favour of the corrupt Electoral Commission and ordered Westminster Magistrates Court to change its ruling that UKIP only has to forfeit £18,481 of the £363,697 in impermissible donations received from Alan Bown.

The donations were found to be impermissible because Alan Bown was mysteriously removed from the electoral register without his knowledge and only put back on when he found that he wasn’t on the register. Under a law designed to prevent foreigners from donating to UK political parties, donors who give more than £200 to a political party must be on the electoral register at the time of the donation to be legal.

The Electoral Commission insisted on a full forfeiture of the £363,697 but UKIP opted to go to court where the magistrate ruled that it was a genuine administrative oversight and ordered that only £18,481 be repayed. The Electoral Commission appealed and today the Court of Appeal ruled in their favour.

The Court of Appeal’s judgement doesn’t mean that Westminster Magistrates Court has to order a full forfeiture and there is always the option to appeal. There are certainly good grounds to appeal – the Lib Dims were found to have taken £2.4m in donations from someone not on the electoral register (who is currently in prison having been convicted of fraud) at around the same time but the Electoral Commission chose not to pursue them for the forfeiture of their impermissible donations.

UKIP is a relatively small party, punching above its weight and embarrassing the LibLabCon. The Electoral Commission is a corrupt quango and sockpuppet of the British government. Going after UKIP and ignoring the Lib Dims is contra bonos mores – so unfair that a reasonable man would never come to the same conclusion (see Wednesbury Unreasonableness).

The ironic thing is that the ultimate court of appeal is not the new “Supreme” Court (which isn’t supreme at all) but an EU court and UKIP’s continued existence as a party may lie in the hands of the corrupt, anti-democratic super-quango that it is trying to undermine.

In UKIP’s 2008 accounts, no provision was put aside for the forfeiture because Alan Bown pledged to underwrite it as he accepted the blame for not being on the electoral register. If he still intends to cover the cost of the forfeiture – estimated to reach around £750k with costs – then there are going to be a lot of very disappointed UKIP hating politicians and civil servants looking for a new way to try and do away with the thorn in their side.

Bloggers4UKIP: 64% of Tories would vote for Farage

No need to spend a fortune on a polling company to find out how many Tories are intending to vote for Farage, ConservativeHome have already got the answer – 64%!

The Tories are more split than ever under the expert leadership of David Camoron. Keep up the good work Dave.

Technorati Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Bloggers4UKIP: EU admits energy saving bulbs are inferior one day before ban

The European Empire has admitted, just one day before the ban on proper light bulbs comes into force, that energy saving bulb manufacturers are “exaggerating” their claims about equivalence.

The British government, its Energy Saving Trust quango, the European Empire, bulb manufacturers and environmental extremists have been telling us that the energy saving bulbs will save us money. They usually quote the magic figure of £37 per year invented by the British government’s Energy Saving Trust quango based on replacing a 60W incandescent bulb with an 15W energy saving bulb and a 100W incandescent bulb with a 20W energy saving bulb.

The Daily Telegraph has today published the results of its own tests on energy saving bulbs which found that an 11W energy saving bulb which claims to be equivalent to a 60W incandescent bulb, even after a 10 minute warm-up period, produced only 58% of the light given off by the incandescent bulb. It would take a 20W energy saving bulb – almost double the power consumption – to get the same amount of light from an energy saving bulb as you get from a 60W incandescent bulb which will pretty much wipe out any supposed cost saving from replacing your bulbs.

This won’t exactly be news to anyone who has experienced the joys of blundering around in half light after changing their proper bulbs to energy saving bulbs but it shows how fundamentally dishonest the European Empire, British government and green lobby is. The European Empire has only today – one day before proper light bulbs are banned – admitted that the claims of equivalence are false, that the energy saving potential from replacing bulbs is false and that the cost savings are a big fat lie. One day before the ban, too late to do anything about it.

Technorati Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Bloggers4UKIP: UKIP for an English Parliament


Back in July I wrote a fairly lengthy post on why UKIP’s devolution policy is wrong. The relatively few comments it attracted belies the number of UKIP members and sympathisers that hold the same views – I received many more comments away from the blog and through the UKIP members’ forum.

This prompted me to look at setting up a group within UKIP for members who support devolution and disagree with UKIP’s policy of abolishing devolution and setting up grand committees of dual mandate British MPs to do the job.

I am pleased to announce that, along with Maidstone branch chairman, John Botting, enough UKIP members have pledged their support for the group to make it worth the effort of applying to the National Executive Council (NEC) for official recognition.

Don’t let the title of this post mislead you though, this group – the UKIP 1997 Group – isn’t just about an English Parliament. The aim of the group is to influence UKIP’s policy on devolution so that the party supports devolved government in all four home nations on an equal basis.

For more information on the UKIP 1997 Group, click here. There is also a Facebook group related to the UKIP 1997 Group.

Just to clarify, the UKIP 1997 Group is not a Bloggers4UKIP project.

Why Cameron won’t answer the referendum question

Lots of people are wondering why David Camoron keeps avoiding answering the question of whether he will hold a retrospective referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The reason is simple – he doesn’t want to admit that he can’t.

To repeal the Lisbon Treaty, or even to just repatriate powers from the EU like the Tories say they will in their manifesto, requires the unanimous agreement of all EU member states.  The only way to repeal the Lisbon Treaty after it has been ratified by all member states and comes into force is to repeal the European Communities Act and leave the European Empire.

This is why David Camoron refuses to answer the question of whether he will hold a retrospective referendum.  He knows that if he holds a retrospective referendum he can’t honour the inevitable no vote unless he takes the UK out of the EU and he has already said that the UK will never leave the EU under a Tory government.

As I said the other day, David Camoron is a fundamentally dishonest person.  Don’t waste your vote on the Tories and their false promises, vote UKIP.

June the 4th is UK Independence Day

Today is June the 4th, UK Independence Day.

Here are your instructions for tomorrow:

  1. Take your voting card to your local polling station
  2. Exchange your voting card for a ballot paper
  3. Find the box with UK Independence Party written next to it
  4. Put a cross in the box

If you encounter any canvassers for the LibLabCon, the Greens, Libertas, Jury Team, the English Democrats, the BNP or any of the other eurofederalist and/or racist parties, adopt the Churchill victory pose as seen on the thousands of UKIP billboards and posters up and down the country, rotate your raised hand 180 degrees and optionally utter the first string of Anglo Saxon words that spring to mind.

Bloggers4UKIP: Messages of Support for Stuart Wheeler

Stuart Wheeler is one of those rarities in political circles – someone who puts principles before party.

While his donation to UKIP and subsequent expulsion from the Tories is great news for UKIP supporters and eurosceptics in general, it has to be remembered that he has been stabbed in the back by the party that he’s supported so generously for so many years.

What Wheeler needs now is messages of support, not just from UKIP supporters, but from Tories as well. Send Bloggers4UKIP your messages of support and we’ll forward them on all together.

Technorati Technorati Tags: ,

Bloggers4UKIP: Tory’s #1 donor defects to UKIP

Stuart Wheeler, the multi-millionaire who has donated millions to the Tories, has defected to UKIP.

When David Camoron reappointed arch-eurofederalist Ken Clarke to his shadow cabinet, he managed to not only irritate vast swathes of the Tory membership but also Stuart Wheeler, their biggest donor.

Wheeler warned Camoron that he wasn’t happy and they needed to buck up on their eurosceptic credentials or he was walking.

According to Wheeler, Camoron had a meeting with 70 Tory MPs and told them the European Empire isn’t an issue and this was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Wheeler has defected to UKIP and written a cheque for £100k to the party.

Wheeler said:

The public know that the EU is incompetent, ineffective, hidebound and riven with fraud but the current political class in Westminster don’t want to talk about it. I believe that millions of people want a say on the matter, and by voting UKIP they can be heard.

The LibLabCon have telling the media at every opportunity that UKIP has collapsed and that the party is going nowhere. One thing you can be sure of is that self-made millionaires don’t get to be millionaires by backing losers.

Iain Dale isn’t bovvered. Honest. Face? Bovvered? Stuart Wheeler has “committed an act of gross disloyalty” apparently. But not Camoron when he knowingly appointed Ken Clarke in the knowledge that it would mean losing their biggest donor.

Technorati Technorati Tags: ,

Welcome to Planet Labour

The LabourList website is being relaunched with a new design. Don’t worry though, it’s still a waste of bandwidth populated by the same tired old sycophant party officials, failed politicians and corrupt communists.

Of course, with the website being hosted on Planet Labour, you can expect the usual bizarre version of reality that Labour supporters and politicians inhabit. There are some amusing comments on the home page, such as:

This is a challenging but exciting time for Labour. Twelve years in office have brought huge advances to Britain, and we continue to be the party of ideas and innovation.

… and …

The distinction between the major parties has rarely been clearer

The blogroll in particular made me laugh. There’s the “A-List” of blogs, a small selection of other sycophant Labour-supporting blogs and the “Z-List” of blogs, comprising the two most popular blogs in the UK – Iain Dale and Guido Fawkes – and ConservativeHome, the Tory grassroots website that the likes of LabourList can only look at with envy.

As well as the entertaining alternate reality stuff, there’s a bit of naughtiness – a link to FixMyStreet in amongst other Labour buttons with the clear implication that the site, which was set up by the same charity behind the website, is a Labour initiative.

We’re under no illusions as to how popular Bloggers4UKIP is likely to be – UKIP is a minor party and we wouldn’t expect to compete directly with the likes of ConservativeHome but if the best “grass roots” website the Labour Party can come up is LabourList then we’re pretty happy with what we’ve managed to achieve in our spare time with a budget of zero and without any help from UKIP.

Just a quick note to LabourList before I finish though: ministers and paid employees aren’t “grass roots“. Ordinary members giving up their spare time without being paid or otherwise rewarded – like us here at Bloggers4UKIP – are the grass roots of a party.

Bloggers4UKIP: Q&A with Bob Spink

UKIP’s Dr Bob Spink MP very kindly agreed to do a Q&A session for Bloggers4UKIP and here it is, unedited and straight from the horses mouth:

  1. It’s now been 8 months since you left the Conservatives and joined UKIP. Do you ever regret making the move? Do you think you still stand a good chance of getting re-elected?

    No regrets and as an Independent, I have a decent chance of winning, but my excellent constituents will decide that. The Tories told lies when I resigned, I sued them, they admitted lying and the overall costs and damages were around £200,000. I am well rid and Cameron is not Prime Minister material.

    Even though I am Independent, since I refuse to take a party political whip in the House, I am an enthusiastic and totally committed UKIP member.

  2. What was it that attracted you to UKIP in the first place?

    The European question (and UKIP is the most honest political party and has the best Leader).

  3. Do you think the Conservatives will ever become a eurosceptic party again?

    I don’t know, I hope so.

  4. It’s well known that the majority of the Conservative Party membership are eurosceptic but their party leadership have different views. Why do you think UKIP hasn’t attracted more high profile Conservatives? Do you think their jobs are more important than their principles or do they genuinely believe that they can change their party from within?

    Ask Redwood, Hague, or the rest of them why they have become Tory Euro-friendly front bench poodles!

  5. How do you think the launch of Libertas will affect UKIP? A lot of people – myself included – believe that the Conservatives will lose most votes to Libertas. Do you agree?

    It is possibly so, since Libertas want to stay in the EU like the Tories.

  6. In the vote on 42 day internment of terrorism suspects you voted with the government and against UKIP policy. Having seen one of your colleagues, Damian Green, being on the receiving end of an abuse of anti-terrorism powers, do you still believe that the government and the police can be trusted with the power to detain people suspected of breaking anti-terrorism laws for 2 months without charge?

    As I say, I don’t take a party whip I just do what is right and I don’t give a damn about party hacks tearing their hair out. I could be wrong on any issue of course, but I am totally open and honest and my own man. There are a number of UKIP policies I would not support and I hope that goes for all your readers. Anyone who blindly follows a set of politicians without question needs their head examined.

  7. You recently asked for yourself to be designated as an Independent in the Commons rather than a UKIP MP. A lot of UKIP members were concerned about this as it appears you are distancing yourself from the party. What were your reasons for doing this and would you describe yourself as UKIP again if there were other UKIP MPs?

    As you have seen, I don’t follow the crowd, I will do what I think is right at the time. As circumstances move on, so must we, or we fall behind. In short, never say never in politics.

  8. The pound has now reached near-parity with the Euro, one of Gordon Brown’s golden rules on dropping the pound and adopting the single currency. Can you see the British government moving to adopt the Euro soon and if so, do you think they will give us the referendum they promised or will they cheat us out of one like they did with the EU Constitution?

    Yes to them thinking about entering the Euro zone, no to a referendum.

  9. What are your predictions for the combined EU/local elections and the next general election?

    Lets work hard for UKIP and wait and see.

  10. Finally, a light-hearted one. If you were stranded on a desert island with one other person and one possession, who and what would they be?

    Nigel Farage since he is astute, reliable and good company, and a set of ear plugs for when I’d had enough.

Thanks to everyone who sent in questions for Bob and thanks to Bob for answering them. Hopefully this will be the first of many interviews with prominent UKIPpers.

Technorati Technorati Tags: ,