Guest slot: Tabman on the UKIP leadership election
July 31st, 2006
-
Could the UKIP caravan hurt the Tories?
The current favourite to succeed Roger Knapman in the UKIP leadership elecrtion which closes on September 7 is MEP Nigel Farage, who stood for the party in the Bromley by-election.
The key point that Farage has grasped is that UKIP can no longer rely upon being a single-issue party if it wishes to grow. In his Manifesto, he sets out his view of the Party’s philosophy:
We are a unique brand. Nationalist with a small ‘n’, libertarian, and in favour of small government and Parliamentary sovereignty. We are opposed to unlimited immigration, high taxes and bureaucracy. He believes that this philosophy, with an obvious appeal to the strongly right-of-centre, will enable the party to build beyond its current small base.
Farage’s main rival is Party Chairman David Campbell Bannerman, the great-great-great-great-nephew of Sir Henry, Liberal Prime-Minister from 1906-8. After many years as a Conservative Councillor, Campbell Bannerman joined UKIP four years ago. He, too, recognises that the party is at a cross-roads:
Does the Party wish to stay as it is – small, single issue focused, doing well in Euro elections, occasionally making a lot of noise, with one regular face, but not achieving enough credibility or success in British domestic politics? Or does it change gear to become a larger, serious party of opposition, more professional in its approach, with a full policy manifesto and real commitment to winning elections of all sorts - local, Scottish, Welsh, mayoral and Westminster as well as Euro elections - and able to take advantage of the huge opportunities of a disenchanted electorate and failed old parties ?
Cambell Bannerman also advocates the sort of robust rightist agenda proposed by Farage; that was in the Conservatives’ 2005 Manifesto; and that David Cameron is now seeking to eschew to improve his party’s electoral fortunes.
Cameron’s centrist strategy for the Conservatives is based on seeking to capture moderate voters from Labour and the Lib Dems and while his core vote may grumble, it has nowhere else to go so will continue loyally to put their Xs in the blue column
But if UKIP gets it act together in the direction that the two front-runners for its leadership propose, then could a serious competitive threat to the Conservatives emerge?
It has been no means clear that the current, single-issue UKIP takes the majority of its support from the Conservatives. The party has hurt the Tories in past elections, but probably not as much as it might have. But if UKIP adopted a broader, “Old Tory” policy platform, would it have a more direct appeal to the traditionalist Conservative voter that Cameron needs to remain on board?
Lord Tebbit recently wrote in the Spectator:“..Bromley suggests that while Conservative voters do believe that the new Conservative Party is unlike the one they used to support, Mr Cameron’s target Labour and Liberal voters do not, and the Tories are in danger of missing the electoral opportunity of a lifetime”.
Finally, if UKIPs campaigning strength were to be more carefully targeted in the manner used most effectively by the Liberal Democrats, then might it bring them their first Westminster seats and thus at a stroke remove the largest hurdle to their future - credibility? This would set them well on the road to their major goal of replacing the Conservatives on the right of British politics.
As yet there is no betting market on the UKIP leadership.
Tabman is Lib Dem blogger and has been a long-standing contributor to the site
Note from Mike Smithson. PBC welcomes guest contributions which should be of interest to users with the emphasis being on posing questions to provoke interesting discussions rather than making assertions. I reserve the right to shorten and edit all contributions. Please email here.
MessageSpace Advertising
Farage is the only well known one and I think he will win.
If only they had kept Kilroy who played a big part in their fast fading 2004 success.
Kilroy: really? He is too much of a meglomaniac to run a party. Yes he is well know, but to a large extent for being a nutter.
Farage seems more likely, but I know nothing of Campbell-Bannerman.
2- Hasn’t done Blair any harm…
Apologies if this has already been mentioned but fans of Oxford liberalism’s hunk in chief will enjoy his latest ‘vidcast’ here:
http://oxfordliberal.blogspot.com/
One phrase which didn’t make the cut was:
“[Cameron] has not so much left his right flank exposed, but actively bombarded it with “friendly fire”.”
As Peter Snow would say when he was in charge, “Just a bit of fun”
The effects of a national swing from Con to UKIP vs Lab to UKIP
1% Con to UKIP: 4 Con losses, 3 Lab gains, 1 Lib Dem gain
2% Con to UKIP: 11 Con losses, 10 Lab gains, 1 Lib Dem gain
3% Con to UKIP: 16 Con losses, 14 Lab gains, 2 Lib Dem gains
4% Con to UKIP: 21 Con losses, 18 Lab gains, 3 Lib Dem gains
5% Con to UKIP: 28 Con losses, 21 Lab gains, 7 Lib Dem gains
1% Lab to UKIP: 12 Lab losses, 11 Con gains, 1 Lib Dem gain
2% Lab to UKIP: 18 Lab losses, 15 Con gains, 1 Lib Dem gain, 1 SNP gain
3% Lab to UKIP: 25 Lab losses, 20 Con gains, 4 Lib Dem gains, 1 SNP gain
4% Lab to UKIP: 34 Lab losses, 27 Con gains, 5 Lib Dem gains, 1 Plaid gain, 1 SNP gain
5% Lab to UKIP: 41 Lab losses, 34 Con gains, 5 Lib Dem gains, 1 Plaid gain, 1 SNP gain
Harry - does your modelling allow you to asess the impact of equal swings from Con and Lab at the same time?
Mike - the three links don’t appear to work. Apologies for the duff html.
All the polling and election evidence is that UKIP have missed the boat and along with the SSP in Scotland are the only smaller parties losing support . I cannot see that whoever is elected leader can reverse this .
Have UKIP nicked Beckett’s caravan ….. I see every expence has been spared on the restoration !
9 - Mark, but isn’t that because as our protagonists recognise, there has been no familiar face and a single issue that has, at present, gone away? UKIP have a chance to redress both these issues. Couple this with (i) a more professional election operation, (ii) vigorous pursuit of disillusioned Tories and (iii) a cotemporous Westminster/Euro poll and you have the recipe for an upset.
UKIP on the path to replacing the Conservatives on the right of British politics? You’re kidding, right? If Nigel Farage is the best candidate, and remembering how he performed in Bromley, I don’t think David Cameron will be losing too much sleep over this one.
One thought that might belong in the previous thread: could the Lib Dem upsurge be due to protest mentality? There’s been a lot of talk recently about how the protest vote is now going to Greens/UKIP/BNP, but perhaps the current Middle East crisis is sharpening the focus on who really is protesting about the government’s position and actions. As a result, people who want to see a change are uniting around the Lib Dems.
If either Farage, or Campbell-Bannerman can follow through on that strategy, I’d say it will work well for them. I can’t see them ever replacing the Conservatives, but I could see them gaining 4-5% nationwide on the sort of platform proposed, which means c. 1.1 m to 1.4 m votes.
Concentrating effort on their 100 best seats, and regularly working council elections in those areas would probably be quite effective.
10. Mildly amusing article but I agree with Mark’s conclusion - UKIP are a busted flush. Having inspected them up close I would say that the idea of them ‘getting their act together’ and turning into some sort of mini Lib Dem byelection fighting machine is a fantasy. It just runs so much against the grain - they are much keener on fighting each other than anyone else.
Which are UKIP’s ‘best areas’, come to mention it? I thought some areas of Devon and Kent. Not aware of the details though, maybe someone knows…?
15 Devon and Cornwall, Lincolnshire, Sussex, NE London, and East Anglia I should say.
14 - I tend to agree but if Cameron drifts too far from centre-right territory they could get an injection of new blood from us!
Having said that almost every UKIP member/activist I have have ever met has been of retirement age or over, slightly mad and the kind of person you would avoid sitting near in the pub. They have tried to make an impact in Wokingham for example but the harder they try the lower their vote seems to go. In Sutton we had a couple of candidates stand but they made no impact, despite one of them having the same surname as one of the sitting Conservative Cllrs in a highly marginal ward.
15. They come first in 2004 Euro Elections in:
Amber Valley
Ashfield
Boston
Erewash
Gedling
Mansfield
NW Leicestershire
Oadby and Wigston
Tendring
Caradon
Isles of Scilly
Kerrier
North Cornwall
North Devon
Plymouth
Restormel
Teignbridge
Torbay
Torridge
West Devon
11 - “a cotemporous (is there such a word?) Westminster/Euro poll” - Surely Labour will not be so reckless as to call the next General Election on the same day as the European Election in June 2009. They’ll either go in May or at some other time, such as autumn 2008 or autumn 2009.
11 I think that that danger is one reason why the next election will not coincide with the next Euro poll . I really thought UKIP would perform rather better in Bromley but Conservatives eather stayed at home than vote for Farage .
20 - Mark it rather confirms my theory that the harder UKIP tries the worse it does (at the moment!)
13. “Concentrating effort on their 100 best seats”.
They probably would do that - and completely dissipate their effort, when they ought to concentrate on, say, 5. But could they agree on those 5 before the next election?
18. Saved deposits by UKIP in 2005 GE: South Staffordshire, Boston & Skegness, Bognor Regis & Littlehampton, Staffordshire Moorlands, Plymouth Devonport, Torbay, Totnes, Louth & Horncastle, South West Devon, Castle Point, Torridge & West Devon, Teignbridge, Plymouth Sutton, East Devon, Birmingham Ladywood, Bournemouth West, Chichester,Manchester Blackley, Nottingham North, Bexhill & Battle, North Cornwall, West Cambridgeshire, Arundel & South Downs, North East Cambridgeshire, Truro & St Austell, Worthing West, North Devon, Wolverhampton South East, Walsall South, New Forest East, Christchurch, Dagenham, St Ives, Thanet South, South Suffolk, South East Cornwall, Cannock Chase
17. “almost every UKIP member/activist I have have ever met has been of retirement age or over, slightly mad and the kind of person you would avoid sitting near in the pub”
I assume the “almost” part is so as to exclude a certain UKIP-supporting fellow peebee!
24. No, Julian, he meant this one:
http://ukipwatch.org/2005/04/carry-on-at-question-time.html
24 - David K is a decent guy but fits the age profile of most I have met. I was thinking of one younger person I met who had joined UKIP.
25 - no I dont! lol
Thanks, Tabbers, for the article. The risk to the Tories is not so much that Ukip win a seat - that’s v unlikely unless they get a celebrity with traction a la Kilroy or Martin Bell - but that they cost Tories seats by letting Lib Dems / Labour hold their seats.
The dilemma for the Tories is whether:
(i) to follow Cameron’s line, try and avoid mentioning Europe for as long as possible, and hope the centrist waverers can be persuaded to give the Tories a chance next time; or
(ii) to switch back to a Bush/Rove GOTV strategy, concentrating on their core message, and hoping the likely perceived closeness of the next election (plus boredom/annoyance with Labour) will motivate their voters.
If Ukip gather any sense of momentum, and campaign smartly, they will put pressure on the Tories to choose between (i) and (ii) - which risks antagonising different sets of Tory activist members.
(Btw, Park Town Boy - thanks for the vidcast plug - wondered why I’d got so many, ahem, hits in the last hour.)
Interesting thread Tabman – if there was a GE on Thursday I would vote UKIP but there isn’t so Labour have 3 years to get me back into the fold which wouldn’t be hard to do. Agree with post 1 that it could have been a lot different if R KS had been elected leader after 2004 Euro Elections – interesting effect shown by post 6 on Labour & Conservative seats however agree with the busted flush statement – Bromley was their chance to regain the band wagon effect but not to be.
28. “if there was a GE on Thursday I would vote UKIP but there isn’t so Labour have 3 years to get me back into the fold which wouldn’t be hard to do. ”
Vino, what happened to make you switch away from Labour?
28. What happened after the last euro elections really proves my point. They could have made a bit of a breakthrough then - but instead descended into the usual infighting. Their latest attempt to gain public attention by stealing the BNP’s clothes is desperate stuff and shows how badly they have lost the plot.
Re 7: Those figures show the impact of a national 1%, 2% and so on swing from Con to UKIP and Lab to UKIP. I can’t do a three party swing for instance, Con -1%, Lab -1%, UKIP +2% in the same manner. What I could do is that on the Election 2005 results (but do we really expect UKIP to poll more than 4%)?
29 - Andrea - at present Labour don’t deserve my vote - they seem to be lost at everything they are trying to do - immigration,fair prison sentences well the list is endless.
30 - Fred - agree entirely - I know of many Labour voters who voted UKIP in 2004 who may have stayed with them in local & General elections especially if Kilroy Silk had been elected Leader.
32. Vino, thanks.
Andrea, although it’s irrelevant to this thread, I thought you might be amused (a propos husbands telling their wives how to vote) by this comment from the immortal (even if sentimental) Giovanni Guareschi:
[Peppone, the Communist mayor of the village, is talking to his wife] “You can go right ahead, without ahy misgivings, and vote just as you did the last time.” “All right, chief”, she replied, not mentioning the fact that the last time she had voted for the Christian Democrats.
Sorry I can’t quote it in Italian, but perhaps you can.
This might get UKIP foaming at the mouth.
“Warning over new EU immigration
The UK immigration system is in the midst of a shake-up
The UK should restrict the right of Bulgarians and Romanians to work in the UK when they join the EU, ex-Labour minister Frank Field has warned.”
“The Home Office document says there is evidence that the influx of foreign workers from the eight ex-communist countries which joined the EU in 2004 - has driven down wages in low-paid jobs.”
This is an issue which must be very difficult for people on the left to reconcile. On the one hand, feelings of internationalism and class solidarity (because we are all basically the same people). On the other, the fear that the newcomers may take their jobs, and thus be used as the tools of the ‘bosses’ to drive down wages.
Can any people whe view themselves as left-of-centre to any degree explain their feelings on this?
Oops! Sorry! Should have given the link to the full story on the BBC.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5231768.stm
35. pobedonoscev, I’ve never read the books, just watched the movies.
Anyway my father doesn’t tell my mother how to vote, but my grandfather tells it to my grandmother (but I think they used to vote in a different way back when the old parties stille existed)
Patrick (and another), thanks for the comment/ info about chavs yesterday. My point, though Stonch seemed a bit annoyed about it, was genuine: you (Patrick) seem to regard the ASBO-type behaviour as part of being a chav, whereas he(? — or at least some people) seem(s) to feel that it’s an unreasonable association with a style of dress/likes/lifestyle which doesn’t please many of us. That’s why I was interested by the association with “gypsies”: to some it means ‘anti-social, itinerant, thieving SoBs’, and to others (me, for example) ‘members of a people more correctly called Roma’ — without any connotations, negative or positive.
39. Has Stonch been on about “chav” again?! He once accused me of being an “awful social snob” because I deployed the word.
18/23 - thanks andrea, a comprehensive list! So it appears that while the BNP might threaten to take votes in some Labour heartland areas, UKIP would tend to take more middle-class votes in areas represented at Westminster by all the main parties, including safe Conservative seats, Lib Dem seats and Lab/Con marginals…
Recent BNP successes show that a vacuum is developing onthe right, much as some Tories might bury their heads in the sand… why shouldn’t the ‘right’ leader take UKIP to greater success, exploiting a gap in the electoral market to become a ‘respectable’ vehicle for anti-liberal middle-class protest? Especially with the combined Con/Lab vote trending downwards and dissatisfaction with the main parties so persistent. Granted - actually winning Westminster seats is an altogether different proposition.
“Nationalist with a small ‘n’, libertarian, and in favour of small government and Parliamentary sovereignty. We are opposed to unlimited immigration, high taxes and bureaucracy.”
One can’t be a libertarian and oppose unlimited immigration. A libertarian can admit, that unlimited immigration isn’t possible with the welfare state like Milton Friedman in this birthday interview, but as libertarians are opposed to the welfare state, that can’t be a reason to oppose unlimited immigration in principle.
Some conservatives seem to have misunderstood the concept of libertarianism. Libertarians want a small government, small in every respect. A libertarian government wouldn’t interfere in immigration, drugs, people’s sex life, etc. Conservatives also want a small government, just small enough to fit inside your bedroom.
Agree with many posters - UKIP are a busted flush, and Bromely showed just how busted.
Tories dropped by around 11,000 votes and UKIP picked up 872 more votes from their GE2005 position.
Hardly a stampede (although someone will now do the percentage swing, no doubt and show hwo they are set to sweep all before them).
Incidentally, the 872 extra votes cost something in the region of 90 quid each; not the greatest value campaigning! Yes I know the LibDem & Tory campaigns were also hugely expensive…
no
Gladstone,
Its not class solidartiy. Class has nothing to do with it. However, the belief that “we are all basically the same people” is accurate. We have one vehicle in place to prevent wages falling below acceptable levels: the minimum wage. For immigration to work there needs to be real supply side growth in the economy (something GB is not supplying). This is achieved through means not familiar to your so called “left-of-centre”: low taxes, limited state intervention, less regulation, ease of investment, less state crowding out of private investment.
Immigration is a good thing and can work. We just need to be sensible about it.
UKIP pose a similar electoral threat to the BNP but with a major difference; the BNP tend to do well in labour seats and UKIP in tory seats. As such they are a threat more to the tories the way that the BNP are to labour in that they can make an election more volatile, with a reduced percentage needed to win and they seem to get different types of support in different areas at different times.
As for leader, Farage is the best known so would be the best bet but there are certain things he is supposed to have said and believed which will be excellent ammunition in any future election.
Libertarian,
Thank you for pointing this out. My libertarian friends are always irritated by the Daily Mail version of your political beliefs. As you say: if you want less Goverment in all areas, you can’t demand big Government for armed forces and keeping out foreigners.
Gladstone. The question of Romanians causes me some problems. Though in principle I think the more the merrier as anyone who has lived in London will tell you their methods of begging-particularly on the tube but basically everywhere in Central London-make travelling so unpleasant that it’s tempting to excercise a veto if one was on offer
ConHome reports that David Gold has been selected as the tory candidate for Eltham. It was an open primary and he won over 50% at the first round.
Re 23. I see there are no Scottish seats where they kept there deposits.
Roger,
Why Romanians in particular? Would this mean you oppose letting them into the EU as you’d have to see more of them. I live in central London and haven’t been disturbed by Romanians in particular.
49 - David is a good guy. Not sure if he is A list tho!
Rik W,
According to ConHome he is: http://conservativehome.blogs.com/goldlist/2006/05/as_promised_thi.html
42 - Essentially that’s correct although there are left leaning libertarians who argue, from a less purist position, that elements of social welfare are necessary in order to safeguard liberty in other areas. Something that, not being on the Friedman end of libertarianism myself, I agree with to an extent.
I also believe that the Libertarian Alliance have a position requiring restriction of immigration. Again, something that I can’t support but how to square the necessity of social welfare to safeguard a society with free immigration? I’m still working on that…….
They use babies to assist in their begging. If you havent had a baby thrust at you while a lady (or once with me a gentleman) starts pleading and screaming while rubbing their fingers to-gether then you are lucky. It’s happened to me several times and I hardly know anyone who has avoided it. They were identified to me as Romanians. They don’t speak English-or seem not to- and they tend to dress in ‘fortune teller’ costume. I was told the baby’s are shared
UKIP are well intentioned but they would be better devoting their resources to encourage a good socially conservative and pro British agenda within the Conservative Party
Edward Leigh for PM
48. Roger. Thanks for taking the trouble to respond.
I think that the EU has been too hasty in admitting Eastern European countries before they were really ready. I think that if the focus had been on improving the economies and living standards of the applicant countries BEFORE they joined, then the ‘problem’ of immigration would not have happened.
The anti-immigration brigade never mention that immigration is a heartache for the migrants as well. Most people would much rather be able to make a comfortable life for themselves in their own surroundings, than have to uproot themselves to go and live abroard.(I am not counting here working for a few years in a different country to get a life experience).
My natural instinct, from a personal christian background, is to want to welcome everyone. Living in London, I probably only see the best effects of immigration, though. There are certain problems though with overcrowding in the South East that need to be addressed, and this is true whether the immigrants come from other areas of the UK or abroad.
Immigration needs control, as much as any other serious issue, but I don’t know if there is enough compassion on the Right for this to be done humanely. This is a nettle that I think the Left needs to grasp, to ensure that we don’t over-react.
I am getting very worried that UKIP/BNP will be able to make capital out of this.
Does that mean I wouldn’t let them into the EEC? Well they do behave in a way which is very alien to us. I always try to find a policeman. Not because I’m scared of them but because of child cruelty. No I don’t suppose you can refuse them. It would be racist………
26 - the 2005 UKIP candidate in Rushcliffe bears a physical resemblance to your good self, Rik! (He’s not as tall as you though)
27 - 1st para is totally spot on, but the chances of UKIP getting their electoral act together with their present membership is between slim and none. UKIP aren’t a threat to the Conservative vote, they’re a threat to their ambitions for government because they will suck up 1-2 percent of the total vots cast that were previously Labour’s, preventing a swing to the Tories.
Like we’ve seen with the fortunes of the SSP in Scotland, any party built on the back of one strong politician will falter when they are no longer at the top. Now Kilroy-Silk has gone UKIP are consigned to taking protest votes at Euro elections, and no more.
I support UKIP, as a single issue party. The EU has a pernicious effect on the UK, and a successful UKIP keeps the issue in the public domain.
I despair of the leadership. They can’t, won’t and shouldn’t try to be something they are not.
A strong showing in EU elections is a significant achievement, which will probably be repeated next time.
The members I know tend to concentrate on a particular EU lunacy which especially bugs them (there are plenty enough to choose from….).
UKIP is no threat to the tory party (or anybody else). But as an effective ‘ginger’ group, highlighting the dated daftness that is the EU—why not think about voting UKIP next time? There are some, even here, who have had enough of this incompetent and sleasy govt, have no enthusiasm for grandpa Ming’s party, and their good-natured bye-election campaigning, and feel that DC’s team is on the thin side.
UKIP won’t pose the remotest threat to anyone at the next GE if the Tories are perceived as having a chance of winning it.
“A recent police stop-and-check in Lincolnshire found 50 per cent of all drivers were committing an offence and 97 per cent of those were migrant workers.” - from todays Times - it’s these side effects of immigration that are so hard to control.Do UKIP poll well in Lincolnshire?
55 - who do Roger? UKIP supporters?!
59 - oh blimey - but he is 29
“I also believe that the Libertarian Alliance have a position requiring restriction of immigration.”
Hmmm, which Libertarian Alliance? There are two organisations with the same name in the UK.
However, anybody who knows even the basics of libertarianism, knows that it isn’t libertarian to restrict immigration. Maybe it is necessary while there is a welfare state, as it would be impossible to support all the potential immigrants with tax money, but a state can only be libertarian if it has open immigration. Of course, a libertarian state can’t have social welfare, either.
64. Romanians
Now I have to go to bed, I’ll come back tomorrow to see if you have answered.
50. Their 2005 best result in Scotland was a 2.4% in Orkney and Shetland
I finally tuned into the Tommy Sheridan story to-day Andrea. I’ll bet you anything that he wins.
66 - Hmm, not sure which one then, just something that had stuck in my mind.
The question is ‘is an absolute libertarian state possible in today’s world?’ and I don’t believe that the conditions are there. Faced with that there is a necessity for welfare and, as much as I hate to have such, restrictions on freedom of movement between states. I’m just not prepared to say ‘all or nothing’ and watch such statist governments as the one we have make the rest of my days more difficult.
Going to bed at 10:30! Fight against the ‘early to bed’ oppression!
70. Roger, Max thinks that if he wins, he’ll take over the party again and he can safe a couple of seats.
For a long time Tabman has been predicting a split in the Tory ranks, between those who sincerely go along with the Cameron line (part of the Liberal diaspora) and those who deplore the changes (and hope they are merely cosmetic).
His article today suggests the mechanism which may finally help to tear the Tory Party asunder: the new-look UKIP.
We shall just have to wait and see.
I doubt it. No one doubts he’s done it but juries never find in favour of garbage newspapers like the News of the World
74. The implication of a Sheridan’s win would be that half of SSP MSPs are liars!
73. I do enjoy these ironic posts.
It’ll be hard for them to work together but everyone knows the rules of suing a tabloid-the tabloid loses. Particularly if its owned by the digger
Just wonder if we can get a quote from Nick Palmer, MP for Broxtowe and Tofuburgers, on immigration from EU accession states.
It’s interesting to compare Nick’s constant assertions that immigration “has not increased greatly under New Labour”, with today’s leaked Cabinet report, which admits that, re the eight 2004 EU accession countries:
“Ministers expected up to 13,000 a year to move to the UK, but 200,000 have come every year so far.”
200,000 a year? Is this problem? Hell, no! It’s not actually happening. And even if it is happening, it’s not a problem. And if you think it’s a problem, well then you’re a racist.
Is that right, Nick? Is this still your attitude, Nick? Hell-o?
Must be running the next DPM’s candidacy….
75 From what I hear on the ground and on the local doorsteps the SSP will be lucky to save any of their list seats. Speaking to a number of voters yesterday whilst canvassing most appear NOT to believe Sheridan but think he might end victorious. Don’t think they can use ‘not proven’. If he does win his cse then it will be 2 (him and Byrne) against the rest of the SSP Parliamentary group. The party will have a rather interesting Autumn conference, it should tear it self apart.
London would disappear without it’s immigrants. It’s the reason it’s such a vibrant place and I for one like it the way it is. Why don’t you go and live in Sunderland Sean. You can live immigrant free in an English only zone. Sheer bliss!
78 - SeanT - Nick P is away and he appointed me his ambassador to you! But since he says he ignores your postings, maybe I should too!
80. Grr. Have I ever said I wanted to end immigration? Or anything similar? As if. My point is I want an honest and open debate about immigration. Which we don’t have. Currently net immigration into Britain is running at record levels. This is a result of deliberate Labour government policy - i.e. its happened because they abolished “primary purpose” legislation, they also opened up to EU accession states, and so forth. Yet, funnily enough, I don’t remember this paragraph appearing in the 1997 Labour manifesto:
‘If we come into power, we promise to increase immigration to record levels, and lose control of the asylum system. We will also lie about this, and get minor MPs to deny it is even happening on political websites’.
Hm. Maybe they thought it would be a vote loser!
You’re right about London though. The city was founded by Italians - a fact the BNP often forgets when canvassing Dagenham…
81. LOL. For someone who claims to ‘ignore’ my postings, NickP shows an inordinate interest in my thoughts, to the extent of personally saving comments I make on other websites. Weird. Then again I claim to ignore his remarks as generalised cant, yet I confess I am intrigued by some of his attitudes. Did you know he wants to ban fishing?
Bless him. And vive la difference!
Tabman has focussed on two UKIP leadership candidates, but he has ignored the true heartbeat of the party: http://www.vote-david.com/index.html
seanT - Just for you - a copy of an email that was making the rounds some weeks ago.
REST OF THE WORLD VERSION:
The squirrel works hard in the withering heat all summer long,
building and improving his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he’s a fool, and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the squirrel is warm and well fed. The shivering grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.
THE END
THE BRITISH VERSION:
The squirrel works hard in the withering heat all summer long,
building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he’s a fool, and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the squirrel is warm and well fed.
A social worker finds the shivering grasshopper, calls a
press conference and demands to know why the squirrel should be
allowed to be warm and well fed while others less fortunate, like
the grasshopper, are cold and starving. The BBC shows up to
provide live coverage of the shivering grasshopper; with cuts to a video of the squirrel in his comfortable warm home with a table laden with food.
The British press inform people that they should be ashamed that
in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to
suffer so while others have plenty. The Labour Party, Greenpeace, Animal Rights and The Grasshopper Council of GB demonstrate in front of the squirrel’s house. The BBC, interrupting a cultural festival special from Notting Hill with breaking news, broadcasts a multi cultural choir singing “We Shall Overcome”. Ken Livingstone rants in an interview with Trevor McDonald that the squirrel has got rich off the backs of grasshoppers, and calls for an immediate tax hike on the squirrel to make him pay his “fair share” and increases the charge for squirrels to enter inner London.
In response to pressure from the media, the Government drafts
the Economic Equity and Grasshopper Anti Discrimination Act,
retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The squirrel’ s taxes
are reassessed. He is taken to court and fined for failing to hire
grasshoppers as builders for the work he was doing on his home and
an additional fine for contempt when he told the court the
grasshopper did not want to work.
The grasshopper is provided with a council house, financial aid
to furnish it and an account with a local taxi firm to ensure he
can be socially mobile.
The squirrels food is seized and re distributed to the more
needy members of society, in this case the grasshopper.
Without enough money to buy more food, to pay the fine and his
newly imposed retroactive taxes, the squirrel has to downsize and
start building a new home. The local authority takes over his old
home and utilises it as a temporary home for asylum seeking cats who had hijacked a plane to get to Britain as they had to share their country of origin with mice. On arrival they have tried to blow up the airport because of Britain’s apparent love of dogs.
The cats had been arrested for the international offence of
hijacking and attempt bombing but were immediately released
because the police fed them pilchards instead of salmon whilst in custody.
Initial moves to then return them to their own country were abandoned because it was feared they would face death by the mice. The cats devise and start a scam to obtain money from peoples credit cards.
A Panorama special shows the grasshopper finishing up the last of
the squirrels’s food, though Spring is still months away, while
the council house he is in, crumbles around him because he hasn’t
bothered to maintain the house. He is shown to be taking
drugs. Inadequate government funding is blamed for the
grasshoppers drug ‘illness’.
The cats seek recompense in the British courts for their treatment
since arrival in UK. The grasshopper gets arrested for stabbing an old dog during a burglary to get money for his drugs habit. He is imprisoned but released immediately because he has been in custody for a few weeks. He is placed in the care of the probation service to monitor and supervise him.
Within a few weeks he has killed a guinea pig in a botched robbery.
A commission of enquiry, that will eventually cost £10,000,000 and
state the obvious, is set up.
Additional money is put into funding a drug rehabilitation scheme
for grasshoppers and legal aid for lawyers representing asylum
seekers is increased. The asylum seeking cats are praised by the government for enriching Britain’s multicultural diversity and dogs are criticised by the government for failing to befriend the cats.
The grasshopper dies of a drug overdose. The usual sections of the
press blame it on the obvious failure of government to address the root causes of despair arising from social inequity and his traumatic experience of prison. They call for the resignation of a minister.
The cats are paid a million pounds each because their rights
were infringed when the government failed to inform them there
were mice in the United Kingdom.
The squirrel, the dogs and the victims of the hijacking, the
bombing the burglaries and robberies have to pay an additional
percentage on their credit cards to cover losses, their taxes are
increased to pay for law and order and they are told that they
will have to work beyond 65 because of a shortfall in government funds.
84- Very good Vino and so true!
I was amazed the other day when some Gordon Brown worship was going on here on PCB. That man is bankrupting Britain and as usual it will be down to us to sort out the mess Labour leave.
Oh and another month gone and still Brown isn’t PM. At least there is some justice!
Does anyone know (really know) what UKIP voters in GE2005 voted previously. I suspect that the protest vote flavour of UKIP probably attracted those who previously voted for all the three main UK wide parties. in different proportions no doubt.
The loss of the ‘protest party of choice’ label might hurt the LibDems as other choices proliferate?
Events in Australia look interesting with top bloke John Howard saying he will go for a fifth term. Talk of a deal that never was to stand down and let his deputy take over. Blair should follow his example.
I just want to see an orderly transition from Blair to Cameron and have Brown sidelined once and for all.
87- There is much debate on this but I would bet my house that it is more than 2 to 1 from Conservative than Labour.
Tabman Fun article but rather a prolonged bout of wishful thinking will not make it so.
I agree with others above, that the UKIP crowd missed the boat, and if they elect Farage with his record of racist statements they may well decline rapidly.
His rather sad outing in Bromley also gives the lie to the idea that all the Tories stayed at home because the candidate was not Eurosceptic enough. If that were true then Farage should have been counting his extra votes in sackful not handfuls.
Justice? Or protection of the innocent?
We agree, Darren.
At this late hour, you ought to be in bed….
I disagree, Blue2Win. People do not, I think switch directly from one party to another. There is a period, long or short, when they are non-aligned.
So the very large large number of previously Tory voters who abstained in Bromley this time may possibly suggest that they will, just possibly, go UKIP next time. Or Lib Dem or wherever.
At the very least, it suggests that they are not satisfied with Cameron and his various messages.
91- Ah! Welcome back Jonny. I had missed you… and your facination with my bedtime habits…
36. Gladstone. the immigration from eastern europe is holding down inflation by expanding the labour supply. BoE estimates that due to eastern europe, inflation and interest rates are 0.5% lower than they would have been otherwise.
And if you look at countries like Australia, New Zealand and Iceland (which is outside the EU), which operate “closed” labour markets and very tight immigration controls, interest rates are much higher, because as soon as there is the slightest growth, you get tight labour supply and wage inflation, which feeds into prices. Australian base rates are 5.75% and rising, New Zealand’s is 7.25% and Iceland is 12%+. In places where there large scale immigration and free movement of people - the USA and the EU, rates are much lower. In Old Europe, there is free movement amongst the original 15 states. Sweden, Britain, Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Greece allow the eastern europeans to work too. The others will allow them access by 2008/9 as per the treaties.
Are Labour people unhappy about this? No. Remember that the govt has put a floor as to how far wages can fall by introducing the minimum wage (this is the main reason for the min wage). And Labour voters in general benefit from the low interest rate/low inflation economy. The economy is coping with the influx. Despite the slow growth last year till Q32005, enough jobs were created to absorb the influx, and the new trend of over 65’s working. Growth is accelerating, so come Q4 2006, this should be even easier.
Not sure how many more eastern europeans will continue to come. Unemployment in the Baltics, the Czech republic and Hungary is falling fast so migration from these areas should dry up. Poland remains the exception, as it is run by strange people from the Law and Justice Party, who may be chasing people away through their socially repressive policies as well as poor economic performance.
People who are anti-immigration should ask themselves if they would be happy paying Aussie and New Zealand style interest rates. The impact on your disposable income would be the same as a hefty hike in tax.
94- Yeah right!
Property is much cheaper in those MUCH LESS OVERCROWDED Countries. If our interest rates were higher, our property prices would be lower. This nonsense about cheaper mortgages under Labour is just that.
Also our interest rates wouldn’t be higher anyway with lower immigration. If anything they could be lower consumer demand by virtue of less consumers.
Sorry Snowflake but your arguments just melt away with the facts…
94. Funny how you never hear the Daily Mail & the little England carpet-chewers who rant about Poles, Romanians & Bulgarians complaining about the holiday homes they’re buying in huge numbers in the new EU member states. The EU is fine when it suits them….
96- So you accept everything that comes with it do you? Funny how only the UK and Ireland have not put limits on the numbers of migrants from the new members… Albania is not in the EU but their criminal gangs find rich pickings here.
Given the way this Country is going under Labour, I can’t blame people for wanting to spend more time abroad. Although emigration is much lower than immigration, it is very high. I wonder why?
96- And what is a carpet-chewer, Mr W? Another insult I assume from your handbook full of them. Typical socialist to use insults when their arguments don’t stack up.
I do not complain about the people themselves, it is the Government who is allowing our Island to become overpopulated that rattles me.
“Hmm, not sure which one then, just something that had stuck in my mind.”
Well, I’m sure it is some misunderstanding, unless you have some reference to their page or something. Please don’t make such allegations unless you can’t prove them.
“The question is ‘is an absolute libertarian state possible in today’s world?’ and I don’t believe that the conditions are there. Faced with that there is a necessity for welfare and, as much as I hate to have such, restrictions on freedom of movement between states. I’m just not prepared to say ‘all or nothing’ and watch such statist governments as the one we have make the rest of my days more difficult.”
Nonsense. There might not exist a libertarian state at the moment, but every single libertarian policy is or has been in use in some state or another.
But this is a too wide subject to be covered on a message board. I just wanted to straighten the misunderstanding, that one could be a libertarian and support restricted immigration. If you want to discuss whether there are conditions for a libertarian state or not, you can do it for instance at the Libertarian Alliance Forum.
“Going to bed at 10:30! Fight against the ‘early to bed’ oppression! ”
I had to wake up early, so I wanted to get some sleep. Now I have to get some work done. Good day for everyone.
46 Ukpaul UKIP are “BNP in blazers” is the quote (from whom I know not) I have seen!
If Farage really is a serious candidate for their leadership - and he has remained their senior MEP - they don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of making a major advance. Apart from Bromley, anyone who saw/ read his ludicrous performance some while ago , when he “took a reporter to Brussels” will understand.
Tim - not sure I agree. There is a window opening up for a genuine ‘English Nationalist’ party in the UK, without the crypto-fascist or criminal undertones of those we have at present. David Cameron appears to be moving the Tories towards more of a mainstream European-style Christian Democrat positioning.
Admittedly UKIP at present seem to lack the nouse or credibility to fill that void, but Farage is nothing if not a consumate politician. His leadership might well encourage other Tories to follow Heffer’s lead. There certainly looks like there is a gap in the market for that kind of party at present.
That’s not to say that I’d dream of voting for them, but there are plenty who would. Tabman is right: the key then would be for them to focus on ruthless targeting of areas that are already strong for them (the places Andrea has listed above) but also the kinds of areas where working class / lower middle class right-wing Conservatism currently flourishes, notably some of the so-called “white flight” areas on the edge of London, especially the NE London / Essex / N Kent areas.
They’d need to broaden their pitch beyond just Euro-phobia; perhaps also advocating a return for capital punishment and/or the birch? Ditto some of the campaigns re Tony Martin, the register of paedos etc.
The real coup would be for them to peel off a sitting Tory MP like Bob Spink. I think they could do that first by building up some campaigning strength in that part of the world and secondly by broadening out their policy offering to a wider group of right-wing policies, not just on Europe. I seem to recall Spink was already quite disaffected - but he is very popular locally.
Farage might just have the skill and vision to achieve that, and that would make things interesting on Cameron’s right flank.
101.”I seem to recall Spink was already quite disaffected - but he is very popular locally.”
There was an attempt of deselection last time (infights with a local councillor..apparently). The local association’s executive voted against automatic reselection (15 against 8). But then the members reselected him with a big margin (507 for him and 78 against)
[97] “Although emigration is much lower than immigration”
Err- actually this is not true- 4.5 million British Citizens live overseas.
103- Yes it is true. Every year a couple of hundred thousand people come in more than the number going out.
So how many Immigrants are here then Cicero? Oh I forget, not even the Government has a clue!
94. Methinks you failed your GCSE economics. Inflation is a function of wage inflation which in turn is a function of the labour supply. If you ahve a tight labour supply (i.e. strong economic growth but no labour entering the market, wages are bid upwards as employers either have to pay more to hire, or end up not delivering their contracts. They pass on the cost to the consumer, and bingo, you get price inflation.
The only way to have strong growth and low inflation at the same time is to have free movement of people - this means that you labour supply increases during strong growth and shrinks during weak growth (as the labour, both migrant and domestic) move elsewhere.
“I suspect that the protest vote flavour of UKIP probably attracted those who previously voted for all the three main UK wide parties. in different proportions no doubt. ”
The Butler and Kavanagh guide to the General Election showed a very strong correlation between an above average UKIP performance, and a below average Conservative performance.
WRT the effect of immigration from Eastern Europe, Ernst & Young believe it is responsible for about one third of the rise in unemployment over the past year, and for holding down wages in certain occupations. This in turn has reduced inflationary pressure. Whether this is on balance a good thing depends whether you’re the one holding down wages, or the one whose wages are being held down.
97. Again you are ill-informed. As of May 2006, the following countries have opened their doors to the eastern europeans - Sweden, Britain, Ireland, Greece, Finland, Spain and Portugal.
06. Unemployment is a lagging indicator - it reflects growth a year ago. This time last year, growth had slowed, to 1.4% (the slowest quarter was Q3 2005). Growth is accelerating - we’re now on course for 2.8%. It will take a year to 18 months to feed into the unemployment figures. I expect unemployment to peak in Q3 2006, and then start to drop as the effects of the above-trend growth this year feeds through.
But make no mistake - migrant labour holds down inflation. Any party that wants to limit migrant labour is effectively in favour of high inflation and high interest rates. So there is a clear choice - prosperity and migration (Labour) versus indulging xenophobia and tolerating the resulting high inflation (Tories).
The impact on inflation, Snowflake, is not huge - Ernst & Young estimate it about 0.5%.
I must say I’m intrigued to read a Labour supporter advocating the use of migrant labour to keep wages down.
09. We’ve installed the minimum wage to put a floor under which wages can’t fall (we don’t want wages falling too low as that would just increase the benefit bill if people decided not worth working). But forget the idea that Labour are in favour of wage inflation - that’s old Labour from the 70’s. Most of our voters are aspirant working class and lower-middle class people. Inflation and high interest rates clobber these people. Since 1997 we’ve won among people with mortgages. In 2005, we got 39% of people with mortgages.
The people who go for the whole Tory anti-immigration thing are older people who’ve retired, so don’t gove a toss about the economy and don’t give a toss about interest rates as they’ve paid off their mortgages. They feel they can indulge their xenophobia. As time goes on, these people should pass on, and the 1960’s generation who are coming up to retirement are much less racist.
“09. We’ve installed the minimum wage to put a floor under which wages can’t fall”
One of the attractions of migrant labourers is that they are unlikely to complain if they’re paid less than the minimum wage.
As a working 39 year old, I can’t say it makes much difference to me whether inflation is at 2.5% or at 3%.
In general, rising real wages are desirable.
99 - For crying out loud don’t be so chippy, it wasn’t an allegation it was reporting what I had read. If you really want something then wikipedia has this.
“Opponents of mass immigration within the libertarian movement
Within recent times, some libertarians, especially paleolibertarians such as Lew Rockwell and Ron Paul, have voiced concerns pertaining to the traditional “open borders” policy held by most libertarians.
It is believed by a number of libertarians that unrestricted immigration into a libertarian society may lead to the undermining of the values that exist inside a libertarian society. This is because large numbers of people may enter a country, who possess no attachment to libertarian ideals and mores or general Western concepts of liberty.
The British-based Libertarian Alliance are prominent advocates of a restricted immigration policy within a libertarian society.”
As for the rest I believe that it’s essential to work towards a libertarian society but it’s not going to happen, probably in my lifetime. Given that, any advance is fine in whatever area (I would imagine that social libertarianism is closer than economic) but I’m not going to complain that there is a welfare system if that is what is necessary to create greater liberty in other areas. It;d be nice to be a purist but I have to live with the world we’ve got at the moment.
111- Sean Gabb certainly favours immigration controls, for the reasons you give.
111. It’s true that migrant workers are willing to work for less than the minimum wage, but domestic workers are not. Without the min wage, people would decide to stay on benefits (which is what happened under the Tories.
The 0.5% inflation difference quoted by Ernst & Young is actually taken from a study the Bank of England did in 2005, when migration from eastern europe was about 150k. It’s much higher now. You also talk glibly about 0.5% inflation not affecting you - there speaks someone who has no idea of what inflation can do, because they’ve been cosseted by the 9 years of Labour govt for most of their working lives!
113 - Thanks Sean, my personal difficulty over this is that I belive that there has to be an element of social welfare in any society in order to safeguard the liberty of others but I believe in completely open borders. The problem is that such immigration would become disproportionate given the welfare support so I’ve not been able to square that circle. Purist libertarians would say get rid of both but, to me, that necessarily endangers the state by creating social unrest.
On every test etc. I come out as a strong libertarian but there are many difficulties that I would find in inhabiting a purist position.
“there speaks someone who has no idea of what inflation can do, because they’ve been cosseted by the 9 years of Labour govt for most of their working lives! ”
LOL! I can (just about) remember double digit inflation in the Seventies, under Labour. *That* has a big impact on people. Fractions of percentages don’t.
What you’re advocating seems to be a kind of pyramid-selling. Eastern Europe doesn’t have an unlimited supply of cheap labour (most Eastern European countrieS have low birth rates, and rising living standards); where will you get people to keep wages down from, once this present wave dries up?
95. Where on earth did you acquire the impression that property prices in Australia are lower than in the UK? Buying a property in a major Australian city will set you back as least as much as it would in London. That’s including the benefit you would gain by earning and buying in pounds rather than aussie dollars - Australians tend to earn the same number of dollars as Brits earn pounds, so the prices are proportionally much higher for them. My parents’ very humble home (two small bedrooms, detached, tiny block by Australian standards, in a nice but very ordinary suburb) is allegedly worth more than 3/4 million $A. With the same money you could definitely by something equivalent in London.
Oxonian
Yes, I see that there is a “gap in the market” - and down here UKIP get quite reasonable support, even at GE, and if they work hard OK in target wards at Council level. I just don’t see the argument about him being an able politician! Most UKIPpers I have seen / spoken to are either dodderers eg Graham Booth MEP, nutters (most of them), or have a serious blind spot, which seems to prevent logical reasoning around that subject area - usually hyper nationalism, but can sometimes be other right wing hangups.
116. LOL, and you don’t rememebr that inflation was at it’s highest in 1980 at 20% and nearly 15% in 1990?
There are several ways to increase labour supply and the Labour govt is pursuing all of them.
1. Tempting people on benefits back into work increases the labour supply. We’ve had huge success here, by introducing the min wage, raising the N.I. threshold sharply and abolishing the N.I. entry fee, and introduing the 10% tax band.
2. Encouraging people to have children. We’ve increased maternity leave, introduced paternity leave, introduced schemes like Sure Start and help with nursery places (all of which the Tories opposed by the way). It’s working, the birth rate has been moving up from 1.6 per female to 1.75 per female.
3. Encouraging people over 65 to work. Already this is having an effect. The number of over 65’s working is up 9.7% compared to last year and stands at 1.1 million. There is huge potential here.
4. Opening the economy to migration from within the EU.
I think the Tories oppose all these things. They’d rather have a shrunken economy, high inflation and high interest rates and keep themselves warm at night congratulating themselves on how they kept Johnny Foreigner out.
119 Inflation was at its highest in 1975, at 28%. Inflation was at 10% when the Tories took over in 1979, and at 2% when the Tories left office in 1997. It did briefly rise to 20% in 1980, on the back of the surge in commodity prices following the fall of the Shah, not something which the incoming government could do much about.
When the Conservatives came into power, they inherited one of the worst-performing economies in Europe; when they left office, they left behind one of the best-performing economies.
I note you make no mention of the fact that (a) the private sector in this country has not been creating jobs now for several years and (b) productivity growth rates (which drive economic growth in the long run) have fallen ever since Gordon Brown became Chancellor, on the back of ever increasing tax and regulation.
120. You are wrong. In 1979, the national debt was 46% of GDP, in 1997 it was 53% of GDP - Tory borrowing binge! Unemployment was under a million in 1979 and well over a million in 1997. Inflation was 2.9% in the year leading up to the 1997 election, not 2% as you claim.
Regarding private sector employment, the figures are as follows:
The private sector employed 21.6 million eight years ago - now it’s over 23 million (circa 1.4 million increase).
Public sector was 5.16 m eight years ago, now it’s 5.86 million..
Employment is at a record 28.9 million. Which is brilliant.
I think you would have to create a Through-the-looking-Glass world in order to convince yourself that the Tory period with it’s high inflation, high interest rates, high public borrowing, high unemployment and property crash was better than the Labour period. Luckily most voters are not fantasists.
“120. You are wrong. In 1979, the national debt was 46% of GDP, in 1997 it was 53% of GDP - Tory borrowing binge!”
Wow! A massive 7%!
“Unemployment was under a million in 1979 and well over a million in 1997. ”
And 2 million more people were in work in 1997 than 18 years previously.
“Inflation was 2.9% in the year leading up to the 1997 election, not 2% as you claim.”
Out by 0.9%? That obviously undermines by argument that inflation fell sharply under the Tories.
Pretty consistently, from 1945 to 1979, under all governments, our economy grew by less than the European average. Pretty consistently since the early eighties, it has grown by more than the European average - which the majority of economic commentators would attribute to the reforms of the Thatcher and Major governments.
I wouldn’t deny that the economic situation since 1997 has been more benign than during much of the Tory period. The difference is the Tories inherited a rotten situation (where the general view was we could only manage our decline) and turned it round. Labour inherited an extremely benign situation.
Moi: “You are wrong. In 1979, the national debt was 46% of GDP, in 1997 it was 53% of GDP - Tory borrowing binge!”
You: “Wow! A massive 7%!”
7% of GDP is a huge number, do you have any conception of just how huge the economy is, and thus how big 7% of it is? When Labour came to power in 1997, more money was being spent on interest than on schools, that’s how bad it got.
Perhaps the raw numbers will give you a better idea.
http://www.dmo.gov.uk/bginfo/natdebt.htm
1979 National debt £86.89 billion 46% of GDP
1997 National Debt £419.54 billion 53% of GDP
2002 National Debt £434.54 billion 42% of GDP.
From 1979 to 1997 the debt rose by a total of 400% or at the rate of nearly 9.5% per annum.
From 1997 to 2002 the debt rose by a total of 3.6% or 0.7% per annum.
The John Major years were much worse than the Thatcher years.
Interestingly, in 1974 when Labour took over from the Tories, debt was 50% of GDP - when Labour left office in 1979, debt was 46% of GDP.
There is a pattern here of Tories accelerating the growth of public debt (by growing the debt at a faster rate than the economy grows) and Labour decelerating it’s growth (by growing the economy faster than the rate the debt grows).
Perhaps absoluy
“Opponents of mass immigration within the libertarian movement
Within recent times, some libertarians, especially paleolibertarians such as Lew Rockwell and Ron Paul, have voiced concerns pertaining to the traditional “open borders” policy held by most libertarians.”
It is generally agreed, that the so-called “paleolibertarians” are more conservatives than libertarians.
“The British-based Libertarian Alliance are prominent advocates of a restricted immigration policy within a libertarian society.”
At least the Libertarian Alliance I know aren’t. I was hoping that you would have some more reliable evidence than something written in the Wikipedia, for instance a quote from Libertarian Alliance’s own pages. As we all know, the objectivity of the Wikipedia can’t be relied, especially when it comes to politics, as anybody can edit there and use it to defame their opponents.
I could for instance write a Wikpedia article where I would claim, that ukpaul is a hoodie, and then use it as evidence in the politicalbetting.com Many times libertarians are described in wikipedia by socialists, and in that case Wikipedia is not telling what the libertarians really think, but what socialist think or want that the libertarians think.
As an organisation maybe not but there are differing views as you know. Those who take the view that multiculturalism is an evil definitely tend towards desiring a manner of controlling immigration. I suppose you could say that they are really conservatives but I’m sure they’d disagree in return.
I’ve got a hoodie but it’s a Gap hoodie so I don’t think that counts.
What a pity Kilroy-Silk had his little tantrum and left. He’d have livened the thing up. He’d have got loads of good publicity and advocated some interesting positions. Who knows, he might even have made some good calls and changed the agenda a bit. I’m sure he’d have got a few things wrong and upset some people.