Why is it all going wrong for UKIP?
March 1st, 2007
Is the party ceasing to be a serious threat?
While all the focus has been on the Labour succession we have ignored the extraordinary goings on at UKIP - the party which only a few weeks ago looked as though it might pose a threat to Cameron’s Conservatives.
Hardly a day goes by without some fresh headlines - the latest being from the Times this morning as reproduced above. The combination of financial issues and the robust response to the council candidate in Weymouth who has been banned because he is disabled create an image of confusion and of a party that cannot be taken seriously.
Yet all this comes after one pollster, at least, has started to find significant support. The last two polls by YouGov have recorded figures of 5% and then 4% for the anti-EU party - shares, it should be said, which have not been detected by the other firms.
All this does have a political impact - for one major threat to the Tories is if they start to lose their core support from elements disgruntled at the direction that David Cameron is taking them.
-
But if UKIP is seen to be a shambles and a joke then the threat to the Tory leadership diminishes and the discontented right-wingers have nowhere really where they can go.
Meanwhile in the Labour leadership the Brown betting price has started to tighten again and it is now at 0.28/1.
PBC Party Details. Those wanting to join the PBC party in London on April 17th 2007 should contact Peter Smith by emailing him at arklebar@talktalk.net. If you are going then please let him know as soon as possible.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Everything seems to be going well for Cameron. Damn it.
1 - Now you begin to get a sense of how we felt from 1993 - 2006.
Having said that, are we really very surprised at these developments? UKIP have always been rather exotic species, and I don’t think either David Cameron or Michael Howard were terribly wide of their mark in their recent descriptions of most (there are some honourable exceptions) UKIP members as ‘nutters’ and ‘gadflies’ respectively. This is almost as entertaining as watching the ongoing mayhem inside the Labour Party.
UKIP’s MEPs have turned out to be a shocking bunch of duffers, even by Brussels standards. Is this another argument against PR? Presumably it is easier for mediocrities to get elected under a list system than when they are subject to individual scrutiny by electors.
Well..it’s not quite as simple as it seems. The Electoral Commission’s decision to force them to forfeit the cash on a technicality designed to prevent foreign donations is incredibly ropey when you consider that the same authority permitted the Lib Dem’s to keep about £2 million from a crook.
The “disabled man” is Jack Briggs, whose daughter’s position on the local council was being targeted by them. He then sent them an email threatening exposure of the “prejudice” story unless they stopped. So again, ropey.
Wise on the other hand, hasn’t been found guilty of anything yet, and I would be very surprised if nearly every M.P of whatever denomination hasnt been using public funds for cars, chauffeurs, etc, under guise of travel allowance.
It also does seem very suspicious that their gains in some polls get no press attention, and this stuff a mountain. Maybe Farage p.o’ed Murdoch some time in the past.
4. - “easier for mediocrities to get elected under a list system?” probably not much in it either way - we are surely not short of mediocre Westminster MPs, and in both systems the key decisions are most often made by the political parties’ selection processes, rather than the electorate. Arguably fewer mediocrities under STV, as evidenced by both Eire and Northern Ireland elections?
All publicity is good publicity, particularly for a party that gets little comment outside Euro elections.
If their vote was trackable, I wouldn’t be surprised to see an *increase* in the UKIP showing in the polls purely because the public have now been reminded that they exist.
Most of UKIP’s current problems have been festering under the surface for a couple of years. The different warring factions make Labour look like happy campers in comparison.
However, I think it would be dangerous for the Tories to try and kill them off because there is only two places ‘ukippers’ can go.
The first option would be to join a small party like the English Democrats. This would be bad for the Tories as it would push the ‘English Parliament’ issue up the political agenda.
The second option would for them to join the BNP. The BNP with money would be dangerous for both Labour & Tories.
Better the devil you know.
BB
UKIP is not very well run as a party. And it has no power to influence any of the news stories about itself (unlike the other parties).
UKIP’s saving grace is its USP. We do not need the EU—we ARE better off out. This is not at the front of most voters’ minds most of the time. But when they are ‘forced’–or choose—to think about it, they mostly agree. UKIP’s attitude to the EU chimes with the majority in England.
Any stories about the EU are good for UKIP. They can never be good news for the EU–as an organisation, its time has passed. We no longer need to bind the hun into the rest of Europe.
When it comes to FPTP Westminster elections, the system does not favour UKIP. But their impact under PR….
7 - but the publicity they’re getting is because the party itself is in danger of collapsing. I think they’d rather do without it, to be honest. I really don’t think people will be particularly impressed by the stuff coming on; pretty impossible to put any positive spin on it.
8 - You say there are two places people can go from UKIP. I think you’re missing out two more - the Tories (’oh well, our protest vote is gone, might as well go back home’) and to abstaining (’sod it, they’re all rubbish and the one party who was right on Europe has collapsed. I can’t be bothered to vote.’)
Further, I don’t think that the English Democrats would get enough support; besides, aren’t Tories eager for an English parliament? Or at least only English MPs voting on England-only legislation.
Also, I know that the BNP and UKIP are put on the ‘lunatic fringe’ but I still think there’s a massive leap there for someone to go from UKIP to the BNP. The BNP I despise; UKIP I scorn.
9 - david: “UKIP’s attitude to the EU chimes with the majority in England. ”
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2005/Talent%20TV%20-%20How%20Euro/Talent%20TV%20-%20How%20Euro.asp
Q14: Which of the following statements do you most agree with? We should…
Integrate fully with other EU countries
16%
Not integrate further but stay as we are
34%
Have a trade agreement with other EU Countries but no more
33%
Leave the EU
15%
So, half of people are fine with it now and 15% want to leave. I’d hardly call that a majority.
Anyway, back to bed!
11 - but half the people are not fine with it.. the thing about this is it encourages debate, where both sides have a chance to say what is good/bad about the EU so people can make up their minds once and for all.
Interesting ICM poll for BBC Wales:
The poll suggested a “bounce” of about +7% for Labour if the Prime Minister went.
The poll indicated that Tony Blair’s departure from Downing Street before the election (on May 3rd) could add 7% to Labour’s support, four to Plaid’s, one to the Conservatives’ and reduce Liberal Democrat votes by 2%.
However, miserably low recongnotion that there’s even an election on May 3rd! Brings it home to all us politics freaks that in the ‘real world’ politics just doesn’t make that much of an impact.
Re. the main story, I hate to say I told you so….UKIP was only ever a real threat in the overheated imaginations of Lib Dem and Labour activists.
Re. 10 - the UKIP to BNP drift has already begun. The overlap is bigger than you might think. Cameron’s ‘closet racist’ description was not unreasonable for a distinct minority of UKIP members.
Re. 11 - both the latter options would effectively mean leaving the EU. Arguably the second one might as well, given that the EU has no intention of letting member states stay ‘as they are’.
10. I think it’s bad for Tories whenever the ‘only English MP’s voting on English issues’ subject comes up. They alienate the Scots and Welsh even more and Labour position themselves as the ‘Pro-Britain’ party.
David Noakes (recent ukip leadership contender) runs some sort of ‘EU awareness training course’. He is recently quoted as saying that most BNP members who attend his courses are ex-ukip members. He estimates almost a thousand have made the journey from ukip to the bnp.
BB
Ryan, Tom Wise stole money from his own researcher, put it into his personal bank account and then used it to pay off his own credit cards
UKIP have suspended him pending an investigation - this is serious abd could have been put in the main article! It shows appalling judgement from a party that claims to be a major political force. The MEPs are the only thing of substance UKIP have. One left, one revealed his true colours as a facist (Ashley Mote), now one is a thief…. are there any more UKIP MEP stars I’ve forgotten about?
re: polls YG has clearly been infiltrated, no other pollster finds this and election results don’t find it either… 40 votes in Horsham, a colossal 8 votes in Nuneaton or whereever it was.
UKIP would pack it in if they had any honour but just like Knapman using cheap polish Labour to build his extension they are just a greasy bunch of hypocrites out to line their personal pockets. Mike didn’t even mention the Ashcroft call center or the branches that have resigned en masse.
The English Democrats in Nuneaton outpolled ukip ten to one
Apologies to Mike I see Wise’s theft is in the pic. That will teach me to post pre caffeine. Brummie Bounder makes an excellent point, scratch ukip and find the bnp. No wonder their support is bleeding to the real racists
UKIP: probably less affected by alleged scandals than most, since people are sending a message when they vote for them. This is also why proving that BNP councillors tend to be rubbish is not decisive - people aren’t voting for them in the hope of improving bin collection, but as a shout of anger. But while UKIP activists are in my experience much, much nicer than BNP activists, I’m afraid that BB is right and the potential UKIP vote could easily transfer to the BNP if the latter are seen as more effective.
RedFlump at 14: Yes, I think the polls and the cognoscenti are still underestimating the size of the bounce of a change of leadership - not because most people loathe TB, but simply because they’re bored and dissatisfied and up for a change. The Tories’ rather inconsistent strategy is to say Brown isn’t really a change, actually he’s much worse than that rather fine fellow Blair, and actually he’s in the same bed as that vile fellow Blair. I doubt if either half of that will stop a bounce.
Commentator 17 - I think that when you talk of the Ashcroft call center you mean Ashford. Michael Ashcroft is a major, if somewhat controversial, donor to the Tory party. Ashford is a town in Kent…and I am absolutely certain that the UKIP spelling is Centre.
LOL! So I do. Apologies to Lord Ashcroft.
Ashford call center; donations were swallowed up with about 8p in the pound going for what they were intended for.
UKIP has a record of total financial incompetence.
19 - Nick, while you’re here (if you still are), what did you make of yesterday’s 2020 Vision launch? Apparently only 12 MPs, including yourself - suitably interviewed by the Beeb - turned up, thus almost rivalling the spectacular Michael Meacher launch. Perhaps, the presence of Nick ‘Gordon knows where you live’ Brown was a deterrent
Whether or not UKIP does well depends far more on what the current debate is tgan what sort of a shambles the party is in. If the press pick up on a few straight banana stories the hard core anti-EU’ers wioll come out and give them their vote whatever the internal shambles. Same with the BNP. Several knife wielding recent immigrant stories and the BNP do well.
The state of parties other than potential governments counts for not very much. Even the Lib Dems put on 4 or 5% at the last election on the single issue of Iraq. Advertising lesson of the day; The market leader always benefits the most.
Why is it all going wrong for UKIP? Two main reasons: firstly, because they’re a party with only one purpose - to campaign against membership of the EU, something they can only really do at Euro- and genral elections unless a relevant issue comes onto the radar (Euro membership, EU constitution). This means for most of the time they’re not relevant to the political debate.
Secondly, they’re an anti- party. ‘Anti’ parties tend to attract ‘anti’ people (mental image of them exploding in a mass of energy upon meeting a positive person
). These are people who are happy to argue against something and each other, and indeed may be at their happiest when doing so. Many will have left other parties to join UKIP. That is not a recipe for organisational stability. They will also have difficulty in forming cohesive movements at any level because of the high proportion of members who are defectors and prone to a ‘my way or the highway’ attitude.
Both points come together when UKIP try to develop any policy on anything other than the EU which is particularly ironic as no-one really cares what their policy is on (for example) benefits reform - except those members who disagree with it, and that’s likely to be a lot of them.
UKIP will always have a modicum of support no matter how useless a candidate is or how badly run a party they form. They have a USP which will resonate with some and will attract support by itself. But structually, they will have trouble making any progress while the EU is a ‘quiet’ issue. Unlike the Greens (who don’t have the two big problems I identified above), it’s not an issue they can easily push at local level either.
So they’ve problems if they try to act and they’ve problems if they don’t. That’s why it’s all going wrong.
Does anyone think an announcement of a definative date from TB on his resignation will help Labour in May?
Seems to me as soon as Simon Hefferlump added his support it all went to cr*p……….
14 - BBC article doesnt give much away - eg if there would be a Labour bounce, from what to what???
And can not understand why Plaid would benefit from TB stepping down….
Anyone know the details???
ps
Cyfarchion o Dydd Gwyl Dewi Sant i bawb…………
22: I thought it was fine as far as it went: estimates of MPs present vary up to 20, but included the 15 listed here (note that someone is reading my pb.com entries!)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1454729.ece
who are a fairly serious bunch not easily identifable with any particular faction. A launch of a website outside the Parliamentary estate would rarely draw more than a couple of MPs - it’s hard enough to get a decent turnout in Westminster itself as there is so much else going on. I always remember Jack Straw inviting all MPs to discuss Iraq shortly before the war: turnout was around 10. There have been a mass of comments on the site since it was launched.
The question is what to do for afters - there are a lot of websites around, so it needs to have some quality policy articles that attract serious attention quite quickly. I hope to contribute some, for what that’s worth! Ideally it will generate a serious debate and provide a basis for ideas and themes for the leadership and deputy leadership candidates to pinch in June.
The media, of course, see it as a masked leadership bid. I think both initiators are perfectly realistic about the prospects of that. A more precise description would be an influence bid: most of us are interested in policy, and will be perfectly happy with GB as leader so long as the policies are right.
having recently joined UKIP from the Tories(after a long membership),I can assure you of a couple of things.
1 I will never, ever, vote Tory until the next Thatcher or Tebbit comes along.David Davies is a girls blouse.
2 I will never vote BNP because besides being racist they are also for big govt (socialist)and I’ve had enough of that.
From what it seems to me,UKIP are aiming to become the only one of the main parties to push for smaller govt.It will take time to establish at a local level but the commitment is there.
Sort of off topic,one thing that gets me with all these polls is that there seems to be no support for the BNP at all.Yet look at the local election results coming through,they have the momentum that Dave is meant to have.Am I wrong or are people refusing to admit to the pollsters that they support them?
Forgive my ignorance only started reading PB recently
Red Flump. I think if he resigned as leader and a leadership election began before May that might make a difference. A similar poll in Scotland showing that his resignation would put on 7%-and I’ve no doubt it would-might embarrass him into going sooner
28. Thanks lucky!
28. Thanks lucky!
To be honest, I think our Tone is beyond embarassment, Roger
On the issue of UKIP polling support every pollster finds UKIP at 1% apart from Yougov. Yougov say that because they draw 2,000 responses from a pool of 140,000 it cannot be easily influenced as it would require 1,400 to guarantee the ability to get 20 in each sample worth 1%. They say they get higher UKIP ratings because people using computers are more willing to be honest. So following this logic a 5% regular rating would need 7,000 in Yougov to be willing to select UKIP. And to add an extra 4% on top of a pre-existing base of 1% would need 5,600.
However I remember something Mike wrote on here about being “a single mum reading the Sun” etc. By selecting those criteria the chances of regular participation can be improved. Maybe from 5,000 to 1,000, but that would require some major effort to organise unless.
Of course the ability to influence this is only at the margins of a few %. With such a large base to draw from, it is clear that the ability to influence is a couple of % at most.
And as Yougov grows its 140,000 it will reduce the ability of any group to influence it beyond a percentage point.
30. Troll alert
A few eeks back I asked what would happen if neither Labour or the Tories could form a coalition with the Libs in a hung parliament, and who would be the thrid parties in such a scenario.
It was replied that the maths didn’t work, and that that could not happen.
Well, the current Baxter prediction of
Party 2005 Votes 2005 Seats Pred Votes Pred Seats
CON 33.24% 211 36.92% 288
LAB 36.21% 346 32.45% 291
LIB 22.65% 64 19.54% 36
leaves Labour 35 short of an overall majority.
Now lets assume that the Nats take two more seats off Labour, and you have the situation of a Hung parliamnet where the Libs can’t get either Lab or Tory into power alone…
So - I ask again - who would be third party members of any such coalition?
34. Yes, you’d think that starting a pointless, illegal and monstrously counter-productive war leading to the deaths of half a million people might make most people.. you know… just slightly embarrassed? - even a tad apologetic! - but not dear old Tonee B.
“I did it for the right reasons, even if it was a catastrophic misjudgement of apocalyptic proportions”.
“Oh, well that’s alright then.”
I’m no supporter of UKIP but if having financial and legal problems makes a party a shambles and a joke, then where does that leave Labour,sorry New Labour, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.
39. The problem is they have nothing BUT financial and legal problems.
The makeup of UKIP does contain the seeds of its own destruction.
One factor that it can do nothing about is the nature of the people it attracts. Most of its Leaders and activists have left another party to join UKIP. People that do that tend to be more individualists than team players. They have to be people unafraid to speak what is on their mind, irregardless of who they upset. They tend to have few friends and are often “self-made” people.
An effective team needs a balance of people with different traits, UKIP contains a massive imbalance which is why there have been so many splits, factions, resignations, “scandals” and administrative chaos.
It also needs some of its people to be willing to compromise for the greater good. But UKIP people are less willing to compromise than any other party. Afterall they left other parties because they would not compromise their principles. They also do not like rules so they are more inclined to interpret rules their way.
And it is this “interpretation of rules” that the Electoral commission and EU/OLAF are clamping down on.
First of all, would posters please note its David Davis, not Davies, (there is a Tory MP David Davies but not that one) Davis being the English spelling, Davies the Welsh.
For a party of the, ‘right’ to succeed, (success being relative) it must have one vital ingredient, a charismatic leader. People on the traditional right, have a tendency to see things in a ,top down’ way. They like order and discipline, UKIP is popular with a lot of ex-service types, they will not take kindly to anything that reeks of disorder. The right is waiting for its Messiah, someone who will flay Labour and take back the Tory Pary from the dreaded Cameroons: could be a long wait!
Re 42 coldstone, I disagree with your point about UKIP that “People on the traditional right, have a tendency to see things in a ,top down’ way. They like order and discipline”.
Many in UKIP do not like discipline, they are basically libertarians who resent all rules. So they are more inclined to break the rules and get into a lot of bother.
If UKIP contained more ex military types it would be more disciplined. But such people would have a bigger tendency to stick with the existing structure and parties.
New parties inaviarbly attract people who want to dismantle the present structure.
UKIP became a relevance when Kilroy-Silk joined.
When he left they returned to being irrelevant again - and so did he.
It really is as sadly simple as that. They had a great chance to make the breakthrough with him but their egos were as bad as his and they clashed. That is the only resonant bell that UKIP strike with much of the population.
If they ever ant to be anything again they need to woo him back and make him leader. Then they’ll be a threat again.
Right-wing parties need a strong man to lead them to their vision of a bright utopian dawn. Luckily they usually end up with leaders considerably less than this…
43. Another problem is that lots of individuals in the organisation see themselves as the potential ‘messiah’. This syndrome was clearly visible years ago in the NF/BNP as well, where continuous and vicious infighting among the galaxy of wannabe ‘Fuhrers’ was the order of the day.
O/T French election update
new poll Ipsos for SFR - Le Point (fieldwork between 26 and 28 feb)
1st round
Sarkozy 32 (+1)
Royal 25 (-1)
Bayrou 18 (+0.5)
Le Pen 12.5 (-0.5)
others 2.5 or less
total left + far-left 35
total right + far-right 64
2nd round
Sarkozy 53.5 (+0.5)
Royal 46.5 (-0.5)
update of my poll of polls
1st round
Sarkozy 30.83
Royal 26.42
Bayrou 16.33
Le Pen 12.42
2nd round
Sarkozy 52.25
Royal 47.75
best poll for Sarkozy in the last two weeks.
Ipsos is traditionnally better for sarkozy than some other pollsters.
Anyway the present situation is quite clear with the four biga candidates in the order Sarkozy-Royal-Bayrou-Le Pen with clear gaps of around 7 points between each of them, so quite outside the margin of error. The situation seems to stabilize a bit, even if part of the fieldwork was before bayrou’s big tv interview on monday and all of it before yesterday’s press allegations against sarkozy.
Anyway, so far so good for sarkozy : not a single poll has announced a Royal victory since 12 january.
44 - pimpernel - I agree with you. For a brief period they looked like they could develop into a real threat.
Farage, whilst presentable, has a lot of enemies within UKIP (I am told) and he is not the man to gain media attention in the way that R K-S could.
Having said that I am sure that UKIP will weather the current storm and struggle on as a fringe party nibbling at the margins of British politics!
We had an interesting discussion last week about the current ideological make up of Labour members and how this tended to differ from popular perceptions in the media (Less left wing than people think) .
Interesting to read the different views today on peoples experience of UKIP, - if it is a mixture of ex army types and libertarians then I can see exactly why this would lead to chaos.
By ex army types - Do people mean the ‘fairly secret army’/Frederick Forsyth’ stereotype that would have supported Mountbattens coup in the 70’s ?
42 Look it’s dickie davis, but no tash
Spectacularly off thread, but as it is St David’s Day please could I refer you to this page on the website of Paul Flynn MP (Lab) for Newport West?
http://www.paulflynnmp.co.uk/commonsdetail.jsp?id=873
All together now……
Thanks for the article Mike. No I haven’t been ignoring UKIP’s woes, I have just been laughing too much to blog about them!
Seriously UKIP looks set to implode. People don’t even need to read theh stories anymore, they just need to look at the headlines!
50.
A Happy St David’s Day to you all!!!
Peter Kilfoyle writes and interesting article in today’s Guardian extolling the merits of a John Denham leadership bid. He says:
‘A credible [leadership] candidate would need to have policy ideas and, for my money, some obvious commitment to principle, as well as being a marketable personality. Many in the Labour party would like to vote for someone who stood against the war. Three ministers resigned over Iraq - one is dead, one is in the Lords, the third is John Denham, the chair of the home affairs select committee. Now, he would give us a real debate.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2023745,00.html
Doesn’t mean he will stand, but it is quite significant in that it shows the discussion of Denham standing is not confined to the blogosphere.
I think the problem with UKIP isn’t the members, who for the most part are perfectly normal people (albeit with a rabid hatred for the EU) just slightly misguided in thinking that leaving the EU will solve all our problems. No the problem with UKIP is clearly the leadership. Those in the upper reaches of UKIP are quite clear - it is not so much an anti EU party as an anti Tory party. For whilst the issue of European integration is one alive in both Conservative AND Labour parties, UKIP only campaign to attract ex Conservative voters. I know a large number of Labour members - and councillors - who are rabidly anti EU, but won’t join UKIP because of it’s so called “Tory” policies. The idea is to create a right wing threat to the Conservative Party, in an attempt to see off David Cameron. The trouble is the vast majority of Conservative Party members actually quite like DC, as do a large proportion of the electorate - around 38-40%! I doubt that sort of percentage of the electorate even know who Nigel Farage is!
Now having dealt with my views on an irrelevant political pressure group, on to Mme Royal. One of my constituents, who tells me she is a French Socialist voter (she lives here part time) tells me she is totally frustrated with Segolene, and as a consequence will not be voting at all. I wonder what proportion of Socialist French will feel the same? Or are they more desperate to keep Nico Sarkozy out - anyone but him?
Any thoughts?
14 - Do you have details of this poll? The figures you quote sound odd - Labour +7, Plaid +4, Con +1, LD -2. This would suggest Others -10, which sound implausible. The Daily Post mentioned this poll today and said that more than 80% said Tony Blair’s departure would make no difference to the way they voted - although I suppose if nearly 20% said it would that could make quite a difference.
51 Benedict, you mentioned you had a blog. I wasn’t aware! Lol! Did you forget to tell us the URL?
ROFL!
37: I like the Freudian flavour of the discussion of a hung Parliament: “a few eeks back”.
The UKIP activists that I know (half a dozen) are all over 50 (like me), and wistfully recall an England of the John Major flavour - warm beer, low crime, cricket, and only a moderate awareness of things foreign. They are puzzled and resentful that Britain has changed so much and that we have agreed to share decisions on many issues with Continental countries. They don’t necessarily dislike Continentals, but feel they are essentially different and should be left to do their own thing. I like them and would entrust them to look after my dog and my life savings without hesitation, but they seem to me to hark back to a world that was never quite real. UKIP *voters* are often another matter - many of them are “We’re angry and we’re gonna show it” type who are perfectly willing to vote for the BNP or Genghis Khan, whatever gets our attention.
46. Chris from Paris: Have any of the recent polls shown results for Sarkozy vs Bayrou in the second round?
NO info on the ICM poll I’m afriad - got it from the BBC News Wales website.
sorry Mike but this sentence UKIP - the party which only a few weeks ago looked as though it might pose a threat to Cameron’s Conservatives is just plain daft. Unusually you have allowed a bit of LD wishful thinking into your article.
UKIP are and always have been a Keystone Kop party led by hugely egotistical nonentities who have never posed a serious threat to the Conservatives.
Nick Palmer is right about their voters; people who just want to kick the establishment. The reason he likes UKIP members so much is that their abiding hatred is for the tory party and they would rather live in Brown’s Marxist Paradise than under a mainstream right wing party.
60. Au contrair - Mike has typically talked UKIP down on here, culminating in the “Why UKIP are not a threat to Dave” (I’m paraphrasing) piece last month.
Anyone (ie NTL customers) else without Sky news today ? I’m left only with Al-Beeb. Freeview watchers will also lose it soon.
Will this not have an impact on the scale and importance of sky news ? If the numbers viewing are going to fall by over 50% (4million homes with cable and 8 million with freeview leaving only the 8 million that have Sky dishes) then are programs like Boulton’s going to suffer - Beeb 24 now the main hub for news.
This is also a downer in that on election night Sky is usually first with results and far more accurate.
A bad day !
Re 56, Ben, My blog? Why it’s here
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
[50][52]
Two housewives in the Valleys met in the street.
1st Housewife: did you know Gwladys was getting married?
2nd Housewife: I didn’t know she was pregnant.
1st HW: She isn’t.
2nd HW: There’s posh, then.
A pedant writes: are you trying to get yourself banned?
***** Grubby And Soiled Political Story Alert *****
There is uproar in Scottish Conservative circles today at the news that prisioners at Glasgows infamous Barlinnie Prison are in a state of high dudgeon, or is that dungeon, over having to wear soiled underwear for protracted periods.
Tory MSP Bill Aitken considered that the prisioners were being “mollycoddled”. Indeed this shitty state of affairs was a lesson to the lags not to break the law. Reports that Mark Oaten is on a flight to Glasgow cannot be confirmed.
Rumours are also ram(pant) that Tom Jones has also sent a discarded fans knicker parcel to Barlinnie. However it’s felt that “Crusher MacTavish” might not consider red silk undies quite this season on Cell block H !!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6404725.stm
61 Yes to be fair Mike has consistently recognised that UKIP pose no current threat. That they once did is also a fact but no longer
This lead shows just what fertile territory Cameron is faced with. At the moment he looks to be the only the sane figure standing as all those around him are losing their heads, losing their finances, bickering, plotting, squabbling- meanwhile Cameron can saunter gently on bathed in the glow of an extended honeymoon he is enjoying with the British public.
58- Jan from Norway- watching Gore at the Oscars I remembered your “pompous ass” quote- how apt, the guy clearly is much more interested now in his superstar status rather than putting in the hard graft of an election campaign. I am going to lay my bet on him.
67. Honeymoon with the British media, more like. They’ll tire eventually when they want a new story.
58 - Jan
the most recent is the LH2 published on 21 feb (fieldwork on 20 feb)which gave a 54/46 lead for Bayrou.
However 4 out of 6 pollsters do not publish them, because this case is still highly hypothetical (Royal lead over Bayrou still seems solid).
Nasty, small minded, single issue and reactionary, with personalities with huge egos.
It just had to go wrong and fall apart at some stage. Why is anybody surprised?
70. Bit harsh on Nu Lab eh Jack ?
62
‘Anyone (ie NTL customers) else without Sky news today ? I’m left only with Al-Beeb. Freeview watchers will also lose it soon.’
Yes, I woke up to the same fate,hopefully this will backfire big time on Murdoch,just amazed that this government stands back while Murdoch gradually monopolises the media and sports broadcasting.
I guess they are too afraid of upsetting him and TB doesn’t want his retirement plans ruined.
Actually BskyB has been referred to the competition authorities because of its stake in ITV.
73. How is that going to help me watch “24″ on Sunday
Kingo: you think I’m more Machiavellian than I am. I generally do like people, and the UKIP members who I know (one is my uncle) are no exception. They don’t seem to me to hate Tories.
61 I was only talking about that sentence in this article - I am well aware of Mike’s objectivism.
I disagree with commentator that UKIP ever posed any sort of threat to the Conservative Party at any stage. I’m with Mr Matlock, watching UKIP fall apart is almost as much fun as watching Bonkers Brown go mad whilst those around him remain too frightened to put up a coherent and serious challenge.
Charles Clarke on Newsnight was hilarious, Milburn was just his usual self, deeply unpleasant and sneering. Compard to these two I don’t suppose Labour MPs have much choice. A bit like UKIP, where Farage is useless but still more credible than any other alternative.
Re 67 Tyson “This lead shows just what fertile territory Cameron is faced with. At the moment he looks to be the only the sane figure standing as all those around him are losing their heads, losing their finances, bickering, plotting, squabbling- meanwhile Cameron can saunter gently on bathed in the glow of an extended honeymoon he is enjoying with the British public.”
I agree. One thing that amuses me is that Labour seem to be trying to get the control of the “agenda” they once had. this is of course a myth. They never actually had it. What they had was a media and public who thought they could do no wrong so did not report anything wrong.
Now they have a media that thinks they can do no right, much like the Conservatives pre 1997 and so are sunk what ever they do.
The positive stories about Cameron will continue.
Nick, I see you attended the ‘launch’ yesterday. what did you make of it? Are they serious about policy or stirring against Gordon?
76. Yes the ugly double act on Newsnight was weird, wasn’t it? These two has-beens wittering on about ‘the need for a debate’ while (unconvincingly) denying they were talking about the leadership. A strange exercise in shadow boxing that will have left many viewers very confused. For once, Paxman’s exasperated tone seemed quite appropriate.
70 “Nasty, small minded,…..and reactionary” sums up a significant swathe of the electorate.
The point is not whether UKIP do or do not survive but whether a revanchist right wing feal the NuTories are not for them. At which point it affects the electoral arithmetic. And it only has to be around 2% to matter
The problem with UKIP is the mutual hatreds of so many of its members. It attracts people who find it hard to work with other people, to achieve common objectives. I’d be willing to bet that something like 60,000 people *have* been members of UKIP at some point in its history - yet only 17,000 of those are currently members. The internet is filled with blogs run by ex-UKIP members trying to trash the party.
That said, I think the Electoral Commission’s behaviour is ridiculous. The purpose of the legislation is to catch donations by people who aren’t British - not to hammer parties over clerical errors.
I doubt if Yougov has been infiltrated by UKIP supporters. You’d need thousands of people to sign up to Yougov, and I just think it’s unlikely. I can easily believe that for 4-5% of the voters, Europe is the most important issue - and it’s natural for them to say they’d vote UKIP.
In urban areas, UKIP and the BNP do appeal to a similar electorate (look at the results in seats like Dagenham, Dudley North, Erith & Thamesmead in 2005) and the BNP will benefit in such areas if UKIP does implode.
75 Nick, why the thought of an MP being Machiavellian entered my head I don’t know
37 - the Lib Dems would get at least 45 seats on 19% of the vote. Baxter is just plain rubbish as a predictor.
A more likely scenario is one where Labour are the largest party (but significantly short of the winning post) and the Lib Dems refuse to back them. The only way for the Tories to get into government would then be with the Libs and AN Other party or parties.
You have to remember despite al the on line chat and opinion poll projections, on the ground it is very difficult for the Tories to get anywhere near the winning post in one election. Going from less that 200 seats to the largest party is a huge challenge in itself.
Last time I posted that I thought Nick Palmer was spot on (again), I was accused of ‘brown nosing’. But he has good handle on UKIP support, accurately distinguishing between their members and voters.
UKIP members don’t hate the tory party, so much as believing that Ted Heath is the anti-christ. He took us into the common market, knowing it would lead to the EU, and he knew he couldn’t tell people at the time. A deliberate and concious con. (Much different from TB’s sleight of hand).
UKIP is and will remain an important single issue pressure group. They will have a marginal impact in Westminster elections, but if there were a hung parliament, and the LDs secured PR, then the arithmetic changes. Votes for UKIP would no longer be ‘wasted’, and with a televisual leader, who didn’t try to bite off more than he chew, prospects would look rather brighter.
Meanwhile Shadow Conservative Chancellor, George Os(boy)rne, sets out Tory some proposals for the economy. Apparently stability is the watch word and nothing will be done to upset the smooth running of the nations tuck shop.
A recent run on gob stoppers has caused great distress and the monopoly position of the ice cream van (by the bike sheds) is being reviewed. The chewing gum franchise is also being negotiated as is the ad buys for the milky barchart kid.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6407077.stm
It’s no surprise UKIP are suddenly getting screwed after years of being ignored by the media. The reason is that the Tories decided after Congdon’s defection that they presented a serious danger - they devoted some money to research on them - UKIP incompetence did the rest and the Tories have served the stories up to the hacks.
Shame they can’t be bothered to do the same for Labour.
36
caught again.doh!
84. In my experience most Tories don’t think much of Ted Heath, either. You are spot on with your description of UK(R)IP as a ‘pressure group’ though.
For me, UKIP incompetence (or at least their lack of political reality) started when the party was formed. Rather than trying to ape the structures and aspirations of the established political parties, they should have recognised their Unique Selling Point and built on it.
They should have made UKIP into a combination of think tank, debating chamber and lobby group, whilst fighting the Euro elections alone. They should have positively welcomed members from all parties to join, but to keep their existing party memberships. Sure, the other parties would all say “You cannot join that lot and stay as a Tory/Lab/Lib Dem member, because they oppose us at Euro Elections!”, but so what? That isn’t UKIP’s problem.
They have wasted everybodies’ time by contesting local and Westminster elections, when they could have been one of the largest pressure groups in the UK. They could have helped to nurture anti-EU voices within the main parties, rather than just telling them that they are traitors who have sold out.
As it happens, I am a euro-fanatic, but some solid criticism of the EU is long overdue - and all UKIP ever seem to do is foam at the mouth whenever the subject is mentioned.
Who was it called them “The BNP in Blazers”? Originally someone on this site, I think.
87. You’re really not very good at this, are you?
76. Likewise, I’ve never understood the relative success of Alan Milburn. No doubt he’s a decent cove in private but his TV persona is deeply objectionable - aggressive, lairy, contemptuous, narcissistic, snide, and not-half-as-clever-or-as-funny-as-he-thinks. Compared to this Tony Blair and Gordon Brown are relatively well-rounded human beings.
Charles Clarke reminds me of Frederick ‘Fatty’ Trotteville, the smart blobster from Enid Blyton’s ‘five find-outers’.
o/t - a Northern Ireland poll ahead of the Assembly elections suggests bad news for the UUP:
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/election07/article2316063.ece
(Also suggests that the 4/1 offered on a Green gain in North Down I mentioned a little while ago was very good value!)
Worth noting that polls in Northern Ireland do not have the best track record though so I don’t know how meaningful any of this is.
89 - think thats what Sked initially saw as the UKIP objective - problem was that once they decided to be a political party then the USP was muddied by the seeking after representation.
The UKIP/BNP crossover is I believe because UKIP has adopted the issue of EU immigration (free movement of peoples) as something to hang their message around, hoping to use it as a springboard to get more support. This become their key message so not surprising they are now getting similar supporters to the BNP.
Unashamedly O/T - but the “lunchtime lull” may be as good a time as any to suggest a future topic.
Does anyone think there is a realistic prospect of effective cost control on the London Olympics? Whilst I am not suggesting that it will, or should, be funded in this way, the current estimates are in the order of £1,000 each year for every Council tax payer in London between now and then.
Does this not suggest that there will be a “scrap the Olympics” candidate at next year’s London Mayoral election since all three “real” parties are committed to the project?
Not for the first time, I wish I could afford to commission a poll - on this occasion, to find out how much extra Council tax Londoners would be willing to pay for the privilege of hosting the Games.
If you want to see the desperate state of Welsh politics go no further than Wales Labour Party’s latest political broadcast which can be viewed on Youtube.Obviously people in the Labour party think it’s great because Leighton ( Im never going to buy my wife a Burberry bag again) Andrews AM for the Rhondda is directing people to it.
Latest BBC Wales opinion poll also shows that most voters will probably not vote in the assembly elections on May 3rd and many didn’t even know there was an election. Only 43% recognised Rhodri Morgan who is supposed to be Labour’s main electoral asset. This figure was positively brilliant compared to the figures for the other party leaders. Only 7% recognised Plaid’s Ieuan Wyn Jones and the Tory Nick Bourne and the Lib Dems Mike German tied on 6%. This obviously makes it a little difficult for Labour to sustain the argument that voters should vote to stop a coaltion government led by the widely known Nick Bourne!
92 A combined vote of 41% for the DUP and UUP seems implausibly low.
Looks like No 10 is getting worried about Cruddas actually winning the deputy leadership election. In this week’s New Statesman Kevin Maguire writes:
‘The loose talk in Downing Street is of Blair preparing to give both barrels to his former adviser Jon Cruddas. The Dagenham MP’s rediscovery of radicalism since leaving No 10 has upset his former line manager, the PM-for-a-little-bit-longer vowing to do all in his power to stop his ex-hireling winning the Labour deputy’s tiara. With powerless enemies like Blair, Cruddas can relax.’
96 - absolutely. But if I were to guess who was the more under-represented between them I would have to say, going on past polls, it was the DUP. It is definitely not good for the UUP. The DUP might even be able to use it to scare unionists into thinking there is a realistic chance that SF might become the biggest party and hence get the First Minister role.
93. Ted - a bit back to front there. Alan Sked opposed standing for the EU parliament on the grounds that it would legitimise the institution, a theoretically cogent viewpoint but one which was not popular within UKIP. He wasn’t against standing for Westminster.
On your other point, there have always been UKIP members with strong anti-immigration views (and worse). UKIP’s adoption of immigration as an issue has reflected a) the big rise in public concern about it and b) an opportunistic attempt to outflank a more centrist Tory party. Unfortunately for UKIP, voters looking for a hard line on immigration have a more electorally effective choice - the BNP.
Re: 94 - Afternoon all :). I have to plead a conflict of interest here as I live in the London Borough of Newham, about a bus ride from the Olympic Stadium to be.
Right back from the beginning, there has been a vociferous anti-olympics minority (Nick Ferrari on his LBC soapbox for example) and of course the euphoria of getting the games on July 6th 2005 was tragically cut short just 24 hours later.
I think many people are aware that the costs of projects like this rise and often considerably over the lifecycle. The questions for me and other Londoners are 1) will there be a substantial return on the games such as we will not be up to your eyes in debt paying them off for years to come and 2) will the investment that the games brings to east London reap benefits in the years after 2012 ?
I think some of the alarmist reporting on this comes from that minority which never wanted the games in the first place. Obviously, I don’t want to pay £1,000 per year every year to 2012 but there’s no suggestion of that in my 2007-8 Council Tax and until I see some more substantive information, I will put a lot of what’s reported in the “scaremongering” file.
OT. American Presidential elections :
John Fortier of “The Hill” reviews his position on Obama and a number of new polls show Obama gaining on Hilary and Rudi leaving MaCain floundering :
http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Comment/JohnFortier/022807.html
http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2007/02/giuliani_out_front_obama_gaini.html
Sean and Neil I understood that the Alliance vote was largely a middle class Protestant vote; at 9% it suggests that the UUP, having lost votes to the Right(DUP), is now losing votes to the left ( if one can describe the Alliance in these terms). Adding up DUP, UUP and Alliance gets you 50% which with some small splinter voting may not be far off the mark. Does anyone know what this poll showed for the various Parties before the last assembly elections? If there was a shy Sinn Fein/DUP vote has this pollster tried to adjust for it?
Ever further OT.
Welsh goat at 95. Are there headline voting intention figures for this poll? Or are the BBC saving them for Dragon’s Eye tonight?
Oooh, must watch Rhun tonight then on Dragon’s Eye. How old is he? He looks about 15!
Unfashionably back on topic - big piece in today’s Birmingham Post from Frederick Forsyth on the ‘Speak Out’ campaign - sort of the referendum party redux but not actually a party, just a campaigning organisation. Could further spike the guns of UKIP?
72. “just amazed that this government stands back while Murdoch gradually monopolises the media”
National television audience shares:
BBC - 35%
ITV - 21%
Sky (total of all Sky channels) - 6%
92/96/98
Ignore the poll, I dont believe the headline figures at face value are going to reflect reality or, more imprtantly seats. Polls have been known to, for example, under-represent the DUP vote by anything upto 8%.
Mr Fear, you are correct,in short I think its a load of old balls.
98. The Alliance vote is mixed depending on where you go, Certainly I would categorise it as being more Protestant than Catholic but Alliance types would have me shot for saying so. It is noticeable that Alliance’s base is in strong unionist constituencies. Two reasons for thsi could be that a) Protestants do make up the greater proportion of Alliance’s vote, particularly in constituencies where it is considered a safe vote that doesn’t lea nationalist in and b) within those strongly unionist constituencies, some of which nationalist parties havent even a hope of one seat out of 6, the small proportion of Catholics in those areas may provide a strong Alliance vote.
A couple of things that the poll may be seen as verifying however are:
The demise of the UUP in terms of 1st prefernces. The UUP have been trying to move onto centre ground (despite the absurd PUP link up) but they are under pressue all over the place and considered very much moribund. They do expect losses. A 2/1 split DUP to UUP first prefernce outcome is very plausible but the UUP may well see a good number of their guys slip in down the card with intra unionist transfers.
Alliance have been very bullish. I think I predicted 1 gain overall for them though their party leader’s seat is under threat himself. Certainly there may well be a soft UUP base that is moving Alliance for first preferences, but you can probably bet their No.2’s & 3’s will be UUP. Those drifting to the DUP are just as liable to do the same.
The re-emergence of the SDLP. Again, there has been feeling amongst many that the SF/SDLP battle which has for some time been showing relentless SF gains has pretty much topped out and that there may be slight swing back to the SDLP. There are a few constituencies where the two are engaed in what appears to be a straight fight for the last available nationalist seat whith every possibility that a loss in one area could see a gain in another. In seat terms, SF may well lose 1 or 2 overall, Id suggest they’d be doing well to post a single overall gain though I don’t expect their vote % to show more than 1-2% gain, if at all. The SDLP could gain 1 overall but there is intra party warfare in some areas where they really need to fight hard to keep SF out so hard to tell if that is going to ruin some of their effort.
The stay at homes. I speculated a day or two ago on pb.com (I think, it may have been the lovely Slugger O’Toole forum) that stay at homes may well be a serious issue here on both sides of this election.
No one seems to have a handle on the rejectionists in both camps and how much damage they will do. They don’t seem to making real waves in terms of winning themselves but they may deny their former friends in the DUP or SF a seat.
100 Stodge - You coyly ‘declare an interest’? I am so bloody partisan it isn’t true.
I was dragged up in Hackney and spent much of my yoof on Hackney Marshes and at Hackney dogs. The first time I heard of the central location proposed for the Olympics I thought ‘Brilliant; couldn’t be anywhere better suited.’ The whole area is centuries overdue for redevelopment and only something as big as this would do the trick.
Personally I’d happily write out a cheque for £2k if it’s needed. Everybody knows these events always cost more than originally planned. Do you want them or not? If you want them, pay for them.
Who’s this Nick Ferrari? If he’s the son of the Ferrari I went to school with, tell him if he doesn’t pipe down, I’ll go round and nut his old man. Wouldn’t be the first time.
107 I’d have thought the abstentionists (on both sides) are most likely to stay at home in seats that are either strongly nationalist, or strongly unionist, and so won’t make that much difference to overall seat totals.
Overall, I’d expect something like DUP 30%, SF 23%, SDLP 18%, UUP 17%, Alliance 6%, Other Unionist (including Conservatives) 4%, Others 3%.
109 - How would these shares compare to the last Assembly elections?
Yokel and Sean I gladly bow to your superior knowledge on the NI scene. Thanks for the analysis.
111 Thanks, but Yokel knows a good deal more than I do.
110 Virtually unchanged on the nationalist side. On the Unionist side, DUP up 4%, UUP down 6%. Also, Alliance would be up 2%. These would be very similar to the vote shares won in the 2005 local elections.
109. Yeah I’d agree with that. Where they may cause an issue though is that SF & DUP are either in puruit of a fresh seat or indeed holding one at the bottom of the card where the dissidents/stay at homes may deny them that gain or indeed lose them one. Newry & Armagh is one example where the SDLP could for example nick the last seat from SF due to a positive rejectionist vote.
Can’t argue with the DUP/UUP proportions. My 2/1 ratio was pretty loose but isnt millions of miles far off your more precise predictions. There is little doubt the UUP are in the mire compared to where they were but I can’t see them losing more than 2-3 in actuality due to people voting down the card. The DUP could have been running bigger slates in some areas where they had some chance of an extra seat but haven’t bothered. For the DUP this campaign is consolidation, for SF its the same.
I think much of the shock value of the poll is headlines and, apart from the UUP numbers (which are not too far off figures in actual recent elections for them where they polled as low as 17.7%) once you start inputting them into very politically divided constituencies and the vagaries of STV, there will only be some deckchair shifting. I have seen just one speculation that there may a transfer of a seat between the communities here.
I took that 4/1 on Wilson in North Down along with 9/4 on the DUP topping the 1st refernce poll in North Down. Otherwise there’s nothing else I’ve fancied punting on in this election.
Where it could become interesting is if the somehow UUP hang on to their seats and SF drop one. Both parties would thus have the same number of seats with possible implications for the sharing of ministerial posts. Thats going to be freakishly hard as, for example, in South Belfast the UUP are looking almost certain to lose one with no areas where a gain is likely.
110. 2003, DUP 25%, SF 23.5, UUP 22.2%, SDLP 17%..no idea on the others…
“Polls have been known to, for example, under-represent the DUP vote by anything upto 8%”
Yokel, do polls also under-estimate Sinn Fein or do they usually get them right?
114 - they have tended to underestimate SF in the past too
113 - I hope the Wilson bet comes off - I noticed he was in to 2/1 today (which I still think is value). Paddy Power have just put some odds for the Northern Ireland elections up so it might be worthwhile checking those for value too.
114. As Neil has pointed out, SF’s vote is historically under represented.
I do wonder though if that stigma is slipping away a bit.
I wonder why we don’t have any Welsh polls? Perhaps we’ll find out tonight. You’d think at least the BBC or the Western Mail would commission one. If they can do it for NI, they can do it for Wales!
115/6. Thanks
117. I wonder if ICM poll reported on BBC website has also asked voting intention questions. And if not, why!
62 & 72 - Yes I’m affected as well, although I’m more concerned about losing Sky 1 than Sky News.
It looks to me as if we have two billionaire empire builders here and not one and the customers are caught in the middle.
Virgin claims that they are protecting customers from dreadful increases by Sky but they will not reduce their charges by the amount they now save by not broadcasting these channels, it’s going to boost their profits.
This all reminds me of those old mega-union disputes when the unions and the management both proclaimed publically their concern for the general public whilst at the same time doing nothing but follow their own selfish agendas.
119. No up to date Simpsons….I see a ‘Falling Down’ style incident coming on……..
72 I’ve asked Virgin if I can have a refund now tbat I’ve not got Sky Channels which I never wanted in the first place. Murdoch’s welcome to them and I shan’t miss them at all. The only thing I’ve ever watched on them was Mile High!
57.
“an England of the John Major flavour - warm beer, low crime, cricket,”
. . . .and a coarse mistress from Liverpool for when you feel like a full toss banged through the covers!
“But if UKIP is seen to be a shambles and a joke then the threat to the Tory leadership diminishes and the discontented right-wingers have nowhere really where they can go.”
Not true at all.
In recent polls the BNP have outperformed UKIP quite considerably. The BNP is the natural home for ‘discontented right-wingers’. It seems that more and more are visiting the BNP website, or meeting BNP canvassers, and liking what they are seeing. It is always an eye-opener when you realise the BNP are not at all as portrayed in the media but are in reality just ordinary, decent, friendly, patriotic men and women like you.
I will be very un happy when UKIP sink beneath the waves…
…I will have to stop Blogging and get a proper job!
Nice page. It’s good to have kids who can use this medium to find you
de, - Sunday, February 22, 2004 at 11:47:29 (PST)
great
This site is truly a great resource thanks for all your hard work
Nice page. It’s good to have kids who can use this medium to find you
Well, I take no pleasure in seeing any emerging party being stuffed by the establishment. All three mainstream parties are incompetent, self interested and not worthy of government.
We desperately need PR to shake them all up. Until we get some competition we have the same old sleaze filled game of pass the parcel with the only winners the snout in the trough politicians.
I am disgusted with the whole unedifying spectacle, especially when Labour get away “SCOT” Free with their dubious £14 Million pounds in loans, the Lib Dum with their 2.5 million donation from a fraudster and the Tories have so many vested interests propping them up. UKIP was the first emerging truly Euro Sceptic Party. If it falls by the wayside the one that comes behind it will be the one that will not only STAY but will (in the fullness of time) whip the backside of all three of the other anti-English parties.
THE ENGLISH DEMOCRATS …. they may be small, but they are being powered by the English Nation, and that is more than can be said by the other three parties. Certainly when the ED’s take a hold, all three parties can start worrying about their political futures.
All electoral signs are set fair and with UKIP on the wane and BNP unelectable the EDP are there to build on the calitions it has already made and with a sensible business orientated team supported by a widening network of sympathisers - who knows what will happen next…………..