Saint Nigel with his nose in the trough
Discussion
Scuffers said:
really?
so, you think that the headlines would have been exactly the same for the last few months without their presence?
you think we would even be talking about EU referendums without UKIP pushing it?
why do you think the Times posted the story on Nigel today?
look, nobody is suggesting they are suddenly running the country, but it's pretty blinkered to suggest they are not having a pretty significant effect on the process right now.
The thing is that WW and maybe some others do appear to think that UKIP really is in control. That's plain daft. so, you think that the headlines would have been exactly the same for the last few months without their presence?
you think we would even be talking about EU referendums without UKIP pushing it?
why do you think the Times posted the story on Nigel today?
look, nobody is suggesting they are suddenly running the country, but it's pretty blinkered to suggest they are not having a pretty significant effect on the process right now.
To respond to you main point, UKIP currently has a major share in what we might call the national conversation, I grant you, but to mistake that for control of the political process is, I suggest, naive or wishful thinking Media driven conversations are curious things anyway - look how much time we spend worrying about things that, in cost and other impact terms, are much less important than things we hardly talk about. Certain issues make more noise than others. The underclass, for example, and benefits malarkey, and migration generally. Important issues, doubtless, but generating fuss that is arguably not proportionate to real importance set against other things. The EU is plainly important, but there are things more pressing than the EU, and I doubt that it will be the key determinant of the 2015 election. Edit: I I said lots of things, but that over states it. Some things.
Hats off, also, to the slick UKIP spin machine and to Farage for his mastery of the game. He presents himself as plain old Joe Bloke, but he is in reality a highly skilled player of the public mood.
[
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 15th April 19:04
Hannan correctly stated ' This is because the sum in question is an allowance, not a claim. It is handed over unconditionally, with no requirement for receipts. Much of the row of the past 24 hours is based on a misunderstanding of this point and, in fairness, it is quite a hard concept to grasp.'
I don't think it's hard to grasp at all. The delicious irony is that UKIP MEPS use the EU allowances to fight the EU.
I don't think it's hard to grasp at all. The delicious irony is that UKIP MEPS use the EU allowances to fight the EU.
Breadvan72 said:
WinstonWolf said:
Yup, they've got you, nunners, Wombat and BV well rattled 
Hard to judge how much influence? Just look at how many smear threads have been started in NP&E. If UKIP weren't having any influence why would you bother discussing it?
They're not having an influence, they're firmly in the driving seat.
No matter how many times you assert that people (variously classed as those pesky lefties, or the evil Establishment "them", or Uncle Tom Cobbley, or whoever) are afraid of UKIP, the fact remains that I'm not, and I have never met anyone who fears UKIP. Laughs at, yes. As for the evil Establishment, I don't know what Cameron thinks, but I doubt that he lies awake at night sweating in fear of Nige and his Mighty Legion of Truth. Sorry to rain on your parade, but that's just how it is. Hard to judge how much influence? Just look at how many smear threads have been started in NP&E. If UKIP weren't having any influence why would you bother discussing it?
They're not having an influence, they're firmly in the driving seat.
Driving seat? What of? Some pedal car at a Garden Fete?
WinstonWolf said:
If Cameron isn't afraid why won't he debate live with Farage? We all know the answer to that, Farage would slaughter him on live TV...
It's very easy to make promises when you think you'll never have to deliver them.If the obligation ever arises, of course, you're f
ked. Just ask Clegg.10 Pence Short said:
WinstonWolf said:
If Cameron isn't afraid why won't he debate live with Farage? We all know the answer to that, Farage would slaughter him on live TV...
It's very easy to make promises when you think you'll never have to deliver them.If the obligation ever arises, of course, you're f
ked. Just ask Clegg.
einsign said:
All attacked for being "privately educated former Conservatives".So, just like Farage then.
WinstonWolf said:
If Cameron isn't afraid why won't he debate live with Farage? We all know the answer to that, Farage would slaughter him on live TV...
It would be good to see this - it will never happen though (for the reason you suggest).I find it strange how some conservative posters are completely obsessed with criticising UKIP... It's almost like UKIP might cost the conservatives the next election...
10 Pence Short said:
Still nothing.
The UKIP supporters cannot name one single thing UKIP have done over and above rhetoric in support of their purported aims. Not one thing.
What they've done is got the issue right to the top of the news agenda. I wasn't really much interested 20 years ago when the party was founded, but I was interested in the 1999 elections when EU withdrawal really was a fringe idea - getting a couple of MEPs was viewed then as an incredible result. The idea that in a few years time they'd be looking to be the biggest party in the European elections, that we would have the Conservatives promising a referendum, TV debates against the leader of the Lib Dems and a true national debate about the merits of EU membership seemed miles away. UKIP have been a big part of making the happen.The UKIP supporters cannot name one single thing UKIP have done over and above rhetoric in support of their purported aims. Not one thing.
To be honest my 21 year old self soon lost interest and wrote the party off as a nice idea but probably too full of bitter old men and obsessive loonies to ever really get anywhere. I was wrong and despite a lot of hiccups on the way the party has got stronger and stronger.
It's hard to do anything very concrete with a dozen MEPs and a handful of councillors but if the next 15 years are as successful as the last then it's all to play for.
Scuffers said:
are you being deliberately stupid or what?
which part of MEP's have nothing what so ever to do with policy making in the EU do you not understand?
all they can do is vote on stuff put before them by the EU commission, ie, a bunch of un-elected bureaucrats (think Neil Kinnock, Chris Patten, Leon Brittan, Roy Jenkins, Christopher Soames, etc etc)
none of which are UKIP (or even ex UKIP) so just how do you expect UKIP to have instigated change in EU?
As has been said, before you go on, I suggest you might want to read up on how EU works...
And yet they are quite happy to take expenses / pocket money / advances without contributing anything bar occasional Farage diatribe that only really appeal to faithful. As you say they are completely powerless. This is the part that I personally have a problem with. I agree with you that they are powerless. So why be there in the first place. Why not lobby for change within UK. Sans EU member states provided money. The whole 'we'll take as much money as possible just to show how wasteful system is' is stupid. Or bent. Or both.which part of MEP's have nothing what so ever to do with policy making in the EU do you not understand?
all they can do is vote on stuff put before them by the EU commission, ie, a bunch of un-elected bureaucrats (think Neil Kinnock, Chris Patten, Leon Brittan, Roy Jenkins, Christopher Soames, etc etc)
none of which are UKIP (or even ex UKIP) so just how do you expect UKIP to have instigated change in EU?
As has been said, before you go on, I suggest you might want to read up on how EU works...
einsign said:
Is 'privately educated' a bad thing now? I understand the part about job history, party membership and so on. But why 'privately educated'? league67 said:
And yet they are quite happy to take expenses / pocket money / advances without contributing anything bar occasional Farage diatribe that only really appeal to faithful. As you say they are completely powerless. This is the part that I personally have a problem with. I agree with you that they are powerless. So why be there in the first place. Why not lobby for change within UK. Sans EU member states provided money. The whole 'we'll take as much money as possible just to show how wasteful system is' is stupid. Or bent. Or both.
On such an important issue I hope Farage racks up every penny of legitimate EU allowance to help him make his case. It's bizarre to assert that because you disagree with how politics currently works you should have to exclude yourself entirely from the political process.
It would be like the lib dems refusing to field any MPs because they do not agree with first past the post.
The real issue is not allowances, or UKIP policy. It's that the Tory party mostly agree with Farage. They are therefore forced to play the man rather than the ball.
league67 said:
einsign said:
Is 'privately educated' a bad thing now? I understand the part about job history, political membership and so on. But why 'privately educated'? 0a said:
On such an important issue I hope Farage racks up every penny of legitimate EU allowance to help him make his case.
It's bizarre to assert that because you disagree with how politics currently works you should have to exclude yourself entirely from the political process.
It would be like the lib dems refusing to field any MPs because they do not agree with first past the post.
The real issue is not allowances, or UKIP policy. It's that the Tory party mostly agree with Farage. They are therefore forced to play the man rather than the ball.
Ok, lets do this step by step. Consensus so far is that they haven't managed to do anything because they are powerless. Do you think that it is necessary for all MEPs to join the 'gravy train' in order for NF to make his case? I just don't see it. Do you think that NF stunts at EU parliament advance their case? Or does it make them sidelined and even less able to do anything about anything. Because of the above the comparison with LD is not valid. It's bizarre to assert that because you disagree with how politics currently works you should have to exclude yourself entirely from the political process.
It would be like the lib dems refusing to field any MPs because they do not agree with first past the post.
The real issue is not allowances, or UKIP policy. It's that the Tory party mostly agree with Farage. They are therefore forced to play the man rather than the ball.
Posters here seems to think that NF is the change that they are longing for. I'd like the change to. I'm very certain that NF is not the person to deliver that. Can't see anyone on the political scene that is able and willing to deliver required change.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/nigel-...
The front page of The Times, the newspaper of the establishment and passionate supporter of David Cameron, has grossly misled the British public in its latest chapter of the smear campaign against me.
A month or so ago it tried, via a politically motivated opponent of mine in the European Parliament, to start a different investigation into my use of EU money. The bureaucracy has belatedly announced – on Monday night – that there was no case to answer, not even enough evidence to request an investigation by Olaf, the European Commission’s anti-fraud office. The very next day The Times opens-up another equally vacuous front.
As a party we have been expecting this; Ukip is doing well in the polls and posing a threat to the status quo. This week’s Times article is based on erroneous second-hand testimony and crass misinterpretation.
The use by The Times of the word “expenses” is a deliberate and cynical attempt to conflate the anger over MPs expenses with the way that MEPs work. I have not claimed any expenses for an office in the UK.
All MEPs are given a fixed allowance of £3,580 per month. They do not have to provide receipts for any of that expenditure, but there is a list that gives suggestions of what the money might be spent on. This includes hotel bills, meeting rooms, mobile phone bills, newspapers, and yes, the cost of an MEP office. Whilst my office has been kindly lent to me by a supporter, there are still associated running costs to pay. Like other UK MEPs, I publish a list of the types of things on which the allowance is spent, this I do entirely voluntarily as I recognise that it is public money.
It is not for me to defend this system: after all, I want it abolished. Ever since 1999, I have expressly stated that Ukip MEPs will use the wherewithal provided by the EU Parliament to campaign for Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union.
In their editorial on Monday, even The Times had to admit that it was “probable” that I have done nothing illegal – I have always said that I will use all legal means to get us out of the EU, and I make absolutely no apologies for using EU money to do it.
In the last 15 years, I have travelled more miles and spoken at more meetings than any other British MEP. I believe that the rise in Eurosceptic opinion demonstrates that putting in the hard effort and mileage has done some good for our cause.
But this week The Times have reached a new low: referring to allegations made by a so-called “whistle-blower” who is currently under a suspended sentence for fraud and forgery. In sentencing her, the judge described her actions in that case as an attempt to “deflect attention from [her] own dishonesty by mounting a wholesale attack on [another Ukip MEP’s] character.”
As if besotted, The Times have published the accusation that I have siphoned money to the Cayman Islands. This is utterly outrageous.
Of course we’re a threat to the Establishment – and it is a sign of the times that that word is now said with an almost audible hiss in the background. We want to limit the power of bureaucracy and quangos and make politicians accountable to the voters. We don’t like the Westminster bubble keeping our lawmakers, newspaper editors and commentators living in a different world to the rest of the country. If they are worried about Ukip’s increasing popularity, they need only look in a mirror to see who to blame.
And if they want to continue to kick the underdog they might be surprised by the results.
The front page of The Times, the newspaper of the establishment and passionate supporter of David Cameron, has grossly misled the British public in its latest chapter of the smear campaign against me.
A month or so ago it tried, via a politically motivated opponent of mine in the European Parliament, to start a different investigation into my use of EU money. The bureaucracy has belatedly announced – on Monday night – that there was no case to answer, not even enough evidence to request an investigation by Olaf, the European Commission’s anti-fraud office. The very next day The Times opens-up another equally vacuous front.
As a party we have been expecting this; Ukip is doing well in the polls and posing a threat to the status quo. This week’s Times article is based on erroneous second-hand testimony and crass misinterpretation.
The use by The Times of the word “expenses” is a deliberate and cynical attempt to conflate the anger over MPs expenses with the way that MEPs work. I have not claimed any expenses for an office in the UK.
All MEPs are given a fixed allowance of £3,580 per month. They do not have to provide receipts for any of that expenditure, but there is a list that gives suggestions of what the money might be spent on. This includes hotel bills, meeting rooms, mobile phone bills, newspapers, and yes, the cost of an MEP office. Whilst my office has been kindly lent to me by a supporter, there are still associated running costs to pay. Like other UK MEPs, I publish a list of the types of things on which the allowance is spent, this I do entirely voluntarily as I recognise that it is public money.
It is not for me to defend this system: after all, I want it abolished. Ever since 1999, I have expressly stated that Ukip MEPs will use the wherewithal provided by the EU Parliament to campaign for Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union.
In their editorial on Monday, even The Times had to admit that it was “probable” that I have done nothing illegal – I have always said that I will use all legal means to get us out of the EU, and I make absolutely no apologies for using EU money to do it.
In the last 15 years, I have travelled more miles and spoken at more meetings than any other British MEP. I believe that the rise in Eurosceptic opinion demonstrates that putting in the hard effort and mileage has done some good for our cause.
But this week The Times have reached a new low: referring to allegations made by a so-called “whistle-blower” who is currently under a suspended sentence for fraud and forgery. In sentencing her, the judge described her actions in that case as an attempt to “deflect attention from [her] own dishonesty by mounting a wholesale attack on [another Ukip MEP’s] character.”
As if besotted, The Times have published the accusation that I have siphoned money to the Cayman Islands. This is utterly outrageous.
Of course we’re a threat to the Establishment – and it is a sign of the times that that word is now said with an almost audible hiss in the background. We want to limit the power of bureaucracy and quangos and make politicians accountable to the voters. We don’t like the Westminster bubble keeping our lawmakers, newspaper editors and commentators living in a different world to the rest of the country. If they are worried about Ukip’s increasing popularity, they need only look in a mirror to see who to blame.
And if they want to continue to kick the underdog they might be surprised by the results.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff