Tuesday, 27 November 2012

Farage talks the talk. Can he walk the walk?

There is a good piece by Farage in today's DT. He is clearly trying to widen UKIP's appeal from disaffected right wing Tories to the poor indigenous population. "Even on the great immigration  debate those in Westminster village cannot, do not and will not feel the impact of large numbers of low skilled migrants arriving here. Its great to have cheap help but not if you are from the sector of society used to provide the help." Its a point I have often made. These people  have seen their wages driven down and have no one to speak for them now New Labour is pandering to the immigrant vote.

Jeff Randall made exactly the same point rather better in Monday's DT in his piece entitled 'Del Boy Blair peddles immigration myths'. Randall writes that big business support for the EU is nothing but naked self interest. Again its the argument I have been making for years and its the argument that can winn UKIP huge numbers of votes this week in Rotherham and Croydon I hope.

Randall finishes as always with a telling sound bite, "The impact of immigration on those living in the Cotswolds manor houses is clearly not the same as it is on minimum wage workers in Barking council flats. Tony Blair knows that but could not care less.

The first person to warn UKIP against becoming a Tory pressure group was its founder Alan Sked.
He is warning again against UKIP being infiltrated by Neanderthal Tories click on


The  piece is headlined UKIP is morally dodgy and extraordinarily right wing. Farage has to correct this asap but with his association with nasty right wingers in the European Parliament it will be very difficult. You see that association generates extra loot and kudos for EUKIP and Nigel. To parody Marilyn Monroe's song a kiss on the cheek can be quite continental but Euros are an MEPs best friend.

So Nigel lets see you walk the walk on that one.


ALAN WOOD said...

Dear Eric,

Finally it seems that Farage is getting the message that the EU is more damaging to the public at large than to the Tory grandees: there are as many if not more votes to be had from Labour than from the Conservatives at the moment.
I am quite shocked by the postbag I get from people in my circle outside of politics regarding the immigration issue, especially regarding Muslims. There is clearly an undercurrent of resentment.
Farage will establish UKIP as the champion of the people on this issue without needing to point out to the public that BNP will not deliver on immigration. The public can sense a party that meets their needs.
As the Lib-Dems found, changing perceptions and opinions takes time.
Farage also needs a top economist to suggest a way of getting UK out of the economic mess. He also needs to get some top businesses in the energy field to help him plot a way forward. Without energy there is no economy.

Eric Edmond said...


I agree. Its the working class Labour vote that UKIP should go after.

The immigration issue is critical because of its impact on this large group who pay the price of immigration.

I have just had a sharp difference of opinion with UKIP's current top econmist, Tim Congdon on BoE mpney printing. I have pointed out to him that the Governor designate did not do money printing in Canada but guaranteed two years of 0.5% rates but then Carney is a banker who understands business wheras Tim and King are economists who really only understannd other economists.

Re energy we have to ditch useless, costly wind farms currently disfiguring our landscape and go for a misture of nuclear and gas.

Mike Bridgeman said...

tides rise about 20 ft and fall about 20 feet. All shipping rises 20 feet and falls 20 feet. That's millions of tons feet that can be changed from potential energy into kinetic energy and into electricity.
Change ships for pontoons.
Less gas, less oil, less nuclear and more self sufficiency. We are surrounded by tides.

Eric Edmond said...

Agreed.It costs a lot to build these facilities but tides are very reliable.

Greg_L-W. said...


tampering with tides COULD be the death of Britain as to alter tides in any way risks effecting the essential task they carry out - that of washing our beaches and dredging our estuaries twice a day!

Nuclear on the other hand is far safer and would be even safer still had it not been for the Communist support of idiot organisations like CND who were willing to accept Communist money to undermine Western developement.

It was CND that has held back nuclear research by 50 years - research which could well have provided SAFE nuclear energy be that by fission or fussion by now.

CND, Green Peace etc. are directly responsible for Fukushima (sp?) and the fact that their technology and safetly was 30 years out of date!

Japan is STILL mere hours from annihilation as the problems of Fukushima are not solved merely the short term symptoms on a day to day basis!


Eric Edmond said...


Man cannot tamper with the tide. The forces exceed man made force including nuclear many thousands of times. Canute showed that.

Nuclear waste is very toxic and has a half life of thousands of years. Safe disposal is the bit you have to get right as well as reactor safety.