Tuesday, 28 May 2013

Farage's EUKIP lacks talent and policies

I do not buy the Murdoch Sunday Times press but I gather their headline on their Farage interview was headlined,

"I must be big – I now need bodyguards"

A coment that displays the illogic and vanity of Farage. He needed protection in Scotland because there he is an unpopular man saying unpopular things. Surely Mr Charisma needs no bodyguards in his home counties' citadel! It will be costing someone, not NF, a packet to provide this vanity cover.

I gather that in the same piece Farage admits that many of the UKIP party hierarchy all of whom were appointed by Farage himself flawed characters. Its another example of his illogical reasoning that led to Andreasen and Bannerman being put high on UKIP slates. Its a long list of names of those deemed wanting by Farage. Come April 2014 there will be a cull of current and wannabe UKIP MEPs. There will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth but he/she who has progressed in UKIP by sucking up to NF will perish by their uncritical adulation. Worse these talentless sycophants have facilitated Farage purging people of talent and integrity from UKIP. That's why UKIP has such a huge policy vacuum.   

So its no surprise to find UKIP so bereft of policies that Bloom suggests buying policies in. Alan Sked rightly points out this lays bare UKIP's intellectual bankruptcy for all the world to see. In other political parties its people of education, experience and talent who develop party policy. UKIP is singularly lacking in members fitting these criteria. I have written before how pathetic I found Bannerman's policy efforts. They were just a rag bag of old failed Tory manifesto commitments and completely without merit.

Current EUKIP policies are invariably not thought through, self contradictory and their only idea of costing is to say everything will be paid for by withdrawing from the EU and its regulatory burden. That will save some money but not nearly enough to pay for UKIP's uncosted wish list.

There are sure fire vote losers in UKIP's policy box particulary the reintroduction of grammar schools. In the old days for very child who got into a grammar nine did not. So UKIP gains one vote and loses nine. I would withdraw tax breaks from public schools which thanks to Cameron, Clegg and Osborne are very unpopular with most of the UK electorate and are only accessible to the wealthy and priveleged ie the Tories . That gains you a lot of votes, loses none , saves tax payers money and in the long run good for the country.

As Sked points out there is a place for a Eurosceptic party in the Centre Left ground where Blair won 3 elections. Thats where UKIP has to be to win. It can never be there with Farage and his collection of Tory rejects.


Mike Bridgeman said...

I must beg to differ over the issue of education and, in particular grammar schools.
I liken comprehensive education to the EU.
It all gets thrown into a melting pot, everything has to be the same for all, and it comes out boring and average.
This is what the 3 main parties strive for, the centre ground, and being all things to all people. I think Ukip have it right. Yes, they may lose a few votes but it's about principle and beliefs.
Cast your mind back to the 50's and 60's, a time when, for a short period, I taught in a grammar school. About 3% of students went on to university when a degree meant something. We now have about 50% going to what are euphemistically called universities. No wonder there are so many unemployed graduates. But can you get a plumber or a carpenter? And if you can are they any good?
The education system needs to encourage talent in the arts, the sciences, technicality and offer a level of education commensurate with people's ability.
I hope I have not made too many spelling mistakes.

Eric Edmond said...

I agree with your points supporting the benefits to some of a grammar school education and yes net net it would be a benefit to the country but in a UK democracy its a vote loser.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Mike Bridgeman on the subject of grammar schools - and don't forget the old "B pass" tech schools.

On the centre left thing I think Thatcher tapped into the psyche of the working class - she was credited with the rise of the working class Conservative; they voted her back into power several times.

It is the creation and nurturing of the C2s that will reap dividends - Dave and his Con gang are latching on to this.

But, once again, UKIP is a party led by Farage - if there are enough free-thinking people who can get themselves elected under a UKIP banner they can forge alliances to oppose and enforce a better style of party democracy.

ALAN WOOD said...

As a former grammar school pupil I benefited from the excellent education provided free to me.
In later years the case for comprehensive schools was made on the basis that grammar schools were elitist and the free education provided at a comprehensive school by streaming was comparable.
Who knows whether the top slice of a comprehensive school compares with the major portion of a grammar school entry ?

For UKIP to win a general election and have a majority in Parliament it needs policies which appeal to the majority of the electorate.
I remember the Bannerman Policy document which was an agglomeration of every contributors wish list.

It used to be the case that a manifesto only needed 5 bullet point issues because the public cannot cope with more.

In recent elections it has been reduced to 2 - schools 'n hospitals.

For UKIP it probably needs to be reduced to 3: highlighting the problem of immigration caused by EU rule, lower taxation and job creation by leaving the EU.

The latter 2 would need working on in secret by a trusted small team so that policies are not stolen by the other parties. The negative EU dimension needs to be introduced wherever possible.