In his cover story for last week’s Spectator, Fraser described how the Frankfurt Group – which he dubbed ‘a new EU hit squad’ – has begun imposing it’s will on Greece and Italy. In the European Parliament on Wednesday night, Ukip leader Nigel Farage made the same case against them – and quite forecefully, too: It’s now going viral, with over 75,000 views so far.
‘Cat-flap’ is the story that just won’t go away. A report in today’s Guardian claims that the whole story may have been lifted from a speech made by Nigel Farage, the leader of the UK Independence Party. One colleague of May’s tells the paper that “Not only has Ms May been caught out making up stories about the Human Rights Act for cheap laughs, she has been plagiarising her clap lines from the UK Independence party.” In the grand scheme of things, this is hardly the most serious charge. There’s just enough truth to the cat anecdote for May to have some ground to stand on and most Tories, understandably,
The Tories are cock-a-hoop about the defection of UKIP MEP David Campbell Bannerman – positively crowing, in fact. “There’s nothing more satisfying,” said one CCHQer, “than UKIP suffering.” Activists and MPs alike reckon that the Conservatives could have won a majority last May if it weren’t for UKIP in the south-west. Vengeance is sweet, but is it of lasting importance? Campbell Bannerman has used a blog post to justify his action: David Cameron is an inspiring leader and an avowed eurosceptic. Perhaps it will become a salve for the right, increasingly seen as Cameron’s blind spot. Equally, the answers Campbell Bannerman gave to Total Politics’ Amber Elliott could be used
One consequence of coalition and the student fees row is, as Nick Clegg said this morning, that the Lib Dems will be more careful about what they sign up to at the next election. This will create political space for a party that is prepared to advocate populist but unrealistic policies such as abolishing tuition fees. I strongly suspect that Labour will choose not to occupy this space, appearing credible will still be the most important thing to them. So, this raises the question of who will try and move into this slot? UKIP aren’t ideologically suited to it, although Farage is a canny enough operator that little can be
Away from turbulent priests and the welfare battle, there have been important changes to electoral politics today. The coalition partners will fight one another in Oldham East and Saddleworth. The seat is a three way marginal, which was number 83 on the Tories’ target list – precisely the sort of seat they’ll need to win in 2015. However, as James noted on Friday, the Liberal Democrats’ need is greater at the moment. Already, tongues are wagging that a pimpled Etonian is destined to journey north of the Watford Gap, safe in the knowledge that gallant defeat will ensure he is the next Prime Minister but three. Enter Nigel Farage, opportunistically.
For a while then, it looked as though Britain and France really were going to share aircraft carriers as a mesure d’austérité. But, today, Liam Fox seems to have put a block on the idea, describing it in Paris as “utterly unrealistic”. He did, though, add that we could pool some of our transport planes and helicopters with the French (which sounds like the military equivalent of hitching a lift, if we happen to be going in the same direction). And Fox’s spokesman has since said that there still might be “strategic co-operation across the maritime domain,” whatever that means. So some sort of link-up with the French should be
The Telegraph’s Andrew Porter reports that UKIP leader Nigel Farage will stand against Speaker Bercow in Buckingham at the next election. Farage explained his decisision: “This man represents all that is wrong with British politics today. He was embroiled in the expenses saga and he presides over a Parliament that virtually does nothing.” Farage has more than an outside chance of winning this very safe Tory seat. It’s fair to say that Bercow’s expense claims and his election as Speaker, facilitated almost exclusively by Mr Brown’s MPs, have not endeared him to the party faithful – even Tim Montgomerie confides he’d be tempted to vote UKIP if he were registered
That didn’t take long, did it? After only a year in charge of UKIP, Lord Pearson has quit the role even more abruptly than he took it. In his resignation statement, he confesses that he is “not much good” at party politics – and it is hard to disagree. A memorable low was his interview on the Campaign Show in which he was only dimly acquainted with his party’s own policy. But more damaging, to my mind, was the general erosion of UKIP’s identity: Pearson’s policy of campaigning for Eurosceptic candidates from other parties may have been magananimous, but it also made you wonder whether UKIP are more a party
Guido reports that a two-seater aeroplane carrying UKIP’s Nigel Farage was circling in the air before crashing near Buckingham. Farage is understood to have walked away from the accident with only minor injuries and is now on his way to hospital. More details to follow. UPDATE: Reports are inconclusive, but it seems that Mr Farage was pulled semi-conscious from wreckage and may be seeing a heart specialist at Horton General Hospital Banbury.
On the face of it, Nigel Farage is right: “There is nothing extreme or radical or ridiculous” about banning the burka. It is a manifestation of many British Muslims’ indifference to society; it is an expression of wilful separation and a symbol of a nation riven with cultural division. In the sphere of private behaviour becoming political, the burka engenders intolerance – reactionary Islam’s intolerance of liberal democracy and vice versa. In this atmosphere, writers and politicians of all hues have drawn the same conclusion and there is capital to be extracted (perhaps cynically) by taking the seemingly sensible decision to ban the burka. To do so would be misguided as well
This video, which some UKIPers have put together in honour of their former leader Nigel Farage, is comedy gold. Problem is, I suspect it’s unintentionally so… Hat-tip: ConservativeHome
Tim Montgomerie reports that a senior source at CCHQ has said that John Bercow will not stand as an official Conservative candidate at the general election, and therefore party members will not be required to vote for him. So, will they be for or against Bercow? Councillor Netta Glover, the Buckingham Association’s deputy chairman and political officer, told me that the executive committee were “standing firm behind Mr Bercow”, and that Tory party rules stated that “anyone seeking an official nomination against the speaker would be barred by the returning officer” – so de-selection can be discounted. However, and this has induced a joint migraine for Central Office and
