Thinking About the Lib/Lab/Con Response to UKIP’s Upsurge

The more that I think about it, the more astonished I am by the recent by-election results. For decades, when a by-election is held, voters have tended to vote against the incumbent Government, but not to any great extent. There will always be a group of people who, for one reason or another, are dissatisfied by the current Government’s performance. Occasionally, the majority will be small enough for the current MP to lose his seat. Generally, the protest votes have moved to the Liberals, since they provided the ‘alternative’ which was not either Labour or Conservative, or to minor parties. The question that comes into my mind is whether or not the fact that the Liberals are actually in government has played any part in the movement to UKIP. I suppose that it must have, to some extent. But, somehow, it doesn’t ring quite true. Failing a ‘lib-alike’ party of some substance to vote for, it would have been far easier for such dissatisfied voters to just stay home and not bother voting at all. After all, the extent of the UKIP surge, apart from the the special situation of Clacton, was a shock.

What could the reason be? Immigration? Perhaps, but the the complaints about immigration have been around for years and years. Why now?

I should imagine that UKIP itself is curious. If you were Farage, what would you do? If I was Farage, and if I had the money, I would have a reputable polling company knocking on doors in Clacton and Middleton to find out why people voted UKIP. I would seriously want to know what was in people’s minds. It may be just immigration, but it could also be immigration and the EU. And it could be immigration and the EU and the EU trampling on our sovereign rights. And it could also be empty pubs and bans and local authorities buggering things up. Who knows? Also, I wonder to what extent the Scottish ‘near-thing’ influenced English people in their decision-making? Should our English politicians be looking after England first and foremost? Perhaps people in large numbers are suddenly beginning to see that the Elite are just making our lives more difficult and miserable with every step the take. Don’t listen to what they, say – watch what they do.

People reading this blog (‘people like us’) highlight the smoking ban, and rightly so. It had an immediate awful effect by turning pub staff against their customers. I remember a 17 year old bar-lad trying to tell me to get out of the porch, even though it was open to the outside. I remember a bar-girl trying to tell me that I had to be five yards away from the pub doorway to smoke. They had been co-opted and, what was worse, seemed to be revelling in their new-found power. If a publican locked the doors of his pub at the end of the night and had a lock-in, he was in danger of being raided by environmental officers backed up by the police – for committing the heinous crime of permitting smoking in his own ‘home’. That is our gripe, which must also be shared by many others. But there will be those who have seen their local close down as a consequence of the smoking ban, or seen the mass exodus of smokers, and are unhappy about what has happened. Thus, for them, it is not so much the smoking ban itself which has upset them but the consequences of the ban. Those people may not be many in number, but the numbers are beginning to add up. there might also be many who have seen the anti-smoker ads on TV and have been disgusted by them, and the pictures on cig packets. Another group of people who are disgusted. The trouble is that many of these influences might be almost subliminal due to their number.

Yes, if I was Farage, I would want to know, and I would want the polling company to try its best to reveal all the possible influences. For example, I would ask people who voted for UKIP to comment on all the matters which the UKIP ‘manifesto’ contains in the form of a short questionnaire of the form, “What influenced your decision to vote UKIP”:

1. Immigration: Very much, somewhat, neither yes or no, not much, not at all.

2. Smoking ban:………………………..”……………………………………………

3. The EU:………………………………..”……………………………………………

And so on.

====

But it must also be true that Con/Lib/Lab Elite want to know. They may be doing such surveys even as we speak (metaphorically, of course – definitely not at midnight). But it is also not unlikely that they will be looking at the UKIP ‘manifesto’ to see how they can steal UKIP’s thunder. Relaxing the smoking ban and anti-PP are both there. Why are they there? If they were not important, they would not be mentioned, would they? Why have UKIP put those two policies into their ‘manifesto’? It stands to reason that UKIP must have some information that those two policies are significant. I could guess that they are significant, and that is why Lab/Con/Lib are avoiding them completely. Lab and Lib are hopelessly compromised, in view of their support for the ban and PP. But the Tories are not quite so compromised, even though they have failed to do anything about the persecution of smokers, or the damage to businesses. But how could they when they have had to rely upon the Libs? Better to go along with the ‘omerta’ until something breaks.

But there has been a ‘break’. The Mirror conducted a poll asking if readers thought that UKIP policies were ‘weird’. Among them was a relaxation of the smoking ban. The vote was that only 7% thought that the relaxation of the ban was ‘weird’. But I’m not sure that I understood that poll correctly. It could have asked ‘which of these policies do you think is MOST weird’. I don’t remember. Even so, only 7% thought that the amendment was ‘weird’, and it was the lowest. I’ve been trying to find that poll again, by without success. It may not even have been in the Mirror.

There are people who got themselves elected at the 2010 GE who, I’m convinced, were not true Tories, but who were anti-tobacco zealots and happened to be doctors. They got themselves elected purely to push healthist policies. They got themselves onto the HoC ‘All Party Health Committee’ and pushed madly for smoking bans, alcohol restrictions, sugar and salt restriction, etc. Tory selection committees should rid their parties of the ‘pretend’ conservatives.

But an even greater problem is the embedded Zealotry  in the Civil Service, especially as regards Health and the Environment. Both of those subjects have the backing of the UN and the WHO, both of which are not democratically accountable. But a ‘weird’ thing has happened. The WHO took its FCTC COP meeting to Moscow, and the USA and Canada withdrew their delegations, but the WHO carried on regardless. Further, the WHO banished the Press and others, including Interpol. Secrecy is their byword, even though public funds sustain them. The arrogance of the WHO (and, implicitly, the UN and EU) is there for all to see. It is beyond my comprehension that States like the USA, UK, France, Germany, etc can put up with it.

But there are very simple answers to the problem of ‘arrogance’, which is to DE-FUND. Put the UN back into a peace-keeping mode. Put the WHO back into a contagious disease prevention mode. Put the IPCC back into an investigative mode. They DO NOT rule, OK?

—–

It must happen eventually. But leaders will have to ’emerge’ who have the strength to stand up to the self-serving medical establishment and climate gang. Universities, in particular, must revert to being places of learning, and not political activists.

====

I think that we are seeing a groundswell of change, but it is hard to see what the direction is. It seems that the collapse of the Roman Empire (aka ‘Pax Romana’) was the result of the massive growth of bureaucracy in Rome, and the intrigue thereof. In some ways, we are now seeing much the same thing.

We must remember at all times that the EU is merely the result of Treaties. The law of the UK is the law of the UK, and the Government of the UK can accept or reject any suggestion of the EU. It is as simple as that. For example, there is no ‘international law’ which might force the UK to adopt the EU ‘recommendations’ about ecigs – or anything else, for that matter. The UK can, if it wishes to, just let the matter lie on the table. I do not think that people like Cameron, Clegg and Miliband understand this. The EU is a miasma created by Treaties. But it is no more than a miasma.

 

Advertisements

9 Responses to “Thinking About the Lib/Lab/Con Response to UKIP’s Upsurge”

  1. smofunking Says:

    Yes, it was the weirdest policy they asked people to vote for: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/ukips-five-weirdest-policies-4408428

  2. Tom Says:

    The poll is here, at this story.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/ukips-five-weirdest-policies-4408428

    Also, at the bottom, they show Farage under smoking ban relaxation, sitting back on a stool with a pint and a fag and say “who would like to see it relaxed”, or words to that effect.

    And I don’t know if that photo is like that for shock effect, would people at this point be shocked, to see someone smoking, or if it’s meant to help him along, by showing him more human than the other parties which are full of anti-smoking nutters.

    This is in response to above, your saying you thought it was in the Mirror, it is.

    Abolish Inheritance Tax 9%
    Amend smoking ban 9%
    Medals to all in armed forces 14%
    Abolish ministry of culture/sports 12%
    None are weird, I agree they should be done 56%

    • junican Says:

      Thanks. It was very late when I wrote the post and I did not have time to find it.
      It is hard to know how the MSM is veering at this time. Certainly, exclusion from COP 6 should concentrate minds. What is TC hiding?

  3. smofunking Says:

    And how Irish kiddy botherer, James Reilly, wants yesterday’s barperson to be tomorrow’s motorist: http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/james-reilly-its-anything-but-a-nanny-state-290748.html

    • junican Says:

      I can’t understand why the guy is a minister at all. He is clearly out of his mind. But perhaps these people must be allowed to go further and further until they destroy themselves.

    • junican Says:

      I don’t understand how guys like Reilly become ministers. He is clearly out of his mind. Instead of being made ‘Health Minister’, or whatever, he should be been made ‘Defence Minister’, if he had political talent. The lesson is that such people should be kept as far away from ‘public health’ as possible. They are deranged.

  4. Frank J Says:

    With both climate and smoking in Govts.,I believe we have the same problems. They are either that, as part of ‘Millennium Goals’ there is a drive to Oligarchy, as China, and top down control – if populations don’t like it, stuff ’em! – or, imo, more likely, they simply don’t understand the party is over or, at least, coming to an end.

    I’ve seen the latter a few times. They still expect the champagne to be delivered regularly and continue to demand it until somebody has to make it plain that it’s over, get out. I suppose it’s understandable, they’re having a good time, don’t want it to end and convince themselves that it isn’t ending, they are the life and soul of the party and in complete command. After all, they are so popular, nobody wants them to leave, do they?

    An example today are Darzi and Davies with their ban in parks etc. idea. What happened last week in the by elections is completely ignored as though it never happened. When the time comes, it’s always a complete shock to them that they, after all, are not very popular. And it is definitely coming.

    • junican Says:

      Our Government is crazy. Or rather, the politicians in the Cabinet are crazy. They twist and turn and waffle, when the correct way is to hit the claims of Zealots is ‘head on’. Dismiss claims that tobacco smoke kills kids. Hit that hard, again and again. Amend the smoking ban to permit publicans etc to permit smoking. De-fund the Zealots completely, at home, in the EU and in the UN. Further, prosecute the liars and thieves.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: