progcon.org

Should an anti-eu party's existence depend on EU funding?

I have found it very uncomfortable reading here recently as various MEP wannabes detail how they will spend their time promoting the ukip cause in the uk etc if elected when all that means is that they are seeking the EU, the very body they detest to fund their mission.

I am not going to be too cynical and say they are simply seeking to get their snouts in a nice 5-year trough, but even with the best of intentions, they are dependent on that trough to survive.

UKIP having MEP's was always going to be a difficult tightrope, and I believe it has failed.

Nigel is a star. He makes cracking speeches, makes the the euphiles feel uncomfortable, but what real impact has it made in terms of slowing down or preventing the ultimate U.S.E. aim?

Why does UKIP need more MEP's to continue the mission of exposing the EU? Why is so much passion displayed in the contest to become an MEP but little to become an MP?

Clearly, UKIP has more chance of getting MEP's elected, but is that in any way a reason to do so? I really do not even buy the idea that it is better to have eusceptic MEP's elected if it reduces the number of euphiles, as we have already established that we want to leave, and we don't need MEP's to gain full info of what is going on there.

If UKIP cannot survive without EU funding, does it have any right to survive at all?

stathan

Yes good idea! Lets get rid of the only little bit of state funding that we do collect along with the tiny bit of media coverage that having elected representatives generates.



We should go far without money to counter the Labour Trade union millions and the Conservative millionaire benefactors along with the state funding that these other parties also get.



Please don't apply for the UKIP post of chief Strategist when it becomes available!!

Anthony Butcher

Stathan, you are being very agressive today. It is a legitimate question that many UKIP members ask.

__________________
If you care about what's in your food and where it comes from, then get it labelled!
Label My Food - http://www.labelmyfood.org.uk

progcon.org

Wake up stathan, consider this as an alternative strategy:

When the LT has been ratified, and the Tories have reneged on any pledge to hold a referdendum, then wouldn't it make more sense to abandon MEP's, abandon other policies and reform as a UK referendum party mark 2 to promote that single issue, with the pledge to resign once the referendum has taken place?

That way, it would generate real support at home, and galvanise the increasing anger at Brits being denied their chance to vote on the issue. I used to support the opinion that this could be done by expanding UKIP's range of policies, but now realise that is not an effective strategy at all.

UKIP's failure is its strategy. It should focus on the growing home support to increase the chance of a referendum, not to increase the chance of getting more MEP's.

UKIP is never going to form a government in the UK, but a single issue, clear referendum party could really capitalise on the growing demand for a vote on EU membership.

I bet that with such a strategy, millions of small and large donations will voluntarily flow into the party. That would be so much better than living off money that has been seized from taxpayers and redistributed via the EU.

This Referendum Party Mark 2 should also not be an anti-EU party. It should simply demand a vote, so it can benefit from support from both sides. This will prevent marginalisation from the press, and I would go so far as to ensure it had two leaders, both euphile and eusceptic to keep the balance.

stathan

So in essense allow the British MEP seats to be taken up by EU supporters who will proceed to syphon off taxpayer funds to promote the EU also thus depriving the anti EU movement any media counter balance.



Any referendum party has to rely on the largesse of the media for any scraps of publicity without the benefit of elected representatives of whom newshounds are so fond of ringing up for interview.


Whats the point of a campaign for a referendum on just a treaty/constitution?


It's out of the EU or nothing as far as I'm concerned.

progcon.org

I'm suggesting a referendum on membership of the EU, not the treaty.

Raymond Finch

I am in complete agreement with Stathan. I do not need to reiterate his points.
Also, it is an ideal opportunity to show the EU what the people of our nation think of it. Consider it a 5-yearly mini-referendum.
I also do not believe that we should not participate in its voting as this gives it unwarranted legitimacy.
Take their (our) money. Show them up for the illiberal rascals they are and use the job to work for our party and our people here where it really matters and we can make a difference.

As for snouts in the trough. I (and probably most of my colleagues) will probably be worse off. I will give a tithe to the party, any expenses I receive over the amount spent will be balanced by a matching donation to UKIP. I will also have my finances independently audited and available to anyone at any time. Why would I want a 5 year job where I will, in all likelihood be worse off when I can stay working for the firm who have employed me for 17 years and where I get excellent benefits and if I am laid off I will get a years wages as a redundancy payment?

Shall I tell you why?

Because I think I will be bloody good at it and will help UKIP to get MPs elected to our real parliament and we can make ourselves free once more.

progcon.org

Yes, I would expect someone looking to become an MEP to say that! Sheeesh!

Ray, the EU doesn't give a **** what the people think. UKIP has had MEP's for years and how has it stopped the path to a federal Europe? Sure, UKIP has been an irksome nuisance, and good on them for that, but what difference will a few more MEP's make? None.

And just imho, I personally believe that UKIP will have less MEP's after the euro elections and will be forced to change its strategy anyway.

gumshoe

Wise words from progcon. Well worth considering by those would-be MEPs in the Eastern Region who appear to be fighting like cat and dog to get to the top of the list.

Nigel Farage has become an institution but his impact in terms of UKIP's aim has been nil. I recall when he was made leader of UKIP he announced his main aim was more MEPs in 2009. Why?

The E.U election in 2004 was in effect a referendum of Britain's membership of the EU. Getting 12 MEPs elected was as much due to outside circumstances as the skill of the UKIP leadership. They bombed at the General Election in 2005 and took a lot of the members money with them. £200,000 in lost deposits, but the MEP's were OK.

UKIP has failed to connect with the electorate except at E.U Elections and never will until its leaders step back from the high life in Brussels and Strasbourg.

The best thing for UKIP would a wipe out in June next year. This would get rid of its stars and make the leadership concentrate on how things work in this country.

mrabody

In the long term, no, in the short term, yes.

I am not going to be too cynical and say they are simply seeking to get their snouts in a nice 5-year trough, but even with the best of intentions, they are dependent on that trough to survive.[/quote]

As I have previously stated, I will only serve a single term so if you are feeling cynical you at least know that the trough has a limit in my case. My reasons for doing so are twofold. First of all, it will give me sufficient resources including time, money, and legitimacy to be able to campaign much more effectively as PPC for Lewes. Those resources will also be used to assist other UKIP PPCs in getting elected. Secondly I will want to assist branches in recruiting new members to UKIP and in improving their ability to campaign.

I would rather that UKIP did not have to rely upon MEPs for money. In fact it may be the case that because we have relied upon MEPs for money we have failed to find other means of raising money rather like someone who becomes dependant on benefits and loses the will or capacity to work. However, with 16,000 members there is is a very definite limit to our fundraising and campaigning capabilities. I happen to believe, based on my prior political experience, that UKIP has a potential membership limit of not less than 130,000. If we had those sorts of membership numbers then fundraising amongst our membership would be sufficient to

I think what the party lacks at the moment is "focus". Unfortunately Nigel is stretched to thin, particularly in regards to the SE region in which he is the sole representative, and which is the largest region in the country. Quite frankly I'm not convinced that many others of our current crop of MEPs have any coherent vision about how they intend to take UKIP to the next step. Like it or not a lot of UKIPers look to our MEPs for guidance and direction and at present I don't think we are getting a lot of either

As an MEP I would be able to devote a great deal more of my time to providing guidance and focus to branches, PPCs and other activists so that we are all pulling in the same direction. I would love to be able to doing this sort of thing right now but due to work constraints I cannot. Being an MEP would give me the freedom to be able to assist others within the party and to build the party into a more effective force in domestic politics.

I do think that we are beginning to make a difference. Witness the repeated illicit actions of the EU Parliament in relation to UKIP and other Eurosceptic MEPs. Whether it means unilaterally ignoring or changing parliamentary rules summary punishment of Eurosceptic MEPs, or ignoring committee votes, the EU parliament when faced with opposition from within has begun acting in an increasingly autocratic manner. By acting in this way, the EU betrays its true nature and exposes itself to further contempt from the public. It may be that at some point the EU will get so annoyed with UKIP and other Eurosceptics that they will simply ban us from parliament, or refuse to pay us or something else equally stupid and oppressive. I'm quite happy to work towards such a goal.

I happen to be very passionate about becoming a UKIP MP for Lewes. In fact my wife and I will be moving down to the constituency. I'm sure there are many other PPCs who are equally passionate. However they no doubt feel daunted by the lack of resources available to them and the long odds. When you know that it is going to be hard work just to save your deposit it can take some of the passion away. As I've stated elsewhere, I will consider my single term as an MEP a roaring success if when I step down in 2014 (assuming I'm not elected to Westminster in 2010 and that I don't carelessly step out in front of a bus), our average branch strength in the Southeast Region is 300+ members, we have a couple of dozen local and county councillors elected throughout the region, and we have good prospects of winning a good portion of our 15 top target constituencies in the region.

As for your question about whether we need MEPs to "expose" the machinations of the EU, we don't, at least not more than one or two. All it requires is researchers.

Your last question begs other questions. If you are opposed to EU funding for UKIP, how do you propose that we raise sufficient funding from other sources to replace that source of funding? Would you really prefer that UKIP die than accept EU funds, even if it meant that withdrawl from the EU was pushed back beyond the forseeable future?