election result

Thanks to all those who have been calling or emailing with sympathy for my losing my seat in the European election count yesterday. Losing is one thing - ceding a seat to the BNP is another.


Local elections and European elections always see a proportion of the electorate voting on national issues. This time, there was next to no European content - just one issue in the press and on the doorstep, that of the Westminster MPs expenses scandal.

Of course we knew that all the main parties would be hurt by the scandal, and Labour perhaps more than others as it is in government. People are rightly indignant about it and the main parties must be vigourous in dealing with their rotten apples if we are to restore trust in the democratic system.

What we did not expect was the additional hit to Labour's vote caused by Hazel Blears, choosing the day before polling to have her tantrum and resign dramatically from the cabinet, ensuring blanket media coverage of a Labour split just as people were preparing to vote. At least others waited until the close of poll. Hazel's actions treated with contempt not just her colleague Labour MEPs, but also kicked in the teeth the thousands of volunteers out campaigning to get the best possible result for Labour in already difficult circumstances. Given the closeness of the result in Yorkshire, it certainly gifted the BNP one of their two seats.

Silver linings? There was no surge to the BNP, which got fewer votes than last time (it was Labour's fall that helped them get past their target of more than half Labour's score in Yorks & Humber). UKIP's vote rose by a mere 0.3 percent - they would have lost most of their seats had it not been for the Westminster MPs expenses scandal. The Tories, looking to the next general election, are far from the sort of figure they would be wanting (their 28 percent is well below the 44 percent Labour were getting in the last European elections befor the 1997 general election).

In any case, we must now fight back. It will need lots of hard work, at all levels, but it can be done.

Expenses, fringe parties and the Euro elections

For three weeks, the news has been dominated by the MP expenses debacle. This sombre chapter in UK political life seems likely to continue for some time. Analysis of its implications and how our political systems should be reformed is now starting to emerge.

As a result, the elections to the European Parliament on 4th June risk becoming an ‘anti-election’ – a rejection of all political parties. Some, like Lord Tebbit, the former Conservative minister, seem to relish this, urging voters to use their European vote to express their disgust at the mainstream political parties. So MEPs look set to become the collateral damage of this sorry national affair.

There is, to say the least, some irony in this. For many years, the only stories written about MEPs and the Parliament itself were the vitriolic and frequently inaccurate accounts of the “gravy train”.

These stories successfully obscured the fact that Parliament had become a serious player in EU lawmaking, voting through the pan-European laws that have, to name a few examples, set various targets for the fight against climate change, developed a Europe-wide energy policy, and created a framework for the use of chemicals that ensures health and safety across Europe.

But behind the scenes and unreported, Labour MEPs decided, as early as 2000, to set an example in how they handled their finances. We took the decision to introduce their own measures to ensure that their expenditure was beyond reproach, by deciding to voluntarily send every item of expenditure from both their office and staff accounts to an independent qualilfied accountant for review.

Furthermore, Labour MEPs elected in the new Parliament on June 4th are committed to publishing a breakdown of expenditure, with receipts, from their European Parliament office allowances every six months on the European Parliamentary Labour Party’s website as well as on their own sites.

No other party in the European Parliament made these reforms so early and so comprehensively.

By contrast, eight years after the Labour MEPs introduced their own measures in addition to those of the European Parliament, the Leader of the Conservative MEPs resigned and the Chief Whip was forced to resign after they were found to have been abusing and misusing their allowances for years, leading to them being required by the EP to pay back sizeable sums.

Most notably, the flash in the pan success of UKIP in the last European election was quickly marred by the behavious of its MEPs. One UKIP MEP Ashley Mote was found guilty of housing benefit fraud in the UK and was sent to prison for nine months, while fellow UKIP Member Tom Wise has recently been charged with counts of money laundering and false accounting following an account by the EU fraud office. Yet, UKIP Members still have no reporting or auditing of their expenditure.

Lord Tebbit could be forgiven for not knowing the details of Mr Mote’s conviction or of Tom Wise’s alleged financial mismanagement. But his exhortation to the electorate to boycott the mainstream parties is careless and unforgiveable. Perhaps it doesn’t really matter to Lord Tebbit if Conservative voters choose more extreme right-wing options such as the BNP.

In the end, efforts to marginalise the UK’s role in Europe are politically irreponsible. However indifferent many may feel, the European Parliament will make decisions over the next five years that will affect us all. No-one should opt-out and allow these decisions to be made by extremists.

The reality is that we live in a global society with opportunities and challenges unrecognisable from those we faced a generation ago. Responding to these needs progressive policies at local, national and European level. To undermine or opt-out of any of these levels is to undermine our British interests.

Europe is not about back room deals and treaty changes, it is about how we work together the improve the lives of our citizens. It is about working together, where possible, to pull out of this recession; it is about making the air we breath cleaner; securing our borders and preventing global warming. To think that any of these major issues can be tackled solely at national level is, at the very least, misguided and naïve.

UKIP employees give up the ghost on their party

I was surprised to be sent an interesting paper by two former UKIP researchers looking, amongst other things, at the possible outcome of the European elections: John Petley, who worked for the UKIP delegation in Brussels before resigning in mysterious circumstances last years; and Gary Cartwright, who is Tom Wise's researcher in the European Parliament. 

If these UKIP researchers are right, then UKIPs chances are disappearing down the toilet. They accuse Farage of a "spectacular failure to seize the initiative in leading the opposition to Lisbon in the UK", and then add, with more than a little hyperbole, that this was "one of the most calamitous errors in recent political history."

Moreover, they claim that UKIPs credibility "is at rock bottom, except in their South-West stronghold, where many members try to avoid mentioning their leader by name if they can help it". They conclude by asserting that "this June is likely to be Farage's - and UKIP's - swansong".

This is explosive stuff. It seems that even professional UKIP workers think that their party is a busted flush.

Intriguingly, Cartwright and Petley are pretty kind to the fascist British National Party. In their words, (and totally wrong - just check out their Yorkshire top candidate Andrew Brons), the BNP has "shaken off its neo-Nazi trappings, and has struck a chord with its focus on the dangers of Islam and immigration". Although they predict that the number of europhobic MEPs will be few in number, they predict that the BNP will win more seats than UKIP.

All the more reason to get out on the campaign trail to stop both these vile parties.

Why UKIP is just not credible in distancing itself from BNP

For all of UKIP's attempts to distance itself from the BNP, the latest being the high-profile announcement that it would not enter into an electoral pact with them, the fact remains that the two parties have overlapping membership, and similar philosophies.

It was telling that the electoral pact was proposed by UKIP activist Buster Mottram, whose links with the BNP are well known and long-standing. Indeed, Nigel Farage, when questioned about Mottram's past as a campaigner for the BNP's forerunner, the National Front, flippantly batted away the question, saying that these were no more than "youthful indiscretions". So much for Farage's claims to be watchful over BNP "infiltration" of UKIP if he can't even spot one in his ranks!

It seems that UKIPs indecision about their links with the BNP has reached the level of their National Executive. Although UKIP have claimed that the BNP pact offer was rejected 'unanimously' by their NEC, tucked away at the bottom of their press release was a note announcing that that two members of UKIPs NEC, Eric Edmond and David Abbott, were removed from their positions yesterday - presumably because they supported the pact. As UKIPwatch said yesterday, this is either a spectacular coincidence or yet another example of Nigel Farage's particular interpretation of the phrase 'party democracy'.

But this is no surprise to anyone who takes more than a superficial look at UKIP. After all, UKIP and the BNP have a habit of swapping members and candidates. For example, at the last European elections, four BNP candidates were former UKIP members or candidates: Dr Peter Lane - BNP candidate in the South East region, Dr Alan Patterson - BNP lead candidate in the North East region and a former UKIP parliamentary candidate in Hexham at the 2001 general election, Roger Robertson - BNP candidate in the South East region and Matt Single - BNP lead candidate in the Eastern region.

Two of UKIPs current MEPs, Jeffrey Titford and Mike Nattrass, are
former members of the far-Right, anti-immigration New Britain Party, which urged the repatriation of immigrants. It's also worth pointing out that a number of UKIP officials and candidates, for example, Andrew Moffatt (former UKIP parliamentary candidate in Beaconsfield at the 2001 general election) and Martyn Heale (Chairman, UKIP Thanet South), are, like Buster Mottram, former activists of the BNP's forerunner, the NF.

So closely intertwined are the two parties that, in 2004, John Brayshaw was found to be serving as the Chairman of UKIPs Vale of York branch (since October 2003) while simultaneously serving as BNP National Treasurer! Indeed, according to Andrew Edwards, a UKIP official who was expelled from the party for trying to publicise the links between the two parties, Brayshaw was also UKIP-BNP “pact liaison officer for the north”.

In some ways, UKIPs links with the BNP were neatly illustrated at last year's UKIP conference, when their fascist comrades paid a visit to hand out leaflets and literature to the several hundred delegates. According to a BNP spokesman at the time, "a substantial proportion of BNP activists are themselves former UKIP members". Meanwhile, Nigel Farage continues to parrot that UKIP are a 'non racist' party. Pull the other one Mr Farage, it has bells on it.

Well done to Calderdale's newest councillor, Judith Gannon, and everybody who helped Labour hold the Illingworth and Mixenden ward in Thursday's by-election.

With the two other seats in the ward held by the BNP it was imperative Labour held on to the seat which was long held by Tom McElroy, who
sadly died in December.

Judith picked up 1104 votes with the BNP beating the Conservatives and Lib Dems into second, though thankfully the far-right party did concede a swing of fiver percent to Labour.

Hopefully we can keep this momentum going in Halifax and unseat the BNP Councillors come May.

In the aftermath of the May local elections, I wrote about the
interesting, if that is the correct word, relationship between UKIP and
the British National Party, and how it appeared that a deal had been
done between them to keep out of each other’s way.

Nationally, there were very few occasions of the two right wing parties
going against each other in a battle for council seats – in fact, UKIP
fielded very few candidates at all. This deal, it appears, was
reciprocated in the Bromley & Chislehurst, and Blaenau Gwent by-elections.

The facts are that UKIP stood, and the BNP did not – the BNP chose not
to field a candidate because it “did not want to split the anti-EU
vote”, choosing instead to actively encourage people to vote UKIP.

So watch out to see how explicit UKIP will be in encouraging people to
vote BNP in next year’s round of local elections.

Sometime ago I published a pamphlet entitled “25 things you didn’t know when you voted UKIP“ highlighting the extensive links between UKIP and the BNP, especially their interchangable membership (and, for that matter, leadership).

At the time of publication, the UKIP were up-in-arms. I suspect they will be distinctly quiet when I refer to my suspicions regarding their activities in the recent local elections.

Looking at the candidates list for each ward in each council in the region, I can only find one example of the BNP standing in the same ward as UKIP. Indeed, when I look at elections in other English regions, examples of BNP and UKIP going head-to-head are rare.

Indeed, it was particularly fascinating to see just how few candidates UKIP fielded. This undoubtedly allowed the BNP to pick up the far right vote without competition.

Could it possibly be that UKIP and the BNP shook hands over a deal? No matter how they package their policies, they are both on the far-right and it would clearly be in each other's interest not to split the far-right vote.

It makes me wonder what UKIP were getting in return for their {suspected} generosity. Could it possibly be a clear run in the European elections in 2009? Only time will tell…

The by-election phenomena is a curious thing (as some of you will know, the resignation of a BNP Councillor in Keighley West has triggered a by-election for Thursday 23rd March). When you’re out campaigning it can seem like nothing exists beyond the ward boundary. When it’s a BNP-held seat, however, it becomes a different story. Their beliefs are so extreme that the whole country should pay attention. If we don’t stamp out the far right’s presence in our region, then we become vulnerable to widespread preaching of hate.

I spent much of today talking to local residents in Keighley West (on one of the coldest days of the winter I might add!), and was delighted to see how many people were making a stand against the BNP. Undoubtedly there is a media backlash against the Labour Party at the moment, but it is imperative that those people who believe in equality, diversity and community all vote for Labour in this two-horse race and reject the far right, non-sensical policies of the BNP.

There have been many reports of the BNP using intimidatory tactics on the doorstep: you don’t have to put up with it, as one constituent quickly learnt. When I asked him if he had had such a visit, he pointed to his fully grown Doberman and laughed. I think he’ll be just fine.

Can't really say I'm sad at the death of BNP founder John Tyndall, except that he won't be able to appear in court to answer for his most recent racist rantings.

But I must confess that I didn't realise just how prolific an extremist Mr Tyndall was. His obituary in our local Yorkshire Evening Post is well worth a read:

"Tyndall operated on the far-right fringe of British politics for five decades, espousing policies based on racial hatred and Aryan superiority. A Hitler-admirer, he was photographed in front of a portrait of the leader of Nazi Germany."