Features

Why it won’t be Ukip’s fault if Cameron loses

Lord Pearson, Ukip’s former leader, on the deal that might have saved the Tories from coalition

18 October 2014

9:00 AM

18 October 2014

9:00 AM

How odd that David Cameron is still threatening us with ‘Vote Ukip, get Labour’, even after the Heywood and Middleton by-election, which Ukip nearly won with thousands of Labour defections. But if the Conservatives do lose the next election by a Ukip-sized margin then Cameron has only himself to blame — for the second time in a row. I know because I tried to stop it happening in 2010 when I was leading Ukip.

Soon after Ukip came second in the 2009 EU elections, David Willoughby de Broke and I went to see Tom Strathclyde, then Tory leader in the Lords. We said Ukip would stand aside at the 2010 election if given a binding promise of an EU in/out referendum.

Tom, an old friend, was enthusiastic. ‘This is just what we need,’ he said. ‘I’m having a one-to-one with David for an hour on Thursday. I’ll pass this on and come back to you.’ Silence ensued. Unluckily for Tom I bumped into him at the peers’ entrance the following Monday. He walked straight past me. I said, ‘Thomas, I’m speaking to you, what happened on Thursday?’ He turned half round and said, ‘It’s all too bloody awful. I can’t talk to you,’ and off he went. Which was worrying because the general election was only 11 months away. We needed any agreement as early as possible because we were appointing candidates. We had to identify the seats which we could deliver to the Conservatives, and we had to get a great many activists on side.

Three months later Nigel Farage stood down as Ukip’s leader to stand against John Bercow, and I took his place, largely to keep it open for him. Cameron still refused to talk to me, but the main theme in my leadership election campaign was ‘Country before party’, i.e. we wouldn’t field candidates in marginal seats if it meant keeping genuine ‘come-outers’ — those who would fight for withdrawal from the EU — out of the Commons. The idea was to get the ‘come-out’ voice going in the Commons at a time when it was not much heard.


When we came to the campaign, I did manage not to put up candidates against Philip Hollobone, Philip Davies, Mark Reckless and Douglas Carswell. We distributed 50,000 Ukip leaflets in their constituencies urging people to vote for them, and I wrote supportive articles and letters in their local press. All four got several times the Conservative swing elsewhere, and all four have proved valiant advocates for the UK to leave the EU.

Cameron and the Conservative whips bitterly opposed our strategy, ordering the MPs not to be seen in public with me nor to have anything to do with Ukip. I said that we would help them whether they liked it or not.

After Cameron’s brush-off, our candidate in Stroud, Steve Parker, in his election address, asked voters there to support the Eurosceptic Labour candidate David Drew (but Drew still lost).

In the end the Conservatives did not get enough seats to form a government — you could argue they lost by a Ukip-sized margin — and went into coalition with the Liberal Democrats. It was only afterwards that I learned why Cameron had refused to let Tom Strathclyde even speak to us privately. He thought he had moved his party sufficiently to the left that he was going to win the election on Lib Dem votes shifting to the Conservatives! So he felt he couldn’t risk being found talking to Ukip. And at that time his attitude to us was still in full ‘loonies and fruitcakes’ mode.

But now the moment has passed; Ukip is no longer largely a Conservative protest group. We are supported by many former Labour voters and a chunk of the 40 per cent who have never voted before. Once again Cameron has said ‘absolutely not’ to any hint of co-operation and I’m afraid most people in Ukip now feel: ‘What the hell — what’s the difference between the others anyway?’ The party’s message has become ‘Vote Ukip and get Ukip, with enough seats to hold the balance of power.’

I have little doubt that if a more conservative Tory leader — Liam Fox, for instance — had been in place for the 2010 election, they would have welcomed a pact with us (it’s absurd for them to say they don’t do pacts with other parties — what about the coalition?). A different Tory leader — one who was more of a Thatcher and less of a Heath — would have understood that the national interest lay in working with us, and in a referendum on our EU membership.

Not many Ukippers want to see a return to old-fashioned socialism in this country under a Miliband government. But David Cameron has forced Ukip to fight him to the end. Clacton and Heywood are just the start.

Malcolm Pearson, Lord Pearson of Rannoch, was leader of Ukip from November 2009 until September 2010.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • cargill55

    It’s Camerons own fault for thinking the solution to the 1997 to 2010 catastrophe could lie in a Libcon liberal left coalition which put ideology, party , self and cronies first and Britain last. As a result he has dug us further into the Labour hole and he has lost the trust of the British people. Here is Camerons legacy as PM.
    -Continuing the big interfering state and taking 50% of GDP to run itself badly.
    -Thieving £200 billion from pensioners and savers to give to borrowers and state spending.
    -Falling living standards and soaring essentials inflation
    -Broken state and personal finances.
    -Uncontrolled immigration, a million immigrants a year.
    -Selling out to the EU, refusing a referendum on Lisbon and advocating expansion with hundreds millions more joining.
    -Failure to reform and cut the cost of the state sector.
    -Failure to deal with the welfare disaster.
    -Continuing to waste £12 billion a year overseas aid.
    -Green energy zealotry killing pensioners and impoverishing us all.
    -Destroying the military.yet helping Libya and wanting involvement in Syria
    -Appalling border security and policing.
    -Continuing multicultural extremism and political correctness.
    -Gay marriage.
    -Doing nothing about illegal immigrants.
    -Decaying infrastructure.
    -Collapsing education and health services.
    -More erosion of our judicial independence through the ECHR and the EU.
    The result is the growth of UKIP which is a rational response by the British people looking for a solution to Liblabcon and today even Yougov has UKIP at 19%, a record. It’s now UKIP v Liblabcon for the future of this country.

    • David Prentice

      Not to mention the continued sexual abuse of young English girls by muslims of Pakistani heritage. True, it began on Labour’s watch but Cameron has done sweet FA about it.

      • Dogzzz

        I liken that 16 years of child rapes to bank robberies up North.

        The Islamic Pakistani pervert rapists are the bank robbers.

        The labour party are the get-away drivers. 17 different labour run agencies, from Child protection to the police Authority, to the NHS trusts, to the local education authority, to social services and many more acted after the fact to cover up the abuse and ensure that prosecutions could not happen.

        Tories were witnesses who said nothing for fear of being called racist.

        UKIP were on the golf course in Essex at the time.

        • Bob of Bonsall

          You missed out the NSPCC from your list. They also knew but did nothing.

        • lojolondon

          Banardos too!

      • rtj1211

        Short of setting up a police state you can’t actually prevent what you don’t know is happening. You can only react to the consequences.

        • John Marlow

          But TPTB did know what was happening – and did nothing.

          • Simon_in_London

            Yes, it was widely known. The BNP were certainly publicising it for many years, and got prosecuted for reporting it.

        • lojolondon

          They ALL knew – all Labour councils, they all knew and all covered it up.

    • John Dalton

      Hear hear!

      The rise and rise of UKIP is not UKIP’s fault, or the voters’ fault – it’s liberal loving Cameron’s fault. The millions of votes now going to UKIP don’t belong to the Tories, or Labour – they belong to UKIP!

      This article should be shared with anyone who might read it. What more proof could conservatives need that Cameron despises them and wants rid of them… until it comes to voting time when, of course, he demands our loyalty and berates us when we don’t give it?

      Our country hangs by a thread. Mass, uncontrolled immigration, subservience to the EU, rampant i*lamisation – all endorsed by the Liblabcon and their media toadies – are destroying the country and diminishing every aspect of our lives. Previous generations would never have allowed it.

      Unless we support the one party that will do something about this – UKIP – we are handing our children a terrible, poisoned legacy.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byHV0yOYvl4

      • global city

        Social media in the Rochester area is pretty vibrant……we should all use it to disseminate this article.

      • Little Black Censored

        The rise and rise of UKIP is not UKIP’s fault, or the voters’ fault…

        True: it’s not a “fault” at all.

    • Simon_in_London

      Agreed – Cameron’s determination to cement the Blair revolution was not only immoral, it was a strategic political error. He got less hostile coverage from the BBC than his predecessors, but he still didn’t win the 2010 election despite Labour having trashed the economy. I get the impression that Cameron is a visceral supporter of Blair’s cultural revolution so I guess it was probably a commitment thing for him, despite his opportunist demeanour and possibly relatively un-Stalinist leanings.

    • mikewaller

      Most of the above is a product of the “me” generation, now heading into old age, who went along with massive borrowing by the politicians to give them social goodies we had not earned that racked up the present debt – still growing BTW – that will cripple the future of the coming generations. Then, to cap it all, having eaten all the pies and consumed most of the North Sea oil and gas, they bleat via UKIP or, as above, directly about the consequences of the money running out. Incidentally I am 70 so saw it all happen.

      • cargill55

        It’s nothing to do with anyone except the pile of s.ts in Liblabcon , ably supported by an appalling MSM and parasitical big business.

        • mikewaller

          I posted what is below few minuted before I got your response, but you will have to admit it gets you to the T.

          “Only a fool would suggest the UK is paradise on earth; but for the most part I think the anger stems from good old self-serving bias i.e. the human universal of preferring to blame others for problems largely of their own making. Given the downward direction our economy is inevitably heading in the this fast changing world, it is far more comforting to blame the immigrant and the politician for what was in fact a National orgy of borrowing, failing to invest, and comparatively low productivity that landed us in the current mess. Owning up to the coming generations about how we threw it all away would be a far more constructive move than voting for that fantasist Farage.”

          • cargill55

            What specific UKIP policy do you oppose?

          • mikewaller

            The sheer lunacy of leaving the EU just as we enter an era when, for the first time in human history,the capacity to make things is going permanently to exceed any feasible capacity to purchase across the world. This will not apply solely to the cheap and cheerful things we have deluded ourselves into thinking is all the newly emergent nations are capable of, but high tech goods as well. It just so happens that what was proposed last week as the minimum a Briton needs to live a reasonable life – about £14,000 p. a.- is about the same as a figure quoted in 2012 as placing those receiving it in the top 4% of global earners. Do you seriously think that a UK operating on its own would have any chance whatsoever of maintaining similar income levels for all but its most talented? I think trade blocks are inevitable, and to be on the outside will be a death sentence.

          • cargill55

            The EU is bad for our democracy and prosperity, it has no electoral mandate to govern us but athe Liblabcon extremists have lied to us for 40 years about the true nature of the EU.
            It’s the same European solution as the other 3 failed attempts at european empires in the last century and the sooner it collapses, as it will, the better.

  • cargill55

    UKIP getting record support in so many polls shows that the whole Liblabcon oligarchy has to be afraid that their failed liberal left zealotry will be destroyed.
    UKIP advocates controlled immigration, rebuilding our military, end of multiculturalism and political correctness, reduced spending and taxation, EU exit giving us back sovereign and democratic government.
    Cameron and his failed Tories and the rest of the Liblabcon mob will keep peddling their anti British , anti democratic agenda of the high tax and spend interfering state, EU membership, degraded military, mass immigration and lax border security and policing, political correctness and multiculturalism all leading to inevitable financial, political and social chaos. They will keep abusing a broken political system to stuff their failed liberal left agenda down our throats with no mandate.
    It’s now UKIP v Liblabcon for the future of Britain.

  • Ali

    If only we could turn the clock back, to before Cameron became leader, we could have a Conservative Party that understands what Conservatism is. Just imagine a Conservative Party led by someone who was not a Socialist without the need for the support of another Socialist party.

    Has anyone read Matthew Parris’s article yet? We aren’t quite Nazis apparently, those of us who believe in democracy and that our ancient systems of justice and being able to hold our MP’s to account are superior to the anti democratic, self serving E.U, but we nearly are. It’s so disappointing to know that a writer and broadcaster you once admired is ridiculous. It pulls the rug from under one’s feet, how does one know the beliefs and ideas one has now are not as dreadful as the idea one once had that Matthew Parris was essentially decent?

    • Earthenware

      We aren’t nazis yet, but they will say that we are if we continue to threaten their cozy monopoly of power.

      • Jerome Leroy

        Its ok, we do not own the UAF, the true Nazi’s of this country, and its sister organisation, Hope not hate.

    • EppingBlogger

      The rot set in long before Cameron!

    • Linda Smith

      But the stupid cons chose Cameron over a real conservative, David Davis, a triumph of style over substance.

      • Major Plonquer

        It’s even worse. They chose a PR expert who couldn’t PR a fart after a night on the baked beans. Probably even worse than Heath.

  • JabbaTheCat

    Lolz…the paragraph less rant by Pearson is a perfect metaphor for Ukip under the dear leader…

    • Dogzzz

      And the inability to read anything not broken up into easy child-like chunks defines the limited intellect of those who oppose UKIP.

  • HamtunscireKippa

    The Tories asked for it, now they are going to get it and they only have themselves to blame.

  • Damaris Tighe

    Cameron moved the Conservatives to the left to garner LibDem votes? So how does this betrayal of core Tory voters feel now Dave?

    Typical establishment solution to a popularity problem: sack your own voters, enlist new ones.

    • rtj1211

      No, it’s called hoping you can offer just enough to win a majority, whilst not dispensing with too much to lose what you currently have.

      There was no UKIP vote to pinch from 2005. It had to come from either Libdems, Labour or non-voters. Otherwise it was more of same-old, same-old in opposition.

      • Damaris Tighe

        I notice that you don’t seem to conceive of a more right of centre solution to breaking out of oppostion.

  • Damaris Tighe

    Great article but the editors need to earn their salaries & break it up into paragraphs. For crissake, how many seconds would that take?

    • Aberrant_Apostrophe

      Looks like someone at the Speccie reads the comments…

      • Damaris Tighe

        Ha!

  • Jack Smith

    There is certainly a lot of hope that UKIP offers something different, but I just hope that it isn’t misplaced. It may be easy to dismiss Godfrey Bloom as an eccentric or as someone scorned, but his comments about UKIP sliding towards the politically correct mainstream should ring some alarm bells. And by specifically emphasising the importance of ‘first and second generation’ Britons in his acceptance speech, Douglas Carswell appeared to be saying – for years nobody has cared about or spoken for the native population, and they still don’t.

    • rtj1211

      His comments suggest that UKIP can get so far targeting one kind of voter, but can they get enough votes to win real power without moderating their pitch??

      It’s the old conundrum which is as old as politics…..

      • global city

        It is actually quite a recent phenomena. This notion that there is an unmoving centreground of political opinion is completely wrong. It is the main reason that Cameron could not win in 2010 and he is repeating the same process again.

        Imagine if Atlee or Thatcher had believed in the nonsense?

    • Dogzzz

      Even IF he is right, I feel there is no choice but to vote UKIP, because that is the only way to get our country back from the EU and make elections worth having again. For me, our sovereignty and our right to elect our lawmakers under English law is more important than PC battles, no matter how much I hate the divisive, prejudicial bigoted PC ideology. UKIP NEEDS to embrace and project those policies which unite former tory and former labour voters and those voters who never voted before. Even if that means a much more limited manifesto. Getting our country back, and controlling our borders, cutting foriegn aid, scrapping the Climate Change Act and amending the equalities Act to remove PC division, and implement meritocratic equality are all good policies.

      • Jack Smith

        However laudable the current aims, none of them will be achieved if UKIP continues to slide into the indistinct, progressive, mainstream blob.

        • Jerome Leroy

          How else are they going to get more MPs? the media have hardly given them a choice, and the UAF.

    • notaracist

      What Godfrey is trying to say is that UKIP now engages brain before opening mouth

    • Jerome Leroy

      Yes, politicians will say whatever it takes to get into office.

      Maybe if the mainstream media didn’t rip into UKIPs former members for making racist remarks, they wouldn’t have had to become more PC in the media.

  • AJAX

    Interesting & well written article bar the reference to Miliband at the end. New Labour abandoned Socialism in the 1980’s & is now little more than a burnt out husk of a political movement peopled by a clutch of not particularly talented professional politicians, who have no ideological purpose beyond being part of a Liblabcon managerial class. Look at its front bench in the Commons for the evidence – not a single figure of any political substance at all sits there.
    UKIP now appears to be metamorphosizing England’s old Classical Liberal Party which vanished into the coalition of the Conservative Party with the Tories in the 1930’s to oppose the Red Menace.

    Interesting times.

    • global city

      But the Liblabcon is the embodiment of the internationalist, 3rd way, cultural Marxist creepiness. Old Labour may be dead but the Spirit of Gramsci lives on in the Liblabcon Blob.

      • AJAX

        There is a Leftist cultural consensus in the Metropolitan class that makes up New Labour & a substantial element of the cultural commentariat, which the dim-witted Tories have never had the cerebral capacity to challenge in the battle of ideas, but it’s not Socialism, it’s more a Fabianesque clique – the wan ghost of the once mighty Labour Movement – that’s waiting to be swept away into the dustbin of the 20th Century by a dynamic alternative for the 21st.
        Hopefully that alternative is a re-appearance of radical Classical Liberalism to compete with Toryism, & UKIP is the vehicle for it.

        • global city

          Yes…I agree….absolutely.

        • Chris Morriss

          Much as I wish to see a resurgence of classical liberalism, I’m not convinced the UKIP really want to go that way, or even have the intellectual rigour to be able to do it. Nevertheless, at the moment it seems the only acceptable alternative to the increasingly amorphous mass of the three mainstream parties as they coalesce like a slime mould when it decides to move around.
          (Strange alien things, slime moulds are!)

    • John Croston

      I will believe that UKIP has taken on the mantle of the “old Classical Liberal Party” when one of its members stands up in the House of Commons with a copy of the Koran in his hand and says – as Gladstone did – “So long as this book exists there will never be peace on this earth.”
      UKIP appear to be just as afraid of Muslims as all the rest and they are also foolishly letting Muslims infiltrate the party – which is strange as they keep telling us they are trying to keep extremists out. In other words, UKIP are in danger of becoming just as Politically Correct as the parties who have already failed and betrayed us.

      • AJAX

        Weighty post.

  • global city

    If any Tory now considers it still right to vote for the Cameroons need their head examining.

  • Someone

    Without wishing to be too cynical, I stopped reading after the first statement:

    “How odd that David Cameron is still threatening us with ‘Vote Ukip, get Labour’, even after the Heywood and Middleton by-election, which Ukip nearly won with thousands of Labour defections.”

    This is strictly not true. Turnout relative to the GE was down by around 20% yet Labour held its vote share in Heywood and Middleton. In other words, the anti-Labour vote coalesced around UKIP in a safe Labour seat, while Labour’s vote share wasn’t impacted. Now UKIP put up one helluva fight in the seat but it should be nailed outright that a vote for UKIP doesn’t really damage Labour as much as it damages the Conservatives. It’s to be welcomed that there is a challenge in Labour heartlands but when that translates into seats, then I’ll believe the ‘Vote UKIP, get UKIP’ rebuttal. Till then, ‘Vote UKIP, get Labour’ is still true enough to make me put my vote elsewhere.

    • Lynton Crosby

      Actually the largest demographic who support UKIP are people who didn’t vote in 2010.

      • Someone

        I’d love to see your ‘demographic’ breakdown for Heywood and Middleton. Because here’s what we can say with assurance:

        Lab vote +0.8%
        UKIP vote +36.1%
        Con vote -14.9%
        LD vote -17.6%
        Turnout -21.5%

        UKIP took vote share from the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats, not Labour. If turnout was down on the GE, it doesn’t necessarily follow that UKIP picked up votes from people who didn’t vote in 2010. Rather that those who voted at the GE didn’t vote this time out.

        • Lynton Crosby

          I meant UKIP’s national polling figures. Not this particular by-election.

          • Someone

            Again, not sure that’s true:

            http://order-order.com/2014/10/16/ashcroft-poll-shows-ukip-helping-labour-in-tory-held-marginals/

            Polling by Lord Ashcroft does suggest that UKIP is pulling support from both the Tories and the Lib Dem’s protest vote, at least in these swing seats which in some cases, is pushing Labour into winning positions. Which goes right back to the initial point which is ‘Vote UKIP, get Labour’ and that will be even more true in key swing seats than other parts of the country.

            Again if you can point to your demographic point, I’d be interested to see it.

          • Jerome Leroy

            And yet, if 3000 Tories bothered to vote for UKIP, they would have 2 MPs by now and Labour would have lost a seat.

            A lot of Labour voters switched to UKIP, maybe not in heywood and middleton, but south Yorkshire is another question.

          • Someone

            Right and again, I will say Jerome, that’s fine in a by-election setting but at a General Election, people are deciding who will govern them. That government will effectively be determined by a handful of seats (by virtue of our electoral system) and the data shows that in those seats, which will decide whether we get Miliband or not, UKIP votes are handing swing seats to Labour. That is harmful to the small ‘c’ conservative cause and that is something which in my view, needs to be avoided at all costs. Whether you or I like it, Farage will not be PM next time out. UKIP MAY (and it is a big MAY because of the perversity of FPTP) hold the balance of power, but the voting system tends to make it easier for parties to hold seats than gain them. But when you hold the balance of power, with Labour as the biggest party, it will force some conglomeration on the political left between Labour, the Limp Dumps, the Greens et al who will proceed to gerrymander the electorate further and thus prevent any future small ‘c’ conservative government, whether UKIP or Conservative. That is something which I do not want.

  • Blindsideflanker

    From Cameron’s actions it became clear to me a long time ago that Cameron has a disability, he has the most malfunctioning political nose ever. When ever we get a little insight to the goings on in Westminster it just confirms my view.

  • Peter Stroud

    Just another piece of evidence of Cameron’s complete lack of judgement on political issues. I’m afraid it is not the sort of thing taught at Eton, or in a PPE degree, even at Oxford.

  • sarahsmith232

    Think the 90s are to blame, myself. Just saw Schama’s ‘History of Britain’, think you’d need to go all the way back to the 1820s for a decade as triumphant, hubristic as spectacularly naïve, and same deal, decades later, the effects of this arrogance and naivety was still pulsating it’s way around the world.
    All 3 leaders are former 20something products of the naïve 1990s, all 3 came of political age during a time when our ‘educated superiors’ believed their utopian end point could so easily be reached with ever greater multicultural ‘progressivism’ and the ‘liberating’ effects of globalisation.
    Being a former 20something product of the naïve 1990s, I know where they’re coming from. ‘Course, difference being, the rest of us spent our time since the 90s still connected to the world and we all started looking around us at the effects of this and got a clue. They couldn’t do that, too far removed from reality. So they’re all still stuck there, sometime during New Labour’s 1994 triumphant crowning of their new modernising progressive messiah. It’s 20yrs later, every single aspect of the New Labour ideology has been absolutely obliterated, disproved, humiliated, exposed as the hubristic product of one of histories most spectacularly naïve decades, yet they’re still stuck there, still being those 20something products of the worlds most flipping clueless decade.
    Will have to wait this gen’ to die off I think, next lot along’s going to be Labour’s open-door progeny, still blethering about ‘racism, racism, racism’ years later. Ummuna’s going to be the first out the trap as a prime e.g.

    • Linda Smith

      That’s the problem with having too many young MPs. No experience.

  • Rockin Ron

    cfds

  • Tom Hewitt

    Why do UKIP have have no choice but to fight him to the end. He is offering an in/out referendum for fuck’s sake. What more do they want – for him to just pull Britain out the EU with no democratic mandate?

    • Ngaire Lowndes

      I think in 2010 it would have been sufficient had the in/out referendum actually taken place. Trust in the promise of a referendum in 2017 is nil. It won’t happen.

    • r3d3

      There is no choice because there is no chance that daves 2017 Referendum will be held.

      1) There has not been a single opinion poll in this parliament that shows Dave getting an absolute majority on the existing Boundaries.

      2) His only potential coalition partner will not countenance the Referendum.

      ps Vote UKIP

    • cambridgeelephant

      We went into the then EEC with no democratic mandate.

      I oppose an establishment rigged referendum.

      What I want is us to pull out and then have a referendum to confirm the fact 18 months later. Just like we had to begin with, when we were hijacked in. That would have a nice symmetry about it.

    • Pay attention; Farage offered a post election working arrangement in return for a referendum in 2015. Cammie wants the ref in 2017 – campaign funded by the EU and powered by the BBC of course – cos the UK will be in the centre seat and he thinks he can swing a deal. Barosso popped that balloon.

  • Tom Hewitt

    By opposing an EU referendum UKIP is now the pro EU party.

    • noix

      Are you a comedy script writer?

      • Tom Hewitt

        An in/out EU referendum is the mechanism for leaving the EU, by opposing the mechanism for leaving the EU it is therefore reasonable to conclude UKIP wishes for Britain to remain in the EU. UKIP are replacing the Lib-Dems as the Europhile party.

        • noix

          So this is ‘Vote UKIP get Labour’ again?

          • Tom Hewitt

            No this is is ‘Pro Europe? Vote UKIP’

          • noix

            It seems rather Machiavellian logic.

    • Jerome Leroy

      No, we just don’t trust Camerons “referendum”.

      He has openly stated he will support to remain in, regardless of what renegotiation is on the table.

      All this talk of “if we don’t get the concessions we need (Immigration) from Europe we will campaign to leave” is another promise “KIPPERS” can’t trust.

  • Lady Magdalene

    Cameron is a short-term tactician; and he’s not much good at that.
    Hence the last minute “essay crisis” style of government he’s presided over; the continual U-turns and the fact that Farage seems able to pull his strings so easily.
    He’s destroyed the Conservative Party …. possibly permanently.
    Personally, I will find it justice delivered if the Party that set out to destroy our Sovereignty when it took us into the EEC and then EU, is in turn destroyed by its treachery.

  • EppingBlogger

    Cameron is a clown.

    I just heard him say, in a BBC News report from Rochester, that the UK was built on immigration. No credit to the previous existing population from time to time, working their butts off. All down to immigration.

    By the way – is there a by-election on? The Tories seem suddenly to want to discuss immigration and the EU. I thought that was a sign of closet racism and being mentally unstable: gadfly, crank and unbalanced. Have things changed?

  • cambridgeelephant

    ” But David Cameron has forced Ukip to fight him to the end. Clacton and Heywood are just the start.”

    Good ! It’s obvious there can be no compromise with Cameron as there is nothing to compromise about. He’s a shallow, untrustworthy charlatan and as you say, UKIP must fight him all the way.

  • Yawn. What a dishonest article. The opening line: “How odd that David Cameron is still threatening us with ‘Vote Ukip, get Labour’”

    That’s not DC threatening you mate, that’s what the money says: look at the most likely outcome for the 2015 election on oddschecker, it’s a labour government. Clacton makes that more likely, not less, that’s what is know in the industry as a “fact”: what was a tory seat is now a ukip seat. One less seats for labour to have to win. Do you understand that? It is possible that by some combination of unlikely factors (northern seats switching from labour to ukip say), that a vote for ukip produces a tory government, but nobody who is looking at the landscape thinks that is MORE likely than a labour government: most active kippers are ex tories, such as Carswell, Reckless, Farage himself.

    Liblabcon haven’t got a monopoly on lies, the slipperly kippers do a nice turn themselves. And you know it.

  • mikewaller

    This really is so much nonsense. The three traditional parties actual live in the real world and know that the whole economic order is changing fundamentally with its new centre of gravity moving inexorably eastward. In such circumstances going it alone would be insane. Trouble is UKIP – the party of the sad sacks – is spinning a fantasy that appeals to millions who would prefer to believe that the deficiencies in the their own lives are a product of some grand conspiracy rather than a fair measure of their own success and failures. Hence Cameron’s current dance of death.

  • lojolondon

    If Cameron was even slightly conservative (or told the truth) then we would not have a UKIP. UKIP would never grow while a proper, conservative leader like Thatcher was in power, because UKIP views are conservative views.

  • BigMach

    Cameron is probably using the Question Time audience as his focus group.

Close