"I agree with the Tories on Europe, but Labour on everything else." said the girl on the bus.
That was nearly five years ago, yet it remains clear as if it were today. After all its not everyday that one hears ordinary people discussing politics in public. That summer the Conservative Party, had stunned the media-political classes by winning the European Elections by a landslide (and had the old FPTP system been used, rather than the vile undemocratic PR system now in place their victory would have been more comprehensive). The overheard comment confirmed what I had suspected about the elections - that contrary to the spin being put about (Labour voters staying home, only Tories voting) the voters had deliberately chosen to vote for the Eurosceptic option - because they were fed up with what was being done to their country without their consent.
Sadly, William Hague and his advisers also drew the wrong conclusion. They decided that Europe would win them the next election, and concentrated on it to the exclusion of all else, resulting in the debacle of 2001.
Well, as Iain has commented below, it rather looks like the successes of 1999 are not going to be repeated for the Conservatives this Thursday - though people looking for results should remember that the votes won't actually be counted in the Euro elections until Sunday night lest their being counted on Thursday influence the continentals who vote on Sundays.
This year, the Eurosceptic vote is not going to the Tories in the wake of their pathetic campaign (once Blair promised a referendum on the Euro-constitution the entire Tory manifesto was rendered obsolete), but looks like it will transfer to the UK Independence Party. All I can say is good. Michael Howard will get a kicking for his incompetence and spinelessness and then, he needs to find a way to reconnect with those voters he's lost. And calling us 'extremists' won't cut it.
Yes, us. Until now I have voted Conservative in every public election I've been able to, and I've been leafletting for the local party candidate in my ward the past few weeks. The local party kept my vote, but in the Euro elections I went for UKIP for a variety of reasons.
My vote was initially shaken from the Tory tree by Michael Howard's opportunistic attacks on the occupation of Iraq and President Bush. Oh, I know Howard is playing what he thinks is a clever game - winking at the anti-war brigade while telling those of us who support the war that we needn't worry about a future Conservative Government's ability to back the USA. I'm unconvinced. What with the Tories proposing Defence cuts in wartime and the entire editorial staff of the Spectator sticking their heads into the sand in the hope that the jihadis will look elsewhere, I rather doubt that even if he wanted to, PM Howard could muster the courage to, say, bomb Syria. The point about that is that when people tell me, as the Spectator did last week, that a vote for UKIP is a vote for Blair, my only response is 'good - I can help him, without actually having to vote Labour'.
But beyond that (and what probably motivates most UKIP voters) there is the complete failure of the Conservative Party's Europe policy to make any sense. In Britain they claim to be Eurosceptic and they call for pulling out of the Common Fisheries Policy (which everyone knows none of our judicial overseers will permit) but in Brussels they sit with the Federasts. Either they are naive or Michael Howard has no control over his own MEPs or they are pulling a Daschle. None of those options makes me want to vote for them.
Iain's friend claims that Kilroy-Silk has had a huge effect on things. Sorry, colour me un-spun. I've seen very little talk about Kilroy, apart from among the pundit class complaining about UKIP being populated by freaks and loons. Guess what? Message: we don't care. We're not selecting a government, we're selecting a delegation to a parliament whose sovereignty many of us don't recognise in the first place. The fact of their election is as important as what they'll actually do once there because this appears to be the only way we'll get a message to our political class that as Melanie Phillips puts it, we want our country back.
Now, we're pragmatic enough to appreciate that right now the Tories are not going to promise outright withdrawal. All that we are looking for is some evidence, that a future Tory government, on hearing that "our European friends" have said no to their precious renegotiation, will do something other than say "OK" and knuckle under. In other words reassurance that Michael Howard won't do exactly what John Major did every time he lost a fight in Europe. Because without that he's no better than Blair.
And of course the Tories would get killed if they brought up straight withdrawal now, but that should not stop the idea from being brought into the mainstream by being floated as the alternative option should renegotiation fail. (Why, incidentally, is it extreme to support [as 40% of the country does] withdrawal from the EU, but moderate to support [as barely 10% do] signing our freedom away into a Euro Empire?)
If the Tories don't recognise this message. If they persist in smearing people who voted for UKIP. If they continue (as Iain's friend does) to talk down to the 'punters' about this (when the 'punters' are more clued up than most MPs), Michael Howard's honeymoon will be more than over. He will wind up having done what John Major, William Hague and IDS all failed to do: drive the core of the Party's voters away.
Posted by Drake at June 9, 2004 05:55 PM