ConservativeHome's ToryDiary

Mr. Montgomerie,

It is very easy to have a one-sided smear campaign, but much more difficult to have a campaign which allows for free debate.

On three occasions UKIP Witney has asked David Cameron to publicly debate with them the subject of Britain's membership of the European Union and he has either ignored or refused those requests. David Cameron is presenting himself as the next Prime Minister and therefore owes the country the opportunity of hearing his unequivocal views on this subject, let alone his own constituents - 19 percent of whom voted UKIP in 2004 - otherwise it shows a contempt, which is beginning to become a two way emotion.

So I will ask you, what is David Cameron afraid of? Why is it that on Rupert Matthews article, the content of which brought its author nor his Party any credit, having asked this same question twice it still remains unanswered.

Good to see we're focussing on UKIP's bizarre voting record. Would any Ukippers like to explain what on Earth their party was playing at?

Raj & Richard J,

UKIP will have a free debate with anyone, even your Party; the trouble is no-one wants to have that debate, least of all you or your party.

I repeat the question - What is David Cameron afraid of? If he was not afraid he would accept the challenge - No?

UKIP have been a bit of a waste of time in Europe (not as useless as LibLabCon though). I read a quote by a BNP spokesman that said "We'll cause more trouble in the EU Parliament in 6 months than UKIP has caused in 5 years". Now that sounds appealing. Even more so after just having heard Ken Clarke's outpourings on the Andrew Marr show.

Clarke is an affront to democracy with his idea of letting the second Irish "vote" determine the future soverignty of this country. Given that he's speaking for the Conservative Party the only remaining alternatives for voters who do not want to be undemocratically railroaded into total surrender to the EU are UKIP and the BNP. Good luck to both of them and a plague on all the main three parties.

Why are these leaflets funded by the EEP ? showing your true colours I see ! Are you allowed to even hand these out in election time I think not. I shall vote UKIP for the very reason you have produced these leaflets. Obviously your running scared !

@WHS

I'm sympathetic to what you say but on this occasion I should point out that I'm only promoting literature produced by Tory MEPs and sent to me for the very purpose of promoting them on this site.

Lol! I bet grassroots Tory members will be so proud to see the party distributing EPP attack material like this.

How lovely to see that sweet pro-USE EPP heart logo on the Tory leaflets.

Whatever happens to the UKIP vote, I can't wait for the 'not quite as you expected' 'EPP withdrawal' after the elections.

That's when the real fight will begin.

"I can't wait for the 'not quite as you expected' 'EPP withdrawal' after the elections.

That's when the real fight will begin."

I think you might be disappointed when all goes according to plan!

Why have you changed your name to "RON" by the way - I am slightly bemused! ;-)

This release is a joke. It does not even give the details of specific votes. Let's deal with the allegations.

The so-called in-fighting has been led by two ex-Tories, Roger Knapman MEP and his disgraced aide Piers Merchant. They and their allies, using stolen membership databases, have been behind the concerted smear campaign against Nigel Farage and the NEC.

Several senior UKIP colleagues expect Knapman, who is desperate for a Peerage, to defect back in the coming weeks. The fact that Knapman used Polish builders is a non-story. UKIP cannot tell a MEP who to employ

The accusations on expenses are nothing compared to Den Dover, Derek Conway and other Tory scandals such as Nannygate. Unlike Den Dover, Wise paid the money back. We will see how clean the Tories are when MP's expenses are published.

UKIP, however, has Marta Andreasen standing for the party. Andreasen was the Chief Accountant of the EU who was sacked for exposing fraud. She initially went to the Tories for help but they let her down. Marta then joined UKIP and is the party's Treasurer and number 2 candidate in the South East.

UKIP will be revealing shortly how Tories have consistently with the federalist chums in the EPP to add to EU red tape and regulations. They recently voted in favour of EU regulation of The City and the financial sector. Unlike here, we will give details of the legislation and who voted for it.

The Wales Chairman mentioned was a new member who rose quickly, ran for the leadership, lost and left the party. UKIP has plenty of anti-Cameron quotes made by supporters of David Davis and MEPs who support the Tories staying in the EPP.

If that quote made by Nigel Farage, in jest, is the best you can do, then UKIP is in fine shape. UKIP will be releasing a series of quotes by Conservative MEPs and MPs supporting the Lisbon Treaty and Britain joining the Euro.

I have jusy spoken to Nigel Farage about this pathetic stunt. He just laughed at it. The Conservatives have become a joke on their failure to oppose the EU super-state effectively.

Still no Ukippers explaining their voting record I see.

"Still no Ukippers explaining their voting record I see.

Come on RichardJ, don't be so pathetic.

UKIP are not in Brussels to play along with the charade of the EU votes, they are there to withdraw.

No-one votes for UKIP to vote for Brussels bills, it is simply a protest vote to register support for EU withdrawal.

UKIP are rubbish as a party. All the criticisms of their infighting, poor organisation etc etc are 100% valid, but 100% meaningless.

It is the potency of their message that keeps them alive, and always will whilst Cameron plays the antidemocratic authoritarian and denys MPs who endorse a policy supported by 55% of the British public a place on his front bench team.

My last comment was not malicious. It pointed out that UKIP will publish a document that spells out the Tories' records in Strasbourg and their plotting against Marta Andreasen of which we have proof.

I think the notion that you can use your vote in the European elections in order that British interests can be promoted within a Parliament, whose members are drawn from 27 states covering 500 million people, is rather meaningless.

I think the best you can hope for is that your vote helps to keep certain ideas in circulation.

UKIP contribute to this on the issue of withdrawal, however ineptly they advance it.

"It is very easy to have a one-sided smear campaign, but much more difficult to have a campaign which allows for free debate."

Take it as a compliment, clearly the Conservative hight command has some concerns about the UKIP vote and whilst unwilling to have much in the way of policies on the EU, it seeks to shore up its vote with a smear campaign.

COMMENT OVERWRITTEN.

Yet again, it is apparent that this website is run by closet UKIP supporters for the benefit of other UKIP - and now BNP - fans. Isn't it about time someone set up a CONSERVATIVE website so that real Tories who want success at all levels of elective representation can exchange productive thoughts on the issues of the day!

Where is the anti-BNP leaflet?

UKIP Member when was Tom Wise kicked out of UKIP? I had read that he never was.

Can we have a cast-iron promise from David Cameron that a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty/Constitution will be held with 12 months of being elected?

Tom Wise lost the UKIP whip and did not renew his membership. Mr Wise has been charged but is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I was not aware that the Conservatives had abandoned the British legal system.

Who should I vote for?

Being a Conservative party member I shouldn't have to ask myself that question. There should be no doubt in my mind that voting Tory is the right thing to do. But there is doubt.

There's a big problem facing the Tory party in the run up to the Euro Elections, and that problem's name is....... Referendum (dun dun dunnnnnn...). It's a problem that David Cameron can do little about without making life very difficult for himself if he is to lead the next government.

It's like this: If Gordon Brown was to do the entire country a favour and call an early election, then Cameron's first year in office becomes a whole lot easier. He can give the go ahead to his promised referendum before the Lisbon Treaty is ratified, the country will vote NO, and the Treaty dies on it's arse. Everybody is happy. But if Gordon decides to desperately cling on to power like we all expect him to, then Cameron has some very difficult times ahead.

If the Lisbon Treaty is already ratified when Dave strides through the big black door then he is left with two options. The first is to say "I'm sorry, but Gordon has put the country into a position that would be too difficult to remove ourselves from". The second option would be to put the UK at odds with the rest of Europe by backing out of a Treaty that we are already signed up to. Unfortunately for David Cameron, neither of the two options are great (understatement). The first will alienate a vast chunk of the party, and the second will be very damaging to European relations.

Of course if Gordon Brown had not broken yet another manifesto promise then this would be all academic.

So where does that leave me?

UKIP? The problem I have with UKIP is a simple one. Though I hate the EU, I cannot see how we can extricate ourselves from it without causing damage. But not only that, I do believe that there are some benefits to being in the EU (though I can't think of any off hand).

Labour and the LibDems? I've lumped these together because they both want further integration into the EU, and hell will freeze over before I vote for that (or them).

Libertas? Now I do like what Libertas have to say but I just can't see how they are going to achieve it, so they are a no no for now.

So that brings me back to the Conservatives. I can't blame Dave for not promising a referendum after ratification. It would be a bloody political nightmare to pull us out of the EU - because that is what it will mean. Once in place, the rest of Europe will not scrap the Treaty because the Brits don't like it.

So I've made my decision. I'm going to vote Tory. I'm voting Tory in the hope that Gordon steps down (or is pushed) before the Treaty is ratified. If that fails then I'm putting my trust in David Cameron's Tories to fight for UK interests from within the Treaty. Their the only party that are likely to do that (apart from Libertas but I can't see them getting the numbers).

So here's a message for Dave: Tell us the truth i.e. If we have a Tory government before ratification then we will have a referendum. If not, then you will do your utmost to get the best deal for the UK post treaty.

@ Sally Roberts, UKIP members are entitled to defend their party against allegations made by the Conservatives. As I said earlier, many of the alleged problems in UKIP have been caused by ex-Tories.

It is telling that these publications carry the logo of the EPP-ED Group. It is possible, even likely, that they were funded by the European Parliament, i.e. with taxpayers money.

UKIP Member,

I was talking about the damage done to foreign relations as we break away from the union. No one can say how bad that will be, but I think you are kidding yourself if you think it will be done amicably.

Sally Roberts at 11.45

"All good fun in a way but many people get turned off by it and that is why, by and large, one tends to read the same comments from the same people."

Including those by Sally Roberts?

Sally, on June 18th last year David Cameron wrote to me stating "I believe it would be wrong for Britain to leave the EU". Has this changed? Does he therefore continue to believe in the political integration of Britain into the EU?

Conservative Home is an 'open' website and therefore you cannot complain if statements made by your party are challenged by those who dispute such statements.

If the Conservative Party is so dismissive of UKIP then publicly debate with them - would that course of action not be to your party's benefit instead of just refusing and leaving the accusation of 'frit' on the table?

Just asking is all.

UKIP Member,

Not joining, and leaving the EU are two totally different subjects (and you know it).

If we leave then all the past treaties will no longer apply. We will be breaking those treaties. Agreements that have stopped disputes with our neighbours will no longer apply (think fishing for a start).

It may be easy for you to say "sod em if they don't like it" but you will not be the Prime Minister having to sort the whole mess out.

Even if we leave the EU, the UK will have to write a whole new bunch of treaties to replace the ones we would be scrapping.

Do I wish that we had never got so involved in the EU - yes. But I think our best option now is to fight further integration and then start to reverse the policies which are bad for the UK. I think Cameron will do that.

""All good fun in a way but many people get turned off by it and that is why, by and large, one tends to read the same comments from the same people."

Including those by Sally Roberts?

Yes, Witterings - I freely admit I'm one of those people! I merely observe that new posters who might like to join us are perhaps deterred.

Sally, on June 18th last year David Cameron wrote to me stating "I believe it would be wrong for Britain to leave the EU". Has this changed? Does he therefore continue to believe in the political integration of Britain into the EU?"

Belonging to the EU and further integration into it are different things as you know as well as I do. I hope that we WILL say in the EU - I in common with other Conservatives simply believe that we do not wish to integrate further.

Resident Leftie @ 10:36 you say "Including "support for the working time directive" is a lie."

The BBC article you refer to says: "However, a majority of Labour MEPs voted to scrap the opt-out, putting them at odds with the UK government just weeks before the European elections" ?

Raj, are you claiming that Dan Hannan MEP and Roger Helmer MEP, Tory Better Off Out signatories, are hypocrites too?

UKIP's MEPs are perfectly entitled to claim expenses in relation to fighting for UK Independence. You just want to silence them like the authoritarian federalists in the Parliament.

UKIP squandered their breakthrough in 2004, in a similar way the Green party squandered theirs in 1989. Let us all hope the BNP squander any gains they may make in June.

Some of the comments bear out what I said earlier- politics is a dirty business.

The Conservatives complained, rightly, about the recent smears on their MPs from Downing St. Pity they have stooped to this themselves.

I don`t mind the vindictive and often idiotic comments you get here. It just shows how pathetic they are. Their leader, with his cheap "fruitcakes and closet racists" jibe set them a good example and they are following it.

ABUSIVE COMMENT OVERWRITTEN.

Many Conservatives vote for UKIP at European elections because it's a good way of putting pressure on their own party to become more eurosceptical.

This leaflet doesn't really address that.

Francis @ 13:28 - if any Conservatives are doing that then they should be very well aware that they are betraying their Party and their own local colleagues who are working hard, knocking on doors, leafleting and generally doing all they can to maximise the Conservative Vote on 4th June - including in County Council Elections. They should also be aware that if the Conservatives do not do as well as they otherwise might on 4th June then it sends a message of aid and succour to the Labour Party that all is perhaps not lost for them next year!

The Tories are very very scared...

@ukipwebmaster

The Conservatives have leaflets against the LibDems, Labour and UKIP. I don't think they are scared but aren't taking any voters for granted.

Tim is right, Conservatives aren't taking anything for granted. If UKIP campaign is based on Conservatives being complacent, and them picking up protest votes. Then UKIP will be very disappointed. Conservatives should be, ever so quietly, confident of good results at European elections.

"We have money on UKIP achieving a very sizeable vote.

However much that might be desirable, I really can't see it happening unfortunately.

The fair criticism of UKIP is that they integration is to vote UKIP in the euros.

Why was my 'posting' of about ten minutes ago rejected?

It wasn't Sentinel. I haven't deleted anything from you.

Matt Jones @ 13:37 - We are agreed that UKIP is a pressure group rather than a political party. But I think the agreement ends there.

It is ironic that you speak of ignorance then relay a series of claims that are worse than heavily qualified. What is it about Britain being politically sovereign over its own affairs that stirs such anger in you? Why should co-operation and being good neighbours with our European friends require us to hand control of our country to an unaccountable series of bodies in Brussels/Strasbourg?

More than 75% of the laws in this country originate in Europe. That is a fact. Perhaps you are confusing what British ministers propose as being the origin of legislation, when in fact it is the ratification process after the legislation had been drawn up in Brussels/Strasbourg.

Do you honestly believe that the EU costs us only £25.55 per person per year? That equates to £1.5bn. The Global Vision estimate of UK net contribution to the EU in 2007 was £4.7bn. So given your lack of accuracy, numeracy or both, just who should be considered too dumb to be allowed to vote now?

Why do UKIP sit in the EP at all? I'd have thought that, if they want us out of the EU, they'd set an example and refuse their seats

But no, they're all quite happy to take their seats and pocket the cash

All aboard the gravy train!

Hi Mel,
There'll be more to read as the campaign progresses but try this for starters:

http://www.conservativeeurope.com//Media/Publication/1113/Delivering%20for%20Brit%20text-09_Rev%207.pdf

Sally thanks bunches, off to read it

Off the Topic but maybe addressing the Sentinel of Hartlepool issue:
I have noticed that since the site updated its technology, I have sometimes had difficulty submitting posts. Sometimes it looks as if a post has gone through and no code is prompted for - sometimes it goes through, sometimes it doesn't. I have gone back and recovered the page in the web-track and resubmitted. Also in the Reply feature, success is a bit more intermittent than I would like in landing on a reply thread. Sometimes just posted off the main thread.
Using Firefox browser.

Tony Sharp: Firstly, you misunderstood me: "British ministers" actions was nothing to do with London - these ministers go to the Consilium, the upper chamber of the European Parliament, which sits in secret, make their proposals and deals about which we never hear the full story, then come home and whinge that those things for which they fought were forced upon them. This is a revolting lie from an unforgivable system - one that British ministers from all recent governments have delighted in, as it allows them to take decisions they want, but then escape much of their responsibility.

Secondly, your figure is wrong - the £4.7bn is the gross contribution, we then have £3.2bn spent within the UK, leading to a net contribution of £1.5bn. These numbers are all a matter of public record in the EU budgets.

Finally, "Britain being politically sovereign in its own affairs" does not stir anger in me, it stirs amusement, and laughter. North Somerset is not politically sovereign in her affairs, 100% of our laws are forced upon us by London. The westcountry as a whole is not politically sovereign, 100% of our laws are forced upon us, and just about the only external investment is thanks to EU funding, as London ignores anything west of Hampshire. I want to see the principle of subsidiarity properly applied, but all layers - so local decisions should be made by better empowered councils, and decisions that need continental weight behind them made by the EU. The thing is, if you do that, you quickly realise that just about the only layer of government that is completely meaningless, and should be abolished, is national - too far removed from localities to make informed decisions, not covering enough land, people or capital to make effective decisions. So I have no anger, only laughter. I am a Somersetter, a Brit, and a European - all of these are emotional identities, but politically I am only the first and the third, and only want to see power resting at those levels.

Posted by: a-tracy | May 03, 2009 at 12:37

Resident Leftie @ 10:36 you say "Including "support for the working time directive" is a lie."

The BBC article you refer to says: "However, a majority of Labour MEPs voted to scrap the opt-out, putting them at odds with the UK government just weeks before the European elections" ?

I stand corrected. It's not a lie, just misleading which is par for the course for a political leaflet.

It is a shame Matt that your argument is undermined by your inaccuracy. For your information the GROSS contribution to the EU between 1997-2006 was £10.4bn per annum. The average NET contribution during that time was £3.27bn. I suggest you do some research before making claims that are plain wrong.

Your argument is also undermined by your inability to comprehend what our contributions to the EU mean for spending in this country. The 'external investment' in the west country is money paid in taxes by the UK taxpayer. The EU allocates less money to UK spending than we contribute to the EU. You also have to factor in the cost of administering this flow of money back and forth. The rest of what we contribute is spent in other EU member states.

It is laughable that you think any decisions need continental weight behind them. If we had a properly sovereign UK Parliament in Westminster responsible for all legislation and regulations in this country, the west country would enjoy more democratic representation than it ever could in the EU Parliament.

The EU is not some benevolent and democratic colossus. It is an unnecessary and intrusive layer of bureaucracy that is not only costly but sees this country left unable to determine its own affairs. Love it if you will, but at least be honest about it.

"I want to see the principle of subsidiarity properly applied, but all layers - so local decisions should be made by better empowered councils, and decisions that need continental weight behind them made by the EU."

What decisions do you think the EU should make and why?

How do we gain from the common external tariff, CAP, CFP, social chapter etc?

Observers may not know that MEPs can change their vote within a few days, in case they vote the wrong way. UKIP had to change their votes on the working time directive, after (on many of the clauses) voting to end the UK's opt-out. Such attention to detail is not good enough if you claim to defend British interests.

I am not a statistician but have been involved in politics for the last 40 years. Speaking to people, reading the “runes” etc my own guess? ( I won’t call it a prediction) is as follows, (adjusted for the reduction of 6 seats)
Cons 27 no net change
Lab 14 net loss 5
Lib 10 net loss 2
UKIP 8 net loss 4
SNP 3 net gain 1
PC 1 no change
Green 3 net gain 1
BNP 3 net gain 3

I would dearly love to see the Greens totally eliminated in the UK but I am realistic enough to realise that with all the publicity they are receiving about the Man-Made Global Warming Myth they are likely to hold what they have and gain one more seat. UKIP will not be clobbered as much as some feel (or even hope) but will lose 4 seats, the SNP will gain a seat from Labour and the BNP will gain from both Labour and the Tories. PC will maintain its seat in Wales. The Conservatives will lose 1 seat to the BNP but gain 3 from UKIP, but will “lose” 2 from the reduction of seats so nil net change for them. Labour will lose 2 seats to BNP, 1 to the SNP and “lose” a further 2 from the reduction. The Libs will lose 1 seat to the Greens and "lose" 2 from the reduction.

It will be interesting to see how accurate this is in the event.