UKIP has an advantage that is not based on concrete policy proposals

The aftermath of the UKIP surge in the polls in the local elections has led to a lot of soul searching in mainstream politics. To the detriment of the Conservative Party whilst also hacking away at both the support of the Labour and Liberal Democrats parties, UKIP emerged as the third most popular party in Britain today.

But a lot has to be said for the state parliament finds itself in 2013. In 2008, the UK entered its longest and harshest economic crisis in 60 years, mainly caused by an unhinged financial sector. Economic growth has been almost non-existent since then.

In 2009, parliamentarians were publicly crucified for living lavishly on expenses paid by the taxpayer and trust in politicians plummeted considerably. MPs are yet to be acquitted by the court of public opinion.

In 2010 the public decided that there was to be no overall winner at the General Election, which took the country into a new political direction – mainly consensus politics. And in 2011 the phone hacking scandal in the press erupted and shook the nation considerably.

With some in the public now openly engaged in warfare with mainstream politicians and further compounded by a politically apathetic majority, UKIP vacuuming up the votes in the space left unoccupied was inevitable. 

The public managed to deliver a puncture to the political spectrum in revenge for what Andrew Rawnsley refers to a ‘resentment felt by many voters that Britain is run in their own interests and those of their friends by a lookalike metropolitan elite who are all implicated in the economic mess.’ However, there is a case to be argued for the need to modernise, and move with the changing demographics of the country, if the parties want to be seen to be fit for government.

YouGov’s analysis of the results for the Observor on Sunday shows that UKIP voters worry mostly about the economy (59%) and immigration (51%), very disproportionately to voters as a whole that worry about immigration (31%). They also tend to be Tory voters who live in the Midlands, who are older and predominantly working class men. But coming second in South Shields would have sent chills down the spine of Labour Party strategists as well.

UKIP doesn’t currently have a clear-cut policy on immigration. It’s ‘undergoing a review and update’ according to its website.  So rhetoric as opposed to actual policies drove its recent successes, which mobilised their supporters, who dislike today’s political class, to the ballot boxes.

David Cameron almost immediately came under pressure to change tack on a number of issues but mainly to bring forward the promised referendum on Europe. His Tory government and friendly backbench colleagues have toured the studios to pour cold water over the idea, and suggested the public needed to deliver a Tory majority in 2015 for the referendum, given that their Coalition partners and the Opposition would kill it off at the first reading in parliament. Good excuse, but will probably do little to win back support from their dissenting base.

Pollsters and political commentators will continue to dissect the results of last week’s local election results and will be conjuring up future predictions of how well UKIP will do at next year’s European and local elections. Cameron’s greatest difficulty is trying to effectively deliver his government’s programme of work without having to do a volte-face on a number of issues, in particular, immigration.

His record will show that he reduced immigration as promised and that’s how he should be judged – it’s also very likely that given the sluggish economy, senior minsters may have an allergic reaction to further draconian measures on immigration and a telling sign that senior Tories are happy with the current flow of immigration is the lack of primary legislation that has come forward to reduce immigration to the level of the early 90s.

The Coalition government continues to control immigration by tweaking Labour’s Points Based System (PBS). Not a single bit of primary legislation aimed at controlling immigration numbers has been introduced under a Tory Prime Minister since Edward Heath.

Nadine Dorries MP brainstormed the recent Eastleigh by-election results in which UKIP voters ‘lapped up’ the need for an Australian-style immigration system... much like the UK’s existing PBS, which is based on the Australian PBS. This is further confused by the fact that UKIP hasn’t got an immigration policy – so if the rhetoric is more draconian than its actual concrete proposals, then it can be argued that UKIP accepts the mainstream consensus on immigration policy, which gives them an illogical advantage that needs to be challenged.

The Tories are unlikely to change tack immediately in response to UKIP’s recent surge. They may (rightly) be banking on their tribe to return home and defend them against a Labour onslaught in 2015.

However, from now until the next General Election, the Conservatives are expected to experience a slump in their support at the ballot box. Now is the time to think of new ways to neutralise the UKIP appeal and attract Labour and Lib Dem supporters if they are to perform better in the 2015 election.

Other users went on to read:


A very good start to neutralising UKIPs immigrant hate campaign would be to document just how racist the Australian Immigration system is and how it actively prevents ordinary Brits from settling there.
The days of the £10.oo Pom resettle to OZ are over. The soaps and relocate programs tell a false story.
Most Brits are decidedly unwelcome to live in Australia except as exploited backpacker farm labour or short term hotel staff.
I invite any Brit to compare their credentials with what is required to move to OZ permanently on the OZ immigration site, you are in for a shock, Brits are not welcome there.
I hear now that even professional British migrants into Oz have had their taxes specifically increased and their right to vote in Oz elections removed.

Then there is the issue of Australia imprisoning children behind barbed wire in isolated prisons for years while their "immigration" status or the "refugee" status of their parents is determined.
The unstated aim being to keep them all in prison so long and painfully that they will want to go anywhere just to be free.
Then there is the issue of children suiciding and self harming in these barbed wire enclosures or going slowly insane. Children with no hope and nowhere to go safely in OZ.

Australian immigration policies should be highlighted as the racist xenophobic anti human vile things they are.
Then Britons can compare that to our sense of fair play and choose if we really want any party to go down that atrocious abusive road.
I am betting that the vast majority of Brits would not want a part of it at all and would demand more sane processes of fair play and stop this migrant bashing.

In my opinion the migrant bashing of a minority and blaming them for UK economic sickness is starting to have overtones of 1940s Nazis. Migrants who cannot vote are the easy target for vote chasers looking for someone for the populace to vent frustration and hate on.

My family did not fight in two world wars to have that sort of thing repeated today, especially here in Britain supposedly the home of fair play, civility, tolerance and democratic freedom.

Successive British governments Tory and Labour alike were better than this and our ministers should take the lead and end all this xenophobic nonsense. The ministers that do will be remembered and those are the ones who will ultimately win more votes.

The other rather bzarre thing about UKIP followers wishing for an Immigration policy like that of Australia is the fact that the last census showed that 25% of Australians were born elsewhere. Neraly half had one parent born overseas while more than a third had both parents born overseas. Not quite the result I imagine UKIP have in mind.

Still, when you contrast the people sayng they support UKIP because the other parties are only looking out for the rich and big business with UKIP's policies on income tax and business taxation it is pretty clear that whatever motivates people to vote for UKIP it is neither facts or policies.

A note on commenting

Due to recent increased commenting activity we have taken the decision to disable commenting on old blogs. As we are a small office it is simply impossible to fight spam and keep removing comments that don’t comply with our house rules on what is now an archive of over 800 pieces.

We have also decided to take a more proactive role in enforcing our blog house rules on the blogs where comments are open. The rules are there for a good reason and we want to make sure we are consistent and apply them across the board. 

This is not in any shape or form meant to stifle debate, but to make sure that it remains civil and on topic.

Thanks and best regards,

--MRN Team

MRN blogging and comments – Policy and House Rules

Your comments

1. Please be civil– we will remove anything that:

  • Is considered likely to provoke, attack or offend others
  • Is racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable
  • Contains swear words or other language likely to offend
  • Breaks the law, condones or encourage unlawful activity or which could endanger the safety or well-being of others
  • Impersonates someone else
  • advertises products or services

2. Comments that could damage the reputation of a person or organisation, that risk prejudicing on-going or forthcoming court proceedings or that could place MRN in contravention of its legal and/or regulatory obligations will be removed.

3. Please make comments relevant to the subject of the article. We may remove comments that we consider to be spam or which are unrelated to the article content against which they are posted.

4. Please keep the number of comments you make on a topic reasonable. Too many posts from an individual or small group can discourage other readers from joining the conversation.

5. In exceptional cases we may get a high volume of similar comments on a post. In these cases we may close comments for that post, adding a note letting you know that further comments will not be published.

6. By submitting comments to this site, you warrant that such comments are not defamatory nor infringe any law. You agree to indemnify MRN against all legal fees, damages and other expenses that may be incurred by MRN as a result of your breach of the above warranty.