The Cross of St George Blog is reporting that one of the putative UKIP leadership candidates is having discussions with the BNP about a possible merger. It sounds completely fanciful to me, and completely barking mad for UKIP to even be associated with such a proposal. Surely even they couldn't be that suicidal? I did hear that somebody in UKIP has been trying to procure the name of the English Independence Party, but the EIP is not playing ball. This is the article on the Cross of St George Blog...
As both the BNP & UKIP are haemorrhaging support to the English Nationalist movement, (led by the English Democrats), it has emerged that one of the UKIP leadership candidates, has negotiated a “make or break” plan to merge the rump of the BNP & UKIP parties together with the DUP Northern Irish party (Democratic Unionist Party) into a new British Nationalist Party to become the dominant Euro-Sceptic Pro-Union force in the UK.
Speculation is mounting that the new combined party will be called the “British Independence & Democracy Party” or “BIDP”, and indeed the UKIP discussion forum has already changed it’s name in preparation for this change.
The new “British Independence & Democracy Party”Will be able to boast: 9 MPs in the House of Commons - 3 Members of the House of Lords - 11 MEP’s in the European Parliament - 150+ Councillors - 40,000 Members. The change will enable UKIP to escape from it’s unpopular “UK”, tag and the BNP to shake off it’s ‘Racist’ tag, the inclusion of the DUP will give both UKIP and BNP full United Kingdom coverage, and indeed a continuing loud voice in Ulster.
UKIP have for a long time referred anyone interested in UKIP in Northern Ireland to the DUP. Recently the BNP openly supported the UKIP candidate (Nigel Farage) in the Bromley & Chislehurst By-Election and co-operation between the parties has continued in the Dartford (Kent) Council By-Election where the BNP candidate nominated the UKIP candidate, and UKIP & BNP have started to campaign together. Another clue is given as the BNP 2005 Manifesto was titled “ Rebuilding British Democracy ”, it has also been known for a number of years that Nigel Farage has had regular meetings with the BNP, indeed in 2004, an election pact was agreed for the European Parliament Election, where UKIP would campaign hard in the South, and the BNP would concentrate on the North, however this plan was cancelled once UKIP secured the services of Robert Kilroy-Silk.
The merger news follows widespread discussion on a name change for UKIP, as voters are uninspired by 'UK' as shown in the poor result in the Bromley & Chislehurst by-election, despite a £75,000 campaign fund.The Leadership of the new BIDP organisation is expected to be Nigel Farage.
37 comments:
Can't see the DUP being involved in such a group Iain...fantasizing on the part of the BNP and UKIP I think. But grassroots cooperation between UKIP and the BNP is a real and growing phenemonon and UKIP's new focus on immigration makes some form of rapprochement between them and the BNP a real possibilty.
Cranmer knows quite a few people in Ulster - people with respectable politics, committed to their Christian faith, and wholeheartedly and unashamedly supportive of the Union.
The Rt. Hon. Rev. Dr. Iain Paisley has devoted his life to Protestant political expression, and, in his 80th year, triumphed by demolishing the UUP and becoming the largest party at Stormont. In the case of a hung parliament, the DUP would be a viable alternative partner to the LibDems for the Conservative and Unionist Party. Iain Paisley is the de facto First Minister of Northern Ireland, a status he has achieved (like it or not) by being principled, consistent, and without resorting to bombs, bullets or corruption.
So, why would a man who has achieved all of this, often at enormous personal cost, who is devoted to the Christian gospel of equality, even consider dignifying a racist group like the BNP, or a monotonously obsessive political rump like UKIP?
He hardly needs to, and I rather suspect that he will not.
Sounds like hogwash to me. An interesting element is the assertion that people didn't vote UKIP in B&C because of their name. Isn't it more likely that people didn't vote for them because they are, as I remember a certain someone putting it 'Fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists'?
Iain Paisley is the de facto First Minister of Northern Ireland, a status he has achieved (like it or not) by being principled, consistent, and without resorting to bombs, bullets or corruption.
The most credible politician in the United Kingdom - now if he were 30 years younger and able to forge his own British Political Party to stand nationally...........
Iain Paisley is the de facto First Minister of Northern Ireland, a status he has achieved (like it or not) by being principled, consistent, and without resorting to bombs, bullets or corruption.
The most credible politician in the United Kingdom - now if he were 30 years younger and able to forge his own British Political Party to stand nationally...........
And they didn't vote Tory either in Bromley because the party hasn't changed enough-----no.Cameron and Maude's message of smearing UKIP won't work and will come back to haunt the party in 2009 just as the EPP issue will.The pink union flag will go down well too!
Iain.
I am sad that people cannot see the real danger to us all and the immediate advantage for this new party.
The Electoral Commission set up by the 3party dictatorship ensures that new parties without MP's or MEP's will not have a party political broadcast!
That is undemocratic but as we all live in a super democracy who wants more party political broadcasts,
BUT with the increasing number of MP's/ MEP's Councillors etc. This gives the new party as much air time as the Lib Dems.
So please do not dismiss this, it is good politics..from their point of view.
If Farage was to become the new leader you can rest assured that he will not last long and a new vibrant voter attractive leader will emerge. I have mentioned Portillo in the past and a read of his speeches and articles on his website tell you he is not a million miles away from the thinking of this new party!
Lastly. The men and women who make up the membership are not racists and people who dismiss them as such are making a rash and incorrect judgement.
I would be very worried if this comes about.
Iain Paisley is the de facto First Minister of Northern Ireland, a status he has achieved (like it or not) by being principled, consistent, and without resorting to bombs, bullets or corruption.
So Ulster Resistance were only carrying water pistols were they?
So Paisley had nothing to do with the UWC strike that brought down Sunningdale?
So Paisley has never resorted to inflammatory speech that has encouraged young men on both sides of the community divide to take up arms?
As for consistency, this is a man who sought to bring down the democratically elected (with a mandate), voluntary power sharing between Unionists and constitutional nationalists executive and then opposed Willie Craig's later proposals, yet now is pursuing a strategy of, oh what a surprise, only preferably voluntary power sharing between Unionists and constitutional nationalists. Nice to see such consistency.
who is devoted to the Christian gospel of equality,
Do the Catholics who stood to benefit from the O'Neill reforms that Paisley bitterly opposed feel they were treated equally by him?What about Paul Berry?
And as for defence of the Union, do me a favour. For far too many Paisley is one of the best reasons for ending the Union. The Union would be much stronger today if Paisley had kept to his church.
You really ought to meet Nigel for a pint Iaando, I think you are getting a little carried away in the heat. Time for a nice glass of Pimms and a complete rest until you feel better.
Finally, UKIP did extremely well in Bromley where the Chameleons did extremely poorly. It is a bit soon to be rewriting history.
Paisley hates Catholics
English Democrats hate the Welsh and Scots
UKIP hates Europe
and the BNP hate everybody else...
...Im sure they will get on like a sack full of jumping frogs!
Strapworld,
Portillo: really? Did you not see the hardcore unionist Tories frothing at the mouth when Portillo wrote the "anti-unionist" article in the Sunday Times? Portillo is also promoting further change (to the centre) in the Tory party and wants more spilling of blood. There is no chance in hell he'd be interested, and they wouldn't have him. Remember the Daily Mail hate campaign?
I am a DUP Councillor in Belfast and I have to say this is the first time I have ever heard of this suggestion. It is completely, totally and utterly a non-starter. The British National Party are beyond the pale of moral decency, their brand of politics revolts me and my party will have nothing to do with them whatsoever.
Yes, t.roll-pickering - Paisley can be an irritating, stubborn old Ulsterman.
But he is
a) consistent,
b) looks after the interests of those that have elected him,
c) will not sell them down the river in some grubby political deal just because it suits an agenda elsewhere,
d) is perfectly clear about where he stands and where the line is drawn.
You may disagree with him, you may even hate his guts, but I wish my political representatives showed the same metal.
Iam intrigued by people who can see into other people's brains - apparently effortlessly and without even having to know, or even meet, the people whose mental condition they are diagnosing.
ed, please share your secret! How do you know that members of UKIP, which is ostensibly focussed on retrieving Britain's sovereignty from the clutches of the EUSSR, really, in their secret hearts, have a racist agenda?
On the other hand, such fanciful blanket accusations could simply be a thuggish way of shutting down debate.
Iain,
I saw you on an interview and the interviewer asked you a very good question and you gave a very good answer.
He explained that journalists have to be sure of their evidence and challenged you about the evidence you have for allegations on this blog.
You replied that people can sue, so you can be sued, and I thought that was a very good answer.
Just like David Cameron who fooled me into joining the CP with good spin, you fooled me with your excellent answer to a great question.
Iain, why should you throw your reputation down the drain by quoting posts from forums?
Iain, why are you making extremely silly speculations about the UKIP forum renamed? It's a preparation, is it Iain.
Let me try and help you save your reputation because you've really screwed up big time.
The UKIP Forum is not the forum of UKIP. It is a privately owned forum, like Con Home is not owned by the CP, so the forum isn't owned by UKIP. Anthony Butcher also has a Conservative Forum and a Liberal Democrat Forum.
The renaming of the forum was at the request of the leadership in UKIP because they did not want people to think it was official.
Now you come up with this!
You've not done well at certain things, and you may end up failing as a blogger if you keep this up!
Christina, as you well know, I was talking about libel laws. My blog is not a news source as such. If I see something interesting on the net I then link to it. This story is quoted from a widely read blog. Are you suggesting I shouldn;t quote from other blogs? I have even written that I think it is quite fanciful. But it does show there are discussions between UKIP and the BNP. Anmd I think that deserves wider exposure, not least to UKIP members, most of whom would be horrified.
bt:
a) I disagree about his consistency. He's hardly been consistent about relations with terrorist groups, about power sharing, about democratic mandates and so forth. The Ian Paisley of 1974 would probably give Brian Faulkner less venom than the Paisley of 2006.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of some of these shifts, let's not be deluded by the idea that Paisley has held the same stance since the early 1960s.
b) He may look after the interests of some of one community but he appeals to the worst elements and stirs things up.
c) So instead Paisley will fiddle while it burns and Northern Ireland drifts into a United Ireland, rather than seek a permanent internal solution that would solidy the Union?
d) So has he always opposed the use of violence? What has always been his long term solution for the government of the province?
Iain,
I have a friend who has worked in the civil service during cold war, and knows a lot about the Soviets.
Your post was described as like Soviet disinformation.
Surely Iain, you are concerned about checking your sources? All you had to do is check out the renamed UKIP Forum and you would have found out that the speculation you quoted was laughable.
Of course I am concerned Iain, but I do not believe you're being genuine, I believe you are being very sly and feigning sincerity.
I have informed the UKIP Party Chairman.
I thought you were better than a malicious gossip, I thought you were someone doing something good for blogging, but you are ruining what you built up, IMO.
If there is any truth in this gossip I will return and apologise to you.
Ian Dale said: My blog is not a news source as such. If I see something interesting on the net I then link to it. This story is quoted from a widely read blog. Are you suggesting I shouldn;t quote from other blogs? I have even written that I think it is quite fanciful. But it does show there are discussions between UKIP and the BNP. And I think that deserves wider exposure, not least to UKIP members, most of whom would be horrified.
What a collection of non sequiturs!
If you concede the report is in essence gossip, how can it "show" that there are any discussions between UKIP and the BNP?
Knowing the owner of the UKIP forum quite well, and the inside track on the name-change issue, I too can assert that the change had everything to do with recognising the forum's unofficial nature, and nothing whatsoever to do with any merger talks, real or feverishly imagined.
Any discussion of the BNP within UKIP (if they are mentioned at all, which in my experience is rarely), usually has to do with putting clear water between us and them, and ways of trashing them in the polls whenever possible.
This is the second time someone, and one can guess from which party, has started a rumor about a 'pact' when the BNP hasn't stood a candidate. Tell it like it is: they were either 'frit' or cash-strapped, and long may that situation continue!
I would also point out that, even if you consider the blogsphere need not concern itself with validating facts, reporting well-engineered false rumours as fact only serves to damage your credibility. That's your problem, not UKIP's and you'll therefore pardon me if I don't worry to much about the consequences.
Incidentally, only a fool would cite lack of libel action as proof of validity. Libel suit is a (very) rich man's game, and especially so in the UK. Deciding, as one normally would, that money is better spent elsewhere changes reality no a jot, but often means the perpetrators get away with it.
A man is judged by the company he keeps...
As the owner of the British Independence and Democracy Forum I can categorically state that the name change was only for the purpose of distancing the forum from the party. This was at the request of the UKIP NEC to ensure that readers understand that it is an unofficial forum.
The comments in your article about this renaming are pure fantasy.
As a UKIP NEC member, I am also unaware of any discussions of a merger with the BNP. Indeed I find it very hard to believe that anyone in the UKIP leadership would want anything to do with the BNP, let alone enter talks with them.
Oh dear, that f*ck up Chad Noble won't like you for that
My Dear Ian,
From your recent posts you really have it in for UKIP and to quote, "Ths is really getting rather boring" Hope Dave gives you the reward you seek.
The Cross of St George blog is something to do with the English Democrat Party, is it not? They are always inventing bizarre, intricate fantasies involving alliances and pacts between different parties. I don't think they are intentionally lying - I just think they have hyperactive imaginations. Among the lesser checkable errors in the story you posted is the claim that "UKIP have for a long time referred anyone interested in UKIP in Northern Ireland to the DUP". This is simply untrue. For a few years UKIP had an electoral pact with a small NI party, the UK Unionists (UKUP). I wonder if that is what the author of this blog story was dimly recalling? However, the UK Unionists have nothing to do with the DUP and so far as I've heard UKIP has never had any sort of connection with the DUP. UKIP is a moderate, non-racist party with a sizeable number of black and Asian members and candidates, and it will never, ever under any circumstances have anything to do with the racist BNP!
Besides which there has recently been a discussion on British Independence and Democracy Forum about banning all the BNP from the forum.
I wouldn't trust that racist Farage to not be considering a deal with the BNP but most UKIP people who've canvassed my house seem fairly decent.
You might also like to remember that the BNP are trying to discredit UKIP as they see them as their biggest obstancle to obtaining the more respectable Euro-sceptic anti-immigration pro-British vote. They often do this by trying to create some association between UKIP and the BNP.
Hey, remember the Vice-Chairman of IDS' leadership campaign was the father-in-law of the BNP leader. Does that prove 'links' and 'co-operation' between the BNP and the Tories?
I received the same report from a member of the English Democrats ....
whilst it sounded like deliberate misinformation to me there is definitely some mutual BNP/UKIP back-scratching going on in Dagenham.
The Conservative Home Comment Forum members have been concerned about a swing to BNP of 33 per cent in Redbridge last week.
The complete absence of any reasonably youthful figure of real stature in any party is distinctly worrying.
Why does 'anonymous' think that UKIP 'hates Europe'? Why do people say stupid and demonstrably false things like this. UKIP hates the EU, a very different matter.
Is it worth pointing out that two thirds of
conservatives support EU withdrawal?
Conservativehome poll.
That's probably reflected across the whole electorate too.
I think it's pretty daft that some attempt to portray withdrawal as akin to madness (fruitcakes, loons, etc).
Are they seriously suggesting that non-membership of a political organisation requires the attention of the men in white coats?
Of course, an extension of this tactic is to keep associating the only credible withdrawal party with racists. "Look, xenophobic scum!!!"
There are cold, hard reasons both for (being generous) and against membership, and to continually play the racist/xenophobe/Little Englander/bonkers card rather suggests one side of the fence has little else in the way of ammo.
It really is way past the time for this country to have a sensible debate on EU membership.
And then leave. :-)
Admit it Iain, you're just doing this to tease the not-very-noble chap (you know, the one who has had more parties than Paris Hilton) running that petty and vindictive vendetta against you.
James Schneider said...
Strapworld,
Portillo: really? Did you not see the hardcore unionist Tories frothing at the mouth when Portillo wrote the "anti-unionist" article in the Sunday Times?
What article was that then?
Christoophjer Stalford of DUP said:
"The British National Party are beyond the pale of moral decency, their brand of politics revolts me and my party will have nothing to do with them whatsoever."
Many in British politics would say the same about the DUP
I notice from the electoral commision figures the BNP have troubles - I've gone through it here
Iain has been fooled into thinking that he can help the Tories by reproducing silly allegations from the BNP and the English Democrats.
In a recent local election in a Tory ward, the BNP came a close second to the Tories.
This shows clearly that many Tory voters are not above voting for the BNP at least as a protest vote.
Ilford North
Con 1014 (39.6;-13.1),
BNP 857 (33.4;+33.4),
Lab 299 (11.7;-7.2),
LD 245 (9.6;-5.9),
Green 147 (5.7;-7.1)
This is what the BNP want. They want UKIP out of the way so they can pick up protest votes.
This is what it would have been like in the Euro elections if there was no UKIP. There would be some BNP MEPs.
Iain, you haven't meant to do so, but your strategy of attacking UKIP from smeary rumours and questionable sources is helping the BNP.
Also, I would guess that this kind of disinformation blogging is putting some people off the Tories, and blogging in general.
Cameron was very unwise to say what he did about UKIP, UKIP couldn'ty sue because they gained from his slurs.
Christina:I thought you were better than a malicious gossip,
Um, you've not been reading long, have you? The malicious gossip is part of the charm of this place.
I thought you were someone doing something good for blogging,
As someone who disagrees with Iain on most issues, and prefers a completely different style of blogging, I think he is doing good for blogging. Posting the occasional dodgy rumour is something we'd expect from any site of this nature.
but you are ruining what you built up, IMO.
Meh, "Tory attacks UKIP and BNP shock!" How daring of him.
If I'd noted this on XStG, I'd have probably reposted it as well, or at least linked strongly. Tehre are respectable, non-racist UKIP members. I even consider a few of them to be friends. But just because some of them aren't racist, doesn't mean a significant proportion of them are. There are racists in every party, but I've met more amongst UKIP activists than I have in other parties.
I have informed the UKIP Party Chairman.
Who'll do what, exactly? Threaten to sue? Iain, if they do, don't capitulate, let it go to court. It'd be funny to watch.
However...
While a merger involving BNP makes no sense at all, a merger between UKIP and DUP would make a lot of sense in many respects. Carful Iain, you may give them some ideas...
Christina - the by-election wasn't in Ilford but in Woodford. Bridge ward was described by a poster on uk.politics electoral as follows:
The western boundary is indeed the Central Line, running up from Woodford station to Roding Valley station. The northern boundary is partly the River Roding and partly the Greater London boundary with Essex. The eastern boundary is the western edge of Claybury Hall and its grounds. The southern boundary is a drain (!) running through some sports grounds before following Broadhead Road back to the Central Line near Woodford station.
This area (and I've been explicitly in Bridge Ward when leafletting) is very different from Ilford. From what I could see the BNP campaign was a local nasty one, especially on the issue of "local roots".
I doubt anyone in UKIP would be so stupid as to suggest a merger between UKIP and the BNP.
But isn't it a bit of a coincidence that this story has emerged during the run up to the leadership contest in which Nigel Farage is being so hotly contested for the top spot? His competition wouldn't exactly mind such a nasty little story doing the rounds right now, would they?
UKIP & "dirty tricks"?
Surely not.
utter utter crap. Don't you recognise the work of the infamous Steve Uncles when you see it?
The selfsame Engdems Steve Uncles who wrote to Sinn Fein and got Barnbrook and Butler on board with the engdems along with other ex BNP members.
This man is a lunatic and is trying to deflect his own dirtiness onto UKIP.
Believe this tosh and you might as well admit you believe in the tooth fairy and goblins.
Post a Comment