Why a campaign rather than parties is the route to getting the UK out of the EU

Anyone who still clings to the belief that voting for a political party, namely UKIP, is the way to bring about a Brexit from the EU could do with thinking long and hard about the following opinion poll response from YouGov.

Party that people would never vote for

PoliticalBetting.com, from where this information was taken, explains that:

This is from a survey that looks at views of the parties in different parts of the country which doesn’t produce any startling conclusions – the Tories are less popular in the north while LAB had problems in the South outside London.

These YouGov numbers are very similar to what Ipsos-MORI found in August when they asked about liking and disliking parties.

This is not a dig at UKIP.  It is just additional evidence that using the party political process to further the Eurosceptic aims of leaving the EU is at best flawed, at worst futile.

UKIP is the only party that has ever committed to leaving the EU, while the other parties are fully ‘on message’ with the Brussels machine and are either actively purusing further integration and dilution of the UK’s fabled ‘influence’ by way of enlargement, or are cheerleading such activity from the oppostion benches.   The fact that UKIP is by far the most unpopular of a very unpopular set of party entities shows it does not have the capacity for a breakthough that would lead to any form of influence in the Parliamentary process.

Instead the focus should be on having a single non-party political ‘No to EU’ type campaign that brings together all the various Eurosceptic groups to push a clear and easy to understand message about ‘Who should run Britain?’ ensuring the real issue – that of political sovereignty – is not swamped by the deceitful focus on economics and big business interests.

Such an alliance of groups, that allows the respective groups that are part of it to preserve their identity, could more effectively raise the necessary awareness of the impact of EU governance and counter the Europhile lies that have been ignored by UKIP for narrow party political reasons.  Sharing the load, the groups can establish a single shared platform to give an honest counter to the flood of nonsense filling the media, making the campaign the ‘go to’ destination for comment and insight.

A non-party ‘No to EU’ alliance established now – before Tory proxies like Matthew Elliot can undermine the ‘out’ side with irrelevant arguments and diversions – could build significant support around the country, and coordinate the right time to apply pressure to individual MPs and candidates to support an in-out referendum in return for endorsement, rather than get bogged down in fighting an election with candidates and all the problems that entails.

Taking the party political route will ensure we never arrive at our destination.  It’s time to take this essential issue out of the control of the increasingly untrusted and deceitful political class and have a genuine grassroots campaign fought on the real issue – sovereignty.

23 Responses to “Why a campaign rather than parties is the route to getting the UK out of the EU”


  1. 1 Martin Shelvey 15/11/2013 at 12:03 pm

    So one “joins a campaign” and then votes Labour,Liberal,Conservative ?
    Or perhaps you mean “join a campaign” and then not vote at all ?
    Incidentally , YouGov is run by Peter Kellner whose wife is the gloriously unelected Catherine Ashton High Representative etc.etc…. I am so glad that you say “this is not a dig at UKIP” because there was just a moment when I wondered.
    Best Wishes , we like (most of) your blogs.
    Martin

  2. 2 graham wood 15/11/2013 at 12:30 pm

    A M. I accept your premise that a future campaign should not be along political lines, and that is fine in theory. However, we all know that this is an impossible ideal for once any such campaign gains a real measure of public traction, then inevitably political parties will be drawn in, and especially as we near the GE.
    In any event there are already alliances and groupings within the wider euro sceptic movement (Bruges, Democracy Movement & etc)
    Also if such a alliance grew, as we all wish, then some MPs would likely join anyway and the usual partisan divide will inevitably emerge.
    The value of an alliance may well have as its primary aim to force the EU membership issue, and particularly the democratic deficit element you identify, to the top of the political agenda for all parties. In a GE year I guess other priorities such as the economy, jobs, housing, energy, will dominate as usual.
    But in the end it is Westminster where the decisions will be taken is it not?

  3. 3 Stephen Wolstenholme 15/11/2013 at 1:09 pm

    Perhaps the Scottish ‘no to Independence’ alliance is a useful example?

  4. 4 Odeston 15/11/2013 at 1:16 pm

    After so many years of dumbed-down teaching in our schools and colleges, our eligible voting population is so stultifyingly ignorant of events – and of the foreigners we allow to run our country, I do not believe them to be capable of recognising a non-party alliance or what it might do for them.

    I wonder just how many even know we are a captive vassal state of the European Union!

    UKIP is making a loud noise: if the electorate hears that, at least it’s a start. And when Farage is replaced by a committed anti-EU politician, with a plan and an exit programme, well, we’ll have numbers on our side, then an alliance such as you describe will overcome Cameron and the other traitors.

  5. 5 Autonomous Mind 15/11/2013 at 1:25 pm

    The decision will be taken by the people in a referendum, Graham. The campaign only needs to build up enough public momentum and pressure on the politicians to ensure it happens.

    Nothing you have said changes the fact that using the electoral system and voting for a political party as a means of getting us to the position we need to be in to fight a referendum, is futile.

    UKIP has hamstrung itself and will not make any big breakthrough in Westminster politics. It will serve as a dustbin for protest votes in meaningless elections like the Euros, but in a General it will do little more than deprive a few Tories of their seats. How does that change anything?

    If you accept that history teaches us a lot, then we should learn from the Norway example of how to defeat a political class that wants to be ‘in’ the EU. That was done via a campaign. It wasn’t achieved through a Eurosceptic political party.

  6. 6 Norm 15/11/2013 at 1:34 pm

    I refuse to vote for any of the LibLabCon coalition who’s stated aim is to remain in the EU. A vote for any of those three parties is a vote to stay in regardless of any renegotiation because we know that is not going to happen and if it did the concessions would be worthless. No the only way is a vote for UKIP and even if it is not as successful as we hope at least some of the lying greedy scumbag MP’s will lose their seats and their place at the trough.

  7. 7 Autonomous Mind 15/11/2013 at 1:39 pm

    Odeston, the ‘loud noise’ UKIP is making is on immigration. The majority of its website homepage comprises immigration related stories, despite the facts showing 2/3 of the people migrating here come from non-EU countries, which leaving the EU will do nothing to counter.

    There’s also some moaning about the BBC, the Farage fetish of HS2 and of course that nonsense misrepresentation about water volume in toilet flushes. UKIP is not talking about withdrawal and is not countering any of the EuroFUD that is streaming out at this time. It is not helping the cause.

    The question your point raises is, who replaces Farage? He and his circle have dispensed with the capable alternatives in order to keep Farage free from challenge. This again reinforces the problem with party maintenance and other ambitions getting in the way of the objective it was created to meet. That’s why we have to take this issue out of the Westminster bubble and away from bubble’s chosen proxies like Matthew Elliot.

  8. 8 Autonomous Mind 15/11/2013 at 1:40 pm

    Norm, but that doesn’t help us much, does it?

    Why not focus on a campaign that can make a difference as the Norwegians have shown?

  9. 9 Autonomous Mind 15/11/2013 at 1:46 pm

    Stephen, if you mean ‘Better Together’ which describes itself as ‘The patriotic all-party and non-party campaign for Scotland in the UK’, then no, I don’t think it is a useful example.

    The problem with it is that it is being led by politicians. The political class is controlling the campaign. For ‘No to EU’ we need a grassroots campaign far removed from the politicians. It’s bad enough for an independence campaign that the likes of Elliot, who is desperate for the reward of a safe Tory seat, is trying to lead an interference campaign as the proxy of the politicians.

  10. 10 mkpdavies 15/11/2013 at 1:59 pm

    More than happy to support any joint campaign, while still voting UKIP.

  11. 11 Dave_G 15/11/2013 at 3:16 pm

    Such survey results don’t resonate with (at least) MY personal experiences of talking to neighbours, friends, relatives etc plus which you are demonstrating a YouGov survey which in my limited experience would hardly be un-biased or misleading….. oh no…. the epitome of honesty and integrity is our Government and it’s offices…….

  12. 12 Autonomous Mind 15/11/2013 at 3:39 pm

    On the basis of your comment, UKIP is heading for a huge result in your constituency. I’ll save your comment, Dave, and then we can revisit it after the general election and compare what they have told you with what the outcome is.

    OK?

  13. 13 TT 15/11/2013 at 3:45 pm

    On the positive campaign note we should be thinking “Yes to an Independent Sovereign Great Britain” n’est pas?

  14. 14 Dave_G 15/11/2013 at 4:08 pm

    AM – sadly my experiences are spread across half the country (apart from neighbours of course) but even in pub talk, at various online forums etc the opinion is still pro-UKIP.
    Whether this is the same as no-one admitting to having a Black Lace single or liking Abba though is anyone’s guess…..

  15. 15 Ken Whittaker 15/11/2013 at 5:37 pm

    I’m assuming the sot of group you have in mind would be The Campaign for an Independent Britain. So why not unite behind them rather formimg yet another campaign group?

  16. 16 Richard North 16/11/2013 at 1:25 am

    In due course, there will have to be an official “no” campaign, which gets the campaign funds from the taxpayer in the referendum campaign. This will have to be a broad-based coalition (and cannot be a political party), of which we would expect CIB to be part.

    However, we should be looking to build alliances now, rather than wait for the referendum to be declared, otherwise the Tory proxies may outflank us.

  17. 17 graham wood 16/11/2013 at 10:14 am

    RN I agree that eventually there will need to be an official NO campaign, and presumably the whole euro sceptic cause of disparate groups would actively give their support. I agree also that we should be looking to building alliances now. But the question arises – who or what will take the necessary steps to jack up such an alliance?
    Linked to this is the fact that such an alliance would need to find a political expression or some sort of political representation. Only UKIP ia able to offer this option, albeit you, AM, and others are bothered by its current weakness and dissatisfaction with NF as leader.
    So be it, but its worth repeating only UKIP can and will assume this role.
    No matter how unsatisfactory therefore, in electoral terms and for the present at least, it makes sense to support it.
    Of course, we all know it is a “dustbin” for political disaffection with the main parties, but a substantial vote for it in the euro election, and strong support for it in the GE will begin to challenge the complacency of the main parties and will concentrate minds wonderfully.
    Game changer? We we cannot yet know, but UKIP is the only game in town now, and for the foreseeable future.

  18. 18 Autonomous Mind 16/11/2013 at 10:42 am

    No Graham, that’s the point. Such a campaign does NOT need political representation. It would be far more powerful as a grassroots movement. The moment parties try to take control of matters, the whole thing becomes tainted – and that 43% who say they will never vote UKIP become alienated.

    Sure, UKIP saying the right things and helping raise awareness would be a help. But they are too busy talking about HS2, immigration and seizing the BNP ground.

  19. 19 graham wood 16/11/2013 at 12:34 pm

    AM “Such a campaign does NOT need political representation”

    AM. I think you miss the obvious point. Of course the campaign does not need the politicos in Oder to educate, and hopefully change public opinion progressively throughout its campaign, but it would only be a means to a greater end, namely, to compel the political parties to polarise on the question of an In/Out position
    This in turn will mean a sea change in the political agenda (as in 1975) , and it will therefore be in the forum of Parliament where the issue will be finally debated and decided. uKIP then will be the only party to “represent” eurosceptism as a political force, albeit without seats in Parliament as yet.
    They do not need to “take control of matters”, as you put it, in order to raise the profile of the EU issue, but clearly it would be very closely associated with such a campaign to Brexit.

  20. 20 Paul Perrin (@pperrin) 20/11/2013 at 4:09 pm

    Go ahead with your ‘campaign’ UKIP aren’t stopping you. If your campaign will get the UK out of the EU I am sure you will have the support of all UKIP supporters…

    ‘Put pressure’ on LibLabCon? How does one do that? by denying them power I would suggest, which you can do by denying them votes *even if you don’t win*.

    I don’t really understand the point of this post other than to have a pop at UKIP… you want to criticize its supporters by saying you have a better approach, mock them for wasting their time – but you completely fail to set out any alternative (better or worse!).

    You really think you can persuade UKIP supporters to support you idea (that you don’t explain)? Well apply that persuasive skill to LibLabCon to convince them to take us out of the EU – simple.

  21. 21 Autonomous Mind 21/11/2013 at 1:36 pm

    What part of the alternative that was set out (see below) was not set out, Perrin?

    Instead the focus should be on having a single non-party political ‘No to EU’ type campaign that brings together all the various Eurosceptic groups to push a clear and easy to understand message about ‘Who should run Britain?’ ensuring the real issue – that of political sovereignty – is not swamped by the deceitful focus on economics and big business interests.

    Such an alliance of groups, that allows the respective groups that are part of it to preserve their identity, could more effectively raise the necessary awareness of the impact of EU governance and counter the Europhile lies that have been ignored by UKIP for narrow party political reasons. Sharing the load, the groups can establish a single shared platform to give an honest counter to the flood of nonsense filling the media, making the campaign the ‘go to’ destination for comment and insight.

  22. 22 odeston 21/11/2013 at 2:32 pm

    AM. To whom should “various Eurosceptic Groups” push a clear and easy to understand message about who should run Britain?
    Having ” raised the awareness of the impact of EU governance:” who will be made aware? How will they be made aware?
    And what would be the vehicle of implementation if not a political organisation?

  23. 23 Autonomous Mind 21/11/2013 at 3:34 pm

    Odeston, I would have thought the concept would have been obvious. The EUphiles publish and publicise their ‘research’ and ‘reports’ for public consumption. The media laps it up because of prestige.

    The EUsceptic alliance would conduct research and generate reports in the same way, for public consumption. With something to say, the media will prick up its ears and publish in the hope of a bunfight that generates more column inches for them. The messages will get more of an airing than they do today.

    I just want to check, do you understand the difference between a political party and a political organisation?


Comments are currently closed.



Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive