If Nigel Farage is the New Enoch Powell He Should Be Proud

Whenever I find my faith wavering in Nigel Farage and the UKIP project, all I have to do is open my morning newspaper to be reminded why they are both so very necessary.

Yesterday’s Telegraph was a case in point with its snide, insinuating story about how in 1994 Farage wrote to Enoch Powell – the Conservative intellectual and politician long acknowledged as one of his heroes – asking him to support his candidature in a local election. UKIP also wrote on several occasions to ask Powell to stand as a candidate in two national elections.

So far so very ho-hum. Powell – a highly intelligent, supremely principled politician with a fine war record, well loved by his constituents – would have been a natural fit for UKIP with his anti-EU views, his ability to connect with the views of ordinary people and his brave refusal to allow the immigration issue to be swept under the carpet as the Establishment was so keen to do then and remains so eager to do so today.

Why then the story?

Well, it was pegged to the fact that on Thursday night a priapic, soap-dodging, informationally-challenged pocket demagogue called Russell Brand accused Farage on BBC Question Time of being a “pound shop Enoch Powell.” And amazingly, the Telegraph was inviting us to take the view that this grandiloquent half-wit’s cheap shot – playing on the popular leftist meme that Powell was a “racist” because of his “Rivers of Blood” speech – ought to be taken as a valid criticism.

Wearing the mask of sage neutrality, the Telegraph opined in its accompanying editorial:

Whatever the stance one takes, it should be remembered that it was the language used by Mr Powell in the Sixties that so poisoned the immigration debate – and arguably made it so difficult to reopen until very recently. Back in 2005, Michael Howard was accused of having a “Powell moment” as Tory leader when he questioned the wisdom of uncontrolled immigration. That spectre has often been used to shut down such conversations, to the advantage of no one.

Hence, while many in Ukip will be unrepentant in their admiration for Mr Powell, they should surely take note of the bitterness that followed the “Rivers of Blood” speech, and consider the consequences of over-heated rhetoric. Certainly, a debate about the impact of immigration needs to be had – and it should be a prominent part of the mainstream political agenda, rather than left to fester on the margins. But this vital discussion is best conducted with calm, reason and respect for the feelings of others.

Ah yes. The old “over-heated rhetoric” canard.

It always puzzles me when I see one of my fellow journalists wheeling it out. It’s akin to a restaurant critic trying to make a virtue of the fact that from now on he’ll only be reviewing establishments that don’t serve meat; or a poet renouncing rhyme. Why would you want to do such a thing? Why would you want to shackle yourself in this way? The point, if your stock in trade is language, surely, is that you want to be free to employ it in all its rich variety – a bit of low snark here, a bit of Augustan rhetoric there. You’re appealing not just to your reader’s intellect but his emotions too. The idea that, say, strong imagery should be off-limits lest some bad person responds incorrectly is as absurd as ordaining that cars should only travel at 10 miles per hour because any faster and they might kill someone.

And exactly the same thing applies to political oratory. In the decades since Powell made that speech in 1968, it has become accepted wisdom that it killed free public debate on immigration stone dead and that the reason it did so was because of its inflammatory language. I’d concede the first part because it is depressingly, self-evidently true. But the second part is a nonsense.

It wasn’t Powell’s inflammatory language that killed the debate. What killed it was that a political and media Establishment which for various reasons didn’t want to have the debate – some for reasons of ideology, others out of moral cowardice – found it convenient to close it down by shooting the messenger. They didn’t have to close it down. There was no law that declared “If any politician quotes Virgil in a speech on immigration and some people get upset or offended by the fiery tone then for a period of no less than half a century the subject of immigration shall be off limits in case any more people get upset or offended.” Rather, it’s because, a craven political and media class chose to close it down, with consequences we are ruing to this day.

Read the rest at Breitbart London

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Frankie Boyle Says Not All Comics Are Lefties. Is This His Best Joke Yet?

Left-wing comedian Frankie Boyle has written an article in the left-wing Guardian explaining to his amen corner of left-wing readers that all his left-wing contemporaries who play left-wing comedy sets at left-wing comedy clubs, perform on left-wing TV panel shows and appear on left-wing comedy programmes on left wing BBC Radio 4 aren’t in fact left-wing at all but hold a broad array of political opinions.

Nice one, Frankie. One of your funniest.

You can tell his heart’s really not in the joke, though, because he keeps undermining it at every turn with sentences like this:

“Comedians, being decent sorts deep down, maybe just don’t take kindly to what they see as their fellows being targeted because of their race or gender.”

To appreciate fully what is so very wrong with this statement, you need to know the context of Boyle’s article. It was written in response to a very brave post on Facebook by comedian Andrew Lawrence having a dig at the “moronic, liberal back-slapping on panel shows like Mock The Week where aging, balding, fat men, ethnic comedians and women-posing-as-comedians, sit congratulating themselves on how enlightened they are about the fact that UKIP are ridiculous and pathetic.”

Boyle, it should be noted, is a middle aged and, though not balding or fat, has been a regular on Mock The Week, a comedy show so gag-destroyingly right on it might have been scripted by Polly Toynbee, Harriet Harman and Yasmin Alibhai Brown.

Understandably, Lawrence’s comments hit a raw nerve.

Read the rest at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. Comedian Frankie Boyle is a bully and a politically correct coward. Wish I’d never stood up for him.
  2. Spectator: Women can’t do comedy
  3. Television: Weekly shockers
  4. Nick Clegg’s riot inquiry panel is beyond a joke

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

The Establishment’s Attacks on UKIP Are Doomed to Backfire

By “the Establishment” I don’t, of course, mean the toffee-nosed, elitist right-wing conspiracy which exists largely in the perfervid imaginations of Russell Brand and Owen Jones.

I mean the new progressive Establishment which has dominated the cultural and political argument since at least the Blair era: the quangos, the seats of academe, the politically correct corporatists, the Eurocrats, the congenitally bien-pensant luvvies, the liberal media from the Guardian to the BBC, the charities, the identikit politicos in the Westminster bubble. They want to destroy UKIP not out of high principle but simply because it represents such a threat to the communitarian status quo. Here are some examples.

The Electoral Commission

In Standpoint Nigel Vinson tells the full, shocking story of how the Electoral Commission deprived UKIP of two MEP seats in the European elections in May – essentially by rigging the ballot paper.

A hitherto unknown party calling itself An Independence From Europe was allowed by the Electoral Commission onto the top of the ballot paper – and went on to claim nearly a quarter of a million votes from confused people who had almost certainly meant to vote UKIP.

The seats went to Green MEPs instead. At the time UKIP didn’t make a big deal of this, presumably because it didn’t want to sound petulant at a moment when it needed to sound exultant. But what happened here was the most extraordinary miscarriage of justice, perpetrated by a supposedly neutral, independent regulatory body which is clearly riddled with bias and is unfit for purpose.

Stand-up comics (aka The Wankocracy)

In the old days, on the Eighties alternative comedy circuit, all someone like Ben Elton would have to do was mention the words “Margaret Thatcher” – or even just “Thatch!” – for their audience to dissolve in smug, consensual, righteously scornful laughter.

Now this role as the butt of every second-rate lefty comic’s crap jokes has been taken over by UKIP. “I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally it means they have not a single political argument left,” Baroness Thatcher once said. As her most plausible current heir, Nigel Farage should find this heartening.

The European Parliament

Last week in Strasbourg, the European parliament’s arch-federalist political establishment rigged the rules and gamed the system in a dirty tricks measure which could almost have destroyed UKIP. Christopher Booker tells the story here:

Ever since Ukip last May won 24 seats, the Parliament’s Euro-elite – led by its German president Martin Schulz, the arch-federalist once famously compared by Silvio Berlusconi to a Nazi concentration camp commandant – has been longing to cut Mr Farage down to size. Last week Mr Schulz thought his moment had come. When an obscure Latvian MEP was persuaded to defect from Farage’s group, it meant that it no longer included representatives of seven countries, the minimum qualification to be recognised as an official parliamentary group.

Mr Schulz triumphantly announced that the group was thus disbanded, which would have been for Mr Farage and his colleagues an utter disaster.

Under new rules introduced by Mr Schulz, not only would they instantly have to vacate their plush offices, losing the services of some 40 administrative staff and £13 million in cash and kind, Mr Farage would also have to retire to the back benches, no longer able to make those speeches at the front of the Parliament that have earned him millions of hits on YouTube, such as that in which he told Herman Van Rompuy that he had “the charisma of a damp rag”.

Scarcely had Mr Schulz exulted at his triumph over the hated Eurosceptics, however, than the group recruited a Polish MEP to make up the numbers again. Despite attempts to discredit this man as a “Holocaust denier”, because his party leader back in Poland once questioned whether Hitler knew about Auschwitz (Farage’s new colleague merely described Hitler as “an evil man”), Mr Schulz soon found himself having to call Farage back to the rostrum as if nothing had happened.

What’s almost as interesting as Schulz’s plot – and how close it came to succeeding – has been the way the story has been reported across the media. Had these dirty tricks been applied to any other mainstream party, the stink would have been enormous.

Instead, even in supposedly conservative newspapers, reports focused not on the monstrousness of Schulz’s wicked, blatantly anti-democratic scheming but on the essentially trivial views of some Polish nobody from a party with whom it was perfectly clear Farage had got into bed out of pure pragmatism rather than deep ideological kinship.

Read the rest at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. Don’t expect the BBC to tell you, but Ukip is on the march
  2. Should Morrissey join Ukip?
  3. Speaker John Bercow: the best reason in the world for voting UKIP
  4. Nigel Farage – the only politician who dares say what we’re thinking

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Face It, the Right Are Going to Lose the Next UK General Election. Unless…

David Cameron has said he thinks schools should teach mainly in imperial measurements rather than in nasty, foreign, and undeniably French metric.

Funny that. It’s almost like he’d had spies at the rowdy Conservative conference fringe event the night before – staged by smokers’ rights campaigner Forest and Conservatives for Liberty – where I raised this very topic in a speech on Europe. I noted the irony that even though we defeated Napoleon in 1815 and Hitler in 1945 we still seem to have inherited half their policies all the same. From Hitler, inter alia, we got the clampdown on smoking and the obsession with environmentalism. From Napoleon, among other things, we got the metric measurement system – despite the fact that most of us continue stubbornly to think in pints and miles rather than half litres and kilometres.

Prime Ministers don’t make these casual asides by accident. Clearly, what’s going on here is that Cameron has been advised to chuck a few gobbets of red meat to the more reactionary wing of the Tory party: to the kind of people, in other words, who feel badly let down by four years of Cameron’s dogged centrism and who are now sorely tempted to throw in their lot with UKIP instead.

We heard similar right-wing mood music in Chancellor George Osborne’s speech yesterday: the freeze on benefits; the emphasis on tax cuts rather than spending rises; the renewed commitment to tackling the deficit. I was reminded of the chats Osborne and I used to have in the playground when our children were briefly at the same school together. “Just you wait till we form a majority government: then you’ll see what real Tories we are…” he used to say.

As a natural small ‘c’ conservative, I have little problem with this rightwards turn. (Though I think this imperial stuff is forgettable nonsense: yes it’s all jolly and jingoistic but let’s get real – the 30cm ruler is here to stay and it’s not like we’re going to go back to pre-decimal currency). But let us not be under any illusions as to why this is happening. It is not because the Cameron claque has suddenly realised that they were right-wing all along and that actually, come to think of it, they really do believe that the state has got far too big and that we’d all be better off outside Europe. It’s because their minds have been concentrated by opinion polls showing that, thanks to UKIP splitting their vote, the Conservatives are on course to lose the next election to Ed Miliband’s socialists.

Read the rest at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. General Election 2010: My mate Dave…
  2. Five reasons why the Conservatives deserve to lose the next election
  3. I hate to say this but Cameron’s speech has just won him the election
  4. The date of the General Election is:

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

David Cameron’s Greatest Legacy: The Rise and Rise of UKIP

British Prime Minister David Cameron has been making bold, statesman-like noises about Islamic State and President Putin this week. Well, of course he has. It’s what desperate leaders always do when their domestic policies and popularity ratings are tanking.

Unfortunately, it may be too little too late.

Cameron has reached that stage in his political career where, even were he singlehandedly to liberate Mosul, personally undo the handcuffs of all the captive Yazidis, Christians and Shias, stop the Syrian civil war, and engineer an enduring peaceful settlement in the Ukraine, he would still go down in history as one of Britain’s lesser prime ministerial also-rans.

Indeed, it is looking increasingly as though his single most significant legacy will be the one summed up by the cover of this week’s Private Eye satirical magazine: David Cameron, perhaps even more so than charismatic leader Nigel Farage, is the man most responsible for rise and rise of the Britain’s tea party UKIP.

Consider the latest opinion polls.

YouGov/Sun poll CON 32%, LAB 35%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 15%

This spells out the situation in black and white. Cameron’s Conservatives stand barely a prayer of winning a working majority at the next UK general election. And this despite the fact that Cameron’s prime opponent, Labour leader Ed Miliband, is widely considered such a weird, comical, economically illiterate joke figure as to be almost unelectable. And also, despite the fact that Britain currently has one of the world’s most successful economies and is enjoying a house price boom which is making many of the people who ought naturally be drawn to voting Conservative earn more in a year, tax free, than they do from their day jobs.

Why then are the Conservatives still polling so relatively dismally?

Read the rest at Breitbart London

Related posts:

  1. Should Morrissey join Ukip?
  2. David Cameron’s worst nightmare
  3. Maybe we’d be better off if David Cameron had gone to Harrow
  4. There was nothing ‘illiberal’ about David Cameron’s speech on multiculturalism

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Unless the Conservatives Come Clean about the Energy Mess They Created, They Will Never Deserve Our Vote

‘Ceci n’est pas un husky.’

Just how stupid does Lynton Crosby think we are?

Very, very, VERY stupid, I’m guessing. And perhaps he’s right. As part of his ongoing campaign to make the Conservatives more electable, he’s inviting us to experience the biggest outbreak of collective amnesia since Odysseus and his crew visited the Land of the Lotus Eaters. He wants us to forget the huskies. And the melting glaciers. And Dave’s announcement from Greenpeace’s HQ, no less that he was going to lead “the greenest government ever”. And to tell ourselves that all these unpopular wind and solar farms, all these rocketing energy prices have nothing whatsoever to do with husky-hugging Dave, leader of the greenest government ever, but with someone else entirely.

Richard North smells a rat here.

I do too. Lots of rats, actually.

Here’s one rat. (Actually, he reminds me more of a neutered poodle). His name is Greg Barker and here he is pretending to feel our pain about all the wind farms blighting our countryside. He’s dressing it up as a mea culpa: Energy Minister admits that some wind farms have been put in “the wrong place.” But it is nothing of the kind. It is part of the Conservatives’ cynical strategy to try to railroad through its offshore wind farms by trying to sell them to a gullible public as a preferable alternative to onshore wind.

And we’re supposed to be grateful for this? Isn’t this a bit like being told by the army besieging your City: “Hey, trapped citizens. Great news! We’ve taken note of your objection that, once you’ve let us through the gates, we’re going to impale every man, woman and child on hot spikes. So instead we’re going to chop your heads off.”

The disastrous Navitus Bay and Atlantic Array offshore projects the ones which will ruin the Dorset coast and utterly devastate the setting of Lundy Island in the Bristol Channel, after all, will require far more taxpayer subsidy (200 per cent, as opposed to 100 per cent) for their useless, intermittent, unreliable, bird-killing, bat-chomping, view-blighting, peace-disturbing, sleep-destroying energy than any onshore wind farms. (Sorry: I can’t bring myself to care about the project off Brighton. It’s God’s punishment for voting Green).

The new deal with the French and the Chinese to build a nuclear power station at Hinckley Point so iniquitous and wrong that even George Monbiot realises it’s a bad idea is another case in point. It’s as terrible as those disastrous PFI hospitals that were inflicted on us in the Blair era: inept government negotiators and greedy corporatists stitching up the market in way that is entirely beyond the consumer’s control. How, in all conscience, can the Coalition express concern about energy prices while simultaneously boasting about their success in striking a deal (for antediluvian technology) which is going to drive them sky high. As Peter Glover says here mini-nukes would have made far more sense.

Or consider the 2008 Climate Change Act, against which only five MPs voted against. The rest including David Cameron were apparently all for introducing the most expensive and pointless legislation in British parliamentary history, guaranteed to cost the taxpayer £18.3 billion a year in needless expenditure (on dubious technologies like carbon capture; and, of course, on wind turbines) till 2050. Yes Ed Miliband may ushered it in as Secretary of State for Energy And Climate Change. But it’s not as if anyone on the Conservative benches save Peter Lilley, Christopher Chope and Andrew Tyrie opposed it.

We have two years until the next General Election and what is already clear as a result of Ed Miliband’s price freeze bribe is that energy prices are going to become a major issue. The only party that has a leg to stand on energy is UKIP, which has consistently noted the flaws in the supposed IPCC consensus and the economic and socio-political dangers of the drive towards unreliable, expensive renewables and the failure to exploit our vast shale gas reserves.

What will be fascinating is to observe how Cameron and co attempt to wriggle out of a mess almost entirely of their own making. There was no need to embrace all that greenery in the way that did. (Whatever Sam Cam may have whispered in Dave’s ear). And God knows, it’s not as though they haven’t had enough opportunities in the last three years to readjust their policies in the light of events. Scarcely a week goes by these days without the Global Warming Policy Foundation presenting such irrefutable evidence from around the world of the disasters being wrought by bad energy policy, and of the decreasing credibility of Man-Made Global Warming Theory. The Conservatives’ ongoing failure in this regard ought to be the single best recruiting sergeant UKIP has.

Related posts:

  1. We need to talk about wind farms…
  2. What Dave and his chum Barack don’t want you to know about green jobs and green energy
  3. Simon Singh’s for the joy of solar energy
  4. Five reasons why the Conservatives deserve to lose the next election

One thought on “Unless the Conservatives come clean about the energy mess they created, they will never deserve our vote”

  1. autolycus3 says:28th October 2013 at 10:06 am“The choice is no longer between global warming catastrophe and economic growth but between economic catastrophe and climate sense”Professor Fritz Vahrenholt is one of the fathers of Germany’s environmental movement and the director of RWE Innogy, one of Europe’s largest renewable energy companies

Comments are closed.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Nigel Farage – The Only Politician Who Dares Say What We’re Thinking

The danger of sounding Conservative

“When we believe something – we don’t go ‘are you thinking what we’re thinking’. We say it out loud.”

I like this line from Nigel Farage’s UKIP conference address. My Spectator colleague Fraser Nelson thinks the  speech was a bit of a let down – which was maybe inevitable given that Farage has had to clip his own wings recently in order to pay more attention to party organisation and party discipline. But for me there was more than enough red meat in it to convince me that UKIP is staying truer to its brand than any of the three other mainstream parties are to theirs.

That paragraph about the Romanian crime wave, for example. You’d never hear Cameron, or Clegg or Miliband getting as near-the-knuckle as this, would you?

London is already experiencing a Romanian crime wave. There have been an astounding 27,500 arrests in the Metropolitan Police area in the last five years. 92 per cent of ATM crime is committed by Romanians. This gets to the heart of the immigration policy that UKIP wants, we should not welcome foreign criminal gangs and we must deport those who have committed offences.

“No,” the usual troll suspects will no doubt say. “But you’d hear it from Nick Griffin….”

And there’s your problem, in a nutshell. Since at least the beginning of the Blair era and probably well before, the left has very successfully managed to close down any argument of which it disapproves by crying “racist”, “elitist”, “homophobe”, “NIMBY”, “Little Englander”, “fascist”, or whatever. This has created within the Westminster bubble a culture of caution bordering on cowardice. Before a politician speaks he almost never asks himself: “Is this true?” Rather, he asks himself: “Will this get me into trouble with the BBC?” Which is why, of course, we get politicians like Rachel “Boring” Reeves.

As Fraser Nelson noted in this astute analysis, things have got so bad that even a Conservative prime minister currently doing well in the polls and with a fair economic wind behind him dare not say anything too conservative-sounding except in near-secret, among High Tories, at occasions like the Carlton Club dinner.

Farage, to his credit, isn’t having this. He recognises, for example, that the Westminster elite’s position on immigration – which boils down, basically, to “racism is bad m’kay?” – doesn’t actually reflect how most real people think.

Most real people these days are relaxed about issues like race, religion and ethnicity, but excedingly unrelaxed about issues like thieving gangs or expensive translation services for immigrants who won’t learn the language or having parts of their city turned into no-go areas by Islamist thugs. Does this make them racists or natural BNP voters? Nope. It just makes them entirely normal.

Related posts:

  1. Don’t expect the BBC to tell you, but Ukip is on the march
  2. ‘Politicians SHOULD be afraid of the people!’ says dangerous US radical politician
  3. In praise of patrons – particularly mine
  4. ‘Everything dead by tomorrow!’ warns Zoological Society of London

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Should Morrissey Join Ukip?

Militant mashup?

Morrissey

Total fruitcake

If, as David Cameron once claimed, UKIP is full of “fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists”, then I suppose Nigel Farage should be welcoming with open arms his latest celebrity would-be member, the mad-as-a-lorry, tofu-munching pop star Morrissey. Interviewed in Loaded magazine, Mozza has said:

“I nearly voted for Ukip. I like Nigel Farage a great deal,”

“His views are quite logical – especially where Europe is concerned.”

But does our future prime minister really want to be messing with such people? I’d say not. And this isn’t because I believe any of that drivel the NME once came up with about Morrissey being a closet “raaaacist” just because he once draped himself on stage in the Union flag. Nor is it because I think Mozza will use his cunning celebrity influence to change Ukip’s policy on gay marriage (Mozza is famously, defiantly celibate). It’s just that I’ve a strong suspicion that Morrissey is basically unsound. Here are a few reasons:

1. “Meat is Murder.” No. Meat is not murder. To believe meat is “murder” you have to belong to the Peter Singer school of animal-rights weirdness and accept that beef cattle and chickens and so on deserve the same status as humans.

2. His gigs never fail to disappoint. He only ever does about two Smiths numbers, really perfunctorily. And he never does nearly enough from his one world-class solo album Vauxhall & I.

3.He hates the Royal Family.

4. He thinks the Falklands belong to the Argies.

5. He is a militant vegetarian.

Farage, I think most of us can agree, is a very splendid fellow and Ukip’s manifesto is quite amazingly sound. But has Morrissey actually read it?

Related posts:

  1. Don’t expect the BBC to tell you, but Ukip is on the march
  2. Five reasons why the Conservatives deserve to lose the next election
  3. Nigel Farage – the only politician who dares say what we’re thinking
  4. Speaker John Bercow: the best reason in the world for voting UKIP

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

The Orgy of Greed Spoiling Our Countryside: Why I Campaigned in Corby

The troughers at Ovenden Moor

From Thursday’s Daily Telegraph

The Yorkshire moorland that inspired Wuthering Heights is about to be blighted by nine 377ft wind turbines, each one the height of Salisbury Cathedral.

Do you need to be a rabid, bat-crazy, monomaniacal, classical liberal loon to find this upsetting? I hope not, I really do. The vandalisation of Ovenden Moor, near Haworth, in the heart of Brontë country should concern us all, regardless of which way we vote or what newspaper we read.

Caring greenies ought to be dismayed by the widespread environmental havoc it will wreak: the kestrels it will slice and dice, the protected bats it will cause to implode, the huge concrete bases, the poisonous rare earth minerals mined under the most atrocious conditions in China. Bookish Left-leaning wimmin in glasses with large, red plastic frames ought surely to be concerned by the blighting of the landscape which inspired Emily – and Charlotte, and Anne.

Red meat socialists ought to be spitting blood at the injustice the Great Wind Scam perpetrates against the common man. It takes money from the poor and funnels it straight into the pockets of greedy, often toffy landowners and rapacious, mostly foreign-owned energy companies.

Here, roughly, is how the spoils will be divided among the troughers at Ovenden Moor. The landowner will be paid £401,000 pa, index-linked, for the next 25 years. The developer will get an income of around £2,679,300 pa, index-linked, over the same period. The vast bulk of this will come straight from the taxpayer in the form of compulsory subsidies, payable even if the turbines produce no power.

And the energy that will emerge from this orgy of greed and destruction? It will be neither green, clean, abundant or useful. Wind power requires full back-up from fossil-fuel-powered stations. It doesn’t save CO2, nor provide energy security, nor contribute anything to the base load power Britain so badly needs to keep the lights on.

These are just a few of the reasons why I consider the Great Wind Scam to be the biggest political scandal of our generation, and why I accepted an invitation by local wind-farm protesters to stand as their candidate in the Corby by-election.

As I said right from the start, the very last thing I wanted was to be an MP: my wife would divorce me. But what I didn’t want to do either was to let down my cause with a really crappy showing on election night. That’s why my strategy was to play the whole thing by ear. If I thought I stood a chance of becoming one of those Martin Bell-type outsiders who sweeps the board, well, whoop-di-do, I’d risk the divorce and spend two years in Westminster doing what I like best – really peeing my enemies off. If I could achieve more with a tactical, last‑minute withdrawal, well that would suit me too – not least because I’d no longer be letting down my friends in Ukip.

I love Ukip. There’s barely a single one of their policies I disagree with. Inevitably, there was much upset among my Ukip pals when I announced I’d be standing against them: they were worried that I’d take away votes from their excellent candidate, Margot Parker. This I didn’t want to do.

Equally, though, I had a lot of sympathy for my local Conservative MP, Chris Heaton-Harris, whom I got to know and like at a Tory conference in Windsor in September and who is masterminding the Tory campaign in Corby. Chris is the kind of Conservative who would have me voting Tory again: small-government, anti-EU, massively anti-wind. He, too, was worried I’d steal Tory votes – gosh how nice it is to feel important! – and was keen to show me that his party was at last seeing sense.

For example, he was the one who drew my attention to the anti-wind speeches made by Owen Paterson and the new energy minister, John Hayes, at the Tory conference. It was newspaper reports of some even stronger anti-wind remarks by Hayes which gave me just the excuse I needed to withdraw from the election with honour, claiming victory.

The timing was perfect. Obviously, I totally love the idea that the Coalition rewrote its entire energy policy because of me – and if the Guardian and Greenpeace wish to credit me with such mighty powers, as they did yesterday, then great. But politics is a bit more complicated than that. George Osborne is known to be fiercely anti-wind; Cameron, it is rumoured, appointed Hayes and Paterson quite deliberately to placate all those shire Tories mortified at the bat-chomping eco-crucifixes ruining their views and wiping out their property values. So while I’m proud to have played my small part in the war to defeat the great wind menace, I think it’s more likely that I was only ever a humble Sancho Panza rather than the true Don Quixote.

Related posts:

  1. We’re destroying our countryside – and for what?
  2. Corby: should I stand?
  3. Wind farms: even worse than we thought…
  4. Wind farms kill whales: blubber on the green movement’s hands

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Corby: Should I Stand?

Augean troughers and reptiles

Would you really want this man as your local MP?

There’s a mischievous online campaign now fast gaining momentum urging that I should stand in the Corby by-election following Louise Mensch’s shock (well, actually not that shocking) decision to abandon the sinking ship SS Coalition.

I’m torn, I must say.

On the one hand I’m moving to Northamptonshire anyway next week and I’d certainly love to do my bit in parliament to help Chris Heaton-Harris MP with his campaign to stop this gorgeous and much-underrated county becoming the wind farm capital of Britain. (Note that phrase “gorgeous and much-underrated”. Seems I’m catching the politician’s smarm bug already….). Also, though I can’t claim to have taken quite as many drugs as Louise Mensch apparently has, I did make a pretty heroic go of it in my younger, longer-haired days – as fans of my Thinly Disguised Autobiography will know.

On the other hand, I’m skint, I’d stand no hope of getting a cabinet position in the Cameron administration (face it: he’s not my biggest fan) and in any case I just don’t think I’d be cynical or sleazy enough to get on in the current Tory party.

Then again, if I did stand it wouldn’t be as a Tory anyway. No way would I want to belong to the same party as such Augean troughers and reptiles as Tim Yeo MP or the even more noisome Lord Deben (formerly John Selwyn Gummer). If I stood – if they’d have me – it would have to be for UKIP whose manifesto gels so perfectly with my own political values I might almost have written it myself.

Until recently Nigel Farage used to describe UKIP as the “Conservative party in exile” and saw the party’s function mainly as the Tories’ conscience, to keep them on the straight and narrow. Over dinner the other night – no: we weren’t talking about my candidature – though, I discovered that his position had hardened. He now sees UKIP as a viable political party not just at the 2014 EU elections (when it will assuredly win the most seats) but also in the next few general elections here in Britain.

I totally understand his shift in thinking. Thanks to David Cameron, the Conservative party in Britain is dead in the water. There’s only one possible thing he could do to save it which is to fall on his sword before the next election and allow Boris Johnson or Gove to take the reins. But since he won’t – doing the decent thing has never really been Cameron’s schtick – Labour will certainly win the next election, if necessary in coalition with the Lib Dems who will then gerrymander the boundaries and tinker with the constitution to ensure that the Tories can never win a working majority again.

Really, so totally unConservative have the Conservatives become in every way (apart from on education) I find it astonishing that any conservative could consider voting for them. But then if I were an old Labour man – and I have a lot more respect for socialists than I do for liberals – I would feel much the same about the way Labour has gone. Instead of being the party which champions the rights of the working man and woman, Labour has become the party of the welfare class, the public sector parasite and the vampire squid quangocracy.

We need a new kind of politics in this country. None of the current three main parties is offering us any viable alternative to the doomed political “consensus” of statism, money-printing, overregulation, corporatism, banksterism, gag-making political correctness and environmental tyranny.

UKIP, on the other hand, has something to offer everyone – both those on the traditional right and on the old left.

Do I really want to be an MP? Probably not. Hateful job, hideous place – like a cross between a very minor public school and a 70s Berni Inn, vile creepy people, long hours and (unless you’re say, Tim Yeo MP) crap money.

Oh and there’s another factor which might rule me way out of contention: I speak rather too honestly for my own good.

Related posts:

  1. What BBC Radio 2’s Chris Evans thinks about global warming
  2. The orgy of greed spoiling our countryside: why I campaigned in Corby
  3. Richard Madeley reveals that the green blight has finally sunk Cornwall
  4. Hollywood fracks up

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations