politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP claims two more Tories ready to defect: Party secretary says MPs will unveiled within days
To the alarm of Conservative HQ, Ukip party secretary Matthew Richardson has boasted privately that two turncoats have agreed to switch parties, according to two separate sources.
I think UKIP are being stupid here. If MPs are going to defect then announce it when they actually do so as they did with Carswell. Otherwise you leave yourself wide open to a bit of clever deception and have to backtrack when they 'change their minds'.
UKIP handled the Carswell defection well (with the exception of not getting the existing PCC on board) but they seem to have rather got carried away with themselves here and it strikes me they are heading for a fall if they are not very careful.
Be foolish for UKIP to unveil them prior to the by-elections. If they make the party seem like a deeper shade of Tory that could rob them of any hope against Labour.
I think UKIP are being stupid here. If MPs are going to defect then announce it when they actually do so as they did with Carswell. Otherwise you leave yourself wide open to a bit of clever deception and have to backtrack when they 'change their minds'.
UKIP handled the Carswell defection well (with the exception of not getting the existing PCC on board) but they seem to have rather got carried away with themselves here and it strikes me they are heading for a fall if they are not very careful.
If someone is going to defect, it absolutely makes sense to wait until they actually defect. That said, if no-ones going to defect, it might make sense to talk up the idea of defections just to keep yourself in the news as a minor party.
Audreyanne said this: "You called Mohammed (pbuh) an asshole, something which is deeply insulting and whatever you might like to think not something you are at liberty to say. Do you wish me to point you to laws of this land it might contravene?"
I would like to know which English laws this contravenes. Defamation is not available to dead people and insulting someone is not, thank God, yet a crime.
I think UKIP are being stupid here. If MPs are going to defect then announce it when they actually do so as they did with Carswell. Otherwise you leave yourself wide open to a bit of clever deception and have to backtrack when they 'change their minds'.
UKIP handled the Carswell defection well (with the exception of not getting the existing PCC on board) but they seem to have rather got carried away with themselves here and it strikes me they are heading for a fall if they are not very careful.
I think it's going to happen for that reason: otherwise it sounds a bit like a grand old Duke of York moment; building expectations only to have them bashed.
As TSE mentions, if there are defectors, I hope they follow Carswell's honourable actions and call a by-election. Although I hope they have the guts to call Cameron and/or the chief whip first.
As for timing: might it be that UKIP want the publicity from by-elections coming up the GE, and therefore want them *before* the election? If the MPs have currently safe seats, and can transfer many Conservative members over with them (as it appears Carswell has done), that would seem to be a risky but sane strategy to build momentum.
I wonder when a resignation would not trigger a by-election, but be automatically rolled up into the GE? How long could it be dragged out? What are the precedents?
A number of those listed have publicly declared they would not be defecting, including Peter Bone. Have they been lying? I would be more worried about those who have been below the radar, and Mike Smithson's speculation (immediately post Carswell) about Philip Hollobone in particular, may prove to be prescient. According to Wikipedia, Gordon Henderson, MP for Sittingbourne and Sheppey, has "stated that the non-Conservative politician he most admires is Nigel Farage".
"Defamation is not available to dead people and insulting someone is not, thank God, yet a crime."
May I refer the right honourable lady to the discussions on this site over the past few weeks on the workings of the Public Order Act and in particular the expositions of it by our learned friend, Life in a market Town.
Insulting someone (alive or dead) can indeed be a criminal offence and this has been the case since at least 1936.
I suspect that the powers that be in the Tory Party have by now accepted that the most likely GE outcome is a Labour or LAB/Lib government and that they might as well lose the clowns now, take it on the chin and rebuild under Boris.
It begs the question. If we are heading towards a continental style five party system, where is the new force on the harder left? Will it take a piss poor Miliband government or coalition to create a new force on the left? A sort of socialist UKIP?
A number of those listed have publicly declared they would not be defecting, including Peter Bone. Have they been lying? I would be more worried about those who have been below the radar, and Mike Smithson's speculation (immediately post Carswell) about Philip Hollobone in particular, may prove to be prescient. According to Wikipedia, Gordon Henderson, MP for Sittingbourne and Sheppey, has "stated that the non-Conservative politician he most admires is Nigel Farage".
But maybe nothing will happen. Not long to wait.
Bone gets more attention being in the Tory caucus as he at least has the ability to influence a larger bloc of anti-EU sentiment.
Surely Farage accusing Cameron of deliberately trying to sabotage his conference is an example of justifying pulling the same trick by announcing defectors during the Tory Conference?
I think UKIP are being stupid here. If MPs are going to defect then announce it when they actually do so as they did with Carswell. Otherwise you leave yourself wide open to a bit of clever deception and have to backtrack when they 'change their minds'.
UKIP handled the Carswell defection well (with the exception of not getting the existing PCC on board) but they seem to have rather got carried away with themselves here and it strikes me they are heading for a fall if they are not very careful.
I think it's going to happen for that reason: otherwise it sounds a bit like a grand old Duke of York moment; building expectations only to have them bashed.
As TSE mentions, if there are defectors, I hope they follow Carswell's honourable actions and call a by-election. Although I hope they have the guts to call Cameron and/or the chief whip first.
As for timing: might it be that UKIP want the publicity from by-elections coming up the GE, and therefore want them *before* the election? If the MPs have currently safe seats, and can transfer many Conservative members over with them (as it appears Carswell has done), that would seem to be a risky but sane strategy to build momentum.
I wonder when a resignation would not trigger a by-election, but be automatically rolled up into the GE? How long could it be dragged out? What are the precedents?
I agree with you about the by-election principle. As you know I don't actually agree that we vote for a party as opposed to an individual representative and so would not like to see an MP forced to stand again as that would give too much power to the parties and would reinforce the misconception that people are voting for a party.
But I do believe that it is the honorable thing for an MP to do and as such would much prefer that to be the case.
No idea how close we would have to get to the GE for it to be rolled up. Apparently the rules are that a writ should be moved within 3 months of the vacancy arising. This can be extended up to 4 months if the subsequent by-election would be held within a month of a GE. According to the HoC Library the By-election must be held between 21 and 27 days after the writ is moved.
So if the next GE is in May then I would expect any by elections after the beginning of 2015 to be rolled up into the GE.
I am sure the usual suspects will be along to state how bad this news ( if true ) is for Labour and Ed M will never be PM .
It is impressive how no Lib Dems have jumped, particularly to Labour for those from the SDP part of the Yellow team. Not even a sniff of a defection.
That compares well for party discipline to the EU headbangers on the Tory side who have put that anti-EU obsession ahead of their country (from my perspective of making a Labour Govt more likely that is).
Put that in your pipe and smoke it Turncoat Carswell - viva Rev Oswald!!!!
I am sure the usual suspects will be along to state how bad this news ( if true ) is for Labour and Ed M will never be PM .
It is impressive how no Lib Dems have jumped, particularly to Labour for those from the SDP part of the Yellow team. Not even a sniff of a defection.
That compares well for party discipline to the EU headbangers on the Tory side who have put that anti-EU obsession ahead of their country (from my perspective of making a Labour Govt more likely that is).
Put that in your pipe and smoke it Turncoat Carswell - viva Rev Oswald!!!!
No they have put the good of the country ahead of narrow party interest.
Tory defectors aren't news - it's the Labour defectors that will be. Whoever it is will become a household name too - the MP that changed politics. For a week at least.
UKIP must be quite close to LD territory in achieving seats. 20-50 is really possible - hugely unlikely at the moment, but still possible. Currently it looks like those would be stolen from the Tories, however if they can make some gains in Labour-land then it could be an enormously interesting GE. Suppose 40 UKIP, and 40 LD's, plus a neutered Scots contingent could make for exciting times. I concede entirely that it'd perhaps just make Ed's reading of tractor production every week just that little bit more euthanasing too.
I'm almost in the UKIP camp myself as Cameron (who I like) gets chummy with Gordon Brown (who I like really quite a lot less).
I am sure the usual suspects will be along to state how bad this news ( if true ) is for Labour and Ed M will never be PM .
It is impressive how no Lib Dems have jumped, particularly to Labour for those from the SDP part of the Yellow team. Not even a sniff of a defection.
That compares well for party discipline to the EU headbangers on the Tory side who have put that anti-EU obsession ahead of their country (from my perspective of making a Labour Govt more likely that is).
Put that in your pipe and smoke it Turncoat Carswell - viva Rev Oswald!!!!
No they have put the good of the country ahead of narrow party interest.
I tend to think of Labour in power as the worst outcome - this week merely confirming my fears as an adviser, investor and indeed resident of the UK - I believe the Tories have many failings but compared to the economic stewardship of Labour and the ongoing 'tightrope' we remain on economically - individual non leftie back-benchers who throw their toys out ahead of May 2015 are putting their own pet-interests ahead of the broad country interest.
Simply it's whether they want Ed Balls as Chancellor & Ed M as PM or they don't - which camp is it Turncoat Carswell?
As I recall, Barry Porter died in November 1996 and the Wirral South By-election was held in late February 1997 so there's still time for by-elections in this Parliament.
IF nothing happens, it's a poor effort by UKIP and makes them look foolish. I struggle with the concept of a defection but if an MP resigns and wants to fight the by-election under a different banner, so be it.
Two defections dovetailing the UKIP and Conservative Conferences will make for an interesting few days.
I am sure the usual suspects will be along to state how bad this news ( if true ) is for Labour and Ed M will never be PM .
It is impressive how no Lib Dems have jumped, particularly to Labour for those from the SDP part of the Yellow team. Not even a sniff of a defection.
That compares well for party discipline to the EU headbangers on the Tory side who have put that anti-EU obsession ahead of their country (from my perspective of making a Labour Govt more likely that is).
Put that in your pipe and smoke it Turncoat Carswell - viva Rev Oswald!!!!
No they have put the good of the country ahead of narrow party interest.
I tend to think of Labour in power as the worst outcome - this week merely confirming my fears as an adviser, investor and indeed resident of the UK - I believe the Tories have many failings but compared to the economic stewardship of Labour and the ongoing 'tightrope' we remain on economically - individual non leftie back-benchers who throw their toys out ahead of May 2015 are putting their own pet-interests ahead of the broad country interest.
Simply it's whether they want Ed Balls as Chancellor & Ed M as PM or they don't - which camp is it Turncoat Carswell?
Part of the calculation is how likely the Tories are to win next election. If you think Labour are very likely to win the next election no matter whether or not you defect, why not going into that election fighting for a party you truly believe in?
I am sure the usual suspects will be along to state how bad this news ( if true ) is for Labour and Ed M will never be PM .
It is impressive how no Lib Dems have jumped, particularly to Labour for those from the SDP part of the Yellow team. Not even a sniff of a defection.
That compares well for party discipline to the EU headbangers on the Tory side who have put that anti-EU obsession ahead of their country (from my perspective of making a Labour Govt more likely that is).
Put that in your pipe and smoke it Turncoat Carswell - viva Rev Oswald!!!!
There are not many backbenchers in the LD, there are just enough LD MP's in government to ensure a majority for the government and in the LD's. Plus there is the myth that LD MP's are not going to lose their seats despite losing 2/3 or more of their votes.
As I recall, Barry Porter died in November 1996 and the Wirral South By-election was held in late February 1997 so there's still time for by-elections in this Parliament.
IF nothing happens, it's a poor effort by UKIP and makes them look foolish. I struggle with the concept of a defection but if an MP resigns and wants to fight the by-election under a different banner, so be it.
Two defections dovetailing the UKIP and Conservative Conferences will make for an interesting few days.
For all this talk of it being a poor effort by ukip etc... they haven't announced anything
Someone has repeated a private conversation... Or is that "announcing" in journalese?
@iancawsey: SNP's Jim Sillars says he won't pay for a TV licence as a protest against BBC news. At 76, thanks to a Labour Government he doesn't have to!
As much as I welcomed Carswell's defection I think I would be rather unhappy with Hollobone's. Whilst clearly I support his Euroscepticism, I certainly would not support his views on banning the burka or reintroducing the death penalty.
That said I do like the fact he is the least expensive MP in Parliament.
As I said before, no doubt there were those hoping for a Scottish YES so they could throw Cameron overboard. Having been thwarted there, they now see a new opportunity to cut off their nose to spite their face - by helping to elect Ed Miliband. But it doesn't say much for their attachment to UKIP that joining them was a Plan B....
The number of WWC Labour voters who have moved to UKIP is almost zero . There has been a movement of WWC voters to UKIP but they are not generally ones who have recently voted Labour , if they have voted at all in recent elections , they have voted BNP , Lib Dem or even Conservative .
@iancawsey: SNP's Jim Sillars says he won't pay for a TV licence as a protest against BBC news. At 76, thanks to a Labour Government he doesn't have to!
@iancawsey: SNP's Jim Sillars says he won't pay for a TV licence as a protest against BBC news. At 76, thanks to a Labour Government he doesn't have to!
"It is impressive how no Lib Dems have jumped, particularly to Labour for those from the SDP part of the Yellow team. Not even a sniff of a defection."
In the pantheon of defections I wouldn't think the scalp of a Lib Dem at the moment would seem like a triumph
I am sure the usual suspects will be along to state how bad this news ( if true ) is for Labour and Ed M will never be PM .
It is impressive how no Lib Dems have jumped, particularly to Labour for those from the SDP part of the Yellow team. Not even a sniff of a defection.
That compares well for party discipline to the EU headbangers on the Tory side who have put that anti-EU obsession ahead of their country (from my perspective of making a Labour Govt more likely that is).
Put that in your pipe and smoke it Turncoat Carswell - viva Rev Oswald!!!!
No they have put the good of the country ahead of narrow party interest.
I tend to think of Labour in power as the worst outcome - this week merely confirming my fears as an adviser, investor and indeed resident of the UK - I believe the Tories have many failings but compared to the economic stewardship of Labour and the ongoing 'tightrope' we remain on economically - individual non leftie back-benchers who throw their toys out ahead of May 2015 are putting their own pet-interests ahead of the broad country interest.
Simply it's whether they want Ed Balls as Chancellor & Ed M as PM or they don't - which camp is it Turncoat Carswell?
You would be better asking that question of Cameron since it is he as PM who has driven so many traditional Tory supporters away from the party. If one of the most inept Oppositions in decades manages to win it will be down to Cameron not Farage.
I agree with you about the by-election principle. As you know I don't actually agree that we vote for a party as opposed to an individual representative and so would not like to see an MP forced to stand again as that would give too much power to the parties and would reinforce the misconception that people are voting for a party.
But I do believe that it is the honorable thing for an MP to do and as such would much prefer that to be the case.
No idea how close we would have to get to the GE for it to be rolled up. Apparently the rules are that a writ should be moved within 3 months of the vacancy arising. This can be extended up to 4 months if the subsequent by-election would be held within a month of a GE. According to the HoC Library the By-election must be held between 21 and 27 days after the writ is moved.
So if the next GE is in May then I would expect any by elections after the beginning of 2015 to be rolled up into the GE.
Thanks for that - the beginning of the year seems like a good estimate.
In what might seem like a staggering run of agreeing with each other, I've always said on here that I vote for a candidate, not a party - which has led to my rather odd voting pattern that some on here seem to find rather unbelievable, causing them to invoke Plato.
However, we live in a political climate where you and I are sadly unusual, I fear, and most people put their cross behind a party, not a candidate. For that reason I think it's the right thing for a candidate to stand for re-election, although as I've said passim it's inconsistent with my vote-for-a-candidate stance.
Going back on topic: if UKIP do not unveil two Conservative MPs in the next few days, then they'll look a little foolish. What will really set the cat amongst the pigeons is if, as someone mentions below, a Labour MP or two make the change.
Although I'd find it hilarious if a Lib Dem made the change. After all, a certain number of Lib Dem supporters appear to have moved over to UKIP...
The number of WWC Labour voters who have moved to UKIP is almost zero . There has been a movement of WWC voters to UKIP but they are not generally ones who have recently voted Labour , if they have voted at all in recent elections , they have voted BNP , Lib Dem or even Conservative .
"It is impressive how no Lib Dems have jumped, particularly to Labour for those from the SDP part of the Yellow team. Not even a sniff of a defection."
In the pantheon of defections I wouldn't think the scalp of a Lib Dem at the moment would seem like a triumph
Greetings from Doncaster Hotel Park Inn, which appears to be a converted warehouse in a parking lot of an industrial estate. Let's hope the conference is in cheerier surroundngs.
UKIP has form in pre-announcing MPs who are almost ready to defect - can't see the point in trailing it. I can confirm it won't be Rosindell, who team have just been in touch with me to confirm arrangements for an event I'm doing with him at the Conservative conference.
@IsabelHardman: Rumoured Tory Ukip defector: ‘I’d much rather be in coalition with Ukip than Lib Dems but I’m not going to defect' http://t.co/KaZBCs6Dde
"It is impressive how no Lib Dems have jumped, particularly to Labour for those from the SDP part of the Yellow team. Not even a sniff of a defection."
In the pantheon of defections I wouldn't think the scalp of a Lib Dem at the moment would seem like a triumph
"It is impressive how no Lib Dems have jumped, particularly to Labour for those from the SDP part of the Yellow team. Not even a sniff of a defection."
In the pantheon of defections I wouldn't think the scalp of a Lib Dem at the moment would seem like a triumph
"Defamation is not available to dead people and insulting someone is not, thank God, yet a crime."
May I refer the right honourable lady to the discussions on this site over the past few weeks on the workings of the Public Order Act and in particular the expositions of it by our learned friend, Life in a market Town.
Insulting someone (alive or dead) can indeed be a criminal offence and this has been the case since at least 1936.
The relevant section is Section 29B: (1) A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.
That does not make it an offence to insult someone nor does it prevent someone from calling Mohammed or Jesus or Buddha an asshole.
Free speech needs to be defended.
Given the original wording which Labour wanted to put in, I have little confidence that that they won't try the same trick again.
@PeterBoneMP: Ladbrokes have me as favourite to defect to UKIP (EVENS) and to be next leader of the Conservative party (200 to 1) NEITHER ARE GOOD BETS!!!
I think Kettering would be a much tougher by-election than Clacton. UKIP would look rank amateurs if they got a defecting MP - then lost the by-election.
A defection of Hollobone nearer the election, to avoid the by-election might be a smarter move. Or maybe the new defectors won't be as honorable as Carswell and just sit tight - which is tricky after Carswell has done "the decent thing" (in causing the unnecessary expense for the good folk of Clacton just to give him a revised mandate - and UKIP some extra publicity...)
They are going to look a bit stupid if there are no defections.
If UKIP is going to move leftwards to attract WWC, Old Labour voters how comfortable are right wing Tory MPs going to feel about signing up?
Just my opinion, but I think WWC old labour voters have more in common with ukip, and right wing Tories come to that, than the current Labour Party.
From a social/cultural perspective perhaps. But Old Labour was very much the party of strong trade unions, high taxes for the rich, nationalised industries, and so on. I am not sure such things come easily to right wing Tories and the UKIP leadership.
"It is impressive how no Lib Dems have jumped, particularly to Labour for those from the SDP part of the Yellow team. Not even a sniff of a defection."
In the pantheon of defections I wouldn't think the scalp of a Lib Dem at the moment would seem like a triumph
Peter Bone has spoken: Peter Bone MP @PeterBoneMP 3m Ladbrokes have me as favourite to defect to UKIP (EVENS) and to be next leader of the Conservative party (200 to 1) NEITHER ARE GOOD BETS!!!
"Defamation is not available to dead people and insulting someone is not, thank God, yet a crime."
May I refer the right honourable lady to the discussions on this site over the past few weeks on the workings of the Public Order Act and in particular the expositions of it by our learned friend, Life in a market Town.
Insulting someone (alive or dead) can indeed be a criminal offence and this has been the case since at least 1936.
The relevant section is Section 29B: (1) A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.
That does not make it an offence to insult someone nor does it prevent someone from calling Mohammed or Jesus or Buddha an asshole.
Free speech needs to be defended.
Given the original wording which Labour wanted to put in, I have little confidence that that they won't try the same trick again.
Sorry been talking with journos (not about this) so haven't followed the thread. As you know the cartoons of the prophet (pbuh) were never published in this country and I think that shows how most of the media treads.
"Defamation is not available to dead people and insulting someone is not, thank God, yet a crime."
May I refer the right honourable lady to the discussions on this site over the past few weeks on the workings of the Public Order Act and in particular the expositions of it by our learned friend, Life in a market Town.
Insulting someone (alive or dead) can indeed be a criminal offence and this has been the case since at least 1936.
Free speech needs to be defended.
I think I'd rather say this: Free speech needs to be respected.
They are going to look a bit stupid if there are no defections.
If UKIP is going to move leftwards to attract WWC, Old Labour voters how comfortable are right wing Tory MPs going to feel about signing up?
Just my opinion, but I think WWC old labour voters have more in common with ukip, and right wing Tories come to that, than the current Labour Party.
From a social/cultural perspective perhaps. But Old Labour was very much the party of strong trade unions, high taxes for the rich, nationalised industries, and so on. I am not sure such things come easily to right wing Tories and the UKIP leadership.
Yes, but do the current Labour Party offer what you describe as appealing to such voters?
Maybe marginally higher tax rates, but the slightly favourable economics come with the baggage of a philosophy that is a million miles away from them
The press in this country didn't publish because they were running scared of retribution. Had those cartoons been about Christians or Buddhists they would have gone right ahead.
"Defamation is not available to dead people and insulting someone is not, thank God, yet a crime."
May I refer the right honourable lady to the discussions on this site over the past few weeks on the workings of the Public Order Act and in particular the expositions of it by our learned friend, Life in a market Town.
Insulting someone (alive or dead) can indeed be a criminal offence and this has been the case since at least 1936.
The relevant section is Section 29B: (1) A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.
That does not make it an offence to insult someone nor does it prevent someone from calling Mohammed or Jesus or Buddha an asshole.
Free speech needs to be defended.
Given the original wording which Labour wanted to put in, I have little confidence that that they won't try the same trick again.
Sorry been talking with journos (not about this) so haven't followed the thread. As you know the cartoons of the prophet (pbuh) were never published in this country and I think that shows how most of the media treads.
I don't believe this story. It smacks of a CCHQ meme to paint UKIP as a cocky, entitled bunch of political gameplayers. It won't happen, and when it doesn't, the attempt will be made in the press to portray the lack of defections as the tide turning against UKIP.
The masterstroke for UKIP here would be to respond by getting a totally unexpected and un-briefed about Labour defection.
I don't believe this story. It smacks of a CCHQ meme to paint UKIP as a cocky, entitled bunch of political gameplayers. It won't happen, and when it doesn't, the attempt will be made in the press to portray the lack of defections as the tide turning against UKIP.
The masterstroke for UKIP here would be to respond by getting a totally unexpected and un-briefed about Labour defection.
It great... Ukip haven't said anything is going to happen... And if nothing happens ukip haters will be crowing about how stupid ukip look
As I recall, Barry Porter died in November 1996 and the Wirral South By-election was held in late February 1997 so there's still time for by-elections in this Parliament.
IF nothing happens, it's a poor effort by UKIP and makes them look foolish. I struggle with the concept of a defection but if an MP resigns and wants to fight the by-election under a different banner, so be it.
Two defections dovetailing the UKIP and Conservative Conferences will make for an interesting few days.
On that basis, it's arguably a no-lose ruse by UKIP. If the only potentially downside is they look foolish, well, many of us would argue that this is no downside at all, given where they are starting from.
UKIP would look rank amateurs if they got a defecting MP - then lost the by-election.
That outcomeof any defection to UKIP would probably be pretty satisfactory for Cameron. It would have no effect on his coalition, if the UKIPper lost it would underline that they are flippant and foolish, and if UKIP lost the seat to any lefty rather than back to the Conservatives, it would underline the message that a vote for UKIP is a vote against an EU referendum.
If this happened ahead of a GE, rather than being a horrible realisation after one, Cameron could probably consider himself a lucky general.
They are going to look a bit stupid if there are no defections.
If UKIP is going to move leftwards to attract WWC, Old Labour voters how comfortable are right wing Tory MPs going to feel about signing up?
Just my opinion, but I think WWC old labour voters have more in common with ukip, and right wing Tories come to that, than the current Labour Party.
From a social/cultural perspective perhaps. But Old Labour was very much the party of strong trade unions, high taxes for the rich, nationalised industries, and so on. I am not sure such things come easily to right wing Tories and the UKIP leadership.
Yes, but do the current Labour Party offer what you describe as appealing to such voters?
Maybe marginally higher tax rates
No it doesn't - far from it. But if UKIP wants to be a party that attracts and retains the support of WWC Labour voters it has to offer policies that will appeal to them. A tough stance on immigration will get their attention and perhaps a protest vote, but to get their loyalty there will need to be more. And that more may not sit well with Tory defectors or UKIP's leadership given what Old Labour was all about.
Just some more detail on Kettering - in 2010, the Tories won 49.1%, Labour 29.9%. The LibDems 15.8%. (Worryingly for the LibDems in any by-election, the Bus Pass Elvis Candidate Dave Bishop stood in 2010, so will have a finely honed operation ready to go to beat them again....)
If there was a by-election, you would have to think that Labour would flood the seat, hoping (expecting) to come through the middle of a hopelessly split Tory/UKIP vote
The masterstroke for UKIP here would be to respond by getting a totally unexpected and un-briefed about Labour defection.
Regardless of whether the rumours are true, a Labour defection would be very useful thing for UKIP to have, especially if rumours of Labour panic over a loss in Heywood turns out to be mere rabble rousing from Labour. Too many Tory defections or only wins in Tory areas, and attempts to cut into the Labour heartlands could be undermined by the accusation that they are, despite protestations, nothing but a place for disaffected Tories. An old attack, but one which could be renewed if the only breakthrough gains are in Tory areas.
No doubt some working class voters are attracted to UKIP by their immigration stance. But those would be former rightwing Tories or BNP voters.
The great bulk of working class voters aren't attracted to UKIP. And former Labour voters certainly won't be won over by their pro-rich, pro-big Business, anti-poor, anti-public service loony Thatcherite policies.
And unlike some I don't make the odd distinction between "white" working class people and those with other skin colours.
They are going to look a bit stupid if there are no defections.
If UKIP is going to move leftwards to attract WWC, Old Labour voters how comfortable are right wing Tory MPs going to feel about signing up?
Just my opinion, but I think WWC old labour voters have more in common with ukip, and right wing Tories come to that, than the current Labour Party.
From a social/cultural perspective perhaps. But Old Labour was very much the party of strong trade unions, high taxes for the rich, nationalised industries, and so on. I am not sure such things come easily to right wing Tories and the UKIP leadership.
The thing is, UKIP don't actually have to explicitly promise those things to get working-class Labour voters. They just have to imply that by sending the immigrants away, there'll be more jobs/higher wages/more to spend on the NHS. Very disingenuous, but with Labour in the current state it is (essentially saying that the wellbeing of the working-class is less important than the sodding deficit and big businesses, not to mention speaking like they're in a Cambridge seminar), that's enough.
The number of WWC Labour voters who have moved to UKIP is almost zero . There has been a movement of WWC voters to UKIP but they are not generally ones who have recently voted Labour , if they have voted at all in recent elections , they have voted BNP , Lib Dem or even Conservative .
The latest YouGov poll has 6% of Labour's 2010 vote going UKIP now. That's low compared to the 16% of 2010 Cons and 11% of 2010 LDs but then Labour's starting from a lower relative base. The figures aren't broken down further but I'd be surprised if there wasn't a majority within that group from the WWC. Middle class Labour voters from 2010 are more likely to identify with Miliband anyway but to the extent that they don't, they probably account for most of the 3% of Lab 2010 who've gone Green.
I don't believe this story. It smacks of a CCHQ meme to paint UKIP as a cocky, entitled bunch of political gameplayers. It won't happen, and when it doesn't, the attempt will be made in the press to portray the lack of defections as the tide turning against UKIP.
The masterstroke for UKIP here would be to respond by getting a totally unexpected and un-briefed about Labour defection.
I heard a rumour it could be Michael Green ( sorry I meant Grant Shapps)
The masterstroke for UKIP here would be to respond by getting a totally unexpected and un-briefed about Labour defection.
Regardless of whether the rumours are true, a Labour defection would be very useful thing for UKIP to have, especially if rumours of Labour panic over a loss in Heywood turns out to be mere rabble rousing from Labour. Too many Tory defections or only wins in Tory areas, and attempts to cut into the Labour heartlands could be undermined by the accusation that they are, despite protestations, nothing but a place for disaffected Tories. An old attack, but one which could be renewed if the only breakthrough gains are in Tory areas.
A Labour MP joining UKIP would be extraordinary as it would mean repudiating so much. By contrast it is but a short skip for a Tory to join a party led by self-described Thatcherites. The Labour defection would certainly have huge impact, but would also be likely to be seen as a one off - unless it indicated a move left by UKIP. That said, keep an eye on Kate Hoey.
By the way, I see from this morning's thread, the penny is starting to drop even with some of the PBTories that the public don't care about the deficit!
Interestingly, Mark Reckless's seat has a similar profile to Kettering - in 2010, Tory 49.2, Labour 28.5%, LibDems 16.3%, English Democrats 4.5%. Again, Labour would flood it with activists from London to try to come through the middle on a split Tory/UKIP vote. 35% might just be enough.
So another seat where UKIP wouldn't want to look like prats by losing a by-election...
They are going to look a bit stupid if there are no defections.
If UKIP is going to move leftwards to attract WWC, Old Labour voters how comfortable are right wing Tory MPs going to feel about signing up?
Just my opinion, but I think WWC old labour voters have more in common with ukip, and right wing Tories come to that, than the current Labour Party.
From a social/cultural perspective perhaps. But Old Labour was very much the party of strong trade unions, high taxes for the rich, nationalised industries, and so on. I am not sure such things come easily to right wing Tories and the UKIP leadership.
The thing is, UKIP don't actually have to explicitly promise those things to get working-class Labour voters. They just have to imply that by sending the immigrants away, there'll be more jobs/higher wages/more to spend on the NHS. Very disingenuous, but with Labour in the current state it is (essentially saying that the wellbeing of the working-class is less important than the sodding deficit and big businesses, not to mention speaking like they're in a Cambridge seminar), that's enough.
UKIP could definitely get WWC Labour protest votes in good numbers for the reasons you state. Blimey, even my Mum is talking about voting for them. But as it becomes more visible across more policy areas it is going to have to have a broad direction of travel - either rightwards or leftwards. And the way the party is set up at the moment the former is more likely than the latter.
Comments
"Two more traitorous pigs dogs rumoured to be about to defect to UKIP"
Really? its a foregone conclusion, isn't it?
UKIP handled the Carswell defection well (with the exception of not getting the existing PCC on board) but they seem to have rather got carried away with themselves here and it strikes me they are heading for a fall if they are not very careful.
As with Carswell, UKIP stood aside in 2010.
UKIP haven't named a candidate in Kettering because they are waiting for him to defect according to reports.
I would like to know which English laws this contravenes. Defamation is not available to dead people and insulting someone is not, thank God, yet a crime.
As TSE mentions, if there are defectors, I hope they follow Carswell's honourable actions and call a by-election. Although I hope they have the guts to call Cameron and/or the chief whip first.
As for timing: might it be that UKIP want the publicity from by-elections coming up the GE, and therefore want them *before* the election? If the MPs have currently safe seats, and can transfer many Conservative members over with them (as it appears Carswell has done), that would seem to be a risky but sane strategy to build momentum.
I wonder when a resignation would not trigger a by-election, but be automatically rolled up into the GE? How long could it be dragged out? What are the precedents?
*gets popcorn in*
But maybe nothing will happen. Not long to wait.
asked at a dinner with editors whether he'd rather push farage or salmond off beachy head, cameron said "salmond. business before pleasure."
May I refer the right honourable lady to the discussions on this site over the past few weeks on the workings of the Public Order Act and in particular the expositions of it by our learned friend, Life in a market Town.
Insulting someone (alive or dead) can indeed be a criminal offence and this has been the case since at least 1936.
It begs the question. If we are heading towards a continental style five party system, where is the new force on the harder left? Will it take a piss poor Miliband government or coalition to create a new force on the left? A sort of socialist UKIP?
Erm.. Nigel, the world does not revolve around you. There are a few bigger things going on at the moment than the Kipper conference.
Coming out with things like that portrays them, rightly or wrongly, as the 'loonies'.
Realistically it could be any Tory MP from the east or the south.
But practically any one who is sure of his re-election under UKIP.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2007/oct/03/wrap.michellepauli
But I do believe that it is the honorable thing for an MP to do and as such would much prefer that to be the case.
No idea how close we would have to get to the GE for it to be rolled up. Apparently the rules are that a writ should be moved within 3 months of the vacancy arising. This can be extended up to 4 months if the subsequent by-election would be held within a month of a GE. According to the HoC Library the By-election must be held between 21 and 27 days after the writ is moved.
So if the next GE is in May then I would expect any by elections after the beginning of 2015 to be rolled up into the GE.
That compares well for party discipline to the EU headbangers on the Tory side who have put that anti-EU obsession ahead of their country (from my perspective of making a Labour Govt more likely that is).
Put that in your pipe and smoke it Turncoat Carswell - viva Rev Oswald!!!!
It won't be Rosindell, Redwood, Rees-Mogg or Cash either.
Not sure it'll be anyone.
@TSEofPB My money's on Kettering MP Philip Holobone being next CON MP to join UKIP though @LadPolitics only allowed me to put £10 on at 10/1
If UKIP is going to move leftwards to attract WWC, Old Labour voters how comfortable are right wing Tory MPs going to feel about signing up?
http://www.wandsworthguardian.co.uk/news/11482512.Has_Banksy_been_to_Battersea_/
UKIP must be quite close to LD territory in achieving seats. 20-50 is really possible - hugely unlikely at the moment, but still possible. Currently it looks like those would be stolen from the Tories, however if they can make some gains in Labour-land then it could be an enormously interesting GE. Suppose 40 UKIP, and 40 LD's, plus a neutered Scots contingent could make for exciting times. I concede entirely that it'd perhaps just make Ed's reading of tractor production every week just that little bit more euthanasing too.
I'm almost in the UKIP camp myself as Cameron (who I like) gets chummy with Gordon Brown (who I like really quite a lot less).
Simply it's whether they want Ed Balls as Chancellor & Ed M as PM or they don't - which camp is it Turncoat Carswell?
As I recall, Barry Porter died in November 1996 and the Wirral South By-election was held in late February 1997 so there's still time for by-elections in this Parliament.
IF nothing happens, it's a poor effort by UKIP and makes them look foolish. I struggle with the concept of a defection but if an MP resigns and wants to fight the by-election under a different banner, so be it.
Two defections dovetailing the UKIP and Conservative Conferences will make for an interesting few days.
Someone has repeated a private conversation... Or is that "announcing" in journalese?
That said I do like the fact he is the least expensive MP in Parliament.
There has been a movement of WWC voters to UKIP but they are not generally ones who have recently voted Labour , if they have voted at all in recent elections , they have voted BNP , Lib Dem or even Conservative .
"It is impressive how no Lib Dems have jumped, particularly to Labour for those from the SDP part of the Yellow team. Not even a sniff of a defection."
In the pantheon of defections I wouldn't think the scalp of a Lib Dem at the moment would seem like a triumph
In what might seem like a staggering run of agreeing with each other, I've always said on here that I vote for a candidate, not a party - which has led to my rather odd voting pattern that some on here seem to find rather unbelievable, causing them to invoke Plato.
However, we live in a political climate where you and I are sadly unusual, I fear, and most people put their cross behind a party, not a candidate. For that reason I think it's the right thing for a candidate to stand for re-election, although as I've said passim it's inconsistent with my vote-for-a-candidate stance.
Going back on topic: if UKIP do not unveil two Conservative MPs in the next few days, then they'll look a little foolish. What will really set the cat amongst the pigeons is if, as someone mentions below, a Labour MP or two make the change.
Although I'd find it hilarious if a Lib Dem made the change. After all, a certain number of Lib Dem supporters appear to have moved over to UKIP...
UKIP has form in pre-announcing MPs who are almost ready to defect - can't see the point in trailing it. I can confirm it won't be Rosindell, who team have just been in touch with me to confirm arrangements for an event I'm doing with him at the Conservative conference.
"I certainly would not support his views on banning the burka or reintroducing the death penalty."
How can you be a UKIPer without entering into the spirit?
That does not make it an offence to insult someone nor does it prevent someone from calling Mohammed or Jesus or Buddha an asshole.
Free speech needs to be defended.
Given the original wording which Labour wanted to put in, I have little confidence that that they won't try the same trick again.
Ladbrokes have me as favourite to defect to UKIP (EVENS) and to be next leader of the Conservative party (200 to 1) NEITHER ARE GOOD BETS!!!
A defection of Hollobone nearer the election, to avoid the by-election might be a smarter move. Or maybe the new defectors won't be as honorable as Carswell and just sit tight - which is tricky after Carswell has done "the decent thing" (in causing the unnecessary expense for the good folk of Clacton just to give him a revised mandate - and UKIP some extra publicity...)
Peter Bone MP @PeterBoneMP 3m
Ladbrokes have me as favourite to defect to UKIP (EVENS) and to be next leader of the Conservative party (200 to 1) NEITHER ARE GOOD BETS!!!
I think we should move on from this.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2769850/BREAKING-NEWS-FBI-says-identified-Jihadi-John.html??ito==social-twitter_dailymailus
"Is she a Fruitcake or a Loon?"
I think she's both.
Why should I be laying her?
Maybe marginally higher tax rates, but the slightly favourable economics come with the baggage of a philosophy that is a million miles away from them
The masterstroke for UKIP here would be to respond by getting a totally unexpected and un-briefed about Labour defection.
If this happened ahead of a GE, rather than being a horrible realisation after one, Cameron could probably consider himself a lucky general.
If there was a by-election, you would have to think that Labour would flood the seat, hoping (expecting) to come through the middle of a hopelessly split Tory/UKIP vote
The great bulk of working class voters aren't attracted to UKIP. And former Labour voters certainly won't be won over by their pro-rich, pro-big Business, anti-poor, anti-public service loony Thatcherite policies.
And unlike some I don't make the odd distinction between "white" working class people and those with other skin colours.
So another seat where UKIP wouldn't want to look like prats by losing a by-election...