Tim Congdon has written a very interesting piece over at Standpoint, concluding with the following paragraph:
"Second, the civil servants invent structures that encourage politicians to approve further integration. For example, the European Parliament now offers subsidies (ostensibly to pay for "research" and such like) to MEPs who form "pan-European groupings" and "pan-European parties". So subsidies to promote European integration are now being offered to MEPs of separatist parties — including Ukip — that are supposed to oppose it. If the Virginia School is right, these MEPs might even accept the money that is being dangled in front of them."
The issue of pan-European parties is a very interesting one. Yes, the EU wants pan-European parties. But it also wants MEPs and a European Parliament and UKIP taking seats here (and the EU's cash) has led to the Party steadily increasing its vote share where it counts, gaining local Councillors and votes at the General Election.
The EU is offering a set pot of money to British political parties that form pan-European parties. If UKIP does not become part of a pan-European Party, more money will go to fund the pro-EU agendas of the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats. If UKIP joins a pan-European Party, it will have money to invest in making the anti-EU argument and will deprive the pro-EU parties of money to make their case. Does exploiting the EU's own system really constitute legitimising it, or is it merely a means to an end?
This is all about playing the EU at its own game, and using the money it has sucked away from British taxpayer's against it. If you don't believe UKIP should form a pan-European Party because it will legitimatise the process and help integration, then why would you believe UKIP should have MEPs standing up in the European Parliament and giving speeches?
3 comments:
UKIP have to take the cash, as the rigged system will simply keep taking it and spending it on pro-EU propaganda otherwise.
I always say my vote for UKIP in an election I don't believe should even exist, is to cause mayhem and repatriate as much money as it can, or use it to help get us out.
You don't vote UKIP to make the sham work.
Both points are spot that you make although I do not think you know you have.
1. I do not believe in pan-EU parties or UKIOP receiving funding.
2. I do not believe we should have MEPs as it has distracted from getting us focused on MPs in Westminster since 1999.
So, entirely consistent on my part.
Probably consistent on your part as well, since in the end the executable actions of your principles would lead to UKIP being more entrenched and reliant on the EU for funding and 'careers' for its key personalities.
As UKIP MEPs show no signs of 'going native', I cannot see that forming a pan-European party will hurt our cause, as long as the raison d'etre is to leave the EU. Indeed it will probably help it because UKIP will be able to give moral support to members in other countries and many more voters will be able to vote for an anti-EU party.
Post a Comment