Young Muslims break ranks and vote Respect.

There is a lot of talk today of the Muslim bloc vote in the Bradford West by-election. But as Sky's Jon Craig reported last night at the count, it isn't as simple as that.

Whilst the Muslim Elders are usually deal breakers in terms of advising younger Muslims who to vote for, this time they were ignored. Reports were that whilst older Muslims in Bradford West advised voting for Labour, their advice was ignored. Jon Craig once again went out of his way to point out that it was particularly young Muslim women who backed George Galloway over Labour and helped get out the vote in their communities.

Is this a sign of things to come? Whilst Labour may retain loyalty among older generations, could the influx of new parties and new choices that simply didn't exist twenty years ago cause many more splits and greater debate among groups who Labour thought they had no matter what? Whether that be Muslims, Christians or white working class voters, the tectonic plates of British politics seem to be shifting slightly.

There is certainly no doubt in my mind that the more choice the people have at the ballot box, the healthier our democracy becomes.

The Beeb fails to deliver.

As George Galloway pulled off one of the most surprising election results in recent political history, the BBC aired pre-recorded programming and Asian business news.

Okay so it was late at night that the result started trickling through, but soon Twitter was buzzing about the result. It wasn't as if the warning signs weren't there, with Ladbrookes having closed the book on backing Galloway the day before the by-election. And as Sky News grabbed an interview with Galloway and kept switching back to the count in Bradford, the BBC seemed to pretty much ignore the whole thing in favour of incredibly dry and pre-scheduled programming. The BBC didn't even broadcast Galloway's victory speech live.

Isn't this what the BBC is for? To cover a moment in British politics that could have big ramifications and that marks one of the most memorable by-election outcomes in recent times? Or were the political bods in the corporation so badly misinformed that this was down as a sure-fire Labour win, that it wasn't deemed worthy of putting any resources into covering properly? Whatever the reason, this is exactly the type of stuff the Beeb should be on top of, not neglecting.

Galloway to win Bradford?

I'd heard a few rumblings that George Galloway is likely to do well in Bradford - he's been busy winning over some decent portions of the Muslim vote and has a following there anyway from a number of speeches he has done in Bradford over the years. With Afghanistan being quite high up on the profile at the moment, the timing of the election plays into his anti-war message well.

Mike Smithson of Political Betting is now reporting that Ladbrookes have now suspended betting on tomorrow's by-election after some big lumps of cash on Galloway.

While I am more interested in whether UKIP will outpoll the LibDems, it would certainly be a big upset if Galloway pulls this off. The lower the turnout, the better his chances.

We need a rebirth of grammar schools.

News that the first 'new' grammar school for 50 years is to be open in Kent is good news. The bad news is that it is only a 'satellite' school as the Coalition are allowing current grammar schools to effectively expand only in areas where selective education remains.

So, if you are lucky enough to be a youngster in Kent you'll get a fair crack. But if you live in most other parts of the UK, particularly in inner city squalor where the poorest and roughest schools often exist, then your situation isn't likely to improve any time soon.

I meet hardly any Tory voters or politicians who don't support restoring grammar schools nationally. They are undoubtedly the greatest tool for meritocracy ever created in Britain - but the very rich Cabinet all seem to disagree, Gove and Cameron included.

Michael Gove gets praised widely for bringing in free schools - but I'd much rather we had grammar schools and technical colleges in every town and city to properly restore British education to a decent standard that gives the poor and non-academic a chance to get on in life.

Sport Relief - charity should begin at home.

I watched a little bit of the BBC's Sport Relief last night, some parts like the Frank Lampard sketch were pretty funny. But I find myself generally avoiding these type of BBC fundraisers nowadays.

Why? Well it annoys me. It annoys me that they speak about raising money for both in the UK and abroad, but never state quite how the money is divvied up. 50/50? 30/70?

The emphasis on these shows always seems to me more focused on money going abroad. But as desperate as the situations are for many in Third World countries, there are two things to point out. Firstly, taxpayers already put money into these countries via foreign aid - which I would cut to zero. Why? Well, secondly, money being poured into poor foreign nations has been shown time and again to be wasted and to become source of dependency that stops the powers that be in such countries making radical changes instead of lining their own pockets.

But most of all, it upsets me that when the packages of UK kids who have been abused, neglected and vulnerable are shown there is always talk of budget constraints. I just don't find it right that instead of looking after our own damaged people, we'll inevitably fall short of funding somewhere for someone because we sent the money abroad instead. Morally I just find that unacceptable.

Sure, kids in the UK may not be dying of famine in the streets. Abuse in this more 'developed' society is far more subtle. It lingers behind heated, closed doors - where paedophiles, abusers and violence linger. Where babies are tortured and mothers raped and beaten daily. 

Lets focus a bit more on getting our own house in order before ploughing cash into other nations. Our country really isn't perfect enough to be worrying about others' problems to the extent that we do.

Another Councillor shuns Cam for Kip

Where oh where will this end? After yesterday's big defection of two Councillors in Windsor to UKIP, true blue South East of England got a bit more purple still as another Councillor has swelled the UKIP ranks.

Christopher Quinton, a councillor for Woodcote on South Oxfordshire District Council, has resigned from the Conservative Party in order to join UKIP. Citing Cameroon's shift to secularism, this is another bona fide conservative packing his bags in response to Cameron's lack of er, conservatism.

How many more will come? I recommend anyone reading this and thinking of doing the same to jump in - the purple waters are feeling good right about now.

The Liberal Democrats - losing here.

Bit by bit the Liberal Democrats are receding locally and being challenged regularly for third place by UKIP. The rise of the Purple Right alongside the fallout from Clegg's lies make for a competitive race as to who will be the UK's third Party by 2015.

Last night's by-election in Waltham Cross saw the LibDems come a distant fourth, with UKIP coming third and getting more than double the vote of the LibDems. Amazingly the local press still can't quite bring themselves to list UKIP as third.

Such small battles add up to big things going forward.

Another big state measure from this 'right wing' government.

Bringing in minimum alcohol pricing is classic nanny state. What's more, adding a quid or two here or there is going to be ineffectual and frankly, an utter waste of time.

If any of the Tories approving the measure came from an ordinaryish background perhaps they'd know that their proposal is pure fail. Pre-drinking before youngsters head out is done because prices in bars and clubs are too expensive for many students - but I know for instance that in the North East drink in the town centre is a lot cheaper than in the South. So less people up there get sauced up before they're out the door as a result.

Anyway, this is another policy that shows that the 'centre-ground' is really code for big state. A 'politicians know best' policy is nearly always wrong. Instead, why not let local Councillors and local people decide if they wish to put a local Council tax on alcohol - in response to local areas' problems with alcohol and the cost incurred by policing the area at night time? Some city centres are out of control, others while bustling are nowhere near as plagued by people passing out and getting ultra lairy after a skinful. But whatever city or area you choose, the fact is that people who take things too far drinking wise are in the minority so why punish the majority with inflated drinks prices?

This one-fits-all policy is yet another pathetic attempt at social engineering from a mob who just don't have a clue. And to think some people support the Tories for less government intervention and more personal liberty!

Another journalist 'comes out' for a referendum.

Where there used to be talk of negotiation and reform, increasing numbers of journalists and those with influence on a national stage now regard the EU as an 'in or out' issue. It has been a slow but predictable process - after all, the public have long regarded 'Europe' as either something they want to leave or pay the price for and stay in.

Niles Gardiner of The Telegraph is the latest to highlight the cause for an EU referendum. Only two or so years ago, anyone in a national newspaper or website championing this line of thinking would have been extremely rare and promoted heavily by anti-EU Eurosceptics. Nowadays it has become common place for right-wingers not wedded to the Cameron project. Gardiner himself is a former Thatcher aide and at a time when it is becoming increasingly obvious that many Thatcherites now want full EU withdrawal.

Mr. Gardiner does however make a fatal mistake in expecting David Cameron to listen to calls for a referendum. I still maintain that pro-EU politicians already have what they want - Britain in the EU. And I don't believe any of them think they could win a referendum on the subject, so why should they? Maintaining the status quo means that they have already won this particular battle, despite the public's growing Euroscepticism. Of course, they should respect democracy regardless of their own personal opinions - but I don't believe they will.

A budget worthy of defections.

Things are changing. This young family are the exact type of aspirational, hard working people that any political party would love to have - but now their natural home is with UKIP.

The budget was the 'last nail in the coffin' for their defection, the pair said. Cllr Tom Bursnall and former Mayor of Windsor & Maidenhead Cllr Catherine Bursnall like many on the Right, want a low tax nation. Unlike many, they have had the courage of their convictions to join the only Party that really is arguing, unequivocally, for lower government spending and low, flat taxes. These are serious people - Catherine Bursnall was covered by the national media for becoming England's youngest Mayor.

This budget truly was one worthy of defections as Osborne and Cameron seek to dance around, pleasing both the Left and the Right with small cuts here and raises there. We are entering into a new era of politics in the UK where plurality will flourish and where the choice is there for all. If you like big government, vote Labour. If you like similar sized government, vote Tory. If you want flat taxes and things like Air Passenger Duty to be abolished and not raised, then you're natural home is surely now UKIP.

Controlling immigration would instantly improve our economy.

On a day of Budget talk, leaks, tax and all the rest, there is one big area that everyone is ignoring. Though the Coalition have admitted the damaging effect that uncontrolled immigration has had by putting in controls on non-EU migration, unlimited EU migration is still having a very damaging effect.

Having a huge, uncontrolled influx of low-skilled workers entering Britain's economy has been damaging. Wages have been undercut and British youngsters have subsequently found it far tougher in some areas of the country to get a job. That has added to the welfare bill massively.

The Office for National Statistics itself tells a very plain story: that since 2004 youth unemployment has gone up and up and up. 2004 - the year that Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia joined the EU and thus had open borders with the UK. Not a coincidence that youth unemployment in the unskilled labour market has increased since then. 


Bosses may love the influx of cheap, hard working labour that they now enjoy. But this reliance on foreign workers en masse has led to a decrease in opportunities for many British youngsters who sit and rot on the dole. They may not want to work as hard as an Eastern European - but not wanting to shouldn't be an option. Working class mentality has turned to lazy ass mentality for far too many. Many youngsters are have fed up and made dependent on government thanks to Britain's huge welfare state. It truly is a disease plaguing our communities.


The common argument heard nowadays is that 'English people won't do the jobs' that migrants now often occupy. So before mass migration in recent years, who did do them exactly?


Britain needs border controls back, allowing migrants in who we actually need while training and getting into work our huge potential workforce of British youngsters who have been hung out to dry, being paid to do no work for money out of our taxes.

How can the London Evening Standard justify excluding UKIP from their Mayoral debate?

The London Evening Standard are having a debate. The choice to be put to Londoners is between Boris Johnson, Ken Livingstone, Brian Paddick and Green candidate Jenny Jones.

Luckily for those in London that isn't the actual choice facing them - now that would be a scary thought. However, it is the choice that the newspaper is presenting to voters, despite the fact that they recently ran an article pointing out that UKIP and the Greens are snapping at the heels of the LibDems for third place.

Except, that isn't quite true. As this YouGov poll demonstrates, the Greens are stuck on 3% (which isn't good enough to return any Assembly Members) while UKIP are the only likely challengers to the LibDems on 5%. Indeed, UKIP are polling ahead of the Greens and BNP combined.

You could argue that the Evening Standard are including the Green Party and not UKIP on their exclusive debate because the Greens won representation on the London Assembly last time. But if that's the criteria, why aren't the BNP included?

It really doesn't add up, does it?

The pollsters don't want UKIP to come third.

Political Betting has spotted that ComRes, the polling company, is now to count only voters who say they are 10/10 certain to vote for 'others' (including UKIP). For Labour/Tories/LibDems they will still count those who are only 5/10 or more certain to vote.

This will obviously highly distort results. Why discount someone who is 8/10 certain to vote for the LibDems but not for UKIP? As UKIP steadily climbs in the polls and gets frighteningly close to outpolling the LibDems, this smacks of anti-UKIP bias. After all, the Greens and BNP are lucky to get more than 1% or 2% nowadays whereas UKIP regularly scores 5% - 7%.

YouGov also seem to spin things a bit. Their President is married to the EU's infamous high flyer Baroness Ashton and the polling firm has been accused of having left-wing bias before.

The daily YouGov tracker polls are promoted on Twitter with the breakdown of Conservatives/Labour/LibDems. Of course, UKIP doesn't have any MPs - but this looks slightly ludicrous when UKIP are normally 1% - 2% behind the LibDems, and normally have double the support of the Greens and BNP put together.

I don't think any of these companies want to produce a poll that sees UKIP leading the LibDems nationally, somehow.

EDIT: Just remembered that ComRes back in December actually had UKIP ahead of the LibDems nationally among voters who were 5/10+ likely to vote. Presumably that's why they're moving the goal posts now.

Lower taxes help the poor.

The slashing of the 50p tax rate has degenerated into a very predictable and boring slagging match. If you want to cut it you're for helping rich people, if you stand against it you're standing up for the poor.

This is hopelessly simplistic. Rich people nowadays are so mobile that they don't have to stand around and hand 50% of their earnings over to the government. I certainly wouldn't. In fact, I think it is morally objectionable for an individual to be spending half of their time effectively working for the government.

Lower taxes encourage the wealthy to stay in the UK and pay taxes here. If wealthy people stay in the country, they are more likely to invest in the country rather than focus on investment in international markets that are crying out for their finance. And who benefits from that? The poor and aspirational who rely on the wealthy risking capital and investing in order for a job in the private sector.

Decreasing government spending dramatically in the long term also means that poor people no longer become reliant on the state, a disease that has crept into many communities in England and crippled aspiration. It is sad and unnecessary. The underclass beneath the working class has been fostered thanks to high taxes, high government spending and a cradle-to-grave welfare system that is costly and damaging to these people by discouraging financial well-being and independence.

Everyone should pay their fair share, which is why I favour a low, simple, flat tax to stop tax avoidance. But it is time that government in the UK stood on the side of wealth creators and entrepreneurs who drive our economy by slashing taxes, red tape and regulation.

Labour want EU to grow and grow.

Those poor Macedonians. Locked out of the European Union, retaining their democracy and currency, whatever will they do?

Labour MEP Richard Howitt is on the case however - championing the cause for Macedonia to join the EU. Those lucky, lucky people.

As if the hardship of the collapse of Yugoslavia wasn't enough for these people to go through, the likes of the Labour Party want to get Macedonia locked into another doomed superstate. I'm not sure whether pushing this cause amidst the EU's dramatic decline is more cheeky or plain, downright insanity.

This club is after all responsible for mass hardship in Greece (youth unemployment at 51.1%), declining economies in Italy, Portugal and Spain as well as its own rejection in the UK. Hardly a winning CV.

In Richard Howitt's own words: "for stability you need to keep moving forward". This lot want the EU to grow bigger and more powerful whatever the cost to individual member states and their people. Labour don't have a monopoly on this idiocy though: Cameron's Conservatives still champion Turkey's accession to the EU. What fun that will be with further open border chaos.

At least we haven't reached the stage of the lobbying of North African and Middle Eastern nations to join Brussels' declining empire, as David Miliband wants. Well not yet, anyway.

UKIP polling 3rd in London - LibDems joint 4th.

UKIPers should be jubilant and LibDems extremely jittery in equal measures tonight - this YouGov poll shows UKIP in third place in London with 7%, while Nick Clegg's party are duking it out with the Green Party for fourth.

The trio of Livingston/Johnson/Paddick all over again was not ever going to inspire. In addition there are two huge differences between now and 2008: a) we're in the era of Coalition whereby the LibDems are now viewed as establishment poodles rather than a viable third party choice and b) that UKIP have seriously got wind behind their sails and are a Party that is in a more professional state than ever before.

Could the LibDems come 5th? Possibly. But one thing I'm more sure of - UKIP will have representation on the Greater London Assembly after May. Whoever the Mayor is, having UKIP GLAs could spice things up a bit. Just like Farage and Co. have done in the European Parliament.

Conservatives Europe-wide are in denial about open borders.

So, President Sarkozy is seeking to deflect the rise of the newly revived Front Nationale by telling the French people that their are too many foreigners in France. What's more, if re-elected, he intends to bring down the number of new arrivals by half.

Except he can't. In fact, no premier in any of the EU's twenty-seven member states can promise such a thing. Because with EU membership comes that magical gift of open borders.

Seriously, it probably is a gift if you're a poor Romanian or Bulgarian or Pole. New labour markets are now instantly open to you, with a healthcare system, social security structure and financial opportunities that they couldn't dream of back home.

Not so good however, if you're an English youngster trying to get a foothold in the unskilled labour market in the midst of an economic collapse and recovery.

The Left can can jump up and down about this being racist or xenophobic all they like. But not being able to control who enters your country and more importantly, how many of them come, is utter madness. Labour and the Conservatives have both agreed that this is wrong but neither has presented any credible solution whatsoever when it comes to EU migrants. The UK has become saturated with low-skilled workers and our own young people are sitting on the dole queue as a result, as the politicians sit on their heads avoiding the elephant in the room.

Cameron knows that immigration is out of control. That's why he has trumpeted immigration controls. But all too often shoddy reporting and a dishonest turn of phrase from the Conservatives has misled the public. There is no controlling migrants from within the EU, as demonstrated by the government's utter failure in bringing numbers down thus far. In fact, the net migration into the UK is on the increase.

Sarkozy similarly has admitted that France has suffered from its current level of immigration. His best hope however is to follow the British Conservatives' line of seeking to talk of 'restricting immigration' without including the EU dimension of the story.

With Greece on the brink of economic destruction inside the Euro straight jacket with Italy, Spain and Portugal not that far behind, we may be about to see another huge wave of EU migration yet.

The Conservative Party - not just Cameron - has left Eurosceptics.

Mark Pritchard has followed up his grievances over Europe in The Telegraph today, claiming that David Cameron's weakness on Europe has forced him to resign from his job in the International Office.

I disagree.

Cameron's effect on the Tory Party has been profound. Among Conservative Party voters, members and activists, anti-EU sentiment remains commonplace. In fact, it's growing.

Yet because of the A-list, a highly controlled MEP selection procedure and so forth, it is the Tory Party itself which is leaving behind its Eurosceptic bedrock of support. It is the Tory Party itself that is now at odds with the likes of Mark Pritchard - he is the exception, the Cameroons are now the rule.

No longer does the Conservative Party talk of lower taxes, less government and the battle against a federal Europe. This Tory-led government is positively encouraging Euro fiscal union, even throwing billions of pounds of British taxpayers' money into the scheme to sustain the doomed Eurozone.

Some may say that 81 Tory MPs defying the whip and voting for an EU referendum is monumental. That depends. In terms of a rebellion, sure.

However, it also means that less than one in three Tories in the House of Commons wants the British people to even have a say on the issue. That surely demonstrates a huge commitment to Britain's continued support for the European Union, even as the Union is being exposed as flawed and ill-thought out like never before. The vast majority of Conservative MPs' loyalty lies with Cameron over the public.

Just as Tony Blair scourged true socialists and principled left-wingers from the Labour Party in the hunt for power, Cameron is doing the same to the Conservative Party (whilst failing to win the election). Anyone who stands for small-c conservative values isn't welcome anymore. The centre-ground doesn't welcome Eurosceptic conviction.

Within a Party that has a leadership process very heavily skewed towards the influence of its MPs, and a system of selecting MPs that relies strongly on Cameron's approval, it is hard to see a way forward for the likes of Mark Pritchard. I'm afraid the Tory Party has left him, just as it did Stuart Wheeler, Lord Hesketh, Lord Pearson of Rannoch, Lord Willoughby de Broke, Roger Helmer and so many more.

Could Mark Pritchard be the next to defect to UKIP?

Mark Pritchard's resignation as Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party's International Office is interesting for a number of reasons.

Firstly, because rather than this being a hissy fit, Pritchard has recent form in speaking out against the Cameron regime.

In fact he penned a devastating piece in The Telegraph calling for an EU referendum. More importantly, he subsequently rebelled in the House of Commons vote on the issue in voting for such a referendum.

The fact that the man also can't be bothered to fight Cameroons to retain internal Party positions is also telling.

But it is surely the very words in his resignation to David Cameron that are most telling. Concerns over Europe, immigration and Cameron's overall ethos on aspiration sound pretty fatal.

Indeed, it all sounds pretty similar to the complaints that Roger Helmer expressed on Saturday in Skegness when he spoke as a UKIP MEP for the first time.