Conservative Party

Has Ukip sold its soul for €2million?


There is apparently a battle currently being waged for the soul of the Conservative Party, at least according to the Jerusalem Post: “..the natural home of British Jews, still quietly but firmly Zionist, and with an emphasis on family, traditional values and enterprise.. (has) become a craven follower of popular trends.” Owen Jones goes a step further in the Guardian, where he argues that both the Tories and Labour have not so much sold their souls but surrendered them to a kind of soul sleep: “Technocratic, rootless, soulless; a professionalised morass of time-servers who see ministerial posts as springboards to nice little earners on corporate boards; manoeuvring constantly not on the basis of political principle but for shameless self-advancement.”

No one much bothers with the spiritual state of the Liberal Democrats, who, along with Richard Dawkins, evolved without a soul.

And then there’s Ukip, who, once gloriously pledged uniquely and solely (of not soully) to the magnificent cause of EU secession, now advance a bunch of (muddled) policies on economics, education, health, defence, energy, policing, welfare, housing, the minimum wage, HS2, wind turbines (and even whether or not to hold an EU referendum)..

And now, apparently, in the pursuit of €2million (or an awful lot more) of EU funding, they have teamed up with a Polish MEP in the European Parliament who comes from a party (the Congress of the New Right) whose leader, Janusz Korwin-Mikke, refers to the “Holocaust industry” and is of the view that “Jews are very talented people, and therefore are our worst enemies, because they are talented communists”. He’s said a few nasty things about minorities and women, too (though these may have been jokes..).

The Congress of the New Right won 7% of Poland’s vote in May’s European elections, thereby gaining four MEPs. Mr Korwin-Mikke says it would have been more had it not been for “the state, Catholics, Communists, the media attacking me all the way”. This party is deemed even by Marine Le Pen to be “too extreme”.

But Janusz Korwin-Mikke is not the man joining Nigel Farage’s Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy (EFDD) group: only Robert Iwaszkiewicz will be doing so, and you can’t tarnish him with the views of his leader.

Or can you?

The Jewish Chronicle reports that the Board of Deputies of British Jews is “gravely concerned by reports that Ukip may sit in the same parliamentary grouping as a far-right Polish MEP in a bid save its funding”. They say:

Robert Iwaszkiewicz belongs to an extremist party whose leader has a history of Holocaust denial, racist remarks and misogynistic comments. For UKIP to choose such a figure as Robert Iwaszkiewicz as a bedfellow, apparently for money, is beyond belief. Nigel Farage now has some very serious questions to answer. He has placed in issue the credibility of Ukip.

For what shall it profit Ukip if they shall gain €2million in EU funding, and lose their soul?

Except.. except..

The Conservatives in the European Parliament are part of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group. This includes Poland’s Law and Justice Party, who have themselves been accused of the occasional bit of homophobia; and the Bulgaria without Censorship (BWC) coalition, who appear to have an “openly racist” MEP.

Politicians routinely dance with the devil and sell their souls for personal advancement. Many if not most are vocationally predisposed to ethical hustling and betraying their morals for personal gain. The greasy pole is manifestly worth a spell in purgatory, if not the risk of eternal damnation. It ought therefore to come as no surprise that political parties, being comprised of those same grasping and conspiring individuals, might occasionally if not routinely compromise their foundational philosophical principles for coalitions of power; prostitute their values in shady backroom realpolitik; or forge alliances with obnoxious foreigners in the pursuit of EU funding. This is the jungle of polity and the politics of statecraft. It ought not to be, but it is. So, as they say in the urban dictionary, “Get over it.”


  • Uncle Brian

    An MEP has to do what an MEP has to do.

    • Less than convinced.

      That does raise 3 things though.

      1. Does UKIP need MEPs and EU money to protest the EU. They have in the past refused to have MEPs or taken EU money – what changed? By having MEPs and wanting a voice in the European parliament despite not recognising its authority, do they not invariably make themselves hostages to fortune (literally?) to EU rules that require them to get into bed with nasty people.

      2. Archbishop Cranmer is quite correct that the other big parties also get into bed with nasty people and big ugly political coalitions are an inevitability of this sort of politics. But, is UKIP not meant to be the broom that brushes away all these establishment cosy deals and intrigues and gets things back on a proper footing? It matters more when UKIP do deals of this sort precisely because they are meant to be different from the other parties who are expected to be corrupt establishment clones.

      3. Rightly or wrongly the media narrative is that UKIP is a racist party with a woman problem. When they get associated with people like this it matters more than when Labour does so – because it fits an existing media narrative.

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        I got into bed with Mr Gladstone once…it wasn’t nice.

        • dannybhoy

          You’re a loose woman…

  • Gerhard

    Shall we ask the same questions to those in the EU parliament that are openly communist or at sympathetic to the cause? Last time I checked, communists murdered 80m people in the last century…

  • JayBee

    Every political party needs substantial funding. But this isn’t just about cash. It’s also about having a voice, influence and a growing movement to save our country from the stranglehold of the EU to restore national sovereignty.

    A few months ago our So-called Conservative MEP’s did all they could to prevent UKIP being able to form a Group in the new Parliament. There are as they say “no rules in a knife fight” and last week UKIP were torpedoed by more scheming Federalists determined to sink their Freedom and Democracy Group. Their Latvian member was cajoled into leaving it in return for a delegation chairmanship position. That meant they were down to representation from 6 countries which would have shut down their Group. You could say that what they have done now in such a short time is pretty smart. Although the credentials of their new ally will raise eyebrows he is but one voice in the Group. He is also in favour of free markets and anti the EU establishment so he can’t be all bad. This I would suggest is a better solution than UKIP joining the “far right” European Alliance for Freedom Group which includes the Front Nationale.

    Now these tactics may not sit comfortably with the claim that UKIP represents a different kind of politics. But in mitigation please remember they have to fight their corner within an existing grubby no holds barred profession. Every dirty underhanded trick in the political universe has been and is still being directed at UKIP by a political class determined to halt the advance of the Peoples Army. They will fail.

    • CliveM

      Your excuse for UKIP’s behaviour could arguably be used by all parties. I’m happy to agree UKIP are no worse then others.

      They are also no better.

    • dannybhoy

      I am an active member of our fledgling UKIP branch. There are as I see it three main problems facing UKIP.
      On a local level they have a lot of work to do in building a coherent representation of the party, not as activistists (plenty of those) but for fundraising and publicity.
      Then there’s the fact that at present Nigel is UKIP, and that has to change. We need to project more real party stalwarts with specific interests into the public arena.
      Finally we need to secure more funding so as to promote and sustain the party.
      I don’t want to see UKIP become as cynical or self serving as eg Labour or the Conservatives. To do so would be to squander a golden opportunity to bring in more openness and accountability into British politics, and break free of the clutches of a sclerotic EU which is both corrupt and self serving and destructive of our sovereignty.

      • Well said dannybhoy, it’s a dog eat dog world as Lord Sugar keeps telling us.
        I agree the next step should be tailor made local marketing campaigns.
        They should marry in UKIP’s answers to local problems with what UKIP have published in their manifesto so that the campaign resonates with the local people in each and every different constituency. If they word literature from the perspective of everyone already being a UKIP voter and part of the family.

  • CliveM

    A couple of questions come out of this (see link), will UKIP selling its soul for its 30 pieces of silver lead more people into the arms of the EU?

    Why do 11% of its support want to remain in the EU? Do they not understand what UKIP is for!

    Are the writers mixing up causation and correlation?

    • Nick

      I think it’s because the public perception of UKIP is that they stand for two main things – withdrawal from the EU and highly limited immigration. Not all of those who are attracted to UKIP because they want less immigration necessarily think it is best to pull out of the EU.

      I’m in a different position in that I would like to see Britain out of the EU but I don’t agree with the UKIP immigration policy. The UKIP immigration policy is a deal breaker for me because I don’t think it is fair on the people who come into this country and already get treated badly.

      As for the ‘soul of UKIP’ – this kind of language arises because of the need for political parties to use a body metaphor and language to describe them. It is entirely manufactured. The Church uses a similar ‘body’ metaphor but this has some plausibility because of the spiritual nature of the Church. The idea of a political party having a soul is used to promote the idea of a party as a body. This is all very nice to discuss at dinner parties or in the company of the politically enlightened but it is also a bogus metaphor.

      I would suggest that political parties behave more like machines in which their members act as cogs. Or as megabites in computers if you prefer. There is little life in them and any perceived unity is largely imagined.

      • CliveM


        You make good points. I don’t vote UKIP for various reasons, I am conflicted about how I feel about the EU. Instinctively I am against it, particularly the style of it, but I do worry that we will simply end up toeing the EU line even if we leave, with even less say.

        With regards immigration I dislike the tone of the debate, I am for less immigration in principle but feel UKIP is going to far. I would insist that non conducive immigration (certain types of Muslims for example) be banned from wherever they arrive.

        I do have other concerns as well.

        • Nick

          Hi Clive,

          I think it will be really hard to leave the EU even in the event of a referendum. If there ever was a referendum then there would be a lot of fear promoted (and this is assuming the Tories get back in next year). I know we are all used to fear, but leaving the EU would be a huge step. I don’t think it is impossible, but it would take a massive amount of courage from the people of Britain.

          • The people of Britain have the courage to leave don’t you worry, it’s the politicians that don’t want to leave and will peddle all sorts of fear evoking tripe in order not to have a referendum, or to swing it their way when the crunch comes.

      • CliveM


        In the run up to the Scottish independence vote I read an interesting article about the outcome of referendums. They had reviewed referendums world wide at noticed that in only one case had the vote chosen to the status quo, when starting off the formal campaign from the position of being behind in the poles. Indeed to have any sure chance of success they had to be significantly ahead. Sadly I can’t remember where I read it for the details.

        Any vote would be difficult for UKIP to win.

    • Hi Clive,

      1).UKIP is riding high because the traditional protest vote party, the lib dems are in government .

      2). No I don’t think a lot of people know what UKIP stand for, because they “reviewed” or ditched their previous manifesto without putting up a new one during the Euro elections. They don’t seem to put an intelligent Euro sceptic case, but bang on endlessly about Romanians and the like. The EU machine has been doing far worse than immigration ( EU arrest warrant, toppling governments via the ECB, creating a de facto confederate union via treaty, after voters said no to it, the fact that the EU is now running for the interests of 1 country, with the UK all but ignored , the list goes on).

      3). 11% of UKIP support wants to stay in the EU? No surprise because I’d say if the EU was just a free trading bloc, one feather in the cap alongside global trade and the traditional commonwealth links and not a quasi confederate union, which dictates more than trading regulations within the club, then most British would want to stay in it.

      4). A lot of activists might be socially conservative people, drawn in as a protest over gay marriage. This is ironic because UKIP see themselves as “libertarian/ free market”. Same goes with their immigration policy. I don’t think they have quite established themselves in terms of their overall philosophy, because they are trying to build up a voting profile from the right to centre. So they are opportunist, who ditched support of gay marriage and became more strident on immigration because these were issues they could get support from disaffected conservative voters.

      In short they’re politicians like the rest of them.

      • CliveM

        More good points!

      • dannybhoy

        I got this leaflet last night at the branch meeting. It was evidently put together after their recent conference. It is not their manifesto.

  • Hi,

    What did Reagan say about politics being the second oldest profession? I’m seeing this right now.

    • CliveM

      Well we have a right bunch of voter tarts parading their wares at the moment.

      I do get depressed.

      • dannybhoy

        Don’t get depressed Clive, get involved. Use the freedoms afforded you by our forefathers,
        “All it takes for wily politicians snd corruption to triumph is that good voters do nothing..”

        • CliveM

          I have spent a significant chunk of my adult life actively involved. I will vote at the next election.

          I do think we are currently particularly badly served.

          • dannybhoy

            Yes we are, and that’s why I hope that UKIP will break us out of this cosy three party cartel. We will never have a perfect society in this world, but that doesn’t absolve us from a responsibility to stand up for truth and openness. Our Christian forefathers did so much to improve our society, we should do what we can too.

  • In respect to UKIPs decision:

    1. Why is the funding so crucial?
    2. Couldn’t they have done without taxpayer’s money and raised the money elsewhere via their members?
    3. The MEP salary and benefits are exceptionally good anyways.
    4. Why did they have to choose this particular individual, kinda like scrapping barrels, surely?
    5. Just because other parties have questionable alliances, doesn’t make this one any better.

    PS- What was that atrocious calypso song all about?

    • CliveM

      I think that atrocious calypso song just about sums it up as far as UKIP are concerned.

      Good post with good points. It’s not that I particularly dislike UKIP more then other parties, but I do object to its smugness. Also I think we have enough politicians peddling simplistic solutions, with readily identifiable scapegoats without needing another bunch of them. Unless they have something genuinely new to offer.

      I do feel this individual is particularly loathsome however.

    • dannybhoy

      I have to agree, the song was truly lousy. I was sent it in an email and deleted it straight away.

  • Shadrach Fire

    Isn’t that what politics is all about? Money and power.
    Unless you have influence you are nothing. Money can bring influence.
    May God bring us politicians with integrity.

    • dannybhoy

      But no, politics isn’t just about money and power. Only if the good guys allow the bad guys to take over. Politics is about social justice, opportunity, the rule of law and freedoms with responsibility.
      There are decent politicians out there in all the parties, but thanks to widespread apathy governments have been allowed to appropriate too much power to themselves and to interfere too much in the running of our country.
      Part of that apathy I would suggest is displayed by Christians who believe that politics is a dirty business and not something good Christian people should be involved with..

      • CliveM


        I think you may have it the wrong way round. It is grubby politicians and their goings on that has led to apathy. Not the other way. If nothing else, the referendum vote showed that people are still able to be motivated in large numbers if they believe the cause is serious enough.

        • dannybhoy

          Clive, the way I see it, (and as always I’m open to correction and modification)
          is that the British people began to lose interest in how our country was run in the ’60s when prosperity and package holidays started to kick in.
          I think that thanks to better wages and HP, people were eager to go abroad, buy a new car etc. and generally buy into the consumer revolution. We’d had enough of the aftermath of the war years and austerity and scrimping and saving; we wanted to live a little!
          I think that left wingers were able to gain control of our major unions because the vast majority of workers had lost interest and stopped attending meetings. The new affluence meant we began to leave the big decisions to the political parties and once they got into power began to expand their spheres of influence. The welfare state required an expanded public sector, paid for by the taxpayers but controlled and increasingly manipulated by politicians in order to win votes and provide employment.
          So I think that’s how the apathy came about, and we are now seeing a reaction to the loss of that prosperity, and looking more closely at what our politicians have done with the powers we the people allowed them to take to themselves.
          It’s not a criticism or a condemnation, just my take on how these things happen.

          • CliveM


            Can’t get my cut and paste to work on the smart phone, see new comment at top!


  • UKIP haven’t done it for the money although it will come in handy, but for
    the extra air time it provides for them to speak. You must see the
    bigger picture and the end goal here. They have been let down by the
    other candidate who left and needed to find a replacement, otherwise
    they would not be a group and have lost most of their speaking time.

    There are hardly any others available to join their group in order
    that they meet the stupid EU criteria on having seven different
    nationalities in the group. They turned down Marie Le Pen. I
    personally can’t see this new replacement lasting but it’s better
    than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

  • IanCad

    The more I hear about Nigel Farage the better David Cameron seems.

    • Uncle Brian

      Would that be the same David Cameron who claims to believe that the Muslim terrorists running the Islamic State are “not real Muslims”?

      • IanCad

        It’s a race to the bottom Uncle Brian.

        • James60498 .

          I have ticked you, but I do think that “less bad comparatively” would have been a better description.

          • IanCad


  • Given Mr Farage’s aim of achieving influence in Parliament after next years election, this particular “dance with the devil” was unwise. Better to have had silence imposed in Brussels and made a noise here about the undemocratic structures, than to have bartered away his parties soul.

    • Uncle Brian

      I don’t think Ukip has bartered away its soul, Jack. Getting your hands dirty isn’t the same as selling your soul.

      • Very true, Brian. Just a bit of hyperbole. Still, it was a politically unwise move.

    • Happy Jack he wouldn’t be able to stand in this position on the front bench
      and speak like this:

      The Last European Commission to Govern Britain – @Nigel_Farage MEP, Ukip Leader

      Note what he says in the last sentence.

      • Not on the BBC news ….

        • Nor any of the other mainstream news either. Interviewers seem to glaze over and change the subject back to domestic issues when Mr Farage launches into details of what he knows goes on in the EU.
          Those You Tube videos from UKIP are a little window for the British people to glimpse into what goes on in a part of the EU.
          And are vital.

      • dannybhoy

        I just love the fact that Nigel speaks plainly and with common sense. He refuses to be overawed by status, he keeps his feet firmly on the ground and says it as he sees it. He embodies some of those English qualities that were probably common in our yeomen farmers of yore..
        Hard working, independent and solid. Regardless of what we think of UKIP we should all be grateful to Nigel Farage for making it acceptable to speak our minds on the issues that people like Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell smothered by labelling them “Racists!”
        That was frankly disgusting.

  • Tom Cook

    > prostitute their values in shady backroom realpolitik

    Can anyone say, Coalition with the Tories?

  • David

    The question is a valid one, as all political parties should be accountable to public opinion for their actions.
    The hard truth thought is, as all mature observers here know, that all political parties and leaders do deals with those that they would rather not to deals with, in order to keep their political machines moving forwards, for a greater good, in this case – freedom. No doubt most of the leadership in Ukip would have been happier if the dirty behind the scenes manoeuvrings, threatenings and promises, that undoubtedly preceded the resignation of the one member that led to the collapse of the last “arrangement”, had never happened. But it did ! So Ukip had to secure the necessary campaigning funds on offer to larger groups, So the party did what was necessary.
    What is at stake here is nothing less than the future freedom, democracy and independence of first the UK, then all the other nation states that may well follow our lead. Did not Churchill shake hands with Stalin ? Let the political party that is perfect cast the first stone I say ……..

  • CliveM


    t would be interesting to have proper research done on this! However:

    I am not convinced that rising levels of prosperity have a big say in increasing voter political apathy. If it had been would you not expect those constituencies with higher levels of poverty to have higher voting levels? This doesn’t appear to be the case.

    I will agree that an expanding welfare state seems to have had a negative impact on peoples willingness to engage in society, “Is there a problem? Don’t ask me to do anything about it, it’s the Governments job!” Seems to be the mantra of so many.

    One of my worries about your analysis, is that it appears to blame the voter. I know it isn’t your intention, but what it seems to imply is that the voter is in effect saying “things are good, don’t bother with me, why should I care?” I think that dissolves our politicians of their responsibility (and in my opinion blame), for what I believe to be the root cause “why should I vote, it changes nothing, they all tell lies, what’s the point?”. I do remember New Labour after their second election victory, being asked why voters appeared less and less willing to go to the polls? Amongst the reasons they gave, they also said that the country were so ecstatic and happy with New Labour. it saw no need to vote (ok, I am exaggerating a little bit, but it was what they implied!!).

    Frankly if the reasoning is good enough for New Labour, it’s good enough to ditch!:)

    • dannybhoy

      Good stuff Clive.
      I don’t blame the voter. It’s the human condition.
      Our collective memories are quite short so who nowadays remembers the heady days when thanks to the preaching of the Wesleys Whitfield and others, the working man found salvation and motivation, then the desire for education and social change? We take these things for granted and our young assume it was ever thus..
      It seems to me that inconsistency is an essential part of being organic beings. As creatures we respond to stimulii and as we age we gain wisdom and lose energy!
      We wax and wane; in our personal relations, our Christian devotion our health, our prosperity and our interests.
      We are awakening from the dream that the State will supply all our needs and being forced to re-evaluate our priorities. Part of that is a renewed interest or appraisal of the relationship between the people and how they are governed.
      I think this is why UKIP is doing so much better than the SDP did with David Owen, Shirley Williams et al. Then we were still a relatively homogenous society, and there was a degree of faith that things would only get better.
      Since our involvement with the EC/EU we are beginning to to register the economic costs to ourselves and our sovereignty.

      I was concerned that you might think I was getting at you re being involved. I wasn’t.

      • CliveM


        No I wasn’t feeling got at! It’s not your style.

        • dannybhoy


  • James60498 .

    Every time I go off the idea of voting UKIP the Tories do something to put me back in the UKIP camp. Got this mornings Telegraph. “Osborne gets mothers back to work” and should continue “and their children into state run liberalism camps

  • dannybhoy

    Regarding the concerns of the Jewish Chronicle and who UKIP gets involved with, I accept that as our oldest established minority British Jewry would be concerned at any perceived threat to the overall stability of our country and the public perception of Jewish people.
    Things are changing all across Europe. Jewish communities are coming under attack, their schools and businesses are being attacked or boycotted. I think the growth of Muslim communities and extremists within these communities are adding to the speed of these changes.
    All the more reason in my view that we get real about what is happening and reinforce our laws and cultural values, and stop pretending we can accommodate all beliefs and all practices. We are a nation built on the Judaeo/Christian religious values cradled in the Protestant tradition, and we need to stand up for what is best about those values.

    • dannybhoy

      Here’s a case in point..

      You can see the original article at Express online

    • dannybhoy

      Here’s another case in point..

      “Ofsted ‘bullies’ Jewish schoolgirls over belief in traditional marriage”
      I am a believer in, and defender of traditional marriage as being between one man and one woman as an expression of their love and commitment, into which relationship children may be born and nurtured and guided.
      The reason why Ofsted can do stupid stuff like this is because good Christian people don’t use their freedoms to stand up and oppose this intrusive and bigoted interference by an unaccountable State.

      • James60498 .

        I always felt that my sons’ Catholic school only got “Outstanding” because it has given into most state liberal bullying.
        No one else of course agrees.
        I think that this story gives some more credence to my suspicions.

        • dannybhoy

          My wife is a foundation school governor and she knows her onions. It is clear that schools implementing the latest policies and thinking will be best thought of.