Latest from UKIP Daily

Letters to the Editor – Saturday 12th August 2017

Today’s letters run the full gamut of issues important to our readers. The first letter, by our contributor Toby Micklethwait, is an invitation to hustings, now even more important because all 11 candidates have officially been nominated:

Dear UKIP Daily readers,

We are pleased to announce the details official South East Regional Hustings:

Thursday August 31, 2017

The Christian Centre, Church Street, Dorking, RH4 1DW

Doors open at 6.45pm for a 7.30pm start

UKIP members who live in the South East Region and wish to attend should apply for a reservation to: Toby Micklethwait,  01932-873557.

You will need to give your: name, branch name, membership number.

Any questions, please phone me.

Regards, Toby Micklethwait

That announcement is followed by the invitation for the Yorkshire and North Lincs Regional Leadership Hustings just in:

Hello everyone,

In line with Party instruction  I have arranged a Regional Leadership Hustings for 24 August at The Kyte Hotel, Chestnut House, Great North Road, Darrington WF8 3HR commencing 7.00pm and I would ask that you circulate this to all your Branch Members. Could you ask them all please to RSVP to me at . It is very important that they do this to ensure the room we have is large enough to accommodate everyone. There will be tea and coffee and water available.

Judith Morris
Regional Chair

Next, our correspondent Cllr Brian Silvester reminds us that Brexit is still not won, and that we cannot relent in our task to make last year’s Referendum reality:


The sell out to the EU over Brexit continues.We now find that the Tory Government are planning to give a whopping £36,000,000,000 of our hard earned taxes to the EU,as a divorce payment.Whatever for? There is no obligation to give them a penny.

When we voted for Brexit we expected to walk away without any further payments to the EU. We have already paid them an amazing net £250,000,000,000 since 1973.Enough is enough.We have paid heavily for all the luxurious EU buildings scattered around the EU, We should be getting our share of the value of those expensive buildings back.

Also we buy £70,000,000,000 a year MORE from EU than what we sell to EU. If we had World Trade Organisation tariffs on that trade the UK would be £7,000,000,000 a year BETTER off. The EU should be paying us for access to our lucrative market.

It beggars belief how weak and supine the Tory Government is over Brexit.

If Maggie or Donald Trump had been in charge of negotiations we would be out of the EU by now and the EU would be paying to trade with us.

Respectfully, Cllr. Brian Silvester, UKIP Crewe and Nantwich

Our contributor ‘Quercus’ sent us this good-bye letter. We hope his absence will be temporary because diversity of opinion is our strength:

Dear Viv and Readers

I must take my leave for more productive pursuits, at least for the time being.

I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to what for the most part has been an interesting, engaging and high-quality debate.   Regrettably however so much of it is of the railing variety and not enough the prescriptive.   We do need to get the analysis right, but we also have to find imaginative and effective solutions, and that’s what we’re not doing well.

Too many posters seem unable to engage in lateral thinking, or to say with their pet theories where they think the voters are going to come from to put us into any position of influence, or indeed to grasp the tribal realities of British politics.   They rarely address the substance of the argument, but bluster at my audacity and go on with the same old conventional predictable thinking.   

They are mostly in fact die-hard ex-Tories trying to have their cake and eat it – control of immigration and Islamification, but with Tory economics.   They can’t see that running a national economy isn’t like running a household budget, that ‘austerity’ is a ploy to ‘roll back the state’ in some perverted definition of  ‘liberty’, that the rich are conning the middle class into supporting their agenda, that the Establishment is rotten to the very top, that our worst enemies are in fact the Tories, because it’s they who have been in a position to save our country but in practice have done nothing to do so, indeed with their selfishness continue to build our nation’s pyre.

Such posters just can’t bring themselves to accept that the only way to save our country is with the support of the common people, and what has to be done to get it.  They think ‘cutting taxes’, denying climate change and extending grammar schools will do the trick.   Well it might on Breitbart, but not in the real world.   The working class will not vote for it.

These posters aren’t typical of the membership, and certainly not of our ex-voters, who are probably 50% Tory / 50% Labour, but my experience on the doorstep indicates there is no doubt where the greater potential lies.    We have to get many more working people onside, and that means policies which make their lives better.   Accept that or we die.

I’ve tried to suggest ideas in my articles to that purpose.   As on the doorstep, revelation is slow to come, but one sows the seeds and gets people thinking.   But nothing is of any avail unless the Party and its leaders start a collective move in the right direction – and the hoped-for signs from this leadership election have not been forthcoming.

The only candidate who comes anywhere near understanding the point is Anne Marie, but sadly her economic programme is tentative, piecemeal, unsophisticated and essentially Tory.   It’s nothing like the radical, eye-catching, alternative manifesto for the nationalist economics we need in order to get attention and counter the MSM’s denigration, which will inevitably come with being portrayed as leading on immigration and Islamification.

In the absence of any candidate who grasps this, my advice as things stand would be to vote for the one who has the most gravitas and all-round credibility.

My thanks to all who have engaged and contributed, and good wishes for the battles to come.  

Yours sincerely, Quercus

And finally, a call to sign a petition sent in to us. We publish the text as received:

Hello there,

I just signed the petition “Teresa May: Ensure all students who voted twice in the General Election are Prosecuted” and wanted to see if you could help by adding your name. Our goal is to reach 100 signatures and we need more support. You can read more and sign the petition at the link provided.

Thanks! Andrew MacLean

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

29 Comments on Letters to the Editor – Saturday 12th August 2017

  1. Yes Maximus – to your last (very kind) comment.
    But leadership and manifesto policies rather go together – and the candidates’ ‘debate’ so far has been abysmal.

    Everyone should be pressing them on these two fundamental questions:
    “How is your programme going to get the mass support we need?”
    “Do you realise that it has to LEAD on policies which on the economy are radical and on equality issues fair?”

    • Quercus.
      Unfortunately not enough time before the vote for the candidates to carry out a major overhaul of their manifesto’s and policies. It looks like the leadership decision will have to be based on the candidates qualities of character. The idea of a politician who goes around telling the truth appeals. We don’t get those very often.
      AMW will be coming up north. I will ask her your two suggested fundamental questions if I get the chance.

  2. No Panmelia (to your last comment)!

    The Referendum is behind us.
    If we are to have any chance of getting what you want we have to have attractive policies that affect people’s lives now.

    That is what you and all the others on here should be concentrating on – the HOW?

  3. Dear Q

    I take heart from ‘… at least for the time being.’ I hope the time of which you speak will be short!

    We possibly don’t see exactly eye to eye on climate, in a friendly way, (at least you now know I don’t think the Earth is flat!) but I think we probably both strongly agree that our economy needs to be fixed and can only be fixed by UKIP because our opponents are the reason it needs fixing!

    A long time ago you spoke in a way that revealed your passion on the doorstep, so I know you to be more than a mere arm-chair warrior.

    So, I do hope we’ll be hearing from you again in the not-too-distant future because one thing’s for sure,

    you’re never boring!

    • I second all this. Anyone who has engaged the public on the doorstep has my respect and has valuable knowledge to pass on.

    • Dear Michael

      Thanks! – I’ve enjoyed our discussions too.

      Recognising that it’s the economy we must lead on puts you more than half way there. If only even one of our candidates could see that – I’d probably be staying.

      I will be back, I’m sure. Meanwhile keep the good fight up, and I look forward to making your acquaintance again some time.


      • Quercus. Has any European country implemented the sort of policies you favour.

        • Plenty of European countries have various degrees of state ownership of railways and utilities, Max (you’re probably buying your electricity from one!) and also find ways to support their industry (eg Dutch energy/horticulture, French action against Far East cars).
          We only have to look to Scandinavia to find richer, happier, more egalitarian populations.
          Never mind GDP – in terms of GDP per capita and productivity, we’re among the paupers of Europe.
          But then we’re British.

  4. Andrew,

    Thanks for the petition link.


    Sorry to see you go; good luck in your future endeavours.

  5. Quercus, I for one have often disagreed with your opinions, but so what!! UKIP Daily is one of the few places where Kippers and UKIP Supporters can have reasonable, free and open discussion. Just because many commenters and perhaps the leadership candidates may not agree with everything you say doesn’t mean that your views should not be available for consideration.
    Your opinions are as valid as the next mans, er … persons. My missus rarely agrees with me but I’m still putting up with that after several decades and she somehow still manages to put up with me. Keep up with your obviously sincerely held views

    • Thanks John, appreciated.

      I have devoted this time in order to try and serve Party and Country, but it is over-consuming, and really anything else I say now is likely to be mere repetition.
      The candidates aren’t listening. Hardly surprising since most of them are nowhere near up to it anyway and are just being self-indulgent at the Party’s expense. And none shows any grasp of the reality of how radical and revolutionary we have to be to stand any chance in the next GE.

      It will give me no pleasure to say ‘I told you so.’
      The tragedy is that time is running out, and we should have learnt the realities of British politics long before now.

  6. Quercus.
    It won’t be the same on here without you. Sincerely hope you return at some point. I always mull over your comments. I am sure you are giving good advice but I haven’t managed to understand it yet.
    Have you got a little reading list of books for me – that explain your ideas.

    • Dear Maximus

      Thanks for your interest, I’ve always been impressed by your comments and intellectual openness too.

      Best I can do is point you to my ‘vision paper’:

      If you click on my name in the title piece my other dozen or so articles will come up.
      Other than that, the best bet is reading up modern economic history on the internet – Galbraith and Keynes are obvious starters (but I don’t believe in gurus).

      Or you could wade into the Laffer curve with this recent post on the Telegraph I found quite amusing:

      “Adam Smith and the Laffer curve aren’t for believing in. If you want to believe in something, the Divine Resurrection comes highly recommended. (Other religions are available).”

      Joseph Fox 28 Jul 2017 11:44AM

  7. Quercus: austerity is not a ploy. It ought really to be called living within our means. Increasing the national debt by giving people free money – to sum up your policies – is an immoral charge on future generations.

    I agree the current Tories are a problem. They are not really Tories at all.

    • Your “summing up” is quite erroneous then, Stout.
      And your economics naive.
      You are stopping the only chance we have.

  8. there is no allah – islam is an excuse for muslim men to have an all boys sex club and treat girls and women like sex slaves- islam is a fake 7th century cult of violence that promises men sex whenever and even when dead in a fake paradise with non existent virgins. Dumb gullible muslim morons are manipulated by imams in mosques to follow sharia law and bully women. The UK is not islamic yet the gullible PC liberals have facilitated the building of 2000 mosques so imams can brainwash and emotionally blackmail muslim women to breed for a non existent deity but on the NHS paid for by taxpayers – all the while missing the irony that islam is sexist racist misogynist and the koran calls for the death of non muslims, homosexuals and gives muslim men permission to rape non muslim white girls – all in the name of a nnon existent allah.
    Perverse, predatory parasites invited in by Blair, welcomed by Corbyn
    and encourged by the HofCommons where Bottomley repeats parrot fashion that islam is peace. Muslims are the cause of all the chaos in the world – so close mosques – ban sharia law and deport all imams and then repatriate all muslims to the 51 islamic countries because UK is not islamic. Is Baroness Cox the only one to campaign against sharia law – but where is Germaine Greer or Julie Birchill?

    • Mike Mouse, you are correct in every particular, but don’t hold your breath waiting for the leftie feministas to come out and attack islam for its appalling treatment of women.
      You see, their brains have been addled by insoluble contradictions, viz.(A) Leftard feminists believe in the advancement of women to a level where they are the superior of the sexes; and in Western countries where they already have the vote and access to all professions, laws should be passed to ensure that there is positive discrimination in favour of women so that they are represented equally in all fields, even ones women don’t take much interest in (eg sewer scrubbers); (B) Leftard feministas are always on the side of 3rd world countries and ethnic/religious minorities in the West, and support cultural relativism, which states that all cultures are equal, therefore no one should criticise cultural practices such as mistreating and beating women or subjecting little girls to sexual abuse & mutilation, or forced marriage of child brides to pervy old men etc.etc. To object to these things would be Western cultural hegemony of the worst kind.

      So, the ideologies regarding the treatment of females are dreadfully conflicting; however, the feminista dogma states that in the event of insoluble contradictions, always err on the side of ethnic/religious minorities who insist on breaking the laws of the patriarchal country they inhabit, even when the ethnic/religious minority is considerably more patriarchal than the host country.
      This way, two desirable objectives are fulfilled: the Leftard spirit of internationalism is honoured; and the extreme Leftard doctrinaire goal of pissing off the majority population of the Western host country with irrational and perverse reasoning is achieved.

    • kenneth james ogilvie // August 13, 2017 at 10:27 am // Reply

      I agree with all you say and would like to do all you suggest but how?
      Muslims enter a community and keep a low profile then as they increase in numbers they ask for a place of worship. fine we say. then they start buying shops and undercut existing shops who go out of business I can cite jewelry shops selling gold in Rochdale. The next thing is local politics and trade unions. All the time their population is growing When they feel strong it is National politics,Sadiq Khan. Eventually it’s to late. Look at countries all over the world and you will see what I am referring to.

      • @kjo
        I know what you are referring to.
        How? The first step is recognition, the end of denial. While our current leaders deny that there is any threat and repeat the lie that “We are not divided”, there is no way forward, especially as the PTB have instructed the Thought Police to persecute dissenters and intimidate the native British population.
        So one way would be to vote in a different kind of government: one that takes the islam problem seriously and takes action to tackle it. This doesn’t look feasible in the near future; therefore the other way is to exert tremendous and relentless political pressure on the government to change its outlook and change its policies. It was achieved with Brexit and it can be achieved again. The drawback is that this process takes a long time.
        Those of us who have recognised the threat will have to elect a leader who is determined to roll back islamisation and introduce a constitution that will not allow our democracy to be captured by those who would subvert it by force of numbers to their own ends: their ends being to eradicate democracy and replace it with sharia law.
        What needs to be achieved within the next three to five years is the eradication of sharia law from our country, plus all its attendant evils such as the subjugation of women, FGM and halal slaughter. All government funding to islamic bodies must cease and a hostile environment for islam created. Needless to say, the failed and nonsensical ideology of multiculturalism has to be relegated to the dustbin of history.
        We need Anne Marie Waters for our next leader. Her time has come.

        • Can’t you see, Panmelia? None of this is going to happen without mass popular support – and the only way to get that is with the right economic and social policies.
          That’s what you should be turning your considerable talents to help to determine, not this constant railing.

          • @ Quercus
            Erm … the EU Referendum and the historic vote to Leave the EU was achieved without any great notice being taken of UKIP’s social and economic policies. Isn’t that true?
            What mattered was that Brexit was, and still is, a massive moral issue of Right vs Wrong, Freedom vs Bondage, Democracy vs Dictatorship, Autonomy vs Autocracy. The Remainers tried to convince everybody that it was an economic issue, but they were wrong.
            It’s the same with the problem of islam in the UK. What are the choices when a clash of cultures is taking place in your homeland, with the host culture being disrespected and defied? When threats (and not idle threats) are being made by the minority culture to outbreed the natives and take over the State? The choices are similar: Right or Wrong, Freedom or Subjugation, Democracy or Dictatorship, British Law or sharia law, National Survival or National Annihilation, Western Culture or islamic culture.

            The stakes with Brexit were high, very high. The stakes with this issue of controlling islam before it can control us are existential in nature – life or death.
            When the majority of people realise this, the mass popular support will be there, as it was with Brexit and, before that, WW2.
            Your constant railing about the economy is irrelevant because it doesn’t address the most crucial moral issue of our times.

          • Quercus. Thanks for your reading suggestions. I am in the process of reading your articles and the large quantity of comments they prompted. I had to go for a walk as I experienced information overload.
            Yes everyone on here wants the right economic and social policies – but the policies are shy and not easily found. My starting point for a debate would be a manifesto of specific policies.
            But the current task is to choose our next leader.

  9. Quercus, Sorry to learn you are departing from these pages. I for one have enjoyed your posts and the articles and comments on this site will be the poorer for your absence. I say this not so much because we agree about everything – on the contrary I am what you may clessify as a “climate change denier” and I am also for “small state” against “big state” government. But nevertheless all points of view are valuable, especially dissenting ones, as they tend to militate against the emergence of any oppressive orthodoxies.

    What is more, if I have understood your opinion correctly, I do agree with you that the preservation of the cultural identity of this country from the effects of mass immigration is more important than any economic question. One of the ways LiblabCon have secured the support of the majority of the electorate is bribing them with “freebies” as part the mis-named welfare state. These “freebies” have been funded by massive government borrowing. If the price of securing the support of ordinary voters for immigraton control is matching the bribes offered to them by LibLabCon then I agree a pragmatic case can be put forward for this approach, as morally repugnant as I find it to bribe the electorate with borrowed money. But at the end of the day the country can, if need be, default on the national debt. What it cannot do is recreate this country as it used to be once its cultural and demographic destruction through mass immigration has been completed.

    Best wishes in your new pursuits and I hope your absence will not be a permanent one.

    • Thanks for your generous comments, Richard.

      You are correct – though my suggestions are based on principle as well as pragmatism.
      I believe in the common people of this nation, who have been betrayed – and even UKIP doesn’t seem to have the sense or the will to help them.

      I hope to be back ere long, but the present contest and debate leave give little hope.

  10. Andrew, I’ve signed with pleasure and passed it on via facebook. Anyone who cheats the electoral system should be named, shamed, and prosecuted.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.