Magnificent, patriotic, impeccable behaviour, bulldog spirit, joyous, defiant, vocal, loud, good humoured, outraged and concerned citizens, true Britons, well organised, well policed, the whole country represented, large crowd.
These are the words I would use, to sum up, the Brexit Rally in London on Sunday 9th December 2018, which I was proud to be part of alongside my friends from Milton Keynes.
The wide support for Gerard Batten was clear for all to see and hear. A tremendous way for him and his fellow UKIP top brass on the stage including Paul Oakley, Stuart Agnew, Neil Hamilton, Liz Phillips, and Alan Craig to round off what was a hugely busy and pivotal week for the Party.
The week had seen several old school prominent UKIP people resign their positions with the Party. Nobody likes to see people who have worked tirelessly for a cause to feel the need to step down, but I believe these people have misread the feeling on the streets of ordinary British people, as comprehensively represented on Sunday in Central London. The thousands upon thousands of people marching with the huge crowd are tired of the lies being told by the Westminster class, by the conniving shenanigans in The Palace of Westminster. Constantly comments were heard like “Traitor MP’s” “noses in the troughs” “they are ignoring us” “we want out” Brexit means exit” “UK out”. The trust in politicians these people have is very low indeed. They are fed up with the lib/lab/con dishonesty and ignorance of the will of The People. They are desperate for a credible political force to represent them and secure their instruction to leave the failed EU.
This crowd was assembled with just a couple of weeks’ notice. Nobody else has arranged a pro-Brexit Rally. But the combined appeal of Tommy Robinson, Gerard Batten, and UKIP concluded in a show of the defiant British spirit reacting to the present political reality.
Stuart Agnew UKIP MEP spoke and said to all his resigning fellow MEP’s “to hell with you”. His colours being nailed firmly to the support of Gerard.
I would say to people like Nigel Farage, Patrick O’Flynn, Peter Whittle, Catherine Blaiklock, Paul Nuttall, Suzanne Evans, et al. who have thrown their toys out of the pram this week over Gerard teaming up with Tommy Robinson in organising this Brexit Rally, you should have done what I did, walked with these people, spent a few hours with them, talk with total strangers who share the same concerns, feel the mood, read the often funny but staggering piercingly worded placards, this is where the votes are, this is where the future is, this is where the need is. I reckon quite probably a big number of the crowd are people who previously have not voted. Something like 35 % of the electorate does not vote, just imagine if these people can be persuaded to become voters because of this new honest type of politics on display with the rapidly evolving new UKIP!
As well as the wonderful placards and those in humorous mocking dress, I saw flags representing England, Scotland, Wales, Britain, France, Israel, For Britain and UKIP.
The honesty I describe came through in all the speeches. Gerard gave his typical no-nonsense, common-sense words delivered with passion. Tommy clearly mentioned the obvious fear that the Establishment have with him and this growing partnership with Gerard and UKIP. A veteran soldier, Simon, passionately spoke about the military unification happening now with EU nations. Paul Oakley spoke about the new UN Treaty to make legal illegal migration, yes you heard that right they want illegal immigration to no longer to be illegal, he mentioned a whole stream of nations who have already declined the UN’s most gracious suggestion, including Hungary, Poland, Israel and Italy but guess what, our very own Treason May feels it’s a wonderful idea! Carl Benjamin gave a few humorous quips on the EU, lightening the mood a little. Welsh Kipper Neil Hamilton spook about his 50 years of fighting off the EU / EEC since 1967. Northern Ireland’s Roland Hill spoke about the northern Irish perspective and their fear of being broken away from the rest of the UK and being subservient to the EU and closed his speech with a “we are not for sale” statement right out of the Ian Paisley school of oratory. Mike Shaw told of how his fishing industry has been kicked around since the very first Ted Heath days and how he longs for the 200-mile international waters limit to once again aid his fellow fisherman. An MP from the Czech Republic travelled all the way to London to speak and inform the appreciative crowd of how the European’s are looking to the British to yet again show them the way to go ( with leaving the EU ) Liz Phillips briefly spoke how we should cherish the time honoured “innocent until proved guilty” maxim, contrary to how the Europeans operate. Lord Pearson commented on how MP’s in Parliament are only interested in votes and how important it is for UKIP to capture these all-important votes and field as many candidates as possible up and down the country.
The event was finished off with the singing of Rule, Britannia and The National Anthem with enthusiastic participation from the crowd. And all compered most effectively by Mr. Alan Craig.
A jolly good event.
Will the Establishment be listening? You bet they will be.
Next event, outside Parliament on Tuesday, be there if you can.
I am relieved and glad that the Betrayal March passed off without the anticipated trouble. However the chances are that had Gerard Batten not linked up with TR, and instead forged a link with Leave means Leave and the Peoples Charter, Brexit List, The Freedom Movement etc etc, the said march might have been organised and supported by UKIP itself, and rather than the 3000 that turned up on Sunday, would in all probability attracted at least 200,000 plus marchers. The whole point to any political party is to gain representation at district,borough, and county council level and also within Parliament. To do this a political party has to appeal to a wide cross section of the electorate and we as a party are simply not doing this. Gerald Batten has done some good things by making us solvent once again and increasing the membership, however the way I see it, in addition to the majority of my branch membership, he most certainly did not have a mandate to drastically change the political direction of the party without prior consultation. His sole focus should have been on Brexit and holding our inept prime minister to account on a daily basis, rather than concentrating his efforts on peripheral and secondary issues. How many more does this have to be said.
Quite a few people here still don’t seem to ‘get it’ as far as communications is concerned. Frankly, I find it MORONIC to think that street rallies and marches are a way to communicate the insanity and dangers of the EU. The FLA/VATS marches throughout the year have been spectacularly pointless as A) the media have ignored them and B) those organisations have failed to project them themselves. Now UKIP is getting all excited abut the same daft theory. I’ll say it again with simpler numbers, if you get 1000 marchers to distribute 500 powerful newspapers each, that’s HALF A MILLION NEWSPAPERS. That’s 100% saturation of Newcastle and Brighton. Please, please stop for a moment and think about that. Standing in the street listening to speeches by the same people is obviously plain stupid. No wonder we’re getting laughed at as a political irrelevance, clutching at straws like Tommy Robinson and losing our best people. The next set of elections are going to be a disaster. ALSO the UKIP national website is an ugly, mostly text mess…and Wednesday morning, still not a WORD about Sunday’s rally.
Whilst I agree with much of what you say, I don’t think your analysis is starting from the right point. UKIP was dead, about to be bankrupt. All staff except a few part-timers doing the absolute necessary had to be let go. UKIPs enemies were internal and external. The art of war is to subdue your enemy without them realising. This is what had happened to UKIP. An act of defiance was required to show the enemy that we are still here and can resist. They have not won. By teaming with TR, GB has driven out many internal enemies who held UKIP back. There is now a platform to build upon. Drastic measures were required to break these gordian bonds. TR is the galactic pair of scissors.
Tacitus, not often that I am this blunt but THAT is a load of complete nonsense,
Gerard disagrees. It’s make your mind up time.
Tacitus, this was a fair distillation of what we (UKIP) said was important to us:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22396690
“What does UKIP stand for?
LAW AND ORDER
UKIP would double prison places and protect frontline policing to enforce zero tolerance of crime.”
It was a few years ago but repeated many times since.
How would you have me answer questions about our adherence to the above at a vigorous public hustings or radio/TV show, without encountering pre-greased giant banana skins?
As sure as eggs is eggs, the matter of those convicted of GBH against a wholly innocent vulnerable bystander, or to attempted armed kidnap, with alleged hard drugs connections, etc.?
Russell, as per usual you are the voice of reason. UKIP is an utter utter shambles. As a branch chairman I am seething with rage that all the man hours that a few of us put in to promote our party manning street stalls, administering elections, delivering the OUT NOW leaflet, can be all undone by a leader that has not concentrated on Brexit and decided to change the political direction without first consulting the membership at grass root level. The result of this total madness is that all the expertise has flowed out of the party for good. Quite a few branch chairman are now of the view that there is no way back, and that we are finished as an electoral force. The hope now is that finally the conservatives get into place a true Brexiteer as prime minister, force through a ‘No Deal’ under WTO rules which is what most of the 17.4 million wanted in the first place, and then we can set about dissolving the party at local branch level. The party which we have all fought for, for years no longer really exists, and has let us down massively at the last hurdle. I will manage this at local level and when Brexit is achieved I will be out of the door. Forget the European elections and the local elections, we do not stand a hope in hell.
Thanks Colin, things are certainly at a very low ebb, Gerard believes his own hype, including how he ‘saved’ the party – the MEMBERS saved the party, it was all those fabulously paid MEPs that got us into this mess in the first place, couldn’t run a whelk stall, never mind a street stall. A word to UKIP MEP’s – it’s your flipping JOB to fight for Brexit. You are PAID to do it and very well…but have done sod all. Now UKIP is split in all directions.
NEUTRAL QUESTION
Could someone help me understand the logic of
“Tommy Robinson good, Anne Marie Waters not so”
?
I saw an interview with GB where he said it was unforgivable that she had gone off to set up a rival party. In the mind of Gerard, 25 years in the same party despite all its ups and downs, loyalty is the most important thing, trumping even ideology.
Freddy, in hindsight, I think it would have been better to have got that ice making machine to stand as leader of the party. It couldn’t have done any worse!!!!
As per my comment on Sunday evening, I was compelled to buy a return train ticket and travel down from Birmingham on Sunday just because I care about Brexit and am passionate about it. And I felt like I had to “do something”. What would I have done otherwise at home on a Sunday? Watch videos and comment on articles online?
I have objections to Tommy Robinson joining UKIP, yes, although there are aspects of his own campaigning that I do agree with. This event, though jointly organised by Gerard Batten and Tommy Robinson, while not officially a UKIP event, was itself titled the “Brexit Betrayal”.
I put aside my feelings for a few hours, and marched for Brexit. That’s the point I want to make: so many people leaving UKIP or resigning their positions within the party, because ‘Tommy Robinson’. How many of them attended the march on Sunday?
I do not know the official figures, and to be honest we may never know, and I don’t really care. There were a great number of people who for whatever reason, took the time to travel into London and join this protest march and rally. I was there, and I know what I saw and heard with my own eyes and ears, despite what that obnoxious little c*ck Owen Jones says.
And for all my misgivings about Tommy Robinson, he stood there on that stage, addressing thousands of people, and urged them to join and support UKIP. Which is more than Nigel Farage has done for the party in the last two years. Whether this has translated into a flood of new membership applications that remains to be seen.
Did we achieve anything by marching on Sunday? Probably not, Brexit is still going to be betrayed, and we’re more likely than ever to not actually be leaving the EU next March.
My final comment is that while this rally appeared to be a UKIP recruitment drive in the end, it was good to see a number of For Britain members waving their flags and handing out leaflets. I have no problem with so-called ‘rival parties’ working together where there is a specific shared common goal, in this case Brexit. The Establishment is a giant monster, and smaller parties will need to join together and ally in order to smash it. Again, be prepared to put your own personal feelings and party politics aside when it comes to campaigning on common issues.
Tough love here. Brace yourself.
Jeff, I’m uninterested in preaching to the converted or the choir. They’re excluded from all numbers below.
For every person whose opinion was swayed in favour of Brexit by directly witnessing the march or rally, there would be hundreds of people whose knowledge of the event came from the MSM.
A neutral scan of the MSM suggests either the march didn’t occur at all, or if it did, mere “thousands” (suggesting 2,000-3,000) participated while the opposition numbered “15,000”, i.e. outnumbered 5:1. So therefore the majority of the UK public must now want to Remain in the EU.
It doesn’t matter that the reality was that Brexiteers outnumbered the opposition (if it had REALLY been the way the MSM presented it, they would have shown helicopter footage – but the uninitiated or naive won’t be able to work this out) – the MSM makes up the reality.
We must not play their numbers game. The only number that matters is the “17,410,741 plus me”.
I’ll leave it to others to go on about the smears.
Hello Freddy, I always enjoy your insights into debate, but in this instance I think you’re missing the point. The MSM are becoming increasingly irrelevant for many, particularly younger, people. The numbers using and being influenced by alternative media is quite staggering; the Sarkan video I linked to below has now been viewed 105,343 times. It has been liked 12000 times/ disliked 212 times! It’s a great way of getting our message out there, all on the back of Sunday’s event.
Whatever we do the MSM is against us ( even the Telegraph ignored the march) . Newer technologies are where it’s at now.
With all due respect, Tim, I believe you are missing Freddy’s point. And Freddy is both 100% correct and has hit the nail on the head. His summary says precisely all that needs to be said and shows exactly why the march was (always going to be) counter-productive, and why it could only ever have been counter-productive – the only question is, how counter-productive. The social media video may well have been watched 100,000 times, but it was largely only watched by those who are already converted, and, more importantly, MSM reporting was watched and read by millions, if not tens of millions, of voters. Yes, the MSM is losing credibility, but if you think it has no persuasive power left, you are very, very badly mistaken. Among the millions of people who watched the MSM reports, considerably more would have been swayed against us than the tiny number of undecideds who watched the social media and might have been persuaded to support us. On the other hand, both numbers are dwarfed by the number of people who have been utterly repelled by us because we associate with Tommy Robinson – a fact that both the social media and the MSM report and acknowledge. Engaging in activities which only have downsides as possible outcomes, and no conceivable upside, isn’t the way to succeed. It can make you feel emotionally all warm and fuzzy and good about yourself (as you fail to acknowledge or even realize that you have just shot yourself in the foot), which I suspect is why it was done – all good feeling rather than a rational thought out plan.
“a rational thought out plan” you mean, like the spending of £100k on the Stoke By- Election campaign, where humiliating defeat was grabbed from the jaws of victory.
Spot the skinheads and tattooed thugs. Will Nigel apologise for this gross slur ?
Hi Tim,
I did consider what you’ve raised before I pressed ‘Send’, but was rushing off to start a long journey to give me a chance to say something on Tuesday evening to Jacob Rees-Mogg (which he and a lot of Cons definitely didn’t want to hear), so was perhaps too cryptic.
You are right but… not yet.
Low-hanging fruit principle. The young, social media generations are *not* our low hanging fruit. Remember, the poor sods have had a decade of brainwashing by sorry lefty excuses for teachers – child abuse is how I view it.
Our low-hanging fruit are those who are more mature and have had time to process the nonsense their heads have been filled with in school and uni.
For those over 18, the likelihood of supporting LEAVE is directly proportional to “age minus 12”, and this proportionaliuty relationship subsists until the age of about 55-60 is reached.
For those averse to maths – that means in a graph of % supporting LEAVE against age, with the axes chosen the most obvious way, is a straight line. At 18 it’s as low as 15%. and rises uniformly to 70% by about 60.
REMAINERs will not vote or support UKIP until they are changed, which is hard work. Much better to aim for LEAVERs (who vote Conservative) or for the undecided.
And they overwhelmingly rely on the MSM. We don’t, ‘cos we know the likes of Al Beeb and Sky decide on what the “news” (sic) is going to be at the start of every day.
Q.E.D.
You will become right in time, though, but too late for us.
Freddy, did you attend the Brexit Betrayed march?
Is there a reason you would want one of UKIP’s very best attack debaters to swell the number in an already large crowd by 1?
Just asking. :–)
I’m sure the [insert suitable collective noun here; I was tempted by “flange”] of wavering Conservatives I took on instead would have far preferred it if I hadn’t turned up.
I don’t preach to choirs, Jeff.
… and I don’t preach to choirs, Hugo.
Freddy, it seems a curious thing that an apparently UKIP event, right in the middle of the London Region, would not be attended by the UKIP London Region Chairman. It would not just be by one though would it? By your enthusiasm and ability to enthuse others you could have brought a small crowd of London Kippers (who may have otherwise lain a-bed) and joined the happy band of brothers and sisters. “And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.”
My question required a simple “yes” or “no” reply. Are you turning into a Conservative, with their inability to answer a straightforward question with a straightforward answer?
May I attempt another question, in the hope of a straightforward answer? Question: Approximately what percentage of active UKIP members from the London Region attended the event?
What a silly and transparent attempt.
I *am* a libertarian conservative. And I’ve always been that. And will continue to be that.
I’ve never belonged to the Conservatives, and have no intention of doing so.
Their problem is, and with many individual exceptions, they haven’t been conservatives for over thirty years. And I see no signs whatsoever that they are becoming conservative (or libertarian).
Each successive Con leader (aside from IDS and Howard, who lasted only for short periods) for nearly 29 years has been less conservative than his or her predecessor. Major. Hague. Cameron. May.
Others – Hugo quit UKIP a long time ago, and his loyalty is with another party. To whom my activities are very undesirable.
So if you think I’m going to disclose strategy to those who field candidates against us in elections, think again.
A better question is – aren’t we far too indulgent on UKIPDaily, allowing it to be a megaphone for Islam-obsessed people who aren’t UKIP and, whatever their intention, will drag us to oblivion?
No other party is this self-destructive.
Try to get it, Hugo et al:
The
English
will
*NOT*
support
or
vote
for
a
party
or
individual
which/who
is
seen
to
be
*OBSESSIVE*
(fullstop)
If the Conservative party had truly been conservative – conserving that which was good, only being radical when it was logical to be so – there wouldn’t have been a UKIP in the first place. The rot goes back to that wretch Heath (elected leader around 1965).
He’d rather be a leader of dozens than a follower with thousands?
Big Fish, Little Pool Syndrom ?
Jeff,
Good to meet you there.
Some of those with me had never been to such an event. There was a concern that it could go wrong, however the reality is that it was a good, friendly crowd. Hopefully more will feel confident to come to the next such event.
The police did a good job too, and rightly were thanked.
I do not think we should be concerned about numbers. I know one or two who wanted to come but were not able to for their own reasons.
The reach of this event is far greater than purely the numbers there.
The so-called “anti-racist” lot largely had their faces covered. Why? What do they have to hide, if they are so virtuous?
As far as I could see, there was only one in our crowd with a face covering. I did ask him why, and it is because he was concerned about losing his job. Which is understandable given all the smears by the MSM.
Friendly crowd, felt good, we shouldn’t be too concerned about numbers?
Other than a very damaging exodus of members during the past week and giving the MSM the opportunity to deliver the message that more people turned up to march for Remain than for Leave (both of which were bad for us) and making a few marchers feel all warm and fuzzy inside for a few hours, what did the march achieve?
The march showed that we’re not going to let Theresa May ignore the Referendum, that Remain are not the only ones who can put on a protest, and that UKIP can put on a good show at short notice. And we have decency and non-violence on our side.
Tomaž in reality UKIP has been divided for a number of years. The actions of Gerard Batten this year have simply brought that division to the forefront.
I became aware of a deep divide in 2015, when I was a member. In that example it was due to the U-turn on the religious non-stun issue. Everyone who was a regular attender at our branch meetings (with one exception) was opposed to non stun I collated their messages into a document and emailed it to the NEC members. However, to no avail – Farage forced the party policy to be pro-Halal and pro-Kosher. For me this was a red line, and I did not renew my membership. However I remained on good terms with local members, and helped, alongside them, in the referendum campaign.
I had hoped that UKIP was going in a better direction, once Farage resigned as leader after the referendum. I helped with the Stoke campaign. Completely unaware of the pro-Islam leaflet which was delivered to the Muslim households. Have you any idea how damaging that leaflet was to morale within the branch, when the members found out about it?
On Sunday I did meet up with some of the UKIP branch members after the march. I asked what the general feeling was about Farage and others leaving. “Good riddance” was the response.
I really do hope that UKIP will get its ideas sorted out. The battle ahead against Islam will need a concerted effort. Personally, I do not care which party or parties sort out the mess as long as someone does. And it certainly will not be LibLabCon, because they are the ones who have got us into it, and they will do every deceitful trick to avoid admitting their grave mistake.
I do know that there are good people in UKIP. Can you appreciate them?
Hugo Jenks wrote:
>I had hoped that UKIP was going in a better direction, once Farage resigned as leader
That you saw Nigel standing down (on September 16, 2016) as a good thing shows how shot your judgement was and still is.
It was an unmitigated and wholly predicted (by me) disaster.
That I understand the “why” – the man was exhausted and depleted in every important way – doesn’t change this.
I know you helped in Stoke because you thought we were going to become an Islam-obsessed party.
But I was more effective at debating by the time I was 10 years old than poor Paul Nuttall ever was – or ever could be.
As to leadership abilities – ha-ha-ha. He’s a nice chap but utterly clueless.
That you should have considered him, at the relevant time, potentially an improvement over Nigel shows the results of your obsession on your judgement.
The preponderance of speakers from UKIP and the large banner with UKIP’s logo at either end that TR and Gerard held as they marched identified Sunday’s rally as a UKIP event. Indeed, the event’s Facebook page announced the rally as “hosted by UKIP”. This is despite Kirstan emailing members to say it was not a UKIP event. The contradiction is no surprise. Gerard disregarded the NEC when appointing TR and it would seem Gerard shares Nigel’s disdain for our elected NEC. (Actions speak louder than words and Gerard’s actions are not consistent with respecting the party being managed by an NEC).
There have been more than “several old school prominent UKIP people” resigning. Two NEC members have now gone and in the South West alone they have lost two MEPs, three County Chairmen, its Regional Organiser and Regional Treasurer, assorted PPCs, some Councillors and Branch officers and ordinary members, foot soldiers, leafleters and door knockers. This hollowing out of the party may hamper if not also entirely cripple its next election efforts.
I noticed that in the extensive comments to yesterday’s letter listing eight questions, that none of the TR supporters, so gratuitously and often insultingly dismissive of anyone who disagrees with them, offered a single answer to any of them and in particular question 6. Altering the identity and direction of the party then exposing ordinary kippers on street stalls to circumstances they did not volunteer for is profoundly disrespectful to them. The author of this article would be better occupied in answering those eight questions and explaining to the `old school’ members how to handle the challenge in question 6.
“Will the Establishment be listening? You bet they will be.” This is delusional. The only time the established listened was when Tory MPs felt insecure because of the defections of their party’s ordinary members to UKIP and because “crusty old Tories” were voting UKIP. The Establishment, if it listened at all on Sunday, will be encouraged by noticing that UKIP is no longer even a remote threat only able to muster a few thousand people.
Come the next GE voters will notice which party has a credible team and which does not. Who is left in UKIP’s `credible’ team?
In my opinion whichever way you look at this protest march [apart from the good behaviour] it was not a success. Only 5000 people out of 17.4 million brexiteers attended. It’s like UKIP’s recent increase in membership – 8000 new members but less support – currently 3% of the voting population. There is a clear message here which GB seems unable to grasp.
It’s tempting to conflate
JUSTIFIABLY FEELING GOOD about doing something
and
MAKING *NET* PROGRESS (there will always be plusses and minuses)
> 8000 new members but less support – currently 3% of the voting population.
Depends which opinion poll you look at. Since the 12 Nov poll you quote, ComRes put us at 7% and Opinium at 8% (most recent fieldwork).
Still miserable, since UKIP (including recent leavers / defectors) is the only party of any standing which UNDIVIDEDLY supports Brexit.
The poll which I have quoted was conducted by YouGov over the period 6-7 December 2018. I am hoping for a new party and/or fresh inspiration.
Ah, Yougov. It usually has UKIP at 2%-4%.
ComRes, Opinium, 6%-8% for the last few months.
YMMV.
I do not entirely agree – please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
for full set of results.
The Indent Bug precludes a threaded response to David.
Again, that I’m forever racing means I’m often too cryptic.
He who pays the pipers gets to choose the tune.
The Times, not our greatest adversary, currently specifies that UKIP appears as a possible choice on all polls carried out on its behalf.
When certain polling companies are left to their own devices, on many of the question papers (region-dependent), UKIP doesn’t even appear as a choice.
It is hard to tick the box marked UKIP if there is no box marked UKIP.
We are, however, meandering in this. It is agreed that 48 months ago we reached 3.5 times higher in the opinion polls than even our best current results.
Why, when we are the only party wholly united on Brexit (For Britain, DVP, Libertarians are too insignificant to count or be polled), this is the case should be food for thought.
This may seem beyond ridiculous but…..
assuming that the Robinson-UKIP rally WAS a bad idea: might there be a shady figure in the background quietly giving our leader bad advice, who subtly pushed him onto this course of action in the first place?
I think you yourself hinted once, that UKIP had one particularly subtle saboteur. Without names being mentioned of course, might we know how we can disable him in future?
> might there be a shady figure in the background quietly giving our leader bad advice
I really don’t think so. Gerard is doing and saying things in accordance with what he’s done and said for years.
> UKIP *had* one particularly subtle saboteur
Most certainly true.
That person has already quietly left the party.
As I do not underestimate that person, I assume a few have been left behind within the party to complete the job.
Edit- forgot to add the link to the video:
Here’s Sarkon of Akkad’s (one of the speakers) video summary of the event. He has 862,000 subscribers on Youtube, and the video has gathered over 10,000 likes since yesterday. As I write it has been viewed 78,409 times. That’s how in the modern era events like this are important; social media spreads and amplifies the message to an audience much,much larger than the actual attendance.
Is he standing as an election candidate?
@St Anthony
I don’t know for a fact, but Batten has repeatedly said that a proven and long-standing track record of loyalty to the party is his pre-condition for someone being a candidate.
Obviously Gerard is seeking to avoid the johnny-come-latelies of the past brought in by Farage who wreaked havoc in UKIP, so I very much doubt any of the new figures who are so diligently promoting our online reach will become candidates any time soon.
A basic law of physics is that every action causes a reaction: look at the other march’s slogans: many to do with race and thereby tainting Brexit as being right wing/fascist. Hitherto the race issue has mostly not featured in the Brexit debate, but is only now rearing its ugly head because of the recent involvement of Johnny Come Lately to the Brexit issue Toxic Tommy & other BNP skinhead lookalikes around him. Past accusations of racist, UKIP being the BNP in blazers etc., while canvassing were always easy to rebut by saying that unlike the three legacy parties UKIP didn’t allow past members of the BNP, EDL etc. to join us, and that the immigration issue was solely about space; not race – or religion. That defence has now gone.
If TR’s toxicity in mainstream politics was going to be out-weighted by his supporters joining UKIP in large numbers, wouldn’t that influx have already happened by now, in the immediate aftermath of him effectively being accepted as a UKIP member in all but name? Just 1% signing up would be 10,000.
It’s a bit rich to accuse Remoaner MP’s of failing to respect the democratic 2016 EU Referendum Leave result when the involvement of TR is replicating this by disrespecting the spirit of the rulings by the democratically elected NEC; talk about take the log out of your own eye before attempting to take eyelashes out of others’! The NEC are already UKIPpers and can be reasonably said to likely have a larger distrust of MSM propaganda than your average ordinary non-political activist voter. So, if NEC members weren’t convinced that having a vote among members, never mind effectively immediately welcoming TR on board as a member in all but name would help the Brexit/UKIP cause, how do you think his involvement is likely to be perceived by 17.4 Million ordinary decent Leave voters feeling betrayed by Conservative & Labour parties who promised to carry out Brexit but have shown their true colours by failing to do so?
Political history tells you that a party seen as divided, which sadly UKIP now inevitably is with the resignations of a string of high profile figures, never mind campaigning activists, hoovering up support from large numbers of Leave voters will be needlessly more challenging than had the TR issue been set aside as the NEC recommended.
David, please identify the slogans to do with ‘race’ that you saw. I didn’t see any. What are you referring to? Are you sure you aren’t referring to the Chelsea match ?
I assume you can read the slogans in the main photograph of https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1820490/Video-Anti-fascists-protest-against-far-right-Brexit-rally-London.html without the need for me to pick out the ones which apply. The heading also backs up what I’ve said about perception: Brexit has not previously been described as ‘Far Right’ because of course Leave had and continues to have many Labour supporters (I saw recently estimated as about a third).
While you’re at it, take a look at https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-6483267/Man-filmed-shouting-racial-slurs-tells-train-passengers–I-m-Tommy-Robinson.html Is TR’s shockingly foul language rebuttal in MSM what most of the 17.4 Million Leave voters would expect of a serious politician? Will it win them round? By his own words Toxic Tommy has yet again shown himself totally unsuitable for a party expecting people to take it seriously as a mainstream party: not just toxic, but politically clumsy hot-headed yobbery, playing the man rather than the ball. How many prominent UKIPpers, even just those at this rally, have used such language to MSM. How many of them are proud to be associated with it – as they now are?
You may not approve of MSM, but I suggest you need to know what most voters are being fed in order to effectively counter it. I trust you’ll anyway accept that photos/videos don’t lie and further suggest you look harder for the evidence yourself before implying criticism of others of failing to do so.
Oh, sorry I misread, you mean the OTHER march had slogans about race. You do realise that the other march was Socialist Worker, who make everything about race? And that them calling UKIP racist is absolutely routine? And has been for years? Where have you been David, you seem to have your head in the sand. You don’t think Farage was called racist for his poster of the long queue of brown people?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants
So having a march which gives the excuse for a counter one and a platform for more insults isn’t that bright then? Yes UKIP has all sorts of insults, but Brexit hasn’t and that’s the unwanted ‘progress’ as a result of Toxic Tommy’s involvement.
David, UKIP conference gives the fascist antifa an excuse when they parade outside and throw insults. I note that you are always at conference. It’s time that we stood up to these thugs financed by our old friend Soros and not cower away in a corner. At least Gerard ha,s via TR, organised something against the established order whilst Farage and the powers that be in UKIP did the square root of nothing.
Political history has proven that we never won enough votes, Carswell excepted, despite being the only choice to fully implement the wishes of 17.4 million voters.
Sometimes you have to blame the electorate.
The catastrophe of promoting Tommy Robinson as the face of UKIP will become painfully clear in 2019 as the initial fizz wears off and we take stock of who is left to run branches and be credible and experienced candidates.
The second catastrophe is the idea that rallies somehow magically ‘speak’ to the wider public with important messages; they don’t. It’s great to be with a big crowd of like minded people making a noise but as a campaigning activity in the internet age, they are useless.
Jeff, what are you talking about ‘the feeling on the streets’, this is a fantasy, you’re just talking to your mates, latest polling puts UKIP back down in low single figures.
What an insult to dismiss the people who don’t want to be associated with a party fixated on Tommy Robinson and street marching, people who have been the intellectual heart of UKIP, able to appear on TV and make reasoned arguments on a wide range of topics, so that people trust UKIP with their votes. Who is going to do that now? We’re back to being a one man band again, as Gerard tries to cover all topics because most of his spokesmen have walked away. What sort of party doesn’t have a credible Shadow Cabinet supportive of the Leader?
Just pointing to headline numbers of members is dangerously misleading. We might well be up to 26,500 members but we have no idea how many won’t be renewing, 10%, 20%, 30%? And multiplying this fake number by £30 does not give us a reliable number for our income, there’s a lot of creative accounting going on here, or bullsh*t to be blunt.
Other parties cosy up to celebrities in the arts, music, TV, film, business etc to enhance their message, to give their ideas wider credibility but who have we picked as poster boy? Tommy Robinson. Great. That shows class, style and ambition doesn’t it? I am NOT against what Tommy has been trying to do in highlighting appalling child abuse and cover ups but SURELY we can find more credible spokespeople who the public will listen to and not be turned off by? Why not Sharon Binks? She’s incredible and doesn’t have a criminal past.
For every person that Tommy might bring to the party, he’s probably turned off ten who give us a wide berth.
Three quick points on our appalling communications ‘strategy’ if it can be called a strategy. 1) If you run public protests, film them properly and get the key speeches online quickly. Right now, Tuesday morning, there is NO mention of Sunday’s protest on our national website and it didn’t even get a mention in the ‘Leader’s Update’ mailed out last night. 2) If you have a protest, for goodness sake give the marchers bold banners with compelling messages; just waving flags looks a bit silly. 3) If people are angry and want to march, give them a REAL job to do: if we had 5000 people at the rally and instead ORGANISED them into teams around the country, give each person 500 top UKIP newspapers to deliver – 5000 x 500 is 2.5 million newspapers, that’s doable, even a million would be stunning and it’s self financing.
THAT is intelligent campaigning. Not chanting in the street like a …..
Russell, re your penultimate paragraph, as the NEC had blocked this from being an official UKIP rally then none of the things you suggest were possible. Part of the problem here seems to be that UKIP is so poorly organised, and has been for so long, that Gerard had to basically subcontract this whole event out to TR as UKIP is unable to organise anything beyond a street stall. Oh, and even before TR became an issue, our street stalls were regularly attacked, e.g. the Bath event reported here a couple of months ago. Or the YI conference being shut down. Or the Lewisham by-election hustings being cancelled. All of these things were pre-TR. Where I live we have organised street stalls over the past 6 years but always ended in confrontation and police, and ‘doxing’ (posting of our personal details on Antifa websites for them to further attack us, hence my anonymity here). How many times was Nigel attacked, obviously he had a reason for full-time security (they guy I always mistook for Paul Nuttall!). I believe Gerard’s frame of mind is that he recognises we are in a battle, the time for armchair warriors is past, and TR is the acid test to identify those ready for the battle, and those who aren’t.
Tacitus, the hustings in Lewisham was shut down primarily because of For Britain being blocked, not because of UKIP being blocked. David Kurten was able to attend, and there was a delightful moment when a white woman accused UKIP of racism! She was escorted out.
Anne Marie Waters was unable to attend. If you watch a video of the protesters blocking her entry, you will hear an incessant chant including the phrase “For Britain go away”. If there was any mention of UKIP in these chantings I think I missed it.
Indeed you missed it. This is a bizarre game of one-upmanship. Watch this video and within 1 minute they are shouting ‘UKIP scum’. But of course, none of this happened until GB started cosying up to TR!!!
https://independencedaily.co.uk/scandal-at-the-last-hustings-lewisham-by-election/
Hello Russell,
We remember you mentioning that you had security in your advan on your last excursion.
That was before TR.
@Russell Hicks
I’m sorry but you’re quite wrong and I’m increasingly coming to the conclusion that Batten is absolutely right.
I shan’t tick off your points one by one, such as lambasting the party’s communications’ strategy for posting videos of the rally too late when they were all streamed LIVE (!), but will rather go to the heart of the matter.
Yes, many important people have left UKIP and many more will regrettably do so. It breaks my heart that so many individuals self-evidently have more disdain for Tommy Robinson than they do the traitors in Westminster selling them out or an ideology that wants to blow them up and rape their children.
It is what it is.
Nevertheless, and there’s just no way past this, by bold and adventurous action Gerard’s priority has to be swelling party membership. End of. With the loss of virtually all paid staff next March practically guaranteed — unless there is an upending of democracy to secure a Remain, and more Eurovotes, which would entirely justify a more radical turn anyway in my opinion — frantically growing membership has to be the foremost concern in the UKIP leader’s mind.
Anything less would be a derieliction. Fighting elections, let alone a General Election, takes millions, indeed multiple millions. We were able to get away with being financially sub par with the eurolargesse gifted by the advantage of the d’Hondt formula every four years. No longer.
Even with recent growth no one is going to donate a million quid to a party of 26,000. Tell me I’m wrong. People can tut, and suck their teeth and be indignant, for entirely righteous and sound reasons, but this reality is just inescapable.
I hope Batten continues to keep his eye on the numbers rather than the grumblers. There may be desertions, some even rooted in ethical motives, but without the ability to supply them with financial ammunition when the electoral time came such people would have been little use anyway.
“… that rallies somehow magically ‘speak’ to the wider public with important messages; they don’t.” Russel they can and do if they’re recorded and posted on the internet. Not sure if this was done in this case. I could only find some of the speeches. If that’s the case this needs to be fixed for next time. Rallies were what got Trump elected. Of course ours have to be held in the street and not in giant stadiums. We don’t have his financial resources.
“A jolly good event”?
What exactly has it achieved?
True, a total catastrophe that would have been caused had violence erupted, and the total meltdown of UKIP that would have followed, has been avoided – for now. The media reported that the Remain side had more protesters than the Leave side (it doesn’t matter if it’s true or not, this is the only information that millions of people across the country will have to go by), which is mildly negative for us. There was never any possible upside to this event.
The author also ignores the white elephant in the room, which is the massive damage that was caused to UKIP over the last week in the form of mass resignations by Gerard being involved in this event, and consorting with Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, at all.
A rose tinted spectacled view of reality, favourable to “Tommy” and the For Britain agenda within UKIP.
I notice that the author writes a lot for UKIP Daily, but his credentials – which would allow the readers to better understand his agenda – are never disclosed.
Jeff Wyatt was Anne Marie Waters’ number 2, the Deputy Leader of For Britain, a party with whose world view he seems to be perfectly aligned. He quit that in order to re-join UKIP – with whose world view he seems to be at odds – as an ordinary member with no position at all, where he started off swimming against the tide. I wonder why?
As far as I can see, he seems to spend a lot of effort agitating for UKIP to move in For Britain’s direction and attract a For Britain sort of member.
Tomaz, what’s a For Britain sort of member?
I joined UKIP at the end of 2014. Previously never being politically active. In fact I consciously refused to vote from 1997. I immediately got behind assisting my two local PPC’s in Milton Keynes, Vince Peddle and David Reilly in their 2015 GE campaigns. Both achieved a vote share well into the teens.
I was actively involved in a cross party Leave group for the Referendum whose leader was another ex UKIP local PPC. We did our bit in securing a narrow 4,000 Leave majority in Milton Keynes.
Following David Reilly joining the Army I stood as MK North PPC for UKIP in the 2017 GE. Reacting to the political reality at the time Vince and I agreed to effectively stand as paper candidates only. We both achieved a vote share better than the national UKIP average.
I openly supported Anne Marie in her leadership bid in 2017.
I resigned from UKIP as a result of Mr Bolton’s election but more importantly because of his and Mr Farages crass comments about Anne Marie and in particular the 2754 members that voted for her. I could stomach the weak, Establishment leaning direction the Party was going in no longer.
I joined For Britain.
Anne Marie invited me to join her national committee and then to be her Deputy.
I resigned following my fundamental disagreement with her proposed wording on Immigration in the Party’s first manifesto. Since my resignation I note the wording on this has been softened to a degree. To this day I largely support her words on Islam and the EU.
I re-joined Ukip very shortly after, following encouragement from many and as a result of the work that Gerard has done and the trajectory the Party is now on being totally different to when I left.
I have been asked locally if I would be prepared to stand as a PPC again. Whilst Gerard is Leader I see no reason not to do so.
In his own video from the march, Robinson asked a Guardian journalist: ‘To understand what these people are opposing, have you read the Koran?’ as he indicated the crowd walking by. He went on to ask what the journalist knew of jihad, and if he’d read Mohammed’s biography. He didn’t once mention UKIP or Brexit although he name-checked ‘the Guardian’ several times. I assume the video was intended for consumption, not in the UK, but in the USA where Rebel Media, his sponsor/employer is based. His audience in the US would assume the rally was in support of TR and his opposition to Islam: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i32rws1sYs0 .
Marie,
You’ve posted a video from a rally that was held over eighteen months ago, that had nothing to do with UKIP or Brexit.
And, by the way, Rebel Media is based in Canada, not the USA, and Robinson is no longer employed by Rebel Media.
Here’s something to think about. There was a girl, a bad girl. She came from a broken home and lived in a bad area. She was drinking and smoking weed by the time she was 14. She used to hang out with older men for sex. She was a slag, white trash. Nobody believed a word she said, she would say anything to cover up her drug habit. She had her baby at 16 to get a council house. Even after having the baby she was still a slag, and got visits from lots of different men. She was locked up a few times for domestic disputes, she lost a few teeth, and she assaulted police officers. The baby had to be taken away from her before she killed it. She started spreading rumours about men she was sleeping with, powerful men including councillors. Nobody believed what she said though because she was a chav and a slag. In fact, everyone hoped she would just go away and keep out of their face. Just seeing her around made them feel angry.
This is the profile of a typical grooming gang victim. The police, the councils, they all said the same, that they were consenting, that they could not be believed, that it was their fault.
Is this really any different to TR? He’s a thug. He’s a criminal. He can’t be believed. We wish he’d just go away. But just like the victims, there is a big wall of denial to break down, but once it breaks down, it can collapse very quickly. And everyone will wonder how they deluded themselves about the truth of what this man was saying all along. Just as the victims are now believed whereas before nobody believed them.
The sad fact is, Gerard is bringing UKIP and Brexit down by associating the Party with Robinson’s reputation and his criminal history.
I’m sure Robinson is right about some things, and I’m sure he is wrong about some other things. He is also undoubtedly a criminal, as are many of his closest confidantes. I’m sure there is some element of the political in some of his convictions, but most of his convictions are just for genuine and serious crimes he was dumb enough to commit and we’ve all seen videos of him punching various people up. Videos do not lie. His excuses that he’s merely a victim of political prosecution are not credible.
He’s never been interested in Brexit. He has forever been obsessed with Islam – an issue which has nothing to do with Brexit, which is UKIP’s raison d’etre.
Why is he in any way relevant?
And why does it make sense to bring down and destroy the only fighting force capable of defending Brexit, because something some somewhat unsavoury individual has at some point said about something totally unrelated which might perhaps be true?
There wouldn’t be any point in deliberately posting an out of date and irrelevant video and it was an honest mistake for which I apologise.
Marie, this is a clip from April last year. It has nothing to do with Sunday’s Brexit betrayal march. Are you deliberately trying to mislead readers?
I have to apologise Rachel. There wouldn’t be any point in deliberately posting an out of date and irrelevant video and it was an honest mistake.
Marie,
This video of the march just posted by Avi Yemini. I was there on Sunday and there were no problems at all. If you don’t like the look of British people then what can I say. We Brits don’t all look like Kate Middleton or Jude Law.
https://youtu.be/mToQ_ShsvdM
Sean, I mistakenly posted an old video which was irrelevant to the march yesterday. My apologies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i32rws1sYs0
Note when it was published – 4 Apr 2017 <<—–
I do hope TR learns and is learning. Middle England just won't vote for people who seem obsessive or single-issue, and many won't even listen.
I too have been accused of being obsessive, but about dozens of different things, by different people. :–)
Freddy, I apologise to you as I have to others for posting a link to an out of date video. I have apologised privately to the duty editor for my error.
So what’s you recipe for increasing membership by 8,000?
How would you prevent the party from becoming a moribund irrelevance in a few short months’ time?
Snipping from the sidelines is easy, providing constructive alternatives somewhat harder.
We’re all ears, any suggestions? (and no, saying, “not what we’re doing now,” doesn’t count)
Thanks for the lecture about providing constructive alternatives. I’ve been in the party for 12 years and my track record is well known. Who are you and what have you ever done?
Here’s a an idea on how to increase our membership: let’s mailshot every jailbird currently imprisoned in every prison in the UK (and if we run out of recruits, abroad) and offer them free membership whenever they are incarcerated. All prospective new members should be given an intelligence test: can they chant “Tommmeee-Tommeeee-Tommeee-Roooobinson” in just the right football hooligan mix of singing and shouty voice. Otherwise, they shouldn’t be too bright, or they won’t fit in with the sort of member or voter we now want to attract. New members should be required to keep their criminal record current, making sure they punch somebody up from time to time, preferably putting them in a coma and causing them permanent brain damage, make sure they get caught and imprisoned, and make sure they video record themselves and upload the action to YouTube.
—-
We are a political party. Political parties need voters and votes. The number of members is irrelevant. The job of the members is first and foremost to be aligned with the Party’s values (as expressed in Article 2.5 of our Party Constitution), to be respectable and not bring the Party into disrepute, to have a track record of loyalty to the party, to stand as (credible) candidates and to be capable of doing things competently for the party and have a track record of doing them. A good member (or losing one) is worth a lot more than 10 waste of space or embarrassing members (or gaining such).
UKIP is already irrelevant. To the extent that our relevance survived James, Nuttall, Bolton and Crowther as Leaders, it was buried completely by our association with Tommy Robinson and a group of anti-Islam ranting criminals and thugs and the consequent mass exodus of long standing members who are not criminals and don’t want to associate with the criminal class.
The way to try to stop being irrelevant – the ONLY way of having any hope of stopping us being irrelevant – is to cut our ties with the anti-Islam chanting and ranting criminal class immediately.
Thanks Jeff, that’s an excellent summary that echoes my own experience of the day. I would also add that Tommy Robinson spoke warmly of Nigel Farage and his long quest for the Brexit referendum.
The police did an excellent job, and were thanked from the stage. Numbers-wise I estimate around 5000 at least. From the video I’ve seen of the opposition rally, they were far fewer in number, and contained many aggressive and troublesome elements. The only violence and arrests came from them.
Many of the speakers emphasised joining UKIP if you hadn’t already, and I expect membership numbers will receive a boost on the back of this.
All in all, a great event, that I’m pleased to have attended.