The news that UKIP-supporting foster parents were stripped of three children by Rotherham Council due to “cultural reasons” is truly shocking. Yet I am not entirely surprised.

The entire multiculturalism agenda spouted by New Labour over many years when they ran the country essentially sought to divide citizens and shut down any opposition to mass migration. Patriotism was now extreme and unlimited migration levels from Eastern Europe were unquestionably positive.

What we have now is a situation where children who need love and care are being treated not as human beings but as a group. Your background or skin colour should never come into who you are, unfortunately this has been championed over many years as being what defines us. I believe people define themselves. I believe we are all individuals, not parts of a statistical bloc.

This ruling by the Council is a symptom of how dangerously wrong the whole divisive, politically correct agenda has got it. Human beings are now hurting emotionally, kids are being denied the care they deserve. Britain stands divided and damaged thanks to Labour. I would suggest that on subjects such as immigration, they are the extremists – not UKIP.

The shockingly low turnout for the Police & Commissioner elections should worry everyone. If people don’t vote, democracy becomes increasingly unrepresentative and so do the decisions that are therefore made. That means the system will eventually break down.

As a great advocate for democracy, it is nonetheless easy to see why voter apathy and indeed antipathy are becoming so widespread in the UK.

Rather than simply moan about it however, I have four points that I believe if implemented, would greatly boost turnout in all elections and strengthen our democratic process come election time.

1) Political Television/Radio Ads: America’s political system thrives on political ads. It takes the message to people directly, both on a national, mass audience scale but also on a more localised radio level. It is incredibly lazy and naive to expect voters to constantly go to the politics – politics must be brought direct to the people. That means presenting arguments and messages on television and radio. It creates talking points on a medium that people can relate to, coupled of course with these videos being uploaded to YouTube to be passed around virally afterwards. A no brainer.

2) Internet Voting: The internet has become a place that people function and live. Where they host their photos, plan events, talk to friends and family. It must too become a place where people can vast their votes, from the comfort of their own homes. Of course there are huge security implications – but if people are typing in their credit card details all day long as they internet shop and sending private emails to loved ones, surely it can also be a place where people can participate in democracy? Imagine the buzz on Facebook of people prompting one another to vote on election day, there and then. An exciting prospect that would engage younger and first time voters particularly.

3) Hold Elections on Weekends: As a bit of a politico myself, I understand the argument that going to a polling station on election day is hardly a massive sacrifice. But people work, have kids to run around after and can be ridiculously busy and stressed on week days. Simply putting polling day on a Saturday would allow people on most of their days off to take the 10 or 15 minutes required to go vote when they are likely to be having a less hectic schedule. I don’t understand why this isn’t done now.

4) Proportional Representation: And no, I don’t mean the doomed Alternative Vote. 920,000 citizens voted UKIP at the last election. Yet they have 0 representation in the House of Commons. How can that be right? The safe seat/marginal seat situation cannot go on. It effectively places greater or less value on each voter based on their geographic proximity. This is wrong. Whilst a local link is good to have, there is no reason that a system that also has a proportional top-up element cannot be brought in,  such as AV+. We cannot expect voters to be motivated to go out and vote if hundreds of thousands of them are doing so and are receiving absolutely no elected representation in return.

If all three of these steps were taken, I believe turnout would increase greatly. Politicians should not simply stand by as turnout plummets. It is a threat to the legitimacy of our political system.

UKIP’s superb 14% of the vote in the Corby by-election despite not standing in the seat in 2010 is clearly a statement of intent.

Whilst the LibDems plummeted and lost their deposit as they enter the beginning of the end of their traitorous verge into government, it is the Conservatives’ devastating defeat that really catches the eye. If Corby was repeated in 2015, there is no foreseeable way that David Cameron could possibly be returned as Prime Minister.

Commentators in the Conservative Party talk of UKIP “splitting the right-wing vote”. But this gross oversimplification completely and utterly misses the point.

I along with the increasing numbers of UKIP supporters up and down the country to not define ourselves by our rosette but by our beliefs. Returning a Conservative PM in 2010 has led to a nigh-on continuation of the pathetic New Labour era. Foreign aid is dished out whilst our people suffer. Loyalty to the EU’s increasing tentacles of power and bloated budget remain. A furious opposition to selective education is the norm amongst the political class whether Labour or Tory. And Abu Qatada remains in our country with whinging Conservative Ministers replacing an impotent Labour government. It simply isn’t good enough for increasing numbers of Brits, particularly in England.

I am convinced that David Cameron’s Conservatives cannot win another General Election as UKIP rises in popularity, willing to act on uncontrolled migration, fund our armed forces properly and crack down on crime. And I don’t care about that. The UKIP surge is about giving people a fresh choice in British politics. If the Conservatives don’t want to split the UKIP vote, maybe they should take a good long hard look at themselves first. I am confident that in time, the Conservative Party will realise that Cameroonism is nothing but a vacuous electoral liability

So the Tories have suspended Nadine Dorries for going to Australia for ITV’s “I’m a Celebrity, Get me out of Here”, a program with a huge national audience. This could be a big mistake.

I personally like Dorries’ style. She isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, but bland hand-wringing sycophants don’t really do anything for me. She says what she thinks. Her calling out of Cameron and Osborne as “two arrogant posh boys” was something a lot of the public agree with, for instance. And it took balls.

Sure, she is taking a huge risk and could come across badly on the show. But she could also come across as a different type of bullish, no BS politician.

Regardless, she’ll become one of the best known politicians in the country and certainly one of the most well known sitting female MPs.

If she joins UKIP upon her return it could have a potentially lasting, damaging effect to the Tories who have overplayed their hand. Cameron’s personal vendetta against Nadine Dorries could end up handing UKIP a high profile, well-liked MP. More could follow.

Is anyone really surprised that Dennis MacShane has been done for wrongfully claiming over £7,000? He fits the mould.

Firstly he was a manic Euro-loving Minister for the EU under the destructive Labour government. Frightful enough.

Secondly, he seemed to have a mad obsession with UKIP that bordered on the psychotic. I am told at a recent University debate in Sheffield he turned even the pro-EU students against him with outrageous smears that attempted to purport Eurosceptics as being far-right extremists. He wishes, seeing as his argument in favour of nation state destruction in favour of centralised Brussels bureaucracy holds so little water in 2012.

Surely though MacShane’s big giveaway was when he tried to ridiculously sell the line (in collusion with The Guardian) that Nigel Farage had somehow falsely claimed expenses when Farage simply explained how much money MEPs receive in terms of staffing and office allowances in order to do the job.

Now as Farage and UKIP rise, MacShane has been found out to be a completely dodgy operator. I can’t think of a man who embodies the rabid nature of pro-EU nationalism better in 21st century Britain than Dennis MacShane. I certainly won’t miss him.

Over the past week or so I’ve noticed a constant trend on Twitter. More people than ever before are questioning why exactly the BBC should be entitled to £145 of their cash each year.

It is not hard to see why. The Jimmy Savile case has shocked people and exposed critical failings at the heart of the BBC as an institution. The fact that it took a private company in ITV to have the guts to expose the saga goes against the mantra that public sector broadcasting serves the public better than a for-profit company.

I believe the BBC license fee’s time has been coming for a long time. I remember appalling a left-wing lecturer during my first year of University when I argued that with the rise of the internet and satellite TV that affords the viewer 1,000 or so subscription channels, the license fee was doomed. Unsurprisingly for me at least, the majority of young people in the seminar agreed with me.

People bash Murdoch and his market share but the BBC’s influence, particularly on the political narrative of Britain, is scary. A democracy requires a plurality of opinions and sadly in Britain we only have two news channels: the BBC or Sky. It is a situation that must change by curbing the BBC’s virtual monopoly fuelled by its gargantuan budget.

It is viable now to get your news on the internet, your entertainment on YouTube and your music on your iPod. Why should the BBC have the right to money from everyone who owns a TV?

Funnily enough I’ve seen the Beeb make money from the changing times. It has launched several paid-for apps such as a Doctor Who game – surely such revenue raising measures should be put into subsidising the license fee and bringing the charge down?

Times are changing. The license fee belongs to another era. I believe it will soon be consigned to the dustbin of history.

Oh and in case you were wondering, I would pay for the BBC. I’m far too fond of Match of the Day and Eastenders.

The usually sound Peter Oborne seems to miss the point over at The Telegraph today, arguing that right-wing Aussie Lynton Crosby’s appointment as Cameron’s new chief strategist would go against everything the Cameron project has been about.

I agree – but that’s the whole point. Cameron’s vacuous ‘centre-ground’ project has been an abject failure.

In opposition it failed to beat the least popular Prime Minister since records began.

In government it lurches from crisis to crisis, fuelled by incompetent Ministers and a lack of joined-up thinking for where the country is to be led.

Take the EU, where Cameron talks tough but backs EU Embassies and submits to an increase in the budget. Or immigration, where the government talks of bringing numbers down whilst supporting open borders with Eastern Europe. Or the economy, where national debt increases at a rapid pace whilst foreign aid is handed out abroad.

Lynton Crosby’s focus on immigration and crime is right. The reason it failed in 2005 isn’t because it wasn’t on the money but because Michael Howard didn’t come across as a Prime Minister.

It shocks me how rated David Cameron still is. His comparison as the Tony Blair of the Conservative Party is exceedingly generous. Blair won three terms – Cameron’s squeezed into a devastatingly poor Coalition. I expect it to be his one term in Number 10.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,933 other followers

%d bloggers like this: