Election 2010: if in doubt, ask
Wednesday, April 7, 2010 The extent of Labour's problem has been evident on this blog for some time as former supporters have lined up to declare that, thanks to the smoking ban, they will never vote for the party again. This mirrors much of the correspondence that Forest has received since 2006.
Last night I received an email from a long-term Labour voter and activist (and smoker) who wrote:
Clearly I’m so over Labour. My MP is Nadine [Dorries]. Do you expect me to vote for her? Of course I’d rather have Dave than Gord, but vote for Nadine? Or do I assume she’s a shoe-in anyway and vote for UKIP as my pro-smoking protest vote? (I’m not going to vote BNP naturellement). I need your guidance.
At risk of upsetting some readers, I replied as follows:
Hmmm, I see your problem. Personally, I couldn't bring myself to vote UKIP not because I don't sympathise with many of their policies but because most of the UKIP activists I have met are weird and I'm not sure that a vote for UKIP would be seen as a protest against the smoking ban because I would be surprised if many UKIP candidates mention it in their election literature.
Given that you don't have to make an immediate decision I would send a short email to Nadine and explain your predicament as a long-term but ex-Labour voter. Nadine voted for the smoking ban (she's an ex-nurse) but you could ask her whether she would support an amendment to the ban plus her reaction to extending the ban to outdoor areas (parks, cars, the home etc) and the tobacco display ban. If she responds it would give you a bit more to go on.
The more I think about it the more I think it would be a good idea if you all sent an email to the candidate (or candidates) who is most likely to become your new MP. Odds are it will be the old MP, unless you live in a marginal constituency or the previous MP has stepped down.
If you write to them as a constituent you are more likely to get a response and it won't look like an organised campaign. Explain that you haven't decided who to vote for and could they indicate their position with regard to (a) an amendment to the smoking ban that would allow some choice for smokers as well as helping those community pubs that have suffered from a loss of business, and (b) what is their attitude to further tobacco control measures such as the tobacco display ban, smoking in cars and public parks etc.
If you get a reply I would be very interested to read their response.
Reader Comments (24)
At any rate, Betfair are currently offering odds of around 1.6 on an overall Conservative majority (ie a 60% profit).
Probably the ONLY way I'll be 'backing' Cameron.......
As it happens, I wrote to my prospective MP (Conservative) some weeks ago. I have not yet had a reply, although I asked for advice. This is odd since he needs only a 4% swing to oust the Labour incumbant. I trust that no one will mind if I reproduce the letter that I wrote to him. I may be useful:
"I hope that you do not mind me writing to you, and that you have time to read my letter. I am writing to you because you are the Conservative PPC for my constituency of Bolton West. I will condense what I have to say as much as possible, but, of course, by condensing in this way, much intellectual vigour will be lost. I trust that you will understand that.
The thing is that I am (and have been for some time) in the blackest of moods. Essentially, I fear for the future of our nation.
I must very briefly say who I am. I am a 70 year old retired bank officer. I live with my wife, a daughter and a grandson, all of whom are voters.
I am in the blackest of moods because everything I hear and everything I read paints a picture of utter doom. Every day, in the newspapers, there are reports of appalling disasters all over the world. These events, such as the earthquake in Haiti, will happen from time to time and we can help as best we can.
Those are not the reports that I am concerned about. What I am concerned about is the nonsense which is being promulgated again and again, not so much by the media, but by the Government. I will give two, very simple examples.
Let us take the ‘five portions of fruit or vegetables per day’. Now, I just happen to know that, because we are carnivores, all the essential ingredients that our bodies need, can be obtained from meat, water and sunshine. So, who decided and promulgated this totally unscientific statement that we need fruit and veg?
Also, who decided that five is the number, regardless of size of portions? A simple thing, but unscientific and nonsensical. The second thing is the ‘2 (or 3) units of alcohol per day’. This statement seems to have become a sort of gospel, and yet there is no justification for these numbers whatsoever. It has taken me a long time to find out where this statement came from, but it seems to have been something dreamed up by the chief medical officer of the day some years ago. I have still not been able to find chapter and verse.
A much more serious example has been the hyping up of Global Warming (I refuse to use the phrase ‘climate change’ for obvious reasons). As a result of the hype, we, as a nation, have committed to the building of 10s of thousands of big windmills, which will be useless most of the time. Now, as a result of Climategate, we have become aware just how suspect the hype is and how hysterical the reaction.
Another example is the hype about ‘binge drinking’. Anyone old enough knows that, for one reason or another, there have always been incidents of punch-ups and squabbles inside and outside dance halls and pubs. Always have been – that is why these places employ bouncers. In today’s news, there are suggestions that swingeing increases are to be introduced in the coming budget in the duty on spirits, to the financial disadvantage of those of use who would never dream of indulging in fisticuffs and who simply enjoy a glass of malt at our leisure. It should be noted that the incident of young people drinking has been falling steadily for years.
And then there is the issue of obesity. Again we see an artificially constructed ‘standard’ (body mass index and weights based thereon) which has become quasi-religious. We saw recently pictures of a perfectly healthy looking young girl who had been described in a letter from her school as being overweight.
Now we see a decent citizen sentenced to six months in prison for having the effrontery to refuse to accept that he should become an unpaid policeman, enforcing the smoking ban. (Be in no doubt that that is the reason for the severity of the sentence and not that he had not paid the fine).
As we read our newspapers and watch the news on the TV and see what is going on around us, we notice that there is a common thread among all these issues and that is THE SINGLE ISSUE GROUP.
In macro terms, we have the IPCC (no doubt funded by our taxes). Is this not a glorified special interest group? What does the IPCC care about the economies of advanced industrialised nations? At a lower level, we have the likes of ASH, CRUK and BHF mashing up the science, lying (the end justifies the means) and blatantly acting as propagandists for the government – all funded by taxpayers. If the new government after the election want to save billions in order to ‘mend our broken economy’, it could do so relatively painlessly by abolishing as many of these quangos as possible and refusing to fund charities which are not proper charities and ‘research’ which is not proper research.
One last thing. There is another common thread which is, perhaps, more harmful than the above and that is THE EROSION OF OUR FREEDOM AND OUR LIBERTIES. We are beset on all sides by instructions on how to live our lives, how to bring up our children. Do not drink this, do not eat that, do not put on a bit of weight, do not enjoy tobacco – not in front of the children, not in your personally owned workplace, not in your own property. Do not allow others to enjoy anything proscribed in your own place, even if they want to and you want to. Private places are now public places. I could go on, but I am sure that you know what I mean. DC wants to mend our broken society. He could do worse than give us the hope that we can claw back some of the freedoms that we as individual people have the right to enjoy.
There are four voters in our household. We will almost certainly all vote together in the same way (what is the use of two of us voting one way and the other two voting in an opposing manner? We would just cancel each other out). For myself, I have been a lifelong socialist supporter, but this last five years of a bunch of fanatics penalising and demonising everyone who does not comply with their ideas has terminated my support – especially the barefaced about-turn on the manifesto pledge not to introduce a total smoking ban.
The problem is that we are not sure which way to vote. Many people say that the Conservatives are just the same as Labour, and that the best option is to vote UKIP or even BNP.
I trust that you will let me know what you think about the above issues in order to help us make up our minds".
Excellent post, great letter to the candidate.
I do hope you get a reply.
Crikey Simon, "most of the UKIP activists I have met are weird?"
I can't wait to see the replies you get to that statement, should be great fun.....
."most of the UKIP activists I have met are weird"
Tell us, Simon, do you find Nigel Farage, UKIP's former Leader and our main spokesperson on TV and throughout the media, to be "wierd". He has been courteous enough to support FOREST in all your major events. You must have had many a pint with him.
He is also Leader of the 2nd largest British representation in the EU Parliament. These anti-EU MEPs were democratically voted for by the British public. Are all the UKIP supporters who voted for them also "wierd"?
UKIP have 3 highly dedicated and intelligent peers in the House of Lords. Do you find our present democratically elected Leader, Lord Pearson of Rannoch, also to be "wierd?".
My goodness, you are a difficult man to please..
"because most of the UKIP activists I have met are weird." Thanks Simon. I am a former Lab supporter and activist and now work for UKIP. I am standing as a candidate. The party has enough to stand across the country. It can win if it gets voter support. It has grown massively from the bottom up since the smoking ban and now has people who are not nuts from a very broad church of political views who were once members of the nutty Lib/Lab/Con alliance. That's not to say that there are no weirdos still in UKIP - but then there are in every party - just look at Gordon Brown and mandleson and Nadine Dorries who spouts that she supports the ban because her clothes don't stink when she goes to the pub anymore - defo weird in my view.
Certainly my campiaging literature does mention the smoking ban. UKIP mentions its policy on choice because it is getting the party more support. Why not check it's manifesto before throwing ill-informed insults!
The only weridos in my view are those who will continue to vote lab or Con or even Lib Dem when they know they will be voting for the eradication of smokers.
Yes, I think your ill-thought out insult to people like myself who have tried to work hard on this issue and support Forest is frankly either misguided or plain ignorant! We have gone to UKIP because we feel that a political fight is the only way to get some choice back. Forest let us down before the ban by doing nothing to stop it. Forest cannot get it amended now. Forest is even being frozen out by the very masters it is calling on people to support!
Hint taken! I guess my support is not welcome as a Ukip "nutter".
Pat, Forest did everything we could to fight the ban. In May 2004 we launched a £400k campaign to "Fight The Ban: Fight For Choice". It included a series of national and local opinion polls; advertisements in national and local newspapers and magazines; and constant lobbying of MPs and peers, so I don't think you can say we did "nothing" to stop it. We weren't successful, but I don't think you can blame us for that!
Anyway, we are where we are (this thread is about the election so let's look forward not back) and the only chance of amending the ban (or preventing further restrictions) is to work with those in parliament and in power. As things stand the Conservatives offer the best (albeit slim) hope and a vote for UKIP would, in my view, endanger some prospective Tory victories in marginal seats. How will that help us?
That is why I suggest that you write to the leading candidate (especially in a marginal constituency) and explain, politely, that their response will influence the way that you vote.
BTW, I am sure that, in Opposition, a greater number of Labour MPs will support a less restrictive attitude to smoking in public.
Can someone tell me how I can find out the names and email addresses of my constituency candidates. I have a new Tory candidate in my Honiton Devon constituency. I did a bit of searching to find out more but didn't get very far. Although I must say that a case of terminal boredom about this election hasn't helped. If my Conservative candidate is pro-smoking, I might vote for him. Otherwise I'm most likely to vote UKIP, even if the candidate may be a bit weird.
Don't disparage UKIP unless you know that the former leader Nigel Farage is a smoker and has led a campaign to save the English pub suffering from the non smoking ban and greedy pub chains. Nigel was encouraged to visit one of the few smoking pubs left in Luxembourg City on his journeys as MEP between Brussels and Strasborg. Visit the George in the Grund down town City
I've really enjoyed this thread. All these ex-socialists who no longer support Labour because of their attacks on civil liberties have renewed my faith in the Left. Though it's a shame you didn't realise earlier that this is where socialism always leads.
As a Conservative I'd obviously like you to vote Conservative. But considering the matter honestly I can understand why, based on current policies, you might be unsure.
So if you cannot bring yourself to vote Conservative (best option), and if UKIP is not to your liking (second-best option), then might I suggest the Libertarian party? They seem the closest to your views. I know they're a small outfit, but every party has to start somewhere. And if you don't have a Libertarian candidate standing - become one!
I told you that it would be fun reading this thread after your statement about UKIP didn't I Simon, but I didn't think it would get this good, this quick.
As well as the usual suspects, we now also have an ex-pat telling us about Nigel Farage's exploits (as a smoker) in leading a campaign to save the English pub suffering from the non smoking ban and greedy pub chains. I might be wrong here, but I thought Mr Farage was backing the Forest Save our Pubs & Clubs campaign, not the other way round?
Then, as if those "weird" Ukippers wasn't bad enough, in their efforts to stuff us with a hung parliament, we now have a third party telling us that it might be a good idea to vote for the Libertarian Party, or worse still, become one!
Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with either UKIP or the Libertarian Party, but not when the General Election is just a few weeks away and so many constituencies will depend on every single vote cast.
We need a strong government who will be able to push through policies. If we get stuck with a hung parliament, this country will be in an even worse state than it is now. For everyone that wants an end or an amendment to the smoking ban, you will not get it through a hung parliament, it will be impossible. You definitely won't get it through Labour or Lib-Dems, and you might not get it through the Conservatives, but they are your only hope.
Vote the Conservatives out by messing around with the midgets of politics and the country is doomed, and the smoking ban will remain in its present state forever. Remember only 25% of Tories voted for an all out ban.
... And Cameron has said he has moved on, while shadow health Andrew Lansley has stated he doesn't want to 'revisit the issue' and was, up till recently (when Private Eye exposed it) earning £114 per day as an adviser for a pharma company and is talking of changing the DoH to the DoPH.
These are our best hope, Peter?
I'm for anyone but the big three, personally. That, or a turnout of under 50% to show disgust.
Problem is Dick that we all need to look at the bigger picture. If it were local elections and I had an independent standing in my borough, I might be tempted to look at what they had to offer, as that lone voice in the wilderness can sometimes give the big boys that boot up the backside they need.
When it something as important as the General Election however, we cannot afford to vote for that nice bloke we met down the pub, who said if he was elected he would make the voice of the ordinary man and woman in the street heard.
That is all very well in local politics, but voting for the Nice Party in the General Election, who won't have a chance in hell of getting into power, could just give power back to Labour again, and I don't know about you, but as far as I'm concerned, Labour are bunch of incompetent crooks who should be in prison, not politics.
"Anyone but the big three" won't win Dick, it will be one of the big three, and we also know it won't be the Lib-Dems, so that narrows it down to "one of the big two".
Labour or Conservative. We know Labour doesn't work...so what do you want Dick?
Idlex,
Have you tried looking
here
If there is no contact info there then try writing to the him/her via the local Conservative association.
Junican -
Excellent letter !
Let's hope he READS it.
I expect he's busily drafting a comprehensive, thoughtful, and comprehensive reply, even as I type....................
I agree Junican, some mighty fine points, skillfully made
I can’t vouch for the “weirdness” or the “non-wierdness” of UKIP members because, sadly, I don’t know any but, whilst bowing to your greater knowledge in this respect, Simon, I still have to ask, what’s actually wrong with “weird?” I’d rather have a weird and eccentric, but nonetheless genuine, candidate who supports policies I agree with, than a suited and booted “yes-man” whose main aim is to line his own pockets and whose political aims are to offer a disguised set of, essentially, the same policies as we’ve had for the last 13 years, which I don’t.
The main point being overlooked here is that it matters not which of these three failed parties you vote for. All are WILLINGLY governed by thE EU. At present 73% of our laws are made by the European Commission,not by Westminster.
The EU wait anxiously at our borders,Lisbon Treaty in hand. They would LOVE a sufficient majority for any of the three failed parties but are abviously manipulating things to give the Tories most popularity. THE GULLIBLE BRITISH PUBLIC WILL THEN BELIEVE THERE COULD BE "CHANGE". Or, at best, dying of boredom at the never ending pantomime, they will continue to not bother to vote as "they are all the same". [Which they are.]
Even without the mighty UKIP waiting in the wings, it will be a hung parliament. Statistics show that the Tories could never get sufficient seats to obtain a governing majority. The LibDems have a very good chance of obtaining more seats than ever before because, [as yet], they are "untried".Their leader is similar to but a slightly more charismatic character than plastic-man Cameron.He also has Vince Cable. BTW does anyone KNOW why we are supposed to bow and scrape when that reverent name is mentioned?
As for poor old "ulcers in the mouth" Gordon Brown; he really has a cat in hell's chance of leading his party to victory. Just look at the abysmal Labour vote in last June's EU and County Council elections. Things have just got worse and nobody is impressed by he and Cameron trotting "wifey" out - American style.
Unless we have a hung parliament with a strong contingent of UKIP within it, at last, we can never force the Referendum regarding our continued membership of the EU. There is STILL time to get out of the EU completely but should, by any ill chance, there NOT be a hung parliament with UKIP in it, the EU Commission will be empowered to make 100% of our laws and we, the silly bored to death public aka the great unwashed, will be doomed to slavery and serfdom even worse than the non-smoking Nazi regime, and the brutal communist USSR.
The sound straight talking UKIP manifesto was published for all to see long before the present three failed parties started bringing out their latest ideas about how they will spend and save our non-existant billions. All three have snatched ideas from the UKIP manifesto. The Lib-Dems in particular - it's almost laughable to see it. The difference is that by withdrawing completely from EU membership, UKIP will be able to create the money needed for complete reform and revitalisation of the once great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It could once again be a lovely place to live and provide a happy future for our children and grandchildren. . .
Blimy doesn't Margot Johston talk a load of old tosh! When Simon said these Ukip folk were weird, he must have had first hand experience of old Margot here. She is the commander in chief of all weirdos!
"She (Margot J) is the commander in chief of all weirdos!"
If so, then it's high time I joined her army.......
I reply to the constant bleat of the likes of Peter Thurgood that a vote for UKIP in a marginal constituency could let Labour back in by default. UKIP Leader and chief weirdo, Lord Pearson of Rannoch, has stated time and again that we are aware of the high percentage of Eurosceptics within the Conservative party and the absolute necessity of not letting NuLabour back in for another five years of government. To this end he has stated, time and again, that no UKIP candidate will stand against the Tories in a marginal constituency.
He repeated this on Saturday 10th April on Straight Talk with Andrew Neil on the BBC T/V News Channel. This programme was repeated four times throughout the weekend and will be repeated again on Tuesday 13th April at 03.30 hrs. If any of you STILL haven't seen it, it is available on the BBC iPlayer and is being put up for a week from first transmission on the website www.bbc.co.uk/straighttalk.
The reason why the rag, tag and bobtail within our society, [aka the weirdo’s]. are prepared to take out second mortgages on their homes to finance their own campaigns in the name of the UK Independence Party [UK I P], is that both the Leadership of Lord Pearson and Nigel Farage together with the 500 candidates and millions of supporters are well aware that the scumbag Leadership of all three failed old parties at present in government have sold themselves completely into permanent EU membership for their own personal financial gain, as did the five previous prime ministers and party leaders before them.
As for Junican’s excellent letter and the following suggestion that everyone should write to their MP and ask what their intentions are, what on earth would be the point of that? The MP will reply, if at all, with a promise along the lines of what the writer wants to hear. The MP can promise anything and it means nothing at all. The present MPs are strictly under the control of their party leaders and the EU Whip Let’s all just suffer the macabre dance of death which is about to take place in front of us until that once in our lifetime and last ever ballot box is finally reached.
Wake up, you Tory luvvies and smell the real coffee….
BTW Have you noticed how quickly this valuable thread has been pushed way down the page by the great god football and other trivial matters?
I guess Simon is trying to change the subject away from politics Margot before it starts coming to blows!
I personally would like to see a hung parliament in Britain, it would shake things up and no better way for the people to express their disgust vote after putting up with the EU hugging main parties for too long.
And I suspect that the reason the Tory's are getting so popular is because Mr Brussels is backing them heavily.
I would like to know why Dave thinks that a hung parliament would be such a disaster.
For whom?
In my opinion, and if it actually happened, at least everyone could say that the people have really spoken this time, with no party politics involved.
I guess you are right, Ann. Heaven forefend that we should discuss politics with the most vital election ever just days away. However, I see that Simon has introduced the subject again in today's topic. Don't worry; I won't waste my time and energy by trying to mention the verboten four letter party.
I agree with you that the Tories will be heavily backed by Mr Brussels now as also are the tiny Greens. I note that their mouthy leader, who speaks with the rapidity of a machine gun and believes recreational drugs, should be reclassified as harmless, [wonder why?], is certainly being well funded and popularised with EU money. She is the one who has encouraged the 1.5 euro tax on each of our sheep because of the methane gas they emit when farting. She is also encouraging production of a new chemical steroid based compound which can be injected into them to decrease the farting. This is the meat we must then eat! You just couldn't make it up.
A very lethal woman and being given maximum publicity on EU controlled TV.
Meantime, the rag, tag and bobtail of the real fourth largest party are being hampered to hell and back in every region in our once fair land. My heart and prayers go out to our brave Pat Nurse and all the other “weirdo” candidates who are using every last penny of their shrinking credit cards to fund their own campaigns. You cannot imagine the skulduggery we are all up against.
So I won’t waste any more of my failing strength and energy by joining the fatuous political charade about to gather momentum at the top of this page.
On a happier note, Ann, I was thrilled to bits and moved to tears by the darling infant school choir from Northern Ireland who won the school choir competition in “Songs of Praise” on Sunday. Hope you saw it. Haven’t had time and space to even mention it and congratulate our own local candidate, who I work so hard for and have a heated row with by phone most evening. He is a fiery local-based Northern Irish man who joined our party originally because we were the only ones doing so much to save his beloved birth land from the clutches of the EU. We lost, eventually, through the usual lies and dirty tricks. However, he’s still in there fighting and funding his own campaign through the very long hours he works. Heaven help the local self satisfied fatuous two parties; Cons & LibDems, when he is finally free during the three weeks he will take off work to fight it through to election day. You can’t beat a soft voiced Irishman with a flaming temper who also knows what he is talking about. They will not know what’s hit them! I personally will be dead, of course; as I inevitably scream back at him most evenings. He doesn’t smoke, but would fight to the death for the right of others to do so in comfort.
God bless us all, Ann.
Indeed Margot, the cultist Greens are all tarred with the one brush in my opinion, no matter what country they're in.
The gang of them in Ireland are so hated for propping up the lies of the present crony capitalist govt that they will be wiped out at the next election.
And also for bringing in unnessary, EU based and crippling so called 'carbon' taxes on taxpayers, on top of almighty and overwhelming taxes we are forced to pay to bail out the corrupt bankers and developers who wreaked havoc on our heritage and countryside with grotesque concrete, and now empty buildings, and brought the country to its knees.
I wish your local candidate well and hope he gets elected, In fact we could do with the likes of him this side of the pond.