Has UKIP achieved its aim and what next for UKIP?

[Steve Morson]

Yes well I believe the trouble is PR. PR and FPTP are two entirely different systems. The UKIP is optimised to win EU elections, and they don't mean an awful lot.

Well, not sure where this fits in, as FPTP wouldn't help because supportive voting is too disparate, unless it was done on a national basis. But I agree - of course - about the EU elections. It's done nothing but cause problems - look at this region - and having 13 / 12 MEPs elected has done absolutely nothing for the party. Waste of time.

[Gothmog]

Indeed. I don't have a problem with paper candidates, although UKIP still holds the dubious honour of being the political party to have lost the largest number of deposits in British electoral history - £229,000.

I think that the resources and money spent in following that policy is reckless, ill-conceived, and futile, and dancing to the Establishment's tune. If, as I say the party was to concentrate it's resources on about 100 seats, it may yield result or two. Nothing to stop members standing locally if they have a strong and well-established candidate, but - generally speaking - for UKIP to fight seats where there is a 4 or 5,000 majority seems to (me to) be a waste of time.

deposits cost not an issue to me.
ukip needs to have a candidate in all seats to theparty political broadcast which would cost as much if had to pay for it.
most deposits funded by branch/candidate (even if paper) anyway.

branch/candidate pays for cost of seat
party then ploughs money into target seats.
thats the way to go.

[Niall Warry]

Well how can you develop a strategy to people like that, Mr Warry? It still galls me two years later. I suppose you will bemoan UKIP's supposed lack of strategy in keeping with your general pessimism, but there are some people who just will not listen to whatever UKIP or indeed any other party will tell them. I can tell you from experience that one of the most soul destroying moments in my life was looking at the stacks of Labour votes in our constituency at the 2010 count. Even with the expenses scandal and several local issues like the one I highlighted, the inertia continued and the MP who has coasted his entire political life stood in the corner without a care in the world, a person who treats his constituents as if they are elderly relatives he is forced to see. So what on earth can be done to answer that kind of voter-MP relationship.

I'd be very interested in whatever strategy you may have to appeal to my replicant neighbours but I can tell you right now that short of banning tax and raising benefits UKIP will never achieve success in my area and that cannot be pinned on Mr Farage or anyone else in the party.

So like trying to push a snowball up hill or banging your head against a brick wall...............................STOP!!!

The FPTP system and tribal party loyality WAS and still IS the problem any new party faces so it was all the more important 18 odd years ago for UKIP to work out a strategy tactics and plan.

You could argue in the 2001 General Election after 1997 (when The Referendum Party stood) that caught up in the general euphoria of the moment UKIP was bound to try and stand in every seat. I don't accept this but It could be argued.

However when that clearly proved to have been a very costly mistake it was simply very very stupid to go on repeating that mistake in 2005 and 2010.

Will EUKIP learn form its past mistakes ?

Sadly under 'Del Boy' Farage not a chance - lovely jubbly this EU racket is making me a millionaire!!

[Steve Morson]

deposits cost not an issue to me.
ukip needs to have a candidate in all seats to theparty political broadcast which would cost as much if had to pay for it.
most deposits funded by branch/candidate (even if paper) anyway.

branch/candidate pays for cost of seat
party then ploughs money into target seats.
thats the way to go.

Are you sure you're a member of UKIP? You, like 1 or 2 others on here, obviously didn't understand what I wrote (my guess), or just didn't read it. What you've done here is parrot the exact thinking that has got EUKIP where it is. Electorally, nowhere.

In the region I chaired, only a handful of the 57 candidates funded their own deposit and campaign - I was one of them. 41 candidates lost their deposits - £20,500. There aren't many branches in the West Mids that could afford ot lose £500 - IIRC - much less the additional campiagn material costs. My point was to devote ALL party resources into approx. 100 seats - no others.

"deposits cost not an issue to me." Classic.

[mrkipling]

Hopefully there will be fewer UKIP deposits lost at the next general election.

[Gothmog]

Are you sure you're a member of UKIP? You, like 1 or 2 others on here, obviously didn't understand what I wrote (my guess), or just didn't read it. What you've done here is parrot the exact thinking that has got EUKIP where it is. Electorally, nowhere.

In the region I chaired, only a handful of the 57 candidates funded their own deposit and campaign - I was one of them. 41 candidates lost their deposits - £20,500. There aren't many branches in the West Mids that could afford ot lose £500 - IIRC - much less the additional campiagn material costs. My point was to devote ALL party resources into approx. 100 seats - no others.

"deposits cost not an issue to me." Classic.

A branch has 4 years to raise the deposits for the next GE.
A % of candidates (like me) fund it themselves anyway.
The branches should be able to do the rest if they are organised.
My branch will have deposits saved up for by next year ready for next GE and we are not a big branch with few active members.

also as i said, lost deposits is basicly the cost we have to pay for a PPB which we need to get votes and I dont see local raised depsoits as a party resource to be put to 100 seats as some donations that come to some branch are to fight that certain seat and not for other seats.
Party needs the PPB to get votes and be taken serious as a party I am afraid.

[Mike]

Looks to me like a party operating in its comfort zone with no real appetite to gain traction inside Britain. It has a far better image than the BNP had but has been unable or unwilling to establish a substantial local presence as the BNP did for a while. Lack of real interest in my view.

[rjt]

A branch has 4 years to raise the deposits for the next GE.
A % of candidates (like me) fund it themselves anyway.
The branches should be able to do the rest if they are organised.
My branch will have deposits saved up for by next year ready for next GE and we are not a big branch with few active members.

also as i said, lost deposits is basicly the cost we have to pay for a PPB which we need to get votes and I dont see local raised depsoits as a party resource to be put to 100 seats as some donations that come to some branch are to fight that certain seat and not for other seats.
Party needs the PPB to get votes and be taken serious as a party I am afraid.

I certianly think it would be suicidial not to stand enough candidates to qualify for a PPB, it is difficult enough to get publicity as a smaller party as it is, but resources need to be ploughed into a small handfull of seats where the UKIP vote is likely to be strongest.

[Niall Warry]

I certianly think it would be suicidial not to stand enough candidates to qualify for a PPB, it is difficult enough to get publicity as a smaller party as it is, but resources need to be ploughed into a small handfull of seats where the UKIP vote is likely to be strongest.

What - So we can have another pink octopus crawling all over Westminster!!!!

[rjt]

What - So we can have another pink octopus crawling all over Westminster!!!!

Hopefully we wont see a repeat of that, the point I am making is the media largely ignore smaller partys unless they think they have a chance of winning a seat, A Party Broadcast is one of the few times a smaller party can set out its agenda.