Alex McKee

I actually echo the comments before me, as I feel they are correct. Young does not necessarily equal bright, and moreover is likely to equal semi-literate, at best.

brian lee

I appear to have been misquoted, or deliberately misunderstood.

The main point is that we need a properly paid, properly staffed organisation.

Nowhere did I say that young people would run things. It is not necessarily the case that bright young things will be smart arses. However, it is a good indication that anyone with an Oxbridge degree will not be stupid.

I did say that younger people would be cheaper, which is an important consideration in a cash strapped organisation. There is also the matter of the ability to commit time to the party. As one gets older one is normally limited by family and other committments. Many of us also loose energy. our memories and quick reactions we had a few years earlier.

However, it is essential that people who are paid a salary by the Party have the necessary qualifications for the job they are employed to do.

Many of us put in vast amounts of time and our own money, some of the time we are correcting mistakes made by paid staff.

Yes, I should go back to my gardening. The only reason I keep doing what I do for the Party is because there is no one else willing to do it.

Britannist

Petrina - this is what the excellent columnist Patrick O'Flynn wrote in the Daily Express on 28.4.2006 (brief extracts):

“After years of growing public resentment about Labour policies on crime and immigration, the dam has finally burst. While Labour’s key home affairs policies have disintegrated, David Cameron has been busy building windmills, visiting glaciers and posing alongside eco-friendly cards. He has said almost nothing about immigration or crime himself and told his immigration spokesman Damien Green that he would only be considered a success if he kept the Tory stance on the issue out of the news.

Likewise, Mr. Cameron is a prisoner of the bland internationalism of the well-heeled metropolitan liberal set which feels more instinctive sympathy for the developing world that it does for hard-pressed British families from the modest middle class. It regards them as somewhat below the salt and is content to ruin their prospects by supporting ‘Tony’ Blair’s university top-up fees.

It feels virtuous for being pro-immigration without acknowledging that it is the rich who benefit from migrant workers and the less well-off who suffer the downside. Mr. Cameron’s Notting Hill heartland would be decimated without a cheap supply of Filipina housekeepers and eastern european restaurant staff. But the lower orders must compete with immigrants for housing and public services and suffer most from immigrant crime.

Mr. Cameron’s blueprint appeals to the affluent, socially liberal public school types with whom he went to university – an upper middle class caste which affects a generous social conscience but is ruthless about its narrow self-interest.

He has shown little appreciation of the interests of the more numerous C1 and C2 socio-economic groups – the lower middle class and skilled workers whose votes propelled Margaret Thatcher into power.

Time is running out and his (David Cameron’s) approach to date suggests self-satisfaction could prove a crippling handicap. Stand him (Cameron) next to Gordon Brown (the Labour Government Chancellor) and – despite the Chancellor’s long-standing addiction to taxation and new-found fondness for celebrity endorsement – it appears like a case of boys against men. Mr. Cameron must grow up – and fast." :x :shock:

Britannist

Brian - I would just point out that the critics (still mostly whispering) of the Conservative Cameron leadership are particuarly unimpressed with the young team around him. They used to be called the "Notting Hill Set" but apparently don't like the label because of its "young, affluent, yuppie" connotations.

Does UKIP want that label too or instead? Aren't there one or two in UKIP(on the UKIP payroll) that already fit the label of young, think they know it all, are terribly convinced of their importance - but who have made BIG mistakes and who don't really have a clue about the real world of politics or have the political nouse to deal with one's opponents that often comes with experience?

Upon entering 10 Downing Street, Churchill had no degree and neither was he young :shock: .

Millennium3

I have mentioned ‘The Secret History of Genghis Khan’ elsewhere. Those who also saw the programme [on BBC2 a month or so back] might also have been impressed by its content.

The secret history was not primarily concerned with GK’s conquests, but how he managed to achieve such loyalty from his followers. Essentially this was done by operating a meritocracy whereby the lower ranks could expect very rapid promotion if they were trustworthy, dedicated and showed ability. Dead wood was quickly removed.

If UKIP is to travel far, as is quite possible given the current decadency in British politics, a similar approach is necessary.

Hartlepool

Denny,just noticed that your request for your beer funds come before your request for UKIP Funds.

Your slipping again,get a grip man. :wink:

Colin McNamee

Originally in the 'not sure' category but tending to come down in favour of Petrina.

Above all we need probity.....and then leadership.

I'll wait to decide when the final runners are declared, nomination date now 30 June.

douglas denny

Well you have to get the priorities right - especially as I am accused of drunken rants .....

Actually I'm much better at rants when stone cold sober. Someone said perhaps I should lighten up and get drunk more .......
There might be something in that - as the burglar said putting his hand in the night commode.

Douglas.
-
-

Hartlepool

Denny said...especially as I am accused of drunken rants.

--------

But not by me though,as if I would. :wink:

brian lee

Brittanist wroteBrittanist may care to read all my postings on this matter. I have already explained my position. However, iIt looks as though I'm to be misunderstood whatever I say. Please note I did not say anything about the age of any candidates for Downing Street or for that matter, for the Party Leadership. I just want party employees to be employed on the basis of their ability or potential rather than being available. Traditionally, with few exceptions, UKIP appears not to support this view.

My current label for UKIP would also be unflattering. That is why I keep going on about the need for it to get its organisation together. At the present rate of improvement, I will be dead before it makes any significant break through. Please note that I have been rabbiting on about this to the "management", for years before this forum existed, and I suspect before many of the posters were members or pathologically interested in UKIP.