Britannist

I have posted suggestions that UKIP/English Democrats/One London/Veritas try to find a way to work together in the campaign for the 2008 London Assembly elections for the last two years (i.e. the comments in the quote above are not the first time that this matter has been discussed on this forum).

In the above quote it is suggested that one pro-sovereignty party stands down close to the next London elections (to be held in May 2008) if it looks as if it is not going to do as well as another pro-sovereignty party.

I do not believe that leaving it that late (i.e. within weeks of polling day) is a good idea or that such a strategy would work. Most political parties will have made too many preparations for that election and might think that they may discredit themselves by pulling their candidates out of a contest so close to the start of an election campaign.

We already know from London-only opinion polls that UKIP are doing better than One London in terms of public support. One London will argue that they expect to get more publicity during their London election campaign next year leading to (potentially) more votes. But UKIP - already ahead of One London in the capital in projected vote share - can easily argue that its vote is likely to rise even more from its current level when it, too, gets publicity during the London Assembly election campaign.

It is time for One London to seriously considering asking UKIP to look at the possibility of merging One London into London UKIP - or of One London running (or helping run) the UKIP London campaign for the 2008 London Assembly/Mayoral elections.

My view is that unless UKIP/One London/Veritas/English Democrats combine to back the same London Mayoral candidate and the same list of candidates for the proportionally-elected seats on the London Assembly - there is a risk that all four parties (those parties which I have just named) will end up with nothing in next May's London elections.

Pro-sovereignty parties must avoid vote splitting (in the London Mayoral/Assembly elections of May 2008) if they are to have a chance of holding on to even just one of the two seats won by UKIP on the London Assembly in 2004.

The time for UKIP, the English Democrats and One London to talk to each other about working together regarding the May 2008 London Elections is now - not next Spring just before official campaigning commences.

Britannist

I think it was a mistake of the two One London members of the London Assembly to have left UKIP and then to have helped form Veritas (and then One London).

However, as things stand it looks (very sadly) as if three pro-sovereignty parties (UKIP, One London and the English Democrats - whose supporters/members are very similar in outlook) are going to run separate campaigns for the 2008 London Mayor/Assembly elections resulting in the anti-EU vote splitting.

Which is just what the europhile Labour/Liberal Dims/EU/BBC/most UK trade union leaders/Livingstone/leftist groups all want.

It is not impossible to imagine that UKIP might just miss holding on to one of the two seats it won in the last London Assembly election because a small, but vital number of votes it needs are taken by One London and/or the English Democrats.

I want to avoid such a scenario: UKIP has the best chance (in my view) of all the pro-sovereignty parties I have named in winning/holding a seat on the London Assembly.

We anti-EU campaigners must do what we can now to unify, work together and avoid our vote fragmenting in the May 2008 London elections.

rjt

Of course the best way for the Pro EU consensus to keep running the country is if opposition to it remains fragmented. As is pointed out above.

__________________
'And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying " Glory to God in the highest, And on the earth peace, goodwill toward men".
Luke 2: 13-14.

Britannist

Yes, you have pointed out before, RJT, that what Labour/Liberal Dims and others in the broad left would like is for the Conservatives to fragment and for UKIP/English Democrats/One London to stand against each in elections and split the pro-freedom and pro-sovereignty vote.

The other thing the Blair/Brown Lie-bour Party has relied on and continues to benefit from is constituency boundaries which help Labour much more than the Conservatives.

Had we had a fairer electoral map at the last General Election (i.e. updated boundaries taking into account population growth in suburban and rural areas) and had there been a united eurosceptic and anti-EU party - i.e. Conservatives/UKIP/Veritas/English Democrats - the realigned Conservative/UKIP /Veritas /English Democrat Party could have got about 36% of the vote like Labour did and (with fairer boundaries) might well have won 270 constituencies in the Commons (72 more than the Conservatives actually did win).

Indeed, because a realigned Conservative/UKIP/Veritas/English Democrat
Party would have been strongly eurosceptic it could have got a larger share of the vote than 36% at the last General Election - making it possible that it might have become the largest party in the Commons and that it may have been able to get close to winning a small overall majority in the Commons (or of it governing as a minority administration with the support of Dr. Paisley's DUP - which has 9 MPs in the Commons - and of the one Ulster Unionist MP).

Division of the eurosceptic/anti-EU vote and Labour relying on outdated constituency boundaries helped Blair to win the last General Election on 36% of the vote - the lowest vote share a winning party has ever got at a UK General Election in the modern era (36% was the share of the vote Labour got at the 1979 General Election - an election it lost).