The message of Ukip for politicians
Ukip’s failure to win Newark should not have surprised anyone who had seen beyond the over-reaction to its performance in the European and local elections. Ukip’s vote in the council elections fell from 23 per cent it achieved last year to 17 per cent this year (partly because of London). In the European elections it gained 27.5 per cent but unfortunately many people seem not to mind who represents them in the European Parliament.
Ukip’s vote is a protest vote that is likely to decline at a General Election but this does not mean it should not be taken seriously. Disillusion with the EU is a factor but other causes are at work. Many voters make a protest vote at European elections because they fail to see that decisions of the European Parliament have an impact on our lives and we need to be represented by MEPs who take an active and intelligent part in its proceedings.
The record of Ukip MEPs is appalling. They have taken the salary and expenses Brussels provides and done little in return. The Financial Times revealed that Nigel Farage has attended only one meeting of the Fisheries Committee where he sat looking bemused and abstaining in almost all the votes.
Churches could play a part in promoting an intelligent interest in European elections by running hustings and getting candidates to debate issues that are likely to be discussed in the Parliament. A European election should not just be a chance for people to express their dislike of politicians.
The EU needs reform as those committed to the UK’s continuing membership admit. Douglas Alexander has called for states to have the ability to extend the possible time limits on people coming to work in them from countries newly joining the EU, action to stop child benefit and tax credit being sent abroad to children not living in the UK, more savings in the EU budget and a greater say for national parliaments in EU policy making.
MPs like Frank Field and others who say that immigration from Europe is putting pressure on housing and services are making a valid point but you cannot have a free market without the free movement of peoples and Britain benefits from being part of Europe’s single market. It is the free movement of goods, services, capital and people that underpins this market.
Educating people about the advantages of EU membership is not going to be easy but a referendum campaign will give the chance to do that. However, as well as making the case for Europe we also need to do more to reduce inequali- ty within Britain and to combat the sense that it is a metropolitan elite who are both reaping the fruits of globalisation and running the country.
In 2008 a study by the Institute of Fiscal Studies revealed that the average pretax income of the richest 0.1 per cent of the population (47,000 in number) was £780,000 a year while the average income was around £25,000. The top 1.00 per cent, 420,000 of all taxpayers, earned an average of £155,000. During the recession many wage earners have seen their income fall while CEOs have seen their incomes rise. A survey in 2012 showed the pay of CEOs in FTSE top 100 companies rose an average of 12 per cent in the proceeding year although it is hard to see any evidence of increased productivity.
Before he resigned, Bob Diamond, CEO of Barclays, received £20.9m in bonuses and remuneration in a single year.
Money buys power and influence. Lord Oakeshott was in a position to spend £20,000 in his bid to unseat Nick Clegg. Most ordinary party members do not have that kind of money. Children of the rich go to the top schools and win a big advantage in life. It is extraordinary how many people in politics and the media are following in the steps of their parents.
This applies on the left as well as on the right. The hereditary principle certainly seems to apply to columnists on The Guardian. Polly Toynbee, Seamus Milne, Simon Jenkins, Martin Kettle and George Monbiot are all offspring of people well known as writers or politicians.
David Runciman, Professor of Politics at Cambridge and the son of a prominent sociologist, has told how when he was at school at Eton there were two contemporaries who aimed to be Prime Minister. They were David Cameron and Boris Johnson.
Acknowledging his own privileged background Runciman admits there are disadvantages in having a narrow political class cut off from the rest of the population. This is an issue elsewhere as well as Britain. A factor behind the revolt of the Tea Party was a desire to wrest control of the Republican Party from such elite figures as members of the Bush family. People consider Ed Miliband ‘weird’ because they think he lives only for politics and seems to have little in common with ordinary people. The fact that he is believed to have stabbed his brother in the back to achieve power doesn’t help.
Europe is only one factor behind the rise of Ukip. What we are witnessing is a popular rebellion against growing inequality and a political elite widely regarded as out of touch.