UK EU MEP Elections

[EmperorSolo51]

I was watching online and on the BBC website for the results for the MEP Elections. Safe to say I was startled that both Labor and the Tories got hit and the smaller parties had more success. Well, Here are the Results with 9 out of 11 Regions' results in. Can anybody tell me why UKIP did better in this election than in 1999? What made them do so well now?

Conservative Party- 22 MEPs
Labour Party- 14 MEPs
UK Independence Party- 11 MEps
Liberal Democrats- 9 Meps
Green party- 2 MEps
British National Party- 0 MEps
Plaid Cymru- 1 MEP

[TheDarkling]

Can anybody tell me why UKIP did better in this election than in 1999? What made them do so well now?

Increased fear mongering about Europe, especially about the proposed constitution.

[SecondStorm]

I was watching online and on the BBC website for the results for the MEP Elections. Safe to say I was startled that both Labor and the Tories got hit and the smaller parties had more success. Well, Here are the Results with 9 out of 11 Regions' results in. Can anybody tell me why UKIP did better in this election than in 1999? What made them do so well now?

Conservative Party- 22 MEPs
Labour Party- 14 MEPs
UK Independence Party- 11 MEps
Liberal Democrats- 9 Meps
Green party- 2 MEps
British National Party- 0 MEps
Plaid Cymru- 1 MEP

Im not from Britain but I believe its because many brits are wary of the EU.
They want out and this is how they show it.

At least the British Nazi Party didnt get any MEPs.

[EmperorSolo51]

I was watching online and on the BBC website for the results for the MEP Elections. Safe to say I was startled that both Labor and the Tories got hit and the smaller parties had more success. Well, Here are the Results with 9 out of 11 Regions' results in. Can anybody tell me why UKIP did better in this election than in 1999? What made them do so well now?

Conservative Party- 22 MEPs
Labour Party- 14 MEPs
UK Independence Party- 11 MEps
Liberal Democrats- 9 Meps
Green party- 2 MEps
British National Party- 0 MEps
Plaid Cymru- 1 MEP

Im not from Britain but I believe its because many brits are wary of the EU.
They want out and this is how they show it.

At least the British Nazi Party didnt get any MEPs.

But if you go by what the BBC is reporting, thier final election numbers are up 8%.

[TheDarkling]

Im not from Britain but I believe its because many brits are wary of the EU.
They want out and this is how they show it.

Most Brits haven't got a clue about the EU because the media barley discusses it and when they do it is the tabloids taking about the latest legislation regarding how oval an egg can be.

At least the British Nazi Party didnt get any MEPs.

No but they did get 5.2% of the vote (meaning they more than quadrupled their vote share) which translates to 788,773 people.

[SecondStorm]

The abominal turnout seems to prevalent in every country.
I believe Poland had as little as 25 % of all voters voting in this election.

The EU needs alot more attention from the media. In my country the medias coverage have been really lacking.

One of the Danish MEPs is our former Prime Minister. I hope that a familiar face can help get the media's attention.

[EmperorSolo51]

A With 10 of 11 regions reporting here are the revised numbers:
Conservative party- 25 MEPs
Labour Party- 17 MEPs
UK Independence Party- 12 MEPs
Liberal Democratic Party- 11 MEPs
Green Party - 2 MEPs
British National Party- 0 MEPs
Plaid Cymru- 1 MEP

[Sarevok]

It is a good thing the fasict BNP did not win any vote. The British electorate has rejected fasism.

[Sharp-kun]

Can anybody tell me why UKIP did better in this election than in 1999? What made them do so well now?

More campaigning than usual (with arses like Kilroy), little effort on the part of Labour and the fact that the tabloids have been spreading untruths about Europe.

A vote for the UKIP is a wasted vote. Does anyone think Kilroy is actually going to be at the parliment now he's won?

[Col. Crackpot]

a strong showing by the Conservatives.

[Sharp-kun]

a strong showing by the Conservatives.

Not really, they did quite well, but they lost a lot to the UKIP.

[Vympel]

BNP got shit, luckily.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Can anybody tell me why UKIP did better in this election than in 1999? What made them do so well now?

More campaigning than usual (with arses like Kilroy), little effort on the part of Labour and the fact that the tabloids have been spreading untruths about Europe.

A vote for the UKIP is a wasted vote. Does anyone think Kilroy is actually going to be at the parliment now he's won?

Last I heard Kilroy couldn't get into the Beeb, what chance does he have in Parliament?

[RedImperator]

It's more than just in Britain. Opposition parties won all over Europe (with notable exceptions in Greece and Spain, where the majority party has only been in power for a short time). It's hard to tell at this point how many people were voting against the EU (in the sense the parties that did win are largely for limiting the EU's power to one degree or another) and how many were voting against Tony Blair, Jacques Chirac, Gerhard Schroder, and so forth. What this election overall seems to be saying is that the EU has a long way to go before its citizens think of themselves as Europeans first, as it doesn't seem many elections were decided on the basis of EU politics.

[Ubiquitous]

The BNP didn't get any seats, but people who dismiss their votes total do so in error. 1 in 20 voters voted for them, and when you consider that only 1 in 4 voted for the winning party, it is a clear sign that they are not dead at all.

I am glad UKIP and the Tories did well. Many have slated the Tories for their 10% vote drop, but they are still far and away the dominant party in Europe as far as the UK is concerned. As for UKIP, it's nice to see an other real party emerge, and any party that humiliates the disgraceful Liberal Democrats deserves applause.

And if you didn't know by now, the LB tried to turn the European election into an anti-war, anti-American campaign. In Liverpool for example, an area with a growing Islamic population, they spread leaflets with pictures of American POW abuse in Iraq, and fielded an Islamic candidate. This went down well with the swingable Islamic voters, who elected him. Of course, Iraq and America have nothing what-so-fucking-ever to do with the EU, but the Lib Dems were desperate to try and avert a humiliating 4th place behind UKIP. Thankfully, their efforts were in vain.

[RadiO]

I'm not greatly Pro-EU by any means, but Man, am I glad I didn't vote for this guy.

[Admiral Valdemar]

I'm not greatly Pro-EU by any means, but Man, am I glad I didn't vote for this guy.

Obviously his ego has got to his mind since losing his talkshow. My heart bleeds.

[Sharp-kun]

I am glad UKIP and the Tories did well.

Tories I don't mind, but do you really think anything good will come of electing the UKIP? Will they even bother to turn up?

[Plekhanov]

It’s a great relief to see the BNP make no gains but their increased and overall level of support is worrying especially as it would suggest that 5% of the population don’t find nationalistic, racist, populists like UKIP too left wing for them.

UKIP’s relatively high level of support is also of concern but its worth bearing in mind that the 16% anti EU vote is balanced by the extremely pro EU Lib Dem’s 15% vote. Crudely speaking this leaves the mainly moderately anti EU Tories and moderately pro EU Labour fighting over the middle ground. This is far from the majority against the EU that UKIP claim.

Hopefully UKIPS strong showing will wake the Pro-Europeans up an make them realise that we can no longer let the right wing press spread it’s anti EU propaganda unopposed and that they have to stand up to be counted or we potentially risk the UK becoming disastrously peripheral in Europe.

I am glad UKIP and the Tories did well. Many have slated the Tories for their 10% vote drop, but they are still far and away the dominant party in Europe as far as the UK is concerned.

Dominant? Lets take another look at the voting
Con. 26.7%
Labour 22.6%
UKIP 16.1%
LibDem 14.9%
You call ¼ of the vote only 4% more than labour dominant?

As for UKIP, it's nice to see an other real party emerge,

Even for a Tory you are dumb, you’re seriously glad that a party that will mainly take voters from the conservatives is on the scene?

A real party? Do you seriously expect UKIP to keep anything like this vote at the general election, you had better hope not because if it did under FPTP it would totally split the right wing vote crippling the Tories and boosting labour and the Lib Dems.

and any party that humiliates the disgraceful Liberal Democrats deserves applause.

The Lib Dem vote went up whereas the Conservatives had their worst result in a national election since 1832 just who was humiliated here?

And if you didn't know by now, the LB tried to turn the European election into an anti-war, anti-American campaign.

Evidence that the Lib Dems are anti American please
The Lib Dems certainly mentioned the war (as did the tories) it’s a hard issue to avoid and on the doorstep it’s one of the major issues on peoples minds. You can hardly blame the lib dems for pointing out that they have been the only party to have been consistently right on Iraq, atleast they took a principled and at times unpopular stand unlike Howard who supported the war and is no making speeches criticising it.

In Liverpool for example, an area with a growing Islamic population, they spread leaflets with pictures of American POW abuse in Iraq, and fielded an Islamic candidate.

They had an Islamic candidate? The bastards that is just disgraceful, how dare they field none white candidate I’ll bet he wasn’t even properly middle class and never went to public school either.

A question for you Ali G what’s so bad about having a muslim candidate? Were they the only party with a muslim standing? in my region all the big 3 parties including the tories did.

This went down well with the swingable Islamic voters, who elected him.

So the non muslim, liberal pro Europeans had nothing to do with it then?

Of course, Iraq and America have nothing what-so-fucking-ever to do with the EU,

Yes it does, the build up to Iraq showed the failure of a divided European foreign policy and the benefits that a common European foreign policy could have. IF you read the Lib Dem manifesto as well as Daily Mail you’d have realised this.

but the Lib Dems were desperate to try and avert a humiliating 4th place behind UKIP. Thankfully, their efforts were in vain.

the Lib Dem vote went up the Conservative to a lesser extent Labour vote plummeted it is they who were humiliated.

[TheDarkling]

Plekhanov: The Lib Dems did cynically target Muslims with whinging about Iraq and that is divisive in the extreme and is something that should not be encouraged (it is exactly that sort of political opportunism that has caused me to lose the respect I once held for the Lib Dems). I would also point out that you are incorrect, Iraq has nothing to do with the EU, since Lib Dem representation in the parliament cannot effect integration on the issue not to mention the Lib Dems were pushing a case opposition to Iraq not a case for suborning foreign policy to Brussels.

I also think you are missing that a common foreign policy in a manner that would have prevented the Iraq split is a bad idea, it is very much putting the cart before the horse, in that foreign policy is derived from economic and strategic benefits (from example cooperation can be reached over Libya and Iran within the EU because we all have the same desires in regard to those areas) that the policy would yield for the country.

For myself I think the idea of electing national parties to the European Parliament is idiotic, Europe wide parties are the way to go so that we can clearly see the agenda that out vote is backing.
This would also prevent national issues overriding what the election is actually about as they often do during UK local elections, (I only received one leaflet dealing with local issues and that was from Labour, surprisingly they regained my council) which is exactly what has happened, not just in the UK but Europe wide.

I do agree with you that it is far past time that the Pro EU case was made, it is a shame that Blair has been forced to make the case in conjunction with that about the EU Constitution but Tony always has been a risk taker.

As a side issue, the thing that really annoys me is how UKIP and the Tories are trying to stitch up Blair over his signing of any potential constitution, apparently after campaigning for a referendum on the issue the Tories now wish to use the election results as a veto on opening up a debate (the reason being two fold, the Tories need something to criticise Blair for since he has agreed to a referendum and the second being that Howard is deathly afraid that his party will fracture between pro and anti EU forces over the issue given UKIP's performance).

[Plekhanov]

Plekhanov: The Lib Dems did cynically target Muslims with whinging about Iraq and that is divisive in the extreme and is something that should not be encouraged (it is exactly that sort of political opportunism that has caused me to lose the respect I once held for the Lib Dems).

The LibDems did target Muslims and made an issue of the war (far more so than I really liked them to) but I don’t think you can call it cynical or opportunistic. The Lib Dems consistently argued against the war and caught a great deal of shit for it from the government, the tories and right wing press as a result, now they have been proved right and during the election they were attempting to cash in on that correct and principled stand.

I would also point out that you are incorrect, Iraq has nothing to do with the EU, since Lib Dem representation in the parliament cannot effect integration on the issue

True the European Parliament won’t really effect this issue but every party I’m aware of fought the election upon Britain’s general position as regards the EU, European elections are always treated (by the parties and the electorate) as a referendum upon the party in government and upon the EU for the LibDems to do the same was accepting reality.

not to mention the Lib Dems were pushing a case opposition to Iraq not a case for suborning foreign policy to Brussels.

The Lib Dems were arguing that Blair had distanced us from the EU through his policy on iraq and in doing so had damaged our national interest. A common Eu foreign policy wouldn’t mean handing over decision making to Brussels as we would be one of the big 3 countries with a decisive voice in shaping the policy. Far from subordinating our policies it would boost them as for the most parts our interests are the rest of Europe’s interests and if we speak with a common voice we will be listened to upon the international stage in a way which we currently are not.

I also think you are missing that a common foreign policy in a manner that would have prevented the Iraq split is a bad idea, it is very much putting the cart before the horse, in that foreign policy is derived from economic and strategic benefits (from example cooperation can be reached over Libya and Iran within the EU because we all have the same desires in regard to those areas) that the policy would yield for the country.

I am suggesting a limited pooling of sovereignty as regards foreign policy with the EU because together we have a voice upon the world stage individually we do not and also because in the majority of circumstances our strategic and economic interests are the same as the other EU members. You think this was the case with Iran and Libya could you enlighten me why wasn’t this also the case for Iraq? How did the UK’s interests on Iraq differ from the EU members not in “the coalition of the willing”? What strategic and economic interests did the war serve for us?

For myself I think the idea of electing national parties to the European Parliament is idiotic, Europe wide parties are the way to go so that we can clearly see the agenda that out vote is backing. This would also prevent national issues overriding what the election is actually about as they often do during UK local elections, (I only received one leaflet dealing with local issues and that was from Labour, surprisingly they regained my council) which is exactly what has happened, not just in the UK but Europe wide.

I too would like elections to be fought in this way (just as I would like local elections to be fought upon local issues) but it will be a very long time before they are. Talk to most people about European legislation and they lose interest even faster than if you talk about Westminster legislation. For the time being most Britons simply don’t see themselves as European and till they do it would be political suicide for anybody to treat them as if they were.

For local elections the solution is to give councils back the power that central government has been remorselessly giving itself so that local government really matters again. When councils can set and raise most of their own budgets (they currently get 80% from the centre) and actually have the freedom to make changes then people will vote on local issues. Europe is a much tougher problem and I’m not at all sure how to deal with getting people interested in the European Parliament other than by assertive pro-european campaigning and by increasing it’s importance by giving the parliament more power to hold the European executive to account.

I do agree with you that it is far past time that the Pro EU case was made, it is a shame that Blair has been forced to make the case in conjunction with that about the EU Constitution but Tony always has been a risk taker.

I don’t know about “always has been a risk taker “but Blair definitely seems to have rediscovered his backbone over Iraq after 1.5 terms of Gov by focus panel, I just hope that he’ll fight as hard in favour of the EU. The EU constitution is hardly the ideal ground to fight a pro-EU battle over but it will have to do at least all the pro-Europeans will no longer be able to duck the issue now as they will no longer be able to take the moderate pro-EU feeling of the UK population for granted on such a complicated issue.

As a side issue, the thing that really annoys me is how UKIP and the Tories are trying to stitch up Blair over his signing of any potential constitution, apparently after campaigning for a referendum on the issue the Tories now wish to use the election results as a veto on opening up a debate (the reason being two fold, the Tories need something to criticise Blair for since he has agreed to a referendum and the second being that Howard is deathly afraid that his party will fracture between pro and anti EU forces over the issue given UKIP's performance).

Finally something we can completely agree upon the elections results may be lots of things but they aren’t a veto on the constitution (which hasn’t even been completely written yet ffs) Blair seems to be making some headway on his “red lines” and hopefully we’ll end up with a document that we can fight and win a referendum on. Sadly the pro-Eu wing of the Tories in Parliament is such a rump now that I don’t think the future splits will be as much fun to watch as they used to be, hopefully their polling suggests that the moderate right pro-Eu vote is still strong vote so Howard will still be paralysed over the issue.

[TheDarkling]

The LibDems did target Muslims and made an issue of the war (far more so than I really liked them to) but I don’t think you can call it cynical or opportunistic. The Lib Dems consistently argued against the war and caught a great deal of shit for it from the government, the tories and right wing press as a result, now they have been proved right and during the election they were attempting to cash in on that correct and principled stand.

You were trying to cash in on Muslim feelings of victimisation and no doubt further fuelled that opinion, it is a bad thing for country as a whole and it was a bad thing for the Lib Dems in their core areas.

True the European Parliament won’t really effect this issue but every party I’m aware of fought the election upon Britain’s general position as regards the EU, European elections are always treated (by the parties and the electorate) as a referendum upon the party in government and upon the EU for the LibDems to do the same was accepting reality.

Labour didn't really camping at all, Howard made some speeches about taking power back from Brussels and the Lib Dems mainly harped on about Iraq.
The Tories were the only ones to really talk abut the issue (in their usual deceitful manner of course).

The Lib Dems were arguing that Blair had distanced us from the EU through his policy on iraq and in doing so had damaged our national interest. A common Eu foreign policy wouldn’t mean handing over decision making to Brussels as we would be one of the big 3 countries with a decisive voice in shaping the policy. Far from subordinating our policies it would boost them as for the most parts our interests are the rest of Europe’s interests and if we speak with a common voice we will be listened to upon the international stage in a way which we currently are not.

It would mean handing over power to Brussels, EU foreign policy should stay as it is, i.e. certain issue we all agree on and others we don’t. Working at finding common ground is the way forward not handing over decision making power to Paris (which is where German foreign policy issues from, if the big three would control any such policy it would actually be France controlling any such policy).

I am suggesting a limited pooling of sovereignty as regards foreign policy with the EU because together we have a voice upon the world stage individually we do not and also because in the majority of circumstances our strategic and economic interests are the same as the other EU members. You think this was the case with Iran and Libya could you enlighten me why wasn’t this also the case for Iraq? How did the UK’s interests on Iraq differ from the EU members not in “the coalition of the willing”? What strategic and economic interests did the war serve for us?

The difference over Iraq was that the French had economic interests to protect and even more they had to follow their usual policy of constraining the US as much as possible. For Britain the issue is far simpler, the EU could border Iraq in a decade or two and having them as a stable trading nation is to our advantage. Whether we will get such a nation remains to be seen but we have a better chance than we did before Saddam was toppled.

I too would like elections to be fought in this way (just as I would like local elections to be fought upon local issues) but it will be a very long time before they are. Talk to most people about European legislation and they lose interest even faster than if you talk about Westminster legislation. For the time being most Britons simply don’t see themselves as European and till they do it would be political suicide for anybody to treat them as if they were.

The problem there would be they have no clue about the EU, media coverage of he EU is both scarce and woefully inaccurate when it does appear.

For local elections the solution is to give councils back the power that central government has been remorselessly giving itself so that local government really matters again. When councils can set and raise most of their own budgets (they currently get 80% from the centre) and actually have the freedom to make changes then people will vote on local issues.

The problem is, at the end of the day if services in your area aren't up to scratch it is the government that will take it in the neck so they are just governing what will effect their election results.

I don’t know about “always has been a risk taker “but Blair definitely seems to have rediscovered his backbone over Iraq after 1.5 terms of Gov by focus panel, I just hope that he’ll fight as hard in favour of the EU. The EU constitution is hardly the ideal ground to fight a pro-EU battle over but it will have to do at least all the pro-Europeans will no longer be able to duck the issue now as they will no longer be able to take the moderate pro-EU feeling of the UK population for granted on such a complicated issue.

Well the issue of constitution itself should be fairly easy to argue since (assuming it stays near to the draft version) it is essentially the tidying up exercise Blair claim it to be, if it had been called the treaty of Milan or something then none of this nonsense would be happening. Fighting the larger EU issue is going to take some skill because the media (especially the tabloids) are weighting against the issue however I see no reason to believe it cannot be won.

Finally something we can completely agree upon the elections results may be lots of things but they aren’t a veto on the constitution (which hasn’t even been completely written yet ffs) Blair seems to be making some headway on his “red lines” and hopefully we’ll end up with a document that we can fight and win a referendum on. Sadly the pro-Eu wing of the Tories in Parliament is such a rump now that I don’t think the future splits will be as much fun to watch as they used to be, hopefully their polling suggests that the moderate right pro-Eu vote is still strong vote so Howard will still be paralysed over the issue.

True any split won't be enough to cripple Howard but in public perception it will make him look like he has the same old problems of any Tory government which can only help his opposition.

[Lord Pounder]

I noticed the Northern Irish seats wheren't in your totals. There where 3 seats available here, one more than last time. The Democratic Unionist Party topped the poles, Sinn Fein/IRA came in second and the Ulster Unionist Party made it into 3rd after 3 recounts. We had a 50% turn out but that figure is dubious given how many votes originate from Roselawn Cemetary.

[MKSheppard]

We had a 50% turn out but that figure is dubious given how many votes originate from Roselawn Cemetary.

Ahhhh........the Chicaco method.

[Plekhanov]

I noticed the Northern Irish seats wheren't in your totals. There where 3 seats available here, one more than last time. The Democratic Unionist Party topped the poles, Sinn Fein/IRA came in second and the Ulster Unionist Party made it into 3rd after 3 recounts. We had a 50% turn out but that figure is dubious given how many votes originate from Roselawn Cemetary.

Sorry about the whole missing Northern Ireland out thing, it’s just that I find NI politics a little impenetrable as the issues there seem so removed from my life. Did the campaign in NI actually have anything to do with Europe or was it as dominated by domestic concerns as on the mainland? Any idea if the new DUP guy actually going to turn up or is he another Paisley?

It is worrying to see the DUP and Sinn Fein marginalizing the more moderate parties in Europe like they have in the assembly and Westminster elections. Do you think this is a long term trend of hardening positions upon both sides of the population or is it just a sign of popular discontent at the lack of progress in the peace process?