Unionist Strategy for Scotland's Holyrood Elections.

The SNP won 56 seats out of 59 on the first past the post vote - the Unionist vote was as good, about equal to the nationalist vote, but divided between Labour, Conservatives and Lib Dems. 

Had the Unionist held open primaries to select a Unionist Candidate per seat, the Unionist side might have taken half the seats.

In late summer 2014, after the referendum , I suggested Unionist should discuss this - the Conservatives replied the next day stating they would do no deals. 

In North East Fife (NEF), the Lib Dems really believed that they would get more than the SNP even when Ashcroft polls showed the SNP on 40/45% with Lib Dems on 30% and Tories on 14% - and the result was on those lines.

The Tories, likewise, told all who would listen that they were going to win. 

Party came before common sense and statistics. That was clear, as even the NO campaign saw each party trying to get credit for being the backbone of Unionism. 

Tories here (NEF) would not concede that a single Unionist would be better, as they wanted the satisfaction of Tories beating the Lib Dems, which they thought they'd do as Ming Campbell had stood down.

It is now past time for Unionists in Scotland to reform - they need a broad coalition or at least a deal to stop the SNP clean-sweeping at Holyrood in 2016. 

I suggest they hold cross party open primaries to select the single Unionist candidate for in each constituency.  The parties should still put forward full party list for the Additional Members contest.

The alternative way to put the full glare on the SNP in power in Holyrood is for Cameron to give Holyrood full fiscal autonomy now.

The SNP, Sturgeon and Swiney, should immediatley have to carry the full the can for a Scottish Budget from the Autumn statement onwards.  That would remove any case the SNP could make to blame Westmintser as usual, and dodge those realities already evident  - such as the poorer showing of the NHS and Education in Scotland compared to England, etc.

Let Unionist parties in Scotland now develop a joint selfless strategy.

Scottish Nanny Party

The Scottish Nanny Party is starting its next roll towards total state insanity. The unbelievable legislation to appoint a state nanny for every child will be one of the biggest steps ever taken anywhere to undermine family life, individual rights and democracy.

The very concept of handing control and coordination of your child to the state from shortly after its conception, to age 16, is now a virtual certainty. I wish No to a Named Person (NO2NP) every success – they will need all of our support.


As yet, I have not seen any mention or answers to some issues that will worry all sane folk:

• Will this idiocy apply to the children of all EU citizens in Scotland?
• Will this idiocy apply to the children of non- EU citizens in Scotland?
• Will parents have the right of access to the personal records of the named person, to ensure they are not criminals or potential paedophiles?
• For how many children will each named person have responsibility?

That’s for starters.

It seems to me this is a policy designed to send the sane south.

Reflection of Farage/Clegg Debate - and the EUs peacocks.

It seems that Nigel Farage and I are in step in our thinking on the Sevastopol issue - the EU has to be careful not to tread deeply into the Russian sphere of influence. At least Obama and the EU are now tacitly acknowledging that military options must be ruled out.
In his debate with Clegg, Farage is reported to have accused the EU of having blood on its hands over the Ukraine. Clegg on the other hand praised the bloc's influence in Eastern Europe; he is reported to have said "It was the British governments that pioneered the enlargement of the European Union so we'd have more peace, more democracy and more rule of law in our European neck of the woods."

Mr Farage responded by saying "we can all hang our heads in shame. We've given a false series of hopes to a group of people in the west of Ukraine; So 'geed' up were they that they actually toppled their own elected leader. That provoked Mr Putin and I think the European Union frankly does have blood on its hands in the Ukraine and I don't want a European army, navy, air force or a European foreign policy."

I think that the way ahead now surely lies in the EU and the USA recognising Crimea as part of Russia, with Russia withdrawing troops from the Ukrainian border and all parties, the USA, the EU's member states, Ukraine and Russia agreeing on Ukrainian neutrality, recognised and guaranteed by all.

Otherwise, we are set for a Black Sea Freeze, if not a wider Cold War II.

Nationalising Familes in Scotland - State Controlled Childhood

The SNP are planning, or rather plotting, to appoint a so-called named person to be a guardian for each and every child in Scotland, without the consent of parents.

This is state imposition. It is tantamount to national control of families in Scotland - nationalisation of families.

I think that parents' common law rights, or, if you will, their so called human rights, are being usurped.  This must be illegal and is contrary to natural justice.

Not at all  British!

Does the Media make or report the news?

PRESS RELEASE IMMEDIATE
UKIP's Chairman in Scotland, Mike Scott-Hayward, has welcomed an Evening Express poll in Aberdeen which shows UKIP ahead of the Liberal Democrats, and just a neck behind the Labour and the Conservatives.

"The poll shows the SNP 35.7%, Conservative 11.9%, Labour 11.9%, Labour 10.3%, UKIP 8.7% and Liberal Democrats 4.8%.

"In contrast to this clear balance seen by the voters, BBC Radio Scotland held a radio hustings excluding UKIP from the panel. The usual Beeb judgement is that only the last election counts, not the present situation or the future. The panel on Brian Taylor's Big Debate was a four party melee - a very noisy incident often reduced to a level of shouting that equalled the unreasoning level of noise I heard on the streets of Edinburgh a fortnight ago.

"I acknowledge that Brian did play sound clips from other candidates, including Otto Inglis of UKIP, but the balance of babble might have been brought round to a better debate had the parties now showing above, say, 5% in the popular polls, all been participants.

"The rules followed by the BBC do entrench the establishment - luckily, voters are not bound by the same fixed mentality and I forsee UKIP beating at least one, or perhaps even two, so called major political parties here in Scotland, as we are already doing elsewhere in the UK".

Mike Scott-Hayward
Chairman UKIPScotland
07917365197/01334655040

UKIP SUPPORT SURGES IN SCOTLAND - FOURFOLD

UKIP SUPPORT SURGES IN SCOTLAND - FOURFOLD

I welcome the UKIP victories in England's councils they not really a surprise to us - and that is not complacency, it is because we have being experiencing a surge in interest from the grassroots of public opinion since the Corby and Rotherham by elections.

I am having to make time to be able to respond to people asking about us. The rate of enquiries and the level of our rise in the opinion polls outpaces our growth in membership. That is because most people who vote do not belong as paid up subscribers to the parties they support.

Our surge has seen us up by 400% in opinion poll ratings. A year ago, we had a vote at elections of just 2%. Polls last year, after Corby, put up us as high as 8 or 9 per cent. A 400% rise. 

Remarkably, the surge is coming from all parties and from none - people who may not have bothered in the past. The public are fed up with political parties who are arrogant and tell them what to think, want to price evrything, even their beer, to suit a political end.

All we want is a strong and sovereign Britain. Seems that that accords with folk, who know it means leaving the disastrous European Union and sticking together un the UK.  

We want stronger defences back; we want far, far fewer regulations and diktats; we want no wasteful subsidised wind turbines; we want simple effective taxes and fair support of those in need, and we want Britain back.

The surge has led UKIP in Scotland to setting up more branches - Lanarkshire, Orkney and Moray are now in being with a branch forming in the Black Isle as well. 

Next week, we launch in the Borders with Professor Tim Congdon addressing us on the awful costs and heavy financial burden of the EU - 10% of our GDP! That's £147 billion. Ordinary people understand where we are coming from - it's where they come from!

SNP – NOT JUST THE TORIES – ARE ATTRACTED BY UKIP

SNP – NOT JUST THE TORIES – ARE ATTRACTED BY UKIP

Across the United Kingdom, the UK Independence Party (UKIP) is attracting increased support, from the previously disengaged and from those now disenchanted with the existing politic elite. According the UKIP, the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats have seen supporters switch to them as, indeed, have some councillors.

This trend is also evident in Scotland where, according to the Chairman of UKIPScotland, Mike Scott-Hayward, even the SNP are now vulnerable to UKIP at grass roots level.

“We were delighted to hear a speech from a prominent former member of the SNP, Michael McCafferty, at our Spring Gathering in Edinburgh,” Mike Scott-Hayward explained.

“We paraded a range of speakers who had previously been members of other parties, and of none, putting to rest the myth that we are comprised simply of former Tories.

"Sure we have ex Tories, including me, but that is just part of the picture.Michael McCafferty, who had been involved with the SNP since from the late eighties and rose to being a member of the YSN National Executive, is now well ensconced with UKIP."

Mr McCafferty told the UKIP Gathering that he had come came to feel that the SNP had turned into just another party of ‘yes’ men and its obsession with the EU seemed misplaced.

He said, “Norway was always trumpeted by Alex Salmond as a role model for Scotland, and yet it wasn’t controlled by Brussels. Indeed the two most prosperous countries in Europe – Switzerland and Norway were fully independent which led me to question the SNP policy of further European integration.

“It was only by spending time in Ireland that I saw the true face of the EU. Ireland had bravely voted ‘no’ to the Lisbon Treaty, but a dodgy rerun got Brussels the ‘yes’ result it wanted. With the EU and IMF firmly in charge now, the country is but a shadow of itself, and is simply a pawn in a bigger game, in which Brussels owns the board and the pieces.

“The situation in Ireland, and in some of the other European countries, encouraged me to look again at the EU. The hand of Brussels was behind all of the major issues affecting the continent, and the UK was similarly being drawn into this economic and social mess.

“But one man was speaking up against this European madness….and it wasn’t Alex Salmond. Indeed it was only when I heard Nigel Farage last year, telling Merkel and Obama to butt out of Britain’s business that I finally decided that it was time to get back into the political game, by joining UKIP.”

Cohesion against the madness of wind as a significant energy source

There are a plethora of anti- wind energy groups.

Some wonder why they are not better co-ordinated and why a new  political party has, despite being little more than a group of single issue lobbyists, has registered?

Don't be confused - the ant-wind lobbies are all united together against wind energy; they have a strong message and Scotland Against Spin does quite well in reaching out to them all. 

As they all, however, lack political clout, some have formed a party.  That doesn't solve the wider issue, because the new party's policies are inept.

The reason for the lack of proper clout lies in the persistence of  political loyalties amongst the lobbyists.  This makes it difficult for the various groups to present a single clear political message.

So,  for most part, they proclaim the need to be "non aligned" in order to keep folk on board.

No one who is truly active on any political issue, however, can be wholly devoid of a party political view or avoid a party preference; for the thinking majority, innate and natural party loyalties are hard to drop.  

It is impossible to divide one's soul between a blind loyalty and a conflicting political objective. So there in the unspoken coalition of supporters of all parties (all but UKIP supporters) in which each member silently bears the dilemma that the party for whom loyalty is felt, does in practise support, promote and implement the abhorrent wind energy polices.  

The question is, can "non-alignment" defeat the dynamics of that dilemma?  Need it?  Will the dilemma lead to much, or continual, repositioning?

When the opportunity to have an impact greater than simple objection and protest arrives, that is, when standing at the ballot box, each individual will have to face down their own demons.  

Will they vote then for undying loyalties that promote wind and accept the drive from the EU, or will they think afresh and vote for UKIP, against both the stupidity of wind as a significant energy source, and against the continued subjugation of the UK to EU rules?

We will have to wait to see what they do on the day. In the meantime Salmond sails on, the Coalition continues dodging, and the EU seems unassailable.  A huge rise in UKIP members and poll support for our clear message could, however, shock the incumbents into policy change.

UKIP is turning the screw on the complacent governing elite.

A little anecdote for you all on lobbying methodology whilst the topic is in the air.

Demonstrations work, and I advocate regularity, e.g. a frequent demo at the Council and outside the MP and MSP surgeries, whenever they have them. As well as the bigger events.

But my anecdote relates to subtle political pressure: the ruling class is now very aware of the surge in membership and rise in popularity of UKIP, and are on watch to see that they are not outflanked by us. Is that so, you say? How does Mike know this?

Well, a few weeks ago I published a Press Release to the effect that UKIP will monitor cases for fraud etc. The Press ignored this but I published it on FB and Blogger, but I have since had several direct approaches by people suffering the blight of turbines, and at a loss as to what to do. They have all asked their elected representatives for help, and to little avail. So they called me, having found me via FB, my blog etc.

I am no expert, but have political experience and am now in the process of advising them - still to get round them all, some far afield, but I will do it. 

Now, here's the rub: I advised one caller, amongst other things, to write to a party leader specifically outlining the mix of horrors suffered and the lack of help received from the elected.  I also advised that the point should be made that UKIP had been approached - i.e. I was cc'd into the email to the said party leader. The point was to rattle a cage. Politics, you see. I also arranged to call to discuss the case.

Last week, I was able to visit as promised and on arrival was surprised to see another caller already there, discussing the case. The woman visitor concerned seemed a bit embarrassed when we were introduced, and she left without further ado. 

So what?

Well, it transpired that the visitor was an elected local councillor, and had revealed that she was calling on behalf of the said party leader and on behalf of the party's local MSP as well.  There is no doubt in my mind that the sudden and immediate attention, where previously there had been lethargy, was clearly a direct result of UKIP involvement and a party attempt to defend their indefensible policies and to cover their flank.

I would like to extend an invitation to any remaining Conservative supporters

A few days have now passed since UKIP's great performances in the English and Welsh Police Commissioners elections and in three Parliamentary by-elections.


We came second in two by-elections and third in two Police Commissioner elections. In Durham, we seem to be replacing the Tory party. We also beat them in Middlesbrough and trounced them in the Police elections where we had more activists at the count than they could muster.

I would like to extend an invitation to any remaining Conservative supporters and voters in Scotland, who may still believe in the freedom and independence of the United Kingdom, to join UKIP now. You will be very welcome.

I also extend this invitation to traditional Labour voters who believe in their country and in the social mobility that we espouse and which Labour's Islington set decry.

Moreover, I know that some Liberal Democrats, indeed some in office who have spoken to me in private, feel that the EU is getting to big for its boots. Liberal Democrat leaders sold out on many policies for the sake of power - and they used to want us to think they are a party of principles. They have proven they are a party of first principles - that is, putting the party and themselves first, not you nor the country."

Calling Alex Salmond.........

Angela Merkel reportedly told the European Parliament, just before heading of to chat to Coalition Dave in Downing Street, “Of course the European Commission will one day become a government, the European Council a second chamber and the European Parliament will have more powers – but for now we have to focus on the euro and give people a little more time to come along."

Now, the First Minister and his separatist bedfellows should ponder hard on what their Independence in Europe really means. Alex Salmond need not ask any lawyers - just ask Angela.

The solution, of course, is independence - for the UK out of the EU.

The EU's British Subjects need to wake up to political realities..

News from The Associated Press

hosted.ap.org

BERLIN (AP) -- German Chancellor Angela Merkel endorsed a proposal for a top European Union official to be given the power to veto member governments' budgets, and suggested Thursday that the bloc could set up a new fund

Edinburgh Agreement on a Scottish Referendum:

UKIP stands four square behind the unity of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

We also firmly believe in the right of the British everywhere to be the final arbiters over their own lives.

That is why we support and would introduce binding (Swiss-style) referenda on vital issues.

That is why we believe it is as much the right of the Scottish nation to determine whether or not Scotland remains an integral part of the United Kingdom, as it is the right of the British people to determine if the UK should remain in the EU.

Our view on those two crucial issues is well known but we will repeat them and fight for them until we achieve what we believe the British people want – the continued integrity of the UK, and full British sovereignty.

So we support the Better Together campaign – we dismiss the SNP 's "wee pretendy Independence" ideas – and we want a referendum to take the whole of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland OUT of the EU to achieve full British sovereignty and true UK Independence.

Vote NO to stop any British break up – and campaign for true British sovereignty thereafter.

Meercats could do it better than Alec

The incompetence of the SNP/Coalition/Brussels Wind Energy policy is horrifying. It lacks common sense and it seems, it also contravenes the Aarhus Convention.

Alec Salmond's pontifications certainly indicate that a so -called independent Scotland would be at risk under the the SNP.   And it is after all only wee pretendy independence anyway - Alex Salmond wants to be in the European Union - nothing independent or sovereign about that!

Once again, I must commend UKIP policy - real independence - sovereignty - for Team GB as a whole; and no wind power - no subsidies, no ROCs, no FITS, no laying the burden on the poorest, cessation of turbines spoiling our landscape. Simples, as the meercat says.

How effective is UKIP?

Could there be a UKIP led political revolution?  

It is entirely possible.

Certainly, UKIP inspired change is on the way. 

The EU's control over us is the bigger part leading to this change - but the wind energy debate is well to the fore.  

The latest YouGov polls show UKIP are now the third most popular party in the UK and in Scotland the poll shows a spectacular change

Scottish Results

Conservative 17% (-2%)
Labour 40% (-1%)
LibDem 4% no change
UKIP 8% (+4%)
SNP 28% (-5%)
Green 1% (-1%)
BNP 2% (+1%)

UKIPScotland is now level pegging with the LibDems in Scotland. The coalition Government will be wide awake to these changes - and worried. The way to stop the Coalition from ignoring popular will is to support UKIP, joining us, voting for us, working with us.

Media Blocks

Pleased to see that Alan Cochrane, writing in Scottish Field,  has taken up the issue of councillors being gagged.

Hurrah! I have been banging on about that for years - and even sent fruitlessly to the media - including the DT.

Ex Cllr Arbuckle used to say nice supportive things when I railed on over the issue in meetings of the Council, and he has since gone to his pet press and published as a journalist on the issue too.  Ironic, as his party was probably the driver for the gagging clause.

Annoying thing is that UKIP policy would put paid to the stupidity but the media seem to have a mental block when they see the letters UKIP - pavlovian beasts, they assume we are a one issue party.

Why don't they read of policies?

Make MSPs take the decison! Or give us binding referenda.

The most destructive planning phenomena we now face in Scotland is the resort to appeals when an elected council rejects a wind farm application.

Some Reporters may uphold the refusals decided democratically but that is not always the case. Communities face division and destruction of amenity as a result.

MSPs who have signed up the Scottish Parliament's pro wind policies and diktats, and whose parties all back subsidies and DECC line to the hilt, sit smugly away from the realities. I have yet to see or hear of my local MSP, for example, going to a community council meeting discussing wind issues, to see the effect of these policies on the community's constituents.

Whilst UKIP policy is that planning appeals would not be taken "out of county" by unelected officers but be decided by binding local referenda amongst the concerned communities/planning area, such trust of the electorate is an anathema to the other parties. It won't happen until UKIP has sufficient elected power in Westminster and Holyrood - on a par with our now being the second largest British party in the European Parliament.

Meantime, why do we have MSPs? Is it their role to sit smugly and aloof in Holyrood, and not carry the buck for what the laws they passed?

I say make them all, sitting in committee of the whole house, decide all wind farm appeals, with their votes recorded, so that we may know them for what they earn.

Mike Scott-Hayward
Chairman UKIP Scotland

OPEN LETTER TO ROD CAMPBELL MSP

OPEN LETTER

Rod Campbell MSP
Scottish Parliament
EDINBURGH

Dear Rod,
I write to seek your immediate active assistance on a matter of concern which is affecting communities across Scotland, but not least in my ward, East Neuk and Landward, in your constituency of North East Fife.

The concern is about the divisive impact which the Feed in Tariff and Community Benefit, provided to support the erection and operation of wind turbines, is having within communities.

The position is simple and easily understood.

We are witnessing a deluge of planning applications for wind turbines and wind farms in East Neuk and Landward, and across your constituency of North East Fife. The driver clearly is the financial benefit which accrues from the various forms of subsidy. I, and many others, consider that without those subsidies, the systems would be wholly uneconomic. A false market is being created and that is leading to considerable potential and actual change to our landscapes.

I would be content to deal with applications on their planning merits alone but I consider that the subsidies are bribes which distort reality. I consider that Scottish Executive's planned resultant pressure must even Have an undue influence on the objectivity of Planning Authority officials. They are human.

Communities are being offered wealth, based on those handouts. In East Neuk and Landward, we have witnessed the loss of a Community Council at Largoward, solely due to the division caused by just such a subsidised application.

Other Community Councils are also facing internal divisions and it may in fact be the case that the conflict of interests they now face is making fair representation by them of their communities impossible.

Further conflicts will arise through the very nature of these small rural communities. Moreover, it is often the case that many of the people who become members of Community Counils also step forward to run Trusts, of various sorts, set up to facilitate, or to gain access to, the subsidised funding packages. The conflicts are obvious.

I understand you were present for a short time at the beginning of a debate in Holytrood on this matter on Thursday 1st December. I hope you will now turn your full attention to this issue, follow the difficulties and debate within your communities and assess the impact which this SNP and Scotttish Executive policy is having.

I suggest you will be well advised to attend a few community council meetings in the East Neuk, the public meeting on the 1st March in St Andrews arranged by Cameron Community Council, and, yes, some sessions of the East Area planning committee.

I will be happy to meet you to elaborate on my concerns about the communities in my ward and in North East Fife in general.

This is, as you will know from the vast correspondence in our local and indeed, increasingly, in national papers, is a growing matter of public interest. I am therefore releasing this as an open letter.

Yours aye

Mike Scott-Hayward
Councillor
East Neuk and Landward

Chairman UKIP Scotland

It started with Blair

We are approaching a period of potentially huge change for the United Kingdom – its possible destruction. Not good news on which to begin 2012. The build up to a referendum which will decide the fate of the United Kingdom has now begun in earnest and the battleground is here, in Scotland. UKIP Scotland is unlikely to be a major player; the media will focus on the establishment and parties with elected parliamentarians – but we can and must be more than observers.

The battle over separatism will be waged over as much as two years and set against the background of the potential, probably pending, collapse of the Euro Zone. Both battles are vital to us and UKIP big guns must deploy here often. The major parties will do so in strength, and we should welcome a strong Unionist fight. Facts and figures and numerous scenarios will be postulated; whilst I believe that ultimately most people will vote based on their emotive roots rather than on sophistry, we must battle to win over the undecided.

The SNP have the upper hand now, the initiative is theirs. It is vital that we all resist any temptation unwittingly to aide and abet separation; the mistake of creating a wholly separate devolved parliament in Scotland, distinct from Britain’s Parliament, must not be replicated elsewhere in Great Britain. Our UKIP policy of abolishing MSPs and replacing them within the Scotland Act with MPs proper is, I believe, right. Indeed, I think an England Act should create devolved parliament on those same lines – existing English MPs sitting for England, with all MPs still together in the House of Commons. We have messed enough with our constitution, an horrendous mistake started by Blair and leading by Coalition complicity towards the unravelling of all thet we have ever been.

English Parliament et al

It is my view that the Scottish Parliament, and the Welsh Assembly, should be made up of those Members of Parliament sitting respectively for Scotland and Wales.

English MPs sitting as such would conducted English business but it may well be that there is a need for an England Act, to formalise English MPs sitting as such, with power to elect a First Minister and to create an English Executive. That English Parliament then would have powers similar to Scotland.

There would, of course, be a need for Acts of Parliament to remove MSPs and Assembly Members, to be replaced by MPs, and possibly also to amend and enhance the Welsh Assembly's powers and status to that of a Welsh Parliament, fully equivalent to the Scottish and English Parliaments.

MPs would continue to serve as they do now at Westminster, working together for the UK, and with their feet on the ground within the devolved Parliaments.