European Elections (or who I will not be voting for)

• 4th June 2009 at 14:12

Over the past few days I've had some pamphlets through the door from various parties who want my vote in the European Elections today. Here are the parties whose leaflets disappointed and/or disgusted me to the point that I will definitely not be voting for them, and made me feel the need to make this post in the first place.

UKIP

Now, I am not a fan of the EU for many reasons, so I should be right in the target audience for UKIP, who "Say No to European Union" (presumably as well as to grammar, but let's not split hairs). However, ignoring the never-ending stream of deliciously stupid mistakes of the past few years, their flyer would not persuade me to vote for them.

Lets ignore the picture of Churchill, which is a pathetic attempt to elicit war-time spirit and patriotism, by cynical politicians who think nothing of cheapening the iconic war-time image. Although his views in the late 1940s were similar to UKIPs now, if my knowledge of history serves correctly he actually proposed a union between Britain and France in 1940, and was the first person to speak publicly about a United States of Europe. Besides, a lot has changed in 60 years; who's to say he'd say the same thing now?

No, it's the actual content of the flyer. Pretty much every sentence starts "Say No" - as far as I can gather, their policy is just to be entirely negative about the EU. I couldn't see a single thing that they will actually do as MEPs - as the few MEPs that were elected last time have demonstrated, they are entirely incapable of achieving their aim of taking the country out of the EU. They simply don't have the power. Even their own pamphlet implies they're only good as a protest vote, to "send out-of-touch politicians a message they cannot ignore". Yes, because that proved so effective at the last european elections.

They're a joke. No clue, no actionable policies, no vote.

Labour

Regular readers will know that I hold Labour in contempt, and revel in any opportunity to point out their shortcomings. Most of you will already be aware that I disagree with our new and improved surveillance society, the piss-poor management of the economy by our Glorious Leader for 10 years and his subsequent piss-poor management of the country as a whole, and of course the pointless wars, bloating of civil service, constant spin, and headline-grabbing empty policies. However, those are things that we should be holding against them at a local or general election; we elect our Euro MPs based on what they will be able to do for us in Europe.

Sadly this distinction has been lost on Glyn Ford, who seems to be an MEP for my area. His head floats above scenic fields on the front page of his pamphlet, accompanied by a quote about how terrible the Tories are, and how Labour is just like President Barack Obama - although of course Labour isn't mentioned until the tiny white un-bold logo buried at the bottom of the page. At least it's good to see someone in the party isn't completely deluded about how popular and successful they are. But it's symbolic of what Labour have become - they know the only way they can get you to vote for them is to deceive you.

The inside of their pamphlet goes on about how wonderful Labour have been to Gloucestershire, and makes tentative links between what parliament does and what the European parliament does. But the best bit is that their pamphlet was glued shut, and surprisingly difficult to open - presumably so you wouldn't see the tiny picture of Gordon Brown on the inside, and instead would just read the back, about how terrible it is that the Tories want to cut spending, and that the Lib Dems want to legalise drug use - the scum.

No credibility, no policies, no vote.

As an aside, I will risk my future political career by coming out and saying that I support legalising drugs, at least in a controlled way. There are plenty of things in this country which are just as addictive, dangerous and destructive as illegal drugs but which are perfectly legal, such as alcohol, smoking, or Jeremy Kyle. If you legalise drugs you will start to lift the stigma and make it easier for people to come forward for help; you can control the supply of drugs at sale, ensuring people are educated on the risks and that they know how to take it safely; you can control the supply of drugs at source, protecting against the harmful effects of production on the country of origin; and you can tax it to the hilt, helping to clean up Brown's economic mess.

I feel the same way about prostitution; legalise it, license it, tax it, protect everybody involved. These things have been going on since time began, and the only thing you succeed in doing by making it illegal is to push it underground where people can be exploited without any protection or representation. Unlike certain (soon-to-be-former) members of our Glorious Leadership, I realise that we shouldn't ban something just because it doesn't fit into my limited view of how the world works.

With one exception:

BNP

There. I've done it. I've mentioned the BNP. I feel dirty doing so, just as I felt dirty holding their propaganda. But it's worth a mention because evidently many people around the country felt equally dirty about being approached to appear on their leaflets; I recognised the Elderly White Loving Couple and the Tanned-But-Still-White American Doctor from spending far too much time on iStockPhoto, and after a quick bit of digging, it turns out I'm right. Reason #374 not to let a photo of you go into a stock photography site.

I won't discuss their "policies" which ignore basic economic truths, or how, similar to UKIP, they're using a spitfire to call upon war-time spirit and patriotism, ignoring the irony that the fight was against a political system who discriminated against people based on race, and despite the fact that 1/5th of the pilots in the Battle of Britain were filthy stinking foreigners - particularly those damned Polish migrant workers, a squadron of whom racked up the highest number of kills in the war. See, they were coming over here and stealing jobs from good hard-working British People even then.

Wait, would these be the same hard-working British People who create the opening for foreign workers in the first place by realising they can make enough money to pay for Sky+ by working the benefits system, instead of getting a menial job that would involve having to wait a few hours before watching Jeremy Kyle?

That's enough of that - Charlie Brooker said it better anyway.

Fail.

Conservatives

Gosh. Really a no to them from me, a Tory born and bred? Well, their pamphlet was actually ok. They said it was a general election communication, and had stuff covering both the local council elections and the EU, with a bit of Gordon-bashing thrown in for good measure. What's not to like?

Well, I disagree with their MEP's policies. They think that copyright terms should be extended, that it's fine to store absurd amounts of data about internet use, and that the three strikes rule for cutting off internet access - based purely on an accusation from a biased commercial entity, without due process - is a fantastic plan.

Well, I make that three strikes - you're out.

So who will I vote for?

Good question. I'm still undecided:

• Lib Dems seem to mostly agree with what I care about most, but I haven't had a flyer from them, their general policies on Europe seem confused, and their website is down so I can't find out more.
• Libertas' policy for reforming the EU seems good, but can't find any actual policy details, let alone how they feel about internet rights. Have they published a manifesto? They certainly haven't posted me anything, which makes me feel left out. Perhaps they're just not running in my region?
• The Greens seem to agree with the ORG, seem to agree with Libertas regarding reforming the EU, and I support environmental reform - but I'm not a hippy.
• votematch.co.uk says I should vote UKIP *spit*

Decisions, decisions.

Comments

Leave a comment