UKIP announce candidates. World shakes.

UKIP have announced, apparently only some, of their 2011 Assembly Candidates.  Yet more spurned UUP members show up.  Trotter was Harry Hamilton’s campaign manager for UCUNF and was rejected for Assembly selection by both East Belfast and Upper Bann, while Reilly went to UKIP in 2007 after losing out to John McCallister in South Down.  He ran then as the only UKIP candidate and picked up a respectable 1200 votes, or put another way, exactly what he always gets at Council elections.

Anyone heard of any of the rest?

  • Marcus

    Reillys vote was always a personal vote. At the EU Election Count I remember seeing him wandering around wearing a TUV badge and hanging out with that lot.

    Cant say I know any of the others. I thought they were going to announce I big name defection?

  • unionistvoter

    Trotter was out of her depth at any level politically and her inclusion shows that she has acheived her dream of having her name on a ballot paper, any ballot paper

  • No Frank Carson?

  • Torregrosa is a long standing member, around 30 I think and is, as you would expect, libertarian. McGlade lives in North West England but is from here. He has been involved in UKIP NW and has been mulling over the idea of standing here for a while now. Robert Woods is a long-standing member of the party I believe.

    As I said on the other thread, the new office in Holborn Avenue was opened this lunchtime. There is a meeting ongoing as we speak in the Marine Court Hotel, Bangor, where Nigel Farage is speaking.

  • fitzjameshorse1745

    I welcome them. Anybody who actually furthers the democratic process by offering themselves to the Electorate deserve credit. Less deserving of credit are those who would scoff at them for so doing.
    Further evidence of course of just how risible the UFNUP project was in the first place….when one person goes to the AP and his election agent ends up with UKIP.
    And of course we now have the entertaining prospect of Mr Farge visiting us to boost the UKIP candidates. Arguably a bigger draw than Tom Elliott.

  • Michael Shilliday

    UKIP NI have two policies, crime and fishing. And I thought this was supposed to be a campaign that reached beyond Kilkeel this time!

    http://ukipni.org/category/policies/

  • fitzjameshorse1745

    Two policies……thats one more than the UUP.

  • Comrade Stalin

    fitz, you got there before me.

  • Comrade Stalin

    No actually fitz, it’s not fair. The UUP have several different policies, many of them on the same subject area.

  • ThomasMourne

    I agree with fitz.
    The more the merrier.
    The Monster Raving Loonies would fit well in here too.
    I might even get out of my chair to give them a vote.

  • Zig70

    bit confused on the policies. If I click read more it says leave a reply. Do they want me to tell them where to find fish?

  • I think that should link to the national website, where all the policies are listed.

    The UKIP campaign for the Assembly elections is being run by Jonathan Arnott, who is the General Secretary of the party and from Sheffield.

  • tinman

    Cecil Andrews is this fella: http://www.takeheed.net/Take_Heed_2011/UKIPNI/Cecil_and_UKIP_web_site_article.htm

    In his own words: “UK membership of the EU has been extremely detrimental to the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ as countless thousands, who adhere to an apostate form of ‘Christianity’ and countless others, who belong to an ideology (that incorporates a strong anti-Christian religious dimension) that seeks world domination and wishes to destroy democracy, have been allowed to flood unchecked into the UK…”

    Which I don’t think is either crime or fishing.

  • tinman deserves a prize for that link. May’s elections get ever more bizarre as the ballot papers fill up with real characters. Unbelievable.

  • ItwasSammyMcNally

    Excellent news another Unionist Party – you can never have enough – absolutely no excuse for lurking in the undergrowth of the Garden Centre.

    UUP
    TUV
    DUP
    BNP
    Alliance
    Tories
    PUP
    North Down Unionist Party
    UKIP

  • CliffNI

    Well boys and girls, good to see the democratic process in full swing. If they want to stand , let them work away. You can guffaw all you like, but at least people want to get involved. Less and less people are voting in all sections of our community. Wonder why that is? Stormont isn`t working and the people are becoming more and more detached. At least Elliott has opened up the debate on the current shambles currently being inflicted on Northern Ireland. DUP/Sinn Fein backslapping is getting us nowhere.

  • fitzjameshorse1745

    Comrade Stalin
    You agreed with me at 8.32pm
    And disagreed with me at 8.33pm.
    New Alliance strategy….two policies on one subject 😉

  • I wonder if we can find a UKIP policy that supports something that Cecil has already declared his opposition to on his website… shouldn’t take too long!

    Cecil was a regular writer to the Belfast Telegraph for years until they stopped publishing the letters a few years ago, always on the subject of how some Christian leader or organisation didn’t fit his extremely narrow view of what Christianity should be (ultra-strict Protestant, making the Free Presbyterians look liberal!) He may still get published in the News Letter, but I couldn’t be sure.

  • UKIP is a non-sectarian party (as stated on Mr. Andrew’s website)

    – Read Mr. Andrew’s words at tinman’s comment above. Cecil Andrew has just succeeded in sectarianising UKIP.

    OK, so it is liberal christians and atheists, rather than catholics who are the target of his criticism but so what. Mr. Andrew’s words undermine toleration of religious and non-religious belief systems.

    Northern Irish people do not need the like of Mr. Andrew in politics.

  • Rory Carr

    I rather think that it was Catholics and Muslims rather than “liberal christians and atheists” that Andrews was getting at in the snippet from Tinman, but I shouldn’t worry I’m sure he’ll get around to them shortly (if he hasn’t already).

    How did Nigel Farage manage to appear on BBC Question Time from Barking (no sniggering, please), Essex while he was also appearing at a meeting in Bangor, Co. Down? Can it be that he shares with the late Padre Pio the gift of bilocation, and if so will this taint him with a touch of Romanist mysticism that will serve to make him a target of Cecil Andrews?

  • Rory,

    You could be right. I can certainly see how his words can apply to Muslims and UKIP’s policy on immigration. Incidentally, it is not very different from Conservative pre-coalition policy.

    It is probably also worth mentioning that UKIP policy does not seem to fit very well with certain environmental policies, such as developing renewals, which are very much in Northern Ireland’s interests to develop.

    Climate change denial seems to have become an article of faith of the right, where Farage comfortably sits. Farage would probably get on like a “house on fire” with Sammy Wilson.

  • Comrade Stalin

    That guy Cecil is clearly as mad as an electric kipper.

    fitz, much as I’d like the idea of Alliance policy flowing out of my fingers as I type, I don’t think I’m quite there yet. Ah, if only they had Slugger and Facebook in the old days. It would have saved an awful lot of problems with the kulaks.

    Sammy, do you not think it’s a bit silly calling Alliance Unionist ? I know you’re a windup, but unionist parties generally don’t have the Taoiseach-in-waiting along to give a speech at their party conference.

  • Greenflag

    One Unionist party sitting on the wall ‘
    One Unionist party sitting on the wall ‘
    One Unionist party sitting on the wall ‘
    And if One Unionist party should accidently fall
    There’ll be Two Unionist parties
    Sitting on the wall

    Two Unionist parties sitting on the wall ‘
    Two Unionist parties sitting on the wall ‘
    Two Unionist parties sitting on the wall ‘
    An if One Unionist party should accidently fall
    There’ll be Three Unionist parties sitting on the wall ‘

    Three Unionist parties etc etc the rest I’ll leave to those out there who have time on their hands 🙂 This is a song without end -just the job for unionist mammies and daddies to sing to baby to put it to sleep 😉

    Mick’s recent analysis of vote segmentation and the failure of individual political parties anywhere on this island or others to command a majority of the vote seems to have reached an ‘extreme’ within ‘unionism ‘ in NI, although there appear to be factions within republicanism and nationalism which endeavour for similar diversity 😉

    In the Republic they are called Independents . But then we don’t have the need for a Monster Raving Loonie party -we are already oversupplied in that department 😉

    @ Comrade Stalin

    Cecil as mad as an electric kipper ? A note just in from Electric of Kipper’s Anonymous states that they very much resent that comparison and will be knocking on your door to demand satisfaction or else 😉

  • Greenflag

    apologies all -too many bloody smilies above an oversupply 🙁

  • ItwasSammyMcNally

    CS,

    I am a fan of the Alliance Party (again) after they got their act together over Police and Justice – they are a sensible, moderate Unioinst party – and of a type that the Tories could have bedded in with (as opposed to the UUP) except of course for their differnces on non-constitutional matters.

    Calling a party a ‘Unionist’ party is not a pejorative term – just descriptive of their poltical outlook.

  • “….the Alliance Party …….are a sensible, moderate Unioinst party..”

    Sammy, with respect, you are confused. Part of that may be to do with the fact that there are no successful nationalist right or unionist left parties in Northern Ireland politics.

    It should be a rather simple matter to test whether a party is unionist or not. The Alliance Party takes no position on whether there should be a united Ireland in the future. It is therefore, very simply, not a unionist party.

  • Munsterview

    Comrade S : ” but unionist parties generally don’t have the Taoiseach-in-waiting along to give a speech at their party conference…..”

    The last Taoiseach of Fine Gael said that the proudest day of his life was not as one may think, being elected as head of Irish Government and getting his seal of office from the President, rather it was his meeting with Prince Charles !

    As to the Taoiseach in waiting : of course he was well at home with Alliance much more in fact than he could have been with any other Southern Political party bar his own. I would not be one bit surprised to find him ( if he makes Taoiseach) coming out from a meeting with the Queen ( if she visits) waving a document and proclaiming ” She has agreed to take us back” !

  • ItwasSammyMcNally

    SM,

    “Sammy, with respect, you are confused. ”

    I think a reasonable defintion of a unionist party is one that is content with the constitutional status quo (the Union) and does not wish to, or seek to, change it.

    The confusion is, I would respectfully suggest, all yours.

  • JAH

    I’d like to start my own Unionist Party. I sent off for the Union Jack and downloaded the instructions on how to fly it the right way up from UnionistsRUs. I bought a sash of Ebay (although why’s it green?). Now what else?

    I don’t need to have any members of my party. I just pretend that I’ve been unanimously selected for some obscure backwater when in fact all I did was look in the mirror. I’ll nab a few guys down the 19th hole at the golf club to nominate me and I’m running! Sorted.

    Policies are a bit tricky. Yes it’s the usual core of Kick the Pope plus a list of crackpot ideas from the David Vance Charm School. But how can I differentiate myself further? Is there room for another far right anti everything party? Can’t go centre as the DUP are heading there and there’s the PUP and Alliance to the centre and left..

    Or maybe I can become a Republican Unionist party? Is there a niche for that?

    Damn SF got there first.

  • ItwasSammyMcNally

    Damn SF got there first.

    Harsh

  • JAH,

    Very amusing.

  • Comrade Stalin

    Calling a party a ‘Unionist’ party is not a pejorative term – just descriptive of their poltical outlook.

    But it’s not descriptive of their political outlook. I’m about as much of a unionist as Gerry Adams is.

  • ItwasSammyMcNally

    CS,

    I was not commenting above on your politcal views but on the Alliance Party as falling with in the definition repeated below

    ” a reasonable defintion of a unionist party is one that is content with the constitutional status quo (the Union) and does not wish to, or seek to, change it. “

  • Reader

    ItwasSammyMcNally: (quoting someone) ” a reasonable defintion of a unionist party is one that is content with the constitutional status quo (the Union) and does not wish to, or seek to, change it. “
    That’s not a reasonable definition of a unionist party. By that definition, there was a unionist party in Government in the last Dail:
    http://greenparty.ie/en/about
    Really, to be a unionist party (or a nationalist party) there would need to be an element of advocacy.
    Your quote, with its assumption of “if you’re not with us, you’re against us” is surely from a one issue politician in full campaign mode. Not that we are short of those guys.

  • Reader,

    I agree with you. I got fed up arguing with IWSM though.

    I would add that one should not be surprised by Sammy’s desire to re-define a unionists.

    Community politics, sprinkled with a bit of sectarianism, is essential to Sinn Fein’s survival. A party, which is agnostic on the union, would be a threat to the survival of community politics if it became the biggest party in Northern Ireland.

  • ItwasSammyMcNally

    SM,

    ” I got fed up arguing with IWSM though”. Your arguing comprised offering a bit of many playing – ie “Sammy, with respect, you are confused.”

    I offered a definition (with some reciprocal) man playing and that was it. If you had ve an ‘arguement’ you could have offered an alternative definition – or challenged mine as Reader had done. But man playing is obviulsy less challenging fro you?

    Reader,

    That is my own definition, not a party political one. It is an interesting point regarding the Green Party and if they didnt/dont have a policy regarding Irish Unification then it is arguable that they are, de-facto a Unionist party, just as I would describe them as being pro-Europe or pro Irish indepedence i.e. they support the staus quo.

    So are you suggesting that the Green Party or indeed any Irish Nationlaist parties dont support Irish
    Independence (which is also the status quo) because there is not an ‘element of advoacy’ ?

    I put it you my good man that your arguement doesnt
    really hold.

    In reality, of course given the Green Party operate as an All Ireland basis it would be be a bit silly to call them a Unionist Pary as presumably they could have joined with the British Green Party – and it would be interesting to know how that debate unfolded within their ranks.

    Regarding, single issue politics/constitutional poltics, it is entirely laudable and understandable of the Alliance party to park this issue but that does not mean that they do not operate within certain poltical and constitutional realities and simply attacking those who point that out (like my goodself) does not diminsih those realities.

  • Sammy,

    There are definitions (presumably widely accepted) of what “unionist” or “unionism” means in the Northern Ireland context.

    You may agree of disagree that there is a distinction between these definitions and yours. I will just quote one of them, which is the Oxford definition. I have highlighted in bold the operative word

    support for the maintenance of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (since 1921, Northern Ireland). “

  • Sorry, I cocked up my code. Should have only written in bold the word “support”

  • Reader

    It was Sammy: So are you suggesting that the Green Party or indeed any Irish Nationlaist parties dont support Irish
    Independence (which is also the status quo) because there is not an ‘element of advoacy’ ?

    In reality, of course given the Green Party operate as an All Ireland basis it would be be a bit silly to call them a Unionist Pary as presumably they could have joined with the British Green Party – and it would be interesting to know how that debate unfolded within their ranks.

    I spent a small amount of time on the GP website, certainly none of their headline policies (and they had quite a few) related to the national question or to partition. There’s no real reason why they should, once the GP has recognised that the matter has already been devolved to the electorate for a future date.
    The Orange Order is organised on an all Ireland basis. I don’t think that makes them into a Nationalist organisation. Neither is the (6 county) SDLP a unionist party.
    There’s a lot of deliberate or incidental fuzziness out there, at odds with your belief that everything needs to bear one of two (only) labels. You might recognise, at least, that *your* preferred flag has 3 colours on it, and use some white sticky labels too.

  • ItwasSammyMcNally

    Seymour Major,

    “support for the maintenance of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (since 1921, Northern Ireland). “

    Yes, support is the operative word – and we are debating whether that support needs to be explicit or implicit, I am suggesting the latter and that the Alliance Party implcitily supports the Union.

    Reader,

    “There’s a lot of deliberate or incidental fuzziness out there, at odds with your belief that everything needs to bear one of two (only) labels. You might recognise, at least, that *your* preferred flag has 3 colours on it, and use some white sticky labels too”

    I agree there is much ‘fuzziness’ and the GFA itself is an exercise in constitutional ‘fuzziness’ – buth that does not mean that it is not reasonable to infer form a Party’s attitude to the status quo what their position is.

    You suggested, that advocacy should be the test of whether a Party supports a particular policy or not this does not hold as we can see from many party policies which implicitly support the status quo on a whole range of areas and so the defintion I offered above survives unscathed.