Not a happy bunny

Your Freedom and Ours has a look at the "Ganley revival". Helen is not a happy bunny, even if she is highly amused by this peculiar man.

COMMENT: "BLAST FROM THE PAST" THREAD

A blast from the past

How interesting it is that we see Declan Ganley coming out of the woodwork again. We never did trust him, and he hardly covered himself with glory in the Lisbon campaign. But he was always a man to watch.

Mary Ellen Synon now says of him that his desire to see the member states of the European Union turn into a federal union based on the United States is just blush-making. Her piece is well worth a read in its entirety. It is too long and too detailed, and too finely written, to summarise adequately.

Booker and North and The Great Deception come out of it well though.

COMMENT THREAD

Nooooooo, it's Yes!

FINAL: It's over. All 43 results are in. The national result is 67.1 percent for the "yes" campaign and 32.9 percent for the "noes". It is being called "swing Saturday". Unlike the second Nice vote, where the "no" vote stayed firm and more "yes" voters turned out, there has been clear evidence of a shift in sentiment, on top of the six percent increase in turnout. Either way, the Irish have sold the pass. It's down to Klaus now.

UPDATE: The president of the EU parliament, Jerzy Buzek, said the result was "good news for Ireland and good news for Europe" but said it was "not the end of the story. Now we must start to work to overcome the difficulties. Our citizens are afraid of the energy issue, the unemployment rate, about immigration, demography and we can do that together, as it was before, also in the future, in solidarity."

"We should also think about those who were answering 'no' because it is our habit and it is our custom to think about all Europeans. I can assure (you) I will work very hard and do feel that it is our common Europe. Let us write our common European history."

UPDATE: Gerry Adams says the Irish political establishment had ignored the decision of the Irish voters after the first Lisbon referendum. They would regret the day they ignored the views of "no" voters this time.

UPDATE: More from Barroso: "Thank you Ireland ... the Irish people have spoken – they have said a resounding 'yes' to Europe. I'm extremely happy at this resounding vote for Europe." And when they said "no"?

UPDATE: Only three constituencies to declare: Carlow-Kilkenny, Dublin North Central and Longford-Westmeath. Sinn Féin Senator Pearse Doherty says he is delighted with the "no" vote in Donegal. It is a clear signal from people in the county that they will not be bullied by the government. A decisive victory for the "bully boys" says Farage. Out of fear, a small country has been bullied into changing its vote. Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny said the result was "a mature reflective decision and the Irish people had risen above cynicism, frustration and anger and had put their country first."

Nationwide turnout is 59.2 percent (1,674,897), up 6 percent on the 2008 referendum.

UPDATE: Klaus is keeping shtum. He has declined to say how he would proceed on the Czech ratification. "The question does not exist today. Today I have a ban...until the Constitutional Court releases something," he said.

UPDATE: Brown joins in the chorus - "The treaty is good for the UK and good for Europe. We can now work together to focus on the issues that matter most to Europeans: a sustained economic recovery, security, tackling global poverty, and action on climate change." Now 33 results in ... 66.8-33.2 percent.

UPDATE: "Now that all Member States have democratically approved the Lisbon Treaty," says Barroso, "I hope that the necessary procedures for its entry into force can be completed as quickly as possible in Poland and the Czech Republic. Today was indeed a great day for the European Union."

UPDATE: Brian Cowen has formally declared victory. There are now 28 results in ... 66.9-33.1 - a two-to-one margin.

UPDATE: With 23 (of 43) results in, well over half way, the "yes" vote is holding up, at 67.8 percent – as against 32.2 percent for "no". Turnout is 59.6 percent – higher than 2008. The result of the day will be Dublin South, which voted "yes" with a resounding 81.67 percent, only 18.3 percent voting against.

After all the nervous tension, the "colleagues" are now relaxing. There had been suggestions that Sweden might call an extra meeting to put pressure on Vaclav Klaus but Swedish prime minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt - holder of the EU presidency – says there is now no need for one. Discussions are going to be left for the European Council in October.

UPDATE: EU commission president, José Manuel Barroso, says the result "shows the value of European solidarity". Nigel Farage compares the referendum to a corrupt election in Zimbabwe or Afghanistan. Twelve results in now, and the trend is holding at 64.6 for the "yes" side. It's all over bar the shouting. The battle now begins.

UPDATE: Nine of 43 counts completed ... running at 64.8 percent "yes" and 35.2 "no", with an average swing of 20.2 percent. Turnout 58.9 percent. That looks to be a firm trend established. Results as they come in can be seen here.

UPDATE: Kildare North has recorded a "yes" vote with 76.19 percent of the vote (32,012). A mere 23.81 percent (10,002) voted "no". The constituency voted "yes" in 2008, but the margin increased by 21.57 percent. Donegal North East has voted "no" - as expected. The vote was 51.46 percent (15,005) for the noes, and 48.54 percent (14,156) for "yes". That gives a swing to the "yes" side of 13.24 percent. Tipperary North has fallen in with the "children" and voted "yes" with 70.38 percent (25,768) of the votes, against 29.62 percent (10,846) "no". The swing is 20.58 percent on a turnout of 52 percent (down from 58.5 percent in 2008 when the vote was 50-49.6 in favour of the "no" campaign).

UPDATE: David Cameron has issued a statement, retailed here: "This weekend we will hear the results of the referendum in Ireland on the re-named EU Constitution. I want to make one thing clear: there will be no change in our policy on Europe and no new announcements at the conference."

Kenneth Clarke will be happy. It would be a "disaster" if the conference was overshadowed by "a row about Europe", he says. He tells The Daily Telegraph, "Most people (i.e., himself), if you say shall we have a debate about the Treaty of Lisbon at our party conference will feel an inner shudder".

UPDATE: "This vote will strengthen the EU and enable it to act in a more unified manner in tackling the many global issues that it faces in today's world" says Joseph Daul, president of the EPP group in the EU parliament. "I particularly commend the Irish voters for the wisdom they exercised in distinguishing between the truth and the lies which unfortunately played such a prevalent part of this campaign," he crows says. And they still voted "yes"?

Liam Murphy, a Dublin cab driver and a "no" voter, says: "We have been fed lies and blackmailed with scaremongering about the economy. It is scaremongering by a government that just wants to hang on to its own jobs." At a polling station in the Dublin suburb of Tallaght, Kathleen Cummins said that the Irish had been "bullied and treated like children" into holding the second vote. And, like children, they've run to nanny.

UPDATE: First result in ... Tipperary South. 68.42 percent (22,712) voted "yes", while 31.58 percent (10,483) voted "no" - a 21.63 percent swing (last time 52.9-46.6 for the "no" campaign). Only ten of the 43 constituencies voted "yes" in 2008. Rhis time there will be a majority in nearly every constituency, says RTE.

UPDATE: Stephen Collins, political editor of the Irish Times offers his "take" on the "decisive victory" for the "yes" side. It is clear signal that the overwhelming majority of voters want Ireland to remain an outward looking country at the heart of the European project, rather than retreating back to an isolated position on the periphery, he says.

"The reasons for the big change of heart from the first referendum last year are many, but it is hard to escape the conclusion that economic crisis focused the minds of many voters on the importance of good relations with our EU neighbours in order to restore the country's prosperity."

UPDATE: A wipeout is being predicted - a clean sweep apart from Donegal North East, the only constituency where a "no" result looks certain.

UPDATE: Indications are that Cowen's constituency of Laois Offaly has again voted "yes". In 2008 the vote went 56 to 44 percent in favour of the treaty, but the early tallies with just under half the boxes open suggest that the "yes" vote could be as high as 70 percent. Nationwide, the "yes" vote is estimated to be in the region of 65 percent, up nearly 20 percent on 2008.

UPDATE: Foreign minister Michael Martin is claiming victory. "It looks like a convincing win," he says. "It's good for Ireland."

UPDATE: Ganley concedes defeat. "This is a very convincing win," the Libertas leader told reporters at the main Dublin counting centre. He accused the "yes" campaign of playing on the fears of many voters, particular in connection with jobs and said he would come back next October with the "Yes for Jobs" posters "and see how we are all doing".

UPDATE: Limerick East put up a turnout five percent above last time, with a high "no" vote in working class areas of the city, producing results in the 70 percent region. Tallies indicate a strong "yes" vote in South Roscommon, homeland of minister Michael Finneran. Some boxes were as high as 90 percent "yes". The vote seems to be split on "class" lines. Meanwhile, Jens Peter Bonde is saying that "Friday 2 October 2009 will be seen as a sad day in European history."

UPDATE: Ian Traynor for The Guardian writes that a "yes" vote will see Merkel and Sarkozy and others "move quickly to introduce the changes under the Lisbon treaty." Intense politicking, he writes, will immediately ensue over the two plum posts created by Lisbon: a president of Europe who will chair EU summits and serve for up to five years, and an EU foreign policy chief. And what about the Czechs and Poles?

UPDATE: The wages of fear - all boxes are opened in Kerry North and tallies are indicating a 60:40 margin in favour of the "yes" side. Turnout was 50 percent. Sinn Féin TD for North Kerry, Martin Ferris, said the campaign run by "yes" side put fear into voters and had a huge effect.

UPDATE: Early tallies across the six Dublin city constituencies suggest a decisive victory for the "yes" side. The Dublin South West constituency, which recorded the highest "no" vote in the state last time, is now indicating a clear "yes" vote, probably in the region of 60 percent. However, the predominately working class areas of Jobstown, west Tallaght and Killinarden are remaining two to one in favour of a "no" vote, according to tallies.

With 50 percent of boxes opened in Dublin South, some 73.5 percent of votes appeared to be in favour of a "yes", compared with 62.5 percent last time, indicating a 10 percent jump in the "yes" vote.

UPDATE: RTE reports unofficial results indicate that the "yes" side is surging ahead. "It looks like a convincing win for the 'yes' side," foreign minister Michael Martin says. The first partial tally came from the constituency of Carlow-Kilkenny - which was exactly 50:50 in the first Lisbon Referendum, but is now said to be running two or three to one in favour of the treaty.

There is a huge swing towards "yes" in the Dublin constituencies with early tallies indicating a 60:40 breakdown for the "yes" side. In Dublin South, with 90 percent of ballot boxes opened, 62.9 percent were "yes". The southern city of Cork was showing a 66 percent trend in favour of the treaty. A "sea change" had also taken place in Cork rural constituencies according to the RTE correspondent.

UPDATE: Statement by Anthony Coughlan (who thinks we've lost). "Not the will of the people, but the fear of the people, has led a majority of Irish voters to approve ratifyng the Lisbon Treaty in yesterday's re-run referendum.

Ireland's voters voted not on the content of Lisbon but on membership of the EU, on fear of political isolation if they did not say Yes to the same Treaty as they said No to last year, and on the promise of jobs and economic recovery which the Yes-side bullied and bamboozled them into believing was they would get if they only voted Yes.

Thus the bankrupt Irish political Establishment, which has ruined its country's economy, has opted through stupidity and fear to clamp an undemocratic Constitution on itself and most of Europe."

UPDATE: Statement from our revered co-editor - If there really is a strong "yes" vote and the Irish whinge in a few months because they did not get what they were "promised", I shall laugh and laugh.

UPDATE: The Independent is claiming that David Cameron faces "a major revolt" by Conservative party grassroots over his policy on Europe (it means the European Union). It cites a poll of "2,205 Tory members" which finds that more than eighty percent want him to call a referendum on the treaty, even if it has been fully ratified by the next general election. Where the Irish go, young David fears to tread.

UPDATE: Offical results expected at 5.30 this evening. Early tallies suggest "strong 'yes' vote".

UPDATE: Counting has started ... and more on that exit poll. A Fine Gael spokesman is claiming that the poll was conducted amongst a representative sample of 1,000 voters at 33 locations (approx 30 at each location). He claims "a massive 'yes' vote in Dublin, touching close to the 70 percent mark," while it was nearer to 60 percent in the rest of the country.

PREVIOUS: Europe is holding its breath after polls closed in Ireland's controversial Lisbon Treaty referendum re-run, we are told by the Press Association.

Casting his ballot in his home county of Offaly in the Midlands, Taoiseach Brian Cowen was cautiously optimistic of a pro-Lisbon Treaty win. "The people's decision is sovereign and of course that will be the case, but I'm hopeful that in the context of today we'll have a good outcome," he said.

Words fail me!

COMMENT THREAD

Rising from the dead

One would have thought that Declan Ganley, after his drubbing in the euro-elections, might stay in his little hole – especially as we heard that he was to quit politics.

The ego will always out, though, and the great man has now re-emerged to take command of the second Irish referendum, giving the Wall Street Journal the benefit of his pearls of wisdom.

For a man who chose a former MoD publicity officer as the leader of his election campaign, and who offered a platform where to describe it as "incoherent" would be an undeserved compliment, to have him on the "no" side is something of a mixed blessing.

The chances are, though, that he has picked the winning side, as sentiment hardens against the “colleagues” and the Irish people realise they are being taken for fools – and have the fortune to have the opportunity to deliver the shamrock version of a Bronx cheer to their masters.

If the Irish people prevail, it will most likely be in spite of rather than because of Ganley's efforts, this dim little man still prattling about being a "committed European." He is not a eurosceptic, not in any way, shape or form, he tells us, chirping that he believes, "that Europe's future as united is the only sensible way forward."

While saddled with Ganley, however, the "no" campaign is able to benefit from the increasingly crass hand being played by the Irish government, which is relying on a procession of visiting commissioners in an attempt to sweet-talk the Irish into believing that the EU can turn water into wine.

If the Irish do fall for this blarney, we will have to revisit all those Irish jokes but, on the face of it, the only jokes currently in town are the Irish government and Ganley.

COMMENT THREAD

So farewell then ...

The Independent reports that Declan Ganley, the would-be saviour of Europe, has quit politics. Mr Ganley had asked for a recount in the horribly complicated Irish voting system because he thought that some of his votes had been allotted to another candidate. It turned out to be the other way round and the votes, allotted properly put Mr Ganley 13,000 behind the front three runners in the North West euro constituency. (That is, clearly, not the same as the North West euro constituency in England.)

Mr Ganley has rather grandly announced that Libertas was not about him and his return to the private sector will not affect the campaign in the second Irish referendum one bit.

On the whole, this can be described as utter tosh. Mr Ganley made quite sure that much of the campaign was about him. Even if that were not true, his behaviour has done great damage to the cause, damage that it may not recover from.

As readers of this blog know, we were sceptical of Mr Ganley and Libertas.eu both for personal and political reasons. Mr Ganley and the Former British Soldier, Robin Matthews, who led the UK campaign, did little to endear themselves to people who were interested in their activity. (As I said before, I do not take kindly to people who patronize me, unless it happens to be the boss.)

Their political ideas were muddled, (and here) to put it mildly. The idea that there could be some sort of a reform of the European Union through the Toy Parliament, no matter who is elected is laughable in its ignorance of the structure of the political entity they were haughtily explaining to others. (Haughtily but rather vaguely.)

Added to that was the incoherent campaigning that consisted of appeals to eurosceptic groups interspersed with assertions that Libertas.eu was definitely Europhile, as, indeed, it was.

I lost track of the number of press releases I was sent, all of which attacked UKIP. When I asked for a reason, I was told that they were anxious to make sure that UKIP did not benefit from the expenses scandals and, therefore, they had to keep reminding people of such dubious characters as Tom Wise.

This would be logical if people voted solely on the basis of what they thought about the expenses scandal. But that was not so. The fact that UKIP came second, the vote for the various eurosceptic parties added up to a sizeable chunk and the BNP got two seats in the Toy Parliament would indicate that there was a great deal more on people's minds. That is why neither Libertas.eu nor Jury Team did particularly well. It was not simply an anti-politician vote, though there was an element of that.

Finally, there was Libertas's unfortunate tendency to be less than completely transparent in its descriptions of its activity.

For those or other reasons Libertas.eu did as badly as we expected in Britain and 25 other member states. Perhaps a little worse than we expected in Poland. What was rather shocking is how badly the party did in Ireland where the only other one to oppose the Constitutional Lisbon Treaty was Sinn Fein. Did the Irish really vote on domestic issues only or did they feel they had had enough of Mr Ganley and his merry men (and women)?

The answer can come only from someone who is better acquainted with the situation in that country. However, it seems to us obvious that Mr Ganley made a monumental mistake when he allowed his vanity to lead him into trying to form a pan-European party.

Flushed with the triumph of the No vote in the first Irish referendum he ought to have sat back and said that he was interested only in stopping the treaty. This could not be done in the Toy Parliament (a point that escaped Mr Ganley, I suspect) and, therefore, Libertas was not going to get involved in those elections but wait for the second referendum and campaign there.

At most, he should have campaigned only in Ireland, making that into a back-up referendum. He and his colleagues might have done quite well.

Instead, Mr Ganley decided to promote himself and his followers into a band of brothers dedicated to the salvation and reform of the European project. They failed miserably and deservedly. In the process, though, they destroyed Libertas's political credibility in Ireland and damaged, very severely, the chances of a No vote in October when the second referendum is likely to take place. (Smart money is on October 10 but no decision can be taken until the Referendum Bill is passed by the Dail in July.)

The battle in Ireland will be a tough one, made much tougher by Declan Ganley's recent antics and failure. We, in this country, must do all we can to help. This blog is standing by.

COMMENT THREAD

It's happening all over

The Labour Party won the European Parliament elections by a landslide, garnering 57 percent of the first count votes. That is the news from Malta, based on early samples taken as the sorting of votes started.

Thus, while we (or some of us) are immersed in the train wreck that is British politics, awaiting tonight's results which will tell us how badly the government party has fared, this is an early sign that there is a significant anti-government movement sweeping the whole of EUrope.

Everywhere, it seems government parties are braced to take heavy losses at the polls and, with the citizens of 19 of the 27 EU member states going through the charade today of electing MEPs, poor turnouts are being reported which further intensifies this expected trend.

José Manuel thingy has been jumping up and down in his native Portugal, exhorting "European citizens" to head for the ballot boxes to elect an EU parliament, his reward being a turnout which is expected to fall below the 45.5 percent record (for low turnouts).

As well as Malta, we now see in Holland Geert Wilders' Party for Freedom came second with 17 percent of the vote, winning four seats in the parliament, with prime minister Jan Peter Balkenende's Christian Democrats finishing with less than 20 percent of the vote. Austria may deliver the FPOe a win 14-17 percent of the vote, three times more than in 2004.

In Greece, where voting is obligatory, the lack of enthusiasm for the main political parties is expected to lead to a 35 percent abstention rate. There, the conservative party has a one-seat parliamentary majority in the Greek parliament and, like the UK, an early general election is considered a real possibility if it fails to retain its presence in the European parliament.

Ireland is also set to deliver some interesting results, where we have also seen the results of the local elections and two by-elections, which delivered rebuke to the two government parties. Fianna Fail, the party of Mr Cowen, received 24.55 percent of the first preference vote, 7.5 percent down on 2004. The euros are expected to go the same way, with Declan Ganley's Libertas party expected to exceed poll expectations.

Interestingly, share in some places is as high as 30 percent, way above the 9 percent poll predictions. Says Sean Ganley, brother of Declan, "Clearly the polls have been completely inaccurate but the people haven't allowed themselves to be misled by inaccurate polls."

One wonders if UK polls are going to prove similarly "inaccurate", giving Labour – and perhaps even the Tories – a bigger shock than anticipated. If so, the "others" could indeed be on a roll.

We'll open up a running post just after eight this evening, ready to report the results - with analysis - as they come in.

COMMENT THREAD

Different views on Ireland

Anthony Coughlin of The National Platform that has been fighting the good fight in Ireland since long before Libertas was even a gleam in Declan Ganley's eye has sent me an article about Ireland that appeared in the New York Times. None of them seem all that impressed by the Celtic Tiger and its ability to go on thriving in the new economic situation.

Paul Krugman, who has won the Nobel Prize for Economics (which is not really a Nobel Prize exactly but let that pass) and, therefore, is to be taken with a large dose of salt, thinks that Ireland has got into the mess it is in by opening itself to the great free market and the government is now making matters worse by "is being forced to raise taxes and slash government spending in the face of an economic slump — policies that will further deepen the slump".

He is worried that America might go the same way.

A somewhat different point of view comes from the Mises Institute. Under the delightful title of "The Celtic Kitten", John Engle explains that Ireland's problems stem largely from excessive government intervention. Mind you, I don't know where he gets the idea that it is something new. So far as I can make out the Irish government has always had controlling interest in "public transport, electricity generation and transmission, and broadcasting media (radio and television)".

What of the EU subsidies that under-wrote a good deal of that much admired economic growth? What part did that play?

COMMENT THREAD

And the news is?

"EU trains a new diplomatic corps - without waiting for Lisbon Treaty" storms the Telegraph, with Bruno Waterfield doing his bit to keep us informed.

This is the EU's putative External Action Service (EEAS), with five hundred and thirty staff from the EU commission having already begun training to build a "shared diplomatic culture and an esprit de corps", ready to take over once the treaty has been bludgeoned into place.

Then we get Declan Ganley telling us that: "It is cause for serious concern that, by implementing the Lisbon Treaty, EU institutions are manifesting outright contempt for democracy." He is right to be concerned. As we wrote:

The EU is also forging ahead with a European diplomatic service, officially called an External Action Service, with EU embassies and ambassadors in every country to project EU foreign policy and issue EU visas. The service, which some governments hope will replace national diplomatic services, will answer to the European foreign minister, a post created by the constitution, but to which Javier Solana, the EU's current head of foreign policy, has already been appointed.

Officials have been told by member governments to start laying the groundwork for the European diplomatic service. One official said the work was continuing: "We are in limbo, but we are carrying on. What else can you do right now?" A British government spokesman said, however: "The external action service does not exist. The only thing happening is preparatory work, and it will not come into being without a treaty."

The only thing is that we wrote this on 8 June 2005, based on a story in The Times. In December 2005, there was further evidence that the EU was implementing the constitutional treaty and, as we know from COM(2006)712 final, it has been actively plotting to take over embassy functions for some considerable time.

This is simply the tip of the iceberg, just another step in the slow process of integration. There is no point in complaining about it – this is what the EU does. The EU, by its very nature, by the very fact that it exists, makes it contemptuous of democracy. It is there to destroy democracy. The only option is to get out.

What is different, of course, is that we are coming up to the euro-elections. So we not only have Ganley pitching in, the Conservatives are also staking a claim.

We thus have Mark Francois, the Conservative spokesman on the EU, declaring: "This project shows just how much more power Brussels would gain over our foreign policy. It is outrageous that the British people are being denied any say over it. That's why the Conservatives will be campaigning for a referendum in the European elections."

And when the election is over, the parties will go back to sleep and we will hear no more until it is convenient to raise it again … when plans will be even further advanced. Nothing else will have changed.

COMMENT THREAD

Still in a fog

Two press releases from Libertas UK (as they still call themselves) yesterday. Well, at least, they keep themselves busy. I hear, by the way, that Jury Team has had a tremendous website response. People are knocking on the door very insistently or, at least, as some of the pro-referendum demo organizers realized, looking at the website. As a political force that remains ungagable.

One press release is a response to Caroline Flint's highly amusing admission that she had not really read the Constitutional Lisbon Treaty though she had assured us all that the Irish no vote was based on a misunderstanding of that document. How would she know, precisely?

Mind you, there is no call for the Conservatives to crow. I recall similar admissions by Conservative Ministers with relation to the Maastricht Treaty. Memory failure is no excuse in politics.

Libertas's comments about Ms Flint are reasonable enough. Having reminded everyone that Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen had not read the treaty either, they add:

Flint and Cowen can't read it and we shouldn’t have to. Democratic governance should be transparent and accountable, not opaque and elitist.

Not sure what they mean by elitist. After all, is it not the case that we would all like to see better and more intelligent people in politics and is that not elitist? The trouble with the whole Libertas mess is that they are not all that good at drawing conclusions either. The whole purpose of the European project is to be unaccountable – its founders and promoters have not time for democracy but, much worse, they have not time for accountability or freedom either.

That Libertas and its denizens do not understand what the fight is really about is shown by the sentence that follows:

Libertas advocates a peoples' constitution that is clear and understandable.

What is a peoples’ constitution and who actually needs or wants it (apart from Mr Ganley and the Former British Soldier, Robin Matthews)? What is wrong with the constitutional structures we already have? You know the ones that involve the Houses of Parliament or the Houses of the Oireachtas or whatever other legislatures the various countries have, not to mention existing legal systems?

The other press release, rather oddly deals with the … ahem … inappropriate expenses on Home Secretary Jacqui Smith’s account. Libertas, they tell us, are in a position to prove that this is merely one aspect of prevailing corruption that is present in the European Parliament as well as in the national one.

As in London, so in Brussels, where the bloated bureaucracy works for itself, not for European people.

Libertas has revealed that, fresh from awarding themselves massive pay rises and lower taxes, our MEPs have decided to also let their assistants help themselves to even more of our money. Employing family and friends (or even fictitious people) in these roles is commonplace and makes abuse very hard to track, making it easy for MEPs and their associates to help themselves to unbelievable amounts of European taxpayers cash.

I am shocked, I tell you, shocked, not least by the press release writer’s inability to put an apostrophe where it is required. But, seriously, none of us knew that about MEPs until Mr Ganley and his merry men came along. Or did we?

Never mind. Former British Soldier, present UK campaign manager for Libertas and prospective Toy Parliament candidate in the South-West, Robin Matthews knows the answer:

As Matthews explained “Libertas wants the people have their say so that together we can build a Europe that we can believe in. This means holding Brussels to account in order to stop the waste and save money. We need to open up the corridors of power and make the EU work for us, not for them."

Robin Matthews added "How can we expect national parties to hold Brussels to account for its corruption and waste when they are too are busy helping themselves to taxpayers money."

I am looking forward to Colonel Matthews explaining to me what he really means by the EU working for us, not for them. He certainly failed to do so at the launch.

COMMENT THREAD

Wooops ...

Libertas, having launched its UK campaign a few days ago, has run into a spot of bother. As my co-editor mentioned, "three UKIPers" had beaten the party to the draw and registered the name with the Electoral Commission. Actually, the three are Bridget Rowe, Damian Wilson and Mick Greenhough, the former an ex-tabloid editor, reported to be friendly with Nigel Farage. They did this in December, taking, as they say, the "as" out of Libertas.

Hilariously, the desperate (but not that desperate) Ganley crew has offered them £2,000 for the complete thing. The three have so far declined, saying they are not interested in the money. Should Ganley add a few noughts, or should he be looking for a different name?

COMMENT THREAD

Muddled thinking

Having expressed a certain lack of enthusiasm for the great Declan Ganley, I did go with interest to the launch of the Libertas's electoral campaign in the UK.

The press conference was not as well attended as I would have expected. When Kilroy Silk launched Veritas in 2005, there was barely standing room in the big hall in One Great George Street and the main media had sent their big guns.

This launch was thinly attended though I gather from Mark Mardell's blog on the BBC site that he was there or, at least, he had spoken to the leader of the campaign, Robin Matthews, described as a former British soldier. Actually, that may have been the previous day as the blog was posted at 10.30 am, the start of the press conference.

A "former British Soldier" is a remarkably coy way of describing a 21-year army career and Mr Matthews was no more forthcoming during the press conference, saying merely that he had served in Bosnia, Sierra Leone and Afghanistan. Mr Ganley also added in ringing tones (he is good at ringing tones) how ironic it was that Mr Matthews has travelled round the world as a British soldier "championing the values of democracy" only to find them being eroded at home.

Yes, that is ironic, all right and one is glad that Mr Matthews has understood this but one is not too sure that he knows quite what to do with that understanding.

The rest of this long and long-delayed analysis of Libertas UK and its launch is over on Eureferendum2. Enjoy.

COMMENT THREAD

Naïve or just plain arrogant?

It takes a really arrogant man to describe himself as being naive, adding immediately that being naive, if you are also ambitious, may not be the worst thing. Sometimes you just have to take your lance, charge downhill and to hell with the consequences.

There was much more sub-military language in Declan Ganley's address to the Henry Jackson Society last Tuesday and in the subsequent discussion; much talk of holding the line, leaving the trenches, the Irish people ("not me, it was the people") being the advance guard that needs the support of the rest of the people of Europe. [And yes, I know, I should have written about it before but other matters intervened.]

In parenthesis it should be noted that as far as Declan Ganley is concerned there is no difference between the EU and Europe and democracy means asking the people of Europe, whatever that might be, though he did acknowledge that there is no pan-European politics as yet. I shall return to this extraordinary muddle in thinking.

Several minutes went on a fiery announcement that he, Declan Ganley, was prepared to make any sacrifice to achieve his aim of restoring [sic] democracy to the European project. There is nothing more "they" can do to him. In fact, "they" have not done much to him anyway, except for calling him names. Big deal! Some of us have had to put with that for some time, on occasion losing jobs for not toeing the line. Hardly great sacrifices, particularly as some of the shocking names he was called were "eurosceptic" and "anti-European". As risk and sacrifice go, facing up to those words does not come very high on my list.

Of course, said Mr Ganley, almost succeeding in looking modest, other people have made far greater sacrifices for democracy. Nevertheless, he managed to draw an implicit parallel between himself and an (unnamed) commander of the Continental Army at Yorktown (not, I presume, Washington) who ordered a devastating artillery fire at his own home, suspecting that General Cornwallis had made it his headquarters.

What there was a shortage of in the talk and subsequent discussion is coherence in Libertas's stance. Just what is it Mr Ganley (oops, sorry he did say call him Declan because Mr Ganley is his father) wants to achieve? I managed to ask two questions, introducing myself as being from EUReferendum, clearly an unfamiliar name to Mr Ganley Declan. Congratulating him on his readiness to make any sacrifice for the cause I wondered whether it might not be wasted.

Even if the Lisbon Treaty fails and even if Libertas gains a large number of seats in the Toy European Parliament, almost all that he dislikes about the EU - lack of accountability, European legislation trumping national, European citizenship - would still be in place. Indeed, they are integral parts of the European project, which Mr Ganley Declan, according to his own repeated comments, supports.

Is he suggesting that the Consolidated Treaties should be torn up and a completely new structure created?

No, of course, not. Mr Ganley Declan is not, he assured us, a revolutionary (though he is ambitious and ready to take risks). The revolutionaries are those who sit in Brussels and create a system that takes power away from the people.

Though that statement had the air of being thought of at the last minute, it is closer to the truth than Mr Ganley Declan suspects - the European project is a revolutionary one. The problem is that it is more coherent than Libertas who seems to have no other spokespersons, gives it credit. To say, as Mr Ganley Declan did, that the problem is the Lisbon Treaty and there is no need for it because we still have the Nice Treaty and then to talk about the need for democracy is to exhibit a terrifying lack of knowledge.

However, he did explain that his main aim in getting himself and others of his ilk into the European Parliament is to ensure that people like me had a voice because at present we have none. They are not listening to people like me. They are not exactly listening to people like him, either, but Mr Ganley Declan obviously has a slight touch of the Obama about him. No, they are not listening and they are not democratic but once he is in the European Parliament, all will change because he is not prepared just to sit there and let business as usual carry on.

I did not bother to ask him what he was going to do about it in the Toy European Parliament because it was quite clear that he saw himself as considerably more savvy and knowledgeable about the EU (despite all evidence to the contrary). In fact, I was waiting for him to tell me not to bother my little head about it because he will ensure that my voice will be heard.

My other question was about the European President, something Mr Ganley Declan finds abhorrent, particularly as the people of Europe have not been asked whether they want one. The people of Britain, he proclaimed in ringing tones, should have a choice in this matter; they should be asked whether they want a European President.

Very well, said I, suppose the people of Britain are asked and vote against the idea; but suppose across Europe the people of it vote in favour; we shall get a European President whether we like it or not. I am sorry to say that Mr Ganley Declan did not answer the question, possibly because he was too busy assuring everyone that he was not a withdrawalist, not a revolutionary and not a eurosceptic. In fact, he wanted to save the European project because if it carries on the way it is going, there will be serious calls in many countries for withdrawal and that would be a tragedy.

This was one of the themes of his talk. The European project, in his opinion has come a long way and must not be undermined by those in Brussels who want to put an anti-democratic spin on it; who are shocked by the fact that people, who ought to be the owners of this project, do not want to march in lockstep with them. If they are allowed to go their own way, the withdrawalists will become strong and the project will disintegrate.

The problem with that is, as all our readers will instantly realize, that the project never had a democratic aspect to it. Clearly Mr Ganley Declan has never read a certain book that the boss and his colleague, Christopher Booker, wrote, in which they clearly explain the anti-democratic nature of the project from the very beginning.

Now, this would not matter if one said openly that democracy is a so-so idea, a recent and not very successful experiment and, maybe, it is best to move on. But that is not what Mr Ganley Declan is saying. He sees himself as the man whose appointed role it is to restore democracy to "Europe" or the European project.

We do not need the Lisbon Treaty, which has all those undemocratic and even anti-democratic ideas in it; we already have the Nice Treaty and can go back to it. Presumably, he has not read the Nice Treaty either and has forgotten that the Irish voters tried rejecting it once but were bullied and cheated into voting it through. Hardly the behaviour of a democracy. No wonder he did not answer my question about the European President.

Furthermore, Mr Ganley Declan keeps talking about the people of Europe and the need for them to have their democratic rights restored and to speak up about the way these are being stolen from them. Those who are doing the stealing, we were told several times, are using the well-tried method of "divide and conquer". They ask the people of individual member states and discard those results if they are not the ones the eurocrats want to hear. Now, if only the people of Europe united and stood up to these dastardly tactics …

Well, what? It seems Mr Ganley Declan does not understand exactly what he is saying. At best he believes in a perestroika: if we change things a little bit here and there the whole project will miraculously become what we always wanted it to be. Except that it was not clear to me or to a number of people in the audience what the aim of the exercise is – just what is it Mr Ganley Declan wants to achieve beyond getting a group of like-minded and woolly-minded individuals into the Toy European Parliament.

He was also very coy about his plans in the UK and one cannot help feeling that he is leaving the putting together of his pan-European list of candidates (the only one, as he proudly explained) very late. Those elections are in June.

COMMENT THREAD

Self-destruct mode

There was a sense of unreality in the report last night, headlined: "World hoping for EU global warming deal," another of those lurid misstatements churned out by AP.

However, from the copy, you do get a sense of how self-important our "European Union leaders" are, when the delicious AP tells us that, with "the world watching" our revered "colleagues" were under pressure "to seal an ambitious deal slashing greenhouse gas emissions". At least the agency has then adds: "… while their economies slide into a slowdown."

Strangely, outside this bubble of "climate groupies" one does not see in the rest of the media any indication that this is the world-shattering event that the participants make it out to be.

You thus have to smile when you are told that "an EU deal could galvanize United Nations global climate talks that failed to make progress in Poznan," and then hear Swedish prime minister Frederik Reinfeldt earnestly declaring: "I came from Poznan so I know that they are actually sitting and waiting for a European response."

Another self-important man also pitched in yesterday, with his own concerns – not unrelated to those of the "colleagues", albeit in a different field. This was Declan Ganley, chairman of Libertas, who managed to pack a press conference in Brussels, then announcing that his organisation, which successfully contested the Irish referendum, is now to contest the European elections in 2009 "on a Pan-European basis".

The Libertas website offers the gist of what Ganley had to say, his main pitch being that, "If people want a strong and healthy Europe that is democratic and answerable to them, they should vote for a Libertas candidate."

On the other hand, he says, "If they do not want Europe to succeed or if they are happy with the current undemocratic practises, then they should vote for an incumbent party. For those who weren't given a vote on the Lisbon Treaty, this will be their referendum".

Wrapped in the EU flag, he does of course mean the "European Union". And, in arguing for an EU that is "democratic" and "answerable" he is, unfortunately suffering from an advanced case of barking cat syndrome. If the EU was either "democratic" or "answerable" or both, it would no longer be the European Union but something else.

A surpranational government, which is what the EU is, could not, by its very nature, exist with those characteristics. But then, the tautology implicit in the use of the two words – the second certainly being dependent on the first – suggests that Mr Ganley is more concerned with sloganising than precision.

If anything, though, he shares the same sense of unreality that afflicts the climate groupies, in thinking that what he represents is actually important. The reality is though that EU member states economies are not so much sliding into a "slowdown" as an abyss. Like it not, the economy is going increasingly to dominate peoples' thoughts.

Closer to the reality, therefore, is the news that the Greek riots are spreading across Europe, with disturbances being reports as far afield as Moscow and Madrid. Even in Copenhagen, 32 people were arrested when their protest in support of the Greek protests turned violent.

Needless to say, despite the turmoil in Greece, prime minister Costas Karamanlis has still jetted off to Brussels to attend the European Council, leaving behind him a government with a parliamentary majority of just one seat. That shows where his priorities really lie, but one wonders whether his majority will still be there when he gets back.

What I particularly liked though was a comment in a newspaper, which stated "This is a country with a state that is in a shambles, a police force in disarray, mediocre universities that serve as hotbeds of rage instead of knowledge and a shattered health care system. It is also on the brink of financial ruin." I had to do a double-take to realise that this was the Greek paper Kathimerini, writing about Greece, which it says is in "self-destruct mode".

Greece is not the only country and, with the "colleagues" prattling on about global warming, Ganley about being "democratic and answerable" and our own local politicians about who knows what (or cares), it seems the whole political class is set to follow.

COMMENT THREAD

The poisonous drip of misinformation

One significant difference between this recession and the last (and the ones preceding it) is the way newspapers are being hit – mostly through a devastating fall in the amount of advertising, although there are many other factors.

Quietly, the big titles are downsizing, reducing the number of journalists they employ. Then, with the burgeoning number of pages and supplements they have to offer, plus podcasts, TV clips and the rest, journalists are actually being asked to do more and more, giving them less time to devote to research and real in-depth reporting.

An important side-effect of this is that, increasingly, the news is not generated by newspapers but by the various agencies. Much of the copy is now simply a "cut and paste" job, with a few tweaks, the less honest of the papers then simply adding their journos' names to the final result.

Where this gets important is that a very few news agencies (and then a very few journalists within those agencies) are essentially controlling the print (and indeed much of the rest of the electronic) media.

Through this means, one sees insidious distortions and simplifications which completely change the context of the political debate. And, like water flowing through the cracks in the dam, they percolate everywhere, finding their way into thousands of print and online journals, influencing the way people think about the world.

By way of example, today we have today a comment by Declan Ganley and Jens-Peter Bonde on the scandalous behaviour of the Irish government, in forcing through another referendum on the constitutional Lisbon treaty. As to what is put to the Irish people, "Not one word or legal obligation will be changed," they say. "The same content will simply be put in a new envelope, just as Valery Giscard d'Estaing said about the change from the Constitution to the Lisbon."

The we have AP briefly reporting on the same issue, under the heading, "EU: Ireland will vote again on treaty next year". This will be repeated a thousand-fold across the world, to be read by millions.

The distortions are well evident, but only to those who know. It tells us: "France, which holds the EU presidency, says Ireland would hold a second vote in return for changes in the treaty." Then, of course, we get the bog-standard formula for describing the treaty: "The document is meant to streamline EU decision-making and boost its role on the world stage…".

As the Ganley – Bonde duo rightly point out – the best the Irish can get is a few meaningless "declarations" which have no legal effect. There will be no changes to the treaty … there cannot be. But this is not what AP is projecting. Its idle simplifications are a complete distortion. They project something which is not true.

As for the intent to "streamline EU decision-making …" etc., we could write an essay on how wrong that is … in fact, we have, several times. But the canards survive, because they are convenient, mindless formulae for the agencies to churn out in their bid to supply the endless pap to fill the pages of the world's media.

At the receiving end, you have production-line journalism, concerned only with filling in spaces – not one whit of sentient thought between copying out the agency text and pasting it onto the virgin page. Worse still, this process is not a deliberate attempt to deceive. But that makes it all the more dangerous.

Media bias, in this context, has never been more real and more dangerous, but the source is not in the offices of the media so much as the agencies which supply them. And their poisonous drip of misinformation is endangering the political process.

COMMENT THREAD

Which one's the democrat?

Excerpts from the transcript of a meeting between Václav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic, and members of the Conference of the Presidents of the European Parliament, Friday 5 December 2008, Prague Castle.

Daniel Cohn-Bendit MEP: I brought you a flag, which - as we heard - you have everywhere here at the Prague Castle. It is the flag of the European Union, so I will place it here in front of you.

It will be a tough Presidency. The Czech Republic will have to deal with the work directive and climate package. EU climate package represents less than what our fraction would wish for. It will be necessary to hold on to the minimum of that. I am certain that the climate change represents not only a risk, but also a danger for the future development of the planet. My view is based on scientific views and majority approval of the EP and I know you disagree with me. You can believe what you want, I don't believe, I know that global warming is a reality.

Lisbon Treaty: I don't care about your opinions on it. I want to know what you are going to do if the Czech Chamber of Deputies and the Senate approve it. Will you respect the will of the representatives of the people? You will have to sign it.

I want you to explain to me what is the level of your friendship with Mr Ganley from Ireland. How can you meet a person whose funding is unclear? You are not supposed to meet him in your function. It is a man whose finances come from problematic sources and he wants to use them to be funding his election campaign into the EP.

President Vaclav Klaus: I must say that nobody has talked to me in such a style and tone for the past 6 years. You are not on the barricades in Paris here. I thought that these manners ended for us 18 years ago but I see I was wrong. I would not dare to ask how the activities of the Greens are funded. If you are concerned about a rational discussion in this half an hour, which we have, please give the floor to someone else, Mr Chairman.

EU Parliament President Hans-Gert Pöttering: No, we have plenty of time. My colleague will continue, because anyone from the members of the EP can ask you whatever he likes. (to Cohn-Bendit:) Please continue.

President Vaclav Klaus: This is incredible. I have never experienced anything like this before.

Daniel Cohn-Bendit: Because you have not experienced me..

Pesident Vaclav Klaus: This is incredible.

Daniel Cohn-Bendit: We have always had good talks with President Havel. And what will you tell me about your attitude towards the anti-discrimination law? I will gladly inform you about our funding.

Hans-Gert Pöttering: Brian Crowley, please.

Brian Crowley MEP: I am from Ireland and I am a member of a party in government. All his life my father fought against the British domination. Many of my relatives lost their lives. That is why I dare to say that the Irish wish for the Lisbon Treaty. It was an insult, Mr. President, to me and to the Irish people what you said during your state visit to Ireland. It was an insult that you met Declan Ganley, a man with no elected mandate. This man has not proven the sources from which his campaign was funded. I just want to inform you what the Irish felt. I wish you that you get the programme of your Presidency through and you will get through what European citizens want to see.

President Vaclav Klaus: Thank you for this experience which I gained from this meeting. I did not think anything like this is possible and have not experienced anything like this for the past 19 years. I thought it was a matter of the past that we live in democracy, but it is post-democracy, really, which rules the EU.

You mentioned the European values. The most important value is freedom and democracy. The citizens of the EU member states are concerned about freedom and democracy, above all. But democracy and freedom are losing ground in the EU today. It is necessary to strive for them and fight for them.

I would like to emphasize, above all, what most citizens of the Czech Republic feel, that for us the EU membership has no alternative. It was me who submitted the EU application in the year 1996 and who signed the Accession treaty in 2003. But the arrangements within the EU have many alternatives. To take one of them as sacrosanct, untouchable, about which it is not possible to doubt or criticize it, is against the very nature of Europe.

As for the Lisbon Treaty, I would like to mention that it is not ratified in Germany either. The Constitutional Treaty, which was basically the same as the Lisbon Treaty, was refused in referendums in other two countries. If Mr. Crowley speaks of an insult to the Irish people, then I must say that the biggest insult to the Irish people is not to accept the result of the Irish referendum. In Ireland I met somebody who represents a majority in his country. You, Mr. Crowley, represent a view which is in minority in Ireland. That is a tangible result of the referendum.

Brian Crowley MEP: With all respect, Mr. President, you will not tell me what the Irish think. As an Irishman, I know it best.

President Vaclav Klaus: I do not speculate about what the Irish think. I state the only measurable data which were proved by the referendum.

In our country the Lisbon Treaty is not ratified because our parliament has not decided on it yet. It is not the President's fault. Let's wait for the decision of both Chambers of the Parliament, that is the current phase of the ratification process in which the President plays no role whatsoever. I cannot sign the Treaty today, it is not on my table, it is up to the parliament to decide about it now. My role will come after the eventual approval of the Treaty in the Parliament. . .

...

Hans-Gert Pöttering: ... In the conclusion - and I want to leave this room in good terms - I would like to say that it is more than unacceptable, if you compare us, compare us with the Soviet Union. We are all deeply rooted in our countries and our constituencies. We are concerned about freedom and reconciliation in Europe, we are good willing, not naïve.

President Vaclav Klaus: I did not compare you with the Soviet Union, I did not mention the word[s] "Soviet Union". I only said that I have not experienced such an atmosphere, such style of debate in the past 19 years in the Czech Republic, really.

My thanks to Anthony Coughlan for passing this on.

COMMENT THREAD

The thot plickens

The Irish Times is not the best of sources but it is the best we have to keep us up to date with the increasingly murky tale of Declan Ganley's plan to take over the world start a political party.

As we left it, our Declan had made his pitch in Brussels. Then there was that strange behaviour of supreme UKIP leader, Mr Farage, at his UKIP love fest conference, and then there was that speculative article in the EU Reporter.

Now, like a virgin tantalisingly shedding her veils with six still to go, Declan has given us a brief glimpse of his next move, recruiting – according to the Irish Times - "two of Europe's most prominent Eurosceptics to help him if he decides to run in next year's European elections."

You have to forgive this newspaper for not knowing the difference but one of these "eurosceptics" is former veteran Danish MEP Jens-Peter Bonde who is not and never has been of the disposition, preferring instead to milk work within the system, arguing about the points of detail but never actually wanting to bring the EU down.

Not so the other recruit, Czech president Václav Klaus, although this man already has a day job and it is difficult to see what help he can be to Declan other than to lend his name to his enterprise.

But, with these two on board (although Jens Peter has never been far from Declan's side), the master plan comes a little clearer in that a launch of Libertas as a pan-EU political party seems to be in the offing – running on the platform of opposition to the constitutional Lisbon treaty.

However, our Declan has repeated his assertion that he is a "pro-European" (we think he means pro-EU) and that his opposition is simply confined to the new treaty. He notes that this is "the first time Brussels is being challenged by enthusiastic Europeans".

In pursuit of his broader aim, whatever that might be, Declan is planning to speak to the Movement for France (MPF) in Paris today, his overt intention being to strengthening his "European links". This party also passes itself off as "eurosceptic" but, like Declan, does not want to secede from the European Union.

Sooner or later Declan will come clean on his precise intentions, which are of some interest to us in lil 'ol England, as to whether he is going to ally himself with UKIP or the Tories. Alternatively, he could bid for seats under the Libertas brand – with or without Farage - thus confusing the electorate and potentially splitting the eurosceptic vote (even more).

Here, the apparent tryst with Václav Klaus is interesting. His Civic Democratic Party has been assiduously courted by the Tories in the hope that they will join a new EU parliament grouping when or if the Tories can finally muster the courage to honour Cameron's promise and quit the EPP.

If Declan is also courting the MPF – which currently has three MEPs in the EU parliament and was also a prospective member of Dave's new EU parliament group – this could cause problems. If Declan's intention is to create an all-new pan-European party and manages to Hoover up the CDP and the MPF, the Tories could end up out on their own if they leave the EPP.

We have, therefore, what seems to be a wild card in the pack, potentially changing the dynamics of next euro-elections in an entirely unpredictable way. The thot, as they say, definitely plickens.

COMMENT THREAD

A whiff of realignment?

The party conference season starts early this year, kicked off by the UK Independence Party which has previously shoehorned its weekend event in between the Labour and Conservative conferences.

And, as always happens when UKIP takes a higher profile than normal – i.e., ceases to be invisible for a brief moment – the detractors leap into breach.

This time, it is the europhiliac Independent but, in its enthusiasm to dish the dirt, it has fallen for an egregious "plant", offering stories of dark and sinister plots against Nigel Farage.

Interestingly, the story prominently features UKIP's erstwhile press officer, Annabelle Fuller, who is styled as an "ally" of Nigel Farage. That is one way of describing their relationship, and has absolutely nothing to do with her complaint, retailed by the paper, about being subjected to abusive telephone calls, "including one at 3am calling her a whore."

More to the point, this Mz Fuller could be the same person who hurriedly departed her post after a confidential and highly damaging video of a mock selection interview – in her custody - had been mysteriously posted on YouTube. This was the one which featured a hapless aspirant MEP candidate, headed, "how not do politics", in an obvious attempt to denigrate the subject. That it was uploaded in Morocco where Fuller happened to go on holiday was, of course, a complete coincidence.

Nothing, as one might expect, appears in the piece about this, nor of the fact that the self-serving Fuller is under criminal investigation by Suffolk Police for an alleged breach of the Data Protection Act.

Needless to say, Iain Dale falls for the scam, aided and abetted by Fuller's former very close associate who has absolutely nothing to do with her complaint about being subjected to abusive telephone calls, "including one at 3am calling her a whore."

Conveniently, the piece gives both Dale and The Independent scope to ruminate on whether UKIP is about to implode. In fact, despite the fond hopes of the newspaper, nothing could be further from the truth. As the line-up at the conference shows, what we have just seen is another internal coup by Farage, still further consolidating his grip on what has become a one-man party.

Out goes current chairman, the independently-minded Dr John Whittaker, to be replaced by Farage's 31-year-old bag carrier, Paul Nuttall, one time history lecturer in Liverpool and until recently the MEP's researcher.

He is now elevated to the highest office (apart from the leader) in the party and has been also been catapulted to the lead position on the UKIP candidate MEP list in the North West, replacing the former lead candidate – voted in by the members. This was the regional organiser Gregg Beaman, who was forced to stand down in favour of Nuttall. He has quit his highly-paid job in disgust and is "mulling over" his continued membership of the party.

Nuttall is thus positioned to serve his master well, keeping the members at bay while the next stage of the Farage agenda is rolled out.

For this, the clues were in the keynote conference speech given by Farage, where he spoke of needing a "21st Century relationship between Britain and our European neighbours." UKIP's line, he said, "needs to be less about what's wrong with the EU… It needs to be positive messages about what we stand for and positive messages about what our MEPs will do."

Although larded with references to the UK being outside the EU, this does not sound like a party committed with anything like the same fervour to the policy of withdrawal it has previously espoused.

For an explanation of this, one must look to Farage's recent meeting(s) with Declan Ganley. There, it was made clear to Farage that UKIP's open hostility to the EU stood in the way of a closer relationship.

With the party all but bankrupt, marginalised in national politics and facing a poor showing in the euro-elections, with insufficient cash to finance an effective campaign, the promise of the Ganley millions was enough to spur Farage on to deliver his coded message from the conference podium.

With a covert alignment in the wings, we will indeed hear "less about what's wrong with the EU…" from Farage. And, with The Independent offering stories of dark and sinister plots against the great leader inspired by la Fuller, the stage is set for bagman Nuttall to crack the whip against the real dissenters – the more dangerous of whom were not "fingered" by Fuller.

Hilariously - if you are that way inclined - the Independent, so keen to see the downfall of UKIP, has helped cement it in place, although it will not be UKIP as we know it. But, in that, the paper has perhaps unwittingly achieved precisely what it wanted, neutering the eurosceptic voice. Only time will tell.

COMMENT THREAD

King maker or pretender?

Declan Ganley was in Brussels yesterday, ostensibly addressing SOS Democracy, the cross party group of MEPs in the EU parliament, chaired by Dan Hannan.

He took an amount of flak from a gaggle of Irish journalists and europhiac MEPs who had evidently conspired beforehand to give the man a hard time but, apparently, brushed off the hostility with ease. The Irish Times thus struggled to make a big deal of the meeting.

What is more interesting is the number of side meetings which Ganley conducted while he was in Brussels, where he is also opening an office to co-ordinate his response to the euro-elections. One such was a long lunch with Farage and colleagues, the latest of several meetings with UKIP MEPs, at which former MEP Jens Peter Bonde has been present.

At the top of the agenda has been Ganley’s plan to field up to 400 candidates at the euros, with UKIP wishing to convince the leader of the Irish think-tank Libertas not to stand against UKIP contenders.

However, Ganley is also being assiduously courted by the Tories, with whom he has a greater philosophical affinity – being broadly in favour of the European Union and imbued with the same fantasy that, if only the organisation could be "reformed", everything in the garden would be rosy.

Whether Ganley stands for office (if you can call it that) is very much in the balance. He told the SOS Democracy meeting that he was reluctant to run as a candidate "because he doesn't feel like a natural politician". And he is also – apparently – undecided on whether to launch Libertas as a political party to fight in the elections. He does not anticipate making a final decision before January 2009, which is leaving it rather late if he wants to get a multi-national election team up and running.

That leaves it open as to whether Ganley is to take on the role of kingmaker or pretender. In the latter, he would be up against the combined weight of all the existing eurosceptic and "euro-hesitant" parties, fighting for his share of the vote and open to the criticism that he was splitting the vote and weakening the established parties.

In the alternative role as "king maker", the endorsement of Ganley – widely seen as the architect of the Irish referendum victory – could be a powerful boost to those who gain his favours.

Despite UKIP's advances, Ganley seems more likely to favour the Tories. As Dan Hannan points out in his blog, Declan is "an insistent pro-European" and has little in common with the party. He also tends to the view – somewhat reinforced by Jens Peter – that UKIP is a busted flush.

Interestingly, this was almost precisely the view expressed recently on the other side of the divide, by no less than Alexander Stubb Finland's foreign minister. Interviewed by the Irish Times he professed himself to be "unconcerned" by the prospect of Ganley fielding candidates, seeing parallels with UKIP. "No matter how slick and brilliant Nigel Farage is, the party has become a complete footnote with no influence," he said.

Certainly, UKIP is going through yet another round of its interminable infighting, lovingly recounted by Iain Dale, which is about to leak into the regional press.

If the Tories able to put their weight behind opposition to the constiutional Lisbon treaty and are also able to attract Ganley's endorsement, the premier anti-EU party may not only find itself outflanked and marginalised at the euro-elections, but also crippled by the burden of adverse publicity.

It is probably not an exaggeration, though, to suggest that Ganley could prove a decisive factor, and it will take more than a good lunch with Farage to turn him round.

COMMENT THREAD

A nightmare comes true?

If there ever was received wisdom after the famous Irish "no" vote, it is that the "colleagues" – if they were to have another referendum – would want it before next year's euro-elections. They would be at pains, it was held, to avoid the contest becoming an unofficial, Europe-wide referendum on the constitutional Lisbon treaty.

Now, it seems – at least according to the Financial Times - that the colleagues' worst nightmare is about to come true.

This paper is reporting that the prospects of Ireland holding a second referendum on the treaty before the elections "are receding as differences emerged on Tuesday between parties supporting a 'yes' vote."

This stems from weekend comments by Dick Roche, Ireland's European affairs minister, who proclaimed that a second vote was "appropriate". But both the Greens, members of the Fianna Fáil-led coalition, and the conservative Fine Gael and Labour, the main opposition parties, ruled out the possibility of putting the question back to the people in the short term.

Until this week, says the FT the expectation was that the Irish would put the question, perhaps with a few political protocols attached to reflect Irish concerns, to a second vote. But Irish officials and some diplomats privately concede that it is more likely any second vote will now take place in late 2009.

This may give Declan Ganley, chairman of the "no" group Libertas, the opening he needs to set up his EU-wide political party to take on the treaty – a prospect trailed last July.

More recently, Ganley has been very quiet. He was due to speak at last weekend's summer school but he pulled out at the last minute, pleading "urgent commitments in the US", leaving Fine Gael Senator Eugene Regan to declaim him as "running scared".

If Ganley is not ready to step up to the plate, the prospect of an unofficial referendum in the UK certainly presents UKIP with an opportunity. It could galvanise the euro-elections, especially if the Tory party tries to fight on domestic issues and is unable or unwilling to clarify its position regarding the constitutional Lisbon treaty when or if it gets into power.

In what could be its saviour, UKIP's only nightmare would be Ganley coming up with some serious money and fielding a full slate in opposition to the UK's premier eurosceptic party.

There is, though, the outside chance that the Tories could get their act together and give UKIP a run for their money. On past performance though, their message will not convince enough voters to make the switch in a contest which is now regarded as UKIP's natural hunting ground.

The chance of registering disapproval of the constitutional Lisbon treaty may be so attractive that the electorate will be prepared to resist Tory invitations to make the contest a two-way joust between Conservatives and Labour, in a rehearsal for the electorally mandated reshuffle general election slated to take place the following year.

Time will tell, of course – it always does.

COMMENT THREAD

A mixed blessing

We've been getting rumours for some weeks now that "a personality" was intending to start up a new eurosceptic party, headed by none of the "usual suspects".

Now, it appears that the cat is out of the bag, with an article in The Sunday Telegraph which has the "hero" of the Irish referendum, Declan Ganley, stepping up to the plate.

According to this article, Ganley is planning to field more than 400 candidates for next June's euro elections, in all the 26 countries – including Britain – where voters have had no direct say on the treaty.

The man claims to be starting to raise £75 million from online donations to run candidates in all 12 of Britain's European parliamentary constituencies, and in seats throughout the EU. As his base, he will use his existing platform, Libertas, turning it from a straightforward pressure group into a fully-fledged political party.

Ganley's message is a simple one: "We will tell people that Libertas is the box you put your X in if you want to vote 'No' to the Lisbon Treaty. It's clear, it's simple," he says. "The message will be: we are now giving you a referendum and it's going to take place in June of next year at the European elections."

The Sunday Telegraph thinks this plan "will unsettle the Brussels establishment," but it is more likely – in Britain at least – that it will unsettle the existing parties. Both the Conservatives and UKIP will be pitching for the eurosceptic vote next June. And like Ganley, UKIP has high hopes of turning the election into a referendum on the constitutional Lisbon treaty.

We have, of course, been here before with Jimmy Goldsmith's Referendum Party in the 1997 general election. But, as he had a fighting fund reputed to be in the order of £20 million, Ganley's £75 million spread over 23 countries begins to look rather modest.

Further, Goldsmith captured the mood of the moment – effectively committing both Labour and the Conservatives to a referendum on the euro. Ganley has no prospect of gaining such a clear outcome. Neither – for all his recent fame in Ireland – does he have the charisma which gave the Goldsmith's campaign its initial boost and had volunteers flocking to the colours.

Ganley's biggest handicap, though – at least from persepctive of the hard core eurosceptics – is that he openly supports the European Union, confining his objections only to the constitutional Lisbon treaty, on which platform we are told he hopes his new party will return 80 MEPs to Brussels. But, in distancing himself from the eurosceptic movement in Britain and setting himself up in competition with the Conservatives, he could well find it difficult to make any progress at all.

The worse case scenario is that he could split the vote, making the euro elections something less of a disaster for Gordon than they might otherwise be. Another possible scenario – if his campaign does build a head of steam – is that he could leach votes from UKIP, robbing it of any chance of getting any MEPs at all for the next parliamentary session.

That makes Ganley's intervention a very mixed blessing indeed.

COMMENT THREAD