Tories to wangle multi-option EU referendum stitch-up as UKIP catches up in polls
Last week, when David Cameron was interpreted by corporate-media as giving a hint that Britons would be allowed some form of referendum on the EU if the Tories were elected in 2015, many sceptical observers must have thought that, given his already-broken “cast-iron guarantee”, he was acting with breathtaking and offensive temerity. However, they might not have realised that Cameron has probably taken the risk of their response into consideration as he, with the help of his so-called eurosceptic MPs playing fake opposition to him, begins another scheme of deception and bamboozlement against the potential Tory-voting part of the electorate in order to stem their increasingly likely mass-desertion by 2015.
For perhaps the first time ever, an opinion polling company has produced the results of a survey of political party support amongst a section of the British electorate where the raw data, after minimal adjustment, more or less constitutes the headline figures. Usually, polling companies manipulate their survey data to make it “representative” of the electorate as a whole, but there is no standard algorithm across the polling industry, and many critics believe that weighting gives one of many opportunities for polling companies to distort their findings for the purposes of creating an illusion of LibLabCon inevitability.
The Survation poll in question was published 23rd September, and the headline figures were as follows: Conservative, 29%; Labour, 41%; Liberal Democrats, 10%; UKIP, 12%. The most striking thing about this information is the mere 17 percentage point difference between UKIP and the Conservative Party; this is the same kind of minor chasm that UKIP has already traversed to overtake the Lib Dems. Not surprisingly, the poll received only a bare mention by the Establishment gatekeepers of polling interpretation.
Nonetheless, Conservative Party planners are now showing signs that they are extremely concerned about the replacement of their party by UKIP as the second biggest in the UK as erstwhile Tory voters realise that David Cameron is not just an aberration which the backbench of the party is too useless to make step down as an unrepresentative leader, but a deliberate outcome of a wholesale and furtive change in the identity of the parliamentary party which, in these last few years, has become a cog in the works of the new British Marxist state.
David Cameron’s laughable “strongest hint yet” about an EU referendum is one of these signs of desperation, and the party strategists must have realised that they risked making Cameron look ludicrous given his assurance in 2007 that British people would have a vote on the Lisbon Treaty – a version of the constitution of the EU which was contrived in part to facilitate dissembling UK politicians as they clumsily attempted to deceive Britons into thinking that there was no plan for a European superstate. However, despite the possibility of making some voters permanently incredulous about the honourableness of David Cameron, the Tory Party strategy is clearly designed to win (by employment of their low cunning) last minute wider support before the 2015 election.
The Daily Mail writer of the above linked-to article took Cameron’s stated support for the EU and a public personal preference for the British to be ruled from Brussels to mean that any referendum “may not include an option for Britain to leave.” This is very likely; indeed, even UKIP have publically stated a suspicion that the referendum will entail a programme of hoodwinking to get the result desired by the Establishment parties: British EU membership maintained. Coinciding with the Labour Party’s own hinting at a plebiscite in some far off distant future, Nigel Farage warned the “political elite” that “muddying the waters, writing promissory notes about what might happen in 10 years’ time, is no longer acceptable.”
In some quarters it is anticipated that the initial form of the referendum, to be announced by the incumbent government, will be along the lines of asking how to define Britain’s relationship with the EU, or how to limit (on the face of it at least – the horse has long left the stable) the EU in its ambitions as a unified country. At some point just before the 2015 election, however, the so-called Tory eurosceptics will complain and stage a campaign about the failings of the planned referendum format, will be seen to win a concession from David Cameron for an option to leave the EU to be included on the ballot paper, and thus, in a timely fashion, bolster support for a party that, at least as far as the Tory High Command hope, will be seen to represent national interests.
The dynamic between Conservative Head Office and Tory backbenchers has already been put into motion. Happy to quote the UKIP leader in the context of Labour recognition for the necessity of a poll, the Daily Mail made sure that it only collected fighting-talk from Tory MP and chief judas-goat, Douglas Carswell, in the body of its Cameron article:
Mr Carswell said: “It is all very well for the Prime Minister to talk about what he may or may not do after the next election but unless we get on and give people a vote in an in/out referendum we will see many more Conservative voters desert us before the next election.
“It would be entirely bogus if he offers the British people a referendum that doesn’t include an option to leave the EU.”
The upshot will be the delivery of another piece of deception. The British Government will have been seen to address the constitutional needs of the British people who, being grateful for the opportunity to have a chance to vote on EU membership, may not oppose the fact that the referendum will have been watered down to incorporate three or more choices; in such a referendum, depending on what is asked and how it is phrased, the facility for the electorate to deliver a clear instruction to leave the EU will be severely compromised.
As such, many observers realise that the only way to ensure a departure from the EU is for the electorate to vote for a party, in elections, that overtly advocates it as policy. In this light, talk of UKIP doing a deal with the Tory Party – a set of people that are clearly pro-EU, and evidently incorrigible serial fraudsters – that would overly benefit the latter at the 2015 election, would be thereafter relentlessly damaging for the Withdrawalist party. UKIP would be far more powerful in terms of garnering leverage towards its ultimate aim of withdrawal from the EU if it did not make deals with Establishment parties, whether they be Labour or the Conservatives, until it had its own representation in the House of Commons – although there is a case for forcing some kind of deal for an “in/out” referendum as soon as possible given the current rate of the EU takeover and invasion of Britain.
It should be noted that chatter about UKIP election pacts is usually instigated by the Establishment which understands how to undermine UKIP in terms of alienating its support. An example of the misrepresentation comes from the aforementioned Daily Mail piece which claimed that “the UK Independent Party has offered to form an electoral pact and not challenge Eurosceptic Tory MPs at the 2015 election, but only if Mr Cameron commit to a referendum ‘in blood’”. In fact, Farage referenced the “cast-iron guarantee” in order to mock Cameron’s fitness to keep a promise, and the “offer” of a pact seemed more mischievously intentioned, and rather like an invitation for the Conservative Party to overthrow Cameron – who is clearly going to offer an “in/out” referendum in the same way as pigs are ever going to fly – in order to even get to the first stage of an agreement; as the Mail reported at the time: UKIP was “prepared to enter negotiations over electoral tactics with any Tory leader who offered the public an in-out nationwide vote”.
