Brown has survived 'Bigotgate', but can he survive tonight's final debate?

What a gaffe that was yesterday, undoubtedly the most cringeworthy, appalling incident of the election campaign. The most enraging part of it all was when after coming out of Ms. Duffy's home after the apology he said with that horrendously eerie fake smile that he was 'mortified'. Then why were you smiling you strange man?!

Despite the monumental cock-up, the whole thing doesn't really seem to have done any damage to Labour in today's polls. So with that, all eyes are now on tonight's crucial final debate. This could just be the turning point of the campaign and with just a week to go the pressure on the three party leaders must be immense.

Brown despite all his failings, can appear strong on the economy. This of course in turn despite the evident fact that he was the one as Chancellor and then Prime Minister who presided over the economic recession and record inflation of our public deficit and national debt. He will spew out numbers and statistics that will out-flank and disorientate the two other naive younger opponents and in order for them to really destroy him they must be prepared with counter-attacks.

Brown's incumbancy is simultaneously his asset and his liability and he will attempt to ring circles around Cameron and Clegg to ensure its the former, not the latter, that the public see tonight.

For Cameron, this is his final chance to prove to the electorate that he can be the agent of change. Do I think this will happen? No. He has been too soft in this campaign; trying too hard to be statesmen-like when ideally he could have gone on the offensive and tore both Labour and the Liberal Democrats apart. He didn't because his party failed to give the clear message of what, when, and how they were going to cut in order to bring down the deficit. They fell into the Blairite trap of nauseating soundbites and slogans such as 'We're all in this together' which fell on deaf ears from an electorate literally numbed by political spin. We have after all, lived under New Labour for the past 13 years. Tonight he must be ruthless and concise in his argument; he must spell out in detail what the Tories will do and when, and above all he must show the electorate how they are different from the other two parties in the debate.

For Clegg too this will be a defining moment: will this debate cement the surge of support gained in the past two weeks or will his weakness on the economy ultimately be his undoing? Personally I do hope the latter occurs precisely because Clegg has become arrogant and presumptious over his potential power and demands should a hung parliament materialise on May 7th. He does not deserve the support of the British people. Nonetheless it is of course the wider electorate in particular the undecideds and marginal voters who will decide the fate of this debate and indeed the election next week. Clegg will have to show he is strong on the economy and be willing to defend his plans for tax reform from two opponents who I presume will be doing their utmost to bring him finally down.

All them will have to answer the questions surrounding the apparent blackholes in all their spending plans, if they don't I am certain the electorate will not tolerate it and rightly so. It is about time we had some honesty and clarity in this campaign, especially when it comes down to the state of our economy.

Will Brown win the debate? I doubt it but I do think it will be close. My prediction (and admittedly I was wrong in the last two: I thought Cameron won both...) is Brown and Cameron neck and neck in first place with Clegg behind but only by a few points. We shall have to wait and see.

Bercow is at it again...

It has been disclosed in today's Daily Telegraph that the Speaker of the House, John Bercow owes more than £600 in taxpayer-subsidised food.

And this is the man who promised to 'clean up' parliamentary politics...perhaps after lunch maybe?

The good people of Buckingham have an incredible oppportunity on May 6th; elect a refreshingly straight talking, dynamic person in Nigel Farage, or retain an arrogant, pompous, self-loathing hypocrite in John Bercow. The people of course will decide, but just seeing what Bercow gets up to with our money is reason enough to throw him out.

Flip Flop Clegg

An article in today's Daily Telegraph reveals that Nick Clegg, leader of the Liberal Democrats has, within two days switched his position on forming a coalition government. On sunday's Andrew Marr Show, Clegg made clear that under no circumstances would the Liberal Democrats prop up the Labour government, especially if they come third in the popular vote and yet win the most parliamentary seats. He rightly said that situation would be undemocratic and the result itself would only go to prove the lack of fairness in our electoral system. And yet today he has changed his mind.

Speaking at a campaign stop, he stated that he would support "even the man on the moon" if it led to electoral reform". So there you have it, due to the surge in support Clegg has become arrogant and has out-reached himself with his demands. This is no longer about fairness and democratic accountability, it is about doing what he can for his party not I might add the British people. He has contradicted himself within two days and this is a perfect reflection of the sheer opportunism and dirty tricks so endemic within the Liberal Democrats. Surely supporting the ditching of Brown after the election in return for a more 'compatible' Labour figure is not only fooling the electorate but itself undemocratic?

For those of you thinking he offers change, he doesn't. He just doesn't. He is doing this for himself and his party, not you. His demands only reinforce his growing ego, who is he is to demand what is the rightful choice of the electorate? It is up to them what happens at this election. All of you please, don't fall for Clegg and his thin veneer of 'change'. He would lead this country to disaster.

Buckingham Tory stands up to be counted.

Guido Fawkes has the news that the first big name in Buckingham's Tory circles has come out and supported Nigel Farage's campaign against John Bercow. Well done Sir Nicholas Bonsor, a former MP who I understand may be risking his Conservative Party membership by backing Farage.

I have heard that the orders from David Cameron are stern: Buckingham Tories are not to back, let alone campaign for Farage. While Cameron's contempt for Bercow personally is well known, I suspect he doesn't exactly like the prospect of Farage causing problems by probing his own anti-EU backbenchers into a stir.

Tory commentators may remain pessimistic about UKIP becoming a major force in Westminster, but I truly believe that it will only take one UKIP MP to start taking the fight to the establishment inside the Commons for the momentum to very quickly build. I can think of no one better to initiate what is to be a vicious battle than Nigel Farage. Not to mention the fantastic constituency representative he would be for the people of Buckingham.

Clegg's Non-Dom Donation Hypocrisy

It has been revealed that the Liberal Democrats have recently received six figure sum donations from donors not fully resident in the UK. The entrepreneur Bhanu Choudhrie is said to have given a large donation as recent as a few days ago.

Similarly, they have received a £354,000 donation from French businessman Bruno Sangle-Ferriere. Now this may not seem that bad depending on whether you agree with large donations or not. The point that is so startling is that Clegg ranted on in last week's debate on how the Tories and Labour are funded by millionaires and trade unions respectively. Yet here he is, allowing his party to happily take large donations themselves, what utter hypocrisy. What an insult to the people. Does he think perhaps that now they have a shot of political power (or at least a say in government) he best take as much money as he can get?

Clegg recently announced that under Lib-Dem plans, political donations would never exceed £10,000. Obviously the recent six figure sum donations don't count then, eh Clegg? What an absolute joke.

All this just adds to the notorious donation of £2.4m by fraudster and runaway Michael Brown in 2005. Oh and the Lib-Dems never gave the money back, it was as Nick said "a long time ago", that's okay then...

The funniest bit of all of this has to be their spokesman's response: "We are committed to making everybody pay their fair share in tax and to reforming the system of party funding. Unlike other parties, our donors support us because of our values and have (wait for it!) no influence on party policy or campaign strategy." No of course they don't. Surely most if not all donations are made because the donors share the values of the given party? Of course the Liberal Democrats are different from the other parties because they....um...they...uhhh...their party colour is yellow! Yep, that's about it.

Hypocrisy, lies and pathetic excuses. Well, it is the Lib-Dems...

Lord Pearson: Stop betraying your own party members

After reading an article in today's Daily Telegraph about Lord Pearson's intentions to actively canvass with Labour and Tory Eurosceptics, I was left feeling utter outrage. Believing it to be a noble cause, Lord Pearson has recently failed to persuade the majority of UKIP candidates standing against these 'eurosceptics' to stand down, they have refused to and rightly so.

I am speaking out against Lord Pearson because I feel not only is he betraying fellow party members and candidates but also tarnishing UKIP with the one-issue EU obsessiveness that so many (including myself) have tried to shake off. If these eurosceptics from other parties are indeed eurosceptics, then why is it they have not spoken out about it before? Why have they not done more in parliament and within their own respective parties? I don't care if they are eurosceptics and neither will the majority of the British electorate. Indeed this idea of standing down for other parties and indeed even canvassing for them will not only confuse any potential supporters but also drive them away.

Lord Pearson would also be wise not to fall into such contradictory territory as he does in the article above. At one point he mentions the "three failed old parties" (a term supported by many UKIP members) and yet professes to say how he plans to campaign for some of their candidates. So what do you really believe Lord Pearson? Are you in this for UKIP or to simply damage (or indeed help?) your previous party, the Tories?

This is a disgrace for all the hard-working activists and candidates who are standing not just so voters can have a voice on matters of the European Union but also to vote for a party that wants to cut taxes for all, increase accountability and democracy through referendums and make our schools centres of excellence through increased choice and accessibility.

It is a disgrace to all the people who have done so much in making the UK Independence Party a party with a fully-fledged, long term domestic agenda which can rival the other parties and finally succeed in national elections. UKIP is not just about the EU, so people should stop acting like it is.

Enough Lord Pearson, stop betraying your own party.

UKIP: A party in an unique position

Despite the apparent three-party squeeze in the opinion polls lately, the UK Independence Party is in an unique position to take voters from all the three old parties and succeed in gaining the current target of one million votes. Indeed in the last national election to take place with the European Elections in June 2009, UKIP not only came second ahead of the Labour government(a record in itself) but also came first in normally strongholds of Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Tories.

This I believe is not only because UKIP is the radical alternative for voters fed up with the three failed old parties, but also because the party incorporates policies from across the political spectrum. UKIP believes in common sense and pragmatism over narrow-minded political tribalism. It offers everyone a radical difference. A new kind of politics, a new refreshing take on government where the people are at the heart of its motives.

Just go see for yourself.

Labour on course for worst electoral results since 1918

With all the media focus now on the Liberal Democrats and whether Cameron can have a come-back that would give him a working majority in Parliament, it seems everyone has forgotten the fact that Labour are on course for an electoral catastrophe. According to the opinion polls Labour are on average at just 27% of the vote. This if repeated on May 6th will be worse than Labour's horrendous defeat in 1983 when Michael Foot was leader. Indeed the latest ICM poll to come out has Labour currently on 26%.

The reason this has not been talked about as much as it should is because Labour are hoping to cling on to power with the help of the Liberal Democrats and their holier-than-thou pure leader, Nick Clegg. As I've said in previous posts, due to the current electoral system even if Labour come third in the popular vote they could still have the most seats come May 7th. So, despite the fact on average some 73% of the electorate plan to vote against Labour they may still be in power for another four or five years. God help us all.

Personally I plan to vote for neither of the three old parties. I am putting my faith in the UK Independence Party because I support their 31% flat tax and especially as a younger person support their no tax on the minimum wage and their plans to abolish tuition fees.

One word of advice to the Tories though, maybe if you highlighted the fact the Labour government are on course for a major haemorraging of electoral support that has not been witnessed for decades, you might just turn the tide. The scrutiny that should have been given to the Liberal Democrats also has not succeeded because Cameron didn't go straight for the jugular.

Anyway enough of that, vote UKIP!

The three failed old parties left the elephants waiting in the room

The second of the Prime-Ministerial debates ended last night with a somewhat expected anti-climax. Focusing on Foreign Affairs, the debate gave the three party leaders the chance to flex their muscles and show (or in Brown's case reinforce) what they can do for Britain in the world. Not one of them proved they can be an international statesman and why I hear you cry? Because they neglected the crucial international issues that affect Britain: the European Union, mass immigration and international security.

The EU was always going to be a tough one for Cameron, his own party is still split (albeit behind the scenes) over Europe and his own position on it leaves many suspicious. His performance reminded me of William Hague's pathetic "In Europe, not run by Europe" rubbish from when he was Tory leader. Let's just get this straight shall we, if we are in the political institution of the European Union we ARE run by Europe. As an EU member, we cannot determine our own trade deals, immigration levels and even to some extent our own judicial matters.

It was the simple fact that because we had our own currency as opposed to the Euro, we could revalue and in turn lower interest rates during the recession. This then saved us from the economic oblivion witnessed in Greece and the other weaker European economies which are in an economic straighjacket with the more robust and larger economies of Germany and France. None of this was mentioned by the three leaders last night.

The European Union is a prison of nations, not one of the 500 million people of the 27 member states has had a democratic say on this union, Britain in particular not since 1975. Even those who have such as the Irish in 2008 and 2009, when they initially said no to further political union they were told to vote again until they said yes and then legislation is rammed down our throats without us asking for it. It is an undemocratic, unaccountable, bureaucratic monstrosity. The reason Britain has not had a say over this for 35 years is because the three old parties know the British would vote no to further political union.

Why should we be controlled by something that we cannot even vote for? The European Parliament doesn't even create legislation it merely votes yes or no to the laws made by the unelected European Commission; appointed by the member states instead of by vote. The EU is a farce and the three political leaders last night shied away from fear of the truth. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Outside of the European Union, an independent Britain could choose to trade with the world, with growing economies such as Brazil, India and China. We could control immigration to levels that don't put pressure on our public services but still maintain and allow economic workers to come and commit to our economy. We could determine what countries we can help with aid and create trade agreements to inject prosperity into the third world countries. We could look at our parliament and see a fully accountable democracy where the undemocratic EU does not hold any power.

The three failed old parties failed to mention all that last night. They scaremonger saying Britain would be isolated with the world, trade would plummet and jobs would disappear. Nonsense! There is nothing stopping an independent Britain reaching out to the world and trading and cooperatiing with nations. Switzerland and Norway are not within the EU, are they isolated? No. Britain can be a global economic and trading power outside the shackles of the European Union. They say the EU has stopped wars in Europe. Not true. Before the official creation of the EEC (which turned into the EU) in 1973, it was NATO and the United Nations that brought the nations of the world together without any political union needed.

Last night the three leaders lied to you, they have lied to all of us for decades. For once vote for honesty and straight talking, clarity and commonsense.

Ban the Bercow.

John Bercow is perhaps one of the most odious characters around. By all accounts arrogant, full of himself and an opportunist who became Speaker thanks to the partisan backing of Labour MPs, he really does need to go.

Great then to see that Nigel Farage, who would be an amazingly good Member of Parliament for Buckingham, using the internet to help raise funds. It doesn't matter to the people of Buckingham whether they are a Labour, Tory or Lib Dem voter - none of these parties are standing. It is a straight choice between a man who represents the cosy consensus of modern day Westminster politics, and the man who could help to single-handidly shatter that consensus into a million pieces.

Go on, donate and help get Nigel Farage into the House of Commons. UKIP really could win in Buckingham.

For those of you who have been taken in by 'Cleggmania' perhaps you would like to read this...

A very insightful article in today's Daily Telegraph shows how hypocritical and sly Nick Clegg truly is and what his party is really up to during this election and the elections that have preceded it.

Now I know many will simply say, 'Oh this is just smearing...' but within the article are events and facts that the Liberal Democrats simply cannot deny.

Be careful what you vote for, the Liberal Democrats may seem to be the 'anti-politics' alternative to the other failed two parties but underneath they are just as bad, if not worse.

So the Tories want to talk EU again.

The opportunism of Cameron's Conservatives is there for all to see. After being one of the many issues that David Cameron has been extremely keen for his Party to avoid, the attacks on Nick Clegg's euro-federalist position have begun.

The Tories are well within their rights to point Clegg out as a massive euro-enthusiast. Yet it is the sheer nature of the Tories bringing up the issue when it suits them, beating Clegg with a quick "eurosceptic" slap and at the same time being reluctant to talk about this vital issue when it doesn't suit them. This is out and out opportunism, not an attack on Clegg driven by a principled stance on the issue.

The televised debate tonight will see the EU issue come up and no doubt Cameron will try and push himself as the natural choice for Britain's eurosceptic public. As I said yesterday, Clegg's in or out referendum pledge on EU membership will do more to placate many thinking of voting Tory or UKIP than Cameron's ruling out of any EU referendum for five years.

Are the Lib Dems now closer to UKIP than the Tories and Labour?

I know, I know. Nick Clegg wants an EU superstate and for Britain to abandon the pound sterling and adopt the euro. Lord Pearson wants Britain to totally and utterly withdraw from the European Union. But could it be that, despite the widespread support for the notion that UKIP are an offshoot of the Tories, it is in fact the Liberals that UKIP are closest to?

I say this because Nick Clegg seems to be strongly pushing the fact that he wants a referendum on EU membership. Now I am not naive: I'm fully aware that the Lib Dems abstained from a vote on the Lisbon Treaty in the House of Commons and failed to support UKIP's Bill in the House of Lords for the very referendum on membership that Clegg is now advocating.

But the fact is that what Clegg is offering is far closer to what UKIP want than Cameron or Brown are offering. Of course Clegg and the Liberal Democrats would stand diametrically opposed to UKIP during the referendum campaign as a rabidly pro-EU Party. But at least Clegg is offering that we get to that point at all, which is rather more than what Brown or Cameron are prepared to commit to.

It may not be a nice thought for those Tories who view their Party as somehow being the natural home for UKIP supporters, but it may now be the Liberal Democrats who, in a roundabout way, have more to offer those thinking of voting UKIP than the Tories themselves.

The people must have their say on the issue of Britain's EU membership. At least the Lib Dems appear to want to have the debate at all.

The more I see Clegg, the more I despise him

After recently finishing watching Clegg being spectacularly interrogated by students on BBC Radio 1 (shown on the BBC Parliament Channel) I have come to the conclusion that Clegg is truly out of his depth when it comes to policy scrutiny. He could barely answer the students' excellent questions and for that reason, I cannot for the life of me stand him. Here is a man whose party is ahead in the majority of opinion polls and he can't answer questions on his own policies for government!

One student rightly asked how illegal immigrants could prove they have been here for more than 10 years in order to meet the Lib-Dems' amnesty deal. How can they if they are illegal? Moreover, what message does it give not only to other immigrants who actually do their bit but also to the rest of the population? Well done Mr. Illegal you've managed to hide out here illegally for ten years, welcome to Britain!

Clegg also ridiculously made the point that all these illegal immigrants get taken in by vicious gangs. Um, what about the illegal immigrants who don't but can somehow claim benefits through our massively flawed welfare system? What about those who have nothing to do with these gangs? It was such an incredible marginalisation on Clegg's part I think even the illegal immigrants who would benefit the amnesty would be offended.

The Liberal Democrats are ridiculous. Clegg is a joke who once properly interrogated over policy where they are properly scrutinised, he has few answers. The answers he does give are laughable and insulting.

I don't like either Cameron or Brown, but I hope they decimate Clegg in tomorrows debate. Clegg deserves it.

Low taxes, small government, good times.

A catchy slogan don't you think? With the election now in full swing, I began to think what it would be like had UKIP the same platform as the three old parties. Would we be seeing a surge of our own? Yes. Would we take votes from all the parties? Yes. Is UKIP doing what it should be doing right now? No. I have prepared myself for the coming tidal wave (or should it be volcanic eruption seen as the media love doing that political analogy) of attacks from members within the party and I shall just come out with it; for once can UKIP not mention the EU in literature or when on television and in the press? Quite frankly, hardly anyone cares!

Those who know of UKIP know the party would, if in government withdraw from the European Union. Those who ask why we can simply say, 'Its a waste of money, its undemocratic, unaccountable and an institution that stifles and erodes sovereignty without the democratic approval of the 500 million people currently within the Union'. Done. Dusted. Anymore info please go to our policies...we actually have some.

UKIP could be a formidable force in British politics if it went on the attack with its domestic policies. It could outflank the Lib-Dems on raising the income tax threshold to £11,500 and no tax on the minimum wage, it could silence Labour with its long term investments in manufacturing and industry and it could decimate the Tories with its School Vouchers system, reintroduction of Grammar Schools, a 5 year freeze on permanent settlement, a flat tax at 31% and the abolition of National Insurance altogether. Along with scrapping tuition fees, a 40% increase in defence investment and increased pensions at £130 per week, UKIP could be on 30% of the vote right now! Why isn't it?

Many answers to that; lack of party focus on building up local areas of support and councillors and lack of proper promotion of its domestic policies. Now obviously if the party had the same access to publicity and airtime as the other parties, it might be a different matter. This is a chance for UKIP to be a real libertarian-leaning alternative to the other parties. It could be as simple as saying to a voter 'when you next look at your pay check and see that NI contribution, just erase that off in your head and add that sum to your wage. That's what you get under a UKIP government.' With UKIP you get low taxes, small government and good times. Perhaps that will stick?

Commentators are still remarkably arrogant when it comes to UKIP.

The Telegraph's Janet Daley is typical of those based in and around Westminster who have no real understanding of UKIP, what it is about or where it is going. In their eyes it is full of ex-Conservative supporters who have formed a political party to pressurise the Tories into being more eurosceptic.

It is for this reason I would guess that Janet Daley has today begged for Lord Pearson to stand down UKIP at this forthcoming General Election. Her argument is that UKIP standing in Liberal Democrat target seats could cost Conservative candidates and MPs their moment of glory on May 6th and help elect Lib Dem MPs.

Daley's take on this is utterly ridiculous for a whole plethora of reasons. Lord Pearson has already gone further than the wishes of many UKIP members and "put country before Party" by persuading UKIP candidates not to stand against anti-EU Tories and one Labour MP. Those Conservatives UKIP are standing against are not brave or wise enough to back Britain withdrawing from the EU.

But further to that, it is wrong for such commentators to believe that UKIP are only interested in the issue of the European Union. No other Party offers policies like the restoration of grammar schools and flat tax. The Conservatives offer nothing closer to these principles than the Liberal Democrats.

In other words, UKIP have their own vision of the UK that is radically different from all of the three old parties. And it is a vision that is picking up more and more support across the country if opinion polls are to be believed. It is a growing political Party with a very bright future and it owes nobody from any other Party a thing. To suggest otherwise is the height of arrogance.

Do the TV debates show just how vacuous politics has become?

I think that the TV debates were a very, very good idea. They simplify things and allow people who are not normally interested in politics to dip their toes in and make their mind up based on those leading the parties.

Yet the sudden emergence of Nick Clegg (and therefore Liberal Democrats) as a serious political contender does remind me a lot of Barack Obama's Presidential campaign. It had a good image, it was clean, smart and represented "change". But hang on just a second - what policy are the public backing Clegg on? What policies, what actions were the American people voting Barack Obama in as President to take?

I've asked a lot of people who have warmed to Nick Clegg in recent days what he said that they support. And not one of them has replied with a policy proposal, simply the fact that he came across better than Gordon Brown and David Cameron. That is in a way unsurprising, but in another really quite scary. Politics is ultimately about handing individuals power that they will use to influence the lives we live. The electorate dishing out power based solely on personalities is very dangerous.

Buckingham needs a Voice, not a Speaker

With the election finally hotting up and even becoming a little exciting, there is one seat in the country that come May 7th has the potential to create an earthquake in British politics. Nigel Farage, the charismatic former leader of the UK Independence Party is on course to topple the Speaker of the House, John Bercow. Now without any hint of bias, Bercow has to go. He is a sly, pompous, obnoxious hypocrite who on being elected Speaker (only because Labour were sticking two fingers up to the Tories) claimed tens of thousands of pounds in taxpayers money to renivate his Speaker's Apartment at a time he was claiming to 'clean up the expenses scandal in politics'. He is quite frankly a joke and the good people of Buckingham deserve better.

Nigel Farage is without doubt the best possible candidate for MP for Buckingham and I implore anyone reading this to do their bit in getting Nigel elected. Once in Westminster, he will be able to fully uncover what absolute disgraces the MPs of the three, failed old parties all really are.

Lord Tebbit: Always a man to speak clarity in times of chaos

Lord Tebbit, one of the last bastions of conservatives with a small 'c' has come out today with a brilliant, stinging attack on Clegg. Although he endorses Cameron (not surprising seen as Tebbit is sadly still in the Tory party) he does make the excellent point that this Lib-Dem surge has been created soley out of Clegg's performance in the debates and not due to an overwhelming support of Liberal Democrat policies.

Does the 30-33% of the electorate actually know what policies they are about to vote for? Probably not, which makes this election all the more unpredictable especially when whoever wins must take into account the sheer economic deficit that faces us all. Would I want Clegg to be the man to sort it out? Good god no! But would I want Brown and Cameron either? Again, absolutely not. And I think that speaks for the majority of the British electorate, no-one can see a real viable and popular alternative in the three failed old parties.

Indeed when you look at the individual party positions in the polls, for each of the failed three some 70% are not planning to vote for them. Despite the fact the Lib-Dems are currently on 31% it still means 69% are against them.

Read Lord Tebbit's post, it's an insight and an enjoyable read.

A flag stolen by extremists or abandoned by politicians?

A poll in the Daily Mail today shows that England is one of the most unpatriotic countries in Europe.

It seems sad but true. Our nation's flag has been abused for many years now as a symbol for extremist nationalism. Yet while some on the extreme fringe of British politics could be blamed for tarnishing a flag, is that really fair?

It seems more the case that our lack of national identity is down to the conditions that our politicians have created where patriotism is derided or viewed with great suspicion. It is of course absurd that anyone should feel any negativity about displaying their nation's flag, but perhaps the feeling would be less pressed into the psyche of English society if those most visible in our country spoke up a bit.

At the end of the day, England is a brilliant country. Just look at some of the fantastic English people who are representing us in the world: from Johnson Beharry to David Haye, Wayne Rooney to Nigel Farage (okay some may disagree with that last one), there are a lot of reasons to be proud of the great nation we remain today. Fly the flag on St. George's Day on Friday and we can slowly restore our nation's flag to what it is meant to be all about.

Voting Labour has led to the danger of a BNP MP.

Rob Flello, the MP for Stoke-on-Trent South, has warned voters that there is a danger of the BNP winning in his constituency. He naturally, as a Labour MP, insists that the only way to beat the BNP is to vote Labour.

Sadly the rise of the BNP has come under a Labour government. It is Mr. Flello's colleagues in the Labour Party who have ignored working class concern on immigration and social breakdown and now unfortunately the BNP are preying on people's concerns and posing a real threat in Labour heartlands at this General Election. I myself will be down in Barking to help UKIP candidate Frank Maloney soon, where the BNP have been making a song and a dance about Nick Griffin standing.

I personally don't think that the BNP will elect a Member of Parliament on May 6th, but not because Labour have done anything to effectively the counter the threat. I believe simply that while some may get so wound up with things that they vote BNP, there are enough people who realise what they are all about to not vote for them.  No matter how disgusted most British people get, they would much rather sit at home than vote for a racist candidate.

For those who believe in tough but fair immigration controls but are not motivated by racism, as is the case with most decent British people, UKIP are there. Which begs the question, why would someone become a member of the BNP if it wasn't because they are racist?

Welcome to the new site!

After some deliberation, Michael Heaver and myself have decided to launch this new blog 'Backbench Rebels'. We plan to focus not just on the recent developments in the election campaign and other political issues but also on a wider range of issues; both domestic and international.

Backbench Rebels will be a political home for independent-minded, libertarian or classical liberal leaning thinkers and also for people who want to read something different!

Enjoy, spread the news and comment away!

Would a Lib-Dem coalition pose a serious threat to national security?

With all the news basically obsessing over the Liberal Democrats coming first in two recent opinion polls, it does beg the question: what would their policies do to Britain? In particular I am incredibly nervous about their plans to scrap Trident, our independent nuclear deterrent. Undoubtedly it appeals to the Left and a lot of young people who see nuclear threats as a thing of the past but one must look at the wider picture. To take away something that is only there as a deterrent to protect us from rogue states is simply irresponsible. It is allowing narrow-minded ideology to get in the way of pragmatic national security.

The Liberal Democrats claim it would save us £100bn over 10-20 years but fail to mention what could happen in those two decades, especially considering the growing arrogance of Iran and the unpredictability of North Korea. No-one can predict the future and the Liberal Democrats are foolish to presume they can scrap it without any consequences whatsoever. Clegg, in another attempt to be in the "I'm not like the others, honest!" mode said how our nuclear weapons were only meant to "wipe Moscow and St.Petersburg off the map". Well yes, they were meant for that but funnily enough our threats have shifted over time Nick.

We must retain our Trident system in order for real national security to be maintained and protected. There are dangers out there that have yet to surface and Britain must be prepared for them. Scrapping Trident would only weaken our defences at a time when other states wish to do harm not just to us but to our Allies across the globe.

If it costs as much as Clegg claims, then perhaps that is a price worth paying for to protect the British people from unimaginable horrors.