Where do we go from here?

Now that the dust has settled after the general election we can consider the results and the way ahead. It is understandable that Eurorealists should be disappointed by the fact that the votes won have not resulted in an equable number of seats but, looking at the actual number cast, it is obvious that UKIP has been responsible for a political earthquake. When we held national committee meetings above a shop in Regent Street in the early 1990s I doubt that there were more than a couple of hundred party activists but on the 7th May 2015 the party's vote was 42% of Labour's and 34% of the Conservatives, the latter a party which has been around for centuries. It is reported that when Nigel arrived in the European Parliament last week some of the parasitic MEPs from Germany and Belgium who infest that place tried to deride him and UKIP as losers, showing just how detached these elitists are from the ordinary people.

Naturally UKIP will go on with the intention of winning many more votes at the next election. We won our first council this time and there is no reason why we should not be aiming at forming a government in the future. We can ignore the nonsense talked up by the media about splits and an end to UKIP's challenge as these are just desperate attempts by the old parties to conceal the danger the party now represents to their power. Although, as Tony Benn always said, it is policies, not personalities that matter, and no one is indispensable, it would be foolish to pay any attention to those seeking to replace Nigel when he clearly still has much to offer and is popular with all those tired of the hypocrites who cannot understand how a politician can say what he means and mean what he says.

Now it seems that there will be an 'in-out' referendum in the next couple of years it is essential that the significant, sane and sensible Eurorealist organisations and individuals bury whatever hatchets may divide them and come together to present a united front and to constitute an official side in the campaign. The last thing we need is to have our arguments represented by those Eurosceptics, whom the BBC no doubt regard as dangerous extremists, but whose equivocations actually undermine our position, as who will follow if the trumpet gives out an uncertain note.

As one of those who was active in a small way on the 'No' side in 1975 I recall the bias, mendacity and trivialisation of the issues which distorted that vote and am desperate that we do not witness a repeat this time. There are many vital issues which much be settled before we even get near to the actual vote, inter alia: who represents each side and whether each will receive central government funding; whether free posting of literature will be provided by the government and whether it will itself send an additional pro EU leaflet, as happened last time; what access each side will have to the media, particularly the BBC; the electorate to be used, as an extension to under 18 year olds is just one of the suggestions which might give an unfair advantage to the 'In' campaign; the wording of the actual question to be voted upon. Of course there will be other equally important issues, not least how a victory for our side would be implemented by a government dedicated to staying in the EU.

We can be certain that Cameron will return from Brussels with a number of meaningless concessions, proclaim victory and then tell the British people that they can safely vote to stay in the EU as everything will be fine. In this he will receive the support of the usual suspects: big businesses who want to deal with unelected apparatchiks rather than elected representatives; the bureaucratic class who relish the opportunity to escape from accountability to the people; the idiots of the liberal left intelligentsia who for some unaccountable reason seem to think that the EU represents some sort of progressive and benign ideal, rather than the corrupt, sclerotic entity it is in reality; those foolish enough to believe that the EU's existence preserves peace, a complete fallacy and the opposite of the truth; and of course the political class, who want to carry on riding the lucrative gravy train and have a wider stage to strut their little hour, not caring that they are betraying democracy in the process.

Naturally the running of the 'out' campaign will not be merely a matter for UKIP, as all those who are not supporters of the party, but want to see Britain freed from Brussels, must be included, although, of course, the party will be one of the strongest voices. Those of us who will be expected to walk the streets delivering publications, writing to the media and organising or attending meetings must know that all these matters are in hand. Should the referendum be lost we would not just give up but it would be a body blow from which the Eurorealist cause would take a long time to recover. For some of us this will probably be the last chance to see Britain break free of the EU in our lifetime, as the inevitable implosion of the latter may not occur for a long while yet.

Victory in the referendum, while no doubt difficult to implement over the wishes of the establishment, will mean, as Churchill said of the Americans after Pearl Harbour, that the country will be delivered from a long pain, and we shall be able to turn back to the path we should never have left, of being a global, free trading and sovereign democracy, where the people, not self interested politicians, are the true rulers.