The Great Debate

So we've had the two of them (hello and good evening, by the way). Two leaders, two debates and one outcome. Not quite election-level, though we'll be going through the motions in May for some locals and the European Parliamentary elections. Nonetheless, TV airtime was dedicated to the parties which hold the most polar views on the UK's EU membership as it stands. The contenders: 

Nigel Farage MEP. Tory until around 20 years ago, made his money as a commodities broker in the city. Currently MEP for the UK Independence Party (UKIP) in the European Parliament. Has a leadership position in his group. Fairly amiable chap, so one would think; hailed as an authentic speaker who has few links to the British political class. Rabidly anti-EU, star of many YouTube videos and permanent bane to Martin Schulz, current President of the European Parliament. 

The Rt Hon Nick Clegg MP PC. Former MEP himself, now Deputy Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and leader of the Liberal Democrat Party. Came to prominence during the 2010 General Election TV debates, when the catchphrase "I agree with Nick" saw the Conservatives go into coalition with him. Known since for not keeping his party to heel and letting Vince Cable run rings round him at will. May see his party's fortunes dip next year over tuition fees, desperately scrambling to rehabilitate his party nationally.

The stakes were, at least to me, slightly unclear. I suppose it helped to maybe push people toward one extreme or the other and one thing which people have said and with which I agree is the noted absence of both Labour and Conservatives. Well Labour don't have much to say on anything that's worth listening to just now, so we can discount them. Conservatives are too busy actually doing things and shaping the country up a bit better. Were the Lib Dems or UKIP able to put anyone else recognisable into the field, then I'd have been all for it, but as UKIP can't quite do that now that Roger Helmer is out of the frame, that could prove somewhat difficult. 

The performances: I only saw snippets of each, I must confess, but it told me all I needed. Farage looked to be in command and was forceful throughout. He told the people what they wanted to hear and they responded back to him positively. Contrast that to Nick, who still wants people to agree with him, but tonight especially sounded desperate, almost whiny and lacked force of personality. Say what you will about Farage (and plenty do) but he has a strength of personality people seem to like. Scratch below the surface and he's another golf club bore, but there we go. 

This is what I mean when I am derogatory about UKIP. Although they are populist in their approach and may have poached many anti-gay marriage Tories off us (they're welcome in my view), they have nothing else to offer. They are now bent on gaining a working-class vote and will use tactics employed by the BNP (a third of their former membership are reported to be in the ranks) to help. Again, they're welcome. Unfortunately this means that their policies will vacillate wildly in order to placate the plethora now in their ranks. To top it off, I cannot honestly name you above three people currently in the ranks who would be of ministerial calibre. Surely they must start to think of this, if they wish to be taken seriously? There are no other names or faces than Nigel Farage, Roger Helmer and Neil & Christine Hamilton who I can recall as notable members of UKIP.

I'd be equally nasty about the Lib Dems, but really, is it worth it? They not only have cake, but they now wish to eat it. Tim Farron being paraded round today going against the Spare Room Subsidy because it might help the party's image and hopefully keep them in double digits at Westminster come next May. They lost voters in 2010 in coalition. They bled them further when the welfare reforms were agreed. They may have stayed some hands on gay marriage, but ultimately the promise was blatantly broken on tuition fees, I do fear for their numbers. 

Neither party has, of course, offered any serious middle ground. UKIP want out and that's it. No negotiation, no attempt at consolidation. Just up, out and leave. OK, but then what? The Lib Dems want in, ever-closer union and one big happy family. No thanks. Labour, well, will want something that will see us edge closer to Brussels but sneakily so nobody suspects and the people won't have a say. Conservatives want a referendum in 2017 when all other avenues have been exhausted and the British people give a full and clear signal as to what should happen next. Not popular with the other three parties and indeed some members (who haven't yet joined Nutty Nigel) would be sceptical. I'm not; 2017 seems to be a sensible date, no election, no foreseeable crisis. A good and clear run starting in 2016, although the question is being debated now, which is good. 

My advice is to all of you not to simply let blind populism or unsupported faith be your guides when deciding what our future in relation to the EU should be. I think we should stick with it, but not in its present form and not for the reasons Nick suggested on BBC 2 tonight. It's a trading bloc and it's solid. Politically it's a complete banana republic and that alone should send the BRICs and US running for the hills. A diplomatic corps for a trading union? Preposterous. Its own flag, anthem and presidential system to boot? Ridiculous. It is these things we ought to change. If we can reform the EU for the good (and I mean less Brussels-based interference) of all the member-states, then we will have achieved something. That will not be delivered by UKIP and cannot be left to the Lib Dems or Labour.