Nigel Farage speaks at the UKIP 2014 Spring Conference at the Riviera International on March 1, 2014 in Torquay. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Ukip named as a “major party” by Ofcom for European elections

The decision means the party will now be entitled to equal levels of TV coverage as the other main parties.

Ahead of the European elections on 22 May, Ofcom has announced that broadcasters will be required to treat Ukip as a “major party” for the contest. The significance of this decision is that it will now be entitled to an equal amount of Party Election Broadcasts (PEBs) as Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems. The ruling, however, will not apply to Scotland-only programming due to Ukip’s low level of support in the country. Here’s the Ofcom statement in full: 

We have consulted on an appropriate approach for determining the composition of the list of major parties ahead of the elections taking place on 22 May 2014.

Our decision is that the United Kingdom Independence Party (“UKIP”) should be added to the list of major parties in England and in Wales for the 2014 European Parliament elections.

The practical effect of this decision is as follows:

  • Broadcasters transmitting PEBs on a UK/Great Britain-wide basis (such as Channel 5 in the European Parliamentary elections) will be obliged to treat UKIP as a major party across the whole of England, Wales and Scotland (ie Great Britain) as a whole.
  •  
  • STV will not be required to treat UKIP as a major party for the purposes of broadcasting Scotland-only PEBs. This reflects the fact that UKIP has low levels of support in Scotland. However, ITV Wales will have to treat UKIP as a major party for the purposes of broadcasting Wales-only PEBs, reflecting the fact that UKIP has significant levels of support in Wales 
  •  
  • In news and current affairs election programming that focuses on the European Parliamentary elections across England, Wales and Scotland (i.e. Great Britain) as a whole, UKIP will be treated as a major party across the whole of England, Wales and Scotland (i.e. Great Britain). However, in news and current affairs election programming that focuses on the European Parliamentary elections in just Scotland, UKIP will not be treated as a major party in such programming.

The decision will intensify the debate over whether Ukip should be regarded as a major party for the 2015 general election. While it has no MPs (in contrasts to its nine MEPs), some will argue that it should be included on the list if it continues to lead the Lib Dems in most opinion polls (and Ofcom appears to have taken its current poll ratings into account). Were Ukip to be classified as a major party, it would make it far harder (and even impossible) to exclude Nigel Farage from any TV leaders’ debates. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

By refusing to stand down, Jeremy Corbyn has betrayed the British working classes

The most successful Labour politicians of the last decades brought to politics not only a burning desire to improve the lot of the working classes but also an understanding of how free market economies work.

Jeremy Corbyn has defended his refusal to resign the leadership of the Labour Party on the grounds that to do so would be betraying all his supporters in the country at large. But by staying on as leader of the party and hence dooming it to heavy defeat in the next general election he would be betraying the interests of the working classes this country. More years of Tory rule means more years of austerity, further cuts in public services, and perpetuation of the gross inequality of incomes. The former Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Seema Malhotra, made the same point when she told Newsnight that “We have an unelectable leader, and if we lose elections then the price of our failure is paid by the working people of this country and their families who do not have a government to stand up for them.”

Of course, in different ways, many leading figures in the Labour movement, particularly in the trade unions, have betrayed the interests of the working classes for several decades. For example, in contrast with their union counterparts in the Scandinavian countries who pressurised governments to help move workers out of declining industries into expanding sectors of the economy, many British trade union leaders adopted the opposite policy. More generally, the trade unions have played a big part in the election of Labour party leaders, like Corbyn, who were unlikely to win a parliamentary election, thereby perpetuating the rule of Tory governments dedicated to promoting the interests of the richer sections of society.

And worse still, even in opposition Corbyn failed to protect the interests of the working classes. He did this by his abysmal failure to understand the significance of Tory economic policies. For example, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer had finished presenting the last budget, in which taxes were reduced for the rich at the expense of public services that benefit everybody, especially the poor, the best John McConnell could do – presumably in agreement with Corbyn – was to stand up and mock the Chancellor for having failed to fulfill his party’s old promise to balance the budget by this year! Obviously neither he nor Corbyn understood that had the government done so the effects on working class standards of living would have been even worse. Neither of them seems to have learnt that the object of fiscal policy is to balance the economy, not the budget.

Instead, they have gone along with Tory myth about the importance of not leaving future generations with the burden of debt. They have never asked “To whom would future generations owe this debt?” To their dead ancestors? To Martians? When Cameron and his accomplices banged on about how important it was to cut public expenditures because the average household in Britain owed about £3,000, they never pointed out that this meant that the average household in Britain was a creditor to the tune of about the same amount (after allowing for net overseas lending). Instead they went along with all this balanced budget nonsense. They did not understand that balancing the budget was just the excuse needed to justify the prime objective of the Tory Party, namely to reduce public expenditures in order to be able to reduce taxes on the rich. For Corbyn and his allies to go along with an overriding objective of balancing the budget is breathtaking economic illiteracy. And the working classes have paid the price.

One left-wing member of the panel on Question Time last week complained that the interests of the working classes were ignored by “the elite”. But it is members of the elite who have been most successful in promoting the interests of the working classes. The most successful pro-working class governments since the war have all been led mainly by politicians who would be castigated for being part of the elite, such as Clement Atlee, Harold Wilson, Tony Crosland, Barbara Castle, Richard Crossman, Roy Jenkins, Denis Healey, Tony Blair, and many others too numerous to list. They brought to politics not only a burning desire to improve the lot of the working classes (from which some of them, like me, had emerged) and reduce inequality in society but also an understanding of how free market economies work and how to deal with its deficiencies. This happens to be more effective than ignorant rhetoric that can only stroke the egos and satisfy the vanity of demagogues

People of stature like those I have singled out above seem to be much more rare in politics these days. But there is surely no need to go to other extreme and persist with leaders like Jeremy Corbyn, a certain election loser, however pure his motives and principled his ambitions.

Wilfred Beckerman is an Emeritus Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford, and was, for several years in the 1970s, the economics correspondent for the New Statesman