EU Referendum: The Disintegration Of Vote Leave?

It's a poor reflection on the so-called reporting skills of most of the legacy media that the dynamics between Leave.EU and Vote Leave is seen as infighting. Describing it as in-fighting heavily implies that both camps have the same objective but simply disagree over method.

But as has readily become apparent over some time Vote Leave has no intention of advocating leaving the EU; a deceptive position of theirs which has been excellently exposed by Mr Brexit. Instead this is a battle to prevent a Tory plant campaign winning designation which has the suspected intention of sabotaging the referendum.

If I was Mr Cameron wanting to win a referendum then an obvious tactic to deploy is make sure the opposition was under my control. And it's within this context we must see the actions of Vote Leave who have shown no explicit intentions to leave the EU despite being given many public opportunities to do so. Their evasiveness is their admission.

Yet with the designation debate raging on the internet - largely ignored by SW1 - it comes as no surprise that the media has rather belatedly woken up and are reporting on the dysfunctional nature of Vote Leave. Its dysfunctional nature is not least due to one of its directors Dominic Cummings, which has come to a head this week. The Times (£) reports:

The leaders of one of the campaigns to take Britain out of Europe were the target of a botched coup this week as infighting among Eurosceptics reached new heights. MPs tried to oust Dominic Cummings, the campaign director of Vote Leave, and Matthew Elliott, its chief executive, at a board meeting of ministers and donors on Tuesday.

Bernard Jenkin, a Tory MP involved with the organisation from the start, made the move after pressure from MPs who objected to the way in which Mr Cummings was running it. The plot was foiled after Mr Cummings got wind of it in advance, tipping off friendly board members and altering the agenda to make it harder for Mr Jenkin to mount his putsch.

One source said: “There was an attempted coup against Dom and Matthew. Bernard was trying to get the board to sack Dom and Matthew. Dom and Matthew are adamant there will be no merger with Arron Banks’s campaign [Leave.EU], which some MPs are pushing for. It was seen off. The money men said no. The board has been quite clear: both are staying in post.”

Another source denied that the coup attempt was dead.
“Cummings and possibly Elliott are on the way out. It’s just a matter of time. My money is on Cummings resigning by the weekend.”

With a temporary failed coup, we begin to see signs of a fight back by Cummings with friendly briefings to various journalists such as the Evening Standard:

A Tory MP faces pressure to quit the board of Vote Leave after he led a failed coup against one of its leaders.

Among the chaos we also see via the Spectator, a magician's "look at this hand" distraction:

The ‘in’ side’s shockingly bad start in the EU referendum campaign
Their data is dodgy, they disregard the facts and their leaders are lazy

The same Spectator whose commissioning editor Mary Wakefield just happens to be married to one Dominic Cummings a director of Vote Leave.

Yet Vote Leave's complete unsuitability for designation has been well rehearsed online for some time; with Elliott's previous No2AV campaign's "sharp practices", enriching colleagues and friends and less than convincing data protection practices.

In addition we can see that Elliott's previous enterprise - Business for Britain has not only been apparently sending incorrect information to Companies House but was potentially trading whilst officially dormant. The latter is a criminal offence and a complaint by a Labour MP has been filed with HMRC

Vote Leave is also being hit with numerous suits over breaches of data protection and libel. And complaints are soon to emerge with Ofcom that Vote Leave's appalling website contravenes disability discrimination laws "which ensures that websites are accessible to blind and disabled users". This consideration is particularly important when applying for taxpayers' money.

To add to the shambles that is Vote Leave there have been long running concerns over Matthew Elliott's Taxpayer's Alliance charitable arrangements which has cast a long shadow. The Guardian reported in 2009:

A campaign group which claims to represent the interests of ordinary taxpayers is using a charitable arm which gives it access to tax relief on donations from wealthy backers. 

The Conservative-linked Taxpayers' Alliance, which campaigns against the misuse of public funds, has set up a charity under a different name which can secure subsidies from the taxman worth up to 40% on individuals' donations. 

In one example, Midlands businessmen said they channelled funds through the Politics and Economics Research Trust at the request of the Taxpayers' Alliance after they asked the campaign group to undertake research into policies which stood to damage their business interests. The arrangement allowed the Taxpayers' Alliance to benefit from Gift Aid on the donations, a spokesman for the donors said.

It is understood that further official complaints have been made to reopen the investigation.

Interestingly Guido Fawkes has thus far remained silent on these matters. Westminster backbiting and scandal has always been his bread and butter. Yet with the potential of a major scoop ahead of the media, given his close contacts involved, there has only been silence. Perhaps that's a reflection of his financially compromised position.

It's becoming clearer that the Vote Leave camp is disintegrating - it is now an organisation engaged in warfare. It's a wonder how it could ever now be designated.

But the myopia of a London based media assumed, and still assume, that Vote Leave will be a shoo-in. That is now looking unlikely with Cummings increasingly resembling toast.

EU Referendum: Cameron's "Reforms" In Tatters

It's interesting that on the day the European Commission President, Juncker, delivers his grand State of the European Union speech we see a headline in the Times (£) which states; "Blow dealt to British hopes of winning Brussels reforms". 

The Times reports that Cameron's well publicised desire to try to attempt to reform the EU to fit in with UK requirements has fundamentally come undone, as told to a House of Lords committee by Chancellor George Osborne. It's worth reproducing the Times' article in full here (my emphasis throughout):

Eurozone countries will gang up on Britain as they did over the Greek bailout unless major changes can be won during renegotiations with the EU, George Osborne claimed yesterday.

However, the prime minister and chancellor have been warned that they could struggle to win such reforms in a report published today by the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), which says that they have yet to win round key allies.

Mr Osborne told a House of Lords committee yesterday that the 19 eurozone countries decided in a meeting in July — to which the UK was not invited — that Britain should pay a share of the Greek bailout.

Eurozone ministers reactivated a bailout fund known as the European financial stability mechanism (EFSM) to make an emergency €7 billion loan to Greece. Britain thought that this fund had been wound down and the decision put about £850 million of UK taxpayers’ money at risk.

“When the EFSM was decided on there were no non-euro members in the room,” Mr Osborne told peers. “When we first raised this issue, the European Commission said to us in a written document we have a QMV [qualified majority vote] now, so we don’t need to pay any attention to you. Lots of member states disavowed that. But it’s just a straw in the wind of what’s coming our way.”

Although eurozone countries used the fund, Britain struck a deal that meant UK taxpayers would be protected in the event of losses. “The treaties of the EU did not envisage a large number of member states in a single currency and a large number of states who are never likely to join,” Mr Osborne added. “The treaties do not really accommodate that situation. Any person looking rationally at that decision can see something needs to be done.”

In its report, the ECFR presents a bleak outlook for Mr Cameron’s renegotiations, declaring that the prime minister still has to convince partners that Britain “will not seek to destroy the DNA of the European Union”.

The ECFR has spoken to 100 leading politicians and thinkers in ten key European capitals about Britain’s plans. It has concluded that Mr Cameron has support for barely a third of his objectives, with his high-profile initiatives to slow the flow of European migrants to Britain among the most difficult to achieve, with none of the ten countries yet won round.

The report says that plans to block welfare handouts for new EU migrants for four years is still opposed in France, the Netherlands and Poland and agreement on the issue is “absolutely not doable” with Germany.

German opposition is so entrenched, the report says, because “the largest political parties oppose the idea of limiting social benefits for migrants because this is against the principle of free movement”.

Another objective for Mr Cameron is to opt-out on “ever closer union” and forge clear boundaries between eurozone members and the rest of the EU that would prevent a repeat of the Greek bailout surprise.

Only two countries — Bulgaria and Denmark — were deemed by the think tank to be “convinced”, with France, Germany, Italy and Sweden labelled “unconvinced”.

By Osborne's own words it's clear that Cameron has failed in his objective to try to 'reform' the EU and certainly before the UK referendum. None of this comes as a surprise but it's encouraging that we have further confirmation, as we noted before, that Cameron has as a consequence had to change strategy three times. The Minister for Europe said back in July:

"The key principle is that the reforms need to be legally binding and not reversible at the drop of a hat … it is not at all likely that by the end of 2017 one could have completed national ratifications of changes to the treaties, but part of any treaty process has to be agreement on the substance and then on the process of ratification … So we say that there would need to be absolutely clear agreement by all 27 countries where they have solemnly committed themselves to deliver on that package. That would be a unanimous decision of the European Council."

All of this leaves now Cameron vulnerable to the timings of the European Union over a new treaty which provides the Associate Membership option - his only get out. We are now beginning to get a firming up of Cameron's strategy.

And here Juncker's speech today takes on a new significance. While Farage concentrates his response to Juncker on his comments on migrants, ranting about "closing borders", aided and abetted by the myopic nature of the UK media, the real agenda of the speech has clearly passed him by. For example a key passage, of many is:

"I want to ensure we preserve the integrity of all four freedoms of the Single Market and at the same time find ways to allow the further integration of the Eurozone to strengthen the Economic and Monetary Union."

We can see clearly then Juncker has fired the starting gun for a new EU treaty; the asylum seeker crisis rather like Greece is being used as a "beneficial crisis" to facilitate a new treaty and so more EU integration.

Throughout the speech Juncker regularly refers to needing "more union", he's being clear about the need for further integration while also having a "fair deal" for Britain with the opportunity for us to participate in further integration should we wish. It looks all a bit familiar - it's the associate membership option we'll be fighting in the referendum.endum EU Referendum EU Referendum EU Referendum EU Referendum EU Referendum EU Referendum EU Referendum EU Referendum EU Referendum EU Referendum EU Referendum 

Rats Leaving A Sinking Ship?

The Times behind a paywall but available elsewhere reports another Farage expenses scandal:

Nigel Farage faces an expenses investigation into almost £60,000 of “missing” European Union funds paid into his personal bank account.

Of course Farage, expenses scandals and his reluctance to publish detailed accounts are nothing new. What's becoming clear though is that there is an element of rats leaving sinking ships within UKIP - in this case information is being provided by "former party officials". Some are wanting to distance themselves...

Newspapers have a number of serious investigations ongoing and they are beginning to close in. Interestingly Farage has this to say:

"And what we are seeing here from The Times - I mean not that I'm surprised because we have been expecting this - we are seeing yet another politically motivated attack from what is the establishment newspaper."

I'm not surprised he's been expecting it...the Times is warming up for the "big one". The sharks are circling...

All of this deeply saddens me as a long time anti EU campaigner. After 20 years what a waste...

Boris Repeats The Words Of Dave

Naturally the headlines suggests Boris Johnson (with one eye on Cameron's job) is trying to portray himself as deeply Eurosceptic but the detail of the Telegraph's article most certainly demonstrates that he's not at all, instead revealing on closer look a policy which is exactly the same as Cameron's...

Mr Johnson warned that the country must be ready to "walk away" from Europe if David Cameron failed to negotiate better terms of membership.

Boris' line will probably convince maybe a few Tories to remain put, but it won't work for everyone else. Our EU membership has been based on lie and so has the Tory party's position on it. It was entirely inevitable that the more the EU would reveal itself the less convincing the Tory party would be.

Faced with a perceived UKIP threat, we starting to see the consequences very clearly of the long established schizophrenic Tory EU policy towards our membership of the European Union, to the extent that some are breaking ranks. First up was Lawson now we have in today's Times Michael Portillo, (click to enlarge the scanned in copy*)

A phrase containing the words "chickens, home and roost" spring to mind -  only the chickens in this case are headless ones. As cosmic notes in the comments on Autonomous Mind:

It’s ridiculous to believe that the Conservatives can solve their current problems with a face lift and putting on a set of clothes that don’t fit. I’d say there’s more to it than getting rid of Cameron, but as for having him pose with a pint and a fag……..

For years they’ve dealt with the problem of the EU with a glorious and totally dishonest fudge and kept the party together by painting a picture of a completely unattainable halfway position.

Now they’re coming to the point where they can’t fudge the issue any more and they have to say whether they are in favour of in or out. Declaring one way or the other will see the party split, continuing to fudge will see support drift away.

When you try to deceive others you only end up deceiving yourself.

*I expect News International won't take too kindly to me publishing without permission a Times' article, so enjoy it while it lasts.

Priorities

From the Times:

Lowest Of The Low

Claims that News Of The World hacked Milly Dowler's mobile after she had been abducted are shocking. Not only was the voicemail accessed but messages were deleted when the inbox became full - leaving Milly Dowler's parents to hope that their daughter was still alive. Truly despicable stuff.

Predictably and understandably there has been outrage from all parties, from twitter and the usual suspects and it's hard not to agree with Labour MP Tom Watson's strong words.

But how much do outraged people really care? Ranting on twitter is not going to worry Murdoch's 'evil empire'; his concern is money. So will there now be mass boycotts of The Sun, The News Of The World, The Times or Sky and Sky Sports in protests? The answer will be a predictable no. Are Scousers the only people of this country with a backbone?

And what about the political parties? Labour didn't care when they cosied up to Murdoch because it suited them, before they threw their toys out the pram in 'disgust' when the The Sun ditched them for the Tories who cosied up to them. Will Cameron or indeed Ed Miliband now distance themselves from News International?

And no outrage over the corruption of the Met who have covered up the scandal (under a Labour government) or that other papers are being unusally quiet about the whole hacking scandal. It's highly unlikely that this was a one off in a case such as this.

As Obnoxio the Clown says: "We get the government we deserve. We also get the media we deserve. "

The inevitable outcome is outrage and condemnation today and tomorrow a phone call into SkySports; "can I renew my subscription in time for the new football season".

Odd

'Prisoners' get the vote' doesn't appear to be getting much traction in the Sun (surely that's a Sun story if ever there was one) or the Times. Hmm I wonder why that could be? And what was the price?

Behind The Times

I don't read the Times anymore since it went behind a 'paywall', however it looks like today that paywall has been removed. Is this Murdoch admitting that he got his strategy wrong?

Update: Woodsy42 in the comments alerts me that the paywall appears to be up and running again. That didn't last long.