Curious Snippets

Reading the blogs I see there is very liberal dose of negative comments aimed at Dr Spink and UKIP. I can understand why, there are some good reasons.

1. Bob Spink is a social authoritarian with possibly some less than favourable views

I do not agree with a lot of what Bob Spink believes, but that does not mean UKIP should not have him as an MP. Indeed he was a Conservative MP, why did they not reject him? The point about politicians is that they are supposed to hold beliefs and principles and align themselves with parties which broadly reflect them. Dr Spink at least is honest about his beliefs and stays true to them, and while they may not align very well with UKIP the overriding area of agreement on the EU is more than enough.

2. Bob Spink was elected as a Tory and should step down and fight a bye-election

It is true that this would show principle, and indeed many in UKIP believe it should be law. Part of me would like him to do the same. However, UKIP would be mad not to use some time to prove its credentials before an election. For the main parties people largely know what they stand for and can make a decision, but how can people judge whether they like a UKIP MP or not when they have no way to compare?

If Spink serves until the next election he should hopefully have given UKIP a platform, which should hopefully overcome some of the media bias, and give the electorate a chance to see a record and make an informed decision on facts and not simply what they read in the media. E.g. if a Labour MP defected to the Lib-Dems, the electorate would have an idea of how the Lib-Dems stand on various issues and how they behave and can better judge how their MP might behave, but they have no such benchmark with UKIP.

So while in principle it would be nice for Spink to fight a bye-election, in practice it would be a self-defeating decision.

In general, for UKIP, having an MP is a major advance. Having an MP in the centre of Westminster means we will have a voice. Two Lords have helped a little, but they are Lords and somewhat detached from the media bubble. The Commons is a different story. If the electorate across the UK are given a chance to see how UKIP MPs might perform, as they can start to see voting records and also hear the message through the (hopefully) increased media coverage, it will allow them to make a better informed choice at the next election.

So ok, yes hypothetically he should fight a bye-election, and yes hypothetically his views are not very aligned with UKIP's, but on balance having him serve even just a short period as a UKIP MP far outweighs these issues. Show me a single MP who has the support of every member of their party and who doesn't hold views different to that of the party line. Well done UKIP!