Even Nick Griffin has criticised UKIP candidate Geoffrey Clark's extreme views on euthanasia for the elderly and forced abortions for disabled babies.
In an age when many politicians are criticised for not having distinct opinions, it seems Geoffrey Clark has them in abundance.
Until yesterday, he was the UKIP candidate for a brace of forthcoming local elections to Gravesham borough council and Kent county council.
In fact so plentiful are his opinions that Mr Clark produced his very own personal manifesto for his campaign. Alas, the opinions verge from the right-wing to the very-right-wing.
At the more moderate end, Mr Clark wants to introduce grammar schools “everywhere”, remove benefits from people having more than two children and cut overseas aid from countries with growing populations (“we must attack them for their wantonness”).
So far, so right-wing.
But his big message is that there should be a “serious national debate” about “service levels in the NHS” to address affordability and help cut the “national debt”.
His remedy?
Remove “disproportionately costly” treatment from the over-80s, “giving free euthanasia advice to all folk over 80 years of age, and indeed to all others”.
He also wants a “national referendum about these pressing matters” although he doesn’t elaborate about whether removing walking sticks and hearing aids features in his plan. Or how exactly we are to dispose of unwanted elderly people.
“Other items for review”, according to Mr Clark, include “ceasing all free IVF treatment on the NHS” and, last but not least, the policy suggestion which landed him in so much trouble yesterday:
“…compulsory abortion when the foetus is detected as having Downs, Spina Bifida or similar syndrome which, if it is born, could render the child a burden on the state as well as on the family.”
His disclaimer says:
“To avoid confusion and misrepresentation I do not, and UKIP does not, endorse any of these ideas: they are suggestions of matters for the review body to properly consider…”
So that’s ok then. The slaughter of pensioners and forced abortion of disabled foetuses will at least go before a “review body” first.
The extremism of Mr Clark’s tirade has drawn criticism from across the political landscape – some of it from an unexpected quarter. His Final Solution for Down’s babies drew perhaps harshest criticism from… BNP leader Nick Griffin.
He was scathing:
“The proposal is more than anything a slap in the face to the thousands of parents who have made the decision to keep and love handicapped children.
“It shows how, despite the efforts of the BBC to portray UKIP as moderate and respectable, Nigel Farage’s international safety valve remains a haven for cranks and real extremists.
“It also highlights the extent to which UKIP is a party in which Christian values and basic human compassion do not appear to have a place.”
To quote Nick Griffin as a voice of moderation may be a through-the-looking-glass experience, but necessary too in order to show just how normalised UKIP has become. If Nick Griffin has the moral high ground then you are in trouble.
Predictably, Mr Clark was cast to the wind yesterday; a sure sign that UKIP is getting serious as it hit its highest level of popular support – 9 per cent – in a ComRes poll. But this episode serves to remind people that behind Nigel Farage’s jaunty Euro-bashing lies some truly noxious elements.
Indeed, as Mr Clark says:
“Many voters still believe we are the BNP in disguise, are extremists, madmen or dotty.”
Now why ever would they think that?
See also:
• UKIP’s supporters are closer to the BNP than Farage would have us believe – March 12th, 2012
• Progressive politics and the purple peril: The rise of UKIP – April 17th, 2011
• The new BNP? UKIP stands by racist PPC – April 9th, 2010
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
12 Responses to “When even Nick Griffin looks down on UKIP’s Dr. Death, Farage knows he’s in trouble”
Newsbot9
The UKIP have – predictably – not been careful in their choice of companions. And now we see another round of inter-far-right bashing. This isn’t very interesting news, afaik.
LB
Not at all. I’m just pointing out that because they didn’t do what Beveridge said to do, namely have a funded state pension, that people are going to be destitute.
Now I suspect since you’re a public sector worker with a huge pension expected, you’ve tweaked, you’re going to get shafted.
1. The state pension pays out 20p in the pound compared to what you would have got with your money going into the ‘risky’ FTSE. Ho hum, the state’s the risk.
2. With 4,700,000 million (4.7 trillion) of debts for the state pensions, Newsbots included, and all the other debts, along with a 30% overspend on taxes of 0.55 triliion again its absolutely clear that it won’t be paid.
So you have to work out who is going to get shafted.
Make your choice between.
1. Cutting pensions to civil servants.
2. Paying a state pension to someone with no savings.
Hmmm, I suspect the civil servants get it.
Newsbot9
Yes, you’re going to break the system Beverage set up, for your own selfish ends.
1. Except it doesn’t. NI pays more than the pension, and it pays far BETTER than private pensions, the British ones being the worst in Europe thanks to you greed.
2. No, that you REFUSE to pay. You’d rather see people die than pay a penny towards them.
3. You class pay tax.
That’s right, you’ll remove the services and raise the poverty premium so you can profit. You’ll shaft anyone else, every tine, for everything they have.
Ian Dacre
So one UKIP Council Candidate has some unsavoury views not endorsed by his party. Is this significant? There are 42 (now former) Labour councillors on the sex offender register as they have been convicted of child-related sex offences – I can’t imagine anyone here would think that reflected badly on the Labour Party?
roy steele
How many voters secretly agree with Clark’s crackpot ves and how many ‘secretly’ vote for those views when secretly hidden behind the ballot box curtain ?
Why must a man be vilified for his openness on wantonness ?
He is manifesting some ‘evil’ thoughts ? Is he, I wonder shewing the way to a more open form of Democracy in the UK ? He isn’t breaking any ‘laws’ canon or man-made, is he > ?