String of Offences Solidifies UKIP’s Dangerous Trajectory in Britain
If you thought that UKIP couldn’t go any further to shock and offend then you were sadly wrong. MEP David Coburn’s recent comment towards SNP minister Humza Yousaf, "Humza Yousaf, or as I call him, Abu Hamza", is completely unacceptable and has no place in the European and British political sphere. Equating the MSP to Abu Hamza who was sentenced to life earlier this year for terrorism offences linked to the Charlie Hebdo attacks, and for inciting violence, is a blatant attack that has no grounds whatsoever, and one which upsettingly provides flames to the fire of growing Islamophobia in the country.
Despite it coming from a representative of UKIP, a party that has become well known for offensive statements since their emergence amongst popular political parties, it is still almost unbelievable that such a comment has any place in modern Britain. Indeed, if he gets away with such blatant racism it is a gross reflection on certain sections of our society. As it stands Nigel Farage has commented that it was simply a “joke in poor taste” and plans no discipline for the incident.
By allowing UKIP to play a role in public affairs by continuing to offer the party support, with it now predicted to gain 15% of votes in the upcoming election, and by failing to condemn such behaviour, Britain could continue on a trajectory of becoming splintered and isolated, taking steps back to the past rather than embracing multiculturalism and integration.
In a statement to the BBC Humza Yousaf said: “This is an insult to the entire Muslim community, which is fighting Islamophobia in society. It has caused hurt and deep offence. David Coburn should resign, and if he does not, Nigel Farage should remove him from UKIP." He is now seeking legal advice to see whether it will be possible to pursue the complaint on the grounds of racism or religious intolerance. The five other Scottish MEPs now stand by Yousaf in urging the European Parliament to take action. Yet, while the president Martin Schulz has condemned the comments as “unacceptable” behaviour, he has no overarching authority over MEP actions outside the parliament. First legal action would have to be taken nationally before parliamentary immunity could be lifted, and action could be forwarded.
Following this statement it is undeniable that UKIP have pushed themselves beyond the boundaries of other offences that seem to have only warranted a “slap on the wrist” or even no measures whatsoever, but have crossed over to a dangerous territory of bigotry and backwardness. As an MEP in a position of authority he has the responsibility to not only uphold certain values and behaviour but to condemn acts of stereotyping and prejudice. The similarities between UKIP and BNP are starting to become increasingly obvious and hopefully statements such as this will force some potential UKIP voters to realise the risky path they support if they elect UKIP into any position of power.
Even while many may vote for UKIP as a statement of feeling disenfranchised by the current political system, it is nonetheless a precarious path to continue down. Yes, the current first-past-the-post system certainly has its imperfections, and undeniably has left many feeling their vote doesn’t make much difference. However, an overhaul of the entire voting system would be needed to counter such problems, not simply a vote for an extreme party that is out of touch with modern values, and a party that seems to attract the kind of questionable representatives that it does.
That the SNP have instead become the demonised target for the main parties to attack is a sad reflection of election politics. The “scaremongering” that has been proliferated from the suggestion of a possible Labour-SNP coalition is disgraceful, and a pattern that follows from the bitterness many still hold on to after the referendum in September last year. For David Cameron who said that such a coalition would be the “worst outcome” and that Milliband should prevent this coalition if he “cares about this country”, shows he doesn’t care about the Union and the voices of a whole country of increasingly politically isolated people. Indeed Milliband’s statement now ruling out such a coalition further feeds into this worrying trend. It is basically surmountable to saying however Scottish people vote in the upcoming election, they will never have any grasp on power in Westminster. The major parties ignore this fact to their peril, and actually risk further splintering of the country, the very thing the leaders claim to be avoiding by spouting fearful statements against such a coalition. Have we forgotten that the current coalition our government is based on seemed much more of a ridiculous, and incompatible policy-wise, alliance in the last election?
Now the scenario in which UKIP gains any real power in government would be the worst-case. Yet, David Cameron has still not ruled out a coalition with the party. Looking at UKIP and the SNP, the question of which party would really be dangerous for leaders who sincerely “care about this country”, appears easily answered given UKIP's track record.
By reducing comments like these to simply a “slip of the tongue” there is an obvious attempt to pretend the incident did not happen. However, David Coburn is not alone in controversy.
Even Nigel Farage admits to some “odd” members within his own party, but insists this should not deter voters. Yet surely a party which attracts such characters as former BNP candidates, a councillor suspended for a Nazi salute, and the disgraced homophobic parliamentary candidate Kerry Smith, to name a few should raise questions about their policies and beliefs. Almost beyond belief would describe the blatantly racist comment from former UKIP councillor Rozanne Duncan of "the only people I do have problems with are negroes and I don't know why”.
It seems that each time a member is expelled from or resigns from the party, a new offence appears to replace, and often exceed it.
David Coburn, as a Member of the European Parliament is probably one of the most senior UKIP members to be stained by such controversy. That’s if you forget Nigel Farage’s sexist comments, and a general secretary being suspended for accused sexual harassment.
It is illustrative that David Soutter, who is responsible for screening candidates, was quoted as saying he has spent a huge amount of time "weeding out the lunatics." None of these admissions and scandals paint a picture of a responsible party in pursuit of the public’s interests. The fact that 'Vice News' has a whole column on ‘Disgraced UKIP councillor of the week’ is proof that such behaviour is not unusual.
Realising the folly of supporting a party such as UKIP with its dubious reputation will hopefully not take voters long. Perhaps the assumed “all press is good press” will be debunked as UKIP increasingly grace the headlines with bad publicity rather than fostering any belief of credibility over their position. Or perhaps this is a reason why some even choose to support such far-right parties. Because some now have a “safe” common ground to voice extreme opinions without any fear of serious penalties. If Coburn escapes any consequences it will only encourage and spread future prejudicial behaviour and actions.
Photo Credit: Mark Aitken
