Conservatives deny coalition with Ukip

Cabinet member – Ukip’s Mark Ellis

Cabinet member – Ukip’s Mark Ellis

First published in News by

THE Tories have been accused of forming a coalition with Ukip after giving the party two cabinet positions – and the deputy mayor’s post.

Linda Allport-Hodge, deputy leader of Ukip and ward councillor for Langdon Hills, and Mark Ellis, who represents Laindon Park, have been made cabinet members without special responsibilities.

During the council's annual general meeting, Nigel Le Gresley, Ukip councillor for Wickford Castledon, was also elected deputy mayor.

It comes despite the Tories insisting they will run Basildon Council as a minority administration.

The remaining opposition parties are convinced a deal has been brokered behind closed doors.

It comes after Ukip roared to victory in the local elections last month – securing 11 of the 15 seats up for grabs.

Aiden McGurran, Labour councillor for Pitsea South East, said: “There is no getting away from the fact Ukip has a massive presence on this council now and we’ve all got to work with that.

“What is interesting is we can already see early signs of a coalition between the Conservatives and Ukip. We have always said a vote for Ukip is a vote for a Tory.”

Geoff Williams, the only Lib Dem councillor left, added: “If it looks like, and walks like a coalition, then it is a coalition.”

There were tuts and jeers at the meeting as the vote to get through the committee set-up went along party lines – with Conservative and Ukip councillors successfully voting it through and Labour, Lib Dem and Independent Labour objecting.

The Labour Party was offered one of the available cabinet positions – but turned it down.

Byron Taylor, leader of the group, said: “The Labour Party has very set rules about joint adminstrations, but there is no way we would sit on a cabinet which included Ukip.

“I don’t think Ukip is going to deliver as coalition partners, and there are going to be a lot of issues between the two parties.”

The Tories and Ukip have both fiercely denied claims of a joint administration.

Phil Turner, who was officially named as new leader of Basildon Council at the meeting, said: “Labour were offered a cabinet position without portfolio.

“However, that was turned down and we had no alternative but to let the oppisiton take the seat.

“It’s fair to say there is no coalition, there are no agreements, we have all got to work together as best we can.”

Ukip’s Kerry Smith added: “Anything we don’t like we are going to vote against.”

Comments (18)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:13am Tue 17 Jun 14

Howard Cháse says...

Of course they have they're cut from the same cloth. Just different ends of the roll.

Got to have some Allies in the Ale And Pies Club after all.
Of course they have they're cut from the same cloth. Just different ends of the roll. Got to have some Allies in the Ale And Pies Club after all. Howard Cháse
  • Score: -1

11:14am Tue 17 Jun 14

rayleighrunner says...

Byron Taylor, leader of the group, said: “The Labour Party has very set rules about joint adminstrations, but there is no way we would sit on a cabinet which included Ukip.

Why not? Mr Taylor speak as though UKIP is the sworn enemy! What don't these people get? UKIP have done well. They are listening to the people. They are being elected....get on with it!
Byron Taylor, leader of the group, said: “The Labour Party has very set rules about joint adminstrations, but there is no way we would sit on a cabinet which included Ukip. Why not? Mr Taylor speak as though UKIP is the sworn enemy! What don't these people get? UKIP have done well. They are listening to the people. They are being elected....get on with it! rayleighrunner
  • Score: 33

11:23am Tue 17 Jun 14

Jack222 says...

Dont forget UKIP overall had 80%+ of the electorate vote against them. And their share of the vote went down in seats they contended in this last election and the one before. The only reason they 'won' was that they stood in a zillion more seats. If they had stood in the same amount of seats in the election before their seats would be down and - as said - their vote share would also be down.

The psepholgists have analysed UKIP voters - they are a mix (or all) of elderly , poor, poorly educated and male.
Dont forget UKIP overall had 80%+ of the electorate vote against them. And their share of the vote went down in seats they contended in this last election and the one before. The only reason they 'won' was that they stood in a zillion more seats. If they had stood in the same amount of seats in the election before their seats would be down and - as said - their vote share would also be down. The psepholgists have analysed UKIP voters - they are a mix (or all) of elderly , poor, poorly educated and male. Jack222
  • Score: -35

11:28am Tue 17 Jun 14

CarnMountification says...

This is good news unless your name sounds like handy, which would explain her role in the run up to the elections, will she be getting a second chance ??
This is good news unless your name sounds like handy, which would explain her role in the run up to the elections, will she be getting a second chance ?? CarnMountification
  • Score: 7

11:34am Tue 17 Jun 14

GrumpyofLeigh says...

Patronising, Jack - how is the demographic of the average UKIP voter relevant? Will a cold winter wipe out a good proportion of them? Their vote is as pertinent as anyone elses.
Patronising, Jack - how is the demographic of the average UKIP voter relevant? Will a cold winter wipe out a good proportion of them? Their vote is as pertinent as anyone elses. GrumpyofLeigh
  • Score: 25

12:24pm Tue 17 Jun 14

Howard Cháse says...

CarnMountification wrote:
This is good news unless your name sounds like handy, which would explain her role in the run up to the elections, will she be getting a second chance ??
The Tories are far too Lefty for her though surely.

UKIP are too.
[quote][p][bold]CarnMountification[/bold] wrote: This is good news unless your name sounds like handy, which would explain her role in the run up to the elections, will she be getting a second chance ??[/p][/quote]The Tories are far too Lefty for her though surely. UKIP are too. Howard Cháse
  • Score: 6

12:46pm Tue 17 Jun 14

Alekhine says...

Jack222 wrote:
Dont forget UKIP overall had 80%+ of the electorate vote against them. And their share of the vote went down in seats they contended in this last election and the one before. The only reason they 'won' was that they stood in a zillion more seats. If they had stood in the same amount of seats in the election before their seats would be down and - as said - their vote share would also be down. The psepholgists have analysed UKIP voters - they are a mix (or all) of elderly , poor, poorly educated and male.
...and when England win 3 - 0 in the footie we will all be waiting for your reasons as to why they actually lost.
[quote][p][bold]Jack222[/bold] wrote: Dont forget UKIP overall had 80%+ of the electorate vote against them. And their share of the vote went down in seats they contended in this last election and the one before. The only reason they 'won' was that they stood in a zillion more seats. If they had stood in the same amount of seats in the election before their seats would be down and - as said - their vote share would also be down. The psepholgists have analysed UKIP voters - they are a mix (or all) of elderly , poor, poorly educated and male.[/p][/quote]...and when England win 3 - 0 in the footie we will all be waiting for your reasons as to why they actually lost. Alekhine
  • Score: 10

12:52pm Tue 17 Jun 14

angryofessex says...

Jack222 wrote:
Dont forget UKIP overall had 80%+ of the electorate vote against them. And their share of the vote went down in seats they contended in this last election and the one before. The only reason they 'won' was that they stood in a zillion more seats. If they had stood in the same amount of seats in the election before their seats would be down and - as said - their vote share would also be down.

The psepholgists have analysed UKIP voters - they are a mix (or all) of elderly , poor, poorly educated and male.
And what do the “psepholgists” make of the people who voted in the last Labour government?
[quote][p][bold]Jack222[/bold] wrote: Dont forget UKIP overall had 80%+ of the electorate vote against them. And their share of the vote went down in seats they contended in this last election and the one before. The only reason they 'won' was that they stood in a zillion more seats. If they had stood in the same amount of seats in the election before their seats would be down and - as said - their vote share would also be down. The psepholgists have analysed UKIP voters - they are a mix (or all) of elderly , poor, poorly educated and male.[/p][/quote]And what do the “psepholgists” make of the people who voted in the last Labour government? angryofessex
  • Score: 15

1:52pm Tue 17 Jun 14

Chris Flunk says...

Alekhine wrote:
Jack222 wrote:
Dont forget UKIP overall had 80%+ of the electorate vote against them. And their share of the vote went down in seats they contended in this last election and the one before. The only reason they 'won' was that they stood in a zillion more seats. If they had stood in the same amount of seats in the election before their seats would be down and - as said - their vote share would also be down. The psepholgists have analysed UKIP voters - they are a mix (or all) of elderly , poor, poorly educated and male.
...and when England win 3 - 0 in the footie we will all be waiting for your reasons as to why they actually lost.
If you are going to use a football analogy, it is more correct to say that declaring UKIP as the winners of the council elections would be the same as declaring England winners of their world cup qualifying group, despite being soundly thrashed by all three of their opponents.
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jack222[/bold] wrote: Dont forget UKIP overall had 80%+ of the electorate vote against them. And their share of the vote went down in seats they contended in this last election and the one before. The only reason they 'won' was that they stood in a zillion more seats. If they had stood in the same amount of seats in the election before their seats would be down and - as said - their vote share would also be down. The psepholgists have analysed UKIP voters - they are a mix (or all) of elderly , poor, poorly educated and male.[/p][/quote]...and when England win 3 - 0 in the footie we will all be waiting for your reasons as to why they actually lost.[/p][/quote]If you are going to use a football analogy, it is more correct to say that declaring UKIP as the winners of the council elections would be the same as declaring England winners of their world cup qualifying group, despite being soundly thrashed by all three of their opponents. Chris Flunk
  • Score: -3

1:52pm Tue 17 Jun 14

GrumpyofLeigh says...

And remember that the old are more likely to use their vote - in part because they are cognisant of the history and sacrifice which led us all to being able to vote. Far more so than the current "yeah wotever" crop I suspect.
And remember that the old are more likely to use their vote - in part because they are cognisant of the history and sacrifice which led us all to being able to vote. Far more so than the current "yeah wotever" crop I suspect. GrumpyofLeigh
  • Score: 15

10:50pm Tue 17 Jun 14

poortaxpayer says...

In Thurrock the Conservatives say a vote for UKIP is a vote for Labour and in Basildon Labour say a vote for UKIP is a vote for the Conservatives!!!
In Thurrock the Conservatives say a vote for UKIP is a vote for Labour and in Basildon Labour say a vote for UKIP is a vote for the Conservatives!!! poortaxpayer
  • Score: 8

10:52pm Tue 17 Jun 14

Alekhine says...

Chris Flunk wrote:
Alekhine wrote:
Jack222 wrote:
Dont forget UKIP overall had 80%+ of the electorate vote against them. And their share of the vote went down in seats they contended in this last election and the one before. The only reason they 'won' was that they stood in a zillion more seats. If they had stood in the same amount of seats in the election before their seats would be down and - as said - their vote share would also be down. The psepholgists have analysed UKIP voters - they are a mix (or all) of elderly , poor, poorly educated and male.
...and when England win 3 - 0 in the footie we will all be waiting for your reasons as to why they actually lost.
If you are going to use a football analogy, it is more correct to say that declaring UKIP as the winners of the council elections would be the same as declaring England winners of their world cup qualifying group, despite being soundly thrashed by all three of their opponents.
It is a game of two halves, but as the half time whistle blows, the Tories can't make up their minds whether to run left or right, Labour are still looking for a good team captain and the Libdems have yet to touch the ball.
[quote][p][bold]Chris Flunk[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jack222[/bold] wrote: Dont forget UKIP overall had 80%+ of the electorate vote against them. And their share of the vote went down in seats they contended in this last election and the one before. The only reason they 'won' was that they stood in a zillion more seats. If they had stood in the same amount of seats in the election before their seats would be down and - as said - their vote share would also be down. The psepholgists have analysed UKIP voters - they are a mix (or all) of elderly , poor, poorly educated and male.[/p][/quote]...and when England win 3 - 0 in the footie we will all be waiting for your reasons as to why they actually lost.[/p][/quote]If you are going to use a football analogy, it is more correct to say that declaring UKIP as the winners of the council elections would be the same as declaring England winners of their world cup qualifying group, despite being soundly thrashed by all three of their opponents.[/p][/quote]It is a game of two halves, but as the half time whistle blows, the Tories can't make up their minds whether to run left or right, Labour are still looking for a good team captain and the Libdems have yet to touch the ball. Alekhine
  • Score: 6

12:27am Wed 18 Jun 14

Devils Advocate says...

And what do the “psepholgists” make of the people who voted in the last Labour government?
Interesting to see how far the damage has spread. watching the quiz on BBC 4 the other night it was interesting to see the list and dates of the Cities that have been declared bankrupt in the last 5 years. Why has "The Sun" (Bible of the lower classes) not managed to blame that on "The Last Labour" as well. Forget last Labour, look at current Coalition. The Tories stated before they were in power that they would NOT stop immigration. In fact it has actually increased year on year. Now watch as more of the people's space in Basildon continues to be sold off. Nothing will change until people of the lower classes start to think for themselves, so..... same old same old and on we go losing everything we have gained over the last one hundred years, since they undemocratically took us into the first world war. (There were only the Tories and Liberals in Power then, and common people were not allowed a vote) Bet you are looking forward to the next one!
And what do the “psepholgists” make of the people who voted in the last Labour government? Interesting to see how far the damage has spread. watching the quiz on BBC 4 the other night it was interesting to see the list and dates of the Cities that have been declared bankrupt in the last 5 years. Why has "The Sun" (Bible of the lower classes) not managed to blame that on "The Last Labour" as well. Forget last Labour, look at current Coalition. The Tories stated before they were in power that they would NOT stop immigration. In fact it has actually increased year on year. Now watch as more of the people's space in Basildon continues to be sold off. Nothing will change until people of the lower classes start to think for themselves, so..... same old same old and on we go losing everything we have gained over the last one hundred years, since they undemocratically took us into the first world war. (There were only the Tories and Liberals in Power then, and common people were not allowed a vote) Bet you are looking forward to the next one! Devils Advocate
  • Score: 4

1:13am Wed 18 Jun 14

ThisYear says...

Jack222 wrote:
Dont forget UKIP overall had 80%+ of the electorate vote against them. And their share of the vote went down in seats they contended in this last election and the one before. The only reason they 'won' was that they stood in a zillion more seats. If they had stood in the same amount of seats in the election before their seats would be down and - as said - their vote share would also be down.

The psepholgists have analysed UKIP voters - they are a mix (or all) of elderly , poor, poorly educated and male.
And mostly on forums like this.
[quote][p][bold]Jack222[/bold] wrote: Dont forget UKIP overall had 80%+ of the electorate vote against them. And their share of the vote went down in seats they contended in this last election and the one before. The only reason they 'won' was that they stood in a zillion more seats. If they had stood in the same amount of seats in the election before their seats would be down and - as said - their vote share would also be down. The psepholgists have analysed UKIP voters - they are a mix (or all) of elderly , poor, poorly educated and male.[/p][/quote]And mostly on forums like this. ThisYear
  • Score: -3

3:02pm Wed 18 Jun 14

jolllyboy says...

What a load of rubbish. All councils should be run with the proportion of the votes cast to the party who won them - regardless of which party it is. That then would be a fair coalition or at least what the people have voted for.
What a load of rubbish. All councils should be run with the proportion of the votes cast to the party who won them - regardless of which party it is. That then would be a fair coalition or at least what the people have voted for. jolllyboy
  • Score: 6

3:20pm Wed 18 Jun 14

billybloggs says...

yes the junior conservatives now known as UKIP .join forces with the conservatives to run Basildon council so its going to be follow the leader leader leader.UKIP was a vote for change fat chance people of Basildon just made the Conservatives stronger pie in the sky plans still on track.Kerry smith comments are so full of rubbish like an headless chicken hope he don't set he's mum on me
yes the junior conservatives now known as UKIP .join forces with the conservatives to run Basildon council so its going to be follow the leader leader leader.UKIP was a vote for change fat chance people of Basildon just made the Conservatives stronger pie in the sky plans still on track.Kerry smith comments are so full of rubbish like an headless chicken hope he don't set he's mum on me billybloggs
  • Score: -2

1:25pm Thu 19 Jun 14

Rouge9 says...

jolllyboy wrote:
What a load of rubbish. All councils should be run with the proportion of the votes cast to the party who won them - regardless of which party it is. That then would be a fair coalition or at least what the people have voted for.
That's Proportional Representation, and the bigger parties don't like that as it means they have to share power unlike the first past the post system we currently use
[quote][p][bold]jolllyboy[/bold] wrote: What a load of rubbish. All councils should be run with the proportion of the votes cast to the party who won them - regardless of which party it is. That then would be a fair coalition or at least what the people have voted for.[/p][/quote]That's Proportional Representation, and the bigger parties don't like that as it means they have to share power unlike the first past the post system we currently use Rouge9
  • Score: 0

2:42pm Thu 19 Jun 14

Devils Advocate says...

Rouge9 wrote:
jolllyboy wrote:
What a load of rubbish. All councils should be run with the proportion of the votes cast to the party who won them - regardless of which party it is. That then would be a fair coalition or at least what the people have voted for.
That's Proportional Representation, and the bigger parties don't like that as it means they have to share power unlike the first past the post system we currently use
Not true. If it was true proportional representation, The Tories would be laying alongside the Dodo, people would be getting a fair days pay for a fair days work, and we would be getting value for the money we earn. Instead we are nearly all back as the serfs we were and, strangely, many of us serfs are voting for the money people to stay precisely that.
[quote][p][bold]Rouge9[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jolllyboy[/bold] wrote: What a load of rubbish. All councils should be run with the proportion of the votes cast to the party who won them - regardless of which party it is. That then would be a fair coalition or at least what the people have voted for.[/p][/quote]That's Proportional Representation, and the bigger parties don't like that as it means they have to share power unlike the first past the post system we currently use[/p][/quote]Not true. If it was true proportional representation, The Tories would be laying alongside the Dodo, people would be getting a fair days pay for a fair days work, and we would be getting value for the money we earn. Instead we are nearly all back as the serfs we were and, strangely, many of us serfs are voting for the money people to stay precisely that. Devils Advocate
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree