You will recall that Niall Warry had his membership renewal refused by UKIP’s corrupt leadership.
Nigel Farage was behind this decision as he had become incensed by Mr Warry’s call for UKIP to be cleaned-up.
The last thing that Farage needs is a party where openness and transparency are the norm. He needs a UKIP that’s compliant and willing to turn a blind eye to his dishonesty, stupidity and incompetence. That’s why he surrounds himself with people like Nuttall, Duffy, Zuckerman, Denny and Clark. These nodding donkeys can be always counted on to collude in corruption and dishonesty.
Farage is determined to remove people like Mr Warry, Mr Young, Mr Edmond, Mr Collier, Mr Harvey, Mr Cole, Mr Abbott and Mr West because they stand for honesty, openness and democracy. Such men have no place in Nigel Farage’s UKIP.
Here is Mr Warry’s appeal against the decision to refuse his membership renewal:
Nr Shepton Mallet
11th January 2009
Dear Mr Zuckerman,
I write to you in your capacity as Party Secretary, as I was advised to do, for you to set aside the arbitrary and perverse decision to reject my membership renewal.
I am advised the UKIP Constitution considers the issue of membership renewal in the following context.
1. Application for Membership is accepted only once, at the point of first application. The annual subscription is simply that, an annual payment; it is not an annual renewal of membership. Membership is ultimately lost if the sub is not paid but membership is not created by the sub as it already exists. Therefore the Party is not at liberty arbitrarily to refuse an annual sub as an underhand ruse to cancel membership.
2. The Constitution specifically sets up a mechanism for terminating membership via the disciplinary process. This clearly indicates that there is no other power to terminate membership. After all why set up a disciplinary system if there was a simple power for the NEC to expel members? In any case the Constitution does not give the NEC that power.
3. To expel a member or refuse membership renewal arbitrarily is an affront to natural justice. It deprives the member of the right to face his accusers, to hear the charges, to defend himself. Neither the NEC nor the leadership are authorised to bring UKIP into disrepute by flouting the rules for their own personal gain or protection at the cost of the democratic rights of the members.
4. Trying to prevent a membership renewal is in fact a devious attempt to bypass the rules and due process, and mocks the constitution. It is ultra vires.. That the NEC and leadership are willing to bring the party into disrepute by such duplicity would indicate that clearly many amongst them are unfit to hold such office. That you as a claimed Solicitor seem willing to collude in this corruption of the party rules does little to instil confidence in you or your professional body.
In addition to the above I respond to your 3 excuses you gave for seeking to set aside the rules and natural justice in trying to refuse to renew my membership as follows:-
1.You claim I openly criticise the party telling readers not to vote for EUkip. Firstly in the main I criticise the leadership NOT the party and I call UKIP EUkip to make readers aware how IMO UKIP MEPs have been shown to have gone native – an issue that is most easily shown and proven. Also I did openly consider whether abstaining would be a better course of action but I never told anyone not to vote for UKIP simply that they should think twice before voting for EUkip. Anyway expulsion on such petty grounds is clearly ridiculous and I don’t recall Francis Pym being expelled from the Tories for suggesting it would be better for the country if the Tory majority was reduced. Your grounds are childish and bring the party into disrepute as it shows the party to be undemocratic and clearly so massively insecure it is unwilling to discuss the future.
2.You have no proof I have collected any money for any fund, perhaps you would be so good as to substantiate your crass claim – in that nowhere has it been stated what any collection is to do other than support any legitimate attempt to ‘clean up’ UKIP. You will be minded that you have already refunded monies by way of compensation for the dishonesty of the drawing up of MEP candidates as shown unequivocally in your own Returning Officer’s Official Report which has been placed in the public domain. May I also remind you that in any event I was volunteered for such a position without my initial consent – consent which I gave when I was aware that an elected NEC member had accepted. If this issue was a problem I would have been happy to discuss it at any disciplinary hearing that may have been appropriate. You will be minded that Nikki Sinclair took UKIP to court and won her case and is still working for you! I understand that as a solicitor YOU represented Nikki – yet now you hold office despite proving UKIP to be legally wrong on that occasion!
3. I am pretty clear I NEVER informed Head Office that I would not be renewing my membership. However even if I had I trust there is no law against changing one’s mind – it is a fundamental right in a free Country to change one’s mind! However I believe I may well have mused on the Democracy Forum what my fate would be at the time of my renewal as I was openly being so critical of Nigel and his style and incompetence in leadership.
In Summary I claim the decision by the NEC to arbitrarily refuse to renew my membership is morally reprehensible, draconian, perverse and unconstitutional being against your own rules and clearly against any form of natural justice.
Rest assure I shall not be letting this matter drop and am seeking professional advice as to the best course of action I should take for the fact that your actions are defamatory to my character, your refusal to renew my membership defames me, and you illegitimately deny me the fundamental right to defend myself in any meaningful way.
Clearly the actions of yourself, your leader and your NEC bring UKIP into disrepute. As if this wasn’t bad enough the party has parachuted in unelected candidates for the Euro Elections and elevating the questionable Ms. Andreasen and David Bannerman – these matters are completely unacceptable in a Political Party in the run up to its elections. The results of such actions would seem to be all too clear with the collapse in membership and active support, the fractured nature of the party under such incompetent leadership and the absence of good publicity.
I look forward to your letter of apology for your unacceptable behaviour and the prompt supply of my membership card and rights. Your attempt to debase the Party rules and bring the party into disrepute with your illegitimate attempt to withhold my membership, which it is NOT within your right to withhold, is clearly invalid. It is of course this type of corruption of the party which I am campaigning against, to give UKIP a sound right and grounding to attack the unacceptable subsidiarity of OUR Country to the illegitimate orders of the EU.
I do not accept that Farage or/& Clark should have signed an agreement to GREATER subsidiarity of our Country to the EU, nor to working more closely with EU Committees to strengthen their controls over Britain.I look forward to actively and energetically campaigning for the election of a cleaned up UKIP and to that end demand my right to membership and my democratic right to campaign for UKIP to be cleaned up.
See also GLW's blog: http://www.caterpillarsandbutterflies.blogspot.com/
Leftist, PC meaningless cliches currently in common use - Politicians love meaningless coded cliches. It means they can never be wrong or understood. It originated in Orwell.s book 1984, War is peace etc. LibDem...
1 hour ago