Tuesday, 24 May 2011

UKIP: More Bannerman, Jill Seymour resigns from NEC & Gerard crashes out

David Bannerman: Political Prostitute

It's overwhelmingly clear now that trusting Cameron with Europe will be as misguided as trusting Blair on Iraq".

Bannerman. June 2010

"I have been increasingly impressed by the leadership shown by David Cameron in dealing with this country's problems. In particular, the Government's determination to clean up the economic mess left by Labour.

"Similarly in Europe, I have been pleased with the robust stance taken by David Cameron and Conservative MEPs over the EU budget negotiations and I believe that it is Conservative MEPs who are working hard to defend Britain's interests. In contrast, as a member of UKIP I witnessed too many colleagues obsess with single issue politics, internal fighting, and shouting from the sidelines. This behaviour does nothing to serve the best interests of the British people."

Bannerman. May 2011

We note that the official UKIP website still fails to mention Bannerman's defection.

The Tories will regret the day that they allowed Bannerman back into the fold. It was actually Hague who was VERY keen to get DB on board. Indeed, he was so keen that he didn't even ask David if there were any skeletons in the cupboard. Silly boy!

The OLAF investigation into the allegations that Bannerman (along with Agnew) was illegally paying Peter Reeve is still ongoing (LINK) and there are certain other issues that could very well embrass the Tory Party. An employment tribunal is another. And we do hope that DB enjoyed his recent trip abroad!

We can confirm Geoffrey Van Orden decision (Tory MEP Eastern Region) to stand down in 2014 proved music to DB's ears! DB hopes to be lead Tory candidate on 2014.

We can confirm that many Tories in the East were not very happy when they heard the news. Many regard Bannerman as a political prostitute who would sell his own mother if it suited his purpose. And many are also unimpressed with Bannerman's offer to 'dish the dirt on UKIP'. One Tory said to a member of the Junius Team that "I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him". Another said that "David Campbell Bannerman was happy to betray the party that got him elected. So what would stop him doing the same to us in the future?"

Here are few quotes from the Tory Home Blog:

Quite. DCB's statement skates rather too smoothly over the fact that until yesty he belonged to a party that intends to get Britain out of the undemocratic EU mess and today he has joined a party that has no such intention.

Careerism, I would say. If he had won the UKIP leadership he would still be in it.

So let's get this right: someone who thinks the UK should leave the EU is now rushing to join a party whose leader has (a) made it clear that he will never allow voters a choice on whether to leave the EU; and (b) who has bent over backwards to give in to EU demands over the last year including an open-ended commitment to the bailout fiasco. What has Campbell-Bannerman been offered?

He says: "Once again, the Conservative Party is proving, as it has so many times before, that it is the only party that can be trusted to sort out Britain's economy and stand up for Britain in Europe."

He clearly has a strange definition of "trusted".

Sadly, many UKIPPERS failed to heed our warnings about DB. Indeed, we were often criticised - along with GLW - for attacking 'a good man'. We have consistantly stated that he was a political opportunist who would do anything to stay on the EU Gravy Train. His 'euro-sceptism' was just a cynical ploy and we have been proved right.

And we have very little sympathy with Eastern Region members. They should have demanded a full investigation into the rigged selection process prior to the last euro elections. Piers Merchant - the returning officer - was quite clear on this:


I was officially appointed as Returning Officer for the UKIP internal elections which were to decide on the regional list candidates for the 2009 European Elections.

My duties were not clearly defined but included supervision of the election campaign and of the subsequent count.

I was appointed after the shortlisting process and therefore took no part in that. However, it was not entirely clear to what extent my remit extended to scrutinising the validity of the shortlisted candidates. Returning Officers normally have some responsibility for ensuring candidates are correctly nominated.

During the course of the election campaign I received complaints on almost a daily basis. Many of these were about the validity of the candidates and often about the process of shortlisting . I formed a view that something had gone wrong in various regions and in some it was sufficient to tarnish the election process itself.

I was placed in a practical position where I had to rule at various times in the campaign whether or not a candidate was a valid candidate because of a chorus of complaints and questions.

I was very keen to try not to disrupt the complex voting process once it had started and so where there were complaints that looked credible I said I would make a final ruling after the count. I could then take an overall view and also give parties a chance to re-consider their position in the light of the results.

In my official report to the National Executive Council ( which I can make available), I stated that I considered the overall position in both the Eastern and London untenable. As far as the Eastern region was concerned I formally recommended that a special sub-committee be set up with a remit to investigate all the complaints and determine how to resolve them.

To my surprise the NEC rejected this recommendation after a very brief discussion which I believe was quite inadequate and, furthermore, decided to take no action at all.

Given the complete failure to even investigate the serious and continuing complaints and given all my original concerns, it is my considered view as Returning Officer that the results of the internal election in the Eastern Region are unsafe and invalid and that the entire process should be re-run.

Piers Merchant
12 February 2009

Several UKIPPERS in the East did express some unease about the rigged selection process but soon backed down. More fool them!

To think that the East could have had someone like Robin Page representing them. Instead, they got DB and Agnew!

The news that Bannerman has finally returned to the Tories continues to generate publicity.

Here are a few links:

Jill Seymour

Jill has resigned from UKIP's NEC. In a letter dated 22nd May, she 'claimed' personal reasons were behind this decision. Poor Jill!

Gerard crash!

From London 24

The UKIP representative’s Ford Focus was involved in a three vehicle pile-up at the junction of Cann Hall Road and Dames Road at about 12.15am on Sunday.

A blue BMW and motorcycle, both believed to have been stolen, were also involved in the collision.

Police were called to the scene amid reports the driver of the BMW assaulted the 18-year-old motorbike rider and fled the scene before officers arrived.

The rider, who is from Haringey, suffered a broken hip and remains in hospital.

Both he and his passenger, a 21-year-old woman from Newham, were arrested and have been bailed pending further inquiries.

Mr Batten, who was travelling with his wife at the time of the crash, suffered head, back and shoulder injuries and was off work on Monday.

His vehicle was also badly damaged.

He told the Recorder: “My wife and I were both severely shocked by this, but I’m just grateful I was not more seriously injured.

Junius says: We hope the wife is ok! Gerard seems more concerned about his own injuries!

“I have given a full statement to the police and I sincerely hope they will arrest those responsible and lay charges against them.”

To read the original: LINK

And also see: LINK


  1. I notice that Mr Bannerman seems to have re-assumed the extra name Campbell now that he has re-joined the Tories. Whatever can it mean?

  2. We noticed! The Tories must be mad to take him on board! Blame Hague. He was the one who was really pushing for it!

  3. We noticed! The Tories must be mad to take him on board! Blame Hague. He was the one who was really pushing for it!