About us

My Photo
Members & staff of UKIP past & present. Committed to reforming the party by exposing the corruption and dishonesty that lies at its heart, in the hope of making it fit for purpose. Only by removing Nigel Farage and his sycophants on the NEC can we save UKIP from electoral oblivion. SEE: http://juniusonukip.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/a-statement-re-junius.html

Wednesday, 29 June 2011

UKIP: Andrew Bridgen is offered support & Gerald Batten on No to PEPs


Annabelle Fuller as Little Miss Innocent

Andrew Bridgen & Annabelle Fuller

We are extremely pleased to note that the office of Andrew Bridgen has received a large number of calls from UKIPPERS offering him information on Annabelle Fuller. Messages of support have also been sent to him following Fuller's attempt to smear him in the press. It is gratifying to see that so many UKIPPERS regard the continued presence of Fuller in UKIP as unacceptable. Indeed, many wish to see her speedy removal from the party at the earliest opportunity.

Only by removing such filth from UKIP can the party ever hope to be cleaned up.

Why I will be voting No to UKIP joining a European Political Party by Gerald Batten MEP

I have taken a pragmatic approach to this issue and I base my decision to vote No in the internal ballot in September on the available information. In my view there are two main issues to be considered before making a decision.

Firstly, can UKIP MEPs or members join a European Political Party without compromising our withdrawalist principles?

Secondly, if the answer to the first question is ‘yes’, can the money or resources available be used to assist UKIP and our cause of British withdrawal from the EU?

Would joining a European Political Party compromise UKIP’s withdrawalist principles?

The honest answer to that we don’t know.

We don’t know what it is we are being asked to join. We are being asked to sign a blank cheque and give blanket approval for UKIP MEPs and members to join an unknown quantity. What is the Constitution or ‘Statute’ of the party in question? Either we haven’t been told or it doesn’t yet exist.

This ballot question should not even be posed at this time. It should wait until we can be presented with a specific European party constitution or statute that we can consider.

If such a party were for example the ‘European Party of EU Withdrawlists’ specifically dedicated to nation states unilaterally leaving the EU then I might consider joining - but that is not what is on offer.

The only statute that we have is that of the European Alliance for Freedom. The statute of this party is in the public domain and can be found on the internet.

This includes the aim to: “campaign for a non-centralised, transparent, flexible and democratically controlled EU…” This is clearly not a withrawalist party but a reformist one. Do you want to reform the EU or to leave? I was a founder member of UKIP in September 1993 and it was I who proposed the name UK Independence Party.

I am an unconditional withdrawalist and I would not join a reformist party.

Can the money or resources available be used to assist our cause of British withdrawal from the EU? The basis on which European political parties will take part in the European elections in 2014 has not yet been decided by an EU Directive and transposed into national law.

The practicalities of how a list of 25 or so candidates will campaign across the European Union has not been finalised and is causing some practical difficulties for those drafting the legislation.

However one thing we know is that is that the list of candidates will fight under the name of their party, e.g. the ‘European Alliance for Freedom’ - not the UK Independence Party.

The voters will most likely be presented with two ballot papers: one will bear UKIP’s name the other will not, it will bear the name of the European political parties.

This will not directly help UKIP or our withdrawalist cause.

The money available cannot be spent on UKIP. It can only be used on European political parties. The EU’s regulations clearly state the money cannot be spent on:

Campaign costs for referenda and elections (except for European Elections for a European Party).

Direct or indirect funding for national parties, election candidates and political foundations both at national and European level. . Debts and debt service charges

PUT SIMPLY: UKIP CANNOT USE THIS MONEY

European Political Foundations:

Great play is being made of the money that could be used to set up a political foundation as a ‘think tank’ to assist our cause. But once again, who will determine what this think tank produces? A foundation will be affiliated to a European political party.

We have the same problem as in our first question: what will be its platform?Will it produce studies advocating EU withdrawal or just EU reform? We don’t know.

Is this issue similar to the one UKIP faced in the 1990s concerning taking up seats in the European Parliament? No. In 1994, as UKIP’s European Election Organiser, I argued that UKIP should fight on the platform of not taking up our seats in the European Parliament. After some years of careful consideration I changed my view in 2001.

I was able to change that view because taking up our seats did not compromise UKIP’s withdrawalist principles. UKIP fights European elections on our terms – not those of the European Union or foreigners influencing or determining our party constitution or manifesto.

Conclusion:

The Yes campaign website in this ballot have kindly referred to me as follows, “Nobody who has the privilege of working with Gerard would describe him for a second as an ‘integrationist’ or a ‘federalist’. But to his substantial credit, he remains fully and properly engaged with the enemy at the front”

I am grateful for their generosity in acknowledging my efforts. But because I am an uncompromising, unconditional withdrawalist. I will not vote Yes to UKIP members joining a European political party until I know what it is, what it stands for, and that it will campaign for outright withdrawal from the EU.

I intend to vote No in this ballot, and I hope that a majority of my fellow UKIP members will do likewise. When we are presented with a specific statute for a European political party, and a proposal for the work of a Political Foundation we can make an informed decision.

Not until then.

The horse must come before the cart.

To read the original: http://www.no2pepp.com/bumf/Why_GB_voting_no.pdf

1 comment:

Greg_L-W. said...

Hi,

I was amused to note Annabelle Fuller styling hersef as Salome, no doubt after Wilde's Femme Fatale figure rather than the Court dancing girl of Herod! Or the serial nobody as portrayed married off as chattel by Josephus!

However one looks at it Ms. Fuller lives down to expectation with a foul mouthed self serving and dellusional posting on UKIP's forum before a singularly unpleasant ad hominem attack on one of UKIP's most foolishly loyal members of many years standing:

>
Re: Annabelle Fuller in the Mail
« Reply #59 on: June 30, 2011, 09:54:23 PM » Reply with quote
Bobfm, it would be defamatory if it were untrue.

I hardly think this would have passed the Sunday Mirror legal team nor the press office of the MET or my solicitor if it were not the truth.

Given these facts, it may be wise to consider what you say and remember that the 1996 Act also covers the internet.

I have had enough ***offensive language auto-deleted by forum*** written about me over the years to put up with it any longer.

Spon: there are many things I could say about you and your possible negative impacts on the party. However, I do not.

Whether it's a matter of idleness in the case of someone who is irrelevant in my life or a possible concern for your occasional feelings I cannot be bothered to look into.

You can pontificate on the issue if you will: I am sure it will fill up the lonely hours.


She all the personality and allure of used cat litter as you can see.

Surely her best bet for a media income is not providing iffy fabrications for papers but a contract on a makeover program such as 'Ladette to Lady' but perhaps a plausible outcome would be beyond the resources of TV.

Her vituperative posturing is you will note deeply flawed by her gratuitous foul language, her admitted drunken coquettry (sp. alternative?) and her track record as a corrupt and unpleasant liar, clearly willing to dishonestly defame.

Farage must realise that one is reasonably judged by the company one keeps as was shown when he consorted with the prostitute Lega.

Regards,
Greg_L-W.