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

Thursday, 29 September 2011

UKIP: Nigel Farage is a liar


We can now confirm that the convicted violent racist Mario Borghezio has not been suspended from the EFD group in the European Parliament.

He was suspended from his own party, Lega Nord, in Italy for one month, but has remained a full member of the EFD. This followed his comments in response to the tragedy in Norway where seventy-six people were killed by Anders Behring Breivik.

Borghezio, described the ideas of Breivik as "good" and "excellent".

Farage's claim that Borghezio was to be suspended from the EFD for 3 months would appear to have been a lie.


How can anybody trust this jumped up little oik now?

Wednesday, 28 September 2011

UKIP: True Finns MP calls for tanks to deal with Greek rioters


'True Finns' MP, Jussi Halla-aho - chairman of the Administration Committee of the Finnish Parliament - recently made this comment on the Greek protests:

"What Greece needs at this particular time is a 'Military Junta' that would not have to worry about its popularity and could use tanks to enforce some order among strikers and rioters".

Source: http://rt.com/programs/keiser-report/episode-187-max-keiser/ (approx 8-9 mins into the show). The comments were originally made on the MP's Facebook page and soon sparked outrage in Finland and Greece. In a face-saving exercise, he was later suspended from his party for a mere two weeks.

So does the MP support a 'shoot to kill' policy in Greece? And does Farage endorse his comments? After all, Nigel happily sits with the True Finns in the EFD group and has chosen to remain silent when it comes to the MP and his sordid views.

Monday, 26 September 2011

UKIP: Pity Poor David Bannerman



It's interesting to note that Bannerman gave UKIP £1500 in the two months before joining the Tories.

Given that he borrowed £30,000 from friends and UKIP members in the Eastern Region and spent some of it on a sports car, where did he get the £1500 from?

And don't forget that Bannerman is still under investigation by OLAF. See: LINK

Interesting article from The Mail blog. It seems that Bannerman is in for a rough ride. What a shame!

Does David Campbell Bannerman know what he's getting himself into? This MEP is best known as the UKIP politician who defected to the Tories. Tonight, he is speaking to the Freedom Association's youth wing, and if the messages being posted about him on Facebook are anything to go by, he's in for a tough time.

"Turncoat! Judas!" exclaimed one member. Another wrote: "Hell would have to freeze over to miss this once in a lifetime event. What a booking!"

The reason people hate Mr Bannerman is not that he defected, but the way he did it. He didn't quit after a bust-up or after gradually drifting away from the party - it was entirely without warning.

In fact, in the month that he joined the Conservatives, he was published in the Campaign for an Independent Britain's magazine, saying:

"The ridiculous choices of the Coalition Government, to spend more on EU membership (now £48 million a day) and foreign aid (£23 million a day) when we are making dangerous cuts to our own military services speaks volumes. They cut at home to squander money abroad. And we call these politicians our public servants!"

Yet on the day of his defection, he claimed that he was "impressed" by David Cameron's leadership. He said: "
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."

Needless to say, UKIP members feel let down after investing time and considerable sums of money to help get him elected.

But Mr Bannerman has probably made the right choice politically. Several months before he defected, I was told by a senior UKIP source that the members were unlikely to reselect him for the next European elections. His future now seems pretty secure. At the last European elections, the Tories automatically put incumbent MEPs at the top the top of party lists. If the same system is repeated for the 2014 elections, he is effectively guaranteed reelection.

Anyway, back to tonight. Around half the audience are likely to be Tory supporters - and a Tory MP is listed on Facebook as attending. So although there will be critics, I wonder if Mr Bannerman will also have some defenders. Whatever happens, the Q&A is sure to be riveting.

To read the original: LINK

Gary Cartwright on why UKIP is the 'Alternative Reality Party'


From Mr Cartwright's blog:

A study by the University of Cardiff has revealed that 82% of Britons are in favour of wind energy. The Danish island of Samsø takes 100% of its elecricity from wind power, and now exports energy to the mainland, and guess what - the lights don't go out when the wind stops blowing! Last year, wind generated elecricity in Spain peaked briefly at 52% of total national demand. UKIP, however, has a different take on all this. A few years ago an e-mail was circulated by a UKIP member stating that it takes a single wind turbine 2 years to generate enough electricity to boil a kettle. Most famously, a UKIP researcher once wrote that wind turbines adversely affect the rotation of the Earth.

UKIP is now in danger of becoming the 'Alternative Reality' party.

The party's Head of Policy is one Christopher Monckton, a man who has recently been chastised for pretending to be a member of the House of Lords. Prior to the Copenhagen conference he claimed to have seen a secret treaty that would be signed by world leaders handing over power to a new world government. That this failed to happen, is something he has yet to address. His testimony to the US Congress on climate change was greeted with derision, and he was again humiliated over his claim to be a member of the House of Lords.

On the day the eurosceptic MEP Derk-jan Eppink presented his excellent book 'Bonfire of Bureaucracy in Europe' in Brussels, UKIP MEPs were supporting the launch of a book about the Bilderburg group. Personally, I am not particularly worried about the activities of an NGO, but some seem to think that this group is planning world domination. Another one of those 'secret governments'?

Society needs dissent. Dissent is good for debate, and it is good for democratic integrity, as it keeps the centre ground fluid. A stagnant polity is vulnerable in terms of the strength of its democratic process. Dissenters come in two types - 'disclosers', who are there to challenge the system and ensure transparency, and 'contrarians', who serve little purpose at all. UKIP now falls into the latter category, with all received wisdom seemingly being rejected on no firm basis whatsoever. This is a great shame, as UKIP made a huge contribution by being the catalyst and rallying point for many thousands of people who felt that their voices were not being heard, or that their concerns about the EU were not being taken seriously. Good people who had grown disillusioned with the established parties got out onto the streets, delivered leaflets, challenged their MPs, and stood in elections they knew they could never win. The contribution of UKIP to British politics has been immense - that makes it even sadder to see what the party has now become.

To read the original: LINK

Thursday, 22 September 2011

UKIP: Nikki Sinclaire & Mike Nattrass


Nikki Sinclaire

We would urge all UKIPPERS to read Nikki's website. It contains a wealth of information regarding Nikki's sterling working in the EU parliament - plus details of her referendum campaign in the UK.

Here is an example:

Strasbourg Report

This week saw the return of the European Parliament to Strasbourg after the summer break. To make up for missing a month in August we will be here twice in September. Next year, this may not happen, as MEPs recently voted to have just 11 sessions here in 2012. The French government, however, is challenging this in the courts. The arrival of the traveling circus in Strasbourg each month is accompanied by skyrocketing hotel charges and a massive demand for casual workers in the service sector. One can understand why the French would be keen to continue with this boost to their economy, but in these times of austerity, we should question the morality of using taxpayer's money in this way.

Calculating the actual expense of all this is difficult, as many costs are hidden. Documents and equipment are transported from Brussels in convoys of lorries, and thousands of staff, all on generous expenses, make their way to Alsace. There are special trains and charter flights laid on, it is often joked that canceling the Strasbourg sessions would enable the EU to meet its carbon emissions reduction targets at a stroke!

Challenging the Commissioner

Karel De Gucht is the Belgian Commissioner for Trade. On Monday 12th in Strasbourg he made an official statement on the ongoing Doha negotiations, by which it is hoped to stimulate development through free trade. I was able to challenge him on the hypocrisy of the EU in such matters, pointing out that whilst on the one hand it calls for an end to trade tariffs, on the other hand it implements tariffs itself. I also pointed out the damaging effects of non-tariff barriers to trade, such as quotas, licensing requirements, etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPoSwtk7XWg&feature=player_embedded

I finished by pointing out that the EU, which is having to bail out its own bankrupt states, might not be the best place to go for advice on trade and economics!


To read the original: LINK


Mike Nattrass

Next month, Mike Nattrass will be attending an open meeting in Sheerwater, Woking. The meeting is free. Be there for 8pm. Mike will be talking about the EU and then taking questions from the floor.

Public Open Meeting

Dear All,

Attached are details of an Open Meeting at Bishop David Brown School, Sheerwater, Woking on Wednesday 19th Oct 2011. You are all cordially invited to attend, together with friends.

Please circulate as widely as possible as I would not like Mike to travel from Birmingham to address just a handful of people.

Best wishes

Robert Shatwell
Chairman
UKIP Woking Branch
tel 07818441148



Monday, 19 September 2011

More Bits and Pieces from the Wacky World of UKIP


Chumbawamba have Farage in their sights

How we laughed after hearing that Chumbawamba were far from happy after UKIP's leadership used the band's 'Tubthumping' hit to accompany Farage on his walk to the podium during the last Fuhrer Rally in Eastbourne.

Singer Dunstan Bruce, who is not in the current incarnation of the group, said:

"This song being used by Ukip is so wrong. I am absolutely appalled that this grubby little organisation are stealing our song to use for their own ends. It's beyond the pale and if they use it again we will consider legal action."

We hear that Farage was inspired to use the song after hearing the line 'He drinks a Whiskey drink, he drinks a Vodka drink, he drinks a Lager drink, he drinks a Cider drink.'

Annabelle gets some lip


Annabelle Fuller has recently been sporting a rather nasty sore on her lip. It has attracted some comment in UKIPPER circles. Here is one joke now doing the rounds .......

What's the difference between Nigel's love and herpes? A: Herpes lasts forever

The Lion Sleeps Tonight



More great publicity for UKIP. But how about auctioning something that's really on the endangered list - Derek Clark and Stuart Agnew's career in the EU parliament. Just ask OLAF!

From the BBC:

UKIP lion skin auction 'stupid and insensitive'

The planned auction of a lion skin and head by the UK Independence Party (UKIP) has been condemned by conservationists.

The item is being auctioned at UKIP's annual gala dinner in Eastbourne.

Chris MacSween, of Kent-based charity Lion Aid, said it was "stupid and insensitive" and UKIP was effectively "condoning lion trophy hunting".

UKIP said it was donated by a party member and it did not support "modern day hunting of lions for their skins".

'Zimbabwe gift'

The party's website listing of the item says: "Antique skin, with head, of a lioness shot in Zimbabwe. (Reserve £200) Donated by Geoffrey Clark (who did not shoot it!)."

A party spokesman said: "We appreciate that such an item is not to everybody's taste.

"The lion head and skin is an antique which was donated to the party by a member. The member in question originally received it as a gift following a stint working in Zimbabwe.

"It is approximately 45 to 50 years old and came into the country long before modern day legislation was in place to halt such imports."

Ms MacSween expressed "shock and horror" and said the auction was "in the worst possible taste".

"UKIP has not only accepted this trophy in as an auction item, but now they want to earn money from it," she said.

"You don't sell trophies onwards. Secondly, anyone who bids for that trophy is also exhibiting the worst possible taste here. Thirdly, buying trophies stimulates the market for more lions to be hunted."

'Trophy hunting'

She called for UKIP to remove the item from the auction list and for it to be confiscated and a full investigation to be conducted as to how it came into the UK.

"Maybe it did come in through a legal means, but we are working so very, very hard with a lot of politicians both in Europe and in the UK, cross party, to try and get trophy hunting stopped," she said.

Will Travers, chief executive of the Born Free Foundation, also condemned the auction.

"Born Free is not interested in politics. It is interested in animal conservation and animal welfare," he said.

"Selling animal trophies of any kind - whether it be lion, rhino or tiger - draws attention to the trade and may stimulate unscrupulous dealings.

"Therefore we would urge all parties, from whatever persuasion, to abandon ideas of selling wildlife for political gain."

The auction is due to take place on Friday evening during the gala, which is part of the party's annual conference.

To read the original: LINK


Stockton on Tees

We note that the Stockton on Tees Branch recently folded. The £1000 in the branch kitty has been sent to UKIP HQ. Gordon Parkin cited 'irreconcilable differences' between him and Alan Hardy as the reason behind the decision. In other words, Gordon is a bad loser. See: LINK


Saturday, 17 September 2011

UKIP Glasgow gets rather rude



It appears that some wag hacked into UKIP's official website and change the section devoted to our old friends at UKIP Glasgow. Or did a member of UKIP Glasgow get carried away after having a wee dram? The offending text was quickly removed but not before the Junius Team got hold of a copy. Double left click on the picture to read a rather interesting alternative UKIPPER viewpoint.

And it was nothing to do with us. We would have been more subtle!

Thursday, 15 September 2011

UKIP: Farage and Racism

Ever wonder why UKIP is so often accused of being racist? On September 3rd, Nigel Farage tweeted "John Cleese has a point: every time I go on public transport in London (which is often!) I'm surrounded by people who don't speak English".

One would question the judgement of a party leader in making such a comment. But then, of course, one would also question who it is who actually makes these postings. Possibly somebody in the UKIP/EFD (UK delegation) press office?

Ms Annabelle 'Bury Me in a Y-shaped coffin' Fuller

The press office has always been a source of amusement for journalists. Whether it be Annabelle Fuller, The Hon. Steven Sobey Nevile, Ralph Atkinson, or blokes who hit women live on air, it has never been something one might describe as a 'slick' operation.

Norman Tebbit's website Critical Reaction pulled no punches in its analysis of the UKIP/EFD press office after the 2010 General Election debacle in Buckingham, highlighting "one of the most stupid pieces of spin imaginable, that Farage was ‘the leading candidate amongst the ten who had (challenged) Bercow … in third place behind John Stevens’."

The latest addition to the team is Lee Allen, the YI press officer, heavy metal fan, and Faragista extraordinaire. We will watch with interest.

A final question. When, or if, Farage uses public transport in Brussels, does he speak Flemish or French?

Wednesday, 14 September 2011

UKIP: Neil Hamilton


Are we seeing an effort to undermine existing structures in UKIP South West?

Sometimes UKIP member Neil Hamilton has Farage's support for his NEC candidacy, and has been shoehorned into place as Chair of UKIP Wiltshire with barely a nod to due process. Hamilton has "not ruled out" standing as an MEP in 2014.

Hamilton is a friendly chap, and enjoys good relations with the membership, to whom he gives a lot of his time. But he does seem to carry a lot of baggage....

In 2002, the BBC alleged that he had given a "Hitler Salute" whilst on a visit to Germany. He successfully sued for libel, but then admitted that he gave "a little salute with two fingers to his nose to give the impression of a toothbrush moustache."

During a debate, Greville Janner said he that lost half of his family in the Holocaust. Hamilton allegedly replied "Unfortunately, the wrong half".

In 1994 Hamilton was accused of taking cash for tabling parliamentary questions. He was found guilty, an enquiry found the evidence that Hamilton took cash from Mohammed Al-Fayed for asking questions was "compelling" and that he was unlikely to have taken less than £25,000. He resigned his position as Corporate Affairs Minister. The incident resulted in a court case, which ultimately led to his bankruptcy.

Edwina Currie, the former health minister, told the cash-for-questions inquiry how Hamilton had been unmoved, in May 1988, by a set of photographs showing cancers that could be caused to young people by a product he was promoting.

In 1997, Hamilton lost the 4th safest Tory seat in the country, Tatton, to independent anti-corruption campaigner Martin Bell.

In 2001, Hamilton was arrested on suspicion of rape. The allegations against him were unfounded, but such an incident, in the context of someone with such a dubious track record, will always be likely to resurface in the media.

And so, we might ask, is Farage trying to promote Hamilton for altruistic reasons, or is he setting him up to damage the South West region by foisting a controversial candidate on them?

Monday, 12 September 2011

UKIP Conference

And so the UKIP conference is over. The Farage spin machine claimed over 800 attended. Indeed, they said that the 'Conference drew record numbers'. Actually, the real figure was just over 400. How can you possibly trust a party that can't even be honest about how many members bothered to attend?

The event was largely ignored by the media. The BBC did cover it but were more interested in highlighting the various splits in the party and the fact that Marta Andreasen had called on Farage to stand down as leader.

One stall is fronted by Marta Andreasen - a sitting UKIP MEP - who has called for the leader Nigel Farage to resign.

Another promotes the cause of Nikki Sinclaire, who was elected as a UKIP member but now sits as an independent in the European Parliament.

She claims Farage has fallen out with half of the MEPs in the party's history, adding: "We can't all be wrong."

Then there is UKIP's founder Alan Sked, who wrote to the The Times to say: "UKIP has been fooling its voters and members for far too long. Its third-rate leaders, propagandists and MEPs all need to be sacked and the party re-established."
See: LINK

And how can you take UKIP's leadership seriously when they invite Neil 'Cash for Questions' Hamilton to be one of the 'star' speakers? And it's no surprise that he wants to join Nigel on the EU Gravy Train as an MEP!

UKIP's leadership also invited representatives of extremist/pan-European parties such as the leader of the True Finns. This is the same party that thinks ethnically Finnish women should study less and spend more time having babies. And let us not forget that in April 2009, all the leaders of Finland's political parties signed a declaration condemning racism. Only Soini refused to sign. The party also believes homosexuality to be an "aberration". That UKIP is happy to invite such people to their conference clearly proves that the party is now firmly on the extreme right of British politics. Indeed, one senior member of UKIP has said to one of our contacts that 'we intend to capture the BNP vote'.

A UKIP spokesman pathetically tried to defend the presence of extremists by highlighting their so-called 'Euroscepticism'. She said the invitation was not an endorsement of their entire policy programme, adding: "We wouldn't seek to tell other political parties how to run their domestic affairs."

It's a good job UKIP wasn't around in the 30's. No doubt members of the Nazi Party would have received an invitation on the basis that Hitler wished to see Britain and her empire remain aloof from European issues!

One attendee told a member of the Junius Team:

The same speeches, the same faces and the same old soundbites from Nigel. Nothing changes. Why did I bother?

Nuff said!

However, we are pleased to note that Nikki Sinclaire attended the conference and was warmly welcomed by the majority of the membership. Many UKIPPERS congratulated her on the success of her referendum petition. Farage's attempts to smear her in the eyes of the membership have failed!

Friday, 9 September 2011

UKIP: Farage is Yesterday's Man



Chris Cooke, once a leading member of UKIP, and a member of the NEC, has circulated an e-mail in which he states:

"I really do have to appreciate what's been done here.

I've only just forced a debate on my own local council (much to other councillors visible anguish I'm pleased to say!! :-) - on that disgusting practice of putting that deadly poisonous waste product impure Hexofluorosilicic Acid (they call it "fluoride"!) into our drinking water. That petition only needed 1000 signatures. Only 1000 signatures is still a lot of work. Although I was more concerned to use it as an public education exercise, for which purpose it worked very well.

Anyway - I fell out with Nikki quite some years ago. She was supporting what in my view then was the wrong side of another one of those ridiculous and interminable UKIP splits. But her actions since then show me that although I may have been right about UKIP - I have been wrong about her.

This petition has done more for the EU critical debate than anything UKIP has done. In fact it is telling that most of the UKIP MEPs have ignored her petition. But that didn't stop her! I have to say it, Nikki - forcing a debate in parliament - you have done very well indeed!

Chris"

Nikki's efforts have attracted international attention, with the British press - particularly the Daily Express - queueing up to interview her - click here to read it. Nigel Farage, however, on the opening day of the party conference has been left looking to be in a very precarious position. Having been given some seconds on the BBC news to attack the Tory position on the EU, attention then switched to DCB's defection to the Tories, Marta's call for Farage to resign the leadership, and then good coverage of Nikki arriving at 10 Downing Street.

Mr 2% Farage is clearly "yesterday's man", and he should step down now.

Thursday, 8 September 2011

UKIP: Nikki Sinclaire, Mike Nattrass and Trevor Colman deliver petition to Number 10



Today, September 8th, Nikki Sinclaire, Mike Nattrass, and Trevor Colman delivered a petition of over 100,000 signatures to 10 Downing Street. Whilst the official line is that there can be no referendum on our membership of the EU, the MEPs have effectively pushed number 10 into a corner, and have forced them to accept the petition. The question being asked is "Why could Farage's UKIP not acheive this?".

UKIP's Independence & Democracy Group in the European parliament spent some £300k on a referendum petition that failed to materialise (this expenditure is currently subject to an OLAF investigation). Sinclaire, Nattrass, and Colman, from their own parliamentary budgets, and also from their own pockets, have made this happen without any financial help from UKIP, or any parliamentary group. Why could the other UKIP MEPs not do this?

Why is it that only the 3 MEPs who have left Farage's extreme-right EFD group are the only ones who can actually acheive anything?

Why is it that only these 3 MEPs seem to have access to funding to acheive what UKIP was supposedly elected to acheive?

Where does the EFD's money go?

Why have the UKIP MEPs in the EFD group seemingly given up any pretence at trying to get Britain out of the EU?

The 3 MEPs will be accompanied to Downing Street by a number of UK MPs, including prominent eurosceptics Kate Hoey and Austin Mitchell, and the Deputy leader of the DUP, Nigel Dodds. Why has Farage's UKIP never been able to attract such serious politicians or to mobilise cross-party support?

The 3 MEPs who have left the EFD group have all donated significant sums to UKIP, whereas Farage appears to have given nothing. Why is this?

The 3 MEPs who have left the EFD group regularly finance initiatives from their own pockets. Why then does Nigel Farage allegedly claim travelling expenses within the UK from the party?

The 3 MEPs who have left the EFD group fund their UK offices from their £4000 + per month general expenditure allowance. Nigel Farage receives a free office in the UK. Where does his £4000, for which he does not have to account, go to? He was known to have been topping up his pension from this budget during the previous two parliaments. Is he still doing this?

The petition for a referendum on Britain's membership of the EU has attracted huge media attention. Why is Farage's UKIP obsessed with conspiracy theories and climate change denial? How do these pointless diversions get us out of the EU?

Are the climate change deniers within the party receiving money, possibly via an NGO, to spout their nonsense? The Heartland Institute, with which Monckton is involved as a "Global Warming Expert", has certainly received funding from the oil industry. Are UKIP MEPs receiving cash in return for making speeches that deny the contribution of burning fossil fuels to global warming?

Why does Farage tolerate Monckton's lies about being a member of the House of Lords? Is it possible that the Heartland Institute might be a conduit for oil company funding?

The Competitive Enterprise Institute, a leading denier of Global warming, has received significant funds from Exxon Mobil. Why has the CEI's Chris Horner often been seen in the company of UKIP MEPs? The CEI was also funded by Phillip Morris Tobacco in order to spread doubt on the effects of passive smoking. Why did Godfrey Bloom try to organise a conference at which the negative effects of passive smoking were denied? The conference was banned by the European Parliament after it was discovered that tobacco industry money was behind the organising body.

We hope that UKIP MEPs are above the corruption that is so rampant in politics, but it does appear that there are some serious questions to be asked.


Nikki Sinclaire at Number 10!



More sterling work from Nikki Sinclaire!

Cameron urged to call EU referendum

© Press Association 2011

David Cameron faces more pressure for an "in-out" referendum on Europe as a 100,000-name petition is delivered.

A cross-party delegation of MPs and MEPs is due to hand in sacks full of signatures at 10 Downing Street.

The number demanding a referendum is enough to trigger a parliamentary debate on the issue - potentially highly awkward for the Prime Minister. Mr Cameron again insisted that there was "no case" for a national poll on EU membership.

"I want us to be influential in Europe about the things that matter to our national interest - promoting the single market, pushing forward for growth, making sure we get lower energy prices," he told MPs.

"Those are things we will be fighting for but I don't see the case for an in out referendum on Europe.

"We are in Europe, we have got to make it work for us."

Under a new e-petition scheme set up by the Government, any suggestion that receives more than 100,000 signatures online is passed to parliament's backbench business committee so a debate can be organised.

However, Commons leader Sir George Young has apparently assured the Europe campaigners that traditional pen-and-ink versions will be treated the same.

Independent MEP Nikki Sinclaire is due to be accompanied by Labour MPs Kelvin Hopkins, Austin Mitchell and Kate Hoey to hand in the petition.

"This is an encouraging development and raises the prospect of an early debate on our continued membership of the EU," she said.


From Nikki's website:

PRESS RELEASE

FIGHT FOR A REFERENDUM ON EUROPE GOES TO NUMBER10 AS 100,000 DEMAND A SAY

The Prime Minister will come under mounting pressure to hold a referendum on Britain’s EU membership tomorrow (Thurs) when his own MPs march on Downing Street.

Tories will join a eight-strong delegation who will hand a 100,000-name petition demanding a straight “in or out” vote at the door of Number 10.

David Cameron has ruled out an early vote on the issue, but the huge public demand for one will give fresh impetus to 80 Eurosceptic back-benchers who want action.

The mountain of signatures has been collected in a cross-party campaign led by West Midlands MEP Nikki Sinclaire.

It raises the prospect of a Commons debate on Britain’s relationship with Europe.

Mr Cameron has promised to give Parliamentary time to any issue which gets the support of at least 100,000 people on any e-petition set up on the official government website.


But Commons leader Sir George Young has written to Ms Sinclaire telling her that her traditional pen-and-ink petition will carry the same weight if it also has the support of an MP.

Her petition has so far been backed by dozens of MPs – many of them Conservative.

David Nuttall, Tory MP for Bury North, will raise the matter with Sir George at business questions tomorrow.

The campaign’s new head of steam comes as a new group of more than 80 Tory MPs plan to meet next week to press Mr Cameron into withdrawing Britain from the debris of the eurozone crisis.

Ms Sinclaire will be flanked by five MPs and two MEPs from all parties when she hands in the sacks full of signatures at 11.45am on Thursday, September 8, 2011.

They include: Kelvin Hopkins MP , Gordon Henderson MP, Trevor Colman MEP , Austin Mitchell MP, Nigel Dodds MP , Mike Nattrass MEP and Kate Hoey MP

Nikki will say:
"This is an encouraging development and raises the prospect of an early debate on our continued membership of the EU - Almost eight in ten people want a national debate on the pros and cons of EU membership"

"To insist that only an online petition will count would disenfranchise millions of people, particularly the poor and elderly, who do not have an email account or access to a computer.”

The breakthrough is bolstered by a YouGov poll which reveals a clear majority want ordinary people to have the final say on whether we pull out of Europe.

It shows for the first time a majority of people would actually vote to leave the European Union in an referendum.

The poll results will make uncomfortable reading for Mr Cameron with mounting dissatisfaction over Europe on his own benches.

While he insists the names must be collected on individually entered electronic petitions, the Commons Leader's office has indicated that a traditional pen-and-ink petition could be lodged with the backbench business committee if it has one or more MPs sponsoring it.

Ms Sinclaire added:
"The huge response to our campaign, together with the findings of our poll, show that most people want their say."

The poll shows overwhelming support for letting the public decide our future in the EU - and if they got their way they would vote to pull out.

Some 60 per cent of voters want a referendum on whether Britain should remain a member of the EU, according to the YouGov survey commissioned by Nikki's campaign.

If there was a vote, a massive 52 per cent would vote to leave, with only 30 per cent preferring to stay in and 15 per cent undecided and 4 per cent not bothering to vote.

Nikki, an independent MEP, added:
"Clearly the people of Britain want to decide who governs Britain. It must be alarming to the government that despite all their assurances on sovereignty and cast iron promises, more and more people have given up on this European project. This argument has gone on far too long, we must decide our course once and for all in a binding referendum"

MPs are already facing demands to debate bring back hanging after 100,000 backed the move in an e-petition.

But Nikki points out that Britain is powerless to restore the death penalty while still in the EU because it would breach the UK's membership conditions by breaching the EU's Fundemental Charter on human rights.

She believes we get the worst of both worlds while inside the EU but outside the eurozone.

"We have one foot in and one foot outside it," she said.
"This is detrimental to our interests and to those of the EU, both politically and economically. We need to take a decision as to where our future lies.

"Despite numerous promises, nobody under the age of 54 has ever had a say on Britain's relationship with the EU. This issue needs to be resolved."

EU membership costs Britain £48 million a day - or £4,912 per household over the last 11 years.

But we have signed away power to decide our own future, with 75 per cent of British regulation coming from EU law.

Nikki also pays tribute to the hundreds of people across the country who have helped collate the petition including one gentleman in Dorset who has collected 2,000 signatures. Nikki said
"I'm overwhelmed by the level of support and the dedication of these people who truly are an inspiration."

Ends

Note to Editors.

The Campaign has collected in excess of 70,000 signatures on paper and in excess of 30,000 online at www.haveyoursay.eu

The paper petition forms will be handed in at 10 Downing Street at 11.45pm on Thursday September 8, 2011.

According to the Office of National Statstics report in 2010 9.2 million people have never accessed the internet.

For further information please contact Josh O’Nyons or
Nikki Sinclaire MEP can be contacted at: 0794 146 1255

Supporting Mp's and MEPs include
Kate Hoey MP Labour
Richard Shepherd MP Conservative
Austin Mithchell MP Labour
Christopher Chope MP Conservative
Philip Davies MP Conservative
Kelvin Hopkins MP Labour
Rt. Hon. Nigel Dodds MP Dem' Unionist
Mike Nattrass MEP UKIP
Rodger Godsiff MP Labour
Phillip Hollobone MP Conservative
Trevor Colman MEP UKIP
Graham Stringer MP Labour

and others

Ends

Wednesday, 7 September 2011

Another UKIP News Roundup


Addendum to ‘One Man’s Sabotage of a Noble Cause by Derek Hunnikin

In my haste to get the above document finished, before the end of August, I expected more than one item to be imperfect. My endeavour was not helped by a computer crash when about half the screed was saved on the machine. In the end I had to buy a new computer and start all over again!

Enough time has gone by for me to assume all incorrect statements have been brought to my notice, but there has been one glaring error, for which I apologise, and one account of events, in particular, is disputed.

The note from Rodney Atkinson, below, corrects the misinformation given in the last paragraph in 1. IN THE BEGINNING.

In your UKIP history you get the timings and facts slightly wrong on the events leading up to after the leadership election in 2000.

First of all Booker, Jamieson and GLW (Greg Lance-Watkins) with Farage's support stole the UKIP mailing list and attacked me - in particular for revealing Bilderberg whose Chairman was at the time Conrad Black the employer of Booker and Jamieson. The latter two were then reprimanded by the Editor of the Sunday Telegraph (Dominic Lawson) for using the St's name in party political matters. Jamieson then left and went to work in Scotland. (Incidentally, I had always supported Booker and Jamieson and both had spoken at the "Oxford Conferences" I had organised for eurosceptic Conservatives).

I then raised funds from many UKIP supporters to send out a refutation of the nonsense Booker/ Jamieson had written (and GLW had mailed out). I narrowly lost the election AND THEN IMMEDTIATELY RESIGNED giving as my reason the general corruption surrounding Farage and Booker/Jamieson's disgraceful intervention. Many hundreds left at the same time, including my friend and collaborator Norris McWhirter.

So, although the Bilderberg matter was a part of the reason for my leaving it was not a reason for my non appointment to a position of influence in UKIP - that was simply due to the fact that I had resigned!!!!

------------

A member of the NEC has asserted that the account by Robin Page (No.12) as to why he was not included in the list of prospective MEPs’ is a parody of the truth. It behoves me to give below his thoughts on this matter.

“Most of these documents are valedictory diatribes from disillusioned people and give a very slanted view of events. To take just one example, the letter from Robin Page is a parody of what actually happened. I joined the NEC just after this one so was not part of it but I was very concerned about the allegations he was making and took great pains to check with those who were involved. I started with Nigel who gave a very different story, then I went to Chris Gill who is a man for whose integrity I have great respect. Somewhat to my surprise he corroborated Nigel's story almost to the letter. Robin had had several months to get his application in but had failed to do so. By making an exception for Robin, Nigel was setting a precedent and therefore laying the party open to potential trouble from others, but nevertheless Nigel had personally intervened with HQ to give Robin a special dispensation to submit his application late. The application was NEVER received. After the interview process was complete and the 'long list' to go forward to the hustings had been determined, Robin demanded to be included. Chris Gill, who was responsible for the process, advised that this would not now be possible. There was more but I cannot now remember it all. I then checked with 3 or 4 other NEC members whom I respected and they all agreed with this version of events.

I am confident that Robin Page’s letter is completely untrue on a number of counts. It reads as a diatribe from someone who is looking for someone else to blame to avoid admitting that he has been rather stupid. Therefore, to circulate Robin's letter as if it were 'fact' is far from the truth. This criticism applies to many of the other documents in your dossier. It seems that whenever you come across a criticism of Nigel you accept it as 'gospel truth' and then ignore any alternative explanation which does not support that criticism - you then put all these criticisms together. To someone like myself it doesn't matter because I can say "well, I know about several of the incidents referred to and I know that the version in the document is rubbish, therefore I give no weight or credence to the ones I don't know about either", but to others who do not know the other side of these stories it amounts to character assassination. It also damages UKIP and I take exception to that.”

However, copied below is a note, recently received, from another NEC member who held a key position within the party.

“All I can say re Robin Page`s letter is that it reflects precisely what he told me and that he felt completely cheated by the whole process. I know that UKIP put out that he was given extra time and failed to comply with the rules but I prefer Robin`s explanation.

I know that Nigel was never keen to have Robin over in Brussels as an MEP and that many others were appalled by the MEP selection process and that Piers Merchant said that some of it should be re-run.”

------------

You will, no doubt, understand why I cannot resist including here a copy of an e-mail I recently received from a former Chairman of one of UKIP’s most successful branches.

“I am most sorry to learn of your resignation, though I understand why and have seriously considered it myself.

We need the local constituency parties to threaten to boycott the next EU elections unless our internal policies are restored and our whole political effort directed to success in local and national elections. You and I didn't work so hard and for so long to make a handful of members rich or to seek leadership of a pan-European party.

We can only escape the EU through political success in the UK (while it's still there). UKIP's main efforts must be made here to prevent us becoming a collection of EU regions. After all, we only supported elections to the EU parliament to provide funds to build UKIP within the UK. Unless UKIP gets back to national politics I for one won't vote for the party in the next EU election and I won't be alone.”

Says it all really – does it not?

------------

Finally

Some members have indicated to me that they are considering resigning from UKIP. If so, PLEASE, reconsider. My reasons for not renewing my membership are unique to me and, under different circumstances, I would still be a member. It is only by staying a member that you can vote for members of the National Executive Committee and a party leader. If all those people who have left the party, in the past 16 years, had not done so, most likely Farage would not be the leader today.

It has been pointed out to me, time and again that, of all possible leaders, Farage has charisma, the abundance of which no other candidate on the horizon can match - and this is sufficient reason to vote for him!?! The leader of the Green Party, Caroline Lucas MP has, to my mind, about as much charisma as a wet fish, and she now has a seat in our Westminster parliament!

I have asked the Chichester Steering Committee to list me as a supporter as, in the run-up to a General Election, I shall do whatever I am able to help get the UKIP candidate elected to our Westminster parliament. The same applies in Council elections.

To the many who have given me encouragement and thanks for my efforts, please, forgive me if I have not replied directly. Your kind words are much appreciated - many thanks.

However, I must also extend my sincere thanks to those who willingly volunteered and supplied additional information, which has been included in the document.

Apart from those members who have asked me to keep in touch, this addendum is the last item you shall receive from me.

Best wishes to you all.

Derek Hunnikin
September 2011


Also see: LINK

.................................

Dr Edmond on Derek Hunnikin

Derek Hunnikin's UKIP papers

Derek Hunnikin joined UKIP in 1995 twelve years before I did. He sent me a series of documents detailing the unsavoury history of UKIP's hierarchy from 1995 to date. His email address is

derekhunnikin@btinternet.com

I urge all interested in UKIP's fate to email Derek requesting a copy of his dossier.

I have never met Mike Nattrass and I know nothing of his views. I think UKIP's best hope lies with Nikki Sinclaire, whom I have met, and who has been very active with her referendum campaign. I know some of her other political views do not play well with some of UKIP's core support but I urge them to concentrate on the big issue of leaving the EU and not be beguiled by a sterile left wing right wing argument. One of the most effective and articulate opponents of the EU in the UK is Bob Crow, the far left, rail worker's leader!

One of the most telling comments in the dossier came from Robin Page who makes the point he was voted onto the governing body of the National Trust against the wishes of the NT establishment only after the NT started using the Electoral Reform Society to conduct is ballots. On the NEC I fought for UKIP to use the ERS for all UKIP elections.I was bad mouthed by Farage, Whittaker, Derek Clarke, Denny etc who clearly had their own agenda in these matters and deliberately mis-represented the service the ERS offered at a very competitive price..

I publish below the reply I have sent to Derek based on my own experience.

Dear Derek,

Thank you very much for sending me copies of the above. It must have taken a great deal of time and effort on your part to do this and I wholeheartedly thank you for this. I read all your documents and learned a great deal from them as I only joined UKIP in 2007!

I had worked for the UK government in the period 71/73 when Heath pushed through the Common Market Accession Act with a succession of dirty tricks. I thought then when I resigned from the Civil Service I had seen it all, that was until I met Nigel Farage!

Looking at the latest list of those standing for the NEC my heart sinks. Farage supporters and wannabe MEPs predominate.

Tim Congdon is a good man and excellent academic economist but lacks the ability to talk to ordinary people. Gerard Batten turns to jelly when opposed by Farage. John Bufton is ill and I doubt Trevor Colman wants to stand again given the villification he has had from SW committee members. William Legge, the belted Earl, is another Bannerman. He simply wants a political career after the Tories had multiply rejected him. Worse, his paid 'minder' is Malcolm Wood a long term associate of Farage who shares many of Farage's characteristics.

I am sorry I have not been more help to you but my energies have been diverted to helping my wife and her French property these last six months. I agree with most of your sentiments and views on UKIP.

UKIP is the only political party I have ever been a member of and through it I met many fine people whom I still count as my friends. It is sad, but not surprising, to realise from your dossier that my UKIP experience merely repeated the experiences of those who had gone before and that if by chance in future any non - Farage supporter is elected onto the NEC list or MEP list I fear they will suffer the same fate!

I was elected both to the NEC and MEP SW slate on the democratic vote of UKIP members. UKIP is not a democratic party but a Farage cult and hence can never have any impact on UK politics

Regards

Eric Edmond

Farage's chosen prosecutor for my fictitious damaging of UKIP was Bannerman. I am still a paid up member and supporter of UKIP. We all know where Bannerman now sits in adoration of his new found political hero and hoped for political patron David Cameron. So tell me Mr Farage who was the traitor in UKIP and who the unjustly prosecuted honest supporter wrongly removed from the NEC and MEP slate at your instigation?

To read the original: Link





Neil Hamilton

How we laughed when we were told that Neil Hamilton was to speak at the UKIP conference! And he is standing for the NEC!

So another failed and discredited Tory joins UKIP's ranks. He should feel right at home in the Farage sycophants club.

NEC Elections

David Black
Louise Bours
Nigel Carter
David Coburn
Douglas Denny
Charles Dodman
Nathan Garbutt
Neil Hamilton
Sean Howlett
Michael Kendall
Raymond Martin
Rob McWhirter
Toby Micklethwait
David Rowlands
Mike Smith
Robin Talbot
Michael Thomas
Piers Wauchope
Steven Woolfe


Another depressing round of candidates are on offer. The odd decent character, but sadly Farage sycophants or wannabe MEPs dominate the list. Don't waste your time! Just ask Steve Allison!

We also note that Ms Oxley is still listed as an NEC member on the UKIP official website despite having resigned from that body.

Good value for money?

We note that UKIP spent a whopping £18,176 on Henry Reilly, their local candidate in South Down. That's over £18,000 for just 2,332 votes. And he lost. See: LINK

Tuesday, 6 September 2011

UKIP: Stuart Agnew

Stuart Agnew: Not the sharpest knife in the box!

A trawl through the content of Stuart Agnew's website always throws up a howler or two. Junius' exposure of Agnew's support for farming subsidies under the CAP caused him, and UKIP, some embarrassment, and good old Aggers was ordered to remove the offending article.

He has on his website a scan of a letter that he had published in the Eastern Daily Press on the subject of global warming. Here he proves he knows as little about this subject as any other!

On the subject of greenhouses gasses he writes that "The largest of these [by a huge margin] is carbon dioxide". Wrong Aggers - the largest of these is water vapour. The latter, of course, has a residence time of just 11 days, and so its temporal impact is less than that of CO2 (we just love throwing in a big word or a technical term here and there just to confuse the old duffer, as he is an avid reader of this blog!).

He then states that it has snowed quite a lot in Norfolk recently. Had he not left school at 15, Aggers might know that increased precipitation is a consequence of increased temperature.

The denial bandwagon ran out of steam a long time ago, and it is somewhat amusing to watch Aggers making a fool of himself on this subject, one which he clearly has not even a basic grounding in.

Agnew seems to be following the UKIP trend of giving up on communicating with the public: his Eastern Counties Newsletter was last published in July 2010. If we want to talk about politicians wasting public money, then for a prime example of waste we need look no further than Agger's taxpayer-funded salary.

Monday, 5 September 2011

UKIP: Douglas Denny slams decision to employ Micheal Heaver without NEC's approval

Even Douglas Denny now realises that UKIP is a dictatorship under one man - Nigel Farage

Douglas Denny is far from amused after learning that Micheal Heaver - Farage sycophant - has been appointed to oversea an online money raising scheme WITHOUT the NEC's approval.

Denny complains that 'derogatory remarks' have been made about him after he queried Heaver's appointment.

He states:

"However as an NEC member I knew nothing of it, had to fight to get information when I found out about it, and querying this business has not made me very popular at all with derogatory personal remarks made to me by those concerned. They clearly don't like me probing into what appears they consider their exclusive affairs.

I have received considerable resistance to my querying this issue including the minor irritation of a highly vitriolic personal attack from a certain lady NEC member.

Stewart Wheeler has refused to discuss the issue with me on the grounds it is wasting his UKIP time, and Steve Crowther has offered explanations which do not satisfy me. With further correspondence with him I have recieved his final say which is that he is worn out by my "churlish and aggressive" attitude. "


End of quote.

We do sympathise with his frustration and anger. However, it should not be forgotten that Mr Denny was more than happy to use similar "churlish and aggressive" tactics when attacking members such as Dr Edmond, Del Young, Robin Page, John West and David Abbott after they all tried to raise concerns about corruption in the party.

But at least Mr Denny now realises that UKIP is not democratic and is simply the plaything of one man - Nigel Farage. If only Mr Denny had realised this earlier!

Here is Mr Denny's complaint in full:

ONLINE MONEY RAISING: NO NEC APPROVAL: EMPLOYEE ALREADY APPOINTED

The following has caused me some considerable annoyance.

I have had some limited e-mail correspondence with Stewart Wheeler and Steve Crowther regarding an issue which in my opinon is properly in the domain of the NEC - namely the appointment of an employee, and the details of the scheme behind the appointment - but it has already been decided without NEC discussion or approval.

This is wrong in my opinion and should not have happened.

Micheal Heaver has been appointed in a position to be paid a (considerable) salary for six months, underwritten as a loan to the party by Stewart Wheeler, for an online money raising scheme. This is of course very generous of him indeed and I recognise that. I also hope the scheme works very well for the party and is successful. However as an NEC member I knew nothing of it, had to fight to get information when I found out about it, and querying this business has not made me very popular at all with derogatory personal remarks made to me by those concerned. They clearly don't like me probing into what appears they consider their exclusive affairs.

In a report I received eventually after some trouble the relevant bit states:

We have received .....a proposal from Michael Heaver and Harry Aldridge on raising money through the internet. It obviously needs some discussion .......... Copy attached.

The proposal from Michael Heaver was agreed, as I have indicated, by all the F&RC. I discussed the question of Michael’s pay with Steve Crowther, who suggested £xxxxxxxx for six months. So I agreed that with Michael, who accordingly started on 8 August.

This has not been discussed in any way by the NEC. The decision has been made by the the Finances and Resources Committee with no reference to the NEC. The F&RC is a sub-committee of the NEC, its deliberations are, or should be, subject to NEC approval if of an important nature such as appointing an employee.

I do not have any quarrel or query about the money-raising scheme itself, nor can I as I have no detailed knowledge of it as a business plan.

I wanted to know if the party would in any way be liable for Mr Heaver's salary or other expenses with the scheme if things failed. I have not received an answer.

I wanted to know why the NEC has not been involved in discussion of this. I have not received an answer.

Appointing a UKIP employee for a money making scheme without any regard to the issue being first brought before the NEC for discussion is I think profoundly wrong. One of the F&RC thinks this is proposterous of me to suggest it.

I have received considerable resistance to my querying this issue including the minor irritation of a highly vitriolic personal attack from a certain lady NEC member.

Stewart Wheeler has refused to discuss the issue with me on the grounds it is wasting his UKIP time, and Steve Crowther has offered explanations which do not satisfy me. With further correspondence with him I have recieved his final say which is that he is worn out by my "churlish and aggressive" attitude.

I have insisted it be brought before the NEC for the next meeting for discussion as I want answers to the above questions. I have not been assured it will be.

The appointment however, and the details of the actual mechanics of the scheme are still not clear to me though they have already been approved to go ahead.

It is my opinon the NEC has been undemocratically by-passed. There are other issues of this nature extant which are of concern.

Members are now informed, should they wish to take it up as an issue themselves with the chairman of the NEC or the Party Treasurer.

Douglas Denny.

Sunday, 4 September 2011

UKIP: One Man's Sabotage of A Noble Cause. The Final Part



ONE MAN’S SABOTAGE OF A NOBLE CAUSE

Final Part

Part One, Part Two, Part Three, Part Four, Part Five & Part Six can be seen by clicking here & here & here & here & here & here

Prepared by Derek Hunnikin
UKIP Membership No. 1428


17. THE UNITED KINGDOM FIRST PARTY

The United Kingdom First Party was formed in Jan/February 2009 by Bruce Lawson (ex UKIP Treasurer) and Peter Cole (ex UKIP Regional Organiser).

A number of other Ex UKIP members joined, including:


Robin Page (former UKIP MEP candidate in the Eastern Region)
John Petley (ex Brussels based researcher)
John West (former UKIP press officer and Chairman of North Ipswich/Central Suffolk)
Petrina Holdsworth (ex Chairman of UKIP). Petrina is a retired Barrister and was thought to be a possible leader of the party
Drew Bellobaba (former UKIP MEP candidate and branch chairman in the South East
Ian Gilman (former UKIP NEC member and MEP candidate East Midlands)
Martin Haslam (former UKIP NEC member – Party and South East Region Treasurer).
David Noakes (who contested for the leadership of UKIP in 2006)

Others, such as David Abbott, Eric Edmond, and Geoffrey Kingscott (now deceased), maintained links with the party but were not members. (All three were thrown out of the NEC for criticising the leadership).

Robin Page, a fierce critic of Nigel Farage, also came on board and became leader of The UK First Party.

There had been much discussion amongst disgruntled UKIP members about forming a new eurosceptic party over the preceding two years.

At first it had been hoped to simply try to reform the inner workings of UKIP, and through the Grassroots Democracy and Phoenix Forum both of which had websites, and the latter which had meetings of interested members in Bournemouth in 2008.

However, it became clear that such activities were having little effect on the management of the party and it was decided to go ahead with a new party which could fight under its own banner in the 2009 Euro elections.

The UK First Party was formed to put forward a manifesto for withdrawal from the EU, its MEPs would publish their expenses in full, keep visits to Brussels to an absolute minimum, would not join any grouping, and only hold office for one term. In short, the party wanted to make it abundantly clear that their MEPs would keep a professional distance from the corrupting influence of the EU and its many blandishments whilst giving their best efforts to organising the Withdrawist Movement in the UK.

The party also had policies for smaller more accountable government, end to mass immigration, freedom of expression, less regulation, welfare reform, dismantling Quangos, food and energy, security, etc.

It was felt that UKIP had sullied itself with far too close contact with the EU; it had not kept its promises about publishing expenses and was perceived by many as having “gone native”.

There were also serious doubts about UKIP’s leadership’s desire and ability to take effective action to help the campaign for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty (the reason Petrina Holdsworth resigned from UKIP in January 2008).

Further to that many who joined The UK First Party had considerable misgivings about the fact that the MEPs were in effect running UKIP rather than being its servants, fairness of the MEP process of selection, and other internal matters.

UK First did well for a new party in the Euro elections but, due to Robin Page’s poor health at the time and internal wrangling, it dissolved itself later in 2009.

------------

18. DODGY POLICY DECISIONS
BOO v BDI

Item14, Farage embraces Eurofederalism, gave details of UKIP’s MEPs endorsing ‘subsidiarity’. There have been other questionable policy decisions notably, the idea UKIP should not contest any Westminster Parliamentary seat where another candidate, from the Conservative or Labour Party, had signed up to the ‘Better Off Out’ (BOO) campaign. As some MPs have clearly stated, they agree the UK would be ‘Better Off Out’ but, nevertheless, they would not advocate the UK leaving the EU.

A much more satisfactory solution to this problem is the one devised by Rodney Atkinson known as ‘British Declaration of Independence’ (BDI). Rodney Atkinson wrote in January 2007:

Press reports in recent days show that UKIP has again changed its policy and agreed not to stand against MPs (but not candidates) – provided they prove their euroscepticism by joining an organisation called “Better Off Out”. But Better Off Out advertises itself as a “non-party organisation committed to making the case for leaving the European Union” but it does not commit its members to legislation to achieve that aim.

Even if it had committed MPs in unequivocal terms to voting to leave the European Union (which it has not) that would not be sufficient to restore British democratic sovereignty – since the EU is not the only cause of the loss.

There is only one organisation which unequivocally commits Parliamentarians and candidates – by their signatures – to totally restoring our country, parliament and democracy and that is the British Declaration of Independence. The credibility which the Declaration provides – by committing signatories, ON PAIN OF RESIGNATION, to specific legislation – has more Westminster Parliamentarians pledged to sovereignty legislation than any other group.

The strength of the BDI is also recognised within UKIP whose members understand that organisations like Better Off Out have for years given cover to those who parade their euroscepticism at elections but then refuse to act when they get to parliament.

The strength of the BDI is recognised by members of other parties because it allows them to remain within their party but use the power of the voter to help them legislate for democratic sovereignty.

The strength of the BDI is recognised by voters because it identifies the supporters and enemies of democratic sovereignty so they can vote accordingly and thus assemble a cross party majority in Parliament for sovereignty legislation. (It needed just such a cross party majority to undermine that sovereignty in the first place – Heath’s Conservatives did not do it on their own).

The Tory party (in particular William Hague, whose own former Constituency Chairman has in desperation joined UKIP) “don’t want to bang on about Europe”.

NEITHER DO WE!! WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BRITAIN, ITS PARLIAMENT AND ITS DEMOCRACY.

AND IF HAGUE AND CAMERON CANNOT COMMIT TO THAT THEY ARE A VERY SICK JOKE INDEED.


A copy of the document MPs and prospective MPs are required to sign is given below.

The Democratic Declaration of a prospective MP to the electorate © 2005

This is a sample – the declarations sent to candidates have a unique code.

I, ………………….hereby irrevocably declare to my electorate that following my election to Parliament and after the BDI Executive Committee has confirmed that a majority of MPs is available to pass the legislation, I shall lay before Parliament and vote for the BDI Bill, or vote in favour of that Bill presented by other and continue to do so until the Bill is passed into law. The BDI Bill, in accordance with the rights of all peoples to self-determination as enshrined in the United Nations Convention on Civil and Political Rights of 1966 will:

Assert the sole authority of the Westminster Parliament to initiate, pass and repeal all legislation and regulation applied to the people of the United Kingdom and asserts the supreme authority of the British judiciary in all law applied to the people of the United Kingdom.


And will recognise:


• the sole allegiance of MPs, ministers and British officials to the Parliament and Democratic institutions of the United Kingdom and that all British subjects owe allegiance, duties and obligations only to the United Kingdom.


• the exclusive control by the Westminster parliament over who resides within and votes in any elections in the United Kingdom, control over the borders of the United Kingdom and the exclusive right to grant or withhold permission to cross those borders.


• the historic rights of British subjects to inter alia Habeas Corpus, Trial by Jury and presumed innocence, preventing their extradition to any jurisdiction which does not afford such rights or which refuses to extradite to the United Kingdom.


• the sole control by the Bank of England of all British gold and foreign currency reserves (and their location within the United Kingdom) and Bank of England or British Government control over t`he Pound Sterling, British national monetary policy and interest rates.


• the right of the British Government, as the representative of a Sovereign British people and nation, to sign international treaties and conventions which facilitate free trade and co-operation between nations but which in no way compromise the supreme authority of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.
And I pledge that in accordance with my Oath of Allegiance I will vote against any legislation which explicitly or impliedly repeals or controverts the above principles, whenever I become and so long as I remain a Member of Parliament.

I, ………………………………… being an MP/prospective parliamentary candidate hereby declare that I make this commitment for this and every future general election at which I may be a candidate. Should I not fulfil the terms of this Agreement when the BDI Bill is presented in Parliament, I will immediately resign so that a by-election may be held and a new mandate obtained for the remainder of the Parliament.


Signed…………………………………………………………………..Dated……………………………………..
For further information visit: www.bdicampaign.org

------------
19. OTHER MATTERS OF INTEREST

Clearly, only a sample of the irregularities, counterproductive policy decisions, and the lack of transparency of UKIP’s accounts, occasioned by the leadership (not our treasurers), are given here. One that was brought to my attention last month is the unexplained reason for a change in policy immediately prior to the Welsh Assembly elections.

Ever since it was founded, Welsh members of UKIP had been campaigning for the Welsh Assembly to be closed down. In the run-up to the recent elections, for the Welsh Assembly, prospective UKIP candidates had been working hard, and spending their own money, broadcasting this policy. They were aware that, following the Conservative Party’s decision to no longer support the closure of the Welsh Assembly, and that in a recent poll 40,000 Welsh Tory supporters made clear they were in favour of its closure, UKIP Wales members believed their chances of representation in the Assembly was a distinct possibility.

However, ten days before the manifesto launch, Farage met with John Bufton in Cardiff to inform him that he had made the decision, unilaterally, that the 12 year policy of opposing the Welsh Assembly and Regional Government was over, and that the party no longer wanted the abolition of the Welsh Assembly.

A few days later Farage met with the prospective candidates and made it clear that the new policy was not going to be changed - ‘so either come with me or don’t stand’. The Conservatives and Labour grasped hold of this change and could not believe their luck. They informed their membership and all who would listen!

It must be pointed out that all of the Welsh UKIP candidates were opposed to the policy change. So, after the election, at the first meeting of the Welsh committee, it was unanimously voted to reinstate the long standing policy of opposition to Regionalisation of the UK and break up the United Kingdom into EU imposed Regional Assemblies.

Warwick Nicholson, the Chairman of UKIP Wales wrote – ‘We joined the party, because we believed in Britain, and we want Britain to leave the EU. UKIP should in no way adopt the EU’s policies or endorse them’.

Note: It was, I think, in 2004 that 78% of voters in the North East of England rejected Regional government.
------------

A member, who proposed that UKIP MEPs should serve for one term only, was threatened with expulsion from the party for daring to make such a suggestion!! A prospective leader who advocated this idea, of one term only for our MEPs, would probably gain wide support. Surely, in future, there is a case for UKIP not to have MEPs. In any case, only those MEPs who use their position to campaign for election to our Westminster parliament are worthy of selection.
.
------------

Then there is the Alan Bown case in which UKIP was informed, no less than seven times by the Electoral Commission, that before he could donate money to the party, Alan’s name and address must appear in a Register of Electors. For reasons which are unknown, this Alan failed to do. Summoning his aggressive style, Nigel Farage scuppered any hope of an amicable solution to this matter when he publicly declared that the Electoral Commission were only interested in prosecuting small parties. UKIP was lucky to come out of this mess with comparatively small legal costs. Many believe that a more diplomatic approach to this matter could have led to a cost free solution.

------------

Then there is the recent call, from Marta Andreasen, for Nigel Farage to resign his leadership position for wasting £150,000 of members’ money on what she perceived as unnecessary expense
on litigation.

------------

Under Farage’s leadership, UKIP is God’s gift to the legal profession. I would like to know the amount of money UKIP has haemorrhaged in legal expenses in the past ten years.

------------

The disappearance, some years ago, of £211,000 from the South East Region accounts (which is Farage’s patch) in ‘other expenses’ has never been satisfactorily explained.

------------

Under Farage’s insistence, UKIP membership application forms now make it clear that anyone who has been a member of The UK First Party, or the BNP, will not be accepted as a member of UKIP. Quite apart from the fact that no ex-UK First member would consider re-joining UKIP while Farage has any influence on the running of the party, anyone of them would be a greater asset to us than our current leader.
------------

Farage’s campaign to absorb our MEPs into a pan-European Political Party is a blatant attempt to trigger an exodus of members and supporters. As the letter I have recently received from a member, clearly illustrates, the mere fact that he has suggested such a course has alerted her to the unsuitability of Farage as leader.

After having read the latest issue of Independence, a member wrote to me and her last paragraph reads as follows: “I have not renewed my membership of UKIP. I shall write to tell them that I cannot possibly support Farage in his attempt to join the pan-European Group. UKIP was formed to come out.” This lady has been a staunch supporter of the party for many years. She never lost an opportunity to canvass for UKIP, be it the butcher, baker, shop assistant, or even a stranger she happened to have got into conversation with. Even her doctor and nurses have been canvassed from her hospital bed. Yet another active member is leaving the party as she has come to the conclusion that our current leader ‘is not fit for purpose.’

------------

Several people mentioned in this document who are said to have supported Farage in the past no longer do so. Regrettably, I do not have a list of these people.
One could go on …………

20. CONCLUSION

Who can doubt that, if all those people who resigned from UKIP over the past sixteen years had not done so, but fought for someone more worthy, Farage would not have been voted leader again last year.

A close relative tells me that, by remaining a member of UKIP, I am wasting my time supporting a party that has no hope, under Farage’s leadership or influence, of achieving the declared aim of freeing the UK from the clutches of the EU. She maintains that I should follow the lead of many other honourable people and leave the party, and that by remaining a member I seemingly endorse Farage’s actions and deeds and, in so doing, tarnish my own reputation.

However, as was clearly demonstrated by the failure of The UK First Party, it is too late to start another political party. There are a couple of dozen pressure groups that do a fine job of giving out ant-EU information but, because they do not have the aim of getting MPs of their persuasion into our Westminster parliament, they are toothless.

So, the only option is to campaign for UKIP to be led by someone who can demonstrate that the party can be trusted. One cannot vote for a new leader unless a party member - hence my reason, to date, for not resigning from UKIP.

In the main, people who join, or support UKIP, do so because they have come to realise that EU membership has caused a huge amount of damage to our nation, and it is rarely due to admiration of the leader. Canvassing by grassroots members, branch officials, and honourable MEPs, is also a major factor in the recruitment of UKIP members and supporters. There can be few sections of our population that have not been detrimentally affected by EU interference. UKIP is the only viable political party to which they can turn. However, I am aware that some people have become so disillusioned with UKIP they have joined the only other party committed to our withdrawal from the EU, namely, the British National Party. (BNP membership is, I believe, now under 4,000)

It would appear that some people support our party purely on the basis of Farage’s ability to entertain, especially in the EU parliament. However, his aggressive, flamboyant, style undoubtedly puts an equal number of people off supporting UKIP. His clowning in the EU parliament (see item 15) begs the questions “can UKIP be taken seriously.”

In my view, only those who are prepared to use their time as MEPs to promote themselves as a prospective MP should be selected to serve in Brussels. During their term in Brussels they must undertake to spend as much time and effort as possible to get themselves elected to Westminster. Before selection can be approved by the Party the candidate must have signed the “British Declaration of Independence”. By so doing they would have an advantage over other candidates who had signed the ‘Better Off Out’ document or demonstrated no commitment to our withdrawal from the EU. (See section 18). Furthermore, no MEP should be allowed to serve for more than one term. Thus, the position of being an MEP is used only as a stepping stone to becoming an MP.

The fact that Farage got 60% of the vote, in the last leadership election, suggests the knowledge of those who voted for him is limited to what they hear on the radio, or see of him on a platform or television/computer screen.

It appears that many believe ‘charisma’ is of vital importance, and look no further as to the suitability of the person as a leader. This is akin to judging the contents of a parcel purely on the appearance of the wrapping paper. History is littered with leaders who had an abundance of charisma but led their followers into disaster. Also, it was the mindset that dictated ‘we must support the leader’ that ensured the said disaster.

The most likely reason for leaving a political party is dissatisfaction with the leadership or policies of the party. (Bizarrely, a member telephoned me to say that, because our then new leader, Lord Pearson of Rannoch, was in favour of fox-hunting, she was resigning from UKIP immediately)!

Thus, the conduct of the party leader, and his/her selection of party officials and advisers, is of paramount importance. It is put to the reader that the vast majority of those who have deserted UKIP have done so purely because of their lack of faith/trust in Mr Nigel Farage MEP.

As Rodney Atkinson pointed out, Edward Heath got us into the EU with cross-party support, and this is probably the only way we can get out. The book, co-authored by the Conservatives Douglas Carswell MP and Daniel Hannan MEP, ‘The PLAN – twelve months to renew Britain’, should leave you in no doubt about their sincerity in campaigning for us to leave the EU. There are several other Conservative and Labour MPs who are equally committed to getting the UK out of the EU.

No-one can deny that Farage has worked very hard - speaking at public meetings throughout the UK and Europe, putting the case for the demise of the European Union. In the early days his commitment to our cause was unquestioned. The feeling among many today, however, is that Farage loves the lifestyle of an MEP and has ‘gone native’ in Europe, and the primary use of his energy is to promote himself, and the advancement of UKIP comes a poor second.

Despite what I have written above, after sixteen years as a member, most of which time I have been the Chichester Branch Membership Secretary and responsible for producing the branch newsletters, under pressure from my family, I have decided not to renew my membership of the party which expires at the end of this month. However, I shall continue to support the local branch in their effort to get our prospective MP, Andrew Moncreiff, elected to Westminster.

In an election for the leadership, or NEC members, it is hoped that members will garner as much information as possible about the candidates before voting.

Some have said, as a member, that by expressing dissatisfaction with the leadership of UKIP they are ‘rocking the UKIP boat’. If a yacht gets stuck on a dangerous sandbank sometimes the only way to free it is to ‘rock it’, which I believe is better than risking waiting for the rising tide to sink it!!

The question is - what can be done to install a trustworthy Captain at the helm of UKIP with a commitment to the noble cause of navigating the UK, with the support of a crew of UK Independence party members, out of the dangerous and damaging waters of the EU, and into a safe UK independent harbour?

A politician is one who thinks only of the next election. A statesman is one who thinks of the next generation. UKIP is in urgent need of a statesman to lead the party.

Have you, dear reader, any suggestions?

Derek Hunnikin
August 2011
------------


Saturday, 3 September 2011

UKIP: One Man's Sabotage of a Noble Cause. Part 6



ONE MAN’S SABOTAGE OF A NOBLE CAUSE

Part Six

Part One, Part Two, Part Three, Part Four & Part Five can be seen by clicking here & here & here & here & here

Prepared by Derek Hunnikin
UKIP Membership No. 1428

14. Farage embraces Eurofederalism’s SUBSIDIARITY.
By RODNEY ATKINSON

The former leader of the UK Independence Party, Roger Knapman, has rightly attacked the present leader Nigel Farage (both are MEPs) for signing up UKIP to the EU’s (eurofederalist) idea of “subsidiarity”. Nothing could be more dangerous for a party which claims at least to believe in democratic national sovereignty.

Having come within a few votes of winning the UKIP leadership election of 2000, one of the many reasons why I was happy to leave was the evident impossibility (in a party bereft of credible leadership and intellect) of persuading anyone of any real political substance to join and persuade the electorate that we were capable of joining other parties in a sovereignty coalition in Parliament.

Nigel Farage was by no means the only barrier to such credibility but his lack of intellectual rigour was always going to be a major stumbling block. Today we see why. Farage has never maintained a UKIP principle if he was offered financial incentives to abandon it. (My emphasis - DH). Thus, when Paul Sykes offered millions of pounds, the party effectively abandoned its objective of “gaining power to withdraw from the European Union” and instead said they would adopt the methods of other spineless euro-federalist parties and merely “hold a referendum”.

Now Farage and many of his UKIP colleagues in the European Parliament – in order to absorb another vaguely euro-sceptic party from Romania into their “Independence/Democracy Group” in the European Parliament – have embraced the dangerous eurofederalist principle of “subsidiarity”. This, Farage maintains, is “UKIP (voting) for things if they reduce power at the centre.” Subsidiarity is of course nothing of the sort. Far from ceding powers, subsidiarity is the means by which the central sovereign authority (The European Union) maintains its control. It hands down responsibilities not power. It decides what can be handed down to “lower” levels – like the nation states! - and it decides how many responsibilities are passed on. Indeed by passing down responsibilities to the subservient nation states the Centre saves money. It means the nation states have the burden of administration and have to raise the unpopular taxes – the centre, having passed on responsibilities, will not be reducing its budget, of that we can be sure.

So anyone who supports “subidiarity” is not only a fool but a dangerous fool. This latest surrender of principle by UKIP is of course (surprise, surprise!) in order to raise more money and privileges for their MEPs.

In aid of the same money grab UKIP has even changed its policy on the wasteful, disastrous Common Agricultural Policy – it now seeks to “reform it”! Anyone see any euro pigs flying?

The Ind/Dem group signed the declaration because it hopes to recruit the Roman Party Pin and its MEPs in order to keep its numbers high enough to continue to qualify as a “group”. This qualifies them for a lot of money and facilities paid for by the EU Parliament.

Thanks to the additional funding, the Ind/Dem group, including UKIP, is going to move to new offices next month but such benefits would disappear if enough of its MEPs were to split off.

Roger Knapman wrote in his letter on May 13: “I, and a number of my colleagues, cannot in all conscience accept something which represents a major departure from what we believed to be UKIP’s policy – withdrawal from the EU, a complete rejection of its authority (and subsidiarity) and rejection of the Common Agricultural Policy.”

Well done Roger Knapman! But one good man does not a party make! If he cannot convince a substantial number of UKIP MEPs to leave the Ind Dem group on this matter of fundamental principle then UKIP is surely finished.

------------

15. My experiences of working for Nigel Farage in Brussels.
By JOHN PETLEY

I joined UKIP in 2001, having never before been a member of a political party. I stood as UKIP’s candidate for Lewes in the 2005 General Election. During the campaign, I became acquainted with John Harvey, one of UKIP’s founder members who lives in a village just outside Lewes. It was thanks to John that I was given the chance to work as a researcher in Brussels, starting in January 2006. I went out to Brussels slightly in awe of Nigel Farage, but within a couple of months, my view of him had begun to change. Indeed, by the summer recess of 2006, a mere seven months since coming out to Brussels, I had arrived at the conclusion that Nigel Farage was a liability to the party. There were several reasons for this. Firstly, I was concerned about the rumours about his sexual impropriety, including that he was having an affair with Annabelle Fuller, one of my colleagues in Brussels at the time. Also, and even more worryingly, was the fact that cronyism rather than competence seemed to be what counted. All the researchers who I regarded as competent ended up being thrown out, while others who are totally unsuitable are still working there!

Nigel’s sincerity also leaves much to be desired. I heard from a colleague about a conversation between Farage and Gerard Batten shortly before the 2006 Bromley by-election. It transpired that Farage had discussed a deal with the Tories whereby if they selected the Eurosceptic but not withdrawalist MEP Syed Kamall as their candidate, UKIP would not put up a candidate. On hearing of this, Gerard was incensed and said, “If you don’t stand, I will.” As it happened, the Tories chose Bob Neill, and with Gerard being the ultra-loyalist that he is, he chose not to leak this out. Nigel then announced at a big UKIP meeting the following weekend about how excited he was at being able to contest another by-election. Most people cheered. I was livid.

Indeed, Nigel has lied - to me and to other party members. In March 2007, David Abbott’s $100 donation to what had turned out to be a BNP support group in America was blown up in the national media in March 2007 simply because of David’s criticism of Nigel’s leadership. Before standing for the NEC, David came quite clean about this donation. He did not want to stand for office if it would compromise him. Being so insignificant a sum, a one-off and inadvertent, Nigel and others said it was not a problem. However, when David began to start opposing Nigel on the NEC, Nigel deliberately leaked this out to the press and made it out that David had been seriously involved with the BNP (which wasn’t remotely true). When I challenged Nigel, saying that either he or Mark Croucher were ill-advised to have done this, his reply was "Neither I nor Croucher contacted the Press." The press had also spoken to a person I know who has held senior office in the party about the David Abbott business, and this person told me that when the reporter concerned rang up, he said, "I've just been speaking to Mark Croucher."

Did Nigel lie about the “Bucharest declaration” – which supported subsidiarity (not withdrawal) and reform (not abolition) of the Common Agricultural Policy and which was signed by a number of MEPs including UKIP’s Derek Clark? Certainly, when party members rang up the South East Regional office in anger about the Bucharest declaration, they were told it was nothing to do with Nigel. Only when it became apparent that too many copies of the e-mail proving he had a hand in its wording were in circulation (I still have a copy at home) did the line change.

Nigel also blew his top over things. He once came into my office and ranted at me because I had contacted Mike Nattrass (whose assistant I was for a while) about a
dubious amendment to a piece of Parliamentary legislation put forward at Committee stage by Jens-Peter Bonde, Ind Dem Co-president, in the name of the group. A colleague of mine had spotted this amendment and said that UKIP MEPs couldn’t support it, as it was giving more power to the EU (I can’t remember the exact details beyond this). I thought I had better tell Mike, and Mike must have contacted Nigel, who then stormed in and said, “But we always vote against this in Plenary.” I guess Nigel knew I wasn’t happy with UKIP MEPs being in the Ind Dem group. I did not discover until I went to Brussels that NONE of the other MEPs in Ind Dem were withdrawalists. Bonde had been, but after 11 years admitted he had changed his position to “reformist” Interestingly enough, when was the last time anyone heard Nigel talk about outright withdrawal?

If Nigel became aware that any staff were in any way unhappy with him, even if they were not working directly for him, life became very uncomfortable. The atmosphere in the offices from February 2008 to my departure in April gave me an inkling of what it must have been like to live in the Soviet Union – You were always watching your back and every pair of footsteps outside the office door made you feel uneasy. So bizarre that fellow-withdrawalists should be the cause of such a poisonous atmosphere. I have to say that in over two years working in Brussels, I had no animosity from the “nasty” EU. UKIP staff were treated fairly.

My dismissal shows the utterly devious nature of Nigel Farage. He was not directly involved, but his fingerprints are all over it. It all began on Monday 7th April 2008, after Roger Knapman’s “Stop the Treaty” conference in Bristol the previous Saturday which I had gone to. When I got back to Brussels, I tried to access my parliamentary e-mail account, but was unable to do so. I entered the password about 10 times, but was repeatedly blocked. I know that I did not type in my password incorrectly. Having worked in IT before going into political research, I knew hacking when I saw it. The hacker had, fortunately, failed to guess my password, but had locked me out. I spoke to Oumar Dombouya, the man delegated to manage IT affairs for Ind Dem. He re-set my password and set a monitoring facility on my account, as one of my colleagues had had a similar problem, and suspected hacking.

On Thursday afternoon (10th April), Graham Booth came into my office with a print-out of the names, subjects and dates of the e-mails I had sent in recent weeks. He asked me to print out the contents of four of these. After he had left the office, I looked at a couple of these e-mails on my computer, and as I was doing so, the access to my e-mail account suddenly went down. When I eventually was able to bring up the initial screen and try to sign on, once again, I was locked out, just as I had been the previous Monday.

I subsequently discovered that it is within the rules to print out the list (although not the content) of the e-mails sent by EP staff without asking them. However, I did not know this at the time, and refused to take Booth‘s word that this was the case or provide him with the content of these e-mails until I could establish the facts. In view of my suspicions about someone trying to tamper with my e-mails, I think this was quite reasonable. However, his response to my refusal was by saying that in his eyes, this amounted to a “lack of trust” in me. This was the catch-all phrase that can be used to dismiss staff if you don’t like them but can’t find any good reason for sacking them. I had always got on fairly well with Graham until then, and I know Nigel set him up, because he expressed a very negative opinion of one person to whom these e-mails were sent (a branch chairman in the South East) and when I contacted this individual, he said that he had never had any dealings with Graham. Only Nigel could have singled out this e-mail.

Oumar was very helpful initially to my attempts to find out who had been hacking into my account. He traced it to a UK-registered machine (no surprise!) but could not go any further because of intimidation by Hermann Verheirstraten, a senior member of the Ind Dem secretariat. He subsequently kept his distance from me, simply out of fear.

My dismissal was e-mailed to me on Thursday 24th April. This was during a Strasbourg plenary, and I was teleworking at the time. Quite honestly, it was a relief not to have to go back to Brussels. It amazed me to hear afterwards from the late Piers Merchant that Graham Booth had been going round the South West telling people that I (along with two other researchers) were MI5 spies!


Meanwhile, Steve Harris, UKIP’s South East regional organiser, again no doubt mouthing Nigel’s words, has been telling people in the South East that my dismissal was because I was hacking into other people’s e-mails!

I made a statement about this illegal hacking to the Belgian police. I have copies of the documents at home.

Nigel also has failed to develop UKIP as a serious domestic force at home. I heard him speak at Hastings in November 2005, just before I started in Brussels. He said something on the lines of, “Well, UKIP isn’t getting much exposure because the EU isn’t in the news much now, but just wait - it’ll be back on the agenda.” He was proved right with a vengeance when the failed Constitution metamorphosised into the Lisbon Treaty, but he singularly missed the opportunity to put UKIP at the head of the campaign to oppose it. It was always going to be a tough battle to stop the treaty, but it would have put the party back in the consciousness of the electorate. Instead, it was left to an ordinary Party member to launch the “Parish Polls” initiative. On the day of the mass lobby of the House of Commons, Farage was in Brussels. I know, because I heard his voice in the corridor outside my office. This missed opportunity, for which he must take the blame, must represent UKIP’s biggest political mistake in its entire history.

He has also failed to educate the party’s rank and file. Many of those who joined UKIP, myself included, were new to politics. We could see that being in the EU was not in Britain’s best interests, but did not necessarily combine this piece of wisdom with political discernment. I would guess I am not alone in admitting that at one point, I believed that anything in print that says something bad about the EU must be correct. I now realise that this isn’t true, but I still hear of party members who innocently swallow all manner of daft conspiracy theories. Shortly before my sacking, at my own initiative, I wrote a little leaflet, called the UKIP Mythbuster, to try to separate fact and fiction. UKIP had had MEPs for 8½ years by then, and the necessary resources to have produced something of this nature several years earlier, but Farage never took any steps to produce something which would have stopped well-meaning UKIP activists from dropping clangers.

Hard though it is to say it, when I was in Brussels, what I saw in the main was a bungling bunch of amateurs. There were, indeed still are, some honourable exceptions, such as Gerard Batten, but if one incident sticks in my mind which shows how Nigel cannot be taken seriously as a politician, let alone as the No. 1 spokesman for the withdrawalist cause, it was the infamous “Chicken Costume” incident in Strasbourg in 2008. I can vouch for this being Nigel’s idea. When three staff members dressed up as chickens (Gawain Towler, Paul Nuttall and Ralph Atkinson) were escorted from the area near the Hemicycle by the security staff, it led to a very heated but almost surreal press conference, firstly with Gawain (still in his costume minus the chicken head!) and then Nigel, complaining bitterly to the media that the reason we were being treated unfairly in not being allowed to parade around in these outfits was because we opposed the Lisbon Treaty. What nonsense! No wonder the rest of the European Parliament saw UKIP as a bit of a joke.

And the blame for this must be placed at the door of its leader. My experience in Brussels has led me to the conclusion that Farage is an obstacle to British withdrawal from the EU. He arranges these stunts and does his “sound bytes” for the media, but what does this contribute to helping us get out of the EU? He has never been able to sell to the British public any vision of just how much life could improve if Britain regains its independence. His whole focus is in Brussels, where he rules the roost with an iron grip, attacking anyone who he sees as a threat or an independent-minded thinker. What does he care for the hard-working party rank and file in the UK, who have given their money and time for him to live the life of Riley over there? Having seen the European Parliament in action, I left Brussels more convinced than ever that our once great land should regain its independence and withdraw from this miserable failure called the European Union, but I am also convinced that the process would be hastened greatly if UKIP could disown that miserable failure called Nigel Farage.

------------

16. DR. ERIC EDMOND

Elected to UKIP’s National Executive Committee in 2008, and selected by the South West Region as a prospective MEP in the 2009 Euro Elections, Dr.Edmond was educated at Edinburgh & Oxford University where he was taught by Mrs Thatcher's old tutor, Dorothy Hodgkin.

He was in the Civil Service 71/73 during Heath's Common Market Entry - resigned in disgust, and was a Liverpool University Lecturer 74/96.

Later, he was a Bank of England market mathematician 98/03 preparing Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) briefings and working with other central banks.

Here follows a statement by Eric Edmond UKIP MEP Candidate SW Region European Elections in 2009.

What I will do if chosen and elected

• Use the letters MEP to keep the UKIP name and brand in the UK media as much as possible.

• Go to Brussels as little as possible. I would prefer not to go at all like the IRA did when elected to Westminster. The IRA won. I want to win.

• I will use every trick and tactic to obstruct the EU.

• Euro Assembly as Mrs Thatcher always called it is a pointless talking shop and I will show it as that.

• Give all salary to UKIP – some £40k pa.

• I will not employ any members of my family.

• Visit every South West Branch each year.

• Contact & lunch local paper & TV editors all the time – use MEP expenses for that!

What I believe in

• Equality and equal opportunity for all irrespective of colour creed or religion.

• Rule of Law and true honest democracy.

• I will always put my country’s interests before party interests.

• I want our country back for our children.

• I want a country with a reducing population & a rising GDP/capita and standard of living.

• I want UK citizenship to have to be earned by 15 years of honest work and a clean criminal record.

• I want real democracy with frequent referendums when the citizens want one

• I want a country like Switzerland with an EU trade agreement like the Swiss one

• I want to copy the Swiss rules for immigration and asylum.

• I don’t want a country for self-important greedy political careerists.

• I don’t want the EU that tries to run the world – like Napoleon and Hitler.

• I don’t want to be in a 4th Reich or Holy Roman Empire called the EU.

• If we had stayed out of Europe in 1914 my family and the country would have benefited hugely.

My strategy to get out of the EU

The Euro is central to the EU project. It needs a state to back it, hence the Lisbon Treaty. I know where its weakness lies. I will write and talk endlessly about the weakness in the Euro and hence undermine the EU

I will cultivate our core vote of retired people who know what this country was before Major, Blair, and Brown.

I will go for the over-taxed middle class vote

Only the UK parliament can get us out of the EU and I will work to get UKIP MPs elected and force other parties to back us in a repeal of Heath's 1972 European Act

What I promise - I will live up to the motto of the city of my birth, Leith, and I will Persevere to get us out of the EU in my lifetime
------------

The removal of Dr Edmond from the list of prospective MEPs - from Junius. (juniusonukip.blogspot.com).

Note: Dr Edmond has confirmed in an e-mail to me that what you read below is true.

On Friday 13th February 2009 the NEC decided to remove Dr Edmond as an MEP candidate. It is pointed out that Dr Edmond was not informed that he was to be on the NEC agenda. He was not given an opportunity to defend himself, and the South West Committee was not informed of the NEC decision.

The following day Nigel Farage travelled to Lexdrum House to meet the South West Committee.

Those present included:

Jeff Mager, Malcolm Wood, David Bendall, Trevor Colman, Elizabeth Burton and Graham Booth.

It was pointed out in a letter signed by Piers Merchant and Roger Knapman that the meeting was unlawful as the committee members had not been given the designated 21 days notice. As you can imagine Farage became extremely agitated after seeing this letter.

The purpose of the meeting was to de-select Dr Edmond as an MEP candidate. However, this could not be done as the meeting had not been properly constituted.

Farage was forced to admit that the NEC had already decided to remove Dr Edmond from the MEP list. The committee was less than impressed with this revelation and pointed out to a now agitated Farage that any decision to remove Dr Edmond should have been left to them as they represented the people who originally selected him.

Farage then accused Dr Edmond of disrupting NEC meetings. He also claimed that he had been removed from the NEC for reporting UKIP to the Electoral Commission.

Farage was lying.

As a member of UKIP’s NEC Dr Edmond had been jointly and severally liable for UKIP’s debts. He had simply written to the Commission AFTER his removal from the NEC informing them that he was no longer liable for any future debts.

I should add that Dr Edmond had also written to Dr Whittaker requesting details of all financial transaction made during his time on the NEC. Dr Whittaker ignored his request.

It was decided to remove Dr Edmond from the committee. They also confirmed his removal from the MEP list. He has also been banned from holding ANY office within UKIP.

Dr Edmond is set to be thrown out of UKIP when the proposed changes are approved.

Please remember that ALL decisions made at this meeting were unlawful because it was not properly constituted. I would urge all South West members to refuse to accept the decision of this ‘committee’. They should also demand the immediate reinstatement of Dr Edmond as both an MEP candidate and committee member.

------------
Thursday, 10 February 2011

Why Farage's UKIP is not fit for purpose

UKIP needs more members, more talent and more UK effort to even start on the road to getting our country back by repealing the 1972 European Communities Act. Since Farage and his Cabal have taken control of UKIP membership has fallen steadily, activists, the life blood of any political party who disagree with Farage have been kicked out, and sycophantic placemen put into all the important party positions. No serious political party carries on like this. You only see this behaviour in cults where a gullible and uncritical membership are conned by, and blindly supports, a corrupt leadership whose only interest is in lining their own pockets.

Look at those at the top of UKIP enjoying a luxurious cosseted lifestyle set up by the EU but paid for ultimately by UK taxpayers. They are tame, pampered, toothless EU poodles kept in Brussels who give Barroso and the other Eurocrats democratic credibility by enabling them to claim they tolerate anti-EU parties. Its tokenism plain and simple. Ask the brothers or the sisterhood.

The lack of talent in the current UKIP leadership is staggering. Look at the elderly, self satisfied Derek Clark, UKIP MEP for the East Midlands but seldom seen there. Under him UKIP in the East Midlands has gone from the strongest region in the country in the heyday of Robert Kilroy-Silk to one of closed and zombie branches with a few deeply unhappy remaining members. It’s a microcosm of what is happening to UKIP over the whole UK. Godfrey Bloom UKIP MEP for Yorkshire is an embarrassment with his crass public behaviour. Bannerman, Dartmouth and Farage are ex-Tories whose political ambitions were judged by the Tory party to be far in excess of their limited talents and deemed not to be worthy of a safe Tory parliamentary seat. Given the low standard of the average Tory MP that is a pretty damning verdict.

Honesty and integrity can make up for lack of ability but even in that UKIP is lacking. When was Andreasen last seen in the South East region she was elected to represent? Why does Trevor Colman sit in Brussels with Farage's nasty neo-Nazi, mid-European associates. How many relatives of UKIP members died at the hands of the Nazis in the Second World War? Do the ordinary UKIP members know their cult leader associates with neo-Nazi parties in Brussels? I think not. Nikki Sinclaire has shown how effective honesty, integrity and consistency can be in opposing the EU. Not surprising then she was kicked out of UKIP.

Why is Malcolm Pearson, Farage's puppet leader of UKIP, a man who at the last General Election campaigned for the Tories, still in the UKIP ruling group? Could this happen in any other party? I don't think so.

Then we have ex-chairman Nuttall MEP who counts success as defeating the BNP for 4th place in elections. UKIP is supposed to be about getting us out of the EU and the best way to handle the BNP is to ignore them! Comrade Nuttall would do better to address the needs of the jobless of Merseyside and try and recruit them for UKIP.

There is also UKIP's top management, Crowther and Duffy. No significant management track record and no organisational ability seems to sum them up. The current NEC is full of wannabe MEPs or more correctly wannabe on the gravy train who are therefore beholden to Farage for preferment.

There are many able and talented people who want us out of the EU but how many will want to join a cult party which measures its success by the leader’s appearances and applause on Question Time (QT). It’s only MPs in Westminster that can get us out of the EU. This needs organisation and hard work in local elections addressing the issues of jobs, schools and health that impinge on peoples lives and earns their trust to vote for UKIP when it matters. It needs a leader who attracts people in, not one who kicks people out. Until Farage and his clique go this will not change. UKIP numbers will continue to decline, the sycophants will squabble about getting onto the EU gravy train, the BBC will continue to massage Farage's vanity with QT invites etc., and UKIP will continue to slide into the garbage can of history.

I pray I will someday see our country free from the EU but clearly Farage's UKIP will play no part in our freedom struggle.

All the stuff I have ever written about Farage and his cabal over the last 3 years is in my blog click http://ukiptruth.blogspot.com/ to read.


------------

As a former UKIP member said:A party that encourages half truths and anonymous lies that seek to destroy a member’s good name forfeits its claim to loyalty from its members.”

------------