David Cameron says thank you to Nigel Farage

Two days ago I was approached by a Tory MEP who asked me to pass on a message from David Cameron to Nigel Farage. Intrigued by what he had to say I readily agreed.

Here is the message:

“David wants to thank Nigel for almost single-handily wrecking UKIP since he became leader. In fact David is so pleased he may even recommend Nigel for a CBE next year. Can you persuade Nigel to stay on until at least June 4th. That way we can be assured of victory in the Euros”.

End of quote.

I know that Gawain Towler monitors the contents of this blog and will be rushing off to tell Nigel within minutes of reading this.

So job done!

A UKIP Chairman and PPC on EUKIP corruption.

Allison West ( pictured here with her husband) is the UKIP chairman and PPC for Suffolk Coastal.

Here is yet another damning account of how corrupt the Party has become under Farage and his cabal. No doubt Mrs West will now face expulsion from the Party for daring to speak her mind. I expect Paul Nuttall - UKIP's very own second-rate Mussolini - is now eagerly drawing up a list of complaints to be made against her.

Everything gained under Roger Knapman has been thrown away by his incompetent successor. Farage lacks the maturity, the intelligence and the integrity to be leader of UKIP. Unless he is removed before June UKIP WILL face electoral oblivion.

Taken from Greg Lance-Watkins blog: http://caterpillarsandbutterflies.blogspot.com/2009/02/287-suffolk-coastal-agm-was-25-nov-2009.html

http://caterpillarsandbutterflies.blogspot.com/2009/02/288-suffolk-coastals-unconstitutional.html

Alma Cottage
5 Spring Lane
Wickham Market
Woodbridge
Suffolk
IP13 0SW

09th February 2009

Dear member,

As you are aware, my husband and I held an AGM at the Bull Hotel on 25th November 2008, as Mr Whitmore had refused to hold one within the 14 month designated period. John and I sought the advice of a senior party member before to ensure that we were following the correct procedure.

At the meeting, which Mr Whitmore and Mrs Larter attended and subsequently disrupted and attempted to prevent from taking place, John was re-elected as Branch Secretary and also as Treasurer. I was elected as Chairman. It was also decided by the members attending that, in the event that our elected positions were not acknowledged by Head Office or the party hierarchy, members wished me to suspend the Branch until such time as the problems festering within the branch were resolved.

Sadly, these problems have not been rectified. The elections of John and me have been dismissed by Head Office and Mr Whitmore is calling an AGM himself. He also resorted to manipulating the facts surrounding Johns’ unlawful removal from the Branch in the letter he sent to members dated 17th December 2008.

In light of these developments it is with regret that I now feel that I have no option but to suspend the Branch with immediate effect. This was the will of the members who attended the AGM.

As Mr Whitmore was not re-elected as Branch Chairman he no longer has that role and therefore does not have the authority to call another AGM.

I should also inform you that:

1 When Mr Whitmore and Mrs Larter attended the meeting they could have put themselves forward for election of official positions. They both failed to do so and instead, as explained above, chose to disrupt the meeting and tried to stop it taking place. When they failed in their aim, they left the meeting. I should also add that the AGM was recorded and the said recording contains evidence of this and everything else that happened.

2 I can assure you that John and I would not have pressed forward with the AGM if we had received advice to the contrary. The senior party member we spoke to assured us that in his capacity as Secretary, John had the right and was duty bound to call an AGM as Mr Whitmore had refused to call one (again, as explained above).

3 3 non-members attended the AGM. One of them complained vociferously about Mr Whitmore’s conduct as he was at the back of the room and talking to member’s backs. The non-members also made it clear that they would not be joining the branch if Mr Whitmore remained in charge. Again, this is on the recording in our possession.

4 It has been claimed that John was removed from the Branch because he approached the press, tried to sell his ’story’ and gave them gory details about activities alleged to be taking place at Jeffrey Titfords’ office. This is a blatant untruth. The fact is that these claims did not originally come from John but from an ex office manager of Mr Titford – Ken Bennett – who left UKIP long before John was made aware of what is alleged to have happened.

5 There are a number of serious issues in UKIP that are causing grave concern for those of us who wish see the party run not for the personal ambitions of certain people but in the best interests of the members, without whose support and money, it must be said, there would be no UKIP at all. Those of us who wish to see UKIP run in an open, honest, just and democratic fashion are being targeted for our beliefs and attempts are being made to throw us out of the party.

6 I intend to vote against the proposals to change the constitution as, if carried, it will give the party Chairman dictatorial powers which he would have the right to use in order to remove members from the party as he saw fit.

7 I will not be attending the AGM Mr Whitmore is arranging. I do not wish to associate myself with people that, as I explained at the AGM in November, I cannot trust and have no confidence in. I expressed these feelings to the members in Mr Whitmore’s and Mrs Larter’s presence. I wish to remain the Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Suffolk Coastal, but I cannot work with people who expect me to endorse unlawful behaviour, backstabbing and bullying.

8 It is my belief that one of the motions that will be put to members at the AGM will be to have me removed as the PPC for Suffolk Coastal, to be replaced with a new candidate.

As the PPC for Suffolk Coastal, I urge members to consider extremely carefully whether you attend the AGM being arranged for 11th February. There may be those amongst you who are feeling considerable discomfort about these events and where your loyalties should lie, and I sympathise with that.

However, as members, you face a very solemn decision – support Mr Whitmore and those like him who support the undemocratic, corrupt actions of the leadership, or support those of us who believe in honesty, decency, justice and democracy in politics.

Dear member, the decision is yours. But I implore you to think very carefully about what you stand for and how you want this party to progress. It isn’t just our integrity that’s at stake here. The survival of our Branch, the party and ultimately our nation depends on the decisions we make from now on.

If you wish to discuss with me any of the above issues and the many others that I have not raised in this letter, please telephone me on 01728 746427 after 6:00pm.

With all good wishes,
Alison West
UKIP Chairman & Prospective Parliamentary Candidate,
Suffolk Coastal Constituency

Fascim in UKIP: Nigel Farage's plan to raid branch funds

As I have said in previous posts UKIP’s finances are in freefall. Marta Andreasen’s Christmas appeal only managed to raise £58,000 despite assurances from Nigel that it would raise at least £250,000. In the South East they have just £20,000 for the Euro elections. In other regions they have even less than that. Only the South West has enough money to fight a good campaign which probably explains why Nigel is so keen to replace Trevor Colman with Gawain ‘Don’t mention the blog’ Towler.

It has already been decided that in March branches will be told that they must hand over the majority of their funds for the Euro elections. If the committees refuse they can expect to face suspension under Farage’s new constitutional changes. The funds will then be seized.

Here is an extract from the minutes for the Eastern Region. The meeting in question took place at the Red Lion Hotel, Whittlesford, Cambridgeshire at 7.45 PM on 10th October. Those present included David Bannerman, George Curtis, Michael McGough, Andrew Smith, Peter Reeve and Stuart Agnew.

I note that Michael ‘Wolfman’ McGough denies having been present at this meeting. I can well understand his reluctance to admit to it. After all, he, along with fellow MEP candidates Bannerman, Smith and Agnew, approved a proposal to raid branch funds in order to finance their quest to become MEPs. Have they never heard of a conflict of interest?

Here is the passage that should alarm every member in the Eastern Region and indeed every member in the UK:

08/112 Fundraising

'The decision at 08/100 to write to all branches in about March 2009 to request substantially the whole of their funds was confirmed'.

I hope that members now realise that the leadership of UKIP is not the remotest bit interested in fighting Westminster or local elections. A serious political party - of which UKIP under Farage is certainly not - would never dream of seizing branch funds just weeks before important local elections. And what happens if Gordon Brown decides to call a Spring General Election? How does Nigel expect branches to finance that?

Of course, Farage is only interested in getting himself and his cronies elected or re-elected as MEPs. The interests of the country and our people count for nothing in Farage’s book. All that matters to him is another five years on the EU Gravy Train.

I am really getting worried about Paul Nuttall

Paul Nuttall - UKIP’s second-rate Mussolini and wannabe leader - has been taking a few knocks lately. His latest official portrait has left many UKIPPERS reeling in shock.

Unfortunately the late night drinking sessions with Farage, the Brussels nightlife, UKIP scandals, Bannerman’s twitching, David Challice’s underpants ‘problem’ and the endless mindless chatter from Derek Clark have clearly taken their toll.

At this rate there will be nothing left of him by June.

Wrong again Nigel! Junius on the Swindon meeting.

Last week in Strasburg Nigel had another Hitler 1945 moment.

This time his venom was directed at the organisers of UK Renewal’s first meeting in Swindon. Nigel was convinced that Dr Eric Edmond, Bruce Lawson and Geoffrey Kingscott were going to announce the launch of a breakaway party. I must say that it was amusing to see his sycophants cowering in fear as he ranted and raved at them for not doing enough to keep him informed about what was going on in the Party.

But once again Fuhrer Farage got it wrong .....

Despite terrible weather conditions 63 UKIP members travelled to Swindon to listen to an interesting and informative range of speakers.

There was one change to the guest list. John West replaced Dr Eric Edmond on the second panel chaired by Steve Roxborough.

Del Young gave an excellent speech. He spoke of Nigel Farage’s dictatorial attitude and his refusal to deal with members complaints. He revealed that on one occasion Farage had torn up a member’s letter of complaint and thrown it into the bin. He also expressed his disgust at the attempts by the leadership to smear all those who questioned the way UKIP was run.

John Petley spoke about his time as researcher in Brussels. He read from one email in which Nigel Farage described Zimbabwe as a democracy! Clearly Nigel’s definition of democracy is different from yours and mine!

Mr Petley then went on to explain how attempts were made to hack into his private emails and how he was finally sacked after he refused to show Graham Booth the contents of his private emails.

Len Baynes spoke of what it meant to be English and British. He spoke of our shared culture, language and history. He warned that the EU threatened to destroy everything we hold dear

Harold James defended Nigel Farage and said that he “would follow him to hell and back”. He claimed that Nigel was always prepared to listen to another point of view and urged all members to work with the leader.

Both John West and Peter Cole pointed out that Farage had not replied to ANY of their complaints and therefore could hardly be described as a man who listens.

Martin Haslam gave an account of how he had been removed from the NEC after he had been entrapped by Nigel Farage and the Independent newspaper. He also expressed his disgust at the posting of John West’s MEP interview on You Tube. He called on Nigel Farage to resign as leader.

Robin Page spoke about the destruction of British farming and how the EU was largely responsible for this. He went on to explain how he had been misled by Peter Reeve and David Challice over the MEP selection process. Despite promising to extend the deadline and help him get his nomination papers signed both Reeve and Challice had failed to do so.

Both panels took questions from the floor. Questions ranged from UKIP MEPs going native to the lack of democracy and accountability in UKIP.

The general opinion held at the end of the meeting was that Nigel Farage should resign as leader. It was also felt that all members should vote against the proposed constitutional changes and the plan to turn UKIP into a limited company.

As you can imagine there have numerous attempts by Farage’s sycophants to smear all those who attended the meeting. It was alleged that the meeting was anti-UKIP. Accusations of BNP involvement have been made by both Bob Feal-Martinez and Michael McGough. Even the number of members attending the meeting has been questioned by Farage worshippers in an attempt to belittle the organisers.

Although numbers were less than expected I note that the organisers of UK Renewal managed to attract more attendees that the UKIP Conference held in Eye at the end of last month. That particular meeting was billed as yet another ‘official’ launch of UKIP’s Eastern Region EU campaign. Despite 20 thousand leaflets being produced to promote the event and despite being heavily promoted on UKIP’s official website it managed to attract less than 50 people. Of these 7 were members of the BNP.

I also note that Bob Feal-Martinez, Nigel Farage, David Bannerman, Paul Nuttall, Michael McGough were too cowardly to attend the Swindon meeting and face their critics.

I applaud all those who attended the conference in Swindon. They cared enough about UKIP and our country to brave the foul weather and ignore the Farage instigated smears, bullying and lies. Their only wish is to see UKIP freed from the corrupting influence of Farage and his cabal. They have our interests at heart and for that they must be commended.

It is planned to hold further UK Renewal meetings in the near future.

I would like to thank all those who passed on information about this meeting. For more information please see: http://ukiptruth.blogspot.com/2009/02/swindon-meeting-7th-feb.html


http://caterpillarsandbutterflies.blogspot.com/2009/02/277-uk-regeneration-ltd-re-eukip.html

Drew Belobaba on why you should vote no to UKIP becoming a limited company.

Mr Belobaba is both a UKIP PPC and a qualified solicitor.

For more information see GLW’s blog: http://caterpillarsandbutterflies.blogspot.com/2009/02/272-eukip-changes-solicitors-view.html

Dear everyone,

I received my ballot papers today. Together with the ballot papers for the NEC elections and the constitutional changes I note that members are being balloted as to whether UKIP should be turned into a Company limited by guarantee.

As a solicitor (albeit not one who has practiced company law) I do have an elementary knowledge of Company Law and this proposal gives me great concern, unaccompanied as it is by any detailed information.

For those of you who are not familiar with these sorts of matters, a company limited by guarantee is a type of company in which members of the company, rather than holding shares, give a guarantee of the debts of the company. It is often used by clubs and other non-profit groups that wish to incorporate (most incorporated businesses are companies limited by shares).

I think it would have been very helpful if together with the ballot question, details of the proposed articles of association of the company had been provided, in particular the following information:

1. Who are to be the guarantors of the company? Is it to be the ordinary members of the party?

2. If the ordinary members of the party are to be the guarantors what is the amount of the guarantee to be given by each member?

3. Companies law allows for different classes of members. How many classes of members is it proposed the new company will have and what rights will each proposed class have.

4. As a company limited by guarantee, I presume that it would become easier for UKIP to borrow money as its members would be guaranteeing the debt. What rights will members of the company have to scrutinize and consent to liabilities that the company may incur?

In my opinion, at the very least members require answers to the above questions before they can make an informed decision about the wisdom of incorporating. Many, if not most of our members will not realize that they are potentially voting on something that may cause them to incur financial liabilities. Therefore to put this question before them at best suggests a serious lack of judgement on the part of those proposing it.

I will be voting no to this proposal. If the proposal passes then I feel that Ileana and I will have no choice but to relinquish our memberships in UKIP until any potential liabilitys attaching to membership are made clear to us.

Yours truly,
Drew Belobaba

End of letter.

Another one to add to Nigel's hit list!

Michael McGough: Still a liar, still a fool.

Michael 'Wolfman’ McGough ( pictured above) is still refusing to apologise for making a false statement in his MEP election address. In this address he described himself as the PPC for Harlow. It was quickly pointed out to him by the UKIP chairman for Harlow that this was untrue.

Piers Merchant - UKIP’s Returning Officer - also raised concerns about this. In his report on the MEP selection process he said: ‘I have received complaints about Michael McGough, who, it was claimed, described himself as a UKIP PPC when he was not, thus seriously misleading the voters’. Predictably the NEC ignored Mr Merchant and his report.

In any other party McGough would have been removed from the MEP list and brought before a disciplinary committee for bringing the party into disrepute. But as this is UKIP you can get away with almost anything as long as you are prepared to condone leadership corruption.

McGough now holds his fellow UKIP members in such contempt that he even jokes about his lies. Indeed, on the British Democracy Forum he has openly mocked fellow members who have demanded that he apologise for his gross misconduct.

I am surprised that Michael ‘Wolfman’ McGough did not put his name forward for the NEC. As the current NEC is full of liars, sycophants and fools McGough would feel quite at home!