UKIP: Who is Michael Greaves?

There have been doubts expressed about Michael 'who ate all the pies' Greaves, EFD staff member and UKIP General Secretary. Supposedly a barrister, Greaves was appointed without any consultation with MEPs whatsoever, into a high-salary job with Farage's delegation in Brussels.

His legal abilities were called into question when he made a total balls-up of the party's defence against a case brought by Nikki Sinclaire, resulting in judgement being made against UKIP, Nigel Farage, and Godfrey Bloom.

Now more questions are being asked, this time about Greaves' qualifications. There is no record anywhere of a barrister in the UK by his name.

Greaves claims to have practiced in the International Court. That might explain the situation, or so we thought. A quick call to a contact in the Hague did not help. Our contact could find no record of Greaves having practised there.

Greaves photograph does not appear on the party website alongside other members of the NEC, all of the other members are pictured.

Yes indeed, questions should surely be asked.

UKIP: Annabelle Fuller in a pickle!

To be quite frank, very few people believed Annabelle Fuller, when in September 2008 she claimed to have been the victim of malicious telephone calls late at night from UKIP members. This, she claimed, was her reason for resigning from her job with UKIP.

She failed, of course, to mention that she was sacked for releasing a video of an interview with a potential candidate on the internet.

To be quite frank once more, very few people believed Annabelle Fuller when she concocted a strange story about her laptop being stolen by a Morroccan taxi driver, who then posted the video in question on the internet.

What disgusted many UKIP members was the way in which Nigel Farage supported his alleged dominatrix in the press over all these dubious tales.

Despite bowing to pressure and sacking Fuller, Farage then quietly put her back on the payroll, knowing that no MEP or NEC member would have the guts to stand up to him. She remains on his parliamentary payroll to this day.

Now it appears that Ms. Fuller may be in a pickle. Today, a certain tabloid will be making a decision, based on legal advice, about the possible publication of a story. Once again, Farage's appalling judgement, based on his own desires and interests, looks set to drag the UKIP name through the mud.

UKIP Hypocrite! Farage pleads for leniency to the EU's Legal Affairs Committee

I promise to be good. I really do!

Yesterday afternoon, Nigel Farage appeared before the European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee. He is trying to defend his parliamentary immunity, in order to overturn the disciplinary action taken against him by the President of the parliament following his abusive outburst against Herman van Rompuy.

It did not go well for him as the Committee decided that they wanted nothing to do with this shabby attempt. The matter has been referred upwards, where it is unlikely to be well received.

Farage claims - or at least he used to claim - that he does not recognise the legitimacy of the European Parliament. How times have changed. Like the playground runt, running to hide behind Nanny, he cuts a sorry figure as he pleads for leniency from the very institution he was so pleased to denigrate.

UKIP: Lega Nord & a bit of advice for Stuart Agnew

It was always destined to end in tears....

The racist and homophobic Lega Nord, which sits as a part of Farage's EFD group in the European Parliament, looks to be on its way out of government. The party is making unreasonable demands on Premier Berlusconi, calling for tax breaks, an end to Italian involvement in Libya, and the relocation of four ministries to the north of Italy. Berlusconi is growing impatient with his coalition partners, and especially with the sickly and socially awkward Umberto Bossi. Bossi is trying to play down the possibility of a split, but Belusconi is refusing to give in to Lega Nord's demands, and his offices are now actively briefing against his partners, suggesting that some movement is likely in the short term.

There are two potential and undesirable outcomes to the break-up of the coalition. Fistly, this could allow the leftists into power. Secondly, the Lega Nord will shift its power base back to the European Parliament, and will likely seek greater control over the EFD group.

The EU's regionalisation plans - as supported by UKIP's Micheal Heaver - are perfect for the federalist Lega Nord, which seeks a break-up of the Italian state, and independence for what they call Padania, which is the grubby industrialised part of northern Italy.

Stuart Agnew is known to read Junius, and so for his benefit, here is a link to an explanation of what federalism involves... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism

Regionalisation and federalism are both anathema to UKIP. (For Stuart Agnew's benefit, here is a link explaining the meaning of the word anathema (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/anathema )

And so, if we are to believe Farage's justification for sitting with convicted racists and extremists - UKIP gets more money that way - then by extension, UKIP is helping Lega Nord to get more money to further their own political aims.

Stuart Agnew knows what money is, of course. It's what he wants the EU to give to farmers like him under the Common Agricultural Policy, although it is interesting to note that embarrassing calls or more subsidies to farmers like him (but not for organic farmers because he isn't one of them) have been removed from his website.

UKIP: Timo Soini

In April 2009, all the leaders of Finland's political parties signed a declaration condemning racism. Only Soini refused to sign. Yet Farage still says that he's a close friend!

http://nemoo.wordpress.com/2009/04/16/timo-soinis-copout-against-racism/

Don't forget that UKIP claims to be opposed to racism:

"The UK Independence Party takes this opportunity to affirm that it is opposed to discrimination on all grounds as prescribed by law and otherwise. The Party acknowledges the principles of non-discrimination, non-racism and non-sectarianism in its Constitution, and holds those principles dear as a libertarian party".

Yet here we have UKIP - on the official website - promoting the leader of a party riddled with anti-Semitism and racism.

More hypocrisy!


When will UKIPPERS wake up to the truth about the sort of person they have in charge of their Party?

And let's not forget that Timo Soini's party is not, by any stretch of the imagination, the most obnoxious of Farage's European allies. Check out for yourself the composition of the EFD. No wonder Nikki Sinclaire, Mike Nattrass and Trevor Colman left!

UKIP: Michael Heaver

Michael Heaver: Another useful idiot

Every so often, the Farage Jugend movement is relaunched with a new chairman, which brings us to one Micheal Heaver, a London-based student.

Heaver maintains his own blog - something that the not yet quite fully educated should avoid doing, as this can come back to haunt them when they grow up. Heaver uses his blog to espouse his federalist sentiments, coming out in support of the EU's regionalisation policy. "Lets radically cut the number of British MPs in Westminster and have fully federal system..."

Heaver's call for the number of Westminster MPs to be cut echoes his Fuhrer's own wishes: In February 2008, Farage also called for a radical cut in the number of MPs, "because more laws were being made in Europe."

In tandem with this cut in the numbers of UK parliamentarians, Farage also supports the move towards a pan-European political party. The engagement in Euro elections of these PEPs will lead to the creation of 25 new 'super constituencies', to be fought over exclusively by the PEPs, and here we get to the real reason for Farage's enthusiasm. Under the party list system, anybody heading a PEP list would be virtually guaranteed a seat in the European Parliament. That is why Farage is so keen - he wants a job for life in Brussels. Farage sees the writing on the wall for UKIP, and he wants a safe berth.

Unsurprisingly, Heaver also supports the idea of UKIP joining a PEP, but as his blog illustrates, he doesn't really know why. Unfortunately for UKIP's budding young Baldur von Schirach, the fuhrer finds him irritating, so what UKIP does or does not do might turn out to be purely academic for him personally.

We should also mention that Heaver's blog recently published a statement from Tim Congdon in which the professor expressed his support for Farage following Marta Andreasen's call for the UKIP leader to step down. It was quickly removed after allegations were made that it been cobbled together from two separate emails (one of which dated from the time of Farage's re-election as leader and therefore had nothing to do with Andreasen's demand that Farage should go). Heaver was accused of having done this in order to deliberately mislead UKIPPERS..

UKIP: Derek Clark, Nikki Sinclaire & David Bannerman

In today's 'Boston Target' Derek Clark claims the European Union's Common Fisheries Policy encourages the discarding of fish and is robbing fishermen of responsibility for looking after their own waters.

http://www.thisislincolnshire.co.uk/MEP-backs-protest-Fish-Fight-Campaign/story-12771772-detail/story.html

The report goes on to say, 'And he has thrown his weight behind the Fish Fight Campaign led by television presenter Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall which aims to have the policy scrapped.'

Well Derek certainly has plenty of weight to throw around, but precious little interest in anything relating to Fishing!

Consider:

In the period Feb 24th 2010 - Jan 31th 2011 Derek Clark submitted 4 written questions - not one of them on problems pertaining to Fishing!

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sidesSearch/search.do?type=QP&language=EN&term=7&author=28493

Derek Clark did partake in one debate on EU fishing policy - on Feb 8th 2010, but was elsewhere for the final vote!

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&language=EN&reference=A7-0014/2010

Nikki Sinclaire in The Yorkshire Post


Nikki Sinclaire: Democracy demands we vote on freedom from the EU

Published on Wednesday 15 June 2011 01:00

I WAS six years old in 1975 when the UK had a referendum on the then Common Market. I don’t remember it myself, but I have since studied the arguments. The government at the time told us it was just a trading agreement, and there would be no loss of sovereignty. The electorate were deceived; we all know what has followed.

Despite numerous promises, no one under the age of 54 has ever had a say on Britain’s relationship with the EU. This is an issue that needs to be resolved, and this is why I’m proud to be involved with the Campaign for a Referendum on our continued membership of the EU.

The EU affects every aspect of our lives: health foods, organ pipe making, steam railway preservation trusts, motorcycling – this list is ever growing. They are now making 75 per cent of our laws. On December 1, 2009, the Lisbon treaty came into force and with it came more powers for the European Parliament. The UK, however, has lost a significant amount of sovereignty as a result of ratification – without the promised referendum – of this treaty.

David Cameron gave us a “cast iron promise” on a referendum which he then jettisoned without a second thought. The Lib Dems also promised a referendum on membership of the EU, but when they joined the coalition, they conveniently dropped the promise.

It is now up to the British people to make their voices heard. People’s petitions have been promised both by the new government and the EU.

A recent YouGov poll shows that 47 per cent of the British people would choose to leave the European Union in such a vote. We often hear the argument that our financial problems would worsen if we were to leave, however this is farcical.

Only 48 per cent of our exports of goods and services go to EU countries (which include our global exports via Rotterdam), which incidentally represents only 10 per cent of our total economy.

We would not be “isolated” if we left the EU, since more than three-quarters of Britain’s overseas assets are in countries outside the EU and roughly 60 per cent of our total external trade (goods, services, and investment income) goes to countries outside the EU.

The EU would not be allowed to raise tariff barriers against us under WTO rules. Leaving the EU would free us from bureaucratic red tape, saving our economy an estimated £50bn a year.

If successful nations like Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Norway, Switzerland and Singapore can flourish without abandoning their national sovereignty, then surely so can we. We did not vote for this loss of sovereignty, we did not give our permission for the EU to create 75 per cent of our laws, nor did we agree to the £48m a day that membership costs us.

I am often asked “if the British people did say they wanted to leave the EU in referendum, would this actually be possible?”

My answer to this is simply – “Yes!” It would give the government authority to repeal of the 1972 European Communities Act. We can leave the EU, because no UK government can bind its successor.

We are subject to EU rules only because UK legislation says that we are. Statutes are passed through Parliament to implement each EU treaty. These statutes require UK judges to have regard to EU law in making their judgments. Repeal this UK legislation and we are free. EU Law would no longer apply to us.

The debate with the EU would be about how best to manage our leaving, not whether we can leave. We don’t have to pay anything to leave; in fact we will stop paying into the EU budget, saving us more money every year.

It is essential to the future of our country that we must work together. This issue is far more important than party politics and personality differences. We have complained about the EU for long enough. We must now all act in unison and co-operation to regain control over our destiny.

This is a cross-party, nationwide initiative which aims to let all citizens of this great nation have their voice. It doesn’t matter whether you are pro or anti-European Union – surely we should be given a voice and a choice either way to decide on our future relationship with the European Union. After all, we are tol d that we live in a democracy.

Nikki Sinclaire is a Ukip MEP for the West Midlands who heads the Campaign for a Referendum.

See: LINK

David Bannerman: Still a liar


We note that David Bannerman persists in telling his new Tory chums that his great uncle was Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, the former liberal prime minister. He never gives up promoting that particular lie. He even told the BBC about this bogus claim at the time of his defection! LINK

Here are the facts:

Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman had no children. Bannerman is not his great, great nephew.

On Bannerman’s Bombay birth certificate his first names are David Campbell and his surname is Bannerman. He used to be known as David Bannerman. When he stood in Scotland (1997) it suddenly became David Campbell-Bannerman (with a hyphen). See: LINK

When he stood in 2001 for the Tories in Warrington and Leamington he reverted to David Bannerman

BBC NEWS VOTE 2001 RESULTS & CONSTITUENCIES Warwick & Leamington

The fable about being the great, great nephew of the dead prime minister wasn't used again until he joined UKIP.

Independence, Issue 63, Dec. 2005

A New Chairman

As some of you may have heard, UKIP has a new party chairman who will take office in January. David Campbell-Bannerman, a great nephew of former Liberal Prime Minister Henry Campbell-Bannerman. David is a senior PR consultant who is looking forward to taking up this new challenge. David contested North Cornwall for UKIP at the general election earlier this year. The January issue of Independence will feature more on David, but for now I am sure you will join me in wishing him all the best.

David Bannerman has said:

"I have explained on numerous occasions that C-B had no children, but that my link to him is through the Bannerman side"

and also

"Technically the link is actually great great great nephew".

If the first of these statements is true, the second must be untrue. The Liberal Prime Minister Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman was born Henry Campbell. His mother was a Janet Bannerman, whose brother left Sir Henry a fortune on condition that he adopted the Bannerman name. Therefore if David Bannerman's link to Sir Henry is through the Bannerman side, he cannot be Sir Henry's nephew or any other kind of descendant. The closeset he can be is a Bannerman first cousin several generations removed.

Even that is in doubt when you consider the possible reason for the uncle foisting his name on his sister Janet's son, Henry Campbell, the most likely being that he had no male heir of his own to carry on the Bannerman family name. That would make David Bannerman's relationship to Sir Henry (if one exists at all) even more distant, at closest a Bannerman second cousin several times removed.

Regarding Bannerman, the above suggests that his surname is really Bannerman and that Campbell is a Christian name which he now uses as if it were part of his surname. Whilst this does not rule out a distant relationship to Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, it doesn't prove one either.