About us

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

Wednesday, 31 August 2011

UKIP: One Man's Sabotage of a Noble Cause. Part 4


Part Four

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

Prepared by Derek Hunnikin
UKIP Membership No. 1428


A letter to the then Party Chairman, from the West Dorset Constituency Association, dated 1st November 2006, reads as follow:

Dear Dr. Whittaker,

It is with deep regret, and a lot of heart searching, that the under mentioned members of the UK Independence Party, West Dorset Constituency Association committee, tender their resignations.

In the 2004 EU elections, UKIP came second in West Dorset, elected two MEPs and beat the Lib/Dems into third place. We felt we were on a roll. Our moment had come when the United Kingdom was waking up. We then had to put up with the ignominy of watching our leaders scrapping with Robert Kilroy-Silk in public, resulting in many good workers leaving UKIP and following RKS into Veritas. That, we feel, was the beginning of the end.

Our leaders squandered the goodwill that members of the party had worked hard to build up during the Euro Election. They did nothing to take the party forward, and we were left rudderless at the one time in the party’s existence when it could have become a serious contender for Westminster.

The MEPs have secured for themselves lucrative jobs, but what has happened to the cash they were going to inject into the Party? Instead, UKIP is relying on money from the very Commission we are supposed to despise and want to destroy. We would remind these MEPs that the public voted for the Party, not for them personally.

The leadership campaign was a disgrace. Lies and scurrilous accusations were made. These were not counteracted by the leadership, and now it is over, there have been no apologies and no offers of the hand of friendship. The questions about the Ashford Call Centre have not been answered, and the new Treasurer has stated that he won’t be looking at the accounts prior to his takeover. Nigel Farage has now declared that UKIP will not stand against BOO (Better Off Out) candidates.

We had high hopes that when a new leader was elected things would change for the better, and the Party would move forward. It is now obvious that Nigel Farage, and other MEPs, do not want the UK Independence Party to be a Party at all. They merely want a pressure group for the Conservatives. This view is substantiated by the news from the recent Conference.

We can see no valid reason to work for a Party that is obviously not going to achieve anything we want, and does not offer the voters a true opposition to the three main parties.

Yours sincerely,

L. K. Hansford, Chairman.
M. Stringfellow, Secretary.
D. Dixon, Treasurer.
J. Bolton.
O. Blackburn.
L. A. Harris.
C. Sparkes.
T. Greenaway.



Downloaded from the internet on 6th February 2007.

I hereby resign as a member of the UK Independence Party.

At the MEP Candidate Selection Meetings I expressed my views of the manner in which the leadership was running our campaign and the results of such. My worst fears have been realised.

In the last year ordinary Party members have been betrayed by incompetence, naivety and waste.

The leadership whilst referring to rogues and knaves in every other Party appears to have behaved in a manner, matching that description, in regard to its own staff and office relocation.

I am disturbed by much else, not least our association with that Master of Sleaze, Max Clifford. Given the way the leadership behaves, it is perhaps an apt choice.

This is no longer a Party I wish to be associated with.


November 2008

Dr. David Abbott, a respected medical doctor and committed Christian, who puts honesty and openness before self interest, speaks out:

I am a member of UKIP’s NEC, elected and re-elected by the members of UKIP.

On both occasions I had stood for election on a platform of transparency, democracy and probity.

Other candidates have been elected on similar platforms in the past, but the emotional toll of the ridicule and abuse from the party leadership has resulted in most of the good people resigning.

Resignations since I have been on the NEC include Anthony Butcher, Linda Guest, Gill Chant, Richard Suchorzewski, and Bryan McCormack.

The result is that there were, until yesterday, only three members of the NEC who had any backbone. Eric Edmond, Del Young, and me. The rest are, for the most part, just nodding donkeys who never disagree with the leader and never vote other than how he wants.

Now Del is the only member with any courage who remains, and it will be lonely for him with no-one to second motions or give moral support.

The circumstances of the removal of Eric and me are as follows. There were complaints on the agenda against both of us. In my case Rachel Oxley had made the complaint that I had circulated a letter calling for the rules of the party to be adhered to.

The item was added to the agenda less than two days before the meeting, and was not drawn to my attention by the secretary or anyone else in the leadership cabal. It was another attempted ambush.

However, her complaint, made under section 7.18.1 of the UKIP constitution was not valid and I had prepared a statement, which I planned to read to the NEC

However, I never did present my case as events took a strange turn. In addition to efforts to get rid of Eric Edmond and me, the leader had also asked for the resignation of Martin Haslam, the deputy treasurer.

Martin is a gentle, honest and very generous man. He has restored our faith in the accounts, at least in the current ones. The leader’s beef was that Martin had taken a phone call from a reporter and had not reported it to Farage. By chance the phone call had come just as Martin had finished a game of tennis with Buster Mottram, who had overheard the conversation and could vouch for what had been said. Martin felt very aggrieved at his dismissal and had come to the NEC with the encouragement of several members, not just the three stalwarts, but also some of the nodding donkeys too. At first he was denied permission to speak but eventually he made a moving speech, reminding the leader how much he had contributed in time and money to the party, he had paid for Nigel’s driver, paid the salary of Marta Andreasen (£30,000 per annum), paid for a fund raising dinner at the House of Lords, and done the SE accounts as well as the national ones, etc.

Farage belittled his contributions and did not once say thank you.

Then came the appalling statement from Farage that he had KNOWN the day before that the reporter was going to phone. But INSTEAD of alerting his colleague he had waited to see if the call would be reported to him. It was a trap.

This sneaky, untrusting treatment of a kind, honest man so incensed me that I left the meeting. I could not sit at the same table as a man who demanded trust but could not trust others, who did not recognize as valuable anyone who didn’t totally agree with him on every single issue.

These new revelations were on top of all his more obvious defects including total amorality, bullying, adultery, and drunkenness, vengefulness and lying. I did not resign from the NEC, but when I got back from the meeting I found that the complaint against me had been upheld.

I enclose the statement I had intended to make to the NEC. (See below).

Bannerman’s complaint (an EU employee's complaint) about Eric had also been upheld. We have both apparently been fired from the NEC. I want to make it clear that our firing had nothing to do with Buster Mottram’s idea of a pact with the BNP, which neither of us endorsed or supported and which I spoke against.

We were each fired as a result of baseless complaints by other NEC members, one of whom was in the pay of the EU. Neither of us presented our defence. In my case I was not given adequate notice and the complaint was patently not valid in any case.

Keeping to the rules (prepared statement for the NEC) by David Abbott NEC - NOV 3rd 2008

All of us sitting here today agree that you can’t have an effective organisation without rules and procedures … that are fair and followed. Rachel accuses me of breaking the rules .. because I distributed a piece asking that our party rules and constitution be adhered to … including observing normal British conventions of fairness.

We may find it telling that she and the chairman are now attempting one of the NEC’s signature Ambushes … by only giving me one day’s notice of the complaint. Our constitution does not forbid NEC members from commenting on the leadership. My comments were not an attack on the party, but a plea to keep to our own rules. Let me remind you of the circumstances that led me to write the letter.

By refunding the fees paid by two of the candidates, the party has already admitted that rules were broken in the MEP selection process. The returning officer‘s report says that rules were changed in mid game … which was one of the observations I had made. He seems to recommend re-running the entire election process in London … because of all the rule breaches.

Our rules do not permit a foreigner (Marta Andreasen) living abroad to be a member of the party, … let alone become the treasurer, or an MEP candidate. The preferment of an Argentinean Dane who lives in Barcelona … and who has told this committee that she does not share UKIP’s core goals is against the spirit and the rules; and is causing much disturbance in the SE.

The lead candidate in the East works for the EU … and thus his terms of employment include that he shall conduct himself solely with the interest of the EU in mind … and shall not take instructions from any organisation or person outside the EU. He is thus not eligible to be on this committee … especially not as deputy leader and certainly he cannot be an MEP candidate.

The fact that he is repeatedly introduced as the relative of a famous man (which claim proves to be completely false), is the icing on the cake …. I would like to know who it was in our organization that checked his credentials and identity as required by a resolution of this committee.

Our press officer loses a computer … with confidential data on it … and somehow someone in Morocco puts up a video of another East Region candidate .. on U tube. And the party didn’t even apologise. In fact our leader seems to sympathise with this woman in a newspaper article rather than with the wronged candidate. The candidate is now suing ….. More trouble because we haven’t kept normal standards of decency.

The constitution says that the chairman is appointed by this committee …. but the membership was told of the appointment of our new chairman before the NEC had even met him, let alone discussed his appointment.

Our leader issues an edict … that MEPs’ wives must not be on the MEP’s payroll … then he is caught paying his own wife. And this committee says and does nothing.

Del (Young), the founder and energetic leader of Young Independence, was ambushed without notice. Eric is similarly pounced on without the notice required by common decency.

The man who was our treasurer at the time knowingly accepted illegal donations …. .landing our party in trouble with Elcom. Alan is kindly picking up the tab .. but this money could have been spent on the cause if we had just kept to the rules in the first place. Rules and conventions are broken time and time again. This lack of attention to rules and procedure is only one aspect of the shambles of a leadership that we now suffer …. but it is an aspect that this committee can and should deal with, if our party is to survive … let alone succeed in its noble goals.

And that is the reason I wrote the letter.


For your information, here is the letter that caused the NEC Cabal to launch its attack on Dr David Abbott.


"Several times we have been proud to point out that the British invented most of the world’s popular games and sports. This happened because we Brits understood the importance of rules. Rules have to be fair, agreed and understood ahead of time, and obeyed. If the rules are broken there are penalties. The rules are not to be ignored or changed in the middle of the game. The umpire or referee has to be unbiased. This is the British way, and it has worked for centuries.

Without rules that are understood and willingly obeyed there is chaos. And chaos is what is engulfing UKIP at the present time.

Where there are UKIP rules they are ignored if it suits the leadership. Often there are no rules and no rule book. The constitution goes missing. Minutes are not kept. Some rules are selectively applied so as only to affect the favoured few.

These problems are sapping the very life out of the party.

A recent manifestation was the MEP lists. I voted for the rules governing the conduct of the selections process because a man, who had been my hero until that time, was going to be the trusted umpire and would ensure that the rules were fairly applied. This has not proved to be the case. It seems that close contact with the party leadership can turn even a principled man into a shyster.

Until our party leadership adopts again the ethics of its members, which is to say British habits of keeping to the rules, fair play and honesty, it is hard to envision any future.

And I mean a future for our country as well as our party. All those leaflets we delivered, all the time and money we have contributed appear to have been dissipated in the fleshpots of Brussels, as our leaders have learnt the nasty and cheating ways that are the norm in parts of Europe.

Please insist that your elected NEC members vote with their consciences and do not succumb to the continuing pressure that legitimises cheating and rule bending ."

Part Five tommorrow.

Tuesday, 30 August 2011

UKIP: One Man's Sabotage of a Noble Cause. Part 3


Part Three

Part One and Part Two can be seen by clicking here & here

Prepared by Derek Hunnikin
UKIP Membership No. 1428


Christopher Booker and Dr. Richard North co-authored several books on the saga of how we were persuaded, by lying and incompetent politicians, into joining the ‘Common Market’ and the devastation membership has caused to our farming, fishing, industries, legal system, and much else.

The two most readable books are ‘The Castle of Lies’ and ‘The Great Deception’. To this day, many articles in The Sunday Telegraph, by Christopher Booker, owe some of the research needed for their production to Dr. North.

(Note: In my view, if all who have influence on our nation’s fortunes had read ‘The Castle of Lies’ within three years of its publication in 1995, then there is every chance we would have left the EU by 2000).

For four years Dr. North was employed as a Chief Researcher for UKIP in Brussels. I think it was in 2004 that Dr. North wrote:

Any claim that UKIP is a ‘right wing party’ is a nonsense. It is, in effect, a one-man party …. the Farage Party. Although he is lauded as the most prominent and effective of members, that is largely of Farage’s making.

Having sat at the desk opposite him and worked very closely with him for four years, I have come to the view that the man has a complete inability to delegate and is also terminally insecure. This latter defect means he cannot tolerate anyone around him or in the Party who he feels is or might be in a position to challenge him. He prefers to surround himself with incompetents and dead-beats and prevents anyone with talent developing. Anyone who emerges who might show an independent streak, he ruthlessly eliminates, to ensure they cannot be seen as competition. He holds the reins of power to himself – acting through surrogates whom he can control or marginalise – and spends the bulk of his time manoeuvring and scheming to keep himself in the dominant position, while presenting to the world his “boyish charm” that effectively conceals his utterly focused grip on that power.

Thus, while he was just what UKIP needed in the very early stages, he has failed to develop with the party and now is the central reason why UKIP itself has failed to develop. Any attempt to develop structures and capabilities that do not revolve around Farage he has failed to support and, if it looks like being effective, he moves heaven and earth to sabotage it. In so doing he has developed a singular expertise for diverting attention – and therefore blame – from himself, not least through exploiting his knowledge of the party to set people against each other, so that he can fade into the background while they fight each other. As long as he is in place, with his grip on the party, that will continue to be the case. The sooner the party wakes up to this, the better.


Alan Sked, former leader of UKIP, wrote in 2004:

I write this article more in sorrow than in anger. I was proud to found the UK Independence Party and I still avidly support the cause. However, since I quit the Party in 1997, I have been disturbed by developments inside it and disagree on principle with its obsession with gaining seats in next month’s elections in the European Parliament. The introduction of a list system of proportional representation has made it relatively easy for it to win seats (and huge salaries and expenses) in Strasbourg with votes that would just scrape past deposit-saving levels in Westminster elections. Meanwhile, the party has given up thinking about any policies and its active base is down to around 1,200 people, if internal voting figures are anything to go by.

What possible purpose has been served by sending UKIP MEPs to Strasbourg? The European Parliament has no power to grant or further UK independence. In addition, who has heard of the UKIP’s MEPs? Their only monument has been the laughter occasioned by the maiden speeches of Michael Holmes, who called for greater powers for the European Parliament – not exactly UKIP policy – and Graham Booth whose incomprehensible speech in Devonian even managed to insult his Cornish and Somerset constituents. (He later apologised).

Worst still, the extra-parliamentary behaviour of the party’s de facto leader, the MEP Nigel Farage, led UKIP’s research director, Dr Richard North, to resign, saying:
“I am not and was not prepared to be a bag-carrier. Nor would I fetch and carry for Farage, or write his letters, or be available to pour him into a taxi when he was so blind drunk that he could no longer stand, or cover for him when he failed to turn up for morning appointments because he had been out on the tiles all night long. I am almost old enough to be his father, but I am not in the business of being his nanny. I am a professional researcher and that, in my mind, was what I was employed to do.”



Richard came second to Nigel Farage in the 2006 UKIP leadership election. In October 2006 he circulated the following:-

Dear Colleague

It is with great sadness and after much consideration that I have today sent by e-Mail and Royal Mail to The Chairman of UKIP the following letter:

Dear Chairman

Please be good as to accept, and post on UKIP.org, this my letter of resignation from The UK Independence Party.

It was a privilege to be elected Chairman of UKIP Wales and work to represent the members in restructuring and introducing an organisational structure for growth. I would like to thank, for their invaluable assistance, John Bufton as Regional Organiser, and my hard working and supportive committee and members in Wales. I am pleased to have been able to help turn UKIP Wales around and put in place foundations for growth and success in the National Assembly Elections next May.

I was honoured to be elected by the membership to represent them at the NEC (National Executive Committee), where they believed I had specialist skills and experience to best represent their interests, to the benefit of UKIP and its primary cause.

When I stood for the leadership election I did so, on a ticket of Transparency, Integrity and Equality. These standards reflected my inner beliefs, as well as the moral, ethical and Christian principles upon which I have based my whole life. I knew there were sufficient problems with the Party, and also believed that the moral integrity of a number of people at the top left much to be desired.

It was my belief that should I be elected leader these problems could be resolved and the Party then could move forward together, on a firmer footing in probity and strength.

Nothing however prepared me for the scurrilous behaviour, defamatory comments, and downright dishonesty of some of Nigel Farage’s and David Bannerman’s staff, supporters and members of the Press Office staff, in which they clearly colluded.

I was accused of having associations with the BNP – even when these scoundrels knew that my grandfather was murdered by the Nazis in a concentration camp and my Great Grandfather was discovered hanged by them from a lamp post near his home by my 14 year old Father. Further I am angry that UKIP’s leadership were happy to collude in this base and obscene slur, particularly in the light of the fact that I have been ‘courting’ a young woman from St Lucia for the last 2 years, she herself has been victimised by racial abuse.

I was accused of being a homosexual, despite no evidence of this, and my having been happily married for 14 years, a marriage which sadly ended in an amicable divorce and now subsequently I am courting the above-mentioned lady.

I was accused of having ‘run up’ a company debt of £4millions in one of my businesses when these accusers knew that I had purchased the company with secured debts, that it had already accrued, amounting to £4millions of losses. My business is in the field of mergers and acquisitions, specialising in the purchase, development and sale of problematic companies. My critics in this area are either commercial illiterates or unarguably dishonest either of which reflects ill on the competence of the new leadership.

My local newspaper was contacted by an UKIP official and advised to look into these accusations – in order to attempt to taint my unblemished reputation.

Even friends within my own local Conservative Party have informed me that they were asked for ‘any dirt’ they had on me including my political, personal and business affairs.

This list shamefully goes on.

Despite all of this I was willing to forgive and forget. I called for Party unity behind the new leader Nigel Farage, regardless of how he had gained his new position. I hoped this would in some way result in a change of attitude.

Clearly it did NOT. Farage colluded with, and thus endorsed the scurrilous behaviour. He was not prepared for his staff to apologise for the BNP allegations as he felt that the issue ‘would go away’ – and he tried to justify the concern on the basis that a fellow NEC member David Abbott volunteered his support of my leadership candidacy. (David Abbott is the very man whom Farage and his secretary Douglas Denny introduced and actively supported to the NEC, and only turned against when he supported my candidacy).

Farage also claimed concern in that a Mr Andrew Edwards supported my leadership bid on an internet blog that he runs. I am to be tainted by this, even though I have never posted on his site, spoken to, nor communicated with the said person, who I am advised is NOT a member of UKIP.

Farage has also claimed that a long term associate of his, Greg Lance-Watkins is a supporter and associate of the BNP, of which I have seen no evidence – yet this seems to besmirch my reputation, as G.L-W. openly supported my candidacy, having stated, based on extensive personal dealings with Nigel Farage that “he was a good performer for UKIP but lacked either the probity or competence to lead UKIP.”

This logic that UKIP’s new leader has adopted if seriously applied, must call into question his own credentials, bearing in mind both his long-term association with G.L-W. and that the BNP actually refused to stand against Farage, and supported his candidacy at the Bromley by-election. Does this make Nigel a BNP supporter?

Rather then be magnanimous in victory and help the Party unite, Nigel and his clique overturned a perfectly legitimate democratic vote at the NEC which had elected Geoffrey Kingscott (a most honourable man) as Party Secretary, denying the Party of another person with integrity at the top, and placing his supporter the discredited Douglas Denny in the post.

A witch hunt has now commenced, seemingly with the aim to disingenuously massage MEP lists, with the disciplinary hearing of Peter Baker for daring to make public his committee’s majority voted opposition to Roger Knapman’s morally questionable exploitation and involvement in a Polish worker’s import business run by his son.

Similarly Dennis Brookes, a loyal and devoted supporter and Regional Organiser of UKIP, would seem to have been victimised for having the temerity not to object to his committee’s support of my candidacy, and this apparently has contributed to losing him his job. I have no doubt from Nigel’s discussion with me, subsequent to the election, that others too will suffer similar fates.

On policy issues, Nigel has made statements already, that makes it clear to me, we are to become a shadow alternative Tory Party. A pressure group created to persuade the Tories to dump Cameron and change its policy on the EU. I am sorry; I did not leave the real Tory party to join a poor imitation.

I believe UKIP was sincere in its endeavour to extricate Britain from the European Union, returning sovereignty to a British Parliament and playing a full independent part in that new Parliament.

On financial transparency issues, I believe a cloud still overhangs the Ashford call centre and various aspects of UKIP accounts. Also the financial dealings and involvement in fraud, (as exposed by the media), of Tom Wise, one of UKIP’s MEPs, have not adequately been resolved.

Likewise there has been a lack of transparency of others. I have contended that the funding mechanisms are too heavily reliant on the EU, as this makes us subservient to the very body from which we wish to disassociate and which we openly accuse of corruption particularly in the area of accounting!

I stood for leader knowing full well that it was a challenge I was unlikely to win. Farage had control of a number of advantages that if abused would guarantee him success. Knowing this, I was more than surprised that he allowed his cronies, supporters, and certain staff to openly and reprehensibly lie and rubbish a loyal UKIP member, with elected duties, who devoted the last 2 years of his life, full time, unpaid, to help UKIP progress.

Even now in ‘victory’ Farage appears determined not to change his ways, and because of this I cannot support this Party under his leadership any longer.

Reluctantly I am left with no honourable action open to me other than to leave, as I am not prepared to give my good name, reputation and integrity, in support of Farage and many in his clique. I therefore stand alongside the other Party devotees and former NEC members, Anthony Butcher, Gill Chant and others (not to mention the many other activists who have already resigned).

My heart and my grateful thanks go out to all of those who supported me and the values in which we believed, and those who have committed so much of their lives in their patriotic pursuit of regaining democracy, British Independence and Sovereignty.

It does not give me any satisfaction to realise that the old saying “Fish Rots from the Head Down” may have more than a cursory resemblance to UKIP.

Please be so good as to convey to the membership my very best wishes and thanks for allowing me to serve them! At the moment I feel honour bound to continue the struggle for liberation from the EU and better Governance outside of UKIP, but would be happy to reconsider my position should there be notable changes within UKIP in the future under very different leadership.

Yours sincerely
Richard Suchorzewski
UKIP Wales Chairman (resigned 5th October 2006)
NEC member (resigned 5th October 2006)


Marcus Stead posted a letter of resignation from UKIP on 24th November 2006. Below is a copy of his resignation letter in full which, at that time, was circulated to about 140 e-mail addresses.

To: Nigel Farage, Present UKIP leader, John Whittaker, UKIP Chairman, Michael Zuckerman, Party Secretary, Roger Knapman, former UKIP leader.

Dear Mr Farage,

I am writing to you to inform you of my resignation, with immediate effect, from the United Kingdom Independence Party, my position as an elected member of the UKIP Wales Committee and from my position as Vice-Chairman of the UKIP Cardiff and District Branch.

After many weeks of deliberating, I have come to the conclusion that UKIP has become a hindrance to Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union. UKIP professes to be the flagship of Euro Sceptic pressure group in Britain (to describe it as a true political party, would I believe, be a gross misrepresentation). This places a serious responsibility upon the shoulders of the party, one it does not take seriously enough. From the perspective of a pro-European, UKIP have become ideal opponents, a party led by useful idiots and therefore being a joke opposition.

The fight to regain control of Britain’s sovereignty needs and deserves a serious political party with a mature core message, a clear strategy for getting that message across and must be led by political heavyweights. UKIP has failed on all these grounds. It cannot decide whether it is a political party or a pressure group, and as a result has not succeeded in being either. Your initial response during your short time as leader has been to treat UKIP as a Conservative Party splinter group, while still lacking any serious policies. If I had wanted to belong to the Conservative Party I would have joined it.

These frustrations on my part are nothing new, and judging by the rapid decline in membership since 2004, this is a view shared by a large number of others.

Yet my principal reason for resigning relates specifically to you, your controlling cabal and your unacceptable behaviour over recent months, most specifically, the series of events that began at the Exeter hustings of July 30th. Simon Muir, David Noakes, Richard Suchorzewski’s solicitor and others have seen and verified the validity of a letter signed by a bona fide member of UKIP clearly stating Annabelle Fuller introduced herself as a member of the Press Office and clearly showed herself to be an ‘intimate’ of yours. She solicited the conversation with a stranger and stated unequivocally that Richard Suchorzewski had lied about his background and CV and that he was a BNP supporter.

Your employee Mark Croucher also made similar accusations on a public internet forum. Mr Croucher’s twisted logic that Mr Suchorzewski’s alleged links to Greg Lance-Watkins somehow made him a BNP plant is bovine in the extreme. Mr Suchorzewski and Mr Lance-Watkins are more febrilely connected as allies with the BNP than you are through your well publicised and close association with Mark Deavin.

I have given you and your clique several opportunities to substantiate these serious accusations, yet all I received from you was an ill-mannered and abusive response on one occasion and no reply at all on others.

During the past eighteen months I have worked closely with Mr Suchorzewski, and have consistently found him to be a man of integrity and great talent who was willing to work long hours, and without pay, to help UKIP develop into a serious political force.

It appears that as soon as he became a threat to your control of the party you resorted to using the politics of the gutter to destroy him. The accusations you made against Mr Suchorzewski were especially absurd when one considers members of his family were killed in the Holocaust and he is in a stable relationship with a woman of Afro-Caribbean origin. Even I was surprised by how low you were prepared to sink to destroy him.

I concede you are a quite brilliant media performer, but I have come to the conclusion that this is where your talents begin and end. Your track record in all other areas has been truly shambolic. You have been convicted of misusing party funds. You have overseen a catastrophe at the Ashford Call Centre where just 15% of all money raised ever reached the party. Can you enlighten me and the many other concerned members as to which black hole the generous donations of ordinary members fell into?

And can you enlighten those of us on modest incomes just how much of your generous salary you have donated to the party? Or do you rely solely on us members and the na├»ve Alan Bown to fund ego-trips, such as your campaign in the Bromley by-election in which every vote you gained cost £86 in campaign money?

Since you became leader many decent people at every level of the party have resigned, and, after a period of reflection, I have decided to do likewise.

My own personal experience of you has taught me a lot about your character. On an occasion during the 2005 conference you personally assured me a Youth Movement would be set up in the near future. A long conversation, followed by a period of email correspondence with your Personal Assistant of the time, persuaded me you were serious about this, whereas in reality it was a ploy to turn me against the successful “Youthkip” movement set up by younger members of the Lechlade Group.

Then, in December of last year, the last time we met in person, you once again assured me that the launch of the Youth movement was “imminent” and likely to occur in February of this year. Your PA then refused to answer emails written by myself or any other younger members of the party who wanted this to be set up.

How is it possible to come to any conclusion other than that the only purpose of this exercise was to turn me against a then-thriving “Youthkip” Movement, favouring the “official” Youth movement which, in truth, you never had any intention of launching?

How can I have confidence in a leader who behaves in such a way?

Your short period as leader so far has fared little better. On day one of your leadership you referred to myself and others who have dared question you as, “A small number of malcontents”, thereby implying we were in some way trouble makers rather than people merely revealing the truth about you and your conduct. You then went on to attack those of us who subscribe to the “Democracy Forum” during your conference speech. It seems you simply dislike those who dare to question you or your conduct in any way.

It also seems you have learnt nothing from past mistakes when it comes to celebrity endorsements. You stupidly invited the mock shock jock James Whale to represent UKIP as the party’s London Mayoral election candidate. Mr Whale is clearly using this as a ploy to draw attention to himself and increase ratings for his radio show – he has no intention of joining UKIP or representing the party at any level, yet you have allowed him to use the party as a self publicity tool. Does this remind you of anyone?

Finally, I turn to the state of the party in Wales. Following the resignation of Mr Suchorzewski as UKIP Wales Chairman, John Pratt, a decent and honourable man, was elected to take his place.

While I hold Mr Pratt in high regard, the notion that he would make a good Chairman is frankly laughable. How can an elderly man, who has numerous commitments outside politics, as well as having no access to the internet and who admits to seldom watching television, possibly be a suitable Chairman?

I fear he will be used and manipulated by you and your controlling cabal as so many others have been, and then chewed up and spat out if he dares to challenge you in any way. I am therefore calling on him to resign from the post, and indeed as a member of the party, with his dignity and reputation in tact and find better uses of his time and resources to contribute to the campaign to get Britain back.

What remains of UKIP is a shipwreck of a party, consisting of a Dad’s Army of largely well meaning, patriotic, and generous people who have no idea about the corrupt nature of those at the top, such as yourself, Mark Croucher, Annabelle Fuller, Tom Wise and Douglas Denny to name a few. Indeed, with their track records, I would consider all of them suitable candidates to become European Commissioners. The way you are lining your pockets, you would be in good company in the current Commission.

I no longer wish to remain in this increasingly autocratic party, led by a corrupt leader who must be obeyed at all times

With your dreadful professional and personal record, you can be sure you will be found out soon enough, and I doubt it will be very long before you cause UKIP and yourself embarrassment in the press, killing off UKIP once and for all in the process.

I also wish to call upon many, many decent ordinary members I have had the privilege of knowing and working with to resign their party membership, as they are doing the euro-sceptic cause far more harm than good remaining in a party led by you and your cabal. I therefore call on all members to abandon this sinking ship led by a rogue Captain, and to confront head-on the tragic conflict of loyalties with which I have myself wrestled for perhaps too long.

To campaign to restore Britain’s sovereignty requires a serious political party led by people of integrity. Instead, we have a joke party led by a two-faced philandering drunk, who enjoys the wealth and trappings his role brings, yet in reality has contributed very little towards the goal of getting Britain out of the European Union and restoring British sovereignty.

Yours Sincerely,
Marcus Stead.
Vice Chairman, Cardiff & District Branch.
Wales Committee member with responsibility for Youth Development

Part four tomorrow.

Monday, 29 August 2011

UKIP: One Man's Sabotage of a Noble Cause. Part 2


Part Two

Part One can be seen by clicking here

Prepared by Derek Hunnikin
UKIP Membership No. 1428


At the time he retired from the navy Bryan Smalley was a submarine commander. A man of the highest integrity, Bryan joined UKIP, and was voted by the membership onto the National Executive Committee (NEC), and held the post of Party Secretary for two years. Clearly, as a commander of many men, Bryan had an above average ability to judge a person’s character and trustworthiness.

In a letter to Roger Knapman, Bryan Smalley wrote:

It is now obvious to all members who know what is happening at the top of the organisation that the Party has been taken over by Nigel Farage and his acolytes.

I am sure you have heard me say before that the Party belongs to its members. We elect some members to specific offices to run the Party for us. Even then, for those elected to the NEC, we only permit members to act in accordance with policies laid down by the committee and not to act independently. It is the failure to run the Party on these lines which is causing its disintegration.

My concern is that those people who are running the Party are unchecked and are behaving extremely irresponsibly. I will make some comments about these individuals which you may think libellous. I assure you I can bring evidence, and witnesses if necessary, to prove that everything I write can be proven.

Nigel Farage is a member of the NEC and has no authority to make individual decisions about the Party.

He is dishonest and frequently makes untrue statements.

He acts independently without consulting the NEC and in doing so frequently gets the Party a bad press.

You will recall that when I drew your attention to Nigel Farage’s illegal copying of video tapes and his lies about his activities, you gave him your full support and permitted the distribution of a press release which was also untruthful. You failed to support me when I was the only person telling the truth. I expect to see Nigel brought under control, by means of a disciplinary hearing if necessary.


On 4th September 2000 Bryan circulated the following letter to members:


I am writing to a number of friends to explain why I have resigned as the Party Secretary and as a member of the NEC. My main purpose in resigning is because I cannot work within an organisation which doesn’t respect the law. The report (below) on the sale of ‘pirated’ videos explains what I mean. I am concerned that my view is not shared by Jeffrey Titford who says that I should accept Nigel for ‘what he wants to be for the Party.’ But there is more to this than meets the eye.

I had hoped that the new NEC would start again with a clean slate, but there are six or seven people on the NEC who are seeking to settle old scores or who have their own specific agendas. Unless these people unite they are not a threat in themselves. The most dangerous threat is Nigel Farage, because he has an organised band of followers who work as a group and which is seeking to control UKIP from outside the NEC. In pursuit of their aim they totally ignore the Party Secretary and his position, and they do their best to denigrate the effectiveness of the operations at the Head Office. This is one of the factors which has led to strain between the elected NEC and Nigel’s supporters.

I do not want to be concerned with fights between opposing groups within the Party. I have therefore decided to resign as Party Secretary and from the NEC. I shall continue to work within my constituency to promote the anti-EU cause.

UKIP will not survive if Nigel Farage is allowed to impose his dishonest and impetuous will on the Party. He is an excellent speaker. His activities should be confined to what he is good at.

Bryan Smalley

Commentary and timetable on the sale of ‘Pirate’ videos by Bryan Smalley - September 2000

24th May. NEC meeting at which Nigel Farage put forward a motion that any NEC member who fell foul of the law should have their legal expenses paid by the Party. Nigel couldn’t get majority support and lost his temper and stormed out of the meeting. I wondered why this was so important to Nigel.

At some time after this I learned that Nigel was going to copy and sell a video tape. I made enquiries and was told that the box which contained the video would be sold for £5 but the video inside it would be given away at no charge. I realised that this was an attempt to circumvent the law.

9th August. Mosaic issued its first warning to Nigel not to sell the videos. I was not aware of this at the time

21st August. I issued a memo saying I would have nothing to do with the sale of ‘pirated’ video tapes. N.B. I said nothing about the BBC holding the copyright.

24th August. Memo to me from Jeffrey (Titford) saying that Nigel had permission to sell the videos and that he (Jeffrey) had seen the letter giving approval.

24th August. Nigel repudiated the statements in my memo and says that the BBC do not hold the copyright. He admits that he has consulted the Leader (Jeffrey Titford) and the Chairman on the matter but not the Party Secretary who is the office holder responsible for legal matters. He fails to mention that Mosaic have told him that he has no right to sell the videos.

25th August. Mosaic wrote to Nigel again asking him to stop selling the videos and send all unsold videos to them. They report that the Trading Standards Department have become involved. I was not aware of this letter at the time.

Weekend of 26th/27th August. Nigel ‘phoned me and told me that a Trading Standards Officer had visited the Redhill Office (a UKIP office at that time) and bought a video under the pretence that he was a member of the Southampton Branch. The conversation then became difficult to interpret. I got the impression that Nigel was suggesting that I had spoken to the Trading Standards Department. He told me that he had consulted Richard North and Christopher Booker who assured him that he had nothing to worry about. He asked me whether I was trying to get him to resign from the Party.

30th August. Mosaic wrote to me, the Party Secretary, with copies of all previous correspondence. I then became aware that Nigel had been in conflict with Mosaic since 9th August. They also spoke to Nikki Sinclaire as I was not available that day.

1st September. Mosaic sent a Fax to Nikki Sinclaire giving further information. They said that they had never given Nigel permission to duplicate and sell copies of the film. This means that no letter giving approval exists. They also said that they were aware that Nigel’s aim was ‘to create a scene with the BBC’.

2nd September. Nigel ‘phoned me and said that the Trading Standards Officer had visited the Redhill Office on Friday 1st September and found a number of videos that had not been sent to Mosaic as instructed.

Signed by Bryan Smalley



Printed and published by Chris Cooke – UKIP West Midlands Regional Office.

Dear Friends


Now a new Party Leader has been elected. Jeffrey Titford won by 15 votes, the narrowest of margins, from Rodney Atkinson (who we felt would at least have given UKIP a fighting chance). We are convinced that this election result condemns UKIP to the far right. Mr Titford was supported by Nigel Farage. Nigel Farage may have a strident speaking style, which UKIP’s more aggressive members seem to admire, but his actions politically have been disastrous for UKIP. He has been instrumental in deposing UKIP’s past leaders and attacks potential leaders. As UKIP Party Chairman, his inaction and poor judgement allowed the extended leadership crisis, a lack of proper party procedures, bad decision making, a continuing lethargy within UKIP, and botched attempts at high level defections to UKIP.

While Mr Farage holds important positions within UKIP his well publicised links to the British National Party will keep sabotaging the efforts of other UKIP members.

Mr. Titford and other prominent UKIP members had been members of the far right New Britain Party. One of these, Mike Natrass, has now been offered the post of UKIP Party Chairman. It matters not whether they were naive or otherwise in past associations – only that they persist in defending these associations. In doing so they give ammunition to UKIP’s political opponents, damaging UKIP credibility. Their intentions are made clear by their abject failure to offer Rodney Atkinson any position at all, despite powerful support from half of UKIP members.


How difficult is it for us to tell you that we, the undersigned, are leaving the UK Independence Party. We tried. From the start we knew that UKIP had “teething troubles”. But we did not understand just how deeply entrenched and corrupting those troubles were. We “fought from within” but were undermined by undemocratic “in-fighting”. From our respective positions within UKIP we did constant battle to ensure fair play for all members, prevent extremism, give UKIP sensible policies and provide the honesty and integrity sadly lacking in much of politics today.

For our troubles many of us have been insulted, harassed, libelled, intimidated or otherwise abused by some rather unsavoury people. We wonder why such people are in UKIP and what they are really after.


After the 1999 EU elections, at the very time when UKIP should have capitalised on its successes, when members up and down the country were aching to get on with recruitment, UKIP had no national recruitment leaflets, no newsletter was put out to members, and nothing was done. Perhaps more could have been done if the Party Chairman, Treasurer, and Secretary, had been less concerned with trying to depose the Party Leader.

In his short term of office party leader, Michael Holmes, successfully led UKIP into a doubling of its party membership and into winning three seats in the 1999 European Elections. Yet he has been hounded out of office by what seemed to be a conspiracy of members, mostly from London or the South East. Their defiance of the wishes of ordinary members (as expressed overwhelmingly at the Birmingham Conference and in a postal poll), and their outrageous attacks and vindictive behaviour has shocked many of us.

Even now they continue to harass Michael Holmes by attempting to divert his phone and mail and freeze his bank accounts. Michael is currently in hospital having suffered a mild stroke. Doctors attribute much of the cause to stress in dealing with his UKIP assailants.

We send him our good wishes and hope that he makes a speedy recovery.


Also infuriating to UKIP members was the ludicrous state of UKIP’s Head Office. The membership database was never correct. During the NEC elections some fifty members were ‘lost’ from the West Midlands alone. Despite strenuous efforts many of these people did not receive their voting papers until it was too late. One of the main workers inside the London HQ caused commotion and scuffles at the Birmingham Conference where he had to be restrained from molesting a young, coloured catering manager in a complaint about service. For that alone he should have been expelled from the party. Instead he continues in the London HQ. He and other London HQ workers vehemently denigrate the previous party leader – and made sure UKIP HQ was used to spread their message!


A cause for concern is that UKIP, with Craig Mackinlay acting as Treasurer, never produced properly audited accounts. Members’ money has been spent, although on what it is not always easy to see. UKIP now has very little of its own money and is effectively “bought” by a handful of people. Far from fighting for UK Independence it can’t even maintain the independence of its own organisation.


Attempts to subvert internal UKIP elections (incidentally the UKIP returning officer, George Franklin-Ryan, has been receiving payments from Nigel Farage since last October – something members should have been told about), wanton disregard for the UKIP constitution or rules (as demonstrated in the case of the wrongful disqualification of a newly elected N.E.C. representative, Janet Girsman), continuing and clear evidence of UKIP links to extremist groups and individuals, are just some of the things that convince us that UKIP is no longer viable, nor is it proper to give it more of our time, effort or money.

Members should know of the dangers of their addresses falling into the hands of extremists. Rodney Atkinson’s recent circular refers members to Mr Farage’s links to an outsider. This person is a non-member who supports extremist groups. He obtained and used a stolen copy of UKIP’s membership database to try to ruin Rodney Atkinson’s leadership bid.


Perhaps even more disturbing than Nigel Farage’s influence over Jeffrey Titford is the svengali-like power Tony Bennett (the person Mr Titford employs as a political assistant) seems to hold over him. Tony Bennett is responsible for the most vicious, and by far the most relentless, attacks on party members. Particularly nasty were his attacks on the last Party Leader, which continue despite an NEC request for him to refrain. Even now Mr Titford seems to do nothing about him. We believe that Jeffrey Titford, as UKIP leader, will be only a marionette dancing to the tune of his political puppet-masters.


When UKIP was formed it was helped enormously by being sucked into a political vacuum where no other moderate political party offered the honest policy of withdrawal from the EU. Now we fear that UKIP, through its tarnished reputation, bad organisation and structure, has become a liability in the fight for withdrawal from the EU. It cannot succeed and yet UKIP will act as a barrier to a more reasonable political force emerging. This is appalling for its members (most of whom are genuinely moderate and reasonable people) and for our country.


Nothing is gained by continuing to work in such a disabled party. UKIP has given us experience and good friends. We are grateful for that. UKIP members are undoubtedly the best of any political party. Their energy, imagination and commitment has done much to turn the tide of public opinion in Britain even if their election efforts continue to be sabotaged. They deserved better.

Other party members will also soon decide if UKIP’s disease is no longer worth the fight. But staying with UKIP tars us with an extremist brush. We must move on – many of us to work in other organisations with similar aims.


It may be – as some suggest – that UKIP was never meant to succeed; it may have been set up as some sort of “sponge” organisation – to soak up opposition to the EU in Britain without allowing it to become an effective force. There is ample evidence to suggest agents provocateurs have been active in UKIP stirring up trouble as the opportunity arises. Without doubt extremists have infiltrated. UKIP structures are incapable of preventing such things (i.e. there has never been a Party Rule book!).


As the door to UKIP closes windows of opportunity will surely come our way. Whether we work within other already established groups or set up a new one (as 1997 UKIP National Agent, Cam Poulter, has done with Reform) we are determined that where UKIP has failed us others must succeed. We have had enough and leave with but few regrets – and much hope for the future.


Rodney Atkinson UKIP NEC Member. 2nd in UKIP leadership election – 2000. Lead UKIP candidate & UKIP Election Campaign Committee – 1999.
Peter Davies Hemsworth (1997) & South Yorkshire (1998) - By Elections candidate.
Carolyn & Michael Holmes UKIP Party Leader 1998 – 2000. UKIP MEP (South West).
Christina Speight Editor: Facts, Figures and Phantasies. Former Chairman Ealing. Cam Poulter Who was Acting Party Chairman in 1996/97
Ashley Banks General Election candidate Battersea 1997. EU Election - Eastern Region 1999.
Ron Dickinson NEC ’95-’97. Former Salisbury Office Administrator. Political Assistant to M. Holmes (MEP).
Bruce King Former Organiser UKIP Devon.
Simon Stoker UKIP Independence News Editor, Website, Derbyshire.
Don Briggs Chairman: Tatton (UKIP NW).
Barrie Draper Founder Organiser for UKIP National & Devon.
Robin Lamming Hull & East Yorkshire Committee.
Mike Carter Former Regional Organiser Cornwall. Chairman Falmouth Cambourne
Janet Girsman UKIP NEC member. Former UKIP National Media Adviser. Eastern. Jose O’Ware General & EU election candidate (London).
Chris Cooke UKIP NEC member. National Conference Organiser. Founder – Truth about Europe Campaign.
Harold Green Chairman: Epsom & Ewell.
Lynn Riley Secretary – British Housewives League.

And more than 200 other UKIP members who want to be associated with this statement.


A founder member, and Party Secretary for three years, wrote:

Nigel Farage is a reasonably competent and hard working salesman, but he is also the alpha and omega of UKIP’s problems because of his widespread manipulation, poor judgement, and poor choice of associates. His manipulative political style suffocates development of Party structures and policy development and drives away many activists. His judgement of personalities and staff is notoriously poor and appears to be based solely on their sycophancy. He is the exemplar for, and the inspiration for, the MEP problem, their self-centredness and lack of subordination to the Party members.

Apparently the membership of UKIP is estimated to be less than 12,000, including those signed up to long term membership and unable to get out. The party lacks cash although the MEPs are well remunerated and many don’t contribute financially to the Party. Press reports of widespread alcoholic consumption, and Farage’s sexual misadventures, steadily drove away supporters who back the Party with their sacrifices of time and money. Many will not abide this abuse of Party support.

A disturbing new feature is the revelation that Mark Croucher, the UKIP Press Officer, shows details about UKIP’s membership to Communist and Socialist Workers via Searchlight and ‘Unite Against Fascism’. Croucher reports to Farage.

Note from DH: From time to time, Anthony Scholefield writes excellent articles published in eurofacts.

Part Three tommorrow.

Sunday, 28 August 2011

UKIP: One Man's Sabotage of a Noble Cause. Part 1


Prepared by Derek Hunnikin
UKIP Membership No. 1428


Having been a member of The UK Independence Party since August 1995 I have witnessed its popularity fluctuate wildly. In the Chichester parliamentary constituency, for example, in April 1998 we had 64 members and, under Roger Knapman’s leadership, reached a peak of 274 in June 2004. Today, July 2011, we have but 124 members. I suspect the Party as a whole has suffered similar ups and downs, but this beggars the question - WHY?

The purpose of this document is to give the reader a clue as to why UKIP is stuck in a rut of mediocrity and, in the eyes of many, is untrustworthy.

Apart from some of my comments in items 19 and 20, the information contained in this document is already in the public domain. All I have done here is to bring some of the disasters inflicted upon UKIP into one document.

For reasons which I trust will become apparent, I was shocked and disappointed when Nigel Farage was re-elected as leader of our Party last year. Clearly, most members are unaware of Farage’s track record. To have him serve on the National Executive Committee (NEC) or as leader is, in my view, unacceptable. His contribution to UKIP should be limited to the speeches he makes in the EU parliament.

This document may give the wrong impression that Farage is solely to blame for UKIP’s less than satisfactory progress – this is not the case. Can anyone doubt that had Conservative party members known just how ignorant David Cameron was, on matters EU, they would have voted him leader? They appear to have selected Cameron purely on the basis of his ‘charisma’. The same goes for UKIP members - many failing to do any research before voting for the leader or NEC members.

I had viewed David Campbell-Bannerman (D.C-B) as a staunch supporter of Farage, and his resignation from the party came as a surprise. However, upon reading his reasons for leaving UKIP, I realised that he was following a long line of people who had got to know Farage well, and had become totally disillusioned with his style of leadership and lack of firm commitment to our cause.

It is ‘par for the course’ that anyone who puts themselves forward as a possible leader, as David Campbell-Bannerman did last year, Farage automatically then regards as an enemy.

What was not revealed, in David’s resignation letter is that, over a period of many months and under his guidance, teams of helpers were organised to produce a comprehensive UKIP manifesto. If one could criticise the work it is that the final document was too detailed and needed downsizing. On its completion, Farage lost no opportunity to belittle and insult David’s contribution to the document. This was probably the tipping-point that prompted David to resign from UKIP.

It was Farage’s decision to remove all 18 policy papers, after years of work by highly dedicated policy teams, and to seriously consider removing even the 2010 manifesto, which confirmed to David that UKIP was not willing to become a serious, credible political party.

Some people have suggested that D. C-B has left UKIP because our MEPs have been asked to contribute £10,000 p.a. to Party funds. D.C-B gave £1,500 in the two months before resigning.

I circulated a copy of David Campbell- Bannerman’s resignation letter to Chichester branch members.

What finally galvanised me into preparing this document was the response I received from a young man, who judges Farage’s suitability as leader on what he sees of him on a computer or television screen. YouTube, I believe, is the most popular source of information for the young. Here follows a copy of the e-mail in question.

Hi and good evening Derek,

After reading D.C-B’s statement (carefully) I am incensed that you feel this is a worthy missive to further push into the UKIP member consciousness - I quote from the honourable David Campbell-Bannerman’s resignation message which is now patently in the public domain, allowing aspirants and adherents of the allegorical NOW (New World Order) to now sleep somewhat easier:

1: “I have lost all faith in UKIP’s ability to win the argument on Europe” - fine we don’t need you with that attitude

2: “A Conservative Party that has demonstrated to me that it is genuinely and deeply Eurosceptic at all levels” – Hey everyone forget paying 50+ million£ a day – how about a referendum?

3: “Is UKIP a proper political party or it is really a pressure group ? “ – Clear Tory HQ media brief.

4: ”Nigel is a plant who is really out to destroy UKIP’s chances from within” – Sit down! Time for your medication.

5: ”I have sadly given up on UKIP ever becoming the serious, credible, fully-fledged political party that it could have become” – Party members of UKIP shape the future direction – you have NO voice or ‘say’ now David as you have left, please close the door after you.

If you have any metal Derek I insist you prove it and disseminate my response to all on our list. I would have a lot more respect for any ‘leadership/UKIP rebels’ if they are prepared to oppose Nigel and offer themselves as an alternative UKIP leadership vision with a constructive and progressive plan – Marta, David and any others (Derek.H?) who wish to divide/disrupt/retard/damage – PUT UP OR SHUT UP!

+Political gains are clearly about internal discipline and consistent external spin, negations of that universal constant will rapidly destroy years of hard work.

Regards Dan

If Dan is suggesting I should put myself forward, that is PUT UP, as a prospective leader of UKIP then, as one who is just three months short of his 80th birthday, this is just one of the many reasons I think it would not be a sensible thing to do.

The production of this document is the only way open to me to ‘PUT UP’. Hopefully, for those who read it, it will act as a wake-up call. The fact is that UKIP goes forward as a result of the work of grassroots foot soldiers and an increasing awareness of the public that membership of the EU is bad for them and, indeed, all the peoples of Europe. The limited way in which Farage takes the party forward is more than lost by his poor judgement, aggressive style, and inability to utilise those of greater talents than himself.

No doubt many having read this document could add their own thoughts and record instances worthy of inclusion.

Derek Hunnikin
August 2011


1. The establishment of Nigel Farage as the de facto leader of The UK Independence Party.

2. The events which led to Bryan Smalley, a retired submarine commander and UKIP National Executive Committee member, branding Farage a thief and a liar.

3. A comprehensive critique of Nigel Farage which led to the resignation of well over 200 UKIP members.

4. Anthony Scholefield, who was a founder member of UKIP, writes about Farage’s good and not so good characteristics.

5. Dr. Richard North worked in Brussels for UKIP as a Chief Researcher. Working opposite Farage for a couple of years, Dr. North got to know him well and gives his verdict on Farage as leader of the party This section includes a comment by former leader and founder of the party, Dr. Alan Sked.

6. Richard Suchorzewski would, without doubt, have made a superb leader of UKIP. Farage knew this and is alleged to have launched the most vile character assassination against Richard. This section is a copy of Richard’s letter of resignation from UKIP.

7. Marcus Stead makes very clear, in his letter of resignation from UKIP, how disgusted he is with Farage’s character assassination of Richard Suchorzewski, his leadership shortcomings, and lack of enthusiasm for a UKIP Youth Movement to be set up.

8. UKIP West Dorset Constituency Association Committee resign en-block from UKIP due to the lack of direction from the leadership, the MEP’s doubtful worth, and the disgraceful way the leadership election was conducted.

9. This section quotes a few lines from the resignation letter of Viscount Exmouth.

10. Farage and his cabal launch an attack on Dr. David Abbott. David Abbott was twice elected to the NEC. This section includes the letter written by Dr. Abbott, in which he claimed that a letter he wrote, claiming that Party Rules were frequently ignored, prompted an attack on him to be launched.

11. The Ashford Call Centre was responsible for a massive number of resignations from UKIP. Two members of the Chichester branch had an audience with members of the NEC in London, with the aim of eliminating further damage to the Party. In this they failed. Read the story here.

12. Robin Page was the nationally renowned presenter on TV of ‘One Man and His Dog’. He is a regular contributor to The Sunday Telegraph, and possessor of a brilliant sense of humour. Indeed, at a London UKIP conference he once rendered us all weak with laughter. This section, by Robin, is his version of events which led to him not being included in the prospective MEP list for the EU elections

13. This is an account of the ambush of Delroy Young written by Dr. David Abbott. At the time of the ambush Delroy was working hard to establish a UKIP Youth section.

14. This section, written by Rodney Atkinson, highlights the inability of Farage to recognise when he is leading UKIP further into the EU web of ‘ever closer union’.

15. John Petley writes about his experiences working under Farage as a Research Assistant.

16. Dr. Eric Edmond, who was heavily involved for a number of years in policy decisions by the Bank of England, gives his verdict on why Farage ‘is not fit for purpose’.

17. The UK First Party was set up by a number of ex-UKIP NEC members and party officials in response to dissatisfaction with the party leadership.

18. Probably, because it is the brainchild of Rodney Atkinson, Farage rejects a sound policy for one of no substance.

19. Other matters of interest include Farage’s last minute change of policy for Wales.

20. Conclusion – this poses a question, not an answer.


The first leader of UKIP, when it was founded towards the end of 1993, was Dr. Alan Sked who was, and still is (as far as I know), a senior lecturer at the London School of Economics. In 1994 Farage proposed that the party endeavour to campaign for UKIP to have MEP representation in the European Parliament. Dr. Sked was adamantly opposed to this proposal, as he thought it would indicate that the United Kingdom had agreed to be subservient to the European Union. Farage’s argument was that UKIP MEPs would generate income for the party and doors, which would otherwise remain closed to our party, would be opened. Farage won the day and Dr. Sked, together with several others, including Colin Bullen (who went on to be a leading light in The Campaign for an Independent Britain), resigned from UKIP.

So, right from the start, Farage has been hugely influential in the policies adopted by UKIP. Indeed, he has been either leader or de facto leader of the party ever since.

All political movements need a figurehead and Farage fulfils that role for UKIP. His energy and passion attract many, particularly the young, and his utilisation of the power of on-line social networking, and especially the online video sharing programme, YouTube, which show his passionate exchanges in the European Parliament to the generally younger viewers.

Without doubt, the fortunes of UKIP are closely linked with the style of leadership and management abilities of Farage, so let us have a look at the history of the party’s ups and downs over the past 17 years.

Dr. Alan Sked resigned as leader of the party in July 1997 and named the then Party Chairman and Treasurer, Craig Mackinlay, as leader. Mackinlay decided that the only way to keep the party going was to rework its constitution and hold a leadership election. Mackinlay, Gerald Roberts, and Michael Holmes stood, with the backing of Farage. Michael Holmes easily won and appointed Mackinlay as his deputy.

Craig Mackinlay resigned from UKIP in 2005 and joined the Conservative Party. I do not have any information on his reasons for leaving UKIP.

Michael Holmes, having won the leadership election in 1997 was, in the same year, elected as an MEP representing the South West. In the same election Farage was elected as an MEP in the South East. As a result of a power struggle, precipitated by an unfortunate remark by Michael Holmes in the European Parliament, and his dismissal of Craig Mackinlay and Tony Scholefield from the NEC, which generated a vote of no confidence in Holmes, he stepped down as leader in 2000.

However, it should be noted that, under Michael Holmes leadership, the membership of UKIP doubled.

Jeffrey Titford was elected as the new leader of UKIP, beating Rodney Atkinson (brother of the comedian Rowan Atkinson) by 15 votes and, again, Farage had backed the winner.

Many believed that Titford should have appointed Rodney Atkinson as deputy leader or, at least, to a position of responsibility within the party. However, because Rodney Atkinson had exposed Conrad Black (who at that time owned the Telegraph group of newspapers) as a member of the Bilderberg Group, Conrad Black put UKIP under pressure not to appoint Rodney Atkinson to a position of authority within UKIP.


Part two tomorrow.

Thursday, 25 August 2011

UKIP: The Ashford Call Centre

A revisit to UKIP's infamous Ashford Call Centre! It is interesting to note that Farage has never come clean about what happened to all the money raised during the time the centre was operating. Indeed, he has resisted EVERY attempt to conduct an independent investigation into this matter. We wonder why?


At the suggestion of John Moran, and with the enthusiastic support of Nigel Farage, the Ashford Call Centre was set up in 2004, to both raise money for the Party and recruit new members.

In August 2005, as the Chichester Branch Membership Secretary, I became so alarmed at the number of members who were refusing to rejoin UKIP on their annual renewal date, and many resigning before the due date, I sent a letter to the Party Leader, Roger Knapman, which included the following:

As Membership Secretary for Chichester for over eight years, I have never witnessed such a large number of members failing to renew their membership. Since May, this year, Chichester has lost 20% of its members! Why? In short I believe largely due to the activities of the Ashford Call Centre.

A typical example is the lady I spoke to recently who told me she would not rejoin because she is fed-up with being constantly telephoned by UKIP asking for money – five times in the past twelve months! Bernard Smith, our Branch Chairmen, tells me he has had dozens of calls from members complaining about unsolicited telephone calls from UKIP asking for money. He spoke to Nigel Farage and John Moran about this matter last June and his concern was brushed aside. I ask myself, what is the point of supporting a political party that so blatantly alienates its members?

As a result of the above letter, Bernard Smith and I met with some members of the NEC in London on 17th October 2005. We were assured that steps would be taken to ensure members would not be harassed by the Ashford Call Centre in future.

In January 2006, I had reason to write to John Moran again on the subject of the damage the Ashford Call Centre was doing to UKIP. There had been no discernible improvement in the operation of the call centre. Factors which came to light include the following:

• Farage said that the call centre, in UKIP terms, is an absolute lifeline. It took us nine years to get 9,500 members, and we doubled the size of the party because of the call centre.

• In January 2006, I wrote again to inform Head Office that we were still getting complaints about the call centre - one lady having gone to the expense of having her telephone number changed. Another member reported she had had three calls in as many weeks. In response to the first she agreed to make a donation, the second call was to say Ashford had not received her cheque, and the third call was downright rude.

• At a Chichester Branch Christmas Lunch not one person present had a good word to say about the call centre.

• Although detailed accounts for the Ashford Call Centre have never been produced, it is generally accepted that only somewhere between 11% and 15% of the money raised by the call centre went to Party funds, the rest was lost in expenses. This means that, of the £400,000 Farage said was raised, only £60,000 was available for promoting the party.

• At the time it was widely reported that at an NEC meeting Farage voted against providing audited accounts of Ashford’s affairs.

• The then Party Treasurer resigned rather than answer questions on ‘Ashford’ and his replacement refused to carry out a retrospective audit.

• It was reported in The Sunday Telegraph, dated 12th February 2007, that outrage over the Ashford Call Centre has been blamed for the resignation of six senior UKIP officials over the previous 18 months. In the same article, Farage is reported to have confessed that a London based UKIP call centre had lost between £5,000 and £6,000 every month and this was the reason he was keen for a ‘professionally run call centre’ to be set up under John Moran in Ashford.

• The call centre operatives are not members of UKIP, and could even be unsympathetic towards it and they are, therefore, motivated solely by financial incentives through soliciting money from members. Indeed, one operator is reported to have said,
"I don’t give a damn about members, I’m here for the bonus!”

To put this matter into context a paragraph, taken from an e-mail to me from a Horsham branch member, is worth recording here:

I was called about six weeks ago one evening just as I had settled down to my meal after a tiring day by someone “from Ashford” calling himself David. Apart from my usual irritation at the casual modern culture of first-name-terms-only from strangers, my main concern with this begging practice is that it tends to annoy and alienate members by its crude interruption of one’s domestic peace and quiet. I don’t mind so much a local person calling me, but I hate being pestered by any ‘national call centre’, especially if they simply want money! This particular pitch has long ago been queered by business big and small. Furthermore, to then expect me to give out personal bank card details, as he did, is exceedingly poor, not only from a courtesy viewpoint but also from a security one. I had no proof, of course, of who he said he was and there are now literally dozens of such telephone (‘cardholder not present’) scams on the go these days, according to our neighbourhood watch advisers. Whilst I appreciate its need for vital funds to fight campaigns against vastly better-funded opponents, UKIP does need to be very careful in not aping the abrasive contemporary habits of commerce in its dealings with its allies! In the end I sent back a few quid on a postal form once I’d checked that the approach was genuine.

Needless to say the Ashford Call Centre was duly closed. Incredibly, a few months after the Ashford Call Centre had been closed down, Nigel Farage called for it to be reopened! Not surprisingly, the NEC rejected this request.

Wednesday, 24 August 2011

UKIP Blogs: A Favourite Waste of Time

Godfrey Bloom - Still pissing in hotel corridors?

It's interesting to note the lack of activity on the UKIP approved blogs. Godfrey Bloom's blog - which reads like a collection of op-eds authored by Exxon Mobil's PR department - has not been updated since December 2010. That is a lot better than the 'Brussels Poacher', of course, which was last added to in June of last year.

Micheal'I wannabe an MEP and join Nigel's Gravy Train' Heaver

Micheal Heaver's blog is still listed but has closed down. The controversial 'UKIP friends of Israel' blog fares a little better, albeit without any content relevant to the party's stated aim - withdrawal from the EU. Stephen Woolfe has also been a bit quiet since May of this year. Have they all simply lost interest?

John Bufton and Marta the Martyr remain active, although Bufton's blog lacks direction, probably reflecting the fact that he is on the periphery of the party at the moment.

And what of the odious Paul Nuttall, UKIP's living tribute to Benito Mussolini? His blog hasn't been updated since 5th May 2011. However, we note that the 5th of May is the anniversary of the death of Napoleon I. Perhaps Nuttall is still in mourning for the first Euro-Federalist!

Of course, these blogs, and indeed their authors, are largely irrelevant to the great leader, Mr 2% Farage. The dominant feature on UKIP.org is a banner encouraging us to visit UKIP@Large with Nigel Farage. This will "feature UKIP's leader giving his views on a number of issues,". As Farage makes policy on the hoof, this is likely to be of limited interest to anybody outside the Farage fan club. Perhaps we can expect the party to be renamed "Farage's UKIP" shortly, with the party logo being replaced on rosettes by a picture of the great man grinning away.

Tuesday, 23 August 2011

UKIP: Another UKIPPER resigns in disgust!

And so UKIP loses another member! And yet another damning resignation letter exposes Farage's inept and corrupt leadership!

95 St Leodegar’s Way
West Sussex
PO20 1PE

22nd August 2011

Dear Nigel

Many thanks for your letter of 18th August, thanking me for the hard work I have done for UKIP over the past 16 years. It has to be said that, until quite recently, I have enjoyed the full support and encouragement of my wife in this endeavour.

I have never forgotten the early morning telephone call we had from you, I think it was in 1999, thanking us for leafleting the whole of Arundel by ourselves. This, after we had covered several villages around Chichester – again, on our own. Back then I had full confidence in your ability to campaign for UKIP.

However, I am sorry to tell you Nigel that, over the years, that confidence has been eroded to the point, reached a few years ago, when I came to the conclusion that you were more of a liability to UKIP than an asset, and today you are a hindrance. Indeed, I was extremely disappointed when you stood for the leadership last year.
Over the years you have driven many talented people away from UKIP. To name a few, they include:

Bryan Smalley Chris Cook Rodney Atkinson Peter Davies Michael Holmes Christina Speight Cam Poulter Ashley banks Ron Dickenson Bruce King Simon Stoker Don Briggs Barrie Draper Robin Laming Mike Carter Janet Girsman Jose O’Ware Harold Green Lyn Riley Richard North Anthony Scholefield Marcus Stead L. K.Hansford M. Stringfellow D. Dixon J. Bolton O. Blackburn Richard Suchorzewski D. Matthews L. A. Harris C. Sparkes T. Greenaway David Abbott Delroy Young Robin Page Petrina Holdsworth John Petley Eric Edmond John West D. Bellobaba Ian Gillman Martin Haslam David Noakes

All the above had given generously of their time and money, and were in responsible positions within the party. In every case they mention your overwhelming influence (as leader or de facto leader) as the reason for their resignation from UKIP. No doubt others could add many more names. In some instances, I understand, whole branches have closed (West Dorset for example) following disputes which could, with care, have been avoided.

There have been several policy decisions, initiated by you, that have been highly questionable - the latest being the attempt to absorb our MEPs into a pan-European political party (PEPP). A letter I recently received from one of our most persistent and hard working campaigners included the following sentence, “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.”

No doubt, had you won the argument on this issue, many others would have resigned from the Party.

As your bid to absorb our MEPs into a PEPP confirms - you have learnt nothing. I can understand those who say that you have ‘gone native’ in the EU. Your speeches in the EU parliament are most entertaining but have not, and will not, get UKIP one MP into our Westminster parliament.

Your attempts to be elected to Westminster have been, at best, an embarrassment, and at worst a disaster. I suspect that in the case of the Buckinghamshire/Bercow election a local UKIP candidate would, undoubtedly, have fared much better. Locals do not generally welcome candidates who have been parachuted in from outside their patch.

Nigel, you have worked very hard for the party but, I regret to say, on too many occasions, in a detrimental way.

Another minus is that you seem to have a penchant for spending party funds on litigation which, in many instances, I suspect, with tact and diplomacy, could have been avoided

In the early days you repeated many times that you hoped your period in politics would be the shortest job of your working career, and that you could make more money as a commodity trader.

As an overwhelming number of members voted against your PEPP initiative you should now do the honourable thing and resign as party leader. By so doing, in the eyes of many, you would mitigate some of the negative opinions held against you. In addition, you would be doing yourself, the party, and the country, a great favour. It is suggested that you make an announcement to this effect at the party conference next month, and invite Trevor Colman or Gerard Batten to act as caretaker leader until an election for your replacement can be held.

Personally, I would recommend that you do not stand again for the NEC or the EU parliament in 2014, and that you take a well earned break from politics!

Finally, Nigel, you must be thanked for the many positive contributions you have made to our cause. I wish you well in the route it is hoped you will now take out of politics.

Yours sincerely

(Sgd) D. Hunnikin

Derek Hunnikin

c.c. The Chichester Branch Steering Committee Members,
Trevor Coleman MEP, Gerard Batten MEP

Nigel Farage MEP
UKIP South East Region
The Old Grain Store
Church Lane
West Sussex
BN17 7QJ

Thursday, 18 August 2011

UKIP: Nigel's sour grapes!

So the official UKIP website finally got round to publishing the results of the PEP vote. It was no surprise to read Farage's petulant remarks at the end of the statement. Sour grapes, sour grapes!

The results of UKIP's Pan-European Party ballot have been announced by Returning Officer Steve Allison.

After the votes had been counted, the result was announced at 4pm on August 16 with the following results:

Total valid votes cast 7,696
Turnout 49.2%
Yes 2535 (32.9%)
No 5161 (67.1%)

Party Chairman Steve Crowther said:

"We have had a clear statement of the members' opinion, and can now move on. This has been an excellent example of party democracy in action, and I would like to thank all the participants, on both sides, for the civilised way in which it was conducted. I would also like to thank the Vice-Chairman, Steve Allison, for running the thing so smoothly.

"It is important to remember that we are all, fundamentally, on the same side. We may disagree on the tactics, but we all share the same goal and can be enormously proud of what we have already achieved.

"Our message is now not only the mainstream view in this country but, increasingly, the view of ordinary people across Europe. As we will see at Conference, it is now attracting increasing numbers of influential people to our cause. Let's put this debate behind us and show the world that we are a powerful, unified force."

Leader of the 'Yes' campaign Stuart Agnew said:

"I would like to congratulate Trevor Colman and his team on an emphatic outcome. As a team player I would never want to go against the wishes of the membership, especially those in the Eastern region, and will abide by the result, as I pledged during the campaign.

Junius says: That is not what you originally said! You said you would seek permission from the Eastern Region Committee to join a PEP even if the membership voted No! Readers should not forget that Agnew - along with Bannerman - is under investigation by OLAF after being caught on video admitting that he was paying Peter Reeve illegally out of EU funds. Agnew is a liar and a crook. See: LINK

"Longer term we may have to consider what will happen if the Duff Report is passed and we face a second, Pan-European, ballot paper in the European Election, or indeed a Referendum.

"In the meantime, however, I'm glad we have a clear result."

Leader of the 'No' campaign Trevor Colman said:

"I have been asked to comment on the significance of Tuesday's ballot count where UKIP membership roundly rejected involvement in a Pan European party by more than two to one.

"The result indicates how far the Party has moved from the grassroots and is a timely reminder that further continued entanglement in EU structures will not be tolerated and rightly so.

"Britain should be where the Party concentrates its greatest efforts with EU parliamentary activity cut to the absolute minimum. It is here, in the streets and meeting places of Britain, that we will eventually win this fight, not in the committee rooms and chambers of Brussels. Future Party strategy should reflect this. The members have spoken. They must not be ignored."

Junius says: Quite right! The members have spoken. So will Godfrey Bloom leave the European Alliance for Freedom? See: LINK And will Farage and Agnew carry out their threat and join a PEP regardless?

Party Leader Nigel Farage said:

"In the light of this result we must hope that the Duff Report does not pass in the European Parliament this autumn. If it does, we have just disqualified ourselves from 50% of the ballot papers to be issued. That makes winning rather difficult".

Junius says: Petulant little man!

And we hope that the likes of Mick 'Wolfman' McGough' - who lied to UKIPPERS over PEPS - will be forced to resign in disgrace.

Remember this email?

From steve allison
to Stuart Agnew MEP
cc Mick McGough
cc Trevor Colman MEP
cc Steve Crowther
Date 19.06.2011


I have received a complaint regarding the video.

Specifically the complaint refers to the claim by Mick McGough that he "has in his hand a cheque for £300,000 payable to UKIP"

The No campaign claim the money CANNOT be paid to UKIP.

Can you please confirm that the claim that the money can be paid from a PEP direct to UKIP is accurate.

If you cannot confirm this is a factually accurate statement then I must ask for the video to be withdrawn until a suitable correction of fact can be made.

Steve Allison
Vice Chairman UKIP.

End of email.

Petrina Holdsworth - former UKIP chairman - spoke for many when she said:

It could be a watershed as far as the party is concerned because the majority of the MEPs seem to want to join and the rank and file are dead against it.

Farage`s position is untenable. As the main protagonist for the PEP his advice to the party has been overwhelmingly rejected.

Conference time could be interesting.