ONE MAN’S SABOTAGE OF A NOBLE CAUSE
Part Five
Part One, Part Two, Part Three & Part Four can be seen by clicking here & here & here & here
Prepared by Derek Hunnikin
UKIP Membership No. 1428
11. The Ashford Call Centre. The full article can be read here
12. ROBIN PAGE
A letter to NEC members giving his version of the events which led to him not being included in the prospective MEP list for the 2009 EU elections.
A letter to NEC members giving his version of the events which led to him not being included in the prospective MEP list for the 2009 EU elections.
Dear Members of the NEC,
I am sorry not to have been in contact with you earlier, but my latest book has just been published - it is flying out through Telegraph Books you will be pleased to hear. I am also involved in a number of articles for the Mail on Sunday which have been very time consuming, in addition to all my other activities and responsibilities.
This is to inform you that the so-called "election" for Euro-selection for the Eastern Region is invalid. I would therefore ask you to put the election on hold immediately. I am writing to Piers Merchant asking him to do this in his capacity of Returning Officer. I assume he is supposed to be independent and not simply a "gofer" for Leader Farage.
My own view is that the election cannot be transparent and the Electoral Reform Society (ERS) should conduct it. I understand that Nigel is opposed to this very normal procedure; I wonder why? Incidentally, the National Trust Council Elections are held under the watchful eye of the ERS and as a result I became only the second person ever to have been elected onto the Council against the wishes of the NT's hierarchy. Not only that, but I comfortably topped the poll last time. It makes me wonder why I have been cheated out of standing in this UKIP poll and "cheated" can be the only adequate word to use.
I must remind you that David Challice asked me to pay my £250 to become part of the procedure. This was paid on 13.5.2008, by Visa, and HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED. My solicitor tells me that acceptance of the money constitutes a contract and I must therefore be included in the selection process - whether Mr.Farage wants this to be the case or not. He may be leader but he is not a dictator and he is not above the Law. Apparently at the NEC meeting, which should have resolved this issue properly and honestly, it was Mr.Farage's Putinesque behaviour that had his automated members of the NEC voting that the issue should be handled, in my view, improperly and dishonestly. Is this the same UKIP that claims that "honesty" is one of its main drive-engines in its battle with Europe? Sadly the sleaze of Europe seems to have swamped many of those leading UKIP and any "sleaze ratio analysis" of political parties in Britain would now surely have UKIP top of the league. My aim in continued membership of UKIP is to get it fighting as an honest, electable party again and because of this I shall be standing in the NEC elections next time. I will be asking for them to be conducted by the ERS to prevent any chance of malpractice and rigging.
To remind you - although you all know the situation. Despite being in a position to complete the various forms by the required date for Euro-selection - Peter Reeve and David Challice gave me another route that was far simpler for me at the time. It meant paying the money, sending the CRB forms and sending my nominations as soon as I returned from my research trip. This was agreed - if Reeve and Challis are honest, then I am sure they will confirm this. Consequently the NEC should have said - "Yes you were mis-directed, but it is our fault – you are part of the selection process". But no - that was too simple, too transparent and too honest. Incredibly too - I understand that Peter Reeve's partner remained in the NEC meeting to vote against me – which again should make the vote invalid.
Incidentally - this is the exact version of the events. After thirty-eight years of national journalism I have never been accused of lying - and I am not now; I have never been sued for libel.
I am also concerned that after explaining the situation I have never had an explanation as to why mistakes by UKIP members of staff have penalised me. When I told Nigel that Christopher Gill had not had the courtesy to explain things to me, Nigel was very uncomplimentary about him and described him as "unprofessional". Nigel has since been similarly "unprofessional", in my view.
Consequently I am now asking you to cancel the election process for the East and to fulfil your legal obligations.
I am afraid that I will be writing articles about all this in due course and issuing a Press Release. I have accepted several UKIP branch speaking engagements recently and I will be telling those present of the current state of affairs at the top of UKIP. I will also be informing our two UKIP Lords of the situation.
I will also be writing to Nigel Farage in the near future - I will be sending copies to you. I am sorry too that I have not been invited to speak at the UKIP Conference - I presume no invitation means that I have been banned. Never mind - I did address 10,000 people the other day. After-wards several people approached to ask me if I would be standing for UKIP at the Europeans. I told them the position and they were duly shocked. News of sleaze travels fast and far - I have had telephone calls from as far afield as Scotland and Devon asking "Is it true?" The simple answer has been "Yes." I hope those of you whose personal ambitions have been put before integrity are satisfied. It is no mean feat to actually turn a small party into an even smaller one - well done to those responsible.
I hope to hear something positive soon and I hope that for the sake of transparency John West will get a fair deal too. The breach of the criminal law against somebody who has worked so hard for UKIP is a disgrace. It seems to me that over the next couple of years the white prison vans could be kept very busy. Presumably the amount of sleaze within UKIP is why some of us, who say things as they are, have been deliberately side-lined.
Yours sincerely,
Robin Page
------------
Why Ukip has just lost another member
The grassroots are good people, but the party has been stolen from them, argues Robin Page.
Reprinted here is the article that appeared in The Daily Telegraph dated 2nd March 2009. It is followed by Farage’s letter which appeared on the following day.
I have just helped the United Kingdom Independence Party (Ukip). I have jumped ship. It is a small party whose main wish at the moment seems to be a desire to become even smaller; so I did my bit and resigned.
Why now? Surely Ukip was on the verge of a great political breakthrough? After the 2004 European Elections, Ukip rode the crest of a wave with 12 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), 2.7 million votes, 16.8% of the vote and membership of 26,000. But now, as the next round of Euro elections approaches, the great breakthrough has turned into break-up.
Ukip’s 12 European parliamentarians have, by defection and expulsion, dropped to nine – and one has even left his constituency to live elsewhere, without telling his constituents. At the Henley by-election last year, the party finished sixth, behind both the Greens and the BNP with just 2.4% of the vote. Membership is down to 14,000 (sorry, make that 13,999) and on the slide. To make matters worse there are accusations of rigged internal elections, tales of extravagance and high living in Brussels, and an embarrassing stampede to try to board the European gravy train this June. In short, Ukip is in the process of imploding. I have absolutely no personal political ambition whatsoever. For me the summer was going to involve seeing gorillas in the Congo for Telegraph Week-end and visiting St Kilda for the first time. I was encouraged to stand as a Ukip candidate because of my concern about the state of my country and I reluctantly agreed. Because of a farcical series of accidents, health problems and other commitments, I had a special dispensation to submit my papers a few days late. Or at least I thought I had.
When I contacted the officials as arranged they told me I was out of time. So I phoned Nigel Farage, Ukip’s Blair-like, ex-public school leader, who said he was very sorry and would do his best to sort things out, but “it’ll be up to the Political Committee”. He came back later with bad news. “The Political Committee won’t accept your late documents, I’m really sorry.” I have since found out Mr Farage is Ukip’s Political Committee. It runs at his whim with no obvious agenda or minutes. Piers Merchant, a former Tory MP who is now Ukip’s Returning Officer, informed me that the process was “flawed” and that there should be a re-run. But there has been no re-run and Ukip refuses to send me a copy of the Returning Officer’s report, even after a Data Protection Act request.
It seems that Nigel Farage has managed to obtain almost complete centralised power of Ukip. Other late nominations were apparently accepted, some people heading MEP lists have been forced out to be replaced by others, and three members of Ukip’s National Executive Council were expelled for criticising the leader. Other high-profile Ukip members have also been removed over the years, so as not to threaten Farage’s control or image. The party’s own policies – such as opposition to genetically modified crops – have been reversed without the membership knowing, including me. Stories from Brussels suggest that Ukip’s MEPs have come to love the high life of gravy and status. The party created to fight centralised government, sleaze and corruption, has become a mirror image of the body it professes to loathe. The grassroots of Ukip are good people, but their party has been stolen from them by their executive; and with David Cameron seemingly afraid to say the word “Europe”, they have nowhere to go – unless lured by the false smile of the BNP.
Just under 2,000 years ago Tacitus wrote words to the effect: “Britons are very good at being Roman. They like the baths, the forum and they think they are becoming Roman whereas in fact these devices enslave them to Rome.” Replace Britons with “Ukip MEPs”, and Roman with “European”, and the disintegration of Ukip is explained.
------------
Nigel Farage’s response to the above was printed in The Daily Telegraph the following day – and is reproduced below.
SIR – I was interested to read Robin Page’s article (“Why Ukip lost another member”, Comment, March 2) in which he professes to have “no personal political ambition whatsoever”.
There was a nine month period for nominations for Ukip candidates; Mr Page telephoned me with two days to go and we relaxed the rules (which I now regret). We asked him to submit his papers – which he failed to do after a further fortnight’s grace.
I admit that, since 2004, Ukip has had some difficult times – especially in 2005, when Robert Kilroy-Silk sought to inflict maximum damage. Since then, Ukip has changed. Membership and candidate lists are younger and more diverse. I have also introduced tougher discipline and anyone linked with extremism is removed. The election of Marta Andreasen, the Spanish former EU accountant, to a winnable position on the MEP candidate list has upset the reactionaries.
It is easy to say that Ukip’s MEPs are on the “gravy train”, but the evidence is different. Several have been major donors to the party and large sums have been promised to this year’s campaign. This is not the behaviour of those intent on personal financial gain.
We are going to fight a vigorous campaign on issues that matter to voters. We will not allow the anti-EU voice in Britain to belong to extremists.
Nigel Farage MEP
Ukip Leader
London W1
13. Del Young
A former member of the National Executive Committee with responsibility for ’UKIP Youth’.
A letter, written by fellow NEC member Dr David Abbott, dated 30th November 2007 is reproduced in full below.
To whom it may concern
Del Young’s treatment at the hands of the NEC at its most recent meeting resembled a Stalinist show trial. Del had founded UKIP Youth. He presented a report on its activities to the NEC at every meeting. (At least his report was always on the agenda, but the meeting frequently did not reach this agenda item).
At the November meeting, before the agenda item was reached, it was announced that Wayne Harling was downstairs and we should interrupt the agenda in order to hear him.
Wayne Harling was a member of the Youth Council, which had made a good impression at UKIP’s recent conference. However, it transpired that Del had removed him from his position due to lack of initiative. I learnt this when Wayne Harling was shown into the room. He sat next to me, and addressed the NEC by reading out from a printed-out sheet where he had listed multiple complaints about Del. There were many accusations that Del had made negative criticisms about the party leadership. Del vehemently denied these charges.
Mr Harling’s appearance was not part of the agenda, but it appeared to come as no surprise to the bulk of NEC members, though it surprised Del and myself. Clearly if Del had known in advance of this ambush, he would have produced the email and other documentation which would have refuted many of Mr Harling’s accusations.
That it is no crime to deplore the leadership is surely a given in a free society. In any case, Del denied those charges, but was given no opportunity to refute them in any detail.
Harling and Del Young left the room while the matter was discussed. It was clear that most NEC members had already made their decision. The motion was put that Del’s resignation as leader of the youth movement should be accepted. This was despite the fact that Del had not in fact submitted his resignation. I was the only one to vote against the motion.
I think that any decent person would agree that the NEC’s actions were un-British, unfair, and unprofessional. I am not making any judgement about the justice of Del Young’s dismissal. I think most people would agree that it was preposterous to handle his dismissal at the NEC meeting in so shabby a fashion.
Del requested a copy of the statement that Mr Harling read at the meeting. Harling said that he would send him a copy. As of a few days ago, it had not been received.
Del deserves all our thanks for making a valiant attempt to establish a successful youth movement.
There is a reason why the boards of every profitable business in the City operate according to respected rules of conduct. If they did not their business would fail.
Sincerely yours,
David F. Abbott, MD
Part Five
Part One, Part Two, Part Three & Part Four can be seen by clicking here & here & here & here
Prepared by Derek Hunnikin
UKIP Membership No. 1428
11. The Ashford Call Centre. The full article can be read here
12. ROBIN PAGE
A letter to NEC members giving his version of the events which led to him not being included in the prospective MEP list for the 2009 EU elections.
A letter to NEC members giving his version of the events which led to him not being included in the prospective MEP list for the 2009 EU elections.
Dear Members of the NEC,
I am sorry not to have been in contact with you earlier, but my latest book has just been published - it is flying out through Telegraph Books you will be pleased to hear. I am also involved in a number of articles for the Mail on Sunday which have been very time consuming, in addition to all my other activities and responsibilities.
This is to inform you that the so-called "election" for Euro-selection for the Eastern Region is invalid. I would therefore ask you to put the election on hold immediately. I am writing to Piers Merchant asking him to do this in his capacity of Returning Officer. I assume he is supposed to be independent and not simply a "gofer" for Leader Farage.
My own view is that the election cannot be transparent and the Electoral Reform Society (ERS) should conduct it. I understand that Nigel is opposed to this very normal procedure; I wonder why? Incidentally, the National Trust Council Elections are held under the watchful eye of the ERS and as a result I became only the second person ever to have been elected onto the Council against the wishes of the NT's hierarchy. Not only that, but I comfortably topped the poll last time. It makes me wonder why I have been cheated out of standing in this UKIP poll and "cheated" can be the only adequate word to use.
I must remind you that David Challice asked me to pay my £250 to become part of the procedure. This was paid on 13.5.2008, by Visa, and HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED. My solicitor tells me that acceptance of the money constitutes a contract and I must therefore be included in the selection process - whether Mr.Farage wants this to be the case or not. He may be leader but he is not a dictator and he is not above the Law. Apparently at the NEC meeting, which should have resolved this issue properly and honestly, it was Mr.Farage's Putinesque behaviour that had his automated members of the NEC voting that the issue should be handled, in my view, improperly and dishonestly. Is this the same UKIP that claims that "honesty" is one of its main drive-engines in its battle with Europe? Sadly the sleaze of Europe seems to have swamped many of those leading UKIP and any "sleaze ratio analysis" of political parties in Britain would now surely have UKIP top of the league. My aim in continued membership of UKIP is to get it fighting as an honest, electable party again and because of this I shall be standing in the NEC elections next time. I will be asking for them to be conducted by the ERS to prevent any chance of malpractice and rigging.
To remind you - although you all know the situation. Despite being in a position to complete the various forms by the required date for Euro-selection - Peter Reeve and David Challice gave me another route that was far simpler for me at the time. It meant paying the money, sending the CRB forms and sending my nominations as soon as I returned from my research trip. This was agreed - if Reeve and Challis are honest, then I am sure they will confirm this. Consequently the NEC should have said - "Yes you were mis-directed, but it is our fault – you are part of the selection process". But no - that was too simple, too transparent and too honest. Incredibly too - I understand that Peter Reeve's partner remained in the NEC meeting to vote against me – which again should make the vote invalid.
Incidentally - this is the exact version of the events. After thirty-eight years of national journalism I have never been accused of lying - and I am not now; I have never been sued for libel.
I am also concerned that after explaining the situation I have never had an explanation as to why mistakes by UKIP members of staff have penalised me. When I told Nigel that Christopher Gill had not had the courtesy to explain things to me, Nigel was very uncomplimentary about him and described him as "unprofessional". Nigel has since been similarly "unprofessional", in my view.
Consequently I am now asking you to cancel the election process for the East and to fulfil your legal obligations.
I am afraid that I will be writing articles about all this in due course and issuing a Press Release. I have accepted several UKIP branch speaking engagements recently and I will be telling those present of the current state of affairs at the top of UKIP. I will also be informing our two UKIP Lords of the situation.
I will also be writing to Nigel Farage in the near future - I will be sending copies to you. I am sorry too that I have not been invited to speak at the UKIP Conference - I presume no invitation means that I have been banned. Never mind - I did address 10,000 people the other day. After-wards several people approached to ask me if I would be standing for UKIP at the Europeans. I told them the position and they were duly shocked. News of sleaze travels fast and far - I have had telephone calls from as far afield as Scotland and Devon asking "Is it true?" The simple answer has been "Yes." I hope those of you whose personal ambitions have been put before integrity are satisfied. It is no mean feat to actually turn a small party into an even smaller one - well done to those responsible.
I hope to hear something positive soon and I hope that for the sake of transparency John West will get a fair deal too. The breach of the criminal law against somebody who has worked so hard for UKIP is a disgrace. It seems to me that over the next couple of years the white prison vans could be kept very busy. Presumably the amount of sleaze within UKIP is why some of us, who say things as they are, have been deliberately side-lined.
Yours sincerely,
Robin Page
------------
Why Ukip has just lost another member
The grassroots are good people, but the party has been stolen from them, argues Robin Page.
Reprinted here is the article that appeared in The Daily Telegraph dated 2nd March 2009. It is followed by Farage’s letter which appeared on the following day.
I have just helped the United Kingdom Independence Party (Ukip). I have jumped ship. It is a small party whose main wish at the moment seems to be a desire to become even smaller; so I did my bit and resigned.
Why now? Surely Ukip was on the verge of a great political breakthrough? After the 2004 European Elections, Ukip rode the crest of a wave with 12 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), 2.7 million votes, 16.8% of the vote and membership of 26,000. But now, as the next round of Euro elections approaches, the great breakthrough has turned into break-up.
Ukip’s 12 European parliamentarians have, by defection and expulsion, dropped to nine – and one has even left his constituency to live elsewhere, without telling his constituents. At the Henley by-election last year, the party finished sixth, behind both the Greens and the BNP with just 2.4% of the vote. Membership is down to 14,000 (sorry, make that 13,999) and on the slide. To make matters worse there are accusations of rigged internal elections, tales of extravagance and high living in Brussels, and an embarrassing stampede to try to board the European gravy train this June. In short, Ukip is in the process of imploding. I have absolutely no personal political ambition whatsoever. For me the summer was going to involve seeing gorillas in the Congo for Telegraph Week-end and visiting St Kilda for the first time. I was encouraged to stand as a Ukip candidate because of my concern about the state of my country and I reluctantly agreed. Because of a farcical series of accidents, health problems and other commitments, I had a special dispensation to submit my papers a few days late. Or at least I thought I had.
When I contacted the officials as arranged they told me I was out of time. So I phoned Nigel Farage, Ukip’s Blair-like, ex-public school leader, who said he was very sorry and would do his best to sort things out, but “it’ll be up to the Political Committee”. He came back later with bad news. “The Political Committee won’t accept your late documents, I’m really sorry.” I have since found out Mr Farage is Ukip’s Political Committee. It runs at his whim with no obvious agenda or minutes. Piers Merchant, a former Tory MP who is now Ukip’s Returning Officer, informed me that the process was “flawed” and that there should be a re-run. But there has been no re-run and Ukip refuses to send me a copy of the Returning Officer’s report, even after a Data Protection Act request.
It seems that Nigel Farage has managed to obtain almost complete centralised power of Ukip. Other late nominations were apparently accepted, some people heading MEP lists have been forced out to be replaced by others, and three members of Ukip’s National Executive Council were expelled for criticising the leader. Other high-profile Ukip members have also been removed over the years, so as not to threaten Farage’s control or image. The party’s own policies – such as opposition to genetically modified crops – have been reversed without the membership knowing, including me. Stories from Brussels suggest that Ukip’s MEPs have come to love the high life of gravy and status. The party created to fight centralised government, sleaze and corruption, has become a mirror image of the body it professes to loathe. The grassroots of Ukip are good people, but their party has been stolen from them by their executive; and with David Cameron seemingly afraid to say the word “Europe”, they have nowhere to go – unless lured by the false smile of the BNP.
Just under 2,000 years ago Tacitus wrote words to the effect: “Britons are very good at being Roman. They like the baths, the forum and they think they are becoming Roman whereas in fact these devices enslave them to Rome.” Replace Britons with “Ukip MEPs”, and Roman with “European”, and the disintegration of Ukip is explained.
------------
Nigel Farage’s response to the above was printed in The Daily Telegraph the following day – and is reproduced below.
SIR – I was interested to read Robin Page’s article (“Why Ukip lost another member”, Comment, March 2) in which he professes to have “no personal political ambition whatsoever”.
There was a nine month period for nominations for Ukip candidates; Mr Page telephoned me with two days to go and we relaxed the rules (which I now regret). We asked him to submit his papers – which he failed to do after a further fortnight’s grace.
I admit that, since 2004, Ukip has had some difficult times – especially in 2005, when Robert Kilroy-Silk sought to inflict maximum damage. Since then, Ukip has changed. Membership and candidate lists are younger and more diverse. I have also introduced tougher discipline and anyone linked with extremism is removed. The election of Marta Andreasen, the Spanish former EU accountant, to a winnable position on the MEP candidate list has upset the reactionaries.
It is easy to say that Ukip’s MEPs are on the “gravy train”, but the evidence is different. Several have been major donors to the party and large sums have been promised to this year’s campaign. This is not the behaviour of those intent on personal financial gain.
We are going to fight a vigorous campaign on issues that matter to voters. We will not allow the anti-EU voice in Britain to belong to extremists.
Nigel Farage MEP
Ukip Leader
London W1
13. Del Young
A former member of the National Executive Committee with responsibility for ’UKIP Youth’.
A letter, written by fellow NEC member Dr David Abbott, dated 30th November 2007 is reproduced in full below.
To whom it may concern
Del Young’s treatment at the hands of the NEC at its most recent meeting resembled a Stalinist show trial. Del had founded UKIP Youth. He presented a report on its activities to the NEC at every meeting. (At least his report was always on the agenda, but the meeting frequently did not reach this agenda item).
At the November meeting, before the agenda item was reached, it was announced that Wayne Harling was downstairs and we should interrupt the agenda in order to hear him.
Wayne Harling was a member of the Youth Council, which had made a good impression at UKIP’s recent conference. However, it transpired that Del had removed him from his position due to lack of initiative. I learnt this when Wayne Harling was shown into the room. He sat next to me, and addressed the NEC by reading out from a printed-out sheet where he had listed multiple complaints about Del. There were many accusations that Del had made negative criticisms about the party leadership. Del vehemently denied these charges.
Mr Harling’s appearance was not part of the agenda, but it appeared to come as no surprise to the bulk of NEC members, though it surprised Del and myself. Clearly if Del had known in advance of this ambush, he would have produced the email and other documentation which would have refuted many of Mr Harling’s accusations.
That it is no crime to deplore the leadership is surely a given in a free society. In any case, Del denied those charges, but was given no opportunity to refute them in any detail.
Harling and Del Young left the room while the matter was discussed. It was clear that most NEC members had already made their decision. The motion was put that Del’s resignation as leader of the youth movement should be accepted. This was despite the fact that Del had not in fact submitted his resignation. I was the only one to vote against the motion.
I think that any decent person would agree that the NEC’s actions were un-British, unfair, and unprofessional. I am not making any judgement about the justice of Del Young’s dismissal. I think most people would agree that it was preposterous to handle his dismissal at the NEC meeting in so shabby a fashion.
Del requested a copy of the statement that Mr Harling read at the meeting. Harling said that he would send him a copy. As of a few days ago, it had not been received.
Del deserves all our thanks for making a valiant attempt to establish a successful youth movement.
There is a reason why the boards of every profitable business in the City operate according to respected rules of conduct. If they did not their business would fail.
Sincerely yours,
David F. Abbott, MD
No comments:
Post a Comment