UKIP Uncovered

UKIP Uncovered
What motivates the leaders of the United Kingdom Independence Party?

Tuesday, August 19, 2003

Martin Cole's 1st April Warning to the NEC

In describing the events that led up to the disqualification of Martin Cole (the writer of this blog) as an MEP candidate for UKIP some fairly detailed back-up is unhappily essential. There were many e-mails exchanged which can be quoted as relevant, but one critical item was that which he sent to all the UKIP NEC, for whom he had an e-mail address, on Ist April 2003, summarising his concerns regarding the BNP and UKIP connections in the North East and his particular doubts over the activities of fellow candidate, Peter Troy, all of which have since been found, by an internal party inquiry, to have been fully justified.

Quote
BNP and UKIP Connections

On Saturday 22nd March, 2003 an article appeared in "The Northern Echo” Darlington’s daily newspaper under the following banner headline:-

RIGHT-WINGERS TARGET TOWN IN COMING LOCAL ELECTIONS

By Liz Lamb

Along with a general description of plans by the BNP to run several candidate’s in the upcoming local council elections it made the following statement:-

Last night Trevor Agnew, a former UK Independence Party candidate in the town, said he was considering standing for the British National Party.

The Northern Echo understands that if Mr Agnew, of Davison Road, Darlington plans to stand, he will campaign for the North Road ward.

He said: "I am toying with the idea but nothing has been decided yet.

"I certainly will be supporting the Tyne and Wear drive for both the BNP and the UK Independence Party.

"The North Road ward has a tradition of protest voting. There is a good chance you could open that up.

"I am quite busy at the moment so I am not sure if I am going to stand. It will be decided at the weekend but nothing is confirmed.”

Mr Agnew last stood in May 1999 as the UK Independence party candidate for the Harrowgate Hill ward.

The full article can be obtained by clicking the attached link:-
Right-wingers target town

I wrote a reply to the newspaper concerned as follows:-

Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 11:26:24 +0200
From: "M.T. Cole"
Subject: Racialist Politics
To: echo@nne.co.uk
Dear Sir,
I am writing regarding the report in your edition of 22nd March 2003 by Liz Lamb, which stated a Mr Trevor Agnew of Darlington was considering tanding as a candidate for both UKIP and BNP in the upcoming council elections.
The United Kingdom Independence Party, for whom I hope to be a North East candidate in the European Parliamentary elections planned for June 2004, is a strictly non-racist party which has no association whatsoever with the BNP.
I have checked with UKIP's regional committee's secretary who has no record of Mr Agnew presently being a UKIP member. It would be no more possible for a candidate to stand as both UKIP and BNP than it would to have a Councillor elected for both Labour and the Conservatives. I have also requested clarification of Mr Agnew's party status from our London Head Office
from whom I expect a reply this week.
Yours sincerely,
Martin Cole.
Prospective MEP UKIP candidate for the North East Region)

I copied this letter to UKIP Party Secretary Michael Harvey who replied with the following:-

From: "Michael Harvey"
Subject: FW: Racialist Politics
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 14:37:44 -0000
Martin
Thanks for this. I will check on Mr Agnew first thing tomorrow. As an addendum to your letter it may be worth adding that all UKIP
Candidates and Party Officers are required to sign a declaration which includes the following:
"I have never engaged in or advocated or condoned racist, violent, criminal or anti-democratic activity nor have I ever been a member of or had any links with any such organisation or group, association with which the National Executive Committee [of UKIP] considers is liable to bring the Party into disrepute."
The BNP falls into this category, so any person with any links with the BNP would most certainly not be welcome in UKIP.
Regards,
Michael

It would appear from the above letter that Trevor Agnew was a complete unknown to UKIP. This was absolutely not the case!

As long ago as 1999 he had been asked to leave the party when NE Regional Chairman Rodney Atkinson was alerted to his BNP membership by the Tyne and Wear Anti- Fascist Association. See the extract from their 1999 Chair’s Report:-

Darlington: in Darlington, there was an attempt to revive the BNP branch in the autumn of 1999. Convicted football hooligan Paul Thompson, who has been active as a fascist for the best part of a decade, was put forward as the dupe who would run the Post Office box

THE ORIGINAL E-MAIL CARRIED A PICTURE HERE of Paul Thompson (right) and Trevor Agnew (centre) march ahead of former BNP boss John Tyndall

Another Darlington fascist, Trevor Agnew, has also raised his head over the past year. In the May local elections he stood as a UK Independence Party candidate. When TWAFA pointed out his murky past he was duly kicked out of the party. Lately, he has been writing to the Northern Echo complaining about the presence of refugees. At one point, Trevor was a member of the Green Party in Darlington.

Tyne and Wear Anti Fascist Association Chairs Report 1999 (Scroll down the page to Darlington)

Nor is this all: for this same Trevor Agnew had made another application to UKIP London Head Office around the time of the last election, but North East Regional Committee members in Newcastle got wind of this and warned London off.

Why then was Agnew again applying for UKIP membership and making the following incredible statement:-

"I WILL CERTAINLY BE SUPPORTING THE TYNE AND WEAR DRIVE FOR BOTH THE BNP AND THE UK INDEPENDENCE PARTY"

These words come from a resident of and voter in Darlington. Why then does he talk about the Tyne and Wear which with the Tees defines the divide that so characterises the region?

Only one explanation is possible: the only time a Darlington voter can possibly give joint consideration to the Tyne and Wear is in an election combining these areas, namely, a European Parliamentary election.

But why join UKIP now? Agnew could remain in BNP and happily use his vote for an apparent UKIP candidate whom he knows is a closet BNP supporter, without ever having to declare himself.

I surmise there is only one answer to this question, which is of course that the "drive" to further the interests of BNP and UKIP was threatened by my candidature, as Peter Troy began to contemplate the prospect of defeat in fair and open hustings and a postal ballot contest. In his own drive for support in that critical ballot he found himself forced to recruit from BNP.

How could the "drive" to further the interests of BNP and UKIP be damaged at this particular time? Only by the defeat of a UKIP MEP candidate who is secretly pledged to further BNP's interests. In my view there are two main candidates who appear to have good reason to believe they might get poll position in the North East Region, myself and Peter Troy. Of we two it is absurd to believe that I could have recruited Agnew or any of the other 27 new members, that have suddenly taken up UKIP Party Membership from the south end of the region.

Troy in whose interests Agnew could only have been re-recruited is clearly now in breach of the UKIP candidate declaration which states:-
Quote nor have I ever been a member of or had any links with any such organisation or group, association with which the National Executive Committee [of UKIP] considers is likely to bring the party into disrepute Unquote
As Michael Harvey said to me in the e-mail I previously quoted "The BNP falls into this category, so any person with any links with the BNP would most certainly not be welcome in UKIP"!!!!!!!!!

Peter Troy therefore must be required to withdraw his candidature for consideration as European MEP for the Party, and resign his UKIP membership, as his links to BNP are clear.

Some might consider this harsh but let me remind the members of the National Executive exactly what it is that the BNP represents. The following are extracts from two FAQ’s on BNP’s website:-

BNP FAQs

I will quote just two of the obnoxious and scientifically inaccurate statements available from the link above:-

Britishness

Q: When you talk about being "British" what do you mean?
A: We mean the bonds of culture, race, identity and roots of the native British peoples of the British Isles. We have lived in these islands near on 40,000 years! We were made by these islands, and these islands are our home. When we in the BNP talk about being British, we talk about the native peoples who have lived in these islands since before the Stone Age, and the relatively small numbers of peoples of almost identical stock, such as the Saxons, Vikings and Normans, and the Irish, who have come here and assimilated.

Q: Why are you against mixed-raced relationships?
A: We are against mixed-raced relationships because we believe that all species and races of life on this planet are beautiful and must be preserved. When whites take partners from other ethnic groups, a white family line that stretches back into deep pre-history is destroyed. And, of course, the same is true of the non-white side. We want generations that spring from us to be the same as us, look like us, and be moved by the same things as us. We feel that to preserve the rich tapestry of mankind, we must preserve ethnic differences, not ‘mish-mash’ them together.

When I joined UKIP I was of the clear understanding the Party was strictly non-racist.
In my recent speech at Newcastle University I made a major point of defending British Multiculturalism, which in light of this present situation now appears somewhat of a nonsense. An extract of what I said, which seemed very well received by the students, (and indeed Neil Herron and I resoundingly defeated the motion) follows:-

Motion “Should Britain Further Integrate with Europe?”

(Extract from Cole's speech regarding muliculturalism)

"Who can be against Integration? I mean it stands to reason, does it not, that to be against integration must make one in favour of Segregation, supporting such concepts as Apartheid and lets face it, perhaps even risk being accused of Racism!
But yes, you’ve guessed it; I am against this integration. Here I stand, shamelessly before you tonight to do just that. I oppose further integration of this country into the European Union and what is more I do so partly in the name of British multi-culturalism.
"Let me explain my reasons: Europe while in the process of extending its borders, is defining its character on the basis of a common European heritage and seems to me to be seeking to unite its peoples by the fostering of antagonism towards outsiders. The EU is in danger of creating a new menace of intolerance in what can only be described as EU supra-nationalism. Like nationalism, yet even more dangerous because of its vast sweep.
Britain with its long history as a maritime trading nation, has links, ties and friendships on each of the six populated continents of the world. In this auditorium tonight I would wager we could find those with friends or relatives from right across the globe.
In recent years I have visited five of those six continents and I can vouch that those ties are real and strong. I have met many different peoples some of whom are proud to trace their links back to these islands. While back in the UK I have shared dining tables with fellow countrymen and women whose own roots can be traced from Hong Kong to Trinidad and Fiji to Singapore. Why are we now being asked to sacrifice all this and integrate with the navel-gazing and culturally self-obsessed peoples of mainland Europe?
"I have also lived in Europe, it has some fantastic countries and wonderful people. But learning foreign languages and experiencing new cultures is a challenge and joy wherever that country may be on the globe. And that surely is the point often overlooked in the debate, Europe has no monopoly on either wonderful countries nor friendly people.
"To me the problem is this. Europe in pursuing a common identity or role, seems to seek to exclude, searching for common threads of heritage solely related to its own region and defining itself by what it is not, unlike we British who are unafraid to rank ourselves by what we are and not mainly from where we came."

Unhappily disposing of the problem of Peter Troy will solve nothing. For other deep problems still remain. A few of the immediate questions are those surrounding the strategy adopted by Head Office staff in London.

No further action seems to have been taken on Monday 24th March as promised by Michael Harvey, Head Office only moved when I sent my round robin e-mail to all members of the UKIP National Executive and other concerned UKIP members on the following Tuesday 25th March, 2003 20:17 “North East Regional Committee and Wider UKIP Problems”. Derek Clark’s explanation of the steps taken did not arrive until late Wednesday afternoon.

Some of the other major queries that now arise:-
“Why were the names of the 28 new members recruited in the southern half of the NE region not advised to the Regional Committee’s secretary as normal procedure would require?”

The suggestion that the suspension of the North East and Yorkshire and Humberside Committees, might have been the cause cannot hold water as the North East’s secretary had already received a congratulatory e-mail in respect of the surge in membership before the 8th March meeting which triggered Troy’s panic approach to London and resulted in the sordid episode of the suspension and solicitor’s letters.

“Why was no action taken to expel Agnew or seek his resignation until after my e-mail to all the National Executive, especially considering Michael Harvey’s Sunday assurance that steps would be taken the following day?”

There are many other serious questions remaining. I will continue to search for answers so that the National Executive can have as many of the facts as is possible ahead of their next Committee meeting which I understand is scheduled for 11th April.
I believe Britain deserves a non-racist anti-EU political party and following recent events I am unconvinced that this is currently available.
Unquote

Two days after sending this I received a warning of disqualification which itself followed soon after. All the circumstance of my candidature will be fully detailed as time permits. Meantime the nub of the matter is clear from the above. Given the speech I made to the Newcastle students, and the lack of response to my concerns from London Head Office, my later declaration of not continuing my candidature without a complete change of UKIP's Leadership was even then becoming inevitable.

posted by Martin |1:24 PM