UKIP Uncovered

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

Tuesday, December 16, 2003

More Mysteries on the Move of Offices!

The latest just in from Andrew Edwards who is closely monitoring this matter:-

Quote
Hi, given the ominous plan to close Bridgeman House this Friday, it is even more essential that the numerous unresolved matters about these offices be cleared up this week.

I understand that what is currently going on in 123 New John Street, is the conversion of part of an old industrial building into a separate office suite, that is to say, a separate demise ( I think that's the correct term). It is now a matter of urgency that the veil be removed from the true facts about these premises:

Take planning permission. Mike Natrass tells me that there are no problems.

Yet, preliminary checks with Birmingham Council have revealed no planning consent???

It's time the relevant documentation was revealed. Assuming that planning consent is still under consideration, then when will it be granted. Clearly obtaining this permission will be a complex matter, and likely to take some time. Especially as a unit is being 'carved out' of an existing demise - not an already separate unit where the Uses Order may allow changes of use in certain cases.

Of course if consent has been granted, then all that has to be done is for the Consent Number to be made available. Then we can all stop squabbling about that element of the move!

Next there is the little matter of a Fire Certificate? Has the building as a whole got a fire certificate? Remember, new demise and change to multi-occupancy will require a new fire certificate. Again, sight of a valid Fire Certificate would allay many concerns!

The intended alterations and occupation will clearly have required building regulations approval. Has this approval been obtained? This question needs clarification, this week, in view of the low concrete beams across the main room, which several people have remarked upon. The height of these beams could well prevent occupation on Health and Safety grounds: the low beams may constitute a hazard, especially to visitors, or in the case of fire or darkness. This matter must be resolved before occupation. Has the H&S Agency been consulted? They are very helpful and give swift advice.

Health and Safety also impacts on any insurance policy. Under the "uberrimae fidei" rule, any possible hazard to the insurance cover MUST be disclosed to UKIPs' insurers in advance in respect of employers liability/public liability, etc. Importantly, this is whether or not it is of interest to the Health and Safety Executive. The insurers may possibly accept the situation after inspection, but if they do, it is also likely that they will want an exclusion clause - this would mean the Party has no public liability or employer liability for anyone getting injured. This, of course, would be totally unacceptable. So if these H&S/Insurance issues are already resolved, let ALL NEC members have sight of the approvals!

Then there is the question of the Rates - has a cost liability calculation been done? If not it should be possible to quickly obtain give a rough estimate of the rates payable by: Calculating the floor area of the proposed Birmingham office suite in relation to the rest of the buildings floor area.

Now I'd like to outline what is actually being proposed for the dispersal of Head Office (as from next week) - as I understand it thus far:

1. the accounting function is to be transferred to John de Roeck's private address.
2. the merchandise function is to be transferred to a private address in South London.
3. the European Elections Committee to operate (possibly) from an address in Aldershot.
4. the Press Office to remain at the Queen Anne's Gate broom cupboard.
5. the membership communications database and other H.O. functions to go to Birmingham.
6. tele-sales will remain at Ashford - no surprise there then.

Can anyone confirm that proper and relevant insurance, etc. has been obtained for all these locations. Health and Safety legislation - includes lighting, fire protection measures, access, etc etc - will also be relevant at these locations if they become official Party addresses.

It seems that the Cabal believes the Party HQ can function more efficiently when its various elements are scattered over so many sites. Surely, the opposite is true, and the potential for the left not knowing what the right is doing will only be made much worse. We've seen how bad it can be when the HQ was centralised, (except for Ashford of course) - the Celtic overspend - this planned brake-up can only make such eventualities more certain in the future.

In conclusion two other critical points that must be properly considered before a duly considered decision can be said to have been taken, they are:

1) The arrangements and costs for discharging and recruiting staff in London and Birmingham are still far from clear. Michael Harvey has only been offered travelling expenses for two months. What then? He will certainly be able to cite this as additional evidence at an Industrial Tribunal!

There is, of course, already a letter from Michael Harvey and others' solicitors protesting proposals on constructive dismissal of staff. A letter to which the NEC have, so far, received no written legal advice. The effects and costs of this issue are therefore an unknown quantity, though no doubt the financial bill to the Party could well be huge!.

2) You may recall seeing the comments of George Stride recently. No costings have so far been given to the NEC of the total costs of new offices - as outlined by George Stride. In spite of a promise to do just that at the November NEC meeting!

There are, of course, many other matters, such as the proper functioning of the Treasurer's office, which are important. Surely all the accounting records should be held at Head Office - and given recent events, the Treasurer would be well advised to ensure that this is where the accounts are indeed kept.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. You simply couldn't make this up, except as a script for a black comedy!

Unquote

posted by Martin |6:57 PM